You might notice that I don’t usually name names of people in my articles, when I am giving examples, or in general. I don’t normally do this to protect the people involved, but instead because naming names singles out people when my message normally is about human nature in general.
We All Have The Same Foundation
If I was discussing an example about a person who was unable to get along with his co-workers, I could tell you that the person was an actual person I know named Chris(I have made up this name), or I could leave that out. I leave it out because Chris in this example represents millions of people around the world. When I talk about anguish felt by someone, it is the same anguish that the 6.7 billion people on the planet are able to face. If I narrow it down to one person I know or have heard of, I am doing a disservice to the message.
Also, within this is the indirect message that we are all the same. People are connected more than a few would like to admit. Often times, the poor person talking badly about the rich person would do the same things the rich person was doing if they were in their place. Our differences are also exaggerated by some for their own benefit.
Business/Strategy Is In Every Field
Let’s say I am giving an example about a business person. I could name a local businessman, but business is something that is in the mindset of people throughout the world, from scientists wanting to sell their guarded information or products, to a lawyer wanting to increase their hourly salary, to a doctor who is thinking about opening their own practice, to an artist who wants to get their sculptures to the public for high profit, to the person who manipulates many to make a profit in their own unique way. Naming any of these specific people takes away from how the message is about human nature and not a specific person.
What we do and what we learn is not about any single person. If I make someone laugh with a certain joke, it is likely that others will laugh due to that joke as well. While we are all different in our mannerisms and verbal patterns, we tend to respond the same, either out of similarity or out of fear of looking dissimilar.
The more I name names, or use a specific location, or act as though an event is exclusive to one scenario, the more my larger message would get muddled. While it is good to use examples from the past that are either well-known or represent a key issue, the basis of my messages can’t be these examples. The human nature I discuss is in me, you, my neighbors, people in other cities, people in other countries, those in urban and rural areas, and so on.
Thinking In Terms Of The Big Picture
There are times where naming names can be helpful, like when the goal is to help a specific person, or to make an example that is easy to see the details of, but there is another aspect about not naming names that is great. It force you or me to think about the big picture more often. You can do this in your own thought examples as well. Let’s say a friend of yours named Michael borrowed $400 from you and didn’t pay you back for 4 months, when the original plan was to have it be paid back much sooner. You could blame Michael for his lack of mutual respect, or let the situation go, or you could think about the issue from human nature that led to this predicament.
You could see that those who borrow funds are usually already in a shady predicament because of their own poor practices, and so their standard response is to seek help in a bit of a frenzy. Also, if you look online for information about how to deal with loaning out large amounts to others, various articles remind you that whatever caused the person to get into dire straits is likely to occur again or continue, and that you shouldn’t think that loaning the money will solve any long-term problems.
When you take the big picture view with any small dealings you have with others, you move forward faster than people who stop in their tracks and become self-conscious or let time slip by or let the problem stay in place.