I am a woman born 1949 and my quest is to find a mindmate
to grow old together as a mutually devoted couple
in a relationship based upon the
egalitarian rational commitment paradigm
bonded by intrinsic commitment
as each other's safe haven and secure basis.

The purpose of this blog is to enable the right man
to recognize us as reciprocal mindmates and
to encourage him to contact me:

The entries directly concerning,
who could be my mindmate,
are mainly at the beginning.
If this is your predominant interest,
I suggest to read this blog in the same order
as it was written, following the numbers.

I am German, therefore my English is sometimes faulty.

Maybe you have stumbled upon this blog not as a potential match.
Please wait a short moment before zapping.

Do you know anybody, who could be my mindmate?
Your neighbour, brother, uncle, cousin, colleague, friend?
If so, please tell him to look at this blog.
While you have no reason to do this for me,
a stranger, maybe you can make someone happy, for whom you care.

Do you have your own webpage or blog,
which someone like my mindmate to be found probably reads?
If so, please mention my quest and add a link to this blog.

Sunday, July 17, 2011

347. Interferences Between Gullibility, Instinctivity and Consequencity

Interferences Between Gullibility, Instinctivity and Consequencity

As outlined in previous entries, three distinctive forces have an impact on the behavior of a person. 
  • external influences accepted by gullibility
  • urges of instinctive and innate needs and the impulses of selfish hedonistic wishes
  • long-term rational considerations enabled by consequencity
1.  When one force is the strongest, this force determines the behavior.   When someone is predominantly determined by one of the forces, this is a part or his personality.   

2.  There can be situations, when all three forces are of about the same strength, and a person feels a conflict of what to do.  
An example:   An obese person not wanting to be overweight.  
  • By instinct, he wants to eat, whatever food he can get.    
  • Rationally he knows, that by eating less calories than he burns, he looses weight.  
  • By gullibility he is tempted to buy expensive diet products promising incredibly fast results.
3.  There is also the possibility, that two of the forces are leading to the same behavior and when combined are stronger than the force that is an expression of the personality.  
  • gullibility + instinctivity > consequencity
    Example:   There are some men, who indicate in their profiles to prefer fat women over slim ones.    If such a man meets a woman, who by her consequencity is able to control her weight, but he starts to cajole and seduce her to eat as much as her instincts would want her to eat, as a result she gets as fat as he wants her to be.  (By the way, my BMI is 20 and I am determined to remain like this.   Such a man is not compatible with me.)
  • gullibility +  consequencity >  instinctivity
    Example:  A person with the tendency towards frustration eating when alone can be empowered to control the weight under the beneficial influence of sharing a healthy diet with a partner.
  • consequencity + instinctivity > gullibility
    As long as children are growing, they need to eat as much as is in accordance with their instinct, but they can be educated to eat healthy food instead of the fast-food and sweets that they are lured to eat by commercials.  

Consequencity has two different strategies when dealing with competing influences:
  • The ability to resist by knowing better and being aware of the long term consequences.
    Example:   The ability to stop eating, when no more hungry, even when the host proffers more tempting food.  
  • The wisdom to avoid triggers for succumbing to influences. 
    Example:   Not buying high calorie food but only buying what is healthy.  Avoiding invitation by people, who like to overfeed their guests.