There's a marked tendency towards thinking, nowadays, that it's better and more admireable to be "proactive" rather than "reactive". A "proactive" person is one that makes thinks happen, while a "reactive" person lets them happen before doing anything. The proactive is an agent of change, who takes the world in his or her hands and makes his own destiny, while the reactive is a shell in the ocean, going wherever the the tide washes him or her off. Well, you put it like that, and you definitivelly want to be proactive instead of reactive. That's the way it is being marketed currently, mostly because so many things need to be changed in the social and economical life, that it is better if the whole herd thinks they are moving because they want to instead of realizing that they are being moved. So far I have not thought much about these concepts until recently someone made me think.
Actually a proactive person is the one that acts before things happen, and the reactive is the one who acts after things happen. SO, "shoot first, ask later" IS a proactive behavior.
Based on that, I started doing some thinking and I have come to the conclusion that being "reactive" not only works better for me, but also it is what I do. I ask first, and then based on the information I get, I either shoot, bomb, squash, smoke, evaporate, disintegrate or let it flow. It is also a very important brick of my personal philosophy: observe first, gather the info and then act upon it, don1t just throw yourself at things. The rewards of this thinking are... clear. ^_^ This way of behaving allows you to "profile", and this allows you to tackle tasks better. sure, it allows you in all kinds of good and nice things, and strategic things too, but also in "not-so-nice" things too, such as... manipulation.
Perhaps I'm just being egged by my recent smashing success, but I started considering the possibility of writing a treaty on Manipulation. Yes, what an evil thing to do, but wouldn't it be a wonderful philosophical and social work? How far to go? Well, my thesis on this, fairly sustained by empirical evidence, would be the conscious manipulation based on person or group profiling, fully upon the "reactive" behavior. Basically know your pupet before you play with it. READ THE MANUAL! The thought came to me as I was basking in my recent success, fairly boosted in the morning by yet another proof of efectiveness (he still expresses regret), which I managed again with my same strategy. So I was wondering what to do next, how to keep laying down the trap, or my recent and favorite analogy: how to keep wrapping the sixpack plastic rings around the neck ot the duck. Then, I had a moment of reality check. Well, yes, I have ease at profiling people on the emotional level, mostly because I write, and because I enjoy figuring out people. At the same time, this particular... "duck" happens to be one of my favorite, most studied profiles, so years of experience on this particular type give me advantage. Proof of it is how I needed only one lunch with him to figure him out to the point of knowing which buttons should I press to get him wrapped up in my evil web. Would I be able to manipulate him for less mean purposes? Were I not so revengeful, would I be REALLY interested (no real interest disappears after disappointment in less than 2 hours... lets get real), probably I might, but I was aiming for harm, so I would have to make further investigation and profiling for other purposes.
So, write a treaty based on one specific character and one specific goal in mind?
Hn.
The project is interesting. I think I'll compliment it first with some readings of criminal and psichological profiling.
Actually a proactive person is the one that acts before things happen, and the reactive is the one who acts after things happen. SO, "shoot first, ask later" IS a proactive behavior.
Based on that, I started doing some thinking and I have come to the conclusion that being "reactive" not only works better for me, but also it is what I do. I ask first, and then based on the information I get, I either shoot, bomb, squash, smoke, evaporate, disintegrate or let it flow. It is also a very important brick of my personal philosophy: observe first, gather the info and then act upon it, don1t just throw yourself at things. The rewards of this thinking are... clear. ^_^ This way of behaving allows you to "profile", and this allows you to tackle tasks better. sure, it allows you in all kinds of good and nice things, and strategic things too, but also in "not-so-nice" things too, such as... manipulation.
Perhaps I'm just being egged by my recent smashing success, but I started considering the possibility of writing a treaty on Manipulation. Yes, what an evil thing to do, but wouldn't it be a wonderful philosophical and social work? How far to go? Well, my thesis on this, fairly sustained by empirical evidence, would be the conscious manipulation based on person or group profiling, fully upon the "reactive" behavior. Basically know your pupet before you play with it. READ THE MANUAL! The thought came to me as I was basking in my recent success, fairly boosted in the morning by yet another proof of efectiveness (he still expresses regret), which I managed again with my same strategy. So I was wondering what to do next, how to keep laying down the trap, or my recent and favorite analogy: how to keep wrapping the sixpack plastic rings around the neck ot the duck. Then, I had a moment of reality check. Well, yes, I have ease at profiling people on the emotional level, mostly because I write, and because I enjoy figuring out people. At the same time, this particular... "duck" happens to be one of my favorite, most studied profiles, so years of experience on this particular type give me advantage. Proof of it is how I needed only one lunch with him to figure him out to the point of knowing which buttons should I press to get him wrapped up in my evil web. Would I be able to manipulate him for less mean purposes? Were I not so revengeful, would I be REALLY interested (no real interest disappears after disappointment in less than 2 hours... lets get real), probably I might, but I was aiming for harm, so I would have to make further investigation and profiling for other purposes.
So, write a treaty based on one specific character and one specific goal in mind?
Hn.
The project is interesting. I think I'll compliment it first with some readings of criminal and psichological profiling.
1 comment:
I believe we are mostly a combination of both. For instance, I do tend to survey the situation before plunging into it. That's reactive, and truth to be told, given the conditions in which we are submerged daily. "Reactive" is the best fit survival attitude. However, you can become proactive when no-fucking-body is doing JACK to get things going and you decide to kame things happen. Also, you are proactive, when you decide to take a chance, risk into the unknown, open for anything, what heppens happens and you are up to shoulder consequences.
Proactive is certainly a riskier attitude.
Post a Comment