As children, we're taught to run to the Be-All, End-All resource of Webster's to define our lives. Have you ever actually evaluated a definition though? Its not very definitive per se. There seems to be a word in the that is always a summation, or evaluator of circumstance. Webster's has not embraced absolutism just as most of civilization has not. Its just a wee bit scary for them.
I mean, if they didn't have a ready built escape route set for them, whatever would they do?!?
No, I think words are funny things we lie to ourselves about. We let ourselves believe they are the emblematic reflections of our character, that they convey something, that they could actually.. mean anything.
All along, they're empty. Devoid of meaning. Take for example Love.. Merriam Websters defines it as follows:
love: \ˈləv\ Function: noun (1): strong affection for another arising out of kinship or personal ties (2): attraction based on sexual desire : affection and tenderness felt by lovers (3): affection based on admiration, benevolence, or common interests b: an assurance of love 2: warm attachment, enthusiasm, or devotion 3 a: the object of attachment, devotion, or admiration b(1): a beloved person :
The only thing a word means, is what it means in your own personal little cerebellum. Honestly, there is no way you can convey that to my cerebellum either because I already have my own predisposed conditional theory developed for those words.
Thus.. while we would all like to believe otherwise.. we are all autonomous. We are all, succinctly individual and incapable of pairing wholly.
The words we share - mean things to us. They have deep, empathic, heart felt meanings. Yet, to others, they are lesser molds of themselves. Do we intend that? Probably not. Do we care? Maybe. We intimate things to our counterparts in the hopes that something.. a desirable something.. at least desirable in our perspective.. happens. And yet, we have no idea truly, how our words are perceived in that other cerebral cortex.
Are we giving them the indication that we expect failure from them? Or, that failure is not an option?!? Are our words so muddled that frustration sets in and they give up on us???
In 1994, The Bell Curve theorized a relationship between intelligence and your later plight in life. The book further extrapolated that intelligence seemed to have more to bear on this than familial socioeconomic standing. In this, the spectrum flowed with the masses of people falling primarily into the bulb of the bell with super-intelligent being at the far end and the lesser achieving intelligence-wise on the opposite end.
If you consider this in relation to words, the masses mixing in this bulging bulb of the Bell Curve may be less than concerned with in perceivable variations or nuances afforded the words they choose. They operate in a seething pool bubbling over with problems that require bail outs and jail time and divorce and the like. That is the only absolution found there.
Meanwhile, on the polar ends of this curve you have two diametrically opposite types. One, is really oblivious per se as to the innuendo or variations of meaning for the words they choose. That someone else could perceive things a different way is inconceivable. While to the other, every word - each single word is a myriad of opportunities. Each one says a million things. Which one will it be?
Thinking of this.. is it a wonder the divorce rate is as high as it is?!? That lifestyle oriented relationships fail on average after 3 months?!? We may have chosen to be linked at some point but the failure to speak fluidly to the other brain means we are always separate. Separate and never equal. Separate and never hearing each other even when we think we are..
We are all just idly nodding in agreement, like the bobble head dogs in the trucker windows as we drive down the highway.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment