A source of misunderstanding between individuals comes from the fact that some of them have an exclusively literal culture of events while others have a symbolic reading of those.
To the first category, this seems completely disproportionate and they cannot understand how this symbolic reading impacts so much those who function this way.
The latter cannot be satisfied with hyper-operationality, with a literal reading and fail to perceive how one can cross the waves without grasping more subtle resonances.
Notes & Silence 
Some see only chance, others see signs.
Same is true of language. Professionally , I require exact, literal interpretations. If I forget to « turn off », the resulting misunderstandings in conversation can be equally frustrating and funny.
J’aimeJ’aime
This tendency to be on a quest for literal interpretation, when not turned off, can make everything come across as obsessional…
I sometimes have one of those days when I don’t « turn off » this feature…And spend my time trying to corner everyone and expose what has never been present in the first place.
I guess this happens when minds get over analytical and cannot find an object that is entangled enough for them to ‘play’ with.
Unbearable me.
I have no idea whether this has a connection with the initial text here.
I have studied law for 2 years only but I have a faint idea of how meticulous (fussy ?) conversations may be…
furthermore, linguistic, which I’ve discovered afterwards, is not itself deprived of such obsessive considerations.
It may even be worse, harder to cope with.
As opposed to legal spheres, linguistics lingo and dissection may eventually be of any help to no one.
J’aimeAimé par 1 personne
You are a hopeless optimist if you think legal spheres are useful. Save for feeding the egos of self important lawyers. A plague on all their houses.
How does the rational mind read the symbolic? Through analysis? Inevitably, I suppose. But it runs the danger of ignoring one simple but very important question.
« What does X mean to me? »
J’aimeAimé par 1 personne
This question is only worth considering once we’ve considered the following :
What is me ?
Who is I ?
Considering legal spheres, it is true that I’m often baffled by the sheer violence emanating from the people professionally involved therein.
I guess only ego can feed such ferocious fires.
Have a nice and domestic (as opposed to wild and barbarian) Sunday.
J’aimeAimé par 1 personne
Sometimes, wild and barbarian might make a refreshing change…
Enjoy your day, also
J’aimeAimé par 1 personne
In case you had this refreshing savage Sunday, I wish you a comfortable return to the velvet slippers of civilization.
What IS refreshing is to always consider how superficial is the varnish of civilization.
I’d say :the shinier the lacquer, the easier is it to see it splinter.
« 3 meals, » said Churchill, who knew a thing or two about barbarian habits.
J’aimeAimé par 1 personne
When I seek refreshing savagery, I seek the mountains, the sea or, simply, the wind.
We carry this wildness within us, but it is more easily accessed through such means.
But do not discount poetry and music either. These are not natural companions of polite society.
J’aimeAimé par 1 personne
‘polite society’ is a toned down version for ‘useless noise.’
Any poetry praised by such society is useless.
Any music it lauds is noise.
Such incompatibility seems to increase as centuries unfold.
J’aimeAimé par 1 personne
I grew up in Dunkirk.
The sea and the wind are home.
To such a point that when I left this town to go to university,
I discovered oceans of concrete
and building blocking off the winds and hiding the sky,
I was homeless.
J’aimeAimé par 1 personne