rules of rhetoric
I think this is a good place to begin experimenting with cyber growth. A good testing ground, perhaps, to see if these ideas for "expansion" can really float.
Here are my ideas on "rules for engagement:"
It is almost always my deepest desire to "get to the root of things"--and by this I mean "find the source" of whatever it is we are discussing or dealing with. For example, if Eric was confessing how he was having trouble this week because he had found himself telling "petty lies" and was asking for insight, I would want to get past the following rhetoric: "You shouldn't lie because 'your robbing people of the truth,' or 'the Bible says,' or 'every time you tell a lie you're driving another nail into Jesus' hands.'" It's not that these bits of insight are "so far from the truth," it's more that this type of talk circles around the issue rather than capturing it by the heart: "Eric, you're telling lies because you're lazy, and it's easier to tell a lie than explain the truth." or "Eric, you are telling lies because of something inside of yourself that is fallen--you want people to think better of yourself, or you want to see things your way so badly that you are ignoring the truth and embracing a lie, etc..."
Okay, I know these are cheezy examples, but the point is that by having a very open forum, we may get to the root of things rather than remaining thinly superficial. To get to the "heart" of the matter by helping Eric see why these lies keep appearing is insightful and productive--it helps Eric deal with his problem, while simultaneously providing insight for others as to the nature of our fallenness among other things...
Here is the flip side of openness: If a discussion turns passionate there is one thing that we must all learn to do: never state an opinion so strongly that you force people who disagree with you to "cross you" or "break relationship" with you in order to do it. In other words, never put your whole self-worth into your opinions, so that if someone disagrees with you they are essentially disagreeing with your value as a person in doing so.
I learned this lesson the hard way...
just so someone has said it--
Josh
Here are my ideas on "rules for engagement:"
It is almost always my deepest desire to "get to the root of things"--and by this I mean "find the source" of whatever it is we are discussing or dealing with. For example, if Eric was confessing how he was having trouble this week because he had found himself telling "petty lies" and was asking for insight, I would want to get past the following rhetoric: "You shouldn't lie because 'your robbing people of the truth,' or 'the Bible says,' or 'every time you tell a lie you're driving another nail into Jesus' hands.'" It's not that these bits of insight are "so far from the truth," it's more that this type of talk circles around the issue rather than capturing it by the heart: "Eric, you're telling lies because you're lazy, and it's easier to tell a lie than explain the truth." or "Eric, you are telling lies because of something inside of yourself that is fallen--you want people to think better of yourself, or you want to see things your way so badly that you are ignoring the truth and embracing a lie, etc..."
Okay, I know these are cheezy examples, but the point is that by having a very open forum, we may get to the root of things rather than remaining thinly superficial. To get to the "heart" of the matter by helping Eric see why these lies keep appearing is insightful and productive--it helps Eric deal with his problem, while simultaneously providing insight for others as to the nature of our fallenness among other things...
Here is the flip side of openness: If a discussion turns passionate there is one thing that we must all learn to do: never state an opinion so strongly that you force people who disagree with you to "cross you" or "break relationship" with you in order to do it. In other words, never put your whole self-worth into your opinions, so that if someone disagrees with you they are essentially disagreeing with your value as a person in doing so.
I learned this lesson the hard way...
just so someone has said it--
Josh
posted by Josh at
3:19 PM
4 Comments:
Thanks for beginning this dialogue, Josh. I like and concur with what you have said. If I read you right, I think you are highlighting at least two values: honesty/integrity/authenticity and respect. Discussion that gets to the real issue and doesn't shirk from the responsibility to challenge each other with an alternative perspective and respect for a fellow's opinion.
Perhaps these can fall under a general principle: love. People who live love are able to see that the other exists and that the other is distinct from oneself and concurrently value the other as such. At the same time, people who live love desire 'the best' for the other, even at great cost to oneself.
On a practical note, the language and method of engagement are important to these ends. The rhetoric we use must be constructive (not destructive). When responding to a blog or comment, I submit that we remember the limits of e-communication and clarify first what we hear the other to be writing (e.g., Josh, I hear you saying X, if that is the case . . .).
Humility is another important facet of the love factor. Being able to say "Ah, I see your point," or "I'm sorry, I misunderstood you," or "I apologize for the way what I wrote must have been understood." Gotta go eat, so this is all I have time for now. Hope to see some other comments soon.
By
Unknown, at 5:26 PM
I miss you guys. I think this is a great idea for us to get to know each other through an open dialogue.
I am excited to see what everyone comes up with.
By
Shiran, at 2:44 PM
We miss you, too. Shiran.
By
Unknown, at 9:08 AM
Shiran, where have you been? Have you missed because you grew disinterested in Romans? or is it something else? just curious. you don't have to answer.
josh
By
Josh, at 9:35 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home