in psych a couple of lectures ago we were looking at attributional styles, which basically focuses how people explain negative events. So there are these three main dimensions we were presented with; internal vs external, stable vs unstable, and global (as in the whole of the person) vs specific. So say i did badly on my psych essay (i actually got a H2A, whoo!), and my explanation was that "i'm just not very good at psychology", that would be internal (blame directed internally), stable (state of "not very good" is relatively constant, not like a mood) and specific (confined to psychology). and supposedly people usually follow the same kind of structure with different negative events. anyway, not that you really needed me to explain it, but just for some foundation. i think it's reasonably normal to internally scrutinize over one's own explanations/excuses (but then i might be more introspective than the norm), but now i have these labels it's really hard not to use them, and then try to change my excuses so they don't sound internal-stable-global (suggesting pessimistic or depressed outlook). ignoring that i'm mediating my responses to people who really wouldn't know these categories or use them, i feel kind of disappointed in myself for mediating them at all. i mean, i'm not totally against conforming, i wouldn't drive without road rules (irrelevant, but i just wanted to say i got my p's last week), but i really don't like labels dictating how i think and act. i know as humans we can't really function or communicate without them, they still shit me up the wall. i guess i'm just trying prove nothing to someone, or something to no one. yeah... well i'm definitely human...


i want a t-shirt that says; "i'm so over ego-centric t-shirts"