Posted by ambrosialdelight on March 10, 2002, at 15:22:18
In reply to mind games, part 1, posted by trouble on March 10, 2002, at 14:33:31
I had a debate with someone some time ago in which he concluded that everything is a game and that even if I take my ball and bat and go home, that's a game too like trouble pointed out. Is every form of interaction we have with others a game? When does a game become a "mind-game"? What is a mind-game? My thoughts are that we label things "mind-games" (with the negative connotation) when they make us a uncomfortable to whatever degree. We feel we need to "gain the upper hand" so we actively strategize to gain this (as opposed to regular "life-skills" strategizing). I also feel that many labels have nothing to do with what things actually are. Some "mind-games" can be fun if all parties involved want to play and agree on goals, intentions, etc. I think this is why "games" as we think of them, baseball, X's and O's, etc, have rules to play by. "Mind-games" tend to vary greately in their goals/intentions many of which are unique in the mind of each player and are often kept secret. This causes the discomfort, misunderstanding and misinterpretation which gives mind-games a bad rep. Even Aussie rules football has rules but there are "fewer" restrictions than in other games so the players tend to get more serious injuries. "Mind-games" essentially have no rules hence greater scope of injury. As far as "controlling" mind-games, I don't know how far someone can control them, but I find that most people don't play "mind games" with people they like or care about, except in the above mentioned case where all parties concerned want to play. However sometimes we may think others want to play when they really don't which makes listening that much more important. Life would be awfully dull if everyone stopped playing, but it's always better if everyone is on the same page.
poster:ambrosialdelight
thread:19517
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/social/20020305/msgs/19572.html