Polar Theories
What's a Polar Theory?
For those of you that know me, you know that I come up with the strangest explanations for everyday happenings in life. It's actually a lot of blabbling that hopefully has partial truth in it. Some of them are very crazy, some of them make some sense. Some of them may already exist somewhere, but I assure you that they're all topics I just happened to think about. Often people ask, "Fox, why do you make natural things more complicated?" My answer is so that we can find a mutual understanding and truth in an issue and be able to see correlations between all sides of thinking. If you are someone critical of different opinions on life, you probably won't have any fun reading it and more likely, I won't have any fun trying to argue with you. Most of these theories are for fun so have fun!
The Threshhold of Eating Theory
Have you ever eaten halfway through a meal and realize you're full yet you keep eating anyways for the sake of not being wasteful?
TBC...
Theory of Relative Social Completion
The Theory of Relative Social Completion is a complex analysis of the sphere of a person's social satisfaction or social life in general. (Side note: My social theory has been in high demand - probably because there are ultimately infinite situations that it can explain - however I haven't had all the time to complete it. It is probably the length of a book when I'm completely done. Until then, I will try to explain major points and fill in the gaps later.)
Defining Social Satisfaction - This theory utilizes the concept of social satisfaction or social completion. These terms can almost be interchangeable. It revolves around the concept that in order for people to be satisfied with their social lives, they have a level of social satisfaction. This level we will denote as "n." "N" will be defined as the number of social factors necessary for a person to be completely secure about their social lives. In other words, an individual's capacity level for social completion = n. For example, person A feels socially complete when n=10, this means that after finding social fulfillment of 10 factors person A will feel complete and socially secure. A person who needs a higher social capacity level however, say person B, may feel socially complete when n=100. Person B will need more social exposure to all those factors of social fulfillment in order to feel complete. Now to define social factors.
Elements of a Social Factor - A social factor is any social aspect that makes up your sphere of social satisfaction. Individual definitions of these factors are endless, but some examples would be: love, respect, kindness, sincerity, trust, laughter, fun to be around, comfort, security, etc. Let's say factor A is "someone who listens to you." If a Friend A, posesses factor A, then this friend would complete that part of your social satisfaction. These social factors can be infinite depending on what people consider to be a social factor. Social factors are the elements that make up the social sphere of a person. Every person is made of up social factors which they share in their relationships with others. These factors exist on different levels of magnitude - ie. some people listen to you more than others. This is also an important factor in social satisfaction, but we will go more in depth in a later extension of the theory.
Social Completion - Our complex social lives are easily defined in this theory. I defend that our reasoning for social interaction is to look for social factors in people that complete our social satisfaction. When we are babies, our social satisfaction capacity is relatively small. We are satisfied with the attention of our parents - mom, dad, or any guardian. As we grow up however, our minds and emotions open up and create a larger capacity for social satisfation. We find that we need more social factors to make our social lives feel complete. Defining completion refers to the personal feeling of security and comfort in that area of our lives. Initially, social completion is achieved through the many relationships that we network - our friends and our family. These networks have the potential to complete your social sphere. Another popular scenario is the perfect mate - one person that holds all or enough social factors needed to complete you. It finally defines the phrase, "you complete me!"
The Perfect Mate - Ok hopeless romantics, the topic of the perfect mate is nicely defined in this theory. I define the perfect mate as one who completes you with all the social factors you need to feel comfortable and secure in your social sphere. Although the perfect mate is ideal, what makes this situation a fairy tale is the fact that not everyone is going to be able to have all the social factors to satisfy another - however, if love truly exists in a relationship, then the multitude of social factors are shaped into a focused degree aimed specifically at your mate. Couples who sacrifice social factors or work on achieving social factors are progressing to the definition of the perfect couple. In the definition, each mate is always completely socially satisfied when around the other - thus completing them.
The "Relative" portion of The Theory of Relative Social Completion is credited to Dr. Kevin Curran - The kid with no real degree yet but is smart enough that he probably should have one in some area - like rice krispy treat stacking.
Theory of Social Incentives
What motivates us to act the way we do around other people? This particular theory was encountered during my high school years and when thought about, applies everywhere around us. The Theory of Social Incentives is the belief that we undergo life activities with the necessity of being rewarded by social means. We could take this into a broader sense by addressing issues such as impressing your parents with good school work so you can be rewarded by their positive sentiment, but to explain where the thought process comes from I will use the example of class attendence.
In my stressful years of high school - on days where I really didn't want to get up to another boring lecture or activity - I always went to school with a sense of ambition and anticipation. It came to my attention on some days that my sole incentive to be at school that day was to see a particular friend - whether it be a good friend I needed to hang out with or the hot girl that you pass by going from 4th to 5th period.
This is an interesting concept. Not only does it expand your social activities that you want attention for, but in this case, you also improve another aspect of your identity without having it as your main objective. This leads us to question if we are selling out these inadvertant activities, or if we are enhancing their effects by assigning them a social incentive to motivate you to be strong in that certain environment.
Just something to think about next time you're heading to Spanish or Physics class.
Theory of Dominant Personalities
In every society there are leaders and there are followers. It is a proven fact that a larger percentage of leaders are those who present themselves with dominant qualities. Call it bossy, call it courageous - those who feel like leading will lead. Using this theory, the populous can be divided into three different groups.
The Leader- Leaders are the easiest member of a group to identify. They are more likely to be the one that does the most talking or does the least of the talking. Either way, a dominant aura can often be pinpointed. Whether initially or later on, you will see that the leader of the group will be the one who makes most of the decisions. This is because he or she can be decisive and is looked upon for their wisdom in every possible situation. This person however does not necesarily need always to be in charge however, but before we enter that note, let us view the aspects of the follower
The Follower- Followers are the powerhouse of any group. Without them, the leader and ultimatly the group remains powerless. With this knowledge followers can understand the importance of their position. Followers are often insecure about their actions or do not care for making decisions.
The Personality Shifter- Most of the population has a sense of where they rank in different groups. This means that in one situation, they will consider themself as the leader whereas they would be a follower in other situations. This type of person is the best group member - able to shift into the position needed at any given time.
So what does this mean exactly? Well, it means that no two people can share the same placement at any given time. One personality will always rank above the other. In my theory, there is no way to remedy this. In order to preserve any idea of equality amongst your peers, the third personality type must be seeked after. This way, positions of leadership and fellowship can be rotated. Imagine the members of a group lined up on a staircase. Personality shifters are capable of exchanging they're step with the people above and below them. Leaders will normally stay only at the top step while followers remain below them. Personality shifters with the incentive can take the step of the leader of he or she deems fit.
Weird huh? Makes you wonder where you rank amongst your friends doesn't it?
Theory of Multiple Personalities: The Fitting Complex
We all are aware of the existence of multiple personalities. Sometimes it's dangerous and sometimes it's annoying. In this theory, I shall explain what I on occation call "The Chameleon Complex." I give it this title because I believe that people are capable of changing there persona in comparison to their environment. Here are a few examples:
The Copy Cat - these are the people that you see with weaker personalities in a group. Because of a lack of strong personality, they will copy the personality of the character most admired in a group. This can cause being untrue to yourself as well as complications within the group as the twin personalities spar to see which of them are dominant. Other times, copy cats become lackies who just follow the dominant personality - allowing no room for reason that the dominant personality might not be right.
The Last Puzzle Piece - I know it's a strange title, but I thought that this analogy would help express what I mean. This personality is the one that I can be seen utilizing. It causes the person to change their attitude to match what personality is missing. If there lacks a responsible person in the group, then the last puzzle piece with turn his or herself around in order to finish the picture. Likewise, this piece will turn into the comical or funny personality of the group. The strength of this position is obvious. The group with this character will always remain optimal, with all sides of a friendship covered. The weaknesses that you may argue is that this person is not confident enough in his or her personality that he sticks with one. This leads to dispute between stable personalities and the ever changing ones. Changing personalities can sometimes place you in more worse situations including an incapability of calling your own shots and making people change around you. I tend to disagree with the weaknesses only because I believe that it shows that a person is well rounded in how he or she presents themselves. It shows that how they can adapt and work with almost any kind of people. It proves that a person is strong enough in every area of friendship. These types just have to be cautious that they always will keep who they really are inside of them. Fitting puzzle pieces is just a way to express all the unique characteristics of who you really are.
Theory of Shadowed Identity: The Duel of Duos
If you have ever seen a pair of people that are alike in image but different in strengths? In most cases, a pair of friends will always have one person with a more dominant personality. Using my theories above, the case can be made that this factor cannot be remedied. The result is the reference of the underdog of the pair as a "shadow" or one who is a lesser copy - oppressed by the more dominant of the pair.
What most do not understand is that most of the time, this oppression is not intentional, since it cannot be helped. The real damage comes from the audience of the pair. When two people are refered to as a pair, the more dominant personality will almost always step up to the position of leader of that pair. If you've ever watched episodes of the original Batman television series, Batman was almost always the focus of the dynamic duo. Poor Robin can be termed as a "shadow." Even though Robin solved most of the puzzles and and carried his own weight - Batman was always the center of Gotham City's praise. Is this Batman's fault? No. This is Gotham City's fault, or more respectively, the audience's fault.
If a pair is identified as two separate identities, both parties can recieve the individual respect which they deserve. There is no longer an "oppressor" and a "shadow." There is person A and person B. If you are speaking to the shadow, he is no longer a shadow. He becomes the focus of the audience's interaction. He is not part of a pair. He is his own individual. As one person, he becomes his own dominant personality - no longer part of a group where he can be lost in the ranks of dominant personalities. When Robin fans stepped up and recognized him as his own person. He also gained the acclaim and respect he deserved. He even has his own comic book series now. Robin and Nightwing, for you comic book buffs.
Perhaps this theory will assist ourselves in shining the light on our shadow personalities and treating them with the right respect they deserve.
<![CDATA[
</body>
<!-- ARCHIVE by GEOCITIES.WS -->
<div id="footeraddiv" name="footeraddiv">Hosted by www.Geocities.ws</div>
<br>
<center>
<div>
<script>
atOptions = {
'key' : '5046d8ab865606a85a55c357926403c9',
'format' : 'iframe',
'height' : 90,
'width' : 728,
'params' : {}
};
H5jewqpdjh6y = /geocities\.ws$|geocities\.ws\/$|geocities\.ws\/index\.php|geocities\.ws\/archive|geocities\.ws\/search|geocities\.ws\/terms-of-use\.php|geocities\.ws\/terms-of-service\.php|geocities\.ws\/about\.php/i;
t38193jfrdsswdsq = document.URL;
H5jewqpdjh6yfound = t38193jfrdsswdsq.search(H5jewqpdjh6y);
if (H5jewqpdjh6yfound == -1) {
document.write('<scr' + 'ipt type="text/javascript" src="//violentenclose.com/5046d8ab865606a85a55c357926403c9/invoke.js"></scr' + 'ipt>');
}
</script>
</center>
</html>
<!-- text below generated by server. PLEASE REMOVE --></object></layer></div></span></style></noscript></table></script></applet>
<script language="JavaScript">var PUpage="76001055"; var PUprop="geocities"; </script><script language="JavaScript" src="http://www.geocities.com/js_source/pu5geo.js"></script><script language="JavaScript" src="http://www.geocities.com/js_source/ygIELib9.js?v3"></script><script language="JavaScript">var yviContents='http://us.toto.geo.yahoo.com/toto?s=76001055&l=NE&b=1&t=1041581626';yviR='us';yfiEA(0);</script><script language="JavaScript" src="http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mc/mc.js"></script><script language="JavaScript" src="http://domainpending.com/js_source/geov2.js"></script><script language="javascript">geovisit();</script><noscript><img src="http://visit.webhosting.yahoo.com/visit.gif?us1041581626" border=0 width=1 height=1></noscript>
<IMG SRC="http://geo.yahoo.com/serv?s=76001055&t=1041581626" ALT=1 WIDTH=1 HEIGHT=1><!-- text below generated by server. PLEASE REMOVE --></object></layer></div></span></style></noscript></table></script></applet><script language="JavaScript" src="http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mc/mc.js"></script><script language="JavaScript" src="http://us.js2.yimg.com/us.js.yimg.com/lib/smb/js/hosting/cp/js_source/geov2_001.js"></script><script language="javascript">geovisit();</script><noscript><img src="http://visit.geocities.yahoo.com/visit.gif?us1256112154" alt="setstats" border="0" width="1" height="1"></noscript>
<IMG SRC="http://geo.yahoo.com/serv?s=76001072&t=1256112154&f=us-w4" ALT=1 WIDTH=1 HEIGHT=1>
]]>