I’ve come to think that way years ago, and am happy to read such a clear exposition on the point.
What’s ironic is that the first time the issue actually called my attention was while reading the famous How to Win Friends and Influence People. Now, the book is about winning, not truth, and the point of the chapter was saying to people “If I were in your position, I would have done the same thing” as a strategy to win their sympathy. Functional and teleological friend-winning strategy, sure. But when afterward Carnegie made the point that saying this wasn’t a lie — since if you were born in the same conditions and had had the same life as the other, you’d be just like him —, I couldn’t argue against it. So, surprisingly, the winning strategy did have some philosophical depth to back it up.
The kinda cheap, new age self-help book The Four Agreements also got it right with his “Don’t Take Anything Personally: Nothing others do is because of you. What others say and do is a projection of their own reality, their own dream.”
Don’t read the book, though: the twisted reasoning(?) that got the author to this rather sensible conclusion would make you want to scream. Of course, this reaction wouldn’t make much sense, ‘cause y’know, if you were a 57-year-old Mexican shaman with his exact same genetics and life experiences...’
This seems trivially false—clearly the actions of others are influenced by my existence and the things I do in myriad ways. What non-trivially-false thing do you mean to say by it?
But not ‘because’ of you. It’s not that personal. The other person carries all her dreams, histories, frustrations, hormones, cognitive biases and—which is relevant—a rather inaccurate map of the very territory that you are. Their response is more like an effect of that mix, in which, what concerns you, only a partial map of who you are play a role.
I’ve come to think that way years ago, and am happy to read such a clear exposition on the point.
What’s ironic is that the first time the issue actually called my attention was while reading the famous How to Win Friends and Influence People. Now, the book is about winning, not truth, and the point of the chapter was saying to people “If I were in your position, I would have done the same thing” as a strategy to win their sympathy. Functional and teleological friend-winning strategy, sure. But when afterward Carnegie made the point that saying this wasn’t a lie — since if you were born in the same conditions and had had the same life as the other, you’d be just like him —, I couldn’t argue against it. So, surprisingly, the winning strategy did have some philosophical depth to back it up.
The kinda cheap, new age self-help book The Four Agreements also got it right with his “Don’t Take Anything Personally: Nothing others do is because of you. What others say and do is a projection of their own reality, their own dream.”
Don’t read the book, though: the twisted reasoning(?) that got the author to this rather sensible conclusion would make you want to scream. Of course, this reaction wouldn’t make much sense, ‘cause y’know, if you were a 57-year-old Mexican shaman with his exact same genetics and life experiences...’
This seems trivially false—clearly the actions of others are influenced by my existence and the things I do in myriad ways. What non-trivially-false thing do you mean to say by it?
Influenced, yes.
But not ‘because’ of you. It’s not that personal. The other person carries all her dreams, histories, frustrations, hormones, cognitive biases and—which is relevant—a rather inaccurate map of the very territory that you are. Their response is more like an effect of that mix, in which, what concerns you, only a partial map of who you are play a role.
That seems to me a very different sentiment from the one you quoted!