Self-confidence is often conflated with confidence in oneself.

Self-confidence is certainty in one’s capacity and righteousness. It disdains to be interrogated, anger rather than answers both to dodge self criticism (which is seen as an attack on one’s shared values, anger justified by default thus) and demo extent of surety. confidence in oneself is faith in one’s abilities and opinions etc. It stands up to interrogation. It invites questions because in answering it presents proofs.

Why’s the latter usually beaten by former?

  • Anger outscreams argument

  • Anger labels ‘trying to explain’ as ‘getting defensive’. It’s thus misperceived as an attack, propped up by the corollary prejudice that open mindedness is synonymous with weakeness, being unsure.

  • Anger repeats its slogans unchanged, reinforced by repetition into authority, a warped self-hypnosis.

  • Open-mindedness admits of apposite detail – places emphasis on truth and the drilling down to bedrock of objective fact whose importance is undeniable and independent of opinion and which side you’re on. Slogans chase lowest common denominator so even if ostensibly benign the simplification/abridging sheds subtlety, nuance, contradictions, diversity, etc. The open-minded preference for apposite detail eschews sloganizing which inevitably means a more complicated message.

Why should simple beat detail (rightly or not)?

  • it gets mistaken for clarity of insight

  • it makes no demand to be thought over

  • it is uniform

  • it plays on people’s hopes dreams idealism just as much as hate cynicism prejudice cuz the viewer instantly interprets to suit path of least resistance – feeling RIGHT also disdains interrogation

  • it is thus always on message

  • detail insists on evaluation and investigation thus no simple uniforms – not path of least resistance

  • detail sans easy uniformity admits all the uncertainties of the individual, never a leader to follow comfortably sure

Ironically, simple cherry picked uniformity that’s actually not what’s being said FEELS more right than detail that’s correct FEELS right with caveats loosens uniformity etc. Feelings when it comes to complex things that’re beyond the dictates of primate natural selection need to be seen as a shorthand for evasion and bullshit, at worst, fantasy self-indulgence at best.

Small wonder it’s not uncommon to choose the uniform and the leader and blind eye the stuff that can’t be reconciled shout louder points of consensus… another meta for path of least resistance plus submerged individualism:

Moses tends to lead the way, but not in the conspiracy destructive sinister way. The cabals are all wearing fatigues; or some other barbarian uniform.

Remember in the movie The Cable Guy? “Kill the Baby sitter!”

Of course we got the internet, Red pill, blue pill, slowly being made manifest? It’s slow-poison sugar all the same.

I think before the TV then internet trending replaced the scatter gun neuroses gestalt of parental inheritance, before God bowed to public acclaim, there was at least a human touch with care and ambition defining the trajectory and force of launch adolescence would add chaos to become the things we do in that decade of energy and hope that’s lived before we realize it.

Fuck all that.


Comments are closed, but trackbacks and pingbacks are open.