"The art of being wise is the art of knowing what to overlook."
~ William James
Being wise...Something I have obviously not yet mastered. There are so many little things that I am trying to overlook, but they continue to bother me and I am antagonizing myself with questions as to whether or not they should continue to be overlooked.
At what point does an action, and/or the continuous repetition of that action, lose its "overlooking privileges"? And what about things that, even occurring ONCE, didn't qualify for that privilege in the first place??
How do I determine what qualifies and what does not? What if it REALLY annoys me? Does that automatically disqualify it for that privilege of being overlooked? And even more so if I have already made it VERY clear on several occasions that it is such an annoyance?
What if it disgusts me? Or annoys AND disgusts me? Or annoys and disgusts AND angers me? Angers? You ask How did it graduate from annoy to disgust to anger? Read on
What if the action is significant enough to change my opinion of the person doing it? That the original sentiment that I have of that person is completely overridden, at that moment, by the opinion I have of that act and that person when it is being done? And when I am able to overlook the act, I try to recalibrate my opinion of the person as if the act had never occurred with no success, then what?
And the blatant disregard for the several requests to cease and desist? Isnt THAT enough to disqualify the original act for overlooking privileges? Wont the continuance of the act, if overlooked, simply fester and become a major point of issue later, bleeding into other areas and causing unnecessary resentment?
Does requesting that the act be discontinued mean that I am trying to CHANGE who that person is? And because the person continues to act that way, isnt THAT a stronger indication that it is ingrained into that persons being? So if I ask them to change it, even if they do for a short period, chances are that they will revert, right? So whats the point? Shouldnt we all be free to do as we wish? But then, if my wish is to not be around such actions, wouldnt I need to exercise my freedom to remove myself from that situation?
But what if I like a lot of other things about the person? What if the person is genuinely good, but they simply have issues annoying issues? And the person does not like that they annoy me, but still does not stop does that mean that the emphasis, the importance of that act, as an issue, is not present in their mind? Does that mean that the importance of ME is not present either?
And if I have the foresight to realize that this act is will impede the person from being effective with potential future roles and responsibilities, would it be unwise for me to, knowingly, consider them as a candidate for that role?
Am I within my right to be angry about the perplexity of this situation? If I really like the person otherwise, and the thought of not having this person around long term pains me and I consider the adjustment of this factor to be a fairly simple task and yet it is not happening, am I within my right to think that my feelings on the topic are insignificant to the person? And therefore be angry?
And if I am angry if I have devoted all this brain time to the subject and it affects me so, would it not be wise to NOT overlook it?
In my belief of fate creating relationships in our lives for a reason, would this be an exercise in helping the person become more aware? Where does my responsibility to do this end? If I have tried and can not, would this be an exercise in learning when to walk away?
I need to consider the significance of the loss vs the significance of the affects of the act.
