I guess we're really riding the whirlwind here.

I'll speak in generalizations to protect the names of the innocent. This note is for my preservation of memory, but posting it here states the obvious: maybe people can relate.

Seems like over the past four weeks, we've been exposed to some novel systems of thought. Maybe not entirely new ideas, but the formalization of the obvious is probably what seems more impactful to my mind.

At the onset, our merry band of 2010'ers was spoken to by a serial entrepreneur, most noted for a popular recreational game he had created. Among many items in his memorable monologue was a description of what he termed a "very human moment." We've all experienced these moments. Maybe, though, what was not common in the experience was our reaction to what was happening. Or more correctly, maybe we did react commonly instead of uncommonly. The idea is to be better in those future human moments.

Fast forward a few days, and we're being run through a new system of thought by a Couple of Speakers. Of peculiar interest to me was the concept of matching tone with tone, in the process of confrontation. It was more the "matching" principle that stuck with me, versus the issue of confrontation resolution.

Finally, today, the methods of building one's social capital with another human were discussed in our behavior class. We dealt with the intriguing idea of prostrating oneself and asking for a favor of someone, as a method of "drawing closer" to the person, if I can borrow the Heinlein phrase. To cut to the quick, though, it's not really the favor that creates the "drawing closer." It's more the fact that one is made vulnerable in the process of asking the favor.

Right, so...

On the way back from dinner tonight, I was on my way to the car, thinking about how I'd have to wear a suit two days in a row and how that hadn't happened since US Bank. Seattle is doing its thing these days, weather-wise; the sidewalks were very much rain-slicked. I'm in business formal, as stated, so the potential for severe loss was on my mind, and I walked carefully.

Ahead of me was someone walking, carrying a heavy box, down a set of stairs toward the parked cars.

You might guess the obvious: there was a slip here, and a fall there, and then I was rushing up to ask:

"Are you all right?"

Next, "Can I carry that box for you?"

Lastly, "You know I slipped myself this very morning, and a bunch of undergrads saw."

Which was only partially true; true on the count of slipping, but false on the count of anyone (of consequence) seeing.

On that point, we walked and talked on quite normally until our separated cars led us in separated directions.

I guess the human moment was the fall. My weak anecdote was attempted willful vulnerability and attempted "matching" of context.

And the "drawing closer" was the conversation that followed, albeit a brief one.

I was told that the economics class would eventually color the way I viewed life, but it seems the colorization happens sooner rather than later and not just from economics. A nearly identical situation occurred about three years ago, in terms of action and my reaction, and I didn't quite chew on it in the same manner I'm doing now.

The lesson here is that the Program messes with your Mind.

Right...I should be doing homework right now, but this seemed more important to me at the moment.