Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

Can Other People Know us better than we know Ourselves? Theme: Religion,…

- - - - Example: Parents
        
        Parents claim to know their children better than the children can know their own self. They think that they can understand a child's emotions, even if they are not living the life that the child is, and as such make assertions based off of emotions that are showing only part of the bigger picture that is the child
      - Because parents are involved in only your home life (for kids going to school) they may not be aware of what their child is experiencing when they are at school. If they only receive context from their home life they are able to determine their home identity but maybe not a person's identity when they are out in the world. In this sense, because they are only making accusations based off of external emotions, they are not able to know their child, better than their child knows themself.
        
        Reasoning 2
      - In this sense it is not possible for a person to know you better than you know yourself, they are missing important context about why your emotions are the way that they are, they may know how you feel about certain things, but they cannot understand what makes you feel that way in the first place
        
        Reasoning 1
  - - - Example: Parents
        
        I am sorry for using this example again.
        
        Following the claim made about Emotion, parents think that they know the truth and lies in what you are saying. This is possible, but on a personal account they do not use reason, they say (in my case) "because I know you" or "you always do that when you lie". It is unethical to make these generalized statements because they are unfair and often, not well reasoned.
        
        Counterclaim
        
        Parents do know things like this sometimes, it is possible for these unsubstantiated claims to be true, but they are still unethical because assumptions like that are still unfair and difficult to determine as true or false.
- - - - Reasoning 1: When humans as a species get to know each other they tend to get an idea for what the emotions of someone they know mean. With this they establish a foundation for how to label someone based on their understanding of their emotions.
      - Reasoning 2: Like how it was stated in the bubble for reason 1, we establish a foundation or a big picture of who someone is, because it comes naturally to us as humans, and as such it makes us feel like we know someone better than someone else due to our emotional connections.
      - Example: Friends interpretations
  - - - Example: Religious Guardians, members of same body
        
        In many religious communities there are people who try to help people out when they are going through hard times, and they try to support them based on what they know from what they hear a person say.
        
        For these people it is natural to try to help out like that and they can build opinions for who someone is by listening to what they say. In religion these people assume that you follow the religions standards, and by hearing what you say they can build a basis of who you are
        
        These are fair assumptions for people to make, and in a sense by interpreting the language that we use they can get a sense for who you are in connection to your religion that you may not have known, giving them a way to know you slightly better than you know yourself in a religious sense based off of your language and the work you do for your religious body.