mind games.

its not about tactics.
its not about strategies.
its all about mind games.

i have seen, and tried, more than enough of it to recognise one when i see one. if i openly admit that i engage in mind games, is that - in effect - ALSO part of the mind game? what if you find yourself trapped between believing and not believing, and confused about the way out of susceptibility? will you double-guess yourself? what if i do not need you to trust something i said, but only doubt everything i said? and subsequently i say EVERYTHING. will that make u -then- doubt everything? is your foothold still ... Yours, after all?

can u ever choose NOT to engage in MY mind game? is the choice yours? or mine? or is there even such thing as "choice" in the first place?

whoever has asked a girl out without engaging in mind games before, hands up. have you not seeked out the opportune moment to ask? have you not also carved out that opportune moment? have you not had thoughts you wished you could IMPLANT into the girls head straight? failing to do so, you either created an IMAGE of your personality, or chose to portray the "candid nonchalent path"? have you not felt the tensions between jealousy and magnanimity? between patience and urges? between loving and fearing? how each and every one of us manoeuvres these tensions, into an eventuality of sorts, is mind games in its most primitive form - notwithstanding faux-honourable denials.

is there anything wrong with playing mind games? wouldn't u love your future husband to be adept at it, while every other guy sucks at it? or would you choose to still believe in true love and the prince charming who wants to kiss a stranger-girl at first sight - consentual or not (as in the case of sleeping beauty). if i play mind games, am i evil? or am i more evil to say that i am just? the logic goes like this.

if i claim to be just, but knowing that we're all players of mind games, our opponents (other players, consisting of every other human being) would deem us as dishonest, hence bad.

if i claim to be evil, my opponents will then add a notch and suspect that i am actually MORE evil than evil (call it evil 2.0). hence i am dishonest, and bad.

if i claim to be evil 2.0, they would thus suspect evil 3.0. So on so forth...

if i were to claim absolute evil, (say Evil-supreme) my opponent would suspect me no more than they suspect a evil 2.0 or evil 3.0 person, since they will - in logic - infinitely add magnitude to whatever was confessed. But i would be branded honest, since i am assuming evil-supreme and there would be no understatement of evil from myself. (note. there is NO evil-supreme 2.0, because evil-supreme is evil supreme. it is the infinity-evil) Hence, it follows that i am evil as everyone else, but i am honest, and good.

so, to claim that you are evil is good, and to claim that you are just is bad.