I Against “against”

My mum used to say that if I had my child, then I could understand my mother’s mind. It was not about young or naive personality, only I needed was mutual understanding. So, I thought if I physically got through many things then I could understand the world. I should travel a lot for the broad vision, or I should marry someone for the wisdom that I cannot get if I don’t marry someone.

I somehow agree with that idea. I can’t tell if I haven’t experienced. But I am not sure that can be the reason I must try. Even if I am impassioned with intervening, there are a lot of things that I cannot experience. There is no way to fully understand how the man feels about life, no way to say how another group of people felt about the world. I don’t know how boyfriend thinks about the girlfriend. That is because there is a solid wall called “ME”. These uncomprehensive holes are from “The other’s” which I cannot fill up 100 percent. How much I try, it is utterly outside of me-world. I will never know how they felt. So, should I alter my sex, marry someone and change my nationality to understand them?

When I was younger, I thought if I try to explain my feeling hard enough the others then they can understand me. If they cannot, it should be either they are not wanting to know me enough or I was not trying enough. I thought the gap of understanding is happening from the desire to know someone.

The whole concept based on an idea, there is a possibility that we all can understand anything if we have spoken thoroughly and experienced absolutely. But is it true? If I experience enough, explained enough, wanting enough, everyone will know each other enough? I have a shadow of a doubt with that. Even if we are trying to communicate each other through the social code, gesture, language, arts, science, general emotion expression or even same sexual gene. It is not enough to communicate each other. These are just one fragment of agreement of what we might mean.

Whole humans’ social acts are, I believe, to share and to receive precise and accurate idea and thought. But it failed to persuade each other in spoken words or written words. As soon as words, texts or sounds departed from the original point, it starts lost its fragrance. Any of that was not perfect.

Nowadays, we all saying equalitarianism sexually, genetically. Some might said we should be all deserve to be equal and the others could persist it is where the humankind should achieve. But still, during we are talking about equality and for gaining the equality, we are fighting each other. Against each other sexually, genetically or nationally. I think that is because we all use the same word in various meaning. There is only “General” stream and estranged stream, but no one can’t tell what is the correct means of “Good” stream.

I am still young. Maybe I haven’t experienced enough to comprehend any of truth. I am not an idealist. I do not believe there will be a perfect tool to accomplish ideal society. We all are trying in individual ways. Still, none of them was perfect, or All of them were perfect. It is because I believe, we are all individuals. We might guess how we can be okay, but we impossibly know how the other could be happy. We can guess though, but it is my criterion, not theirs.

Simple answer or confusing monologue. We all different. We all cannot perfectly understand the world. There is no “one” solution for all of us. There are individual solutions for individuals. With this understanding – If there are only selves but not groups – not against each other but lean on each other, I hope I can be myself, not controlled by experiences and circumstances.

 

Or not.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Respond to I Against “against”

Leave a reply

Basic HTML is allowed. Your email address will not be published.