How we equate our significance on an individual basis comes in many varieties. Naturally, our significance is manifested into us by way of socialization.
This socialization starts at birth and extends into the duration of our lives, our relationship with our family, friends, teachers, or anyone we perceive as admirable.
We tend to emulate the people we admire while we try not to be like the people we don’t admire. This is not limited to celebrities or those in the lime light of the media; these people can be teachers, relatives, or even peers.
Our significance may also come from ideals such as religion. Nonetheless, these ideals will most likely have originated by another person’s creation which we then consume through books, movies, music, theatre, etc.
Any ideals besides that are an adaptation to something that came before it whether we are aware of the previous ideals or not.
This is to say, ultimately, that our significance is rooted in human interaction from various outlets, relationships and degrees of availability. Conversely, our insignificance is equated by contrasting interests of any of the aforementioned.
If one admires their family but is also alienated by that family, they will feel insignificant. Similarly, with anyone or anything that we admire or socialize with; if it disowns us or denies us in any fashion or dynamic we will feel the manifestation of insignificance.
This is to say that our insignificance is rooted on a contrast in human interactions at various outlets and relationships. The majority of us will choose social dynamics based on what’s most prominent.
This includes a myriad of cultures that one has observed from their situation in life. For example, the perception a child from a low social economic family will have compared to the perception a child will have from being born into an affluent family.
The child from the low social economic family will be born into premises that his world is small because his family has little to no life experiences outside of their living standards. Where the child from the affluent family is exposed to much more because their living standards permit it.
For these people who choose social dynamics based on what’s most prominent may be concluded that they are weak for choosing an easy option or smart for subscribing to the dominant factions.
Nonetheless, these types of people will choose based on what makes them feel significant. For those that choose options outside of prominence, they will be considered outsiders to the dominant majority; perhaps, even, a low pedigree of human; fools, weird, and abnormal.
However, none of that judgment of other classes of people matters at all. The continuation of this column ,as well as "Significance of absurdity:part I" can be found on tejanotribune.com