3.10.2009

what it aims to preserve

if we make up patterns to gain control over situations that are out of our comfort zone then how do we know if what we are feeling, or perceiving, is real? do we make it real by acting in accordance to this perception or do we make the situation less tangible by distancing ourselves with needed patterns and insinuated emotions? 

can our perceptions be right in one place and wrong in another, even with the same person, because of an outside player? can a disturbance on one end disturb the overall if the environment has changed? or has the environment been instituted in the first place because this other party was looking for a pattern set by that same outsider? 

do we place ourselves in situations to look for patterns? and can two people be looking for two completely different designs and still find a common ground? can we even see the others ground from where we're standing? and if we can and we acknowledge it is that a pattern too? or does that disturb what we were already looking for?

what if we are looking for the same things but in different patterns and maybe all it would take is looking at where we are at face value instead of trying to substitute it with the patterns we are so used to seeing? 

is it possible for us to take things at face value, with no expectation, or want, to see something that may or may not be there? and if we can is that when real person to person connection takes place? or is this when we miss each other?

can we find each-other through the holes in the patterns we are trying to find? and if we happen to look through the same holes at the same time is that when things catch? is that when we can both fathom things working, if even for a second? 
before this outside player closes the hole and makes the pattern complete? or are we only affected by this outside player because we feel obligated to be? because we were for so long. and acknowledging their lack of power over us would be breaking a pattern that we find comfort in? 

or is this whole game a pattern in itself? and by this pattern becoming reliable and expected we never really see someone for who they could be within the context of our own life. 
and how do we break this pattern? 

3.06.2009

just with


If familiarity is a function of environment, and liking is a result of familiarity with a person, then there must be a certain amount of time where liking can turn to loving. But once that time has passed, liking will remain stagnant or start to decrease. This "threshold" (or time limit) must therefore be measured with consideration to environment. Also, If a certain amount of familiarity is essential for love then it may be possible to sustain love by re-familiarizing one person with another through a change of environment. 

familiarity -> expectation/anticipation -> ritual -> love? 

or maybe:

familiarity -> expectation -> ritual (disappointment) -> like
familiarity -> anticipation -> ritual -> love

so maybe the key is not predicting what a person is going to do and being disappointed in their not coming through but instead anticipating what someone will do and being happy when they surprise you by being unpredictable. 

now thats a concept.