A series of stories, that is analysed by a couple, not yet together. They’re getting to know each-other by reading and watching some of their favorite stories (books / movies) and tell each-other why each means so much to themselves, what they see in the story and in the characters and what each author wanted to convey and how they view each author and the author’s intentions within own’s way of life and philosophy – and how they think each author saw the world as reflected by their creations also within the real context (cultural, social, personal) of each particular story as well as the other stories by the same author or other authors that were influential in contemporary context.. As their story-telling progresses you get to wonder what other stories will be next, what conclusions will they, or yourself, get to – and even if they will end up together or not at the end.
1. One of the stories peaks in an apparent cheesy moment about insecurity and the apparent lingering ‘primitive’ culture (as they describe it) that still primes physical-sexual appeal as worthiness. Because of some bad experiences, a girl with very small breasts was feeling very insecure and distrusting. The cheesy peak is when, in this story, she finally lets a boy get close to her and, as they arrive in an intimate moment, undressed, she feels ashamed and confesses her insecurity. To that, he proposes that they hold each-other tight as they are, so that they would feel each-other’s heart-beat. As they are tight together, he tells her that some people are like that indeed, and for that kind of guys this hold could indeed have been about feeling her breasts tight upon their chest. But, he adds, for the long run what seems to really be worthwhile, even for most of these guys, is someone with whom their heart can beat as one. As they say, two hearts close to one another beat as one – like when you hear the music your heart beats faster or slower as it ascends or descends with the rhythm. But, he continues, for that you need to listen to the other’s heart… infatuated with the sensation of the breasts the guy’s heart can start climbing on the rhythm of his fantasies… Maybe, listening only to that rhythm of sexual fantasies could work out for some people – if both are the same in that regard.. if so, possibly nothing lost there. Still, life tends to be ever more then just this supposed sexual rhythm, and so, listening to another’s heart might require patience.. If your heart is racing faster then the other’s, it’s likely only the other to be feeling your heart, just like the louder music covers the softer one. So then – if you don’t feel the other’s heart you’d need to calm yours down and listen. As your heart will beat slower it will allow the other to catch up and make itself be heard. So in this context, he says that he’s happy to feel her heart and that there are people that know this greater importance to feel someone’s heart – than the breasts. The thing is that this story has then a twist and the guy seems to have just taken advantage of her in a moment of his own demon of insecurity taking over. But until the end, like in so many movies, we find that what he said was actually the way he really saw and appreciated the world, thus he didn’t just say that because he knew is what she needed to hear, it was what he unknowingly also needed to state and clarify for himself but had not allowed himself to believe that he was also worthy of. So he initially brakes her heart as this epiphany takes him off-guard and caused him to sort of panic in a fight/ flight response. But as she starts to cry, he realises his mistake and projects his redemption in being with her, yet feels so ashamed and unworthy, resulting him in just standing and looking at her as she sobbed. The story ends sudden with him trying to amend everything by saying something and we don’t know what happens. This ending is initially discorded by the receiver of the story, but the teller goes on to say that it is part of the realisation, that there is no certainty, there are no guarantees, that anyone can have fears and insecurities of their own, that it takes a lot of patience and understanding, even patience in understanding each-other, just like letting our hearts literally feel and be felt by the other and beat along, though, the rising or the dimming of the rhythms. There is wisdom in the heart beat, not as the metaphor that we feel with our hearth, but in the patience and willingness that is required to listen to the pulse of emotions.
Considering this first story they also talk about sexual attraction and its manifestations and perception, how they initially reacted by deeming the pure physical-sexual attraction primitive. They do still find it so, but that not denying its importance and/ or potential or influence. They speak of some evolution of attraction, also in the other animals, an instinctive survival-attraction. After all the physical attraction is a manifestation of the evolved survival instinct too, but in humans – with our ability to conceptualise – this takes different forms, like a chameleon, adapting to our contextual needs and familiarity of what attachment is and how the people from the beginning of our lives gave us their example of how family members treat each other. As the conceptual attraction is so subjective and often dissimulated in the realm of everyone’s ego, they admit some sincerity in the pure-physical attraction, in that its animal instinct could convey honest attraction. But then we are conceptual and consensual animals that have found, at least part of us, redemption in the wisdom of deeper attraction and commitment than in contrast with what solely the pure-physical brings; and that not because of the contextual utility, but as a choice – as a conclusion, a self identifying resolution that allows us to be patient with someone else’s flaws because we have our own and need the same patience and just like we strive to better ourselves and believe that we ourselves can be better, someone else also can and desires to be better, realising thus and allowing our paths of evolution converge with the other’s, just like bringing our hearts together, patiently – knowingly – willingly.
Themes in the story being (at least) insecurity, intimacy and trust. (other themes to cover: survival – social/ cultural/ financial/ physical – medical; predominant lean towards rewarding/ ego-centric/ experience oriented values versus altruistic/ greater-good oriented values and how the latter is actually very subjective and causing extreme behaviour of the negative kind too; truth and selective attention to the peaks; power and vulnerability in the influential segments of humanity and from this the learned by example behaviour/ standards/ attachment manner and what love and real-value is; truth/ science and perception; maybe more)
2. Then, one of them tells about an author who seems that wanted to, and has obsessively created a set of stories that, as much as he could muster, were bringing upfront the highest fears and aspirations of man-kind and their redemptions. The teller was fascinated by how this very attempt to understand and define human-nature is actually an identifier for humanity and sets us apart from the other animals, but then how we seem to be getting to this conclusion (that we’re the most or only animal with this ability, to question) and how reluctant we seem to take this as the obvious. What could push us to consider otherwise then stories which we come-up with ourselves – an idea which disarms the concept all-together, unless a monkey would suddenly come and sit next to us and tell us what it’s all really about – when mentioning this last idea it makes them both laugh.
But then comes a reaction of the listener (to this 2nd story) that leads to the 3rd story and moves to a non-fiction author (for them). The reaction is that, while the story-parts were well detailed and complexly in-tune with reality in their regard; they were too provincial in time / place/ culture (with too little exception) to accomplish the supposed obsession, which would require a broader – holistic take. And while self-reflection seems indeed a human key treat, it doesn’t necessarily seem to be the most predominant. And so refers to the next story.
3. A scientist (neuropsychologist) and philosopher detailed a theory about how information is all around in different frequencies which are perceived to different extents (or not at all) subjectively depending on the dimension you consider. For instance, a subjective dimension would be the charisma of the bringer of the information or the appeal of the manner it is brought in our context. This can be for each of us very charismatic or appealing on one extreme down to neutral or the opposite in the other extreme. An argument is that we tend to first notice the positive peaks of this dimension and also prefer them (if we even notice the neutral or negative values or who knows where the thresholds of our ‘notification setting’ is for noticing below what value. Another dimension is the niche pair/ the match/ compatibility of the information with our subjective interests. Again there will be peaks on both ends and neutrals – and this will not necessarily be because the information is indeed not pair-able but often because we perceive it so. This takes us to another dimension which is the ability to be accurate and understandable of the transmitter. Mind that this has nothing to do with the validity of the information or the intent of the transmitter, but merely with the ability to effectively inform of the source that was on our topic and intriguing; this of-course is affected by the recipient’s ability and preponderant exposure to certain higher or lower standards of efficiency/ accuracy of information. Then of-course there’s the dimension of validity/ accuracy of the information which has nor much to do with the other dimension as any peak or threshold in any of them does not also guarantee validity. Not even the dimension of frequency; some information is more present/ repeated but that doesn’t imply if it is true or not, maybe it can show that it brought the expected result when it was stated but not much more necessarily… Also, another also very concerning dimension is the acceptance of the information – regardless if it is more present/ repeated, some information is held as a belief/ as a truth more then other information (probably affected by the subjective thresholds of the other dimensions), this also has no implication that any such information is the truth – it does however represent the perceived truth of the most. This, the author adds, is on one hand impossible or close to impossible to really accurately determine, and on the other hand, people can and have gained power by claiming they know which this is or by influencing the perception towards what they claimed – most often becoming a positively perceived transmitter of information. The author continues to explain how information in certain thresholds in these dimensions (preponderantly the peaks) result in our brain emitting corresponding stimulus/ chemicals / hormones and, often due to our biases, particularly the confirmation-bias, it tends to be selective in which synapses/ neuronal connections get stronger and expand and which are weakened or lost, thus affecting our behaviour and how we interact with and perceive the world around us.
To be continued.. (probable typos/ grammar bugs and such, it’s late..)