Every so often a story wanders our community, and we leap upon it in outrage at the injustice or fear at the what-if-it-had-been-me. Support is rallied, blogs written, facebook pages created. And then, as time passes, we find out more details, or we have questions, and we're forced with choices on what to do with the information. No good way to go, in terms of the personal consequences. People don't like their parades rained on, and they really don't appreciate it when they find out they've been duped or been offered an incomplete version. Maybe the support would have still remained had full disclosure been offered but once that moment has past and one's put forward that incomplete version, the self-justifying begins.
It's disappointing to discover when someone does that, lets people get worked up over an issue when there are key details left out. And nope, I'm not saying what the latest episode of it is as it's just a continuation of an old one, and if you know the details, you already know what I'm talking about. And if you don't you can probably think of a situation that fits this, and you'll nod in agreement, anyway. And if it's not one of those, you'll probably think I'm writing about you cuz you don't like me anyway.
Another thing that's troubling and happens more frequently than I'd like is when people who ought to know better, who are trained to be evidence-based, either buy into the woo or realize they can market themselves to those who do. It's a Ferengi trait, the desire for profit and more markets.
And now for the significance of the insignificant. We're all reminded of this upon occasion, chaos theory at work. We turned left instead of right, we went here instead of there. Two roads diverged sort of thing. If we really thought about it, recognized that lives are irrevocably altered on the most seemingly insignificant of decisions, would we not all be paralyzed with the fear of what the potential possibilities could be?
I think that most people must not see in their minds this immediate, often overwhelming diverging of potential outcomes when they're making a decision. I don't mean I do this on absolutely everything I think of, but a certain level of visual consequence mapping, of decision trees, does occur when I need to make an intentional decision, a projection cast forth that although I know it's only a mental projection, it's one I see, and I think, at times like this, that perhaps I understand some of what Temple Grandin says when she talks about thinking in pictures (it's just that I think she's probably wrong if she thinks there's no language overlaid on those pictures to give them meaning, even if it's unintentional language). And I wonder when my kids are paralyzed when offered choices if they have visual mappings of the potential consequences. And I hope both that they do and that they don't: please let them be spared the Stephen King visual consequence mapping system I seem to be hardwired with.