A harsh discussion ensued between me and Elisa, triggered by comparisons to other people and the situation described in another post. Her argument was that I could achieve more, but I didn't because I didn't behave optimally, so I should change the way I behave. And I should plan a solid future.
Everything can be viewed from optimistic and pessimistic points of view, just like a half-full half-empty glass. And I am not completely unsatisfied of myself, and I don't completely lack self-esteem. So, if I look back to my life, I see that I achieved something, I can be proud of something, I have enough money to afford to eat every day. And, about planning of lack thereof, I don't see it as disastrous, many friends of mine do even less and are happy, maybe happier than me.
All this leads to a choice.
1. I should not care if Elisa looks at the half-empty glass. I should enjoy my half-full glass. Elisa must not tell that I would be the right person if only... Either I am the right person, or I am the wrong person. Stop. Then you decide.
2. I should re-consider my everyday behaviour, starting from tomorrow.
Looking back to my previous jobs, I actually applied policy 1, with satisfaction. So the natural choice is 1. But there is something which makes me think about 2:
- things to lose. This may sound conservative, but when faced with the choice of breaking up, one is naturally inclined to think about what there is to lose. Only when you have nothing to lose, are you really free to decide. Evaluate what there is to lose is difficult, and so is choosing if losing it is worth it
- many pleasant things that happened in my life (yes, there have been many) happened because at certain points I could break the mould, do something unthinkable one month before
- what Elisa says actually touches me, even if I don't want to show that.
I absolutely need a copy of the book Life: A User's Manual. Why is everything so complicated?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment