--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > We live in a world in which many of the conflicts > around us are based (IMO) on ideas, and on *how* > those ideas are communicated to others. Some on > this planet clearly feel that their ideas are so > "right" that they have the "duty" to convince > others of their "rightness." Think religious > fanatics who actively attempt to convert others > to their beliefs. Think those who believe that > their particular beliefs or form of meditation > or prayer or worship should be mandated, made > into a law, and imposed on everyone "for their > own good." Think even those who seem compelled > to react to any idea that is in conflict with > their own ideas as an "attack," or an excuse for > an argument in which they can "prove" the super- > iority of their ideas. > > Does that seem *respectful* to you? Does that > seem like the most effective manner in which one > can present one's spiritual ideas to others? > > It doesn't to me. There is a metaphor that, for > me, presents a somewhat cooler way of presenting > one's ideas to others -- just *present* them and > then see whether anyone has an interest in them. > If so, and the other person asks to hear more, > explain more. If not, cool. The ideas have been > presented, made available.
So you're saying that's a better way to behave?
