Lord777
Professional
- Messages
- 2,579
- Reaction score
- 1,513
- Points
- 113
The Strugatskys' novel Ugly Swans contains the following lines: “... because the she-wolf says to her cubs:“ Bite like me, ”and that's enough, and the hare teaches the bunnies:“ Run away like me, ”and that's also enough, but a man teaches the cub: "Think like me", and this is already a crime ... "
The problem is that independent thinking is often perceived by loved ones as a betrayal. "Are you crazy! What are you talking about! We didn't raise you like that!" - say the parents to the teenager and sincerely worry, believing that they have lost their boy (girl) in the wilds of free thought.
It doesn't matter what the young man says: that he does not believe in God, does not want to get a higher education, is not going to register a marriage, falls in love with people of the same sex, or plans to create his own political party - tools to neutralize his inappropriate views are universal and varied at the same time.
For example, devaluation and ridicule: “Have you heard how mad is ours? He came up with the idea that there is no God / the family has outlived its usefulness / there is some kind of orientation besides the usual / that he can engage in politics - ahaha! Well, age, hormones. Nothing, nothing. "And all this in a condescending tone of a psychiatrist, persuading not to attach importance to delusional statements. It works like this: a person is allowed to say whatever he wants, because everything he says has no meaning because of his" temporary insanity. "Another trick is to inform in a low, serious voice that the mother (grandmother, cousin with a weak heart) will not survive IT. You can twist your hands and ask" not to injure. "The second option is to ask“ do not disgrace. ”The mechanism is as follows: responsibility is shifted onto a person for that others may have different feelings due to disagreement with someone else's point of view. Served with the sauce "since they are worried about you, their worries belong to you, make them calm down." If the freethinker is not a flint, then very soon he will stop distinguishing his experiences from his aunt's and grandmother's and will begin to suffer for the whole family, thrusting his ideas somewhere deeper.
You can try to stigmatize and hang a label - this will deprive a person of the opportunity to express and defend their point of view. Because everything is clear with him. He is an atheist / ignoramus / shame of the family / all in Uncle Vasya - he was the same idiot and drank himself to drink by the age of forty. It works in much the same way as the first method: everything that the person-with-a-label says is deprived of meaning as a result of devaluation of the very personality of the free-thinker.
You can starve out, ignore, shame, mock, scandal, humiliate, blackmail with your health and close relationships. And never enter into a conversation on equal terms, not be interested in how an idea develops, what is valuable in it for a person, what all this means for himself. Because the meaning is always the same: “Think like me. It's safe and understandable for me when you think the same. "
Many teenagers have to fight so fiercely for the right to think for themselves that there is no time left for this war to think. Already balding, they still defend themselves, forgetting about the content. Others never tell anyone what they are really thinking. Even myself. Only psoriasis, headaches and alcohol abuse betray the need to formulate one's own thoughts, suppressed in childhood.
The Strugatsky brothers were right: to impose their own way of thinking on a living person is a crime. This can kill. At least it's great to cripple.
And the worst thing is that this is always done under the guise of care and love - for the “good” of the one who is “mistaken”.
The problem is that independent thinking is often perceived by loved ones as a betrayal. "Are you crazy! What are you talking about! We didn't raise you like that!" - say the parents to the teenager and sincerely worry, believing that they have lost their boy (girl) in the wilds of free thought.
It doesn't matter what the young man says: that he does not believe in God, does not want to get a higher education, is not going to register a marriage, falls in love with people of the same sex, or plans to create his own political party - tools to neutralize his inappropriate views are universal and varied at the same time.
For example, devaluation and ridicule: “Have you heard how mad is ours? He came up with the idea that there is no God / the family has outlived its usefulness / there is some kind of orientation besides the usual / that he can engage in politics - ahaha! Well, age, hormones. Nothing, nothing. "And all this in a condescending tone of a psychiatrist, persuading not to attach importance to delusional statements. It works like this: a person is allowed to say whatever he wants, because everything he says has no meaning because of his" temporary insanity. "Another trick is to inform in a low, serious voice that the mother (grandmother, cousin with a weak heart) will not survive IT. You can twist your hands and ask" not to injure. "The second option is to ask“ do not disgrace. ”The mechanism is as follows: responsibility is shifted onto a person for that others may have different feelings due to disagreement with someone else's point of view. Served with the sauce "since they are worried about you, their worries belong to you, make them calm down." If the freethinker is not a flint, then very soon he will stop distinguishing his experiences from his aunt's and grandmother's and will begin to suffer for the whole family, thrusting his ideas somewhere deeper.
You can try to stigmatize and hang a label - this will deprive a person of the opportunity to express and defend their point of view. Because everything is clear with him. He is an atheist / ignoramus / shame of the family / all in Uncle Vasya - he was the same idiot and drank himself to drink by the age of forty. It works in much the same way as the first method: everything that the person-with-a-label says is deprived of meaning as a result of devaluation of the very personality of the free-thinker.
You can starve out, ignore, shame, mock, scandal, humiliate, blackmail with your health and close relationships. And never enter into a conversation on equal terms, not be interested in how an idea develops, what is valuable in it for a person, what all this means for himself. Because the meaning is always the same: “Think like me. It's safe and understandable for me when you think the same. "
Many teenagers have to fight so fiercely for the right to think for themselves that there is no time left for this war to think. Already balding, they still defend themselves, forgetting about the content. Others never tell anyone what they are really thinking. Even myself. Only psoriasis, headaches and alcohol abuse betray the need to formulate one's own thoughts, suppressed in childhood.
The Strugatsky brothers were right: to impose their own way of thinking on a living person is a crime. This can kill. At least it's great to cripple.
And the worst thing is that this is always done under the guise of care and love - for the “good” of the one who is “mistaken”.
