The Art of Discussion

[MooNiNite]

This thread proposes the idea that while discussing a topic with others there could be better or worse ways to engage in discussion.

 

[dawei]

Very cool idea... if we could actually discuss it

[Daeluin]

One theme that arose today in another thread relates to gentleness and sharpness.

 

When we have something to share, we have the choice to present it gently, or sharply.

 

Sharply, we cut straight to the point with very clear and sometimes cutting words. Often this can happen when we react to something we have read that rubbed us the wrong way. Maybe it felt completely off-base and we felt violated by the intent, motive or conclusion the point stood behind. Maybe only just a part of it triggered us to react, where someone said "this is like this" but in our heart we can think of many situations where "this is not like this." Was it a blunder or wording, or did the person really intend such a strong blanket stance?

 

Often this is the path to take to make a lot of people feel pushed away and reactive to one's words.

 

Gently, we may present the same general sharing in a way that is not forced upon another. In a way that allows the other more time and consideration before deciding whether the content has

• triggered a reaction, or
• is able to gently flow past those who don't agree, or
• is allowed to be held with more care by those who want to allow it more depth within.

I think gentleness in posting can be done by using words that avoid these triggers. I find these types of words often do trigger reactions:This is, this will, you are, it is, always, never, etc.

 

While these types of words tend to soften that sharpness and absoluteness: This may be, this can be, I think this, I sense, I feel (owning it as something personal rather than projecting it as blanket absolute), Perhaps, tend to, sometimes, etc.

 

One may be able to develop a feel for what types of things are more likely to result in reactions, and what types of things are OK to leave without softening as much. In general I find that gentleness like this allows people ample room to dismiss my content without needing to defend against it, leading to greater harmony.

 

Sometimes I find it helpful to create an invitation for people to dismiss me. Genuine humility can be very powerful, and can serve as a pre-defense, eliminating the energetic need to defend against any posts that do find something to attack. It needs to be genuine, or one may not feel able to let things go.

 

In the end we all have our own ways, so I hope that others won't become too caught up by my own unique perspective. I don't believe that any perspective holds an absolute truth that cannot be tripped over, or described in more accessible terms for different audiences.

 

Thanks for the thread!

[Daeluin]

tl;dr

 

Post so that nothing you write feels like it would require defending.

If it does, change it.

IMO.

[Daeluin]

Something else that comes to mind, is recognizing and working with the nature of one's audience.

 

When we recognize the nature of the various members of our audience, we can also gauge how they will respond to what we have to share. It isn't helpful to hold people in boxes, but it is helpful to recognize when people's behavior is repeated again and again with very minor changes.

 

This is a part of listening to our audience and responding to the openings it allows, rather than trying to force something on it that goes against its nature.

 

I often share long messages full of understanding. I realize that lots of people may not wish to read my posts, and in a way this deals with the nature of those who only look at the surface of things, and prevents me from having to deal with people who like posting their first emotional reaction to things that don't take long to absorb and reflect.

 

I also try to look at things from multiple perspectives, and even though I explain complex things sometimes, I try to present them as simple as possible. I take extra care to reflect on what might be confusing to someone completely unfamiliar with a given concept, and see if I can present it in a simpler way.

 

Often I will re-read my posts and make things simpler. Editing run-on complex sentences to become shorter sentences. Rewording things that might be interpreted in two different ways. Replacing words that don't feel quite right, and so on. Sometimes, for me, editing after the post has been published lets me see it more clearly than reading what I have written before I publish the post.

 

If I am going to post something more personal, I also take a greater care before doing so. I examine myself to see if I have any insecurities regarding the sharing, or if I am sharing something to seek validation from others. If I expose a part of myself that is vulnerable, or holds an expectation from others, I am only setting myself up for disappointment.

 

Additionally, in sharing something personal, I try to only do so when the "weather" within the "room" is pleasant and "safe." This makes it more likely for the sharing to be taken as something meaningful rather than brushed past. Sometimes even if a thread is inviting something I have a very specific contribution for, I will avoid posting if the thread seems to be hijacked by people who are avoiding the topic and playing their own game. There seems to be little point in letting my post get lost amidst a mess of other postings.

 

Something a friend once shared with me, is that no one else can ever know what any experience I shared is truly like for me, no matter how well I word it. That experience is mine alone. Zhuangzi says, we can ever only know ourselves from the inside out, and all else from the outside in. The choice is ours to decide how to best act in exchange between the internal and external. If we have expectations of the external, it is often hard to get them met. However, we have the capacity to observe where the openings and closing within the external are. It is then our choice to decide if we feel internally open to serving that external opening. Sometimes we are able to tell if this potential relationship is something that will be healing and evolutionary, or if it is something that is imbalanced and negative. Other times it is a mystery, and we can only hope to do our best. Blessings!

[Stosh]

One would have to know, what the purpose of the communication actually is. That is to ask, whats my motivation for saying anything , here. ? And from the readers perspective, why are they reading it?

This is a much more subtle question than what the ostensible subject matter is. 

You see, The initial post, is often set up as a question, but its really a self sponsored opportunity ,to make a statement. And if the reader wasnt really having a question on the subject, its likely that they will not want a new perspective shown to them. 

Secondly, there is the problem that some people just bail out of reacting to statements, ,out of fear for loss of their own composure, and the others. 

People that accept one another, do not need to be ensconced in a protective shell of platitudes an inanities, and so can be vigorous in word with one another, still knowing respect is not gone. Pussyfooting around, is for stangers.

[Stosh]

So far we have estabilshed a few things, that one needs to consider who it is one is speaking to.. That everyoune should be entering the conversation for complimentary reasons, , that the effusive groveling and sucking up to be accepted isnt neccesary.  You can say ,Have a nice day, and someone may take it wrong. You might consider saying nothing, ,but thats not a conversation and its no fun. 

Platitudes go over great, when folks just want the superficial acceptance of platitudes. They flop, when someone wants sincere dialog. Goofing around likewise is fun, but not for everyone. Generally speaking its best to steer away from disclosing any fact which is in action able for the other party. Its basically hanging someone out to dry, by starting a subject which is personal, and is not up for random contradiction. 

Lastly, for now, its a good policy to check in frequently ,to see if anything being said, is sinking in, or readily digested, because if one goes on and on ,blowing past divided sentiments the stuff afterward is unsupported confidence wise.

[Daeluin]

2 hours ago, Stosh said:

People that accept one another, do not need to be ensconced in a protective shell of platitudes an inanities, and so can be vigorous in word with one another, still knowing respect is not gone. Pussyfooting around, is for strangers.

 

Something to remember, here on the internet, is that we cannot assume our audience is limited to those who are participating in the discussion. For the record, I am not advocating use of platitudes. Platitudes soften the edges of things after the fact. My suggestion is to soften the edges first, taking ownership and responsibility for one's actions with care, to avoid needing platitudes later. The reason is precisely because we are among strangers. I'm not having this conversation with you in your kitchen, but in a crowd at Grand Central.

 

Often, on these boards, adherents of particular schools will share their teachings with strong convictions. This can easily clash with other schools, which is likely obvious. What may not be as obvious is the confusion generated within an unknown number of witnesses to this exchange. Presented with two opposing perspectives, each proclaiming to be correct, how does the reader draw conclusion? Presumably based upon the information that ends up feeling most right for them.

 

My suggestion, is that that there is a way to nestle truth and clarity within gentleness, such that it does not generate confusion, yet is readily unwrapped by those who choose to look deeper.

 

Each school is correct, IMO, when in an environment designed for the ears of their own students. In this environment the teachings are able to be practiced as tools that lead to results. It is when those tools are presented at large to strangers, IMO, that things with edges create unsought for cuts.

[Marblehead]

Reading that reminded me of something from Chuang Tzu.

 

Chuang Tzu was talking to his student and Chuang Tzu told his student to go find another teacher because he, Chuang Tzu did not have the capacity to teach him (the student).

 

[Stosh]

Certainly true Daeluin, its a train station. But despite agreeing , I still hold this as true, that sincerity and even opposition ,can be handled best by those who trust in one another, not to go too far. And soft soap works for those for whom that kind of a relationship doesnt exist. Personally,,, I do disclose, share more of my mind ,than is really tailored to those I dont know closely,, but aim at keeping it a moot point how they might take it. ,its not exactly trust or distrust. After a lot of that, I would say that little ever comes of words alone like that, Id just rather say it as I see it, than constanly reframe.

[Stosh]

I cant keep everyone from cutting themselves, especially when they just arent listening .

[Daeluin]

They say where sincerity is, the way is open.

 

My suggestions are full of cautions, things to double check, things to be aware of, and so on. This could easily get in the way of discussion, and more importantly, of naturalness. Perhaps my goal is for these things to be natural.

 

However, when one is natural, it is difficult for one to avoid cutting something accidentally. After all it is hard to walk outside without inevitably stepping on and killing some other living being.

 

This excerpt hones in on the goal:

 

Within the Daoist tradition, there is actually much discussion of and different perspectives on the relationship between "fate" (ontological givenness) and freedom, or the capacity for independent action and the possibility and desirability of "perfection." Wuwei involves allowing each being to unfold according to its own nature and connection with the Dao. It involves allowing space for ziran to appear. Applied to ethics, wuwei  inspires one to stop doing everything that prevents one from being who one is and that inhibits other beings from expressing their innate condition with the Dao. Such a condition is characterized by virtue. For Daoists, it is possible to be "naturally ethical," but that entails a corresponding transcendence of social conditioning, familial obligations, and personal  habituation. It involves understanding the sources of desire. A lack of attention to the condition of one's core goodness also frequently results in acceptance of what should be rejected and rejection of what should be accepted.

 

In the end, what can we do but set the intention upon greater integrity and core goodness, then as you say, exercise trust.

[Stosh]

Thats certainly an approach that makes sense. It does fit a philososphy, but since there are others. It may not suit all of them. Im not sure one can transcend all socialization, which would put this view of wei wu wei permanently out of reach of all. So this view, needs modification to suit the reality that we cant function long without socialization at all. I am not under any compulsion aside from social pressures to be nice ,kind, harmless or exhibit virtue of any sort, and clearly individuals can benefit by actions outside those constraints. 

[Daeluin]

It involves understanding the sources of desire.

 

 

[Stosh]

7 hours ago, Daeluin said:

It involves understanding the sources of desire.

Possibly, How so, and Do you really think you can manipulate the sources of desire or something? 

 

 

 

[Daeluin]

Nevertheless, the actual practice goes from shallow to deep, from crude to fine. Throughout, it is best to be consistent. The practice is one from beginning to end, but its quality during the process can be known only by oneself. Nevertheless, it is necessary to wind up at the point where "heaven is open, earth is broad, and all things are just as they are," for only this can be considered attainment.

 

What has been communicated through successive sages is not beyond reversed gazing. Confucians call it "reaching toward knowledge." Buddhists call it "observing mind." Taoists call it "inner observation."

 

The essential teaching is summarized above; as for the rest, matters of entering and exiting stillness, the prelude and the aftermath, one should use the book Small Stopping and Seeing for a touchstone.

 

The words focus on the center are most sublime. The center is omnipresent; the whole universe is within it. This indicates the mechanism of Creation; you focus on this to enter the gate, that is all. To focus means to focus on this as a hint, not to become rigidly fixated. The meaning of the word focus has life to it; it is very subtle.

 

The terms stopping and seeing basically cannot be separated. They mean concentration and insight. Hereafter, whenever thoughts arise, you don't need to sit still as before, but you should investigate this thought: where is it? Where does it come from? Where does it disappear? Push this inquiry on and on over and over until you realize it cannot be grasped; then you will see where the thought arises. You don't need to seek out the point of arising any more. "'Having looked for my mind, I realize it cannot be grasped.' 'I have pacified your mind for you.'"

 

This is correct seeing; whatever is contrary to this is false seeing. Once you reach this ungraspability, then as before you continuously practice stopping and continue it by seeing, practice seeing and continue it by stopping. This is twin cultivation of stopping and seeing. This is turning the light around.

 

The turning around is stopping, the light is seeing. Stopping without seeing is called turning around without light; seeing without stopping is called having light without turning it around. Remember this.

 

The Secret of the Golden Flower/Fluorescence

end of chapter 3

tl Thomas Cleary

[Stosh]

You personally, not Thomas Cleary, do this.....? and he/you  can make himself like broccoli? like insults ? ignore the death of loved ones ? remove his/ your own ambitions and desires? 

If not you , I must declare this unsubstantiated second hand claim.  

[Marblehead]

I can and have done magic before.

 

(At least, that's what she told me.)

 

[Daeluin]

35 minutes ago, Stosh said:

Possibly, How so, and Do you really think you can manipulate the sources of desire or something? 

 

Here we are on daoist forums, where there are many discussions on spiritual achievement.

 

The general concept here, as I see it, is that at first, yes it is difficult to recognize the sources of desire. This leads to actions based on desire, and motives at cross purposes can fall out of harmony with each other.

 

However, this is all ego, and ego is largely self-created and self-sustained, through self-indulgence. It can easily be dissolved, and rather than acting upon desire one can instead turn within and trace back the signal to its source. At some layer, we might observe this to be the organ spirits of the body sending messages to the sovereign heart-mind, informing of some discomfort or need. The message is not requesting that something external needs to be done, but requesting internal acknowledgement. Listening to the message and sending the messenger back home, and perhaps internally adjusting to ease the discomfort allows for greater regulation of the organ shen and bodily qi. More importantly, it ceases the separation between the upper soul and the lower soul. It is little different from the choice between not feeling comfortable in a dirty room and feeling like leaving (desire) or doing the work to clean the room and feeling like staying. When we do the work, the internal become inviting again, and there is increased harmony and integration between the upper (hun) and lower (po) souls, in terms of daoist understanding.

 

As this work toward integration increases, what is rough within become finer and finer, and transformations take place. One begins to develop a greater and greater sense of peace within, until resting within stillness is quite natural, and does not take extra effort to maintain. Instead, one would rather not leave this sense of peace. This integration miraculously leads to external synchronization with one's environment, and surprisingly one seems to be in the right place at the right time more and more frequently, without necessarily intending to do so.

 

This is the manifestation of the ziran within wu wei.... do to the increase of integration and peaceful state within, one's decisions are not based on desire, but based upon flowing within the natural openings and closings available to one, without forcing things. The navigation of this is natural and needs no forcing; it just happens, of itself.

 

I speak of this from personal experience, yes. Some of the most magical moments in my life came about from being like this.

[Daeluin]

9 minutes ago, Stosh said:

You personally, not Thomas Cleary, do this.....? and he/you  can make himself like broccoli? like insults ? ignore the death of loved ones ? remove his/ your own ambitions and desires? 

If not you , I must declare this unsubstantiated second hand claim.  

 

Thomas Cleary is simply the translator - haha, I cannot really speak to what he can or cannot do! The text has been passed down for a long time. But yes, I have experienced these things, and was quite surprised at the unfolding of synchronicities within my life.

 

One weekend, I was in class, and Sifu asked us to study hexagram 26. After class some of us gathered togther for lunch and we talked about hexagram 26, and I happened to get the birth date from a friend to look up his I-Ching Birth Hexagram (he luo li shu). The next day I wandered into a tea house to do the calculations. It was getting a little busy in there, so after some time someone approaches me and asks if he could share my table while waiting for his friend to show up, and I happily accepted. He became curious about what I was doing, and I explained the chart to him. Arriving at the conclusion of my calculations, I discovered that my friend's Birth Hexagram was 26! Then my table-neighbor gave me his birth date so I could calculate his as well.... and to my surprise I discovered that he shared the exact same birth year, month and day as the friend from class whose calculations I had just finished. They were born at different hours however, and had different Birth Hexagrams.

 

It was at this point that the friend he had been waiting for showed up, who happened to be another friend from my class, who I had been spontaneously running into here and there all month! A couple days later I explain all these things to Sifu, who sagely nods and says with a twinkle in his eye, yes, that's how it works.

 

Insults? They are just gifts of energy? Accept the gift, happily, why let the mind catch upon itself?

Death is an incredible process or rebirth, one beautiful phase within cyclical motion.

 

None of this is about denying others or denying self - it is about going beyond the ego, into the discovery of true self. Somehow the ego likes to protect it's fabricated identity, but as I dissolve it, again, yet again, I discover its actions tend to prevent more wholeness of self than it presumes to protect.

[Stosh]

Can you make yourself like broccoli, ignore the death of a loved one , remove your own ambitions , likes and dislikes ? so that they never modify your actions? 

My own palliative for discussions, a type of unicorn I would like to see some day ,  is much more basic ,it's simply the honest Direct answer of any question mark.

I am willing to reciprocate. 

 

Mr Cleary isnt here to cross examine. 

Edited June 19, 2017 by Stosh

[Daeluin]

A beautiful part of it, to me, is that in this increased integration, this increased attention to one's core goodness, one not only begins to walk a path that is free and open to one's self, one also nurtures, through alignment, the natural path of others.

[Daeluin]

17 minutes ago, Stosh said:

My own palliative for discussions, a type of unicorn I would like to see some day ,  is much more basic ,it's simply the honest Direct answer of any question mark.

 

Well I've answered your questions graciously already! In fact I was already writing my own personal response to your earlier question when you replied to my quote from The Secret of the Golden Flower/Fluorescence. Now you've replied again, expectant and impatient. How is that working for you?

 

This does bring something to mind however. Not only does desire get in the way of harmony, at times, if we attach too strongly to our desires, we set ourselves up for disappointment. Expectation is the hoary curse of humanity.  - Steven Erikson

 

Who made us entitled to receive answers to questions? Who made us entitled to receive those answers only in forms we are willing to accept? The answers are ever present, always - it is often us who lose the ability to perceive them.

 

Another experience I have been led to, is the ability to look for answers before there are questions. This is a part of the discovery of emptiness. In being led toward deeper emptiness, at first it seems as though my questions are given non-answers... yet with deeper apperception I discover that this emptiness is not empty at all, yet pregnant with all that is, including the answers I sought.

 

From this, what point in holding another to my own desires? Do they owe something to me?

[Stosh]

7 minutes ago, Daeluin said:

 

Well I've answered your questions graciously already! In fact I was already writing my own personal response to your earlier question when you replied to my quote from The Secret of the Golden Flower/Fluorescence. Now you've replied again, expectant and impatient. How is that working for you?

 

This does bring something to mind however. Not only does desire get in the way of harmony, at times, if we attach too strongly to our desires, we set ourselves up for disappointment. Expectation is the hoary curse of humanity.  - Steven Erikson

 

Who made us entitled to receive answers to questions? Who made us entitled to receive those answers only in forms we are willing to accept? The answers are ever present, always - it is often us who lose the ability to perceive them.

 

Another experience I have been led to, is the ability to look for answers before there are questions. This is a part of the discovery of emptiness. In being led toward deeper emptiness, at first it seems as though my questions are given non-answers... yet with deeper apperception I discover that this emptiness is not empty at all, yet pregnant with all that is, including the answers I sought.

 

From this, what point in holding another to my own desires? Do they owe something to me?

 

I didnt say you werent gracious, my issue with the answer that it was indirect. As far as entitlement goes I never claimed it, why then should I push for this directness? because , if you held yourself to it I think you would be moved to make concessions which I think fair , and nothing to be uncomfortable about really. If you said , No I cannot make myself like broccoli , then I would say something like, Then there is a limit to how much you can control these sources of desire. We then would not be polarized about the claim of control , but would instead be examining the limits of it , and the assertive fact of it. 

By constantly diverting and evading the tight spots , discussers just never get to the point where the attitudes of Both can agree rather than ensure disappointment. 

But like I indicated , its just a unicorn , an imagined creature , so its certainly not unusual not to see them. The habits of discussion are part of socialization, rarely examined. You quote Cleary Erikson and others , and they mean literally nothing , what they say is just claims , nothing at all , just a wast of space , compared to your own presentation which can be looked at closely. 

[Daeluin]

To be clear, nothing I said speaks to controlling anything - rather the opposite, really.

 

Directness does tend to be somewhat controlling, and if indirectness eludes its grasp, it is like complaining that someone won't stand still to take a punch?

 

Meeting directness with directness tends to lead away from balance, like one person grasping at the other - when the grasp lands, they tend toward wrestling upon the floor. One person thinks it means one thing and that the other should agree, and the other has a difference of opinion - where does grappling truly lead them, unless one side or the other is willing to release their expectations?

 

As my Sifu says, lead to emptiness.

 

Indirectness to meet directness is balance - it brings natural circularity to that which is too linear.

It is a gift, but perhaps not one that all are willing to appreciate.