Interpreting someone’s words or deeds

nietzche

Wesley finally decided to call her friend Karen, after sometime of not knowing anything about her.

Wesley had a swift romantic relationship with Karen a couple of years ago. The relationship ended because Karen was in love with another guy, Terry.

From Karen’s perspective, Wesley was the kind of supportive person who was helping her while she “rebuilt herself,” while she was alone, after breaking up with Terry.

From Wesley’s perspective, that “rebuilding herself” meant “until Terry called her again.”

Destiny brought a surprise to Wesley.

Karen was available again! She just finished a 2-year relationship with Tom.

Wesley went out with Karen. They had a good time. Karen embraced Wesley effusively at the end of the night, smiled at him and left.

Wesley interpreted that hug as the open door to pursue Karen.

From Karen’s perspective, that effusive hug was her appreciation and care for Wesley.

It was Wesley’s interpretation, which brought about his own disappointment later on: Karen repeated the same pattern. She gave Tom, her latest “better half” a new opportunity to reunite.

This example illustrates the danger of interpretation.

Interpretation cannot convey the true meaning of things, for it is limited to our own life experiences. To value or judge others based on what we consider to be “right” is to be narrow-minded.
To believe that God has a “formula” of what is “good or bad” is truly infantile.

An interpretation is a belief… and beliefs are just that. Beliefs.

To be able to perceive the unspoken language, or the expression behind words and behaviors, is an art which requires a different kind of intelligence.

Human beings are contradictive in nature. For example, living a long life is the ideal for most minds but not to get old and decrepit. We cannot live a long life without getting old… 🙂
That contradiction implies a paradoxical aspect of life.

When there is an interpretation of a text or a talk by someone, we could only go as far as our own experience.

The well-known Guru “Top Cat,” meowed to his gang: “ In love 2 beings become One, but yet they are 2.”

The logical “Brain” interpreted: “ It is not logical that 2 beings could be 1, for 1+1 =2 not 1. TC is wrong. Logic is always right.”

The philosophical “Choo-choo” interpreted: “For 2 to be One, someone must follow the other. Love then is to follow the beloved.”

The metaphysical “Benny” said: “ There is unity in nothingness. An egoless romance of 2 is always one.”

The fun-loving “Spook” interpreted: “ Like …cheese and bread, man.”

“Fancy-Fancy” did not say a thing. He probably knew by “experience.” 🙂

Our experience is not the benchmark for understanding. It is just the way life has chosen to interact with us.

Reality is when interpretation is not.

3 comments

  1. avyakt7

    I like that one Hariod! 🙂
    What about this one: Life is not death but there is no death without life.. so.. are life and death different? Yes… but no… 🙂

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s