Behaviour

Another part of on independence, looking at the modelling and whipping of people into a specific seating and what this means for their interactions and identity in the world

There is a specific way to be that is accepted by the group as the way that the normal person should be in each given situation. This is not something that is actively thought of like the way you look, but is more like the way that your face looks before you apply anything to it, utterly natural but more controlled than that.

From the moment you are born, you are aware of other people around you and how they behave and you see that such behaviour is accepted by others, as a natural animal that needs to survive you will appropriate this behaviour and the communication the other people use as the correct way to be, so that you are the most successful you can be.

This is something that does not stop no matter how aware the individual may become of it they will always be locked in behaving as they feel they should. There are those that will create the ideas of behaving, such as new gestures or ways of sitting in accordance with, or a display of a wider ideal. That is to say that for example if you believed in freedom of the individual and the end of oppression, you would likely behave this way toward parents or any authority figure, because the idea of authority to you is something to be fought against.

No person can honestly say that they will always behave the same, will always be the same person, because these things are determined by the situation, they are relative. You will not be the same to your girlfriend as you would to your grandmother, because the concepts of the two people relative to you are different.

This is something that looks up into the higher ideals, the concepts of what is correct and how one should be in a given situation, and this is gained all the way back to the beginnings of how people were, though really it is how the powers above see the correct behaviour. That is the argument that we have an innate way of seeing people above us and therefore following them so that those that are more open to more people because of their popularity and power should be followed. At this scale, it should be understood that behaviour is an extension of acceptance of hierarchical place, that if you are young you are not able to behave as the older and the greater.

That would be ridiculous; you would not be able to apply the ideas of being wise and understanding, as you have not in a strange way achieved the rank of that person. The highest mark of this is age. This is a strange immunity from judgement in a way, which you are when old not able to be ridiculed in the same way as the inexperienced have. This is as I have said before something that is limited; once you are very old you become vulnerable and hungry of care.

There is a golden age though, where no matter your intelligence or in many ways your status, there will at least be one way that you are able to be far above the alternatives, and so you will find that no matter what you do, you are held as someone who is intelligent, though it doesn’t matter the level.

This is because of an old idea that by living, that by experiencing life and existing for a long time, you become someone better, and even more than just the appreciation of the old, there are also laws that follow this idea. This is based on the impressions that as a general rule people become better through living, so that when you have been alive for eighteen years you are an adult, and so you gain new privileges.

This is a part of behaviour, though these arguments are things that should be a part of the further arguments, at this scale your own awareness to the world around you and how it perceives your age is something that determines how you behave.

When you are young, you can behave as you wish, because of the lack of teaching and independent thought that you have at the time, and in the very beginning you will do whatever you wish, the only thing that stops you from behaving in a specific way is the punishment of those above you.

This is the structuring of you, the restrictions of who you are due to what you can do, from the wider ideals of law to the norms of family, you know what is correct and so more complexly, this is the making of your behaviour. This is only something that is going to be overcome if you want to be something even better or because of this system pushing you down, and so for you it is best to fight against the rules because they are the cause of your hardship.

As you progress you are given more and more complex views of what is correct, from the fear of not having something or being punished. This is a way to make sure that the majority of people behave in a way that is acceptable, and the easiest way to be, that is to say that people are not going to voluntarily behave so that they are ridiculed or separated.

Instead by creating restrictions on people, you are able to create the existence of rules and restrictions and a way of making sure that people do not defer from the right way too much by having a system that makes that a bad thing.

This is an innate part of survival, that you should conform to be a part of the society and so someone that is going to reproduce more people. What this then leads to is a battle of being unique and interesting while still being within the general levels of what is correct.

To the general person then, to the behaviour of a person that clings to not being a conformist, that they try to be unique, and in some cases forcibly so, trying to show themselves as someone that is beyond just the normal and boring person.

As far as I can see though, this is a ridiculousness as a lot of the people that say they are not normal are the majority, and somehow try to say that there is a boring normal person out there that they do not want to be. This is of course one of the many people that is somewhere along the scale of being a married person with children.

People choose to rebel, they choose that they wish not to be a part of this process, but much in media and advertising forces you to become this, forces you to become at least a little into this idea of the normal person. There is no way to avoid being someone that is the accepted human, someone that is pleasant and has a social group, someone that is confident and happy at least in the fact that they have displayed this.

I have watched people communicate with others, competing to be the best person you can in these ideas of acceptance, so that when there is a point of reaction, you should be the most happy, you should be the most loud. Though this involves politeness, it is in the loudness of how you act and the way that you talk, so that you make sure that though from the outside you can be seen as someone that is polite, you are competing and fighting with other people.

When you act and react, you will be trying to make yourself the source of the most attention, you will be loud, and try to be the most odd, try to be the one that gains the most laughs, and is in a way the most unique. Even if you try to go against the order of things, pure rebellion, you will be categorised as a specific type of person, i.e. a rebel that whenever another person sees them will know that the norm will be fought against, that is to say that they invent a norm that is the opposite to other norms.

Therefore each person is not going to try to be defined by other ideas of how they should behave, they want to be someone that though the general behaviour may define them, they also have things that are above the ideas of this general umbrella term of how to be.

That is the natural way to be and of course if you are away from this idea you are someone that is held in ridicule, that is seen as minor and in some way failing as they have not achieved this idea of an acceptable person. For women there is the push to want to be a parent, as maternally they wish to care. This can be the same for the man, and also that they wish to be able to protect their own family and create the bond that they once had.

The entire invention of family is something for the next level of discussion, but it should be seen that in each person’s behaviour, you are not able to be unique as part of the overall machine, and that really those ideas of uniqueness are the ideas that are shared by other people, and so is not actually unique.

Of course different people will have different behaviour, as they are obviously different, they are not going to be exactly the same, but there are still impressions and it is still going to end up in the same level as the other people. That is to say that you will become an adult, that you will be expected again to become a parent and a successful person.

 

To the idea of ranks more though, this is the levels of people that can control how you behave and thus who can punish and control who. This can be seen at many levels, but for the single person is based on their appearance and status, all of which can be seen in their behaviour.

This is the place of maturity and communications as well as the strange identifier of age, which if you behave as someone that is intelligent, then there is no reason to doubt that you are, and so what you say is going to be listened to in a higher regard than those that are immature as a general rule. The thing of age is that it is believed that when you reach specific ages, you will become a specific level of maturity and so you will be worthy of new freedoms.

This is a generalisation that comes from an inherent part of culture, as you will see later, that ease and norms are things that need to be so that society can function easily, but as with the individuals’ normalisation of people, it is fraught with dangers.

This is because you attribute ideals onto a person based on how they behave is basing your idea of them on a version of how they behave, and so your entire view of who that person is becomes relative. Most engagements stay in one situation, so this difference is not found, but still the very perception of who that person is still is not something that is constant.

I think this really needs a change in the definition of what a person’s identity is. Firstly there is the layer that everyone can see, a layer that the individual decides is appropriate for everyone to see, and for most will be a serious and open person, an all size fits all way of being.

This can then be built upon, depending on where you are that you secondarily scale yourself in comparison to who you are talking to, because of what you see as their expectations of you.

This is that when you need to be a specific way then you will be, so that you will be a morphing impression of the type of person you are, that you are either a very general person who is only choosing some parts to display to others, or there are some of the attributes that are truly you, and so you generally accept other attributes for some situations, so that therefore they are pretending.

In the first instance, you are too much of a general person to have any real uniqueness, so that really you are just a basic person that contains the acceptable views so that they are able to continue in life. This is the same as if you hide things that you believe to be true so that you can be seen as a correct person, as by not saying something you are in a way agreeing to the other people.

Usually you are able to fit into groups that you wish to be a part of, that by disagreeing you are not able to just become someone that disagrees outright with other opinions, you need to be a part of something that contains the same view as you to hold any confidence in such a view. As in the wild world, you will not be able to be separate from other people in the group, by not allowing yourself to be excluded; you can be neutral even if you disagree.

To be a person that edits how you feel, you are not able to show who you truly are to anyone unless they agree to exactly how you feel. This then would mean that you have created immunity from difference to how you are and what you believe, so that though you know there are other views, you cannot see them, and as you are not criticised you care less and less about what they think and have your own opinion strengthened.

Rank though is the very engine that makes sure there is a scale of who is right above the person that is also right, so that even if there are people that agree with each other, there are levels to how that is reacted to. It is authority and the levels that create order, so that where there is not the idea of right and wrong, there is command.

 

Behaviour of course is something that is changed, so that you will get bonds to other people and perceptions that have come from nothing in the beginning but have now created strength. This is because at the beginning you know nothing; you feel nothing toward people, but slowly you will gain the idea of bonds and in that creates them.

People that at the beginning did not know each other will become close because first of at least some attraction or something that they hold that is similar. Only in looking an extreme manner do you segregate yourself, but normally there is nothing that will get in the way of two people creating a bond.

This is the pack mentality of other people, so that you will yearn to get other bonds so that in these numbers you can find something of your own enjoyment, so that you can gain confidence and satisfaction that is beyond the purely sexual. People will mostly create links and then stay with those links, only ever exclusively creating links with new people when they are seen as good enough to be in your group. This is a way of keeping yourself separate from others, as in your own collection of bonds you are beyond the other people, and do not have to prove yourself socially again.

These links are something that can partly be seen as the pressure of the world around us, that we wish to reach the level of being that the other people have also reached, so that you can be at least equal to them, and of course for those that have accomplished these tasks they have the strong feeling of being greater than those that have not.

At the beginning if these bonds are not just to feed ego and to answer for instinct that you have to get yourself into groups, it is also born from the physical level up. When you first get into a relationship with someone, there is the excitement and then the actual physical-ness of being together.

This actually will create a strong natural feeling of connection and thrill, and so it will be hard to separate yourself from the other person. If there is nothing particularly wrong with the other person, then the relationship will continue forever. Most of the things that exist in human life can be seen to at least partly be fabricated in exaggeration. This can be seen in such things as love and family, in that it is a sacred bond and something that is special and amazing.

The media and individuals dream of some immensely satisfying world, and so they apply imagination and hopeful creation that masks the reality of feeling so that in a way we can all think that we are better than the animals that form bonds much the same as we do.

Part of being a human is being able to lie about what is around you, which can be seen in a way in the acceptance of rules and faiths, though this is something for later, it can be seen on the level of behaviour that the majority of people accept what is believed to be right, and conform to it, rather than challenge what is there.

I would say that sadly it is the same with experience, that like if you are in a hysterical crowd, you are going to feel as the people around you do without realising that you are, and the same as in bonds, you have seen people react emotionally, and so not to be outdone or to appear strange, you join in with gusto.

This is the pull of peer pressure that every person has felt at least once, that want to be a part of at least one group, and so abate the in-built inferiority every one of us have, but that is a subject that will need to wait for later.

 

Behaviour of course has to be controlled and understood, that people search to groups and again can be defined by what they do is a part of survival and another example that highlights the fact we are not as devoid of the rules of nature as we thought.

This is the way that mankind is still evolving its people, by controlling the process themselves, systems are able to make sure that the right people get the most privileges and so remain the most attractive.

It is something that should act as a way to make men better by showing them a negative reaction to things that they do which are wrong.