It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Thoughts about Universal Balances.

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 18 2011 @ 03:11 PM
link   
This idea has been in my head for the past couple weeks. I am going to try my best to explain it.

Imagine a group of friends or co-workers. Think of the positions that the people of that group naturally fill over time. The archetypes you could say. You have the leader, the wise, the follower, the shy/outkast, etc...

It seems like within a group of people, there are different roles that people within that group fill. But the same person can be in one role in one group, and a different role in another.

For instance, in one group of people, that person may be the leader, but in another group of people, that person fills the follower role.

So hard to explain.

Basically, to me, it feels like groups will naturally develop of balance of different traits, and you can see these traits within any group of people for the most part.

Sorry for this confusing string of thoughts. Just wondering if anyone else notices this.




posted on Dec, 18 2011 @ 03:32 PM
link   
reply to post by SolarE-Souljah
 


I have an interesting thought I saw your title and thought Universe. So, what if the Universe tries to balnce itself out through humanity. Probably not but interesting.

but your topic, I do think groups fillout how you describ if you have two leaders they will be prone to fight. Doesn't mean those type of groups don't exist, because they do and are some times quite humorus to be apart of. The other thing you bring is is people acting which makes me upset I would rather them just be theirself.



posted on Dec, 18 2011 @ 04:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Doublemint
 



but your topic, I do think groups fillout how you describ if you have two leaders they will be prone to fight. Doesn't mean those type of groups don't exist, because they do and are some times quite humorus to be apart of. The other thing you bring is is people acting which makes me upset I would rather them just be theirself.

I think I understand what the OP is saying. But it's not "acting."

I know I've fulfilled different roles in different groups--sometimes consciously, sometimes without any conscious thought at all.

For example, it's not unusual to find a leaderless group, or a group whose leader is either incompetent or not interested in being the leader. Often someone else in the group will eventually assume the role (or even invisibly "lead" from behind the current leader.) Seen it many times. I've even done it myself.

Group structures are highly dynamic, and people will tend to fill-in the vacuums....
edit on 12/18/2011 by Ex_CT2 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 18 2011 @ 08:58 PM
link   
The Universe is like an atom, the perfect balance of electrons, protrons, and neutrons surrounding the nucleus.

The balance of the Universe is force & inverted force, that being a pull from all angles in this spatial dimension and a push in the spatial dimension below this one. An equal pull from everywhere in this dimension and an equal push everywhere in the one below this one and you have the perfect equalibrium that exists.


Ribbit



edit on 18-12-2011 by ButtUglyToad because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 18 2011 @ 09:04 PM
link   
reply to post by SolarE-Souljah
 


I notice it all the time.

At work, unless they are paying me the big bucks, why lead? Let the person making the money do it, although I do believe in work harder, not smarter. Usually the leader is the one who delegates, and does the least work of all.

If I am in a situation where I know a lot about something, as in teaching people how to do something, I might take the roll of a leader, or if I am there to learn something, be the follower.

Does that help you with your thoughts?



new topics

top topics
 
1

log in

join