Exact words refer to exact positions on the structure. You can say, "I was referring to the equobenity of adapt, not to its impoverished mode". And if someone who claims to know all about equobenity says, "That was a transcendent dessert!" you can either be polite and let it pass or you can say, "Yes, I agree. Now, what was the equobenity that went into its making? Perhaps there were several equobenities. There usually is in a very good dish." Or if someone says, "You are so in the impoverished mode!", you can laugh and challenge them, "And what is the equobenity?"

Equobenity does not, of course, give any protection from physical attack. But a false verbal attack can be just as, or more serious if it leaves you feeling withered, weakened, and full of doubts you were sure you had processed.

 

Equobenity deflects the pain of a verbal attack in two ways. To begin with, you see

the issue on the structure but you see it in both the e. position and the u. position, the e.'s impoverished mode. (This applies equally to e. and its o. position.)

 

As you observe it in its impoverished mode you have the opportunity to say to yourself, "Hmmm. Am I really there?" If you really are there, the verbal attack will have done you a service by pointing it out.

 

But as you quickly scan the situation, and are aware of all you have thought about, you may come to the conclusion that are you are definitely not in the u. (or o.) position, but in the e. or the q.. This secure knowledge protects you from any permanent feelings of being withered, weakened or doubtful.

 

Example of protection from "social" or psychological vengeance

Context: at a dinner party with friends but the cook cares more about his cooking than he cares about his friends. All he wants is to hear praise.

 

Equobenity from guest's point of view:

e. continue to be politely complimentary                    

q. say what you really think

 

"I remember another dinner in which the host asked how we liked the food. Twice. 'But really, tell me what you think of the stew,' he said. Everyone at the dinner table restated their adoration for his chiles en nogada.... Unsatisfied he turned to one dinner guest (me), demanding some note on which the dish could be improved.

 

" 'Well,'  I said, swallowing a mouthful of the delicious food, wishing I could reverse time to a minute ago when we were all enjoying one another's company, 'it's a little clovey.'

 

"Unable to proceed without critical feedback and equally unable to accept it, my friend has not missed an opportunity in the four years since that dinner to ask if my food is 'too clovey.' "

 

How is the friend/guest protected? How is friend/guest protected by equobenity?

 

By knowing what her choice was when the cook persevered with his questions. She can ask herself if, indeed, she did wrong, that she now deserves the continual harping on the subject of "clovey", year after year.

 

But, after examining the whole situation she understands she did not do wrong. And therefore there is no cause whatsoever for shame. He is demonstrating a childish aggression in continuing to talk about it but she now shifts the blame to the host/cook.

 

She can identify the equobenity the questioner was working in and she realizes he was in impoverished mode of his equobenity.

 

All this happens in the blink of an eye. Our intuitions for this kind of situation are finely tuned to figure at out. (Unless of course, the guest is somewhat shy, or is new at these situations, or is prone to self-blame. Etc.)

 

Context from the host/cook's point of view: it's a new dish, but is it so successful that he will want to repeat it someday? After all, it was a lot of work. He wants to know.

Equobenity:

e. knowing by hearing guests' opinions   

q. knowing by observing how much guests eat and with what pleasure

 

The host/cook is in the impoverished mode of e. He only gets an answer to his questions by hearing expressed opinions. He pays no, or insufficient, attention to the body language of physically expressed answers, how much they eat, how happy they are. The T. of course, is a non-coerced back and forth of both sides.

 

 

There is no reason for you to have to talk about equobenity. You don't talk about the

hammer and saws you used to winterize your porch. Don't talk about it, just look at the structure from time to time and check yourself out. It's amazing how fast one can start to drift toward an impoverished mode and amazing how fast you can haul yourself back up again.

The pleasures of life are enhanced if you are aware of how common is the transcendence, the T. sitting up there above the two sides of the equobenity.

Someone messing your, and everyone else's life up, is not just a mess-up, creating a general condition of life being no good, disillusionment, confusion and disgust with all the pious moralities, it's also information to you about that person. You know where this person is on the equobenity map. This reality helps to ward off the very harm the person would otherwise been inflicting on you. You don't waste your strength in protest, or in trying to change the person. If you are unable to get away, you merely endure and by your own, chosen, behavior you may change h/im (or provoke h/im to kill you.)

 

The reality is that the person who's messing everything is in at least one impoverished mode and probably many. This reality contains in it many possibilities of change and you may have no control whatsoever over that.

 

Nevertheless, knowing the truth of how this is happening to you, you yourself are able to remain grounded and strong; you are able to stand outside the confusion, the disillusion, the  generalized bitterness and warping hatred.

 

Knowing the reality of this person, or these people, or even this whole governmental system! gives you a clear space in which to make your own decisions about how to proceed.

Once you identify the equobenity you are working in and then have finished dealing with it --the next equobenity may appear immediately. It is more refined than the first. In the overall problem to be solved, you are getting down to the nitty-gritty. For example:

     Context: going on vacation

 

      equobenities getting into more and more detail:

 

e. just the nuclear family?                    q. the extended family?

e. where? nearby?                               q. where? far away

e. by car                                             q. by another means

e. resort?                                            q. campground

e. water?                                             q. mountains?

e. diet requirements?                      q. eat whatever they have

e. be near a hospital?                           q. just bring first aid, meds etc.

 

Each of these is able to raise a fine welt of resistance.         

 

This is true for your own thinking as well as group-think. It happens so fast you might not notice it. It can become very heated in discussions with others about problems or plans, work or leisure.

You get used to asking, "What's the other side look like? I don't doubt you but let's just take a look."

Context is always the key element in any situation involving people and action. Context never goes away. (Ethics is the other thing that never goes away --the cost is too high.) Being constantly tuned into context enlarges understanding and creates the conditions for more apt decisions.

You don't waste time trying to achieve balance by taking a little of this a little of that. You know you will fall between two stools if you try this sort of compromise.  You know that the two opposing sides, e. and q. are there to be entered fully and lived to creative completion. No matter how fast the process moves along. (Or how slow.) You know that balance is only discovered when you look back at the choices you have made and see that they have worked out, that you have gone back and forth between the e. and the q. again and again, making deliberate choices.

Extremes find a safe place in equobenity. (Mozart was in the extreme; single-minded geniuses maybe always are.) This kind of extreme is safe. It has no relationship to the impoverished mode of the world's dread "extremists". e.g. extreme sports is an equobenity (until it isn't).