Much of our discussion has reflected on the unconscious enforcement of the dominator model which keeps us from attaining our right to our individuated, becoming self. We have found that such unconscious efforts stem from a societal meaning perspective about doing things for someone else's good, especially during our most formative years. This unconscious impulse arises from that same impulse learned in the formative years of those who perpetrate it as adults, those who care for us in our formative years. That impulse persists from a meaning perspective that informs all its believers that the dominator model of the world exists as the sole possibility based on human nature. We can tell how that meaning perspective sees human nature by how we generally use the phrase to describe people: "That's just human nature." That phrase rarely if ever turns up in a positive context. If Gerald does something kind to Carol, we don't call it human nature. If he does something terrible to her, we call that human nature. Human nature in perception and conception appears endlessly negative and out of control if left on its own. That being the case, the dominator model and its attendant conformity must operate successfully to keep all that nasty human nature under some sort of control.
That nasty human nature doesn't just live and drive in others. When we pause and think about it, it's our nature as well. If we critically reflect on the idea that we all suffer from the evils of our uncontrolled human nature, we might find it makes very little sense to us on very personal and even on a public level. Do we really feel our own human nature feels essentially brutish? We all do things that we don't like from time to time. We have brutish capabilities, but do we really feel essentially nasty and brutish?
Generally, we see very little harm committed by people on one another every day. If we read, watch, or listen to the news we might get that impression, but it simply isn’t the case in our everyday lives. Most of us find it safe and caring to live with the people with whom we live. Most of us find the people we encounter treat us at least reasonably well, and often they go out of their way to treat us very well. Even in the seemingly extreme situation of driving, very little happens to us that does any real harm, and the overwhelming majority of drivers mean no harm when they drive. People make mistakes when they drive, and in doing so, bad things happen. That doesn't mean that their human nature rose up and turned them into some vehicular, homicidal maniac. Interestingly, we tell endless stories about how people treat us badly, but when we look at a complete day, we find those situations are a rarity. When we look at those stories carefully, we might also find that we tell the same story multiple times with an every heightening sense of outrage. That kind of story telling may also arise from the "human nature is nasty" meaning perspective that the dominator, conformist model of life wishes to promote. We promulgate the feeling about the essentially negative quality of our human nature with every story. It supports that perception and raises our level of that perception. We may even miss seeing the good things that happen to us because we remain ever diligent in looking out for the bad things that happen to us.
It feels as if the dominator model wants us to perceive the world and its people, all chock full of human nature, as a constant threat. We will never encounter any unconditional positive regard, and we must remain constantly diligent and judgmental to face the threats of human nature. This hyper-diligence and aggressive defensiveness carries its own dangers.
If we remain judgmental toward others, we will lose our own sense of personal unconditional positive regard. If something works unconditionally, we do it without judgment. The unconditional will never happen when we judge. Judgment, by its definable nature, requires preconditions in observation and reception or we won't see or acknowledge it. If we withhold the unconditional until proved to deserve it, it ceases to be the unconditional. If we do that constantly to others, we will undoubtedly do it to ourselves. We know that when we judge others, they must be judging ourselves as well. If that is the case, our ego needs to grow defensively and our identity must look elsewhere than in unconditional positive regard for some form of validation to keep its sense of viability, value, and purpose.