A Good Riddance---Interpersonal Communication

Phew! No more interpersonal communication!!!

I'm not sure what Brad thinks of this: but philosophy will tell you that being interpersonal all the time and all the while and round the clock, in every single interaction and circumstance is unsound and therefore totally wrong!

That is because there is no moderation, and only any thing or body that produces moderation is perfection or desirable! And because everything in nature is an agent of moderation---just look at the sunrise and sunset.

A person who conducts himself interpersonally all the time, all the while, round the clock, with no differentiation or variety or balance with other types of interaction that are perhaps not interpersonal---such as being for half the time exacting or totalitarian or otherwise, is doom for trouble! Let us see why!

Although this interpersonal person might not do hurt or trouble unto another, by virtue he is always forever interpersonal or SOFT, he might have hurt or trouble done unto him instead, because people might tend to take advantage of his empathy and kindness.

 In a perfect world in some divine one, that person might survive because nobody could or knows how to do hurt or take advantage of others, by virtue they are so perfect and regulated or holy! In short, they couldn't hurt a fly, nor accidentally either!!!!!! We don't have that sort of highly initiated and aware human beings on earth. Therefore, a forever interpersonal person cannot guarantee that no misdemeanor will be done unto him, in action, word and thought. He needs to understand that our world is imperfect, and that caused moderation into our world. For why would a perfect world need any moderation? A perfect world has only one side of the argument of good and bad, that of which is of course the former; for a perfect world is perfectly good or holy or otherwise. Therefore, a perfect world needs no moderation.

That person will need to rightly and justifiably moderate his interpersonal (good) agency with some other perhaps more hostile (bad) agency. If one day he talks nicely and sweetly and empathetically to your ears, HE MUST the next day or some weeks later, SHOUT, JUDGE, CRITICIZE YOU IN A MANNER THAT SEEMS OVERBOARD, RUDE, DISRESPECTFUL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Even if he isn't going to shout, judge, criticize you in a manner that seems overboard, rude, disrespectful, HE HAS TO AT LEAST DO IT WITH OTHER PERSONS; WHERE AS LONG AS HE DEMONSTRATES A CONTRAST AND CONTRADICTION IN HIS MANNER OF DISPOSITION AND AGENCY; WHEREIN IT DOES NOT MATTER IF HE DOES IT WITH THE SAME EXACT PERSON OR NOT, HE IS JUSTIFIED, MODERATED, BLAMELESS IN OUR IMPERFECT WORLD.

In short, supposing myself for instance only; today I walk into ES2007S and smile and engage everybody so interpersonally until they almost want to marry me, even the boys: but when I go out of ES2007S class and perhaps back to my home and I have a troublesome brother toddler, who is disrupting to the brink, I will want to SHOUT, LASH, JUDGE, CRITICIZE, SLAP, AND HURT VERBALLY, NONVERBALLY AND EVEN PHYSICALLY WITH A CANE!!!!!!!!

Voila, I am a moderated human being, perfect by moderation and therefore justified! My brother toddler won’t take or learn to take advantage of me because I’ve been too OVERBEARINGLY nice, sweet, interpersonal, empathetic, or indiscriminatingly forgiving. And yes, nice-ness can be overbearing, as too much of any thing is a bad thing.

Does everybody see this beautiful philosophy, which also defines the rest of nature? I am trying to address the ontology of interpersonal communication, which is the layer deep beneath superficial interpersonal communication; because if you do like I do for every subject matter you encounter, YOU UNDERSTAND THE TRUE MEANING OF LIVING AND LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! For that reason, philosophy of every thing is VERY SIMILAR to religion of every kind, wherein you also learn about the true meaning of life.

The real issue of ES2007s is WHEN and WHY AND WHO to be interpersonal, rather just WHAT or HOW to be interpersonal, because you don’t want to be interpersonal with everybody and anybody. Do you think you want to be interpersonal when you see a vicious reservoir dog? Because it isn’t ALL THE TIME that your smile and pat on the dog’s head will get you out of trouble; if anything you were lucky is all!!! Because success in and with anything is MATTER OF LUCK! Today you may get away with this vicious dog; the next day, you may not, because even your subject and your behavior are being changed on a day to day basis, though not as in significantly, but more atomically!!!

And so the dictum: be moderately interpersonal, AND, interpersonally moderated.

And also, I would like to retrieve back my statement in January in one of my posts here, which says that consistency define interpersonal communication. By virtue of the philosophy of moderation, you cannot be consistent enough to be overall consistent, so I have to retrieve that statement and render it null. Consistency is only useful for writing an expository or argumentative essay. It cannot, so I feel, be applied to life and living because then you will get into all sorts of problems with moderation.

Cheers