Celebrities don’t matter. The box office take of a recent movie doesn’t matter. Sports results don’t matter. And, if we’re honest about it, the vast majority of politics doesn’t matter either. Even if you disagree with this statement, you’d have to agree that your opinion about these things matters even less than the things themselves. So why talk about such stuff? Well, there are two benefits.
The first is that it trains your mind so you’re mentally fit when you have to make a decision about something that actually does matter in your own life. Such discussions are a sort of mental weight training so your mind is strong when it counts. The second is that these topics offer a fertile soil out of which conversations and, therefore, relationships with other people can be grown. That said, it should be easy to see that such discussions become counterproductive either when they divide us from others or when the fun of mental exercise displaces the necessity of doing actual mental labor on our real responsibilities.
By definition, perversion is whenever something good is used contrary to its intended valid purpose.
TOD 11.30.07
At lunch yesterday I was talking with a friend about how quickly his mind works, and I told him that it would be more loving for him to slow down for other people and explain things more thoroughly to them. Since communication is about working with people rather than by ourselves, this is correct advice. But he pointed out something equally important in response.
He said that too much accommodating other people winds up allowing them to dominate and destroy our own identity. He’s exactly right. Just as it is unloving to not accommodate others, it is also unloving to allow them to so control our interaction that we lose who we are in the process. Love must affirm the value of both participants.
The main goal of wise love is that others become loving as well. That’s why love yields to them but also encourages yielding in response. Too much accommodation seems like love, but it’s really just selfishness depriving them of giving the gift of accommodating us. It’s not loving at all to allow others to remain unloving toward us.
He said that too much accommodating other people winds up allowing them to dominate and destroy our own identity. He’s exactly right. Just as it is unloving to not accommodate others, it is also unloving to allow them to so control our interaction that we lose who we are in the process. Love must affirm the value of both participants.
The main goal of wise love is that others become loving as well. That’s why love yields to them but also encourages yielding in response. Too much accommodation seems like love, but it’s really just selfishness depriving them of giving the gift of accommodating us. It’s not loving at all to allow others to remain unloving toward us.
TOD 11.29.07
“All women are bad drivers.”
“Most women are bad drivers.”
“Some women are bad drivers.”
“That woman is a bad driver.”
“That woman is driving badly.”
“That woman is driving badly right now.”
“That woman is driving badly right now according to me.”
“That woman has done one thing while driving that I do not like.”
“That woman has done one thing while driving for a few seconds that I do not like but which may have a perfectly decent explanation and which I’ve certainly done myself in the past and would not want to be judged by.”
It sounds downright silly when I say it like that. Almost like stereotyping is dumb…and unloving.
Remember, the language you use in your head is the most potently repetitive mechanism of belief formation you have. And by the way, one final thought. Why does it even matter that the other driver was a woman?
“Most women are bad drivers.”
“Some women are bad drivers.”
“That woman is a bad driver.”
“That woman is driving badly.”
“That woman is driving badly right now.”
“That woman is driving badly right now according to me.”
“That woman has done one thing while driving that I do not like.”
“That woman has done one thing while driving for a few seconds that I do not like but which may have a perfectly decent explanation and which I’ve certainly done myself in the past and would not want to be judged by.”
It sounds downright silly when I say it like that. Almost like stereotyping is dumb…and unloving.
Remember, the language you use in your head is the most potently repetitive mechanism of belief formation you have. And by the way, one final thought. Why does it even matter that the other driver was a woman?
TOD 11.28.07
I love my children. I want only the best for them, which often is at odds with what they want for themselves. Hence, I am constantly guiding, correcting, and disciplining them. Of course I also give my children at least as much affection and encouragement as possible, but I must confess that it’s all too easy to begin to see them primarily as a bundle of errors needing correction.
That’s why it was so valuable to have my father visit us during Thanksgiving. He gave them unconditional love, attention, and indulgence, which means they really liked having him around…naturally. After all, he doesn’t have to shape them and mold them and keep them alive. All he has to do is play with them and take joy in them and then leave the dirty work to us.
But instead of resenting him for this, which would have been easy, I took it as a reminder that I’ve been entrusted with a masterpiece. And it’s useful as a parent to remember that Claude Monet’s paintings were neither created by nor intended to be enjoyed by looking through a microscope.
TOD 11.27.07
“I disagree with what you’re saying, but I’d fight to the death for your right to say it.” To me, this has always been the heart of the American philosophy of freedom and tolerance. Unfortunately, I see a lot of people these days who seem more prone to saying, “I disagree with what you’re saying, but I’ll fight to the death to stop you from saying it.” Although I hope we all recognize this as tyranny rather than tolerance, I think there’s some merit in considering which freedoms we value enough to defend when people use them differently than we do.
For instance, I wouldn’t lift even a finger to protect the right to publish pornography. However, I would risk my life to protect someone’s right to read the Koran. I would never shop at a store owned by racists, but I would in fact put my life at risk to protect people in believing that all races are not equal. I support making abortion illegal, but I would gladly risk my life protecting the publication of books advocating evolution.
See, it’s easy to defend what we admire. But until you have identified at least some things you hate but believe in protecting, you have not actually embraced the idea of freedom. Giving other people the freedom to do as you would have them do isn’t really much of a definition of freedom.
For instance, I wouldn’t lift even a finger to protect the right to publish pornography. However, I would risk my life to protect someone’s right to read the Koran. I would never shop at a store owned by racists, but I would in fact put my life at risk to protect people in believing that all races are not equal. I support making abortion illegal, but I would gladly risk my life protecting the publication of books advocating evolution.
See, it’s easy to defend what we admire. But until you have identified at least some things you hate but believe in protecting, you have not actually embraced the idea of freedom. Giving other people the freedom to do as you would have them do isn’t really much of a definition of freedom.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
