There is a phenomenon that's come up here lately that fascinates me, because I've seen it on a *lot* of Internet forums that deal with spirituality. It's the conflict of two paradigms of what such forums should be like.
In the first paradigm -- 'reacting to' -- one encounters an idea that runs contrary to one's own belief or exper- ence and the immediate reaction is to become reactive, often agressively so, as if one has been attacked person- ally. It's as if such a conflict in beliefs or in belief systems should not be allowed to exist. One of them has to be RIGHT, and the other WRONG. And therefore the only "proper" response to a contrary view is to challenge it and draw the other person into an argument, during which the goal is to prove one person WRONG and the other RIGHT. In the second paradigm -- 'bouncing off of' -- it's more like jazz. One encounters different ideas and they are perceived as merely different. You may agree with the ideas or you may not, but you don't necessarily have to get reactive and attempt to portray the person who has these different ideas as WRONG and yourself as RIGHT. You can just play with the ideas and riff on them, and thus allow the discussion to just flow. In my opinion (and that's all it is), one of the key dif- ferences in the two paradigms is the level of attachment one has for one's belief system. Those who have been taught that their belief system is RIGHT, and in fact superior to all other belief systems, the "highest teach- ing" (sound familiar?), and have come to believe it with- out question, tend to fall into the 'react to' camp. Those who are less dogmatic, or who might have been around the spiritual block a few more times and encount- ered more varieties of belief systems, are often less convinced that their particular view is RIGHT. It's Just Another Point Of View. Therefore they often have the freedom to just "rap," to riff on the words of others and bounce off of them and take the conversation in new and interesting directions. As opposed to getting stuck in an endless circle of "I'm right, you're wrong" that goes nowhere and never "proves" diddley-squat. In an absolute sense, probably neither of these approaches is either "RIGHT" or "WRONG," they are Just What Happens. But for me there is simply no question which paradigm is more fun. For some, only argumentation and proving them- selves RIGHT is fun. Go figure. Unc 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/
