thePIANIST

Thursday, 5 November 2009

qualifications, disclaimers, pre-emptive measures..

Been thinking about this habit of mine for eons. Maybe it's not so much a habit, but pretty much in my character. Whatever the case, it was brought up quite some time ago by a friend, procrastinated in penning this entry, subsequently matriculated into law school and realised how true it was and its attached extensions.

Two main points on the basic situation:
1) I tend to qualify myself in whatever I say, giving tons of disclaimers to certain things.
2) I tend to, upon receiving someone's feedback and reply to my proposition, acknowledge their viewpoint and then simply going on to dismiss them and put mine across - what it looks like is that I seem to have taken into account a person's perspective when in reality, I merely acknowledged his viewpoint without giving much consideration - or at least, that's what my friend pointed out in those observations/comments about me.

First things first, I'll admit to the first point. Well, I can be pretty insecure about myself, about my thoughts (and yes God knows why I'm putting my thoughts to public scrutiny in the cyber world). Sometimes when people point out my blatant error (which I didnt see it so plainly initially), and I realise that it was sheer ignorance on my part and there's no way out of it, then yeah, I'll just remark major fail, attempt to laugh at myself, and make light out of the whole situation. After all, if you have made a mistake, best to acknowledge and admit it than to spiral down the path of further mistakes and embarrassment, while at the same time amusing your friends and providing some comic relief. But such innocuous situations aside, to caveat my remarks and statements are but a way of showing a balanced consideration, and more importantly to give myself a back-door. You can pretty much think of it as a disclaimer or exclusion/limitation clause in a contract/agreement kind of thing. Yes, it does get irritating for some people to talk to me but I guess, that'll just be one of my idiosyncrasies that ain't likely to change.

As for the second issue of discounting and dismissing people's opinions, I'll admit, too, that sometimes I'm guilty of that, but definitely not all the time, notwithstanding the ostensible circumstances. Sometimes, I rebut pretty quickly because the alternative proposed has streaked through my mind before, at some point in time; sometimes, I am just being insecure and it's a defence mechanism that kicks up when I feel that the other party is being vindictive or exploitative; sometimes, it's to see how well-thought-through the person is of his idea, and how strongly he feels for it. Nonetheless, it's palpable (or so I hope) that if you feel sufficiently strongly for something and once again puts it across to me, I will, at the end of the day, listen to you properly and evaluate that alternative.

And if you are one of those who simply can't stand this trait of mine, then it's really a pity because I doubt it'll go away. Especially after 3 months in law school, I'll admit that it manifests itself in many more ways than I could have imagined. When Prof Arun asks a question, there's an impulse to shoot off my mouth my exact thoughts and feelings, but I've learnt from experience that I'll be immediately thrown with the alternative view. So it turns out, when I want to say something, I'll come up with something contradictory to what I wanted to say, and then the battle of ideas takes place inside my mind and I start to trail off. Or when someone asks me something, my mind immediately splits into both sides, or if you want, half of my brain is wearing the Black Hat, and the other half is wearing the Yellow Hat. It pretty much takes place simultaneously, though yes, I know it goes against the teachings of Edward De Bono's 6 Thinking Hats.

Anyhows, I've finally thought through it, and gone through with this entry, and I can (pretty proudly, I must say) say that qualifications, disclaimers and pre-empt are just ways by which I function. I'm not saying it's a good or a bad thing, though it really gets irritating when I realise that almost after every viewpoint/stand I state, the word 'but' immediately follows. Indeed, sometimes on MSN while chatting with friends I had already typed out my but-statements, but I chose to press the backspace key and left it open. Sometimes it's easier that way, sometimes it aint.

To the friend who brought up the issue, at the very least, thanks for being truthful and honest in telling me and I really appreciate it. I won't say that I'll change 'cos I know I probably won't. BUT, I know now that I'll take note and be more wary of the impressions I'm giving people. Now, whenever I qualify with a 'but' after any sentence, it's pretty much instinctive to wonder whether there's really that absolute need for that. And I know that if there's no need for it, or if I can afford to just suspend myself in time for that few seconds and really put some serious thought into the alternative proposition, and to show that I really am giving thought to a person's opinion, then it would be a win-win situation - I don't jump to conclusions, nor rush through a hasty evaluative process, and the person will feel much appreciated, valued and encouraged, bolstering his sense of security and esteem in providing constructive alternative intellectual discourse in the future.

17:27; The Pianist'

thePIANIST;

~ice dragon~
edmund
twenty one
phpps tchs hci nus
bmt-b sispec-g eti-ep
npcc choir
piano

theLOVE;

violin
saxaphone
jazz
spiritual revival.renewal
books
lit
friends
love

theWISH;

personalised room
~~keyboard~~
~~games~~
~~books~~
love
guitar lesson
jazz piano lesson

theCHATTERBOX;

theESCAPES;

theHISTORY;

theCREDITS;

host: blogger
brushes : x
picture: x x
designer: Winter min