Nature of those thoughts?
Uh-huh, how to control the ego. So, the scenario I’m trying to paint here is: I am having a conversation with a family member and I am not taking control or interfering -not to agree; not to disagree. So, what am I localizing my focus on as the talk progresses? I am only listening.
I am only listening. The first element that pops in is the fact that, as I foreshadowed yesterday, I do want to speak. I want to speak, usually badly. People who are opinionated will have an internal mechanism that receives a statement and produces a statement.
Some of us usually have something to say. Does that play in our favor or not? It depends, vastly, and such flexibility tends to matter. In my case, I need to ponder that every time.
When I´m measuring if I should speak or not, I always think about what fits my situation best. A mother talks about her day and will probably want a kid to reciprocate. Once, and if, the kid notices that and has the determination to engage, a decision is made in favor of communication.
But why? Mainly because the kid detects that the mother’s objective is to catch up, and wants to help her achieve that. This is a moment in which active communication is had, and it’s coming from both parts. Both parts, due to their own reasons, want that. In my experiments, however, we’re moving away from it.
I am silent, but am I silent?
Yes, my partner can’t hear my thoughts breaking his, but I really seem to be trying to every time I find an opinion I could break. That doesn’t mean thoughts are not being broken, which is what’s substantial here. Think about it. Let’s analyze the breaking tomorrow. 30 mins. And I know I didn’t even mention ego.