“Recognition, big or small, matters as long as you are recognized amongst the lesser knowns.” Does that mean even the lesser knowns could be known because they are the reason for your recognition? Need your thoughts…
Wondering - which may make a difference in an answer - matters to whom? Recognized by whom?
1 Like
Matters to everybody of course. Recognition or having an identity of some sort is always required. One is always recognized by another. A family member, a friend, a fellow human being (stranger, astronaut, some Mr. Dawson or an anticipated child). My question is, whether we’re known as who we are because of the presence of the “lesser knowns” (those who don’t have the same identity as ours) or are they the same individuals recognized by us “knowns” the same way they recognize us? In simpler terms, would one’s recognition suffice if he is unknown among others? Or is his recognition only recognized when others know him?
I would like to respond to your posts, but I’m totally lost, and this could be because of me. But if you could make another post to explain by giving an example, that would be very helpful.
I contend that this is perhaps nonsensical.
Each term could refer to one’s self or the other person in the transaction of recognition.
Being recognised means you are known to the re-cogniser. You must be known to be recognised.
So the question may be whether the existence of those who don’t recognise us makes richer the moments when someone does?? Is that it?