Synchronization in Human Beings!
Friday, June 23, 2006 at 04:49PM I remember in Moral Science class back in middle school, all the kids were taught the Golden Rule! The rule more or less stated "Do to others as you would have them do to you!" Now in the field that I going to discuss this I am probably going to trip over my own words and trip the circuits in both ur and my brain. Anyways, the truth is this Golden Rule is awesome for issues like "If you dont want to be kicked in the balls, dont kick someone else in em!" U follow it and find out "Damn, the Golden Rule works, I dont kick people in the balls, and my balls remain safe!" However, in relationships this rule totally falls apart. (Assumption and Definition: Relationships are with people who dont want to kick you in the balls as a prerequisite!)
Okay, so let me explain. Say, you and me are in a relationship, any kind. When you are troubled by something, and want to talk it out with me and I ask you if something is wrong, you first say "No nothing is wrong!" However, at this point, you wish I wud ask you one more time "Are you sure?" Now, the deciding factor at this point is "Am I the same type as you in this respect?" If I am and I follow the Golden Rule, I would want you to ask me again if I were in ur shoes and so I ask you "Are you sure?" and things are rosy coz I know something is wrong and would ask you till you tell me and both of us are happy! Now, what if I am the opposite variety? What if when I am upset, I want everyone to leave me the fuck alone? Then following the Golden Rule, I would not ask you a second time, coz I wudnt want to be asked a second time if I were in ur shoes, thus, I would have you leave me alone, so I would do to you as I would have you do to me and leave you the fuck alone! Breakdown, breakdown, breakdown! At this time you would have been upset with me and the Golden Rule fails. The same applies in the converse situation, if I were the one upset, you would keep asking me if I were okay, which is the way you would have had me behave and I would be upset with you coz I would rather have you leave me alone!
So rather confusing, but what I am saying is that in relations, it isnt important to act as you would have others act with you, but to act as they DO with you. So since you are the "need to be asked again" variety and have done that to me before, when you are upset, I shud keep asking you till you tell me whats wrong. Conversely, the moment I say I'm fine or I dont wanna talk about it, U, knowing that I am the "leave me the fuck alone" variety should do exactly that! See, we disobeyed the Golden Rule, and things worked out just fine. Another example of where it works is next. Lets say, a couple is in a relationship. Everytime, lets say the girl gets angry and says she wants to be left alone, the guy does exactly that, and she spends the next few hours wishing he would just ask her more times. The next time the guy is angry and says he wants to be left alone, shud she keep talking to him remembering how bad she felt when he gave her "space" or should she remember that he walked out and figure out that he did that thinking that wud make her happy, and give him "space" coz now she knows that thats the way he likes it! Easy, give him space! Conversely, Guy, dont walk out!
The conclusion suggests that in a relationship, we should not "do to others as you would have them do to you" but you should "Do to others as they do to you!". Sounds good, but there is an underlying fallacy. If everyone did to others what they do to them and followed my Golden Rule, people might already be doing things for the other based on their personality analysis, and this action might be the opposite of what they would want for themselves. Therefore, the rule should be ""Do to others as they WANT to do to you!" coz back to the first example, even if I learnt that you need to be asked twice and keep asking you, I still WANT to leave you alone, so you should do what I WANT to do to you!
Now, to figure out what someone wants is not the best solution. So the proposed algorithm involves a synchronization phase and a Processing Phase.
Synchronization Phase: In the synchro phase two people meet and should behave spontaneously. if you need to be asked twice, ask the other twice, if you need to be left the fuck alone, leave the other the fuck alone. So, everyone in the synchro phase should show what they want they want done to themselves. The other should record these events. In the Processing phase: the partners in the relationship shud start doing what the other did in the synchronization phase in a similar situation. The result will be perfect bliss! Hence proved!
The synchro phase can be used to unveil tastes, desires, weaknesses, turn ons, unacceptable actions, etc etc. The more ground covered, I hope the happier and smoother and more honest the relationship. In the processing phase, each one blends to the recordings of the other in the synchro phase.
Duration of synchronization phase(friends): Synchronization phases of various lengths may be required for different pairs of people. Suggested durations, for friends, synchronize till you buy each other presents. (note: people who wanna be friends and not lovers, and buy you gifts within the first month of knowing you are CREEPS)
Duration of synchronization phase(lovers): Until the first time you sleep together. Well, if you are the variety who sleep with each other within 20 mins of meeting each other, please synchronize till ur first time one-month anniversary at least (Yes, yes, the Bandy et al "First Understanding, Common Knowledge (FUCK) Synchronization Algo" works for SLUTS too. And yeah, if you are the variety who must refrain from sex before marriage blah blah, this might keep you synchronizing for ever, so synchronize till ur first kiss! If even that is gonna happen after ages, then keep synchronizing, God knows you'll need it! Bandy et al do not guarantee algorithm for people who kiss only after marriage!
Claimer: I am writing my thesis, and this is what one month of writing a thesis on clock synchronization and data fusion in Wireless Sensor Networks has done to me. help! help! help! The sequel to this will be the intro to my Thesis stating how human beings are the best wireless sensor nodes. (provided my boss allows it!)
NeurONSENSE!
Reader Comments (4)
:)
Good luck with your thesis and I hope that you don't kick it in the balls :P