pseudonymous
Obtuse Kineticist
I have expended a lot of energy in the past trying to get others to see through my perceptions. If our brains interpret what we are sensing, then a long line of experiences, causes and effects, and personal preferences are tinting our views. I finally came to the awareness that we are all essentially looking at the same view. This was an important realization when I tried my hand at being a teacher, to have the spiritual maturity to affectively interpret what others have perceived. The trick to sharing the picture within and without is in figuring the language of the one I was sharing with. This only happened when I became able to hear and see the other person.
It helped me to ascertain my motivation regarding my sharing. Sometimes it was out of loneliness of having a unique viewpoint. Sometimes it was out of the joy of discovery, that I wanted to share the vistas of the journey. I have witnessed a natural phase with expanding awareness many times, where a seeker tries to prove their perceptions, and disprove the other's. What does it harm us that another person does not share our perceptions? Why would we expect them to? It seems a function of an unhealthy ego to need to be in anxious control of its perceptions, and fearful (at core) of another's.
Managing and belonging to online communities for nearly four years now, I have seen regularly that there are always a few people who participate with an immature unconscious desire to find the flaws in other people's ontologies. They will offer very little but conceptual debate, and will not attempt to see or hear the other person they are trying in desperation to knock down. If they were contemplative, and could unplug their emotional need for control, they might discover that the other person speaks of the same truth as they do (much like two people witnessing the same accident, but giving different reports). It might appear like a second grader, and a college student describing the same reality. But it is the same reality at core.
I remember when I first noticed myself at this place where I needed to value, judge, compare, or destroy another's ontology. I finally became aware of how self serving it was. Debate has always seemed limiting to me because it presupposes one person's perceptions are true, and the other person's needs to be corrected. A person's perceptions are going to be appropriate for their experiences & education. By placing another on the defensive, we lose any opportunity that was possible to reach out and share different perspectives. In dialogue however, by accepting that the other person's perceptions are supposed to be different from mine, since they have a history different than mine, it has always been my experience that both participants' eyes and ears tend to be more open.
I also had to learn how to deal with someone who has no interest in my perceptions, but insists their's is worth hearing. These days I don't deal with them. I do not have a responsibility to take on every emotional pattern of the ones I come into contact with. Sometimes the best way to teach is by setting an example that if the other person is not able or willing to be mature in their interactions, than I do not have to entertain or suffer fools (as I have stated before: I do not have a television set for a head). I have seen it happen countless times in forums where one immature person sullies up any chance of mature people having meaningful dialogue.
It is no different than a group of adults gathering in a room, and the host's undisciplined child enters causing a maelstrom of attention grabbing antics. The status quo at times seems to be that we are all supposed to see these unruly children as "precious" or "cute", when in fact if not nipped in the bud, a monster of emotional baggage is created in that child. They should be made aware of what is appropriate, and what is not appropriate behavior. A person whose interest is exploration should not be made to suffer these internet antagonists who are bored with themselves, have read a few books and became experts, and require tittilation and chaos to be satiated.
But the unruly and immature are not the only cancer that is amongst these internet communities. There is the sad fact that meaningless pissing contests are a secret tittilation for many. Just like in the school yard when a fight breaks out, a crowd gathers to be entertained. If you ever witness one of these internet skirmishes ensue, take notice of the "page views" as they spike sky high. Do not be a part of a community that has this poison seething under its surface. A mature community that has progressive goals in mind will have administrators that will not tolerate such foolishness. Every time we settle for the dummying down of progressive exploration, we have no one to blame but ourselves when it becomes our turn to be the target of some hateful or spiteful person online.
©2004 DC Vision
It helped me to ascertain my motivation regarding my sharing. Sometimes it was out of loneliness of having a unique viewpoint. Sometimes it was out of the joy of discovery, that I wanted to share the vistas of the journey. I have witnessed a natural phase with expanding awareness many times, where a seeker tries to prove their perceptions, and disprove the other's. What does it harm us that another person does not share our perceptions? Why would we expect them to? It seems a function of an unhealthy ego to need to be in anxious control of its perceptions, and fearful (at core) of another's.
Managing and belonging to online communities for nearly four years now, I have seen regularly that there are always a few people who participate with an immature unconscious desire to find the flaws in other people's ontologies. They will offer very little but conceptual debate, and will not attempt to see or hear the other person they are trying in desperation to knock down. If they were contemplative, and could unplug their emotional need for control, they might discover that the other person speaks of the same truth as they do (much like two people witnessing the same accident, but giving different reports). It might appear like a second grader, and a college student describing the same reality. But it is the same reality at core.
I remember when I first noticed myself at this place where I needed to value, judge, compare, or destroy another's ontology. I finally became aware of how self serving it was. Debate has always seemed limiting to me because it presupposes one person's perceptions are true, and the other person's needs to be corrected. A person's perceptions are going to be appropriate for their experiences & education. By placing another on the defensive, we lose any opportunity that was possible to reach out and share different perspectives. In dialogue however, by accepting that the other person's perceptions are supposed to be different from mine, since they have a history different than mine, it has always been my experience that both participants' eyes and ears tend to be more open.
I also had to learn how to deal with someone who has no interest in my perceptions, but insists their's is worth hearing. These days I don't deal with them. I do not have a responsibility to take on every emotional pattern of the ones I come into contact with. Sometimes the best way to teach is by setting an example that if the other person is not able or willing to be mature in their interactions, than I do not have to entertain or suffer fools (as I have stated before: I do not have a television set for a head). I have seen it happen countless times in forums where one immature person sullies up any chance of mature people having meaningful dialogue.
It is no different than a group of adults gathering in a room, and the host's undisciplined child enters causing a maelstrom of attention grabbing antics. The status quo at times seems to be that we are all supposed to see these unruly children as "precious" or "cute", when in fact if not nipped in the bud, a monster of emotional baggage is created in that child. They should be made aware of what is appropriate, and what is not appropriate behavior. A person whose interest is exploration should not be made to suffer these internet antagonists who are bored with themselves, have read a few books and became experts, and require tittilation and chaos to be satiated.
But the unruly and immature are not the only cancer that is amongst these internet communities. There is the sad fact that meaningless pissing contests are a secret tittilation for many. Just like in the school yard when a fight breaks out, a crowd gathers to be entertained. If you ever witness one of these internet skirmishes ensue, take notice of the "page views" as they spike sky high. Do not be a part of a community that has this poison seething under its surface. A mature community that has progressive goals in mind will have administrators that will not tolerate such foolishness. Every time we settle for the dummying down of progressive exploration, we have no one to blame but ourselves when it becomes our turn to be the target of some hateful or spiteful person online.
©2004 DC Vision