By Titmoss
Quite a few smart men have studied the matter down through the ages and most have come to the unanimous conclusion that while studying men like books has its place (in psychology, perhaps), it cannot tell you everything, nor get you a friendship.
For example, there once was a man named Clive Staples Lewis, who had one of the people in one of his novels say this:
"I happen to believe that you can't study men,
you can only get to know them, which is quite a different thing."₁
I agree with (what I would suspect to be) Jack's own sentiments. Studying men as we would, say, science, is pretty base—or at least dehumanizing in that it reduces them to a subject or object to be studied, tested, and have results drawn up from. Humans are each unique and therefore often unsuitable for the bestowing upon of 'blanket statements', as which we find the many studies of man by men seem to generate . Humans are changing and therefore, often the same person acts and thinks differently throughout their day, week, years, and life. Minute by minute we are forming new opinions, and abolishing old ones, acquiring new information, and losing other information. Today, you may be a charming as a bird, but tomorrow we may find you an absolute grouch.
Also, humans are made with an immortal soul, and a personality characteristic to only themselves. All this makes studying men (if you are going to attempt it) faceted with even more issues, problems, and hang-ups. Frankly, I believe that to study men in the sense of this dictionary definition of "to study"
"to discover facts about something by doing research or experiments"₂
...is pretty ridiculous. How many of us, if we want to understand a certain person, run down to the library and look up books on that specific person's habit, time, place, character, gender, etc? Hopefully, not many of us. Why? Simply because it is much simpler to get to know that individual as you interact with them on a daily basis. So in the sense of studying a person in order to understand them in order to know them, we might find this next definition of “study” more suitably satisfying towards illuminating us as to the proper way of ‘studying’ people:
Study: [verb] “to look at…something and think about it carefully”
Better, better. To look at—observe—someone and think about them carefully. It’s closer to our ‘getting to know you’ idea; but still, to just look at someone and think about them doesn’t quite encompass all that really should happen when we “get to know” people. I’m sure you don’t just look at and study your friend when you meet them. Usually, you want to know more of them (their habits, dreams, thoughts, etc.) rather than about them (their favorite color, the shape of their nose, how they sit, etc.)
So, what definition (if any) fits this idea of studying to learn of someone instead of just learning about them? Well, how about this next definition:
“the process of learning about a [person] by reading, thought, intuition, or research [
This could fit. For our purposes, it seems to include a more personal, and certainly more verbal kind of studying. In learning about a person by reading, you may think of them perhaps sharing their journals and letters with you; often that is a very intimate, and deep look into the person. In getting to know them by thought, you may think of conversing with them; hearing their opinions on subjects and understanding their person through the verbalizing of their problems, hopes, or plans. By intuition, we can feel or sense what the person we are learning of is feeling. Through intuition we learn their habits, emotional patterns, and ways.
If we employ research to get to know someone, we are learning of their past (which usually effects how they will respond and interact with us now) and we are discovering their feelings on subjects, and how they came to where they are; intellectually, spiritually, and socially. All these facets of studying (a person): observation, reading, thought, intuition and research are merely supplements to the first and foremost thing that they are require—talking. To sit down and talk, debate, talk, laugh, discuss with someone is still the best and fastest way to get to know them.
That last definition describes the process of actively getting to know a person (the concept Lewis alluded to as being better than plain ‘studying’ them) quite well, but not perfectly. "Getting to know" someone also implies that the person being known playing a part also. Friendship—the essence of ‘getting to know someone’--is not just about me passively studying them. It's about us knowing each other, together.
“Getting to know you is much different than studying you. If I wanted a quiet thing to study, I’d go to the library. But since I want something more—a friend--- let’s have lunch sometime, just you and me. Okay?”
₁ A Most Reluctant Convert: C. S. Lewis
₂ www.merriam-webster.com Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, Encyclopedia, & Thesaurus"
ATTENTION W.A. STAFF: You now have free reign to edit this and/ or suggest improvements.
So, back to square one! Sorry for the confusion (and inconvenience.) If you have any suggestions for the webzine, or problems with the way it is step up, please tell me. And give us your ideas for it too! Write Away is really all about, you, the writers. :)
Thanks & God bless,
Hannah (Editor)
Posts
All Comments
