In our understanding, the word I is the representative of me. The me who resides within the realm of myself. When I speaks, it is me that is doing the talking. I is an identifier, used to let you know that it is me we are talking about. I is not possessive; however everything belongs to me. When me takes ownership of something, it becomes mine. That which is mine is part of me, and I reserves it to the kingdom of myself; for the primary, if not exclusive benefit of me. You therefore, is everyone, and anything which is not me.
You is automatically a threat to me simply because you is not me; and any actions you take which I cannot predict are a potential threat to me. Therefore you is the interloper; the stranger in the distance whose motives, goals, and intent, are unknown and therefore suspect. For I can never hold the same level of trust in you that I have reserved for me. Since you may, by turns, be either ally or adversary; neither or both over time. But always you is a separate entity from me, whose point of view requires that my consideration of it, bring to bear tools beyond my primary senses.
So unless my understanding harmonizes with the message you relay exactly, there is room for miscommunication and misunderstanding; doubt and concern. This increases the likelihood that error and mistrust will occur which will taint your message. As a result it is the normal course of events that information from you and its’ trustworthiness, like consideration of you and your correctness; is secondary in weight and value to information from, and consideration of, me. Survival dictates that my judgment of the ideal course of action I follow is paramount. Accepting your judgment carries risk because trusting you may cost me dearly.
Unless I have some reliable assurance that your actions and goals are not an impediment to my continuing existence; you are a potential, and perhaps unacceptable threat. If circumstances indicate I must interact with you, that relationship may well be adversarial unless and until, I receive some information from you which proves your behavior is not a danger to me. When we are young, we have little to no choice in whether we must rely on those around us for our survival. As we grow (and hopefully mature) we discover from others what degree of trust we should have in those who are not us.
When I determines, based on the reflection me has done, that it holds a sufficient store of information about the nature of reality to judge for itself what is in its best interests; you is the main obstacle to my ability to work my will in the world around me. In order to advance my agenda for survival I must manage a relationship with you. That interaction will manifest itself in whatever terms, or whatever means are requisite for me to exercise as much control as possible over what actions actually unfold.
Me can decide that the ideal method for realizing these results is through cooperation arrived at through a shared understanding. Or me can decide that results are better achieved only by using guile; or that conflict is the preferred path to success. Our society has established rules which address, and outline civil discourse; which are there to allow me access to the means for survival, peacefully. However, it is important to remember that the decisions me makes, and the actions me takes, stem to a degree from the decisions you makes, and the actions you takes.
J. A. Stubbs, Editor-In-Chief
Forgotten Lore Publishing, llc