c. scott andreas

note: this is part one of a three-part series.

Humans are relational beings – we desire and require meaningful interaction.

It is by these relationships that we define, create, and invent ourselves. Left alone, we lay stagnant, and often end up depressed in our solitude.

When we first encounter someone, we do not exist to them as anything other than a physical sight that quickly fades following the initial meeting. As we speak, interact, communicate, and build our relationship with others, we create our mental selves within them. Though a date may begin with nothing other than physical attraction, it concludes with a plethora of information having been exchanged, the totality of which is filed under the metaphor of their name.

Left alone, we exist only in our own minds. It is not until we begin to interact with others, to “create ourselves� within them, that we define who we are.

Some have the desire to have the ability to know everyone intimately – to “break down the barriers of communication� that divide us, the “group tensions,� the “cliques� that isolate us from others. They desire to remove any sort of vagaries and hidden connotations to words; rather than subjective, contextual language, their ideal is objective speech and perfect, intact transmission of ideas.

Living in an imperfect world, the realization of such perfection would have abhorrent and far-reaching consequences. In “perfect communion,� we would be one in thought, billions living out the singular consciousness that could just as easily be done by one.

We all have people whom we do not or would not like, in the event that we became acquainted with them. In such a world, we would become literally one with them, unavoidably sharing our innermost secrets, wants, and desires.

The traditional problem with the sorts of people with whom we do not “easily relate� is that we cannot trust them. To return to the previous analogy, we do not wish to create ourselves within them; we do not believe their minds would make hospitable homes for us. We’d feel unsafe, as if living in a dangerous neighborhood, doors unlocked. Conversing with them is not unlike wandering the poorly-lit side streets and alleys of Chicago unescorted at night – we sense that we (our persons within themselves) will be assaulted and attacked, left defenseless in an unfamiliar world.

look for part two tomorrow