So, we are bearing witness to selected and selective versions of us, chattering away in our minds, like a flock of clucking birds in a word-cage.
It can be very tricky to navigate the sounds of it; like attempting to hear the sound of one hand clapping amid a cacophony of them.
Enter cognitive dissonance: Intuitively knowing what’s true or best, but choosing to ignore it.
Cognitive dissonance is experienced when our desire for truth alignment, consistency and understanding are not being met. Whether consciously or not, this inability to discover cohesion between words and actions (choosing to feed an immediate gratification cycle, despite the known damage it causes), is not really an inability to discern, but rather, a choice not to.
It’s a choice to deny oneself access to alternative (and often times, better) options. This is done to prevent ‘the fear’; fear of having to deal with losing that which offers familiar and reliable outcomes, in the great unknown.
But there’s another reason cognitive dissonance can visit.
Oftentimes, we are challenged to discover cohesion between words and actions in others, when there is none to discover. For instance, if pertinent information is intentionally withheld, this directly affects one’s ability to trust, and more importantly, to make sound decisions (and, again, this is typically done to satisfy a need for both immediate gratification, and fear avoidance), which further imposes a sense of ‘this doesn’t feel right’-ness. Yet we remain, seeking discovery.
Cognitive dissonance occurs in these cases because the need for immediate gratification (from all contributors, in different ways, and for variable reasons) is heavily encouraged (hit the easy button!) and naturally, very strong. So strong, in some cases, that it can supersede, override or ‘sound drown’ consequential truth. This imbalance is transmitted on an intuitive level, the effects of which are misalignment. This in turn can manifest in a number of ways: As anxiety, confusion, repeat spin cycles of the same old ‘mother-clucking bird noise’ in both your head, and demonstrably, in the form of others who feed the cycle, or even, as dis-ease. Oh dear.
MS: You post-dated letters with a burden of proof … are you trying to communicate my denial of truth?
Our power to choose our own and best outcomes are therefore determined not just by our own ability to invoke the former power, but also, by those we choose to share time and space with. (This is why Trust is huge.) So, as we bear witness to selected and selective versions of us, chattering away in our minds, like a flock of clucking birds in a word-cage, we must indeed be very selective.
I feel comfortable saying that the measure of a system as a whole can be considered ‘perfect’, aligned or at equilibrium state, when certain, precise conditions are met.
Analogy exercise time: Think of your thoughts as the conditional parameters which determine the atomic and molecular alignment within your thermodynamic system; as the ‘arrangers’ for the constituent parts of your whole, working body; as that which can preserve energy (for optimization), and maintain homeostasis and optimal health and wellness, within your ride, within your house, within your body.
Does this mean it’s possible to send some thought letters back to my MS? (I’ll refrain from making a joke about the letters my bird brain would like to send.) Indeed. Is it probable I will do so? Indeed.
Possibility is qualitative (subjective, as it may or may not happen), whereas probability is quantitative (a mathematical measurement of how possible something is or isn’t). Example: It is possible to eat well; it becomes probable when one chooses to repeatedly do so. Another example: It is possible for one to heal oneself by addressing the discord inside, on a cellular level, and sending back harmonious feedback; it becomes probable (likely) that one will heal oneself when one chooses to repeatedly do so.
Our thoughts and actions are like this: A constant stream of input and output possibilities, which must be appropriately and selectively entertained, prior to being fed into the probability loop.
What shall I choose to offer as harmonious feedback in response to the dissonant MS letters? Let’s see.
Dear MS: I heard and hear you. Now hear me. Your encrypted message has been decoded, and my operating system has been enhanced and rebooted as a result. Thank you for the reminder that this was necessary. Now, I release you from service, as the lesson you provided has served me greatly: To better understand discernment, and how to be more gentle, kind, loving and selective with my letters and words inside the communication process. Sincerely, MR.
Maintain course. Maintain focus. Keep thoughts sound.
Murmuration – by AJC1 on flickr – Some Rights Reserved