What if?

[synecdoche]

Yesterday when i was in the check-out line i heard someone say, "It must have happened because you created it to teach yourself something."

Do you believe that we each create every single aspect of reality? I asked.

Yes.

But when we're creating our realities, do they intersect?

Yes.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

An assumption possible to make in dialogue and deliberation, as in the "New Age" spirituality that i'm guessing this person came from (they'd seen "What the Bleep do We Know [www.whatthebleep.biz ] multiple times) is that "we're" the ones in control, and if only "we" can co-create our realities, we'll all get what we need.

But who is "we"?

What if "we're" not the only ones out there - or in control?

Whether the others are God/Devil, extraterrestrials, spirits, ancestors, more-sentient-than-thought plants and animals, Gaia, or some mixture of entirely other and/or any of the above makes a great deal of difference and is up for all kinds of debate.

Given that, what is the benefit of a dialogue of "we" when "we" are not all-inclusive, and "our" best consensuses shattered by the deeds of the universe? Especially if to reach consensus would involve drastic changes of worldview and life?

If someone depended on, say, weapons manufacture, for their living, they might find it a challenge to even risk seeing war as an unforgivable atrocity. If someone were entrenched in the peace movement, the opposite might be true, especially if public attention were on the person making a perceived wavering of position a huge node of assumptions and hard feelings.

This brings up a second elephant, which is, that morning-after feeling when a person's previous convictions wake up again after being lulled in a stream of warmth and excitement and they bolt. I recently had dialogue with an ex-logger who still used the word "us" when speaking of loggers and logging. He had been drinking. We reached a point of singing around the campfire with each other after some intensely felt conversation (empathy on my side; also trying to honestly answer his questions). As soon as he woke up the next morning he bolted, though his wife was unwilling and wanted to stay. That also happened with a mediation between two people. One remembered the other sexually assaulting them, and the other strenuously questioned that person's definitions and perception. The air-shift happened, where tension magically lifted and everyone started smiling more. Then, bare days later, the person who questioned the other's perceptions came out as extremely dissatisfied, and withdrew all further involvement.

That is a fear that people could have around dialogue and deliberation - that it could manufacture a seeming consent based on manipulation of the feel-good buttons in one part of people's brains, leaving them to wake up to a sudden shock of non-integrity later.

Are those big enough elephants for all y'all?
*******Serena
_________________
Synecdoche: A figure of speech by which the part is put for the whole, the whole for a part, the species for the genus, the genus for the species, or the name of the material for the thing made.

[synecdoche]

There goes my lefty framing-handicap again.

Whether what exists other than ourselves is up for debate is MAJORLY up for debate in some circles. Any God other than the Trinity equals blasphemy, and any debate equals doubt equals weakness equals opening the doorway to sin.

And whether this is true, i have no absolute idea. And that places me in one box - and people might not be comfortable blending views with one so unrepentantly unsaved, and regrettably hellbound.

[synecdoche]

Oh, and am I a lefty? I don't actually define myself as such - and highly dispute anyone else's labelling of me. I think there was an element of wanting to show myself a part of a lefty "us" in my (incomplete and therefore inaccurate) self-labelling.

[Rex Barger]

What if no one can control the whole, because the only control any of us can exercise is over ourselves? It makes for a very interesting universe & a life that is full of surprises, yes? Over 6 billion of us, simultaneously making up our own minds about what to do (with permission or not) & then doing it! No wonder uncertaintly is our only certainty! That's our reality! Everything we do has an impact on reality & that reality is always impacting us. That's why I never expect us to acheive an all-inclusive consensus about anything. It wouldn't do much good anyway because we can never know whether our ideas will work till after the work is done, so even an all-inclusive consensus can't guarantee success!
But I believe it is emminently good for us to seek agreement whenever & wherever we can. The more agreement we have, the more likely we are to succeed. That's why I like D&D! But D&D can't be a free-for-all if it is going to be healthy. Participants need to agree to speak honestly from their hearts & listen deeply to each other's hearts. They need to stay open so they can welcome disagreements as an opportunity to expand their own understandings of reality. And they need to be committed to the building of a healthy, globalocal community. In a healthy community, everyone respects all life. [No we/they! Just us!]

[synecdoche]

Hmmm....what if?
But what if that just isn't how people see the universe?
In fact, what if it's inaccurate (through incompleteness) thinking that we can only control ourselves? What if we can't control ourselves, or one or more than one higher power controls us? Or, saying that we are utterly responsible for our own behavior, do we then shuck responsibility for torture onto the one being tortured?

What if there exist a wide body of people who might take great offense at the idea that they or their ancestors chose to be raped, enslaved? What if there exists a wide body of people that detest the idea of free will unless it leads to surrendering free will to God as a part of the struggle towards salvation?

What if I find out after dying that they are right and that I've lived my life insensible to truth even when it was shoved before me?

Currently i am one Gaia-theory lovin' NVC speakin' carbon-based life form. Currently i think that i choose what i do, out of a nearly infinite array of choices that are also shaped - i could be raped, and it wouldn't be the fate i'd choose, because other beings are making unlimited choices as well AND THEY AFFECT ME!

Nonetheless that's just my best guess at the moment, and i do admit the possibility that i'm gambling with Allah's wrath and hellfire among many others.....

What if group process could be a free-for-all because that's process sometimes? What if listening is defined different ways by different people or peoples?

What would you call a free-for-all? How have you reacted when something that you think of as a free-for-all happens, or when you fear it's going to happen? What backgrounds do the people you dialogue and deliberate with generally come from - and i don't just mean race class and ethnicity?

I'll stop here......but there are more questions if you enjoyed these!
_________________
Synecdoche: A figure of speech by which the part is put for the whole, the whole for a part, the species for the genus, the genus for the species, or the name of the material for the thing made.

[Rex Barger]

You certainly seem to be "one Gaia-theory lovin' NVC speakin' carbon-based life form" (if I only knew what 'NVC' stands for)! Just recognizing that "other beings are making unlimited choices as well AND THEY AFFECT ME" gives me confidence that we're in close agreement & reminds me of this line in one of my favorite songs: "when people hurt each other, they hurt themselves & ME!"

Who do I D&D with? Anyone! You didn't ask this (but I'll ask me anyway): who do I argue with? No one! It seems to me that 'dialogue' can be fruitful; argument is much less likely to be. Our local conversation cafes have been very satisfying because (I believe) they establish reasonable rules. [All life has to live within limits!] Anyone is welcome to join us, but before we begin, we get agreement on simple guidelines: mutual respect &, without going on&on&on, speak from our hearts & listen deeply! We respect each person's right to self-determination. We even agree to disagree without being disagreeable!

D&D can be so unbelievably fruitful when we are all committed to mutual respect. When we are all striving to refine our understandings of how we can live together more harmoniously, D&D CAN'T BE BEAT!

If you're still interested in elephants, see my "Over 6 billion elephants in as many rooms".