When 1 plus 1 does not equal 2
Most of us have had the experience of thinking we are going to have a logical discussion but find out that we are unable to comprehend the logic of the person with whom we are talking. Such has been my experience on several occasions when discussing the use of face masks with other individuals. I understand those who let me know how their PTSD is making it difficult, and perhaps impossible, for them to wear a mask without the mask triggering an anxiety or even panic attack. I also understand when a history of asthma or other breathing issues make it impossible. I get very confused when someone here in the United States cites the second amendment as protecting their right to not wear a mask. I have heard this “reason” given on a number of occasions. One night this week when attending a virtual meeting comprised of so called educated, successful people the question of mandating the wearing of masks in public spaces arose. One attendee said he does normally wear a mask but will do so if his not wearing one makes others uncomfortable. One of the other attendees, a female businesswoman, cited The Second Amendment to the Constitution as protecting her right to not wear a mask in public spaces. As has been the case when others used this reason, I was mystified. I again googled the wording of The Second Amendment to make sure my aged mind was recalling it correctly. Just as I remembered, it states:
A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
Although I disagree with those who quote this amendment as supporting the right to carry – even open carry – arms into most public places I understand how they might apply this amendment to that argument. It is not my intent in this blog to argue for or against that reasoning.
I am mystified by the defense of using this amendment to defend one’s argument that they have a right to potentially infect others with covid- 19 or have the right to deliberately expose themselves to the virus and, thus, further burden the health care system. Are they suggesting that they have the right to shoot me if I request they wear a mask? I certainly hope that is not the case and, yet, given the assertive, often apparently angry response, I am not entirely sure.
More likely their assertive, even angry, use of the second amendment has nothing to do with the second amendment. Their response is likely related to either (1) anxiety triggered by wearing a mask which cannot be directly linked to a trauma they are willing to share, (2) A sincere belief that covid-19 is not more dangerous than the normal flue which kills a significant number of people or (3) a history of being told what to do as if they were not entitled to an opinion or to make a decision for themselves. I suspect that what they are really saying is, “Please don’t treat me like an idiot. Please don’t act as if you always know better. I will not allow you to tell me what to do.
I understand reason 1 but would appreciate individuals saying this. Reason (2) tells me that they have been convinced that the dangers of covid-19 are a part of fake news or that the protection of masks are fake news. Again, although that is not my belief at least there is some logic in the mind of the person refusing to wear a mask.
Reason three makes sense if I assume the person using the second amendment as a reason to not wear a mask does not possess the skills of self-awareness to articulate the real reason (even to themselves) or does not feel safe in sharing their history of being treated as if their feelings or thoughts do not matter.
All the potential reasons require the listener to use the musical concept of transposing to understand what the person is really saying or rather what they are not saying. The danger is, of course, that one is experienced as being patronizing - of not accepting at face value what the person is saying. Of course, I do not need to say to the person, “I think this is what you are really saying.” That would certainly be experienced as patronizing. It is enough to know that, at some level, there is a logic for not wearing a mask which is not being clearly heard by this listener. It is also important to accept that I often communicate in a way which does not make sense or compute to other. Often the language or words we use have a connection which is only understood in the context of our own emotional history. In one’s emotional life 1 plus 1 does not have to equal two; at least not on the surface level.
Written December 3, 2020
Jimmy F Pickett
coachpickett.org
Most of us have had the experience of thinking we are going to have a logical discussion but find out that we are unable to comprehend the logic of the person with whom we are talking. Such has been my experience on several occasions when discussing the use of face masks with other individuals. I understand those who let me know how their PTSD is making it difficult, and perhaps impossible, for them to wear a mask without the mask triggering an anxiety or even panic attack. I also understand when a history of asthma or other breathing issues make it impossible. I get very confused when someone here in the United States cites the second amendment as protecting their right to not wear a mask. I have heard this “reason” given on a number of occasions. One night this week when attending a virtual meeting comprised of so called educated, successful people the question of mandating the wearing of masks in public spaces arose. One attendee said he does normally wear a mask but will do so if his not wearing one makes others uncomfortable. One of the other attendees, a female businesswoman, cited The Second Amendment to the Constitution as protecting her right to not wear a mask in public spaces. As has been the case when others used this reason, I was mystified. I again googled the wording of The Second Amendment to make sure my aged mind was recalling it correctly. Just as I remembered, it states:
A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
Although I disagree with those who quote this amendment as supporting the right to carry – even open carry – arms into most public places I understand how they might apply this amendment to that argument. It is not my intent in this blog to argue for or against that reasoning.
I am mystified by the defense of using this amendment to defend one’s argument that they have a right to potentially infect others with covid- 19 or have the right to deliberately expose themselves to the virus and, thus, further burden the health care system. Are they suggesting that they have the right to shoot me if I request they wear a mask? I certainly hope that is not the case and, yet, given the assertive, often apparently angry response, I am not entirely sure.
More likely their assertive, even angry, use of the second amendment has nothing to do with the second amendment. Their response is likely related to either (1) anxiety triggered by wearing a mask which cannot be directly linked to a trauma they are willing to share, (2) A sincere belief that covid-19 is not more dangerous than the normal flue which kills a significant number of people or (3) a history of being told what to do as if they were not entitled to an opinion or to make a decision for themselves. I suspect that what they are really saying is, “Please don’t treat me like an idiot. Please don’t act as if you always know better. I will not allow you to tell me what to do.
I understand reason 1 but would appreciate individuals saying this. Reason (2) tells me that they have been convinced that the dangers of covid-19 are a part of fake news or that the protection of masks are fake news. Again, although that is not my belief at least there is some logic in the mind of the person refusing to wear a mask.
Reason three makes sense if I assume the person using the second amendment as a reason to not wear a mask does not possess the skills of self-awareness to articulate the real reason (even to themselves) or does not feel safe in sharing their history of being treated as if their feelings or thoughts do not matter.
All the potential reasons require the listener to use the musical concept of transposing to understand what the person is really saying or rather what they are not saying. The danger is, of course, that one is experienced as being patronizing - of not accepting at face value what the person is saying. Of course, I do not need to say to the person, “I think this is what you are really saying.” That would certainly be experienced as patronizing. It is enough to know that, at some level, there is a logic for not wearing a mask which is not being clearly heard by this listener. It is also important to accept that I often communicate in a way which does not make sense or compute to other. Often the language or words we use have a connection which is only understood in the context of our own emotional history. In one’s emotional life 1 plus 1 does not have to equal two; at least not on the surface level.
Written December 3, 2020
Jimmy F Pickett
coachpickett.org
RSS Feed