It’s hard to draw a clear line between a naive, an idealist or simply a stupid person. When one is trying to tell the truth about how one feels the world should be, or the neighborhood or people around him/her should be in an ideal setting, one usually receive similar replies such as:
1) You’re so naive
2) You’re too idealist
3) You must be stupid, don’t you know that the world is changing?
Examples of the questions that usually receive the abovementioned replies:
1) But he should practice what he preached, shouldn’t he? People must be consistent with what the said, don’t they?
2) But ones should not use their friends for their own benefits for whatsoever reason, isn’t it?
3) But it is clear that he/she is wrong, why don’t just he/she admit and so that the problem solved? Why it is so difficult to admit that he/she is wrong?
One may say, it’s OK if the person who mention the question is a child, but not a 20’s, 30’s or older persons, who should have seen the world long enough to realize that the world doesn’t operate the way we thought when we were children. Then life must be difficult for the person who insist to see the world from a child’s perspective. I did want to insist doing so: seeing the world from a child’s perspective. And the result: some people just using you, cheating at you, try to get benefit from you, and you witnessed some people doing things contradict with what they always "preach" about. It isn’t the good world you would have ever imagined when you’re a child, is it?
I just asked a question to my friends: and why I now have to face all these difficulties and problems? The answer from different friends (is simple and short each) are as follows:
1) because you’re stupid, lack of suspiciousness, unaware.
2) because you’re naive, too trust someone.
3) because you’re too idealist. you thought you can change people, you thought when you’re kind to someone, they will treat you as kind as you expect.
4) because you’re too kind.
The answers are not necessarily reflecting the "normal" causal-effect answer, are they? (note: I consider "normal" causal effect e.g: if you’re kind, other will be kind, vice versa. If you do evil things, bad things will happen to you, etc.). And when I observe others’ life, similar things applied: some evil people found a happy ending and live happily ever after, while some good and nice people live their life in misery and suffering. I’m confused. I’m just trying to see the world through my perspective, and do what I taught to do be consistent, be trustworthy, be kind, be faithful et cetera. Apparently, those values are no longer trendy. Those are old fashioned values from the world in ideal realm. They are impractical to contemporary life.
Let’s check what Wikipedia says about these three problematic terminologies:
Naive: lacking experience or understanding; inexperienced; unsuspecting
Idealist:
1) (philosophy) One who adheres to idealism.
2) Someone whose conduct stems from idealism rather than from practicality.
3) An unrealistic or impractical visionary.
Stupid: Lacking in intelligence. Also, exhibiting the quality of having been done by someone lacking in intelligence.
Seems to me like they’re different in definition, albeit the slight similarity between naive and idealist. Stupid is totally different, it is something given rather than something done by choice. Naive could be mix of by choice or given.
If so, can someone who by intention choose to be naive or idealist, survive in this contemporary world? The answer, my friend, is blowing in the wind..the answer is blowing in the wind.. (inspired by Bob Dylan lyrics that I listened to last night).
May 13, 2007 -also migrated from old FS blog
No comments:
Post a Comment