Yes, Statement 1 does logically follow from Statement 2.
Statement 2 is broad and unqualified, universal.
If you accept that as true, Statement 1 definitely does logically follow from it.
If I tell you, “I want to be left alone, and be independent”, then the inescapable conclusion is that either I will initiate interaction with you, or if you initiate, you are violating my wishes.
Being independent means that one is the acting agent, not the one being acted upon, it means being the initiator or instigator, being proactive instead of reactive.
If you want to say that Statement 2 actually is qualified, has actual specific conditions where ‘leave me alone and let me be independent’ does not apply, well, then we would need those conditions to be clearly stated.
The entire problem is that they are not clearly stated, and that every single individual has different specific conditions, unique to them, which must be communicated before they can be understood.
… what?
Yes, Statement 1 does logically follow from Statement 2.
Statement 2 is broad and unqualified, universal.
If you accept that as true, Statement 1 definitely does logically follow from it.
If I tell you, “I want to be left alone, and be independent”, then the inescapable conclusion is that either I will initiate interaction with you, or if you initiate, you are violating my wishes.
Being independent means that one is the acting agent, not the one being acted upon, it means being the initiator or instigator, being proactive instead of reactive.
If you want to say that Statement 2 actually is qualified, has actual specific conditions where ‘leave me alone and let me be independent’ does not apply, well, then we would need those conditions to be clearly stated.
The entire problem is that they are not clearly stated, and that every single individual has different specific conditions, unique to them, which must be communicated before they can be understood.