living genuinely • gary e. davis • berkeley


	gedavis.com	soul of Self interest

	living genuinely gary e. davis	September 7, 2020

The wide ranging normal senses of ‘genuine’ can benefit from highlighting the selfidentity/interpersonal relational difference (the s/p difference), because
what one wants from another person’s genuineness (“being genuine,” says the dictionary) relates to the difference: congruence between personal expression
and intending self (no duplicity); nonconcealment, transparency, fidelity to self
in personal presence—being trustworthy, transparent, etc.

But lexicography doesn’t highlight the character of one’s intentions about oneself being: showing integrity, trustworthiness. The basis of genuineness is one’s integ-rity, yet the activity is relational: caring that the others’ trust is secure (for good reason!); caring about an other’s want of trust; caring that importances of mutu-
ality prevail. Genuineness shows in the way of being with. It’s proven in relational time.

Yet, integrity itself is hardly the basis of itself. While integrity is the basis of dem-onstrable genuineness, integrity itself is “grown” through background individu-ation, a matter of engaged, self-reflective time and learning. One individuates oneself to have reliable claim to integrity for interaction. Authenticity is the basis of integrity, thus genuineness.

Commonly, ‘genuine’ and ‘authentic’ are regarded as synonyms, but the potential difference is very important: between the background of one’s integrity (a life-orienting matter—authoriality of the life, so to speak) and background of one’s interpersonal presence (an interrelation-orienting matter, authorship of shared presence).

Being reliably genuine stands a test of time as belonging to the singularity, the selfidentical durability of one’s interrelations.

And by the way, that “self-reflective time and learning” is about the learning
that time allows. Recognizing one’s invalidity is a learning opportunity.

next—> good_ life