You are a function of how I perceive you to be

Everyone believes that they are right and justified in what they do. And this is no surprise. What person would live their life believing that all their choices are wrong? Who would perpetually second-guess themselves to the point of immobility? There comes a time when action must be taken, when the lesser of two evils must be chosen -- and we make this choice based upon what we consider to have the most profitable result. For who makes a deliberate choice knowing and hoping that the outcome will prove the most negative, unless of course, a negative outcome was the initial desired result? The one who lives their life believing that all their choices are wrong, the one who second-guesses themselves to the point of immobility are doing so because it aligns with some other larger goal. One thing seems to be certain: the choices we make reflect the desires we have, whether for bliss or woe.

Therefore, as we perceive our fellow human beings, the behavior we see signifies a context -- their context. And it must be mentioned that the perceptions of the observer also filter through the lens of their own preconceptions as well; there is no such thing as a perception-less perceiver. The behavior of the perceived occurs as the embodiment of their intention and purpose, while the observer's framework of interpretation, too, is the embodiment of intention and purpose. Such is the harmony between perceiver and perceived, each full with a world of intention and purpose.

Can we draw clear and divisive lines between the intentions and perceptions of the observer and the intentions and perceptions of the perceived? How much of what we see is function of our own perceptions, biases, and pre-conceptions? How much of what we know of other people stems from the self-fulling prophecy of our own experiences and person-hood? We cannot know the depths of our own mind, heart, and soul because the instruments of perception are not perfect themselves; we stand less of a chance knowing what moves in the depths of another person's heart. Yet at the same time, that which we perceive reflect choices and desires; how we perceive it also reflects choices and desires.

Consider misunderstanding: how often are we misunderstood? How often do we misunderstand? Words leave the mouth of the talker and are heard by the ears of the listener -- if biases and preconceptions did not exist, then there would be no further complications because the words would be understood in the same manner in which they were spoken. There would be no need to filter intentions or ask for clarification because listening and understanding would exist as a 1:1 ratio. But this is not the case. The moment words leave the mouth of the speaker, or in this case, the moment that words are written on the computer screen, and the words become fodder for others, the potential for misunderstanding is born in the self-same moment. In other words, I write or I speak and you interpret.

This is the chasm between people that will always prevent people from truly understanding one another. There might be moments where the intention of the speaker and the intention of the listener align closer together, however, to be perfectly aligned with one another is a fantasy. This fantasy of "oneness" perhaps has roots in the harmony experienced between fetus and mother while developing in the womb. At the moment of birth, at the moment of separation, such "oneness" is never to be experienced again, except perhaps by the religious who commune with God who they believe is in all places, even within their own hearts and minds.