two kinds of people
It's a common trope to categorise people this way. To make a point or lead into a story. minimise the multitudes, and feed the little boxes in our minds, as we other a person into a type.
Looking inwards though, it's hard to define ourselves as one thing — and then be confronted by feedback that does not match our thing. Is my judgement of me more reliable than that of a friend? Or is their experience of me more relevant because we only need to define ourselves to help others navigate us?
Best to keep one’s identity small, I agree, but is it up to me? Labels are for others. And to label things outside of the self is easier. They behave this way a lot, in the limited time I've engaged with them, so they must be a [label]. But isn't every performer a spectator somewhere, and every spectator, a performer on another stage?
who we are juggles between our reflective self and the performance of self, and language demands an objectivity that cannot be applied to the practice of being a person. It's as if the two kinds of people are really only separated by time and place. is there any truth of our continuity as a person, or would fickleness be a more honest expression of our being?
Against all intuition, I’m beginning to sense that contradiction maybe more authentic than consistency.