Accomodating Imperfection

 The greatest myth is an illusion usually propounded by the vested interests that wants the herd to believe that greatest hurdle to their success are traits of imperfection listed in their blood. It may be that quality of yearning for a picture perfect face of a model, perfectionist soldier in army or perfectionist CEO of a company and so on.

 

 This crave for perfectionism that has been pushed by the individuals from top rung to its ground fleet has somehow made imperfection less attractive. The only soul that sees imperfection yet feels proud of the offspring is its parents who doesn't buy the world's argument of restraining love for a imperfect individual.

Being imperfect makes this world a work in progress. A perfectionist who harbors a superiority complex dies down before imperfect individuals who battle inferior complexity tried to be imposed on them by the society. Audience who are used to perfection would turn violent at slightest clue of imperfection exhibited by their lordships as they have muted their belief system that has stopped accommodating imperfection.

 

Its similar to a society that devalues the role of poor amidst mad rush for appropriating the rich. Many are fooled by the cartel that imperfection doesn't produce the best result which is simply untrue as not all perfect results are accepted as the best result because best result is the one that fills one's heart and it has no connection with perfected traits.

 

Contextual contradictions

When two people begin to communicate with different aesthetic background there are high probability that they end being non-constructive. The reason is they only try to understand the message from opposite rather than context behind it. There is nothing demeaning as there was no impure intent and the miscommunication was basically due to lack of co-ordination.

 Context plays a major role while deciding the quality of communication between the individuals. There many chances that when you confidently argue with your dissenter based on certain preconceived context in a fit of a moment. But when you recall the argument at later time of day in a feel good ambience you realize that your entire argument delivery was taken out of your opponent's context. Context can make as well as break the conversation. 

There are instances where two people get into argument with a premeditated context and those kind of argument will most probably end up in brawl. Its something innate that neither of two factions try to arrive at a mid-path as they don't want to give space to opponent's context as that would mean a death knell to their version of illusion. 

 

Everything can be sorted out over a cup of tea when there is an intent to arrive at a solution. But beyond a certain level the point of action is all about show of pounding power rather than allowing the wisdom to take charge. When it comes to pounding power it can only derail the physicality and it is the wisdom that takes the final call.   

I am right, no! I am right

 We always tend to defend the argument from our side as believed by us. It will take immense polity to understand why the one who is opposing your stand has indeed taken that stand.

Worst is that you upholding a propaganda which is by design framed to generate guilty conscious amongst the people who are true to their conscience and identify a cat as a cat amongst a group who make the cat believe as lion.

When deeply deliberated its fear getting inferior amongst the masses that these image makers take shelter of propaganda to silence the critics and think that they have over powered the reality with their image making heroism.

More the mass believes these image makeovers the more they stay away from the reality which holds the solution to the problems generated in the real world and the imaginary world fall as a pack of cards just by a single probe.