[Sushi-Y]

Daily lives in the world are run by people's connections with each other.
However, that does not mean everyone is connected to each other.

Everyone knows that even if some nameless person crys or laughs on the other side of the planet, it will not effect them in any way.
However, if it happened within a very limited small community such as a neighborhood, then it's not an impossibility either.

It's possible that a single significant act within a small community can have a large effect on the entire population afterwards.

If the scale of the act increases to an extremely large size, then ......Well, it's possible that some nameless person's heroic speech on the other side of the planet might affect my life in some way.

But that doesn't mean everything is like that.

Like I said in the beginning, fundamentally speaking, the connections between people are not as obvious as the society would have you believe.
Whether the family across the street is having hamburger meat or croquette as their dinner side-dish doesn't affect me in any way.
When I put on my shoes, whether I start with my right foot first or left foot first doesn't affect anyone in any way.

......Most people can probably understand everything up to this point.

However, truly practically realistically speaking, the connections between people is actually something that's much more black and white.
It is not an issue of distance like "it doesn't matter because it's on the other side of the Earth" or "it affects me because it's near me" or anything.

For example, let's say that the actions of a certain person A affect me.
That doesn't mean a certain person B's actions would affect me as well.
Same goes for the reverse. Just because my actions affect A does not mean that they will affect B as well.

Let's put it more bluntly.

If we were to describe people's connections or fates as gears, then there will be people who are engaged with my gear, as well as people who aren't. That's what I mean.

Some people will probably object to this, calling it a fallacy.

For those people, I'll refer them to the gears within a clock.
The gears within a clock are mostly only engaged with one or two other gears beside themselves.

However, if one gear spins, it moves the gear beside it, and through their connections with each other, it will have moved all the gears in the end.

.........It certainly makes sense, and it also has enough power to persuade most people.

Now then, why does it have persuasive power?

...The answer is simple.
Because something as abstract as "connections between people" cannot be explained except as a concept.
Because it is impossible to physically explain just exactly which gear connects with which in what way, and how they link and relate to each other, so we can only shroud it in smoke by using such logics.

Now then, for those people who liked that explanation, let me object to it by referring to the clock again.

To begin with, it is a mistake to think of this world as a single clock.

There's more than one clock.
In this world, there are lots of clocks, each pointing to their own time.
Think about it, to think of this world as having only one clock is an incredibly ignorant thing in itself.

If you think about that way, then while I explain people's connections by using the gear example, it would also explain how there are gears from other clocks that have absolutely no relationship to my gear, right?

The neighbor A and B.
Since A is a gear in the same clock as me, I should probably pay more attention to him.
Since B is a gear in a different clock from me, his existence doesn't really matter to me.

A clear-cut distinction, just like that.

You want to call that a fallacy?

Then, for an easier understanding, let's use a daily life example that's easier for us to relate to than the clock.
You have probably heard of the expression "the fire on the other side of the river", right?

For example, if your neighbor is having a fire, you would obviously help with firefighting effort, right? It'd be troublesome if the fire spreads to your house, after all.

But what if that fire is over at the town across the river from you?

Would you go through the trouble of getting up to go help? You won't, right? No matter what, there's no way it would spread to your house, after all.

What I mean is, even for fires, there are houses that can spread their fires to your own house, and then there are completely irrelevant houses that won't spread their fires to you.
With an example as concrete as this, you can probably understand the gear example about the gears that relate to you and the gears that don't, even if only a little bit, right?

......What I'm saying is that there are lots of things like these in the world, even without the rivers.

It's not an issue of distance like "neighbor" or "the other side of the river" or anything, understand?