Serenity then Loneliness

It was her presence around him that made him effervescent. It was a bliss that he came to know her, and after that they used to spend hours reciprocating experiences imparted upon them from various realms, rendering an atmosphere of halcyon within their vicinity. But his pedantic nature always used to create enmities for himself, and she being part of the human race was no exception. It wasn't long enough until a deplorable scene disclosed itself upon their days filled with gaiety to outline a new despicable reality.

Now, lying on his couch, struck by lethargy and abulia, his mind restlessly dwells in reminiscence, and his limbs are numb, picturing himself as an ineffectual piece of flesh despite his great scholarly achievements. Indeed, he was endowed with great mental capacities, yet this brought him knowledge and not people, for he might have forgot that he must always realize the dichotomy between people and ideas.

An Impending Situation with some psychological analysis

People who often describe a bad situation that is impending, then they go on repeating how they will react upon the situation and they go on changing tactics in one talk several times, may reflect an inner stress that is lingering for long in their mind. Whenever they try to calm themselves, this stress makes its firings that provoke a state that calls for simulating the upcoming situation and by that they go on forming future narratives that might sooth their ego. In most cases, when the situation is processing, the stressful person follows a very different path of what he was describing, for he was and is dictated by his emotions and surroundings and the situation provides a real and different environment rather than an imaginative one that was presented by his mind, important to mention that his mind was creating the upper hand for himself in the mind-made situations.

I take a step forward on this aspect, and wonder if this attitude is exclusive for people with certain inclinations and understanding of the world? Does it have any relation to depth and superficiality? Does it address any aspect about the knowledge of the person? Can it shade any light upon the reality that such people are naïve or dishonest? Can we impute fear to their act and adduce this aspect with some argument? 

I think that indeed people who usually act in this fashion have certain understandings, which they might be unconscious about, and that is that people are conspiring against them and that they can in no way negotiate with these conspirers. These people might be inclined toward the belief that as these conspirers are just holding their stances then there is no means to convince them logically but the only way is to be brusque. Secondly, they might have strong beliefs that they are the ones who are facing the world in the best way and the rest of the world are dealing with aspects with some degree of naivety. 

Relating this aspect to depth and superficiality, it is not hard to realize that these people might have superficial understanding on many aspects, and it is well known that superficial people are damn sure about their stand, as they have not been shocked by the realization that they had been holding utterly erroneous understandings. People with some depth realize that their perspective might be a marred one compared to what others hold, and this gives them the initiative of allowing the others to adduce their arguments, on contrary, the person who has never felt this feeling of mistake so deep, can hardly convince himself that he might be carrying the wrong point of view. 

It addresses the person’s knowledge directly, and we can know so by reading the number of possibilities the person puts forward. One can ask this person if he thinks that there are different possibilities to happen at the situation and by his reply one can understand how far this person has knowledge in the matter being addressed. 

I think such people have a certain degree of dishonesty with themselves. They might be saying their words, of projecting how they will act, and at the same time, maybe, they realize that a certain feeling in them is notifying them that they will hardly act in this way, yet they force their words to be articulated just to show the audience their audacity. The reactions of these people, when presented with counter arguments of what they are saying, makes stronger the point that they are impetuously throwing words without even giving good attention to how the circumstance may unfold. 

I think that this whole step is taken to sooth themselves of what they might regard as an impending danger. They do it the first time and the calming feeling they experience calls them to repeat what they are saying as it covers the reality that is upcoming. When giving their simulations, they won’t allow too much interruption as that will diminish the calming effect of their act. With this, I think that I have gained a strong ground on saying that this shows that their act is based on a kind of fear that they are trying to distort in their brain. It is lingering and causing them stress and this is how they counter it and such counters might be good but for the very short-term and it gains the person no new skills in dealing with situations, neither does it polish any former skill but it just acts as a brain analgesic.