The subjective world is rather tricky.
We start thinking about what really is, instead of what appears to be, to question beliefs and feelings, and quickly becomes obvious that we don't know anything at all.
It's a very slippery thing. Like that rainbow you can only see with the corner of the eye, and disappears once you focus your vision.
How do we know when we like someone? Sounds like a stupid question, but is it?
It's easy to convince ourselves that we like someone when we are in the middle of nowhere, lacking options, feeling underappreciated, lonely, etc.
First it's required to figure out what you value. In a way the brain attributes ponderosity to each thing, and with that it proceed with the task it was made for: calculate.
Maybe that's not so obvious to everybody but the brain is a huge calculator which presents the results in feelings, instead of numbers, probably to convince us of authenticity. And this calculation isn't always accurate. And it is far from seldom how often we cheat during this process.
A temporary situation enters the equation as much as something more permanent, and it doesn't have to last a long time, be very intense, or require that we put a lot of effort to convince ourselves of its perenniality. And then our results start losing their reliability.
Say you value beauty, and end up going to a place everybody is what you consider ugly. Even if you stay for a short time, you'll quickly choose the least worse, and in no time you'll believe you should be together with that person. But how is this "least worse"? You analyze how good looking people are (since in this example beauty is the key factor) among those you believe you stand a chance with (be it real or imaginary, and that will depend both on the beliefs you have based on your self-esteem, as on reality, I.e. from the standpoint on the other person to be interested in you), and if the result is too tight between some people, you will insert on the calculation some other attributes that you value a lot. But the biggest ponderosity is what happens between the two of you. If you never had anything with a person, that won't make it to the equation, but you have been going out with someone, everything will be amplified. The positive sides will be much more important, the pleasure of being with the other person will make a very relevant part of the equation (which by itself ruins the whole calculation already since you can't estimate how pleasant would be to be with someone you never been with), but the negative sides will go through the same changes, and you will believe that none of those negative things would be felt with other people, with those you never had anything with.
Let's say you have much more good moments than bad together and, even though rationally you don't find that person gorgeous or possessing many of the secondary (for you) traits, you end up distorting your perception and considering this person better than you would really see them. And then you start a relationship.
You think you are very happy in your relationship, until you move to another town on which everybody is much better looking (you can easily change the example of what you value for whatever you want: intelligence regarding what you appreciate, sense of humor, ambition, etc.) than your partner. Soon enough you start finding your relationship insufficient (in so far as looks matters more than the experiences you had together). It wasn't that things grew sour, your calculation just changed. You start convincing yourself of the opposite, for worse. And so you break up.
That's why many relationships don't last. Say you have low self-esteem and haven't been with anyone for a while. Whatever comes will be good enough, because your expectations are low. It's like starving: getting something to eat seems to be the best thing in the world, but when food stops being an issue you start to need more, like safety, for instance. And if you have food and safety for granted you'll start considering bad that you don't have culture. Nothing but Maslow's Pyramid (read about it, it's worth!).
But we can't forget how much our brains value positive experiences with someone. It's a mechanism that makes us create strong and long-lasting bounds with those who gives us pleasure, or helps us in time of need. That perpetuates relationships far beyond ideal (as if there was such thing as an ideal situation...). This happens not only regarding people, but also places, jobs, hobbies, etc.
So we face a dilemma. We know we are fooling ourselves, but, on one side thinking just about the possibilities (never real ones, always believed ones) will prevent us of wanting to be with someone, because there will always be someone "better", and on the other side believe only in the illusions we create for ourselves will make us settle for dissatisfaction.
We like books, soup-operas, movies, tv shows, etc. e feel real emotions with such fantasies because our brains like to believe things are real. It's all content from someone's mind, who wrote that story. Same goes for liking videogames: it's nothing more than an intricate myriad of equations hidden by images and sounds. It's our propensity to deceive ourselves that allows us believe in the veracity of such products (the immersion). If you take your time to analyze you'll see it's all just words or calculations that someone came up with and, as a magic trick gets boring after you get how it works, those medias will also lose their value for us.
My dad mockingly says a sentence "Fool me because I enjoy it". And that, to be honest, is our definition as humans. We like illusions, and they give meaning and color to our lives, but our other option, too see everything for what they really are, is a cold and disconnected world.
What a ironically cruel destiny, this one!
Where should we draw the line between been objective or been fooled (and fool ourselves)?
Postado por Ricardo Ceratti.