Author: admin

Green as an idea

Looking at how we live in the world, what’s the best way of seeing things? Given how we each stand within our environment, how are we to look at this one shared reality and plot collective courses within it? It seems an intriguing thought, given how we’re essentially thinking beings trying to make sense of this world we find ourselves within. What are we to make of life’s opportunities?

It seems undeniable, much as we might rail against it, that we depend on our environment – our lives interwoven with all that surrounds us in so many delicate, powerful ways. Rather than being entirely independent, we need nature for the resources and climate that make life possible. This idea of humans existing “within” nature may be as childlike as it is fundamental: it’s where we stand. (Notes One)

As if life itself might be this chance at living and understanding life. That we’re here to understand all that allows us to live and all the ways those lives feed back into that world – this perpetual dance of forces and interactions serving to bring other things into existence. It’s amazing to think of all that’s gone into this: all the years and lives, hopes and dreams, progress and destruction. (Notes Two)

These days, though, we sometimes seem strangely detached from those realities (Notes Three). As if we’re retreating into this world removed from real life, not feeling consequences or accepting other perspectives. Reality, perhaps, left standing there filled with our neglect or disinterest as we increasingly see things from our side and take whatever it is “we” want from the world.

How closely are we living within our communities, be they natural or social? How much do our ideas on “life” track compassionately alongside all the other lives besides ours? Sometimes it seems such a one-sided relationship, as if we don’t truly care about the inner lives of those we affect. As if it’s now each to his own as we fight it out to grab whatever resources we can.

Alternatively, could we not weave ourselves somewhat differently into the world? Find more creative, harmonious ways to coexist with nature and other people? This idea that there might be another way, that greed and power may not be the only foundational principles on which to build our reality. That we could choose to stand differently in relation to one another and to nature.

Which, in roundabout ways, gets back to the idea of being “green” – this notion of humanity finding other paths toward living sustainably and constructively, rather than competitively or destructively, within our environment. Why are we so different? This exclusive sense with which we carve up the world and all the people in it, viewing each other as rivals. (Notes Four)

As thinking beings, is that the only way we can live within an environment? Breaking it down. Sharing it out. Seeking more. Why do balance, creativity and cooperation seem so difficult for us when, all around, they’re so natural?

Notes and References:

Note 1: Beauty and wonder in nature
Note 1: Nature speaks in many ways, do we listen?
Note 1: Our roles in relation to nature
Note 2: Appreciating other ways of being
Note 2: Intrinsic value of nature
Note 2: How ideas find their place in the world
Note 2: Where do ideas of evolution leave us?
Note 3: Detaching from the world around us
Note 3: Having a sense for being alive
Note 3: Do we live in different worlds?
Note 4: The optimism in nature
Note 4: Imagining another way?
Note 4: Living as a form of art
Note 4: The creativity of living

In terms of where we stand and the paths we take from here, there’s also Appealing to human nature or the human spirit.

Ways to share this:

The battlegrounds of our minds

As humans, how do we stand in the world? Isn’t the essence of “us”, at least a significant part of it, that we reflect the world in thought? That, of all the creatures, we see things with our minds, put those observations into words and share those thoughts with others. Being human being, perhaps, this idea of converting experience into thought and seeing what we make of it all.

Don’t we almost “live” in our minds? Identifying with those processes of observation, reflection and the naming of things. Living our lives through whatever narrative we spin or inherit from the world around us, so many of our choices in life effectively being formed by whatever ideas we have in mind and paths they lead us to tread. Don’t almost all of our actions stem from the world of our thoughts? (Notes One)

The meaning we assign to things seems, in a way, the meaning we bring to life through our response: our assumptions or evaluations becoming “real” through the fact we voice them, act upon them or let them inform our unspoken beliefs. Isn’t “the mind” where we form such views? Where we’re weighing things up and deciding. Where the steps we’ll take in life are determined.

If we’re all acting on our thoughts, they must matter. Each seemingly insignificant idea inevitably rippling out from us to become potentially quite significant realities for the world. Doesn’t every choice matter? Every action becoming a reality in someone’s life or a cumulative pattern shifting things in certain directions through the subtle reinforcement of our involvement. (Notes Two)

Perhaps, then, it’s only natural we experience such conflict in the world of ideas? If “what we think” has the power to change the realities around us, our minds seem the focal point for many important battles. Of all that’s going on in life, the idea of getting people to see – and, care about – the consequences of their choices, beliefs or actions may be the only real option we have for creating a better future.

What’s it like, though, living in that mental space? Not only the fairly insistent and overwhelming contents of our own minds as we attempt to chart our course within an imperfect world, but also this strangely aggressive collective conversation we’re all now immersed in. Almost like this pooled thought process of “everyone” trying to describe their concerns and iron out all the differences.

Sometimes it seems we’re all just fighting to have our thoughts heard; struggling to make space for anyone else’s (Notes Three). Everyone caring deeply about whatever “life” placed at their feet, we rightly want others to see those problems and help fix them. With our selves so tied up with our lives and our thoughts about them, it seems likely all of this quickly becomes personal – each person’s sense of self or worth on the line.

Standing within flawed human realities and attempting to agree what to do about it seems, in many ways, far from easy.

Notes and References:

Note 1: The philosopher stance
Note 1: Problems & the thought that created them
Note 1: How quickly things can change
Note 1: Power in what we believe
Note 2: The incredible responsibility of freedom
Note 2: All we concern ourselves with & encourage
Note 2: Whether we make a difference
Note 2: What we create by our presence
Note 2: Losing the sense of meaning
Note 3: The thought surrounding us
Note 3: Is there any end to the power of thought?
Note 3: Desire to retreat, need to engage
Note 3: Do we live in different worlds?

Thinking more of the attempt to communicate, there’s What is the public conversation?

Ways to share this:

Do we live in different worlds?

At this point, is it true that we essentially live in quite different worlds? Each person increasingly seeing this world their own way, informed by their own experiences, ideas and conclusions as to what it all means. Everyone, then, responding to what they encounter in their own way, based on their own values, beliefs and interpretations of what’s going on and how best to work within it to achieve their own ends.

Sometimes it really seems to be true, as if we’re each speaking from our own unique take on life – often, slightly at odds with how anyone else might be looking at the exact same realities. As if life’s now taking us off on all these tangents where, after a few left turns, we’re finding ourselves in quite different places, looking at things from different angles and reading them differently. (Notes One)

As opposed to a world of fairly common experiences, beliefs and responses, aren’t we now living quite differently? As if there’s no real common culture or set of ideas with which we’re looking at life, no common channels down which our thoughts travel. The landscape of our shared existence having been carved up by all these individual paths we’re taking to places where common ground seems to have disappeared.

Seeing ourselves as standing within reality and reflecting it in thought, what does it mean to be living that way? Each of us thinking whatever we like. Bearing in mind that our thoughts become our words, our connections with others and our relationship to the world, what happens if we each take our own path and believe it the only acceptable one?

Almost as if, alongside reality, there’s this world of thought – in reality, many worlds. Each of us creating this bubble of all we think and believe to be true: all these subtle, possibly unexamined ideas we have in mind about everything we’ve ever encountered and the narrative we’ve spun to connect, justify or understand it all. All of us carrying that world in our heads as we navigate the realities we still share. (Notes Two)

How well can those bubbles coexist? How interested are we in what others think? Should we just push our bubble over anyone else’s? Seeking to correct whatever “misconceptions” their life or thinking might’ve led them to. Or, might we be better off letting things merge into a larger, shared bubble capable of encompassing all of our experiences, perspectives and concerns in life? (Notes Three)

Clearly it must make communication important: if we’re to live like this, don’t we need to be skilful in tracking alongside one another in respectful, companionable ways? Otherwise, we’ll surely just experience life as a series of conflicts, disagreements or misunderstandings – feeling that others aren’t listening or aren’t interested in seeing what life is like through our eyes.

However we look at it, finding ways to stand alongside one another within this single reality of the systems and planet we share seems a challenge we all face.

Notes and References:

Note 1: All that we carry around with us
Note 1: Is there any end to the power of thought?
Note 1: Joining the dots
Note 1: Seeing where others are coming from
Note 1: Can “how we relate” really change?
Note 2: Connecting truthfully with life
Note 2: Where do we get our ideas from?
Note 2: The thought surrounding us
Note 2: Words & relating as paths to change
Note 2: With our words, do we cast spells?
Note 3: These ideas we have of one another
Note 3: Attention as a resource
Note 3: Modern challenges to relationship
Note 3: What does it mean to be tolerant?
Note 3: Can there be beauty in communication?

Ways to share this:

Values, compromise & how things are

How often in life are people going into things with the finest of intentions, only to have that spirit crushed by the weight of “how things are”? This idea that, somewhere, there’s a point between “dreams”, “money” and “reality” where the desire to make a difference gets outweighed, buried or suppressed. As if we, with our values, are walking through life trying to emerge unscathed by it all.

Isn’t youth generally a place of idealism? A time when we believe things can change and expect the world to be good. This childlike spirit that gets, almost inevitably, broken by the realities we encounter over the years. As if life in the real world “means” to have hopes crushed by how things are and the imperfection we find at almost every turn. (Notes One)

Does it have to be that way? Sometimes it seems we’re compromised simply by being part of this system with all its inequality and injustice – this inherited burden humanity’s path to this point places on our shoulders through no fault of our own. This sense of almost everything we meet in life being founded on unequal relationships, environmental destruction or questionable values.

Is idealism simply unrealistic, then? In reality, maybe there’s always compromise by way of us inheriting flawed systems based on an imperfect sense of how we might bring ideals to life. Is that what life is? Being on the receiving end of all we’ve been working towards so far – all the good and all of the bad. This idea of progress being a journey, each generation striving to improve on whatever’s been handed to them. (Notes Two)

In that light, are we right to crumple under to weight of “how things are” and resign ourselves to making the most of what’s on offer? Giving up the fight – or, giving into temptations – we may find ourselves reassured by those who’ve taken similar paths, but where does it leave things down the line? If we’re jumping in with good intentions, having them crushed and justifying that as inevitable then our future seems bleak.

Maybe it’s simply that realities are complex and, working within them, ideals struggle to hold their own? Perhaps, painting compromise as an irredeemable moral failing, we find there’s no place for idealism alongside all life’s practical demands. Can we operate within flawed, compromised systems yet still hold to the highest ideals once paths are created for realising them? (Notes Three)

Life sometimes seems so all or nothing, with anything less than unerring perfection being worthless. But, is that realistic either? It seems unlikely many would already be fully aware of all we need to be, risking us all just tearing one another down. Finding the right ways to bring values to life in every area where they count seems rightfully daunting: if it all matters, how are we to unravel compounded mistakes?

Defending all the points our intentional engagement serves to underline what truly matters may be hard, but where are we without it?

Notes and References:

Note 1: How much do intentions matter?
Note 1: The relationship between statistics & reality
Note 1: Where’s the reset button & can we press it?
Note 1: Values, and what’s in evidence
Note 2: Dystopia as a powerful ideal
Note 2: Ideals & the pursuit of them
Note 2: On whose terms? 
Note 2: Imperfection as perfection?
Note 2: Passing on what’s important
Note 3: Connecting truthfully with life
Note 3: Will things change if we don’t make them?
Note 3: Values on which we stand firm?

Ways to share this:

If life’s a sum, are our choices calculations?

Thinking of all the ways our lives can be boiled down to figures, everything reduced to money and the decisions we’re most likely to make given the resources we have to hand, isn’t it almost true that life is a sum? One where we’re forever trying to get ahead, make the most of things and shift to better positions. Much, of course, already being determined by the outset and by the systems surrounding us.

It’s interesting to imagine how “our lives” intersect with the world of belongings and money: the cards we’re each dealt, insight with which we might play them, and question of whether other values might ever stand against economic thinking (Notes One). “Life” can certainly be looked at and broken down using those terms – everything seen in the light of financial worth and all that can buy.

Sometimes it seems like “the most important thing”, the defining element in how our lives are going to be, how we’ll be viewed by others and the opportunities we’ll have. As if our lives really are a sum. But one where those starting high are almost guaranteed to go higher while those coming in low stand little chance of progressing much beyond that. How did we get to that point? Where birth determines so much.

Beyond that, though, isn’t there a sense in which seeing life “this way” makes us predictable? Each person viewing their assets in relation to this system we’ve created, it seems the choices any of us might make become rather foreseeable: we’ll act for our own enhancement or the protection of our existing situation. Calculations we’ve already made for our future becoming the lines we’ll defend when questions are asked.

Won’t we tend to maintain our own interests? As if society’s been carved up – assets allocated, chances determined, people profiled – and “how we’re likely to act” is essentially a calculation based on where we’re each known to stand. This sense in which democratic choices can be designed to appeal to certain segments: offering people some advantage that’s sure to buy their vote and secure their support. (Notes Two)

Almost as if the world’s been divided, power placed in certain hands and systems created to protect those interests, so calculations “can” be done to ensure the paths taken are those seen as desirable. If we’re all acting based on our personal – often, economic – concerns, can’t it all be predicted from the start? What to offer each person, the carrots and sticks that can shift things in directions of someone’s choosing.

Aren’t there values capable of standing against that? Other ways we might view our situations and collectively chart a course that works better for everyone? This sense in which we might step out of ourselves to see how things work from all angles, making decisions on behalf of the whole – whether that’s society, environment or whatever other concerns we might hold dear. (Notes Three)

How much might life change if we started looking at it all differently?

Notes and References:

Note 1: The self within society
Note 1: Does it all come down to money?
Note 1: Humans, tangled in these systems
Note 1: Making ends meet
Note 2: How are we supposed to choose?
Note 2: Appealing to human nature or the human spirit
Note 2: How much is in the hands of the market
Note 2: Those who are leading us
Note 3: What should be leading us?
Note 3: Understanding what we’re all part of
Note 3: Integrity and integration
Note 3: Value and meaning in our lives

Ways to share this:

What does it mean to be tolerant?

What is it, to let another exist in your presence? To not challenge something we find questionable, but let it coexist peaceably alongside our own views, in full acceptance of another’s right to be or think however they choose. This idea of letting multiple realities exist at once and not fighting, not seeking to make our own perspective the only one. Is that what it is to be tolerant? To allow.

It seems to be the root of the word: this sense of not reacting but accepting or enduring something we may not agree with, letting it exist or occur without interference. Almost a stepping back, an allowing of difference and not attacking the other even on the level of thought. It seems quite an incredible notion, even before you factor in all the specific challenges we face in modern times. (Notes One)

How many, in the past, would have had to be as tolerant as we’re expected to be? Within homogenous, closely regulated communities there presumably wasn’t so much “need” for tolerance of contradictory or incompatible ideas, practices and behaviours. Modern societies, though, are so delightfully diverse and free in terms of what we might each choose to believe or act upon in daily life.

Yet if what we think, do and say has impacts for the world we share, how “are” we to tolerate divergent perspectives? Sometimes it seems it can’t be said not to matter – that the ideas we have in mind and paths we’re choosing to walk are perhaps what makes all the difference to the realities we’ll then share, the situations we all have to deal with. What if our choices impinge upon others?

Take, for example, the question of sound sensitivity: if sounds people are making within an environment are causing others inner distress, who’s responsible for resolving the issue? As with anything, there seems a mutuality between cause and effect, and where exactly the line falls between personal freedom, sensitivity and empathy doesn’t always seem so clear. As if the line’s simply a free-floating point we must agree over.

What if one person’s freedom causes another pain? Whatever sensitivity each of us has, might we not be causing one another inadvertent suffering? Whether it’s intellectual, in the realm of ideas; cultural, in terms of beliefs or behaviour; social, in how we relate and treat one another; or personal, on the level of interest or respect – aren’t there countless significant lines we might tread? (Notes Two)

Sometimes the idea of “letting others be” seems an impossible ask. This sense in which the choices we face and freedom we have in our response perhaps carry too much weight. That, left to our own devices, too much pain might be caused and too many irreversible impacts accumulate for us to not “attempt” to shift things in better directions. (Notes Three)

If “how we live” matters, in big and little ways, letting potentially damaging things exist within our environment may be as risky as it is admirable.

Notes and References:

Note 1: Is there any end to the power of thought?
Note 1: Everything culture used to be
Note 1: Giving others space to be
Note 1: Why assume there’s only one set of values?
Note 1: Valuing people more
Note 2: Sensitivity & the place for feeling
Note 2: The incredible responsibility of freedom
Note 2: Treading carefully in the lives of others
Note 2: Mutual awareness and accommodation?
Note 2: Seeing where others are coming from
Note 3: All we’re expected to understand
Note 3: Thoughts of idealism and intolerance
Note 3: All that we carry around with us
Note 3: Situations which ask us to trust
Note 3: How are we supposed to choose?

Ways to share this:

Voices within cultural life

With all the voices talking at us each day, where exactly are they coming from? Which of these are voices from within our own society, as opposed to those speaking out of other societies with all of their own unique, complex, interwoven realities? Which are political, economic or social voices and which are using the symbolic language of culture itself? And, if all this is now “one” conversation, what’s that going to mean?

At times it seems we’re all listening to and immersed in one another’s cultural conversations: all those varied voices weaving their way through all of our lives, distant and unrelated as they may be. As if “all this” enfolds us in a new, overlaying conversation we’re letting affect us in ways we mightn’t even imagine. (Notes One)

If “all that we listen to” is what’s serving to inform us about our lives, the lives of others, and life in general on this planet, what’s likely to come of this strange interblended communication? Where one country’s political battles spill over into quite different discussions the world over. Words and images being exchanged without the luxury of clear lines or insight as to what the topic being addressed might really be.

Isn’t conversation already complicated? Finding all the fine lines between what’s said, meant, concealed, known or denied. Understanding what’s really happening beneath the veneer of words, within the inner chambers of each person’s mind. How are we to know what any individual meant to communicate? What they hoped to gain from planting seeds of doubt. Also, what others might be taking away from this. (Notes Two)

How are we to navigate a world of everyone’s concerns voiced at once? Where comments related to the specific conditions that’ve evolved within one country become words spoken on the global stage. Where we appear to be having “one” conversation but the realities we’re each referring to might be subtly or significantly different.

Almost as if we’re all potentially talking at crossed purposes: some fighting political battles; some advancing social causes; some seeking economic advantage; some looking for examples of how to live; some preferring symbolic representations of our various human struggles. All these interests coming together in one fractured, confusing conversation.

What are we to take away from that? Aside, perhaps, from frustration that all those concerns might be drowned out by a completely ineffective way of dealing with them. Could it not be that, in reality, none of those conversations are actually happening? That nothing’s truly being addressed while all these things we rightly care about are being deflected by others’ equally valid concerns. A sort of conversational stalemate. (Notes Three)

If each person or country’s conversation is a projection of their interests and concerns, what does it mean if that’s billowing into a place where little gets received as it’s intended? If there’s little true listening or mutual recognition of whatever issues, wounds or struggles have emerged from that entity’s past. Instead of being resolved, wouldn’t things just linger?

Notes and References:

Note 1: Culture as information
Note 1: The stories that we hear
Note 1: Tuning out the static
Note 2: Diplomacy and knowing where we stand
Note 2: Do “the lies” blind us to truth?
Note 2: Going towards the unknown
Note 3: Anger, and where we direct it
Note 3: Can there be beauty in communication?
Note 3: Seeing where others are coming from

Ways to share this:

The optimism in nature

Isn’t nature incredibly optimistic? Always shifting, growing, developing, interacting. Everything wisely and harmoniously balanced in the sense of order generally being maintained and any loss being another’s gain. A complex dance of relentless hope, courage and persistence as each creature does all it can to live, move forward and achieve its goals. Nothing sitting idly by, resigned to its inevitable fate, or aggressively plotting destruction.

As if the world around us is filled with this buoyancy of life seeking its way – this constant motion of cycles that, together, create all the conditions, resources and beauty from which we benefit. A place where even decay serves its purpose, enriching further growth. Somewhere where, arguably, nothing’s ever lost but forever shifting to exist in new forms as forces flourish and fade through each day, season or lifetime. (Notes One)

There seems such a beautiful example in nature; brutal and amoral as it often is. This sense in which there’s an acceptance there of the terms of existence, and a willingness to do all that can be done to further any cause within the limits as they’re established. Each plant, animal or landscape holding its own as best it’s able – insisting on itself until the moment of its defeat.

In that realm, the terms of evolution seem almost fair as each plays their role within an environment that benefits from them all. In our world, as an aside, doesn’t such thinking take on a different light? This sense in which our capacity for destruction’s too great and justification for overriding the concerns of others too questionable. Doesn’t natural law become immoral when it’s placed alongside our power for thought? (Notes Two)

With nature, though, it seems harm is rarely intended or carried through as it is with us. As if each being is simply living its life, fulfilling its nature, giving all it has and taking only what’s needed to sustain its ongoing existence. This picture of integrated sustainability as the various pieces of this universal puzzle come together to generate, maintain and enrich the incredible diversity of “life” that exists at this particular point in space.

Yet, fairly often, writing about nature seems to drift onto the knife’s edge of hope or despair (Notes Three). Is that because it’s simply an honest depiction of where we stand? That, faced with nature’s innocent optimism, “we” stand out as dangerously destructive? The juxtaposition of all this harmonious, hopeful wisdom placing our own attitudes and actions in stark contrast. As if nature’s reproaching us with its own way of being.

Behind the more calculated language of evolution and its battles, then, is there a better lesson to be learnt from nature’s optimism? Some way for the relentless hope of “life seeking to live to the full” to find another home within human society and the activities with which we fill it. Instead of competing as we do, might we not come together more harmoniously while still allowing for the truth of each being to flourish?

Notes and References:

Note 1: Beauty and wonder in nature
Note 1: Having a sense for being alive
Note 1: Nature tells a story, about the planet
Note 1: Gardening as therapy, the light
Note 1: Living the dream
Note 2: Our roles in relation to nature
Note 2: Where do ideas of evolution leave us?
Note 2: Things with life have to be maintained
Note 2: Detaching from the world around us
Note 2: Limits having a purpose
Note 3: Appreciating other ways of being
Note 3: Nature speaks in many ways, do we listen?
Note 3: Gardening as therapy, the dark
Note 3: Aesthetic value of nature
Note 3: Some thoughts about ‘life’

Ways to share this:

Using shame as a weapon

Are we right to use shame as a weapon? While it might, in some ways, be effective, is that enough of a justification for us to wield it as freely as we do? Sometimes it seems we’re strangely “knowing” about the kinds of tools societies have used in the past to control or suppress their members; thinking it’s only natural we use similar methods to meet modern ends. But where does it lead, and what are we hoping to achieve?

As a means of social control, it seems pretty extreme: this negation, denial or rejection of individuals as a way of pressuring them and others to change. Often it seems to entail an almost complete loss of self, acceptance and belonging as the person involved is ostracised, excommunicated, erased from the presence of their peers. A sort of moral or social “death”. (Notes One)

In terms of punishment, it’s surely powerful and must be painful. Especially if there’s no redress; no formal process; no common standards; no path for redemption. Doesn’t justice generally conform to pre-established terms? Shame normally sitting alongside a clear sense of right and wrong – a tool that’s always existed in relation to the “thought” already governing any given community. (Notes Two)

If our values and standards are in flux, doesn’t that make “shame” a volatile weapon? Given how damaging it seems to be for the psyche – many personal struggles seemingly stemming from that flawed sense of self, worth, agency or blame – isn’t it a risky concept to be throwing around as confidently as we do? On the human level, might it not cripple people’s engagement with life in scarring, unforeseeable ways?

Might it not also create an atmosphere of terror, hypervigilance, doubt, aggression, despair? A powerless uncertainty over where such lines may be or appear retrospectively. This shifting unpredictable earthquake underneath the fabric of our lives where any number of mistaken habits, traditions, beliefs or assumptions might suddenly be called into question and cast into the fiery waters of irredeemable judgement. (Notes Three)

With modern societies fluidly blending into a shared global reality, can we really be said to have one clear set of established terms? Aren’t all previous value systems and ways of life combining into an evolving code for an emerging humanity? All of our previously unshakable, well-known guidelines being revised, broken up or set against one another in pitched battles.

How are we to navigate that? How are we to renegotiate an agreeable set of values for a diverse body of people? How are we to deal with the fact others might’ve been raised with quite different beliefs, attitudes or behaviours towards common everyday occurrences? If we’re all holding firm to whatever we see as right, how’s this evolving conversation to happen? (Notes Four)

Maybe it’s only “natural” we turn to tools such as shame in an attempt to re-establish clarity. As a means of communication in a complex ongoing conversation, however, is it truly as straightforward or unproblematic as we might hope?

Notes and References:

Note 1: Tempting justifications of self
Note 1: Empathy in a world that happily destroys
Note 1: The dignity & power of a human life
Note 2: Codes of behaviour
Note 2: What is acceptable?
Note 2: People, rules & social cohesion
Note 2: Human nature and community life
Note 2: What are our moral judgements?
Note 3: Having boundaries
Note 3: In the deep end…
Note 3: Does anything exist in isolation?
Note 3: Ideas that tie things together
Note 4: What holds it all together
Note 4: The conversation of society
Note 4: Why assume there’s only one set of values?
Note 4: Detaching ourselves from the past
Note 4: Words & relating as paths to change

Looking to cultural voices that model ways through such challenges, perhaps there’s “Women who run with the wolves” or Rich Roll & the spirit of transformation.

Ways to share this:

Words & relating as paths to change

As humans, are we generally leaving others with the burden of our words? How we’re choosing to relate to others lingering in the air as another’s estimation of our worth, value, identity or purpose in life. As if we’re just casting our eyes over each other, then casting forth judgements through our attitudes, assumptions or unspoken criticism.

Almost as if these barriers between us are based on each person’s understanding of reality, what things mean and what matters – all our personal evaluations and priorities within the complex ever-shifting realities of “life”. Given we’re all perhaps taking “thought” in service of “self”, though, isn’t it likely we all just end up defending our own perspective, our own corner of all this?

It seems intriguing how we’re each seeing things our own way: looking out at this one, shared reality, carving it up and interpreting it according to some pre-established sense of what it all means (Notes One). Presumably things can be seen in many different ways? Stacked up in various manners to reach many varied conclusions. Yet, doesn’t it all still need to come harmoniously together?

Life, in many ways, seems mutual: we don’t live in our own version of reality but in one shared by others. We can’t just insist on “our way” of interpreting things if, in doing so, we’re changing the reality of others. Isn’t life, as much as language, about agreement? About words referring to the same things, discussing them in relatable terms, and creating a common sense of meaning. (Notes Two)

In that, don’t we need to find ways of mapping the differences between us? To listen, hear through to the reality of another’s being and respect what we find there. If understanding or appreciation is lacking, doesn’t it need fostering? Some encompassing explanation of all life “is” in its diverse complexity that can move us towards the same page, rather than fighting over any one particular interpretation.

Language seems such a powerful thing. This sense with which we wrap reality in thought and send it out there. Might our words not sometimes be barbs? Comments that stick in others’ sides as painful reminders of what a fellow human thought of them, and thought it wise to say. Isn’t it all a subtle or overt display of whatever interest, care or concern we have for other people’s path through life?

If, in all we say and do, we’re conveying the worth things have in our eyes, what are we making of that? How often are we forcing our views on others, recasting their reality in light of our own? Telling people what things mean rather than asking. Won’t that generally serve to reinforce any barriers between us? Making those differences firm lines; points of disagreement; obstacles to relationship. (Notes Three)

Taking it that few have a thoroughly perfect understanding of all that’s going on in the world, how are we to navigate this and make the kinds of constructive response that move things in better directions?

Notes and References:

Note 1: The thought surrounding us
Note 1: Joining the dots
Note 1: Everything’s interconnected
Note 2: Is there any end to the power of thought?
Note 2: Mutual awareness and accommodation?
Note 2: How much do intentions matter?
Note 2: Can “how we relate” really change?
Note 3: These ideas we have of one another
Note 3: Might we lose our social muscles?
Note 3: Treading carefully in the lives of others

Looking back to earlier ideas around the value of communication, there’s Conversation as revelation & Does being alone amplify things?

Ways to share this: