Every interaction with someone presents the choice to either maintain footing or to cover some distance to meet the other person where they are at.
Maintaining footing is about defaulting to projection — expecting the other person to think as you think, to see as you see, and to feel as you feel.
Meeting the person where they are at, on the other hand, is about making an effort to discover areas of common ground, differences in perspective, and to seek to understand what these discoveries can teach you about the person you’re engaging with and the world.
Maintaining footing in any conversation is a nonstarter because there isn’t any actual exchanging of ideas and therefore conversation to be had.
If the goal is to achieve mutual understanding, solve problems, and help others, then the only option that makes sense is the one that involves you generously listening, understanding, and responding.
now this is a cultural representation of them. I actually think that in the longterm they have maintained their footing but in the day to day it probably consisted of a lot of distance covering.... but with the caveat that they want to bring the other person someplace else after the distance is covered.
I also find it remarkable that the attribute people see as a postiive in the people they admire "maintaining ground" is often seen as a negative when it's present in people directly around them -> maintaining ground will be seen as stubborn.
Local and Global Minimums and Maximums
At some point I'm going to revisit this topic because I didn't really capture this nuance but should have.