I

improperly resolving needs

(v.) To resolve one's own needs at the involuntary expense of others, negatively impacting their needs. For example, stealing their food (negatively impacting their need for food security) so you can satiate your hunger. You fully resolve your body's nutrient requirements in a way that prevents others from fully resolving their needs. Opposite to properly resolving needs. See objective evil or evil.

indulgent side-taking

(n. & v.) - DEFUNCTION

The defunction of choosing to support a side in some conflict against the opposing side as a way to pacify discomfort, instead of taking the disciplined approach of empathy and mutual regard to address each other’s affected needs. This shameless rush to a take side typically...

1. overemphasizes each other's differences while disregarding common ground,

2. relies on impersonal arguments to avoid engaging relevant specifics,

3. resists addressing or resolving needs when easing discomfort of those needs,

4. opposes the other side’s inflexible needs that they cannot change, called moral conflation (i.e., conflates unchosen needs with chosen responses to them),

5. misapplies critique of moral relativism and moral neutrality,

6. provokes the opposed side’s defensiveness to produce more of what is opposed, and

7. self-righteously and arrogantly serves own conflict porn to win at the expense of others.

Although aiming to ease pain, it usually results in more pain since it overlooks the affected needs prompting that pain (i.e., discomfort avoidance). See premature opposition and oppo culture.

This contrasts with a more disciplined approach to take a side on a contested issue, which could include a negotiated agreement on a resolution path to mutually solve the issue. The key distinction is between an intent to relieve discomfort and to resolve needs. See easement orientation and conflict orientation.

See adversarialism and avoidant adversarialism.

inflexible need

(n.) Another identifier of core needs, organic needs, or natural needs. Refers to unchosen needs that automatically occur in response to a diminished ability to function. Distinguishes from flexible responses to needs, which colloquially can be called a need, but anankelogy refers to as a preference or access need.

E.g., I inflexibly need water when thirsty but if I say I need a bottle of water, I am more accurately saying that I prefer the water that my body requires to be provided in a bottle. Since water is the only or primary way to restore by body's fluid equilibrium, it is an inflexible need since I cannot choose anything else that would restore my fluid equilibrium as effectively. The bottle is a flexible "access need" since I could flexibly get the water I inflexibly need directly from a faucet or a glass.

Distinguishing between inflexible natural needs and flexible access needs can save us from many unfortunate problems. We often falsely expect others to change their inflexible needs. We would do better to focus on flexible access needs, on how we each flexibly respond to our core inflexible needs. Otherwise, you may find that what you reactively resist you tend to reflexively reinforce.