--- In [email protected], Peter Sutphen
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've got a serious question for everybody and no
> implicit criticism is meant and I'm also curious if
> there is a legitimate/valid, whatever reason, someone
> can come up with that I'm not quite getting. Why do we
> need any story whatsoever regarding MMY? We can
> neither confirm nor disconfirm any story. The
> arguments go on and on. Most of our stories whether in
> the pro or con camp are simply narratives of what we
> already believe. All we have is our own experiences
> regarding MMY. The stories can never, ever resolve;
> they never "make sense" unless you deny huge chunks of
> contradictory material. So, why and what is this need
> that some, all, a few, including moi, struggle with?
> -Peter

The question raises some interesting issues. First, the broader
question is why do we need any stories. Second, what exactly is a
story. Some thoughts.

The terem "stories" itself is a bit of a story -- having for me a bit
of a connotation of stemming from pop-psycholgy roots with an inherent
 condescending view of having "stories" -- a sort of coping mechanism
that "gets us throught the day". Or night.

Stories are really broader than this, they stretch across a broad
domain: they can be i)explanations and/or ii)evaluations. Stories can
explain i) how things work and/ or ii) what is. When they explain
things well -- explain relevant observable data, and can be used
accurately predict, we call them scientific theories. (Not to be
confused with slang use of theory -- aka Reagan on evolution "well,
its just a theory.")  As such, they are useful, and positive. I am
glad NASA had a good "story" to rely on about how the planets move
before they launched rockets towards them. 

Stories about "what is", are often less useful. It usually involves a
judgement or categorization. "He is a bad person". Such evaluation
stories are useful when we need to make a decision, to make a choice
about someone or something. "She is to be a good person. I will
therefore trust her advice". Decision prompted "stories" can be
working hypotheses and have a stated uncertainty / adjustment
component, instead of being absolute. "She appears to be a good
person, but I don't really know, thus I will trust her advice, but may
change course as I get more information." 

Hyper-evaluation -- having stories, making judgements and categorizing
many many people and things, outside of having to make a decision
regarding them/it, is usually a waste of time and a big habit of the
monkey-mind. 

Coping stories and rationalizations are a type of evaluation of "what
is" and are not useful in the long run. The intellect neeeds to be on
guard that one is not rationalizing a certain choice or behavior by
hiding from its true impetus, nature or impact. Such as, "I know I
need to lose a few pounds, but sugar is satvic and chocolate has the
love chemical, so another few pieces of chocolate won't hurt -- and is
really a good thing."

Do we need stories about MMY that reconcile the apparent
contradictions?  Perhaps -- if we need to make a decision that relates
to him. For example, if you are debating to go to the recert course,
then reconciling issues via a story may be usful and warranted. If no
decision is necessary, why do we need a story? To feed the monkey mind
something to hop up and down and squeal about for a while?

Anyway, thats my monkey-minded story for now -- to help me make it
through the day -- and night.  I may have a new story about stories
tomorrow.














To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 


Reply via email to