It’s “in” T and V, you could say. But there’s more to it, than that.
I have often heard folks asking me to look at the big picture; I have often heard myself telling folks to look at the big picture. I guess, it is all a factor of where you are and how big or small the picture looks from where you stand. My big picture is your detail and something like that.
I have often “given a perspective” to explain what I have said; I have often been “given a perspective” to help me understand. Nearly always, irrespective of who gives it, the perspective or the big picture is really a license to push an agenda. If you take the perspective, it only means that you become a part of; accept that agenda.
Objects themselves do not change if you change your point of view. Metaphysicians may disagree, but in the simplest of the interpretations, that is true. What changes is what you see, how much you see.
Much of it is a factor of position. What you see and how much you see depends on where you are. On what stand you take. It also depends on what you are willing to see and what expectations you have set of what you are seeing.
It becomes more complicated when two humans see each other – more variables get added and the entire process of observation, connotation and denotation becomes a mangled web of real, unreal and the perceived.
The solution; the way to see clearly is to put yourself in perspective, then? For that is what you have in control. But then you have to know your own big picture; your own perspective – else how will you be in it?
It takes two of yourself then, I’d suppose — to put yourself in perspective: one to be in it and another to put you there.
Gaizabonts 
This was beautiful. I really enjoyed reading this piece.
I have a thought for you –
Is ‘giving a perspective’ always a case of ‘pushing an agenda’? Don’t we often learn a little bit more about the world, and sometimes about ourselves too, when we hear the other’s perspective on the greater (or deeper) picture? So often, don’t we get lost in our own biases and preconceived notions that we fail to see objective reality for what it is? Is giving us an opportunity to overcome our biases really just someone else’s agenda? (I dare say it should be our own too… No? :))
I don’t see why you need two of oneself to see a perspective. Put another way, you need one person to have a perspective and another to revise it. Of course, it assumes that you don’t need a third – an alter ego or some such – to catalyze that change of perspective. It takes elevation of the self to be humble enough to accept fundamental changes to our biases… but it is entirely possible – and yes, just by one soul! 🙂
LikeLike
S, welcome to Gaizabonts. The two of oneself is really only one, actually! 🙂
LikeLike