Today I am going to talk about an experience I had with a young girl I taught. This girl came from a stable home, her clothes were in order, her presentation always clean, her work done. She responded in the classroom with capacity, but it was slow. She often was silent in her behavior, listening more than participating.
During a parent teacher conference I met and listened to the mother of this child speak. The whole time the mother did not speak about her daughter and instead actually tried to pick up the male teacher present. This woman obviously was stable with a job and a home, as her daughter came to school clean and tidy in her appearance This mother was obsessed with a societal idea that she needed a man, this being revealed in her attentions as what she focused on which was her sense of being alone, and her desire to date the male teacher present.
One time, when I had the opportunity to work with the daughter of this woman, I found myself perplexed, because the child would stare at me, eyes wide, and to me, seem to not be able to take the information I was giving to her directly and apply this into some kind of reciprocal response. She merely listened as though what I was saying was something new that she had never thought of and thus she needed time to integrate. What I did not realize, and also, remember seeing with my own children, is that when the eyes of a child are wide open, and the mouth is open, they are absorbing their world, taking in the form as all the movements that build a structural understanding of the design of their world around them..
This girl was taking in what I was explaining, and she was doing it at a slower pace then I expected and that I felt I had the allotted time to accomplish.
In getting to know her mother, and the focus the mother was so possessed with, that was not a “ bad” thing as we all want relationship, I realized that this girl had little in the way of being substantiated, meaning little in the way of having someone really look at her and explain things. This was apparent in the eyes becoming wide and the mouth being open. At her age, within this context, some manner of story structure should have had enough of a grasp of story that this behavior of reconstruction would happen at a somewhat faster pace.
If this child, that was cared for in the most basic ways, was being cared for to substantiate the mother’s desire ONLY, again not a “ bad: but when the directive, other points of development were being placed on the side, and that child was being substantiated in relation to the parent’s desires, which means the details of existence were not being related to the child, and she was behind in her ability to understand.
If we come to allow an idea to define us, we become a very narrow focus. Looking at ideas is not a bad thing, nor is narrowing our focus. When we become a directive as this, such as the belief that a woman must have a relationship, the “ small things of existence” are placed on the side, and the detail of practical living and what this means in structure is shadowed by the desire and need being made larger than all the other aspects of living.
It reminds me of a story told by a Canadian Politician. A woman came up to the politician and said she had worked in a church for 30 years, putting together Christmas baskets for those in need. She realized one day that giving the families in need the money directly would self empower those in need and allow them to go out and purchase their own Christmas dinner wants. This woman went back to her church group and made the suggestion to give the money used for the baskets directly to the families. The response of the church group was that they would lose what made them feel good, which was this charitable act of giving something to the families.
In this example, we have a self definition coming before what would empower a person to self discover and take direction themselves. This is the mother of this child, so obsessed with an idea, that everything is in the order of this. That child, had little in the way of any real self direction, and she had the behaviors to match, because her world was driven by how the mother defined herself; as the single mom, in need of a partner. The mother defined herself as her perceived lack, and could not step out of her self definition. I ask myself, is she the product of that which she exhibits as behavior, and is she passing down the sins of the fathers onto her daughter? Is the lack of movement, conceptually in her daughter the result of all attention in her space being focused on a self definition before practical reality - and within this that there was some awareness in reality as was evident that this child was orderly in many ways, yet had little in the way and structure of things outside of an emotional obsession in the mother? Did the speed at which she processed work/language reveal her cognition- meaning her depth perception, her understanding, the ability to generate understanding, and her respons-ibility? Was all what language she did have, bound with an impulsed value to what words she had learned as this was the directive as the self definition of the parent?
This is like the unsubstantiated passing on in-substantiation! By this, I mean the amount of substance as self being in awareness of the practical world and the information of this world and how this information in practical terms moves.
We can realize, that via our media, having an ideological romantic relationship is a huge impulsed value at the ignorance of other aspects of life. Unfortunately, we learn this when reality hits, and the romance no longer can sustain itself as the bills must be paid, and the home cared for. This value is a value, but at the expense of other values, an idol as an idea is formed and that comes to define us, at the expense of those around us and the world in which we live. It is like a measure learned as the structure within that is warped and missing reality. In essence, on the side here, our media uses this, as we have allowed a system of wealth accumulation, which is a system of competition, based on ideas in self definitions more than in what we really are practically.
The presence of value impulsing in our media, that is everywhere, and a cheap form of entertainment as other entertainments have been allowed to be costly, must exist in such a constant way, because this is how great our ability to take in form exists as what we are as human beings. The media as what we allow to flow through it, and the economic structures we allow that determine access to opportunity, are in essence a system of great suppression. Why would this be? because that is how great the ability of men is, when allowed to interact with all substance of this practical world. Yet, where did this begin? Within each of us? Can we clean up our words and ground ourselves into the practical and thereby opening the way to substantiating relationships?
As I have described in the story of this child in a public school, we can see how an obsession based on a self defining value that is not necessarily a bad value and that can come to limit exposure into a narrow focus that suppresses through consuming the attention of that human being who is so very very capable of living and placing their presence here, enjoying all things, through interacting and building understanding of how all things work in tandem on this earth.
Here I ask? Can we rebuild our cognition to bring our focus back into becoming functional human beings here on earth? Can we structure the within cognition into focusing ourselves and our children here, realizing so many are living within a veil composed of self definitions based on value judgements that separate us from our real capacity?
Since men communicate with words, and words can focus us towards the details of practical reality, and build structure within to see directly without, thereby building a superior memory, would a technological tool that never gets tired, has no judgements be the means to help us help ourselves to ground ourselves back into actual living? And would this not enable us to speak clearly, direct ourselves as our true expression and thereby bring us into relationships that are best for us, and as such best for all?
What would a tool that builds substantive focus for the parent and the child give? Would it give the character of what it means to live a life of awareness and the ability to respond beyond ideas that are not “ bad” but simply limited?
We decide, the means to do this are available, to self empower the innate learning ability of each of us, to ground ourselves into being present and living a full life. Abracadabra, we are the words we know.
No comments :
Post a Comment