A while conversing with a friend, came the question of the intangible. I suggested that he had two boxes full of important things: one with material things and the other with intangibles. Since then, over several days, it was inevitable really rethink what those intangible possessions that human beings have.
The word is an adjective which qualifies meaning anything that does not have a physical presence, ie should or should not be touched. As I read most often is associated with the economy but in this case, I refer to the intangible targeting only deep characters. In my opinion, these are mainly: the thoughts, values, languages, feelings (such as the need, love, madness, passion, excitement, tranquility, euphoria, sadness, happiness, just to name a few), the knowledge, attitude, vulnerability , perspective and experience.
The metaphor of a box so preserving important properties of a person arises from a simple vision of preserving them through a material object can be opened and closed under the consent.
The idea of \u200b\u200bdeciding who, when and where I will open my box to deliver the essence stored sounds great since I put in a position of control. But honestly I do not have to be so, I disagree with trying to control or hide myself and not share one of the definitions that I named in the second paragraph: "Do not touch that."
One in everyday life is constantly interacting with people. If you think about it a few minutes, the relationships with peers are increasingly superficial and inconsequential. Why is that? What's so great to show only insubstantial?
We are all trained from young to take an educated stance, acceptable and consistent against the company, which brings with the concealment of some beliefs, thoughts and attitudes.
time ago I read about the theory of "the layers of neurosis" of Fritz Perls, one of the great teachers of psychotherapy, which compares and explains relations between individuals using the metaphor of an onion. He argues that the authenticity of the self (the core of the onion) is under five layers: clichés and stereotypes, phobic layer, impasse, and finally imploding stratum layer explosive.
transcribe an explanation of the theory cited in the book Reaching the top and keep climbing: "we all walk through the world with a thick outer layer, which corresponds to a shell and contains all that we show others in our casual encounters every day. A costume educated and socially acceptable. If for some reason we got involved a little more, we turn one of the roles we learned and are stored and neatly classified in the second layer. Roles we learned for convenience at any time or that were imposed on us under threat, but in this we have accepted and embraced as their own. When you build a relationship, even surface with one person, open a hole in the shell and let you know some details of us who go a little beyond our first costume. I do know the other that we are compliant, or friendly, or reliable, or insecure, or workers or released. If the relationship flourishes and start to feel the seed of trust in others, may encourage me to show a third layer, that of my beliefs and thoughts more real. Someone will discover what lies beneath those roles, even at the risk of no longer think I'm nice, kind and charming. Show me the way I am. I find the last layer, near the heart, is that you go beyond words and thoughts, is the layer of emotions. I feel and I'm exposed to show it. If the other person does the same, not only know how, but I begin to understand, perhaps you can realize why they act how they act, what things have led them to be who he is. Discover not only what he does, not only thinks but also what you feel, its deepest essence. "
I think if you continue to smother in every relationship that characterizes the essence of fear of rejection ... for example, will empty the intangibles of the soul.
course, open up my box and give birth to the heterogeneity of things that make me who I am placed in a vulnerable state ... however, we may keep in a constant state of openness. It's easy to think "to be more exposed, will be weaker against the possible evil intentions of the other" but I propose to set aside that kind of thinking closely linked to insecurities and fears. Is better (and much healthier) think "that other person may also natural, authentic and without malicious intent," we must take the risk, bearing in mind that the essence of each one (the real self) is inherently solid, strong and wonderful.
By Karen Alurralde.
0 comments:
Post a Comment