Dilemmas and Conundrums

There's an intrinsic problem with the world. It is too interdependent.

In an ideal world, the domino stack that starts tumbling due to a catastrophic event stops at a certain disconnected point; thus limiting the damage and sparing the rest of the setup from annihilation.

However life doesn't follow the same pattern.

I have earlier mentioned how everything we do has repercussions in places so far away that we never can imagine. While some of them are clearly visible, most of them require immense insight and thought to perceive. Due to the interconnected beings that we are, we are just as susceptible to being at the receiving end of those repercussions as we are of causing them. 

That brings us to today’s problem or conundrum as you might call it.

If you were aware of someone else's actions, and the repercussions it might have on them and yourself, just how much intervention is warranted?

Assuming that the repercussions aren't of a desired nature, the logical answer would be to take all the steps necessary to stop the cause or action that will be responsible for it. 

There are two ways that can be done. The first one is to give the right advice and hope that it will help avert an undesired result. Although the second way is more direct, it is also more intrusive; and it involves use of the words 'I Want...'

Sadly the manual of life has no directions specifying which option should be chosen at each specific moment. Let me illustrate the difference between the two. 

Giving Advice:

This is more impersonal, insensitive (most good advice is very insensitive) and less direct. It involves putting your point across in a way that seems philosophical and altruistic. However there is a problem with this way. The final outcome of the situation is dependent on the understanding and judgement of the person performing the action. This is best put in the following words. 

"Anyone who proposes to do good must not expect people to roll stones out of his way, but must accept his lot calmly if they even roll a few more upon it."

The problem with endeavoring to give the right advice is that one has to be very careful. In that the given advice may not be the right one but merely given to have the desired effect for yourself. This is akin to perjury and must be avoided at any cost.

In brief: Give the right counsel, hope it has the desired effect, and let the chips fall where they may.

I Want…:

The second and infinitely more direct method is to express the desired result.

e.g. I want you to do this.

I do not want this to happen.

I want you to take this decision.

While most people use this method to get their way, I feel that it amounts to coaxing someone to do something that you want. The power of persuasion is something that is blatantly used by many and more often than not, has the desired effect. But it also has the risk of never being able to understand someone’s actions and the underlying reasons for taking that action. By using the words ‘I Want…’ you rob yourself the chance to know what the other person might have done had you not influenced their thoughts in such a strong manner. I think that understanding that component of someone’s character is almost as important as influencing the outcome of the situation….if not more.

So when I am faced by this conundrum, I usually choose the first method. It does mean that I come across as insensitive and overly philosophical (the result of using clichés to explain certain stuff). It gives the impression of not caring enough when the truth is sometimes I care about it more than words can express.

It also means that I carry the risk of being hurt or disappointed more often than others. But I also possess the comfort of knowing that someone did something because they really wanted to and not because I told them to.

That leaves another conundrum… A clean conscience and a lot of sleepless nights. Sigh. Wouldn’t have it any other way.