I was discussing couple of people (M, F) related to a friend of mine.
I told my friend that, while M and F are both a pain in the back and seen that way by most people known to them, F was better in that he was socially functional while M was dysfunctional - none could tolerate F. F came and destroyed everything, every relationship. She was a pathological liar, almost a criminal and most likely mentally ill.
F, on the other hand, was just obnoxious and a person whose absence is eminently desirable. And he was certainly no criminal.
Now my friend said she didn't care for my distinction and that both F, M had made my friend miserable.
Now I wondered. My friend was using a different yardstick to evaluate - how someone made her feel. A fine yardstick, such as it is.
My metric was what a person was without looking at how they made a particular person feel. Being a person unaffected by either of M or F, I could look at them only based on their character and how they treated others.
But if I were to live with them, I guess how they made me feel would override how they deal with others. Personal feelings truly are a source of bias. And, I guess, correctly so. It's only when one's feelings are unaffected that one can see a larger picture.
No comments:
Post a Comment