seemingly off topic long answers to 2 questions
[email protected]
Short answers can be wonderful.
This isn't one of those.
People who want to wait for good short answers should feel free to skip this
by. <g>
Sandra
In a message dated 4/14/2005 3:29:18 AM Mountain Daylight Time,
woodjmac3@... writes lots of :
I know. . . . I know from the depths of my being.
-------------------------------
Those statements bothered me. The substance of them didn't bother me, but
the form did--not grammatically or logically, but philosophically and in terms
of physiology.
Then we come up against language.
Had you said "I believe that..." it would've been softened.
And had I not grown up in an atmosphere in which people knew things because
in the depths of their beings they knew it was true, my little "alert" lights
wouldn't go off.
And that comes to the two questions:
-=-1) How come knowing these things I sometimes find it so hard to implement
them. -=-
Everything you listed has to do with theory and practice of attachment
parenting and unschooling. That's cool with me! As stated, they are ideals
almost in the realm of virtues (and when we live by principle instead of rules,
that IS in the realm of philosophy/belief, and so the best we can do is
approach our ideas as nearly as we can).
You were really stating principles that make logical sense to you, things
you intellectually believe to be viable and true, and probably things you've
seen work with your own children and others. That's legitimate, and that's
how beliefs become convictions.
-=-2) As I know these are right am I being conceited or as I believe just
more aware than those who do not.-=-
You're more aware of the topics you're discussing, I think. You're
focussing your thought and energy and BEing on being that kind of parent. It's the
looming in the forefront of your awareness. That's not a bad thing. But in
many people's lives something else is looming at the forefront. (And then in
some people's lives, nothing much looms, they play on a flatter field,
emotionally. Fervor isn't one of their emotions.)
Besides thinking about attachment parenting, and before that and during,
I've also spent a lot of time talking/thinking/writing/debating (kinda same
stuff we do on the discussion list and other such places) about virtue and
belief, so this all jumped out at me. In that area, I've come to believe that
there are three levels of "belief": an idea, a theory and a conviction.
An idea doesn't have to be original, but can be something we've borrowed to
try out, to think about, to hold as possibly worth believing. Then if it
works we believe it, but we need to really wear it around, ride it, sleep on
it, try it out in different environments, test it. If it stands up to all
other beliefs it meets and still seems true and best, and if we have experienced
good results and find no reason to abandon the belief for something we think
is better, then it becomes a conviction. We are convinced.
Those are all words to try to describe levels of confidence that I think are
combinations of logic and biochemistry. Is something a calm belief or an
agitated, nervous belief? Does it flow deep and still like a conviction or
does it hop around like little idea? Does it ask little questions inside us all
the time like a belief?
There's a place inside the brain (recent research has shown) where fervor
and religious experience live, are formed, react, "spark." As with other
biochemical things, science is just newly discovering and unravelling what's up,
but when there is a deep personal experience/feeling/thought involving a
person's relationship to the rest of the universe, that's the part of the brain
that's stimulated (so people are attempting to clarify and prove and examine
more closely).
When someone is emotionally and in other ways invested in something as big
as life to them, they get that feeling of just knowing deep in their being.
That leads to love and religion. That wasn't your question, but that might
be part of your answer.
More in other posts,
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
This isn't one of those.
People who want to wait for good short answers should feel free to skip this
by. <g>
Sandra
In a message dated 4/14/2005 3:29:18 AM Mountain Daylight Time,
woodjmac3@... writes lots of :
I know. . . . I know from the depths of my being.
-------------------------------
Those statements bothered me. The substance of them didn't bother me, but
the form did--not grammatically or logically, but philosophically and in terms
of physiology.
Then we come up against language.
Had you said "I believe that..." it would've been softened.
And had I not grown up in an atmosphere in which people knew things because
in the depths of their beings they knew it was true, my little "alert" lights
wouldn't go off.
And that comes to the two questions:
-=-1) How come knowing these things I sometimes find it so hard to implement
them. -=-
Everything you listed has to do with theory and practice of attachment
parenting and unschooling. That's cool with me! As stated, they are ideals
almost in the realm of virtues (and when we live by principle instead of rules,
that IS in the realm of philosophy/belief, and so the best we can do is
approach our ideas as nearly as we can).
You were really stating principles that make logical sense to you, things
you intellectually believe to be viable and true, and probably things you've
seen work with your own children and others. That's legitimate, and that's
how beliefs become convictions.
-=-2) As I know these are right am I being conceited or as I believe just
more aware than those who do not.-=-
You're more aware of the topics you're discussing, I think. You're
focussing your thought and energy and BEing on being that kind of parent. It's the
looming in the forefront of your awareness. That's not a bad thing. But in
many people's lives something else is looming at the forefront. (And then in
some people's lives, nothing much looms, they play on a flatter field,
emotionally. Fervor isn't one of their emotions.)
Besides thinking about attachment parenting, and before that and during,
I've also spent a lot of time talking/thinking/writing/debating (kinda same
stuff we do on the discussion list and other such places) about virtue and
belief, so this all jumped out at me. In that area, I've come to believe that
there are three levels of "belief": an idea, a theory and a conviction.
An idea doesn't have to be original, but can be something we've borrowed to
try out, to think about, to hold as possibly worth believing. Then if it
works we believe it, but we need to really wear it around, ride it, sleep on
it, try it out in different environments, test it. If it stands up to all
other beliefs it meets and still seems true and best, and if we have experienced
good results and find no reason to abandon the belief for something we think
is better, then it becomes a conviction. We are convinced.
Those are all words to try to describe levels of confidence that I think are
combinations of logic and biochemistry. Is something a calm belief or an
agitated, nervous belief? Does it flow deep and still like a conviction or
does it hop around like little idea? Does it ask little questions inside us all
the time like a belief?
There's a place inside the brain (recent research has shown) where fervor
and religious experience live, are formed, react, "spark." As with other
biochemical things, science is just newly discovering and unravelling what's up,
but when there is a deep personal experience/feeling/thought involving a
person's relationship to the rest of the universe, that's the part of the brain
that's stimulated (so people are attempting to clarify and prove and examine
more closely).
When someone is emotionally and in other ways invested in something as big
as life to them, they get that feeling of just knowing deep in their being.
That leads to love and religion. That wasn't your question, but that might
be part of your answer.
More in other posts,
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]