tabular_rasa (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
tabular_rasa) wrote2010-09-13 06:26 pm
tabular_rasa) wrote2010-09-13 06:26 pm
Entry tags:
Writer's Block: Do you want to know a secret?
[Error: unknown template qotd]
I think it would be deeply upsetting for some people and possibly destroy a lot of relationships at first, but ultimately I think it could be a positive thing for relationships as far as what we'd learn from it.
Right now we're used to living in a world in which no one can read minds. Some people use intuition or cognitive training to accurately guess people's motivations or emotions some of the time, but I think we can agree that for the most part any one of us can assume that until we personally take action otherwise (speaking, writing, Tweeting, etc) our private thoughts remain private. This affords us not only the safety of thinking whatever we want with no repercussions, but the luxury of remaining ignorant of others' thoughts that might harm us, like that our spouse finds his 20-year-old blond coworker attractive or our girlfriends don't really like our new haircut.
If tomorrow we were to all suddenly wake up with mind-reading powers, at first chaos would ensue. The comfortable delusions that My Husband Has Never Been Attracted To Another Woman Since We Were Married or My Friends Agree With Me About Everything would disappear. We would be shocked to realize just how inconsistent and judgmental everyone's thoughts really are. For many, it would disrupt everything they previously thought to be true and would absolutely devastate them.
Once the initial shock of hearing others' thoughts uncensored in time wore off, however, I think we would get used to reading minds and come to embrace it. Lying would be impossible, so while dating we would know potential partners' secrets right away and would not be fooled by a charmer hiding malicious intentions. We would know of a history of infidelity. We might even be able to identify emotional abusers by their possessive or destructive thoughts before being psychologically trapped. On the other hand, we would also know of positive feelings others are too shy, defensive, or "manly" to say. I think dating would move much more quickly than it does now, because we would know so much about our partner almost instantly.
However, while reading minds would allow us to be more selective about our partners, immediately screening out those who could really harm us, I think being able to read more mundane negative thoughts-- nothing like malicious intentions, but just everyday judgment and snark-- would actually help us to be less picky. Knowing the innermost thoughts of everyone would force us to take a more realistic perspective regarding what people really think about us and our relationships. For example, if we hadn't all broken up with our significant others over the first time we perceived s/he fantasized about someone else in bed, we would come to see how frequent attraction and thinking about sex and relationships with other people really is-- and how it very seldom has anything to do an actual intention to cheat. (Something which I already know, but I am consistently amazed at how many women are convinced their boyfriends/husbands have never DARED look at another woman, and omg if he even looks at PORN it's as good as CHEATING). We would realize that sometimes our friends have criticisms of our lifestyle or choices, but that they kept them inside (or were waiting for a more diplomatic time) out of sensitivity to our feelings-- and that doesn't mean they are backstabbing liars, but that they struggle with the age-old conundrum of when to validate and support and when to confront and solicit advice. We would realize that thoughts are controlled by mood even more than words are, and eventually would learn that a "God, you're so fucking ANNOYING!"-- or even "Just fucking DIE!"-- isn't necessarily a friend's stable opinion of you but just the desperation of a tired or PMS-ing mind or the passion of a fight.
And knowing our thoughts are on display as well would hopefully grant us the empathy to expedite these conclusions. I don't think we can ever completely suppress our negative thoughts; the most we can do is think them first and then think how we are conflicted about them and try to think ourselves in a better pattern of thinking. Knowing the thoughts we are hearing are just as involuntary as our own, we would learn to wait for the internal correction (and possibly an apology) from our friends when they think something judgmental or insensitive. We would inevitably have to become more forgiving of the occasional negative thought, realizing that even genuine people have moments of insincerity and the nicest person will still have occasional cruel thoughts. Forced to be genuine and honest all of the time, we realize that no one person's opinion or personality trait is consistent all of the time.
All things considered, I'd still rather not live in a world where everyone could read minds. (Though I wouldn't mind if it were just me reading others' thoughts :-P My job as a teacher or psychologist would be so much easier!). As a universal trait it opens up the possibility of citizens being punished for thoughtcrime or precrime, with the law attempting to guess when negative thoughts might become reality. Bosses might start docking pay for minutes workers spend thinking about subjects other than work. (Jeez, I'd only be paid like 1/3 my salary O.o). I still think most relationships could benefit from the honesty and realistic expectations reading minds should bring, but we shouldn't have to read minds to achieve that!
Edit (7:02 pm): That I see the opening of private human nature, with all its potential for selfishness, deceit, and cruelty, as a positive thing is nothing new. It reminds me a little of when we studied Hawthorne's short story Goodman Brown in 11th grade English. My English teacher taught us that it was an allegory about public good vs. private evil, a depressing revelation that even the best of us is evil inside. She seemed perplexed by my much more optimistic interpretation: The way I see it, the Puritans were impossibly strict about holiness and sin; it was impossible not to be a sinner. The unholy meeting in the wilderness was not so much about good people being evil inside as recognizing that all human beings are incapable of the godly perfection they hold themselves to. The meeting was really about the unity of their flawed humanity-- after all, in the end, everyone is present at the ritual-- a celebration that they are imperfect and that's okay. Goodman Brown just couldn't accept it, which is his fault for being such a blasted perfectionist. People are flawed; to believe otherwise is delusional. However, to conclude from this that humans will never be anything but evil is also delusional, as it ignores that despite all our sins we still manage to do good at least half the time.
And I'm not entirely convinced Hawthorne didn't intend for the story to possibly be read my way, either, honestly.
I think it would be deeply upsetting for some people and possibly destroy a lot of relationships at first, but ultimately I think it could be a positive thing for relationships as far as what we'd learn from it.
Right now we're used to living in a world in which no one can read minds. Some people use intuition or cognitive training to accurately guess people's motivations or emotions some of the time, but I think we can agree that for the most part any one of us can assume that until we personally take action otherwise (speaking, writing, Tweeting, etc) our private thoughts remain private. This affords us not only the safety of thinking whatever we want with no repercussions, but the luxury of remaining ignorant of others' thoughts that might harm us, like that our spouse finds his 20-year-old blond coworker attractive or our girlfriends don't really like our new haircut.
If tomorrow we were to all suddenly wake up with mind-reading powers, at first chaos would ensue. The comfortable delusions that My Husband Has Never Been Attracted To Another Woman Since We Were Married or My Friends Agree With Me About Everything would disappear. We would be shocked to realize just how inconsistent and judgmental everyone's thoughts really are. For many, it would disrupt everything they previously thought to be true and would absolutely devastate them.
Once the initial shock of hearing others' thoughts uncensored in time wore off, however, I think we would get used to reading minds and come to embrace it. Lying would be impossible, so while dating we would know potential partners' secrets right away and would not be fooled by a charmer hiding malicious intentions. We would know of a history of infidelity. We might even be able to identify emotional abusers by their possessive or destructive thoughts before being psychologically trapped. On the other hand, we would also know of positive feelings others are too shy, defensive, or "manly" to say. I think dating would move much more quickly than it does now, because we would know so much about our partner almost instantly.
However, while reading minds would allow us to be more selective about our partners, immediately screening out those who could really harm us, I think being able to read more mundane negative thoughts-- nothing like malicious intentions, but just everyday judgment and snark-- would actually help us to be less picky. Knowing the innermost thoughts of everyone would force us to take a more realistic perspective regarding what people really think about us and our relationships. For example, if we hadn't all broken up with our significant others over the first time we perceived s/he fantasized about someone else in bed, we would come to see how frequent attraction and thinking about sex and relationships with other people really is-- and how it very seldom has anything to do an actual intention to cheat. (Something which I already know, but I am consistently amazed at how many women are convinced their boyfriends/husbands have never DARED look at another woman, and omg if he even looks at PORN it's as good as CHEATING). We would realize that sometimes our friends have criticisms of our lifestyle or choices, but that they kept them inside (or were waiting for a more diplomatic time) out of sensitivity to our feelings-- and that doesn't mean they are backstabbing liars, but that they struggle with the age-old conundrum of when to validate and support and when to confront and solicit advice. We would realize that thoughts are controlled by mood even more than words are, and eventually would learn that a "God, you're so fucking ANNOYING!"-- or even "Just fucking DIE!"-- isn't necessarily a friend's stable opinion of you but just the desperation of a tired or PMS-ing mind or the passion of a fight.
And knowing our thoughts are on display as well would hopefully grant us the empathy to expedite these conclusions. I don't think we can ever completely suppress our negative thoughts; the most we can do is think them first and then think how we are conflicted about them and try to think ourselves in a better pattern of thinking. Knowing the thoughts we are hearing are just as involuntary as our own, we would learn to wait for the internal correction (and possibly an apology) from our friends when they think something judgmental or insensitive. We would inevitably have to become more forgiving of the occasional negative thought, realizing that even genuine people have moments of insincerity and the nicest person will still have occasional cruel thoughts. Forced to be genuine and honest all of the time, we realize that no one person's opinion or personality trait is consistent all of the time.
All things considered, I'd still rather not live in a world where everyone could read minds. (Though I wouldn't mind if it were just me reading others' thoughts :-P My job as a teacher or psychologist would be so much easier!). As a universal trait it opens up the possibility of citizens being punished for thoughtcrime or precrime, with the law attempting to guess when negative thoughts might become reality. Bosses might start docking pay for minutes workers spend thinking about subjects other than work. (Jeez, I'd only be paid like 1/3 my salary O.o). I still think most relationships could benefit from the honesty and realistic expectations reading minds should bring, but we shouldn't have to read minds to achieve that!
Edit (7:02 pm): That I see the opening of private human nature, with all its potential for selfishness, deceit, and cruelty, as a positive thing is nothing new. It reminds me a little of when we studied Hawthorne's short story Goodman Brown in 11th grade English. My English teacher taught us that it was an allegory about public good vs. private evil, a depressing revelation that even the best of us is evil inside. She seemed perplexed by my much more optimistic interpretation: The way I see it, the Puritans were impossibly strict about holiness and sin; it was impossible not to be a sinner. The unholy meeting in the wilderness was not so much about good people being evil inside as recognizing that all human beings are incapable of the godly perfection they hold themselves to. The meeting was really about the unity of their flawed humanity-- after all, in the end, everyone is present at the ritual-- a celebration that they are imperfect and that's okay. Goodman Brown just couldn't accept it, which is his fault for being such a blasted perfectionist. People are flawed; to believe otherwise is delusional. However, to conclude from this that humans will never be anything but evil is also delusional, as it ignores that despite all our sins we still manage to do good at least half the time.
And I'm not entirely convinced Hawthorne didn't intend for the story to possibly be read my way, either, honestly.
no subject
You can't, and I'd wager we're all better off for it.