Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site decwrl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!decwrl!wall
From: wall@decwrl.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.singles
Subject: cold and callous
Message-ID: <5006@decwrl.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 16-Jan-84 20:32:13 EST
Article-I.D.: decwrl.5006
Posted: Mon Jan 16 20:32:13 1984
Date-Received: Wed, 18-Jan-84 06:34:09 EST
Sender: wall@decwrl.UUCP
Organization: DEC Western Research Lab, Los Altos, CA
Lines: 43

From: wall (David Wall)
Brava, Laura!  Your "cold and callous reaction" was a breath
of fresh air.

If I feel as though X mistreated me, the following case analysis
applies.  Either (a) X didn't deliver something that X promised,
or (b) X didn't deliver something that X never promised in the
first place.

In case (a), well, okay, X is a creep; but why should I mope
around over the actions of a creep?  I know a lot of people
who aren't creeps, so there's no reason to stop trusting
people in general.

In case (b), why exactly do I feel mistreated?  I must have been
expecting something not agreed on, and probably even something I
didn't bother to mention.  This may not be totally inexcusable;
I've expected my share of things without mentioning them because
I was naive enough to believe that everybody thought the same way.
But for heaven's sake is it X's fault that X can't read my mind?

The beautiful part about this is that it doesn't even make any
difference which case applies.  You can even apply it one level
up if you need some excuse for forgiving case (a), if (for example)
X is someone you have to deal with every day: Well, sure, X promised
something and then reneged.  Obviously X had a reason, and no matter
what I might think of the reason it was obviously a sufficient reason
in X's eyes.  Give X the benefit of the doubt, and get on with your
life!

Unfortunately there is by long tradition a lot of drama attached
to "having your heart broken" and it's terribly tempting to slip
into such a predefined role, talking yourself into feeling a grief
that you neither want nor need.  Discipline is required to overcome
this temptation, just like any kind of sloppy thinking.

There is perhaps a less contractual and more sympathetic way of
putting all this: There are several worse things than being by
yourself.  Being eaten by a walrus is one.  Another is being
so dependent on another person for your happiness and peace of
mind that they can make you miserable by mistreating you.  If
you have escaped that trap, regardless of the cost, count yourself
fortunate.