Are you? I’m not talking about racism or prejudice, I’m talking about you – how and who you are, all your bits and bobs. Are you a series of ‘parts’ or are you complete? Do you do what you do, when you do it, with the same standard? Perhaps a definition will give us a context. Webster: “having different parts working together as a unit.” There’s part of the definition when discussing racism that also applies – “allowing all types… to participate, to make something a part of another larger thing.” Does this help?
My contention is that we tend to compartmentalize us – my: work life, leisure, family, ‘activities’, etc. What we need to look at is our core – who we are and then incorporate the various ‘pieces’ into a whole without each losing their structure. Impossible? Why necessary? There are a number of reasons that should apply when looking at a complete v. component parts approach to who we are and how we express this.
One reason to focus on the complete basis would be: how do we remember how the part fits within the whole and in tune with each other – is it ‘relative’? If this sounds confusing it’s because we do tend to complicate us. What standards guide you, are any diametrically opposed to an other of your core standards? You could be surprised. Or maybe it’s the positioning of the standard. Quick example/question: is truth, regardless of the potential cost, a high prioritized standard? Do you apply this across all your various ‘parts’?
If truth is truth then do you ever try and ‘soften the blow’ and equivocate the message – still speaking the truth but obfuscating the message? Perhaps speaking the truth but how you speak it to a friend or an underling, is it with a different tone or expression.? If either (or any other diminishing affect) is your methodology, then what message does this provide? This requires you to look at how you do what you do. Are you the integrated or the many-aspect type?
