I voted for reactions, instinctively. After reading the comments here, going about my busy day, coming back to read other comments, thinking about this when going to bed, etc. in a circular motion, I realized I'd chosen reactions considering the spontaneous ones, as they'd be an expression of one's instincts, of what would be one's true nature. My thought process is now lost in my mind, but it was of much value to me. In the end I concluded that character is not exactly defined by one's nature alone and that there are also delayed reactions, so I hit a standstill. I'm curious to know what you think of it yourself.
Really, it's been very interesting. Please provide us with more questions like these. My favorite post in a very long time. :)
Thanks, I'm flattered. It's nice to hear when people like my contrbutions.
I think my gut reaction would be reactions. They are more telling of the subconscious, but you can't always take it at face value. The same is true with actions. Actions are planned. It is often what you want other people to see in you. This does not mean it is a false indicator, only a partial one. You have to ask yourself, "what was the intent behind that action?" Why did that person donate to charity, for the image, or the joy of giving? Is one reason better than the other? When you see an accident, is your instinct to stop and help, or ignore it and carry on per usual? What if you were late in picking your child up from sschool? Is that a valid reason to ignore the scene and assume the next person will tend to it? We may never know the reasoning behind someones's actions and/or reactions to any given situation. But I do think we are often too quick to judge motive in many cases and this drives actions in some people. We can't always control reactions in the same manner. So our reactions can point to the nature of our actions. Does that make any sense?
action or reaction?
↑ View this comment's parent
← View full post
I voted for reactions, instinctively. After reading the comments here, going about my busy day, coming back to read other comments, thinking about this when going to bed, etc. in a circular motion, I realized I'd chosen reactions considering the spontaneous ones, as they'd be an expression of one's instincts, of what would be one's true nature. My thought process is now lost in my mind, but it was of much value to me. In the end I concluded that character is not exactly defined by one's nature alone and that there are also delayed reactions, so I hit a standstill. I'm curious to know what you think of it yourself.
Really, it's been very interesting. Please provide us with more questions like these. My favorite post in a very long time. :)
--
Anonymous Post Author
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Thanks, I'm flattered. It's nice to hear when people like my contrbutions.
I think my gut reaction would be reactions. They are more telling of the subconscious, but you can't always take it at face value. The same is true with actions. Actions are planned. It is often what you want other people to see in you. This does not mean it is a false indicator, only a partial one. You have to ask yourself, "what was the intent behind that action?" Why did that person donate to charity, for the image, or the joy of giving? Is one reason better than the other? When you see an accident, is your instinct to stop and help, or ignore it and carry on per usual? What if you were late in picking your child up from sschool? Is that a valid reason to ignore the scene and assume the next person will tend to it? We may never know the reasoning behind someones's actions and/or reactions to any given situation. But I do think we are often too quick to judge motive in many cases and this drives actions in some people. We can't always control reactions in the same manner. So our reactions can point to the nature of our actions. Does that make any sense?