Often, when penning a post for the Tao Bible or Line by Line series, I will make a point and one or more of you will respond with "That's not what it means at all" or "How on earth did you come to that analysis or conclusion?"
There are two things I wish to point out. Number one, most of these classic works -- the Tao Te Ching or King James version of the Christian Bible -- are open to numerous interpretations. Each of us understands words, sentences and paragraphs based on our own intellectual abilities AND experiences.
Put another way, you and I might read the same passage and get completely different meanings out of it. While some people may desire to debate which meaning is most accurate, I'm trying not to go down that road anymore. I write about what it seems to say to me and I allow you the space to state what it means to you in the comments section.
If you disagree with what I have offered, for the most part, I have decided not to turn the differences of opinion or perspective into a debate and this is why I frequently don't offer a rebuttal in the comments section. I let your difference of opinion stand on its own without a protracted back-and-forth.
Number two, I feel I need to remind my readers that I am autistic and suffer from a form of schizophrenia. Consequently, it should be a given that I view the world differently than most other people. This certainly is NOT to suggest that I don't make errors in analysis or judgment and it certainly doesn't mean I don't learn quite a lot from the perspectives that you folks share, but it does tend to indicate that I focus (obsess?) on or draw out analyses that the average person might not.
It should also go without saying -- though I still feel the need to point this out -- that how many of you interpret what I write isn't anywhere close to how it reads to me. I am sometimes amazed and dumbfounded that one or more of you will hone in on a particular word or phrase that, in my mind, is rather inconsequential and yet you seem to miss the main thrust of what I'm trying to express.
I realize that, in the main, what appears inconsequential to my strange mind is of utter importance to the vast majority of you. I accept this for what it is, but I would be lying if I didn't admit that it bewilders me, at times.
There are two things I wish to point out. Number one, most of these classic works -- the Tao Te Ching or King James version of the Christian Bible -- are open to numerous interpretations. Each of us understands words, sentences and paragraphs based on our own intellectual abilities AND experiences.
Put another way, you and I might read the same passage and get completely different meanings out of it. While some people may desire to debate which meaning is most accurate, I'm trying not to go down that road anymore. I write about what it seems to say to me and I allow you the space to state what it means to you in the comments section.
If you disagree with what I have offered, for the most part, I have decided not to turn the differences of opinion or perspective into a debate and this is why I frequently don't offer a rebuttal in the comments section. I let your difference of opinion stand on its own without a protracted back-and-forth.
Number two, I feel I need to remind my readers that I am autistic and suffer from a form of schizophrenia. Consequently, it should be a given that I view the world differently than most other people. This certainly is NOT to suggest that I don't make errors in analysis or judgment and it certainly doesn't mean I don't learn quite a lot from the perspectives that you folks share, but it does tend to indicate that I focus (obsess?) on or draw out analyses that the average person might not.
It should also go without saying -- though I still feel the need to point this out -- that how many of you interpret what I write isn't anywhere close to how it reads to me. I am sometimes amazed and dumbfounded that one or more of you will hone in on a particular word or phrase that, in my mind, is rather inconsequential and yet you seem to miss the main thrust of what I'm trying to express.
I realize that, in the main, what appears inconsequential to my strange mind is of utter importance to the vast majority of you. I accept this for what it is, but I would be lying if I didn't admit that it bewilders me, at times.
I think part of this is also due to the lack of body language and inflection online.
ReplyDeleteIt changes how we read things, especially with strangers.
Lydia makes a good point.
ReplyDeleteAnd since this is an intellectual pursuit, discussion and debate are how we learn and grow. It's not necessarily about winning, it's just conversation. And you know what they say about talking about religion and politics. It can get heated.
While I agree that the lack of body language and inflection can cause problems, I have a great deal of trouble noting AND understanding them in face-to-face conversation! This is one of the reasons I often misunderstand what people are saying to me.
ReplyDeleteI made a comment yesterday but I think it got lost in the ether yesterday.
ReplyDeleteWhat is going on here on the blog is primarily an intellectual pursuit, where, like in philosophy and literature, the "conversation" takes place in the written form. Because the topics are provocative, in the realm of ideas (religion and politics, metaphysics and morality) dialogue is inevitable. Sometimes it gets heated. But it's how we come to understand each other and ourselves. It just emphasizes the need for clarity in written communication and careful reading.
I work in an office where the primary method of communication is email...even with people in adjacent offices or cubicles. Apart from its CYA quality, it does lack the "human" face to face element. But the point is, you have to be very clear and careful before hitting the send button.
I think this might be a good springboard for a little discussion of communication...I mean, the most vital interesting part of magazines and newspapers it the letters to the editor.