For my Psychology of Personality class, I will be writing several deep-thought/reaction/reflection essays in regards to assigned articles.
I will be posting them here.
I have not yet adjusted to APA style. That really needs to happen soon.
----------------------------
Carina Botterbusch
Dr. Randy Young
PSY 430
27 January 2010
_____Thought Paper #1
_____What Do We Know When We Know a Person?
_____Personality and character traits have always been things I have enjoyed considering, particularly in my personal reflective writing, both about myself and about others. Before reading McAdams’ article, I did not have any concrete, tangible opinion about personality theory, outside of the simple belief that personality is influenced by both internal and external factors. As I read the article, I noticed I disagreed with a few points the author made, specifically the fact that I place more emphasis on traits than he does. However, by the time I finished reading the article, I agreed with his main theme that there are levels of personality when it comes to how well one knows a particular person.
_____The author primarily asks what is meant by “knowing a person better,” after simple personality details and character traits have been noted. My original opinion was that getting to know a person better simply refers to getting to know more of these personality details and character traits. McAdams disagrees and says that getting to know a person better refers to knowing something deeper about the person, specifically how the person views their own identity and how they relate this through autobiographical narrative. After reading this, I agreed that getting to know a person better should consist of some deeper connection and communication, but was still not convinced that personality is much more than just traits.
_____The theory that personality consists of only traits makes sense to me because I believe that non-trait personality items (values, motives, and goals) can be broken down and reduced to the trait they represent and are motivated by. For example, my career goal of being a youth counselor is motivated by my personality trait of compassion, my value of integrity represents my own characteristic of integrity, and my goal of writing a few books is motivated by my characteristics of being intelligent and outspoken. I agree with the author that knowing traits is not enough to fully know a person. One must also be familiar with how these traits are internalized by the individual; how they influence their values, motives, and goals; and how they are perceived by the individual.
_____I also agree with McAdams that rating personality is difficult because there is no real standard and the average must be estimated. Rating one’s own personality is also difficult because self-perception tends to differ from objective-perception. Subjectivity is an obstacle in any social sciences topic, but especially in regards to studying personality. McAdams’ Level III, identity through narrative, is entirely subjective because it is how a person tells stories that define them. Because of this, when considering one’s own personality traits, it is important to consider both personal perceptions of personality, as well as the perceptions of friends and family.
_____The most interesting thing about personality that I am now considering is the fact that it seems like personality traits tend to divide themselves into two categories. McAdams discusses the “Big Five:” extraversion, neuroticism, openness to experience, agreeableness, and conscientiousness, but also mentions other, purely positive characteristics. These positive personality traits include having compassion, being a good listener, and volunteering time. These traits sound more like good deeds to me, but I have often heard them talked about as if they are inherent personality traits. I even included “compassionate” on my list of three characteristics that define me.
_____Such transient characteristics are certainly different than the “Big Five,” at least in some way. McAdams somewhat makes this distinction, but refers to them as dispositional traits (the “Big Five”) and personal concerns (what people want). I agree with McAdams more than I originally thought I did, although we do use different terminology. Traits are the actual characteristics of the individual (extraversion, neuroticism, openness to experience, agreeableness, and conscientiousness) and personal concerns are positive “traits” that the individual strives to have (compassion, empathy, listening, concern, volunteerism, etc.).
_____I also thought I disagreed with McAdams’ claim that traits such as extraversion and agreeableness exist independent from development based on the fact that all three of my defining characteristics have surfaced and been solidified very recently. However, now having made the distinction between traits and “personal concerns,” I see that my three characteristics (outspoken, confident, and compassionate) are more strived-for traits than foundational personality traits. Because of this, these “personal concerns” have arisen recently because I have realized how important they are to me and now concern myself with making them true in my personality.
_____So what makes a certain trait a real “dispositional trait” and not a “personal concern”? It at first seems like those characteristics that are strived-for are all positive and that the “Big Five” personality traits have opposites that are negative. But is this to say that one cannot strive for and attain a higher level of extroversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, and openness to experience or a lower level or neuroticism? It is my opinion that this is possible. I believe that the factor with the most influence is the individual and their attitude and that, with the right attitude and commitment, one can strive to be and be more extroverted, agreeable, conscientious, and open to experience or less neurotic.
----------------------------
Saturday, January 30, 2010
Humanism? Not.
Humanism?
I figured it out. I am not a Humanist, I am a Humanitarian.
hu⋅man⋅i⋅tar⋅i⋅an
/hyuˌmænɪˈtɛəriən or, often, yu-/
[hyoo-man-i-tair-ee-uhn or, often, yoo-]
–adjective
1. having concern for or helping to improve the welfare and happiness of people.
2. of or pertaining to ethical or theological humanitarianism.
3. pertaining to the saving of human lives or to the alleviation of suffering: a humanitarian crisis.
–noun
4. a person actively engaged in promoting human welfare and social reforms, as a philanthropist.
5. a person who professes ethical or theological humanitarianism.
Origin:
1810–20; humanit(y) + -arian
Dictionary.com Unabridged
Based on the Random House Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2010.
In Social Welfare class last night, we wrote a short essay answering three questions:
What is poverty?
Why are there poor people?
What should be done about poverty and poor people?
While I was writing my essay, I had a small, earth-shaking epiphany that there is a word for human-centered that is less human-is-superman than humanistic. This is humanitarian.
I am concerned for the welfare and happiness of people.
I will help to improve the welfare and happiness of people.
I may save human lives.
I will alleviate suffering.
I will promote human welfare and social reforms.
I am a humanitarian.
I may often sound like a Buddhist.
I may often sound like a Taoist.
I may often sound like a Pragmatist.
Some may interpret this as Humanism.
It is not.
It is humanitarianism.
I figured it out. I am not a Humanist, I am a Humanitarian.
hu⋅man⋅i⋅tar⋅i⋅an
/hyuˌmænɪˈtɛəriən or, often, yu-/
[hyoo-man-i-tair-ee-uhn or, often, yoo-]
–adjective
1. having concern for or helping to improve the welfare and happiness of people.
2. of or pertaining to ethical or theological humanitarianism.
3. pertaining to the saving of human lives or to the alleviation of suffering: a humanitarian crisis.
–noun
4. a person actively engaged in promoting human welfare and social reforms, as a philanthropist.
5. a person who professes ethical or theological humanitarianism.
Origin:
1810–20; humanit(y) + -arian
Dictionary.com Unabridged
Based on the Random House Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2010.
In Social Welfare class last night, we wrote a short essay answering three questions:
What is poverty?
Why are there poor people?
What should be done about poverty and poor people?
While I was writing my essay, I had a small, earth-shaking epiphany that there is a word for human-centered that is less human-is-superman than humanistic. This is humanitarian.
I am concerned for the welfare and happiness of people.
I will help to improve the welfare and happiness of people.
I may save human lives.
I will alleviate suffering.
I will promote human welfare and social reforms.
I am a humanitarian.
I may often sound like a Buddhist.
I may often sound like a Taoist.
I may often sound like a Pragmatist.
Some may interpret this as Humanism.
It is not.
It is humanitarianism.
Monday, January 25, 2010
Complaining (with a bit of Humanism)
It has occurred to me that many of my viewpoints and attitudes and opinions sound a bit more Humanistic than I’d like them to sound. …specifically my opinions and attitudes and viewpoints on things such as how situations should be handled and how responsible everyone is for most everything in their own lives.
See? Humanistic-sounding. At least I think so…
Now, everyone should know that all Humanistic ideas and ideals should not be thrown out simply because they come from a larger body of beliefs with which we disagree.
That would be like banning written text because cuneiform was developed by pagan Phoenicians. Or like banning traditional ceremonial dress because of its origin in ancient Druid cultures.
Yeah, you heard me.
I’m kind of a bitter person. Haha.
Anyway. My Humanistic-sounding philosophy on complaining.
Essentially, you’re not allowed to complain. This is very similar to my philosophy of why I have nearly no sympathy for people who procrastinate. More than 99% of the time, the circumstances that “made” you procrastinate were not beyond your control and you are therefore responsible for any consequences you encounter because of having procrastinated. That sounds a little Humanistic to me. You’re responsible. It’s all about your attitude. Etc. Perhaps Humanistic isn’t quite the right term.
But it’s very human-centered, which makes sense, as a Sociologist and a counselor, but when does human-centered become too human-centered? Hm, yeah, that’s the problem. I’d rather not cross the line from human-centered to Humanistic.
((I am not Humanistic because I believe in the depravity of man and that mankind is far too fallen to ultimately succeed))
Back to complaining.
You’re essentially not allowed to complain. This is very similar to procrastination. You don’t get sympathy from me when you procrastinate because there is a minimal chance your procrastination was beyond your control. It’s your responsibility, so take it like a man.
I’m a pretty cynical person.
You’re not allowed to complain because there is a minimal chance that your situation is beyond your control. It’s your responsibility, so… if you’re not happy, change it. You have the ability to change it. And if your cost-benefit analysis says that it’s unwise to change it, then don’t. And don’t complain. There are obviously enough good reasons to stay where you are. If there are enough good reasons to stay where you are not particularly perfectly happy, then get over it. And now we’re back to how it’s all about attitude.
Quite often, I wish that I could have an audio-blog because I know for a fact that the way you hear my words in your head as you read them is not how I heard them in my head as I wrote them. Perhaps a video-blog! Perhaps one day! I just moved here from Facebook! I can't leave so soon!
Upcoming post is entitled, “Not Causes, Catalysts.” Upcoming topic is jazz rhythms.
See? Humanistic-sounding. At least I think so…
Now, everyone should know that all Humanistic ideas and ideals should not be thrown out simply because they come from a larger body of beliefs with which we disagree.
That would be like banning written text because cuneiform was developed by pagan Phoenicians. Or like banning traditional ceremonial dress because of its origin in ancient Druid cultures.
Yeah, you heard me.
I’m kind of a bitter person. Haha.
Anyway. My Humanistic-sounding philosophy on complaining.
Essentially, you’re not allowed to complain. This is very similar to my philosophy of why I have nearly no sympathy for people who procrastinate. More than 99% of the time, the circumstances that “made” you procrastinate were not beyond your control and you are therefore responsible for any consequences you encounter because of having procrastinated. That sounds a little Humanistic to me. You’re responsible. It’s all about your attitude. Etc. Perhaps Humanistic isn’t quite the right term.
But it’s very human-centered, which makes sense, as a Sociologist and a counselor, but when does human-centered become too human-centered? Hm, yeah, that’s the problem. I’d rather not cross the line from human-centered to Humanistic.
((I am not Humanistic because I believe in the depravity of man and that mankind is far too fallen to ultimately succeed))
Back to complaining.
You’re essentially not allowed to complain. This is very similar to procrastination. You don’t get sympathy from me when you procrastinate because there is a minimal chance your procrastination was beyond your control. It’s your responsibility, so take it like a man.
I’m a pretty cynical person.
You’re not allowed to complain because there is a minimal chance that your situation is beyond your control. It’s your responsibility, so… if you’re not happy, change it. You have the ability to change it. And if your cost-benefit analysis says that it’s unwise to change it, then don’t. And don’t complain. There are obviously enough good reasons to stay where you are. If there are enough good reasons to stay where you are not particularly perfectly happy, then get over it. And now we’re back to how it’s all about attitude.
Quite often, I wish that I could have an audio-blog because I know for a fact that the way you hear my words in your head as you read them is not how I heard them in my head as I wrote them. Perhaps a video-blog! Perhaps one day! I just moved here from Facebook! I can't leave so soon!
Upcoming post is entitled, “Not Causes, Catalysts.” Upcoming topic is jazz rhythms.
Sunday, January 24, 2010
Placebos and Attitude.
Placebos.
Everything’s a placebo.
You, me, love. Placebo.
So, I have this new theory. Everything’s a placebo… at least to some extent. Everything’s a placebo.
Anyone who knows me knows that I am no big fan of the medical system, no big fan of medicine, and certainly no big fan of doctors. The type of person I am most prejudiced against would probably have to be doctors… and nurses… pretty much all medical personnel with the exceptions of emergency responders.
This “everything’s a placebo” theory is pretty simple.
Essentially, you wouldn’t take a certain medicine if you didn’t believe in it in some capacity. Therefore, every medicine, whether medical or natural, has the potential to be a placebo to some extent.
So… if everything’s a placebo, why take a potential poison?
Aside from some placebos containing poisonous substances… aside from that… there’s nothing inherently wrong with the concept and philosophy of placebos. Placebos have astoundingly high success rates. Placebos work. It’s all about attitude. Everything’s all about attitude.
Attitude.
Everything’s all about attitude.
Bad attitude, bad day.
Better attitude, better day.
Notice I didn’t say “Good attitude, good day.” A good attitude is no guarantee for a good day. A great attitude is no guarantee for a great day. There are those who believe that a supremely positive and optimistic attitude can overcome any negative obstacle, any negative situation, any negative person. I disagree. There is more to overcoming everything than attitude. This is vision. Vision. The ability to see past such obstacles and keep one’s sights set on the ultimate goal, the ultimate hope. Vision. Having an ultimate hope for the ultimate goal.
However, the degree of your attitude greatly affects not the outcome of situations, events, and days, but how you view such situations, events, and days. Your attitude affects not the situations, events, and days, but your perspective of them. A positive attitude allows a positive perspective of even the most negative of situations, which ultimately provides the opportunity for a positive outcome.
Your positive attitude is a catalyst for positive influences from negative events.
Attitude is everything. Everything’s all about attitude.
I'll probably definitely discuss attitude more in depth in the few upcoming entries. Attitude. The issue's been coming up a lot lately.
Upcoming topic is complaining.
Everything’s a placebo.
You, me, love. Placebo.
So, I have this new theory. Everything’s a placebo… at least to some extent. Everything’s a placebo.
Anyone who knows me knows that I am no big fan of the medical system, no big fan of medicine, and certainly no big fan of doctors. The type of person I am most prejudiced against would probably have to be doctors… and nurses… pretty much all medical personnel with the exceptions of emergency responders.
This “everything’s a placebo” theory is pretty simple.
Essentially, you wouldn’t take a certain medicine if you didn’t believe in it in some capacity. Therefore, every medicine, whether medical or natural, has the potential to be a placebo to some extent.
So… if everything’s a placebo, why take a potential poison?
Aside from some placebos containing poisonous substances… aside from that… there’s nothing inherently wrong with the concept and philosophy of placebos. Placebos have astoundingly high success rates. Placebos work. It’s all about attitude. Everything’s all about attitude.
Attitude.
Everything’s all about attitude.
Bad attitude, bad day.
Better attitude, better day.
Notice I didn’t say “Good attitude, good day.” A good attitude is no guarantee for a good day. A great attitude is no guarantee for a great day. There are those who believe that a supremely positive and optimistic attitude can overcome any negative obstacle, any negative situation, any negative person. I disagree. There is more to overcoming everything than attitude. This is vision. Vision. The ability to see past such obstacles and keep one’s sights set on the ultimate goal, the ultimate hope. Vision. Having an ultimate hope for the ultimate goal.
However, the degree of your attitude greatly affects not the outcome of situations, events, and days, but how you view such situations, events, and days. Your attitude affects not the situations, events, and days, but your perspective of them. A positive attitude allows a positive perspective of even the most negative of situations, which ultimately provides the opportunity for a positive outcome.
Your positive attitude is a catalyst for positive influences from negative events.
Attitude is everything. Everything’s all about attitude.
I'll probably definitely discuss attitude more in depth in the few upcoming entries. Attitude. The issue's been coming up a lot lately.
Upcoming topic is complaining.
Friday, January 22, 2010
Gossip, Deep + Other Things
Gossip, Deep + Other Things
I believe I have pinpointed my real number one antipathy (pet peeve). My antipathies include arrogance, ignorance, being unnecessarily loud, bad parents, really bad grammar, and so on. But this one takes the cake: a lack of integrity.
“Takes the cake.” What a funny expression.
After compassion, integrity is probably the character trait I value the most.
-----------------------
in⋅teg⋅ri⋅ty [in-teg-ri-tee] –noun
1. adherence to moral and ethical principles; soundness of moral character; honesty.
2. the state of being whole, entire, or undiminished: to preserve the integrity of the empire.
3. a sound, unimpaired, or perfect condition: the integrity of a ship's hull.
Origin:
1400–50; late ME integrite < L integritās. See integer, -ity
Synonyms:
1. rectitude, probity, virtue. See honor.
Antonyms:
1. dishonesty.
Dictionary.com Unabridged
Based on the Random House Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2010.
-----------------------
Sound and unimpaired, virtue, honor. Mmm, I like words a whole lot. Mmm, words. It gets better!
-----------------------
[Middle English integrite, from Old French, from Latin integritās, soundness, from integer, whole, complete; see tag- in Indo-European roots.]
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2009 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
-----------------------
Middle English “integrite” and Latin “integritas,” from integer, meaning whole and complete.
Integrity is to have the qualities of being whole and complete.
Integer means whole and complete.
An integer is a whole number!
Mmm, words! See, kids? It’s fun to be a nerd! Anyway, on to the point! Gossip.
This is a draft text from approximately Jan 8, 2010.
Gossip is false witness. It all comes down to a lack of integrity. You put up this image, this front, but it’s all a ruse, it’s all a lie. It’s just a front. This is a lack of integrity and it is bearing false witness. You may not be specifically telling a lie, but oh, how you are. Gossip is a lack of integrity and so is putting up this front image. You’re spreading unsound knowledge, you’re lying. It all comes back to a lack of integrity. This may just be my ultimate antipathy, above all others.
I essentially don’t remember what I meant, exactly. I suppose it was all about the connection between putting up an image and bearing false witness and bearing false witness and gossip. It all comes down to unsound knowledge. The quality of not being sound. A lack of integrity.
I hope that makes sense.
In regards to this and the two previous entries about gossip, I feel it is necessary to say that I understand there are and can be exceptions. Even within my non-gossip philosophy, a person or two can have an exemption. For example, a non-related third-party confidant and best friend, to whom one tells basically everything. And, even though I see putting up a front as a lack of integrity, I realize that there are and can be times when “keeping up appearances” is both important and acceptable. But I am even not entirely sold on this exception. I believe I wrote about this in regards to brand new friendships at college. Amongst a community of strangers, I feel that my new friendships are some of the most honest friendships I have because they are newly established, free from expectations, preconditions, judgments, etc.
Upcoming topics include placebos and complaining.
I believe I have pinpointed my real number one antipathy (pet peeve). My antipathies include arrogance, ignorance, being unnecessarily loud, bad parents, really bad grammar, and so on. But this one takes the cake: a lack of integrity.
“Takes the cake.” What a funny expression.
After compassion, integrity is probably the character trait I value the most.
-----------------------
in⋅teg⋅ri⋅ty [in-teg-ri-tee] –noun
1. adherence to moral and ethical principles; soundness of moral character; honesty.
2. the state of being whole, entire, or undiminished: to preserve the integrity of the empire.
3. a sound, unimpaired, or perfect condition: the integrity of a ship's hull.
Origin:
1400–50; late ME integrite < L integritās. See integer, -ity
Synonyms:
1. rectitude, probity, virtue. See honor.
Antonyms:
1. dishonesty.
Dictionary.com Unabridged
Based on the Random House Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2010.
-----------------------
Sound and unimpaired, virtue, honor. Mmm, I like words a whole lot. Mmm, words. It gets better!
-----------------------
[Middle English integrite, from Old French, from Latin integritās, soundness, from integer, whole, complete; see tag- in Indo-European roots.]
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2009 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
-----------------------
Middle English “integrite” and Latin “integritas,” from integer, meaning whole and complete.
Integrity is to have the qualities of being whole and complete.
Integer means whole and complete.
An integer is a whole number!
Mmm, words! See, kids? It’s fun to be a nerd! Anyway, on to the point! Gossip.
This is a draft text from approximately Jan 8, 2010.
Gossip is false witness. It all comes down to a lack of integrity. You put up this image, this front, but it’s all a ruse, it’s all a lie. It’s just a front. This is a lack of integrity and it is bearing false witness. You may not be specifically telling a lie, but oh, how you are. Gossip is a lack of integrity and so is putting up this front image. You’re spreading unsound knowledge, you’re lying. It all comes back to a lack of integrity. This may just be my ultimate antipathy, above all others.
I essentially don’t remember what I meant, exactly. I suppose it was all about the connection between putting up an image and bearing false witness and bearing false witness and gossip. It all comes down to unsound knowledge. The quality of not being sound. A lack of integrity.
I hope that makes sense.
In regards to this and the two previous entries about gossip, I feel it is necessary to say that I understand there are and can be exceptions. Even within my non-gossip philosophy, a person or two can have an exemption. For example, a non-related third-party confidant and best friend, to whom one tells basically everything. And, even though I see putting up a front as a lack of integrity, I realize that there are and can be times when “keeping up appearances” is both important and acceptable. But I am even not entirely sold on this exception. I believe I wrote about this in regards to brand new friendships at college. Amongst a community of strangers, I feel that my new friendships are some of the most honest friendships I have because they are newly established, free from expectations, preconditions, judgments, etc.
Upcoming topics include placebos and complaining.
Saturday, January 16, 2010
Gossip, Amended. (Jan 5, 2010)
(posted to Facebook, January 5, 2010)
Amended.
My conclusion from Jan 3:
Essentially, if you tell me something about someone else that I have not observed or intuited on my own, I will listen and I will take it in and I will consider it, but I will not give it much weight.
I suppose that’s more like the converse? Applying my non-gossip philosophy to the gossip I hear from others? Sure. Converse.
Amendment:
There is an additional converse of my non-gossip philosophy. I will summarize each of the three strategies (the original and the two converse).
If Alvin tells me something about Miranda that I otherwise would not have known (ie something I would not have been able to gather from my own intuition or observation), it is my philosophy that I cannot morally share that with anyone else, especially Miranda and anyone that knows her.
If Alvin tells me something about Miranda that, through logic, I otherwise would not have known (ie something I would not have been able to gather from my own intuition or observation), it is my new, amended philosophy that I will not treat that gossiped information with as much weight as my own personal intuition or observation, objective information.
If Alvin tells me something about Miranda that, through logic, I know Alvin could not have gathered by his own intuition or observation, it is my new, amended philosophy that I will not treat this second-hand information with very much weight, if any.
There you have it. The same concept applied in three directions. Just like responsibility and critical thinking should be taught in PDP instead of being overshadowed by the teaching of the four pillars (whatever they may be, lol).
At Justin Cerra's request, I am considering blogging instead of facebook noting,
but would first have to post my previous facebook notes to my blog. Everything
has to be at the same place. Thoughts?
Amended.
My conclusion from Jan 3:
Essentially, if you tell me something about someone else that I have not observed or intuited on my own, I will listen and I will take it in and I will consider it, but I will not give it much weight.
I suppose that’s more like the converse? Applying my non-gossip philosophy to the gossip I hear from others? Sure. Converse.
Amendment:
There is an additional converse of my non-gossip philosophy. I will summarize each of the three strategies (the original and the two converse).
If Alvin tells me something about Miranda that I otherwise would not have known (ie something I would not have been able to gather from my own intuition or observation), it is my philosophy that I cannot morally share that with anyone else, especially Miranda and anyone that knows her.
If Alvin tells me something about Miranda that, through logic, I otherwise would not have known (ie something I would not have been able to gather from my own intuition or observation), it is my new, amended philosophy that I will not treat that gossiped information with as much weight as my own personal intuition or observation, objective information.
If Alvin tells me something about Miranda that, through logic, I know Alvin could not have gathered by his own intuition or observation, it is my new, amended philosophy that I will not treat this second-hand information with very much weight, if any.
There you have it. The same concept applied in three directions. Just like responsibility and critical thinking should be taught in PDP instead of being overshadowed by the teaching of the four pillars (whatever they may be, lol).
At Justin Cerra's request, I am considering blogging instead of facebook noting,
but would first have to post my previous facebook notes to my blog. Everything
has to be at the same place. Thoughts?
Gossip. (Jan 3, 2010)
(posted to Facebook, January 3, 2010)
Gossip.
[gos-uh p] noun, verb, -siped or -sipped, -sip⋅ing or -sip⋅ping.
–noun
1. idle talk or rumor, esp. about the personal or private affairs of others: the endless gossip about Hollywood stars.
2. light, familiar talk or writing.
3. Also, gos⋅sip⋅er, gos⋅sip⋅per. a person given to tattling or idle talk.
4. Chiefly British Dialect. a godparent.
5. Archaic. a friend, esp. a woman.
–verb (used without object)
6. to talk idly, esp. about the affairs of others; go about tattling.
–verb (used with object)
7. Chiefly British Dialect. to stand godparent to.
8. Archaic. to repeat like a gossip.
Origin:
bef. 1050; ME gossib, godsib(be), OE godsibb, orig. godparent, equiv. to god God + sibb related; see sib1
Related forms:
gos⋅sip⋅ing⋅ly, adverb
Synonyms:
1. small talk, hearsay, palaver, chitchat. Gossip, scandal apply to idle talk and newsmongering about the affairs of others. Gossip is light chat or talk: to trade gossip about the neighbors. Scandal is rumor or general talk that is damaging to reputation; it is usually more or less malicious: The town never lived down the election scandal. 3. chatterer, talker, gabbler, rumormonger. 6. chatter, prattle, prate, palaver.
Dictionary.com Unabridged
Based on the Random House Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2009.
I’ve written briefly about this before, kind of. I’ll explain it again differently so as to clarify.
Well, no, first I’ll start with a word study from dictionary.com.
Idle talk.
So, gossip is what you do when you have nothing real to talk about? Nothing of substance. You gossip when you have nothing of substance to talk about? Weird. But that makes sense. Because people are not comfortable with talking about their own lives (substance), they talk about the lives of others. They talk about what they do not have the right to talk about. Or perhaps because their own lives have nothing
of substance?
Perhaps this stems from politeness. Politeness has created the need for idle talk, I believe. When a person is not close enough to another to talk about anything of substance, politeness says that one cannot just sit there awkwardly. We’ve all experienced that, eh? So then develops idles talk and then develops gossip, maybe.
Light, familiar talk or writing.
Politeness. Hm. I’m not the biggest fan of politeness, you’ll find. It’s all politics. A lot of it is shady. Political politeness, formal formalities. There is a time and place, indeed, but… like anything, it can go too far and often does. I’m not the biggest fan of politeness, you’ll find.
Gossipper = a person given to tattling or idle talk.
Hm. Tattling? Tattling tends to refer to information that is relied that is privileged information, not allowed to be relied. Not that tattling is an absolute taboo. I’m a big fan of balance and moderation, you’ll find.
The synonyms are absolutely my favorite part, so I’ll relay them again:
Idle talk or rumor, esp. about the personal or private affairs of others: Small talk, hearsay, palaver, chitchat. Gossip, scandal apply to idle talk and newsmongering about the affairs of others. Gossip is light chat or talk: to trade gossip about the neighbors. Scandal is rumor or general talk that is damaging to reputation; it is usually more or less malicious: The town never lived down the election scandal.
Gos⋅sip⋅er, gos⋅sip⋅per. a person given to tattling or idle talk: Chatterer, talker, gabbler, rumormonger.
To talk idly, esp. about the affairs of others; go about tattling
Chatter, prattle, prate, palaver.
So… gossip is non-substantial conversation material that is “light chat or talk.” Scandal is damaging to reputation. Hey, kids, no such things as synonyms! Gossip isn’t what we think of. Of. Hm. We tend to think of gossip as damaging. Scandal is damaging. Gossip is the political politeness one reverts to when there is nothing else to say, when one is not secure enough to talk honestly about themselves. Gossip has since become the scandal.
Before I move on to the final thesis of this note (my personal opinion, philosophy, and strategy in regards to gossip), another word study!
Idle talk.
noun
idle or foolish and irrelevant talk [syn: prate]
WordNet® 3.0, © 2006 by Princeton University.
Prate.
[preyt] verb, prat⋅ed, prat⋅ing, noun
–verb (used without object)
1. to talk excessively and pointlessly; babble: They prated on until I was ready to scream.
–verb (used with object)
2. to utter in empty or foolish talk: to prate absurdities with the greatest seriousness.
–noun
3. act of prating.
4. empty or foolish talk.
Origin:
1375–1425; late ME praten (v.) < MD praeten. See prattle
Related forms:
prater, noun
prat⋅ing⋅ly, adverb
Dictionary.com Unabridged
Based on the Random House Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2009.
My personal opinion, philosophy, and strategy in regards to gossip.
Or scandal.
My personal strategy (opinion, philosophy) has always been this: If Alvin tells me something about Miranda that I otherwise would not have known (ie something I would not have been able to gather from my own intuition or observation), it is my philosophy that I cannot morally share that with anyone else, especially Miranda and
anyone that knows her.
I do believe that is the most simply (simplest?) I’ve ever explained that. Hm. I’m becoming more… um… concise? Likely story. >.>
That has always been my personal strategy, at least since I was “old enough” to be involved in such confrontations of what to say, who to tell, what to say to whom, etc.
Recently (like, two days ago), I realized that my personal strategy can be applied in reverse. Inverse? Converse? That was my favorite part of geometry, but I don’t remember the difference.
If Alvin tells me something about Miranda that, through logic, I otherwise would not have known (ie something I would not have been able to gather from my own intuition or observation), it is my new, amended philosophy that I will not treat that gossiped information with as much weight as my own personal intuition or observation, objective information.
This made more sense in my head, I promise. Perhaps it will make as much sense to you as it did in my head.
Thesis Statement! Conclusion!
Essentially, if you tell me something about someone else that I have not observed or intuited on my own, I will listen and I will take it in and I will consider it, but I will not give it much weight.
I suppose that’s more like the converse? Applying my non-gossip philosophy to the gossip I hear from others? Sure. Converse.
Have a great day!
:]
Gossip.
[gos-uh p] noun, verb, -siped or -sipped, -sip⋅ing or -sip⋅ping.
–noun
1. idle talk or rumor, esp. about the personal or private affairs of others: the endless gossip about Hollywood stars.
2. light, familiar talk or writing.
3. Also, gos⋅sip⋅er, gos⋅sip⋅per. a person given to tattling or idle talk.
4. Chiefly British Dialect. a godparent.
5. Archaic. a friend, esp. a woman.
–verb (used without object)
6. to talk idly, esp. about the affairs of others; go about tattling.
–verb (used with object)
7. Chiefly British Dialect. to stand godparent to.
8. Archaic. to repeat like a gossip.
Origin:
bef. 1050; ME gossib, godsib(be), OE godsibb, orig. godparent, equiv. to god God + sibb related; see sib1
Related forms:
gos⋅sip⋅ing⋅ly, adverb
Synonyms:
1. small talk, hearsay, palaver, chitchat. Gossip, scandal apply to idle talk and newsmongering about the affairs of others. Gossip is light chat or talk: to trade gossip about the neighbors. Scandal is rumor or general talk that is damaging to reputation; it is usually more or less malicious: The town never lived down the election scandal. 3. chatterer, talker, gabbler, rumormonger. 6. chatter, prattle, prate, palaver.
Dictionary.com Unabridged
Based on the Random House Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2009.
I’ve written briefly about this before, kind of. I’ll explain it again differently so as to clarify.
Well, no, first I’ll start with a word study from dictionary.com.
Idle talk.
So, gossip is what you do when you have nothing real to talk about? Nothing of substance. You gossip when you have nothing of substance to talk about? Weird. But that makes sense. Because people are not comfortable with talking about their own lives (substance), they talk about the lives of others. They talk about what they do not have the right to talk about. Or perhaps because their own lives have nothing
of substance?
Perhaps this stems from politeness. Politeness has created the need for idle talk, I believe. When a person is not close enough to another to talk about anything of substance, politeness says that one cannot just sit there awkwardly. We’ve all experienced that, eh? So then develops idles talk and then develops gossip, maybe.
Light, familiar talk or writing.
Politeness. Hm. I’m not the biggest fan of politeness, you’ll find. It’s all politics. A lot of it is shady. Political politeness, formal formalities. There is a time and place, indeed, but… like anything, it can go too far and often does. I’m not the biggest fan of politeness, you’ll find.
Gossipper = a person given to tattling or idle talk.
Hm. Tattling? Tattling tends to refer to information that is relied that is privileged information, not allowed to be relied. Not that tattling is an absolute taboo. I’m a big fan of balance and moderation, you’ll find.
The synonyms are absolutely my favorite part, so I’ll relay them again:
Idle talk or rumor, esp. about the personal or private affairs of others: Small talk, hearsay, palaver, chitchat. Gossip, scandal apply to idle talk and newsmongering about the affairs of others. Gossip is light chat or talk: to trade gossip about the neighbors. Scandal is rumor or general talk that is damaging to reputation; it is usually more or less malicious: The town never lived down the election scandal.
Gos⋅sip⋅er, gos⋅sip⋅per. a person given to tattling or idle talk: Chatterer, talker, gabbler, rumormonger.
To talk idly, esp. about the affairs of others; go about tattling
Chatter, prattle, prate, palaver.
So… gossip is non-substantial conversation material that is “light chat or talk.” Scandal is damaging to reputation. Hey, kids, no such things as synonyms! Gossip isn’t what we think of. Of. Hm. We tend to think of gossip as damaging. Scandal is damaging. Gossip is the political politeness one reverts to when there is nothing else to say, when one is not secure enough to talk honestly about themselves. Gossip has since become the scandal.
Before I move on to the final thesis of this note (my personal opinion, philosophy, and strategy in regards to gossip), another word study!
Idle talk.
noun
idle or foolish and irrelevant talk [syn: prate]
WordNet® 3.0, © 2006 by Princeton University.
Prate.
[preyt] verb, prat⋅ed, prat⋅ing, noun
–verb (used without object)
1. to talk excessively and pointlessly; babble: They prated on until I was ready to scream.
–verb (used with object)
2. to utter in empty or foolish talk: to prate absurdities with the greatest seriousness.
–noun
3. act of prating.
4. empty or foolish talk.
Origin:
1375–1425; late ME praten (v.) < MD praeten. See prattle
Related forms:
prater, noun
prat⋅ing⋅ly, adverb
Dictionary.com Unabridged
Based on the Random House Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2009.
My personal opinion, philosophy, and strategy in regards to gossip.
Or scandal.
My personal strategy (opinion, philosophy) has always been this: If Alvin tells me something about Miranda that I otherwise would not have known (ie something I would not have been able to gather from my own intuition or observation), it is my philosophy that I cannot morally share that with anyone else, especially Miranda and
anyone that knows her.
I do believe that is the most simply (simplest?) I’ve ever explained that. Hm. I’m becoming more… um… concise? Likely story. >.>
That has always been my personal strategy, at least since I was “old enough” to be involved in such confrontations of what to say, who to tell, what to say to whom, etc.
Recently (like, two days ago), I realized that my personal strategy can be applied in reverse. Inverse? Converse? That was my favorite part of geometry, but I don’t remember the difference.
If Alvin tells me something about Miranda that, through logic, I otherwise would not have known (ie something I would not have been able to gather from my own intuition or observation), it is my new, amended philosophy that I will not treat that gossiped information with as much weight as my own personal intuition or observation, objective information.
This made more sense in my head, I promise. Perhaps it will make as much sense to you as it did in my head.
Thesis Statement! Conclusion!
Essentially, if you tell me something about someone else that I have not observed or intuited on my own, I will listen and I will take it in and I will consider it, but I will not give it much weight.
I suppose that’s more like the converse? Applying my non-gossip philosophy to the gossip I hear from others? Sure. Converse.
Have a great day!
:]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
