And, uh, not a "conversation of a higher order."JamesN. wrote: ( To thoses who are curious we were just sharing a moment of whimsical " Folly ". Wouldn't you agree Cindy? )
Bad shadow, behave.
At least in public.
Moderators: Clemsy, Martin_Weyers, Cindy B.
Ercan,Ercan2121 wrote:Instead, stay my friends.Nermin wrote:Byebye to all those who go
Aren't-we all happy in our own parish?
Talk, discuss, quarrel over a straw but stay
My main concern about psychological perceptions is that they cut both ways. The "us and them" business is a foundational bias. The good guys vs. the bad guys, the conflict paradigm for discussion and related matters concern me.JamesN. wrote:The focus of the subject stated was on the exploration of causes of the psychological perceptions as barriers that imprison humanity. Relating them to Joseph Campbell's insights as a possible avenue to break free as in the metaphor of " [/i]Cutting the Gordian Knot " was it's intent. ) The discussion was opened with the reference to " looking for fair ground as a place to begin ". " Cultural bias " was an excellent place to start; and the " Middle East " is ( only one ) of the examples from which to draw. " Asia and The West "; provide others but this is really only the starting point. " The effects of this imprint on children " is another point; as well as the many spiritual and political dimensions that really only just scratch the surface of topic possibility; not to mention the psychological mechanisms involved.
As to addressing the assumption that " conflict of ideas " is the only spark worthy of consideration to generate intellectual growth as a concept; you may find; falls far short as an ideal in which to promote the very thing to which you are aspiring; ( metaphorically or not ). If you say discourse as debate you had well better include at least some degree of agreement as well; for you will have only argument without it.