When we ask a question to someone, that question expresses a need in us, a need to know, to make a decision, so that we can advance. Yet, very often, we receive no answer from that person. After a while, we wonder “why can’t he/she answer a question?” Much like our question reflects “our priorities”, the answer generally reflects the “other’s priorities”, which most often have nothing in common with ours. It is a good discipline when asked a question to prioritize, before all, answering the other ‘s concern. It establishes a direct connect, a first step in larger learning.
Often after listening, we find cracks or errors in the other’s point of view. At times, the error is so flagrant that we can’t help but interrupt the other in mid-sentence. We can then fully opine that there is error and express the correct view, of course our view.
We end up defining ourselves with others by “opposition” instead of “inclusion”. So much is missed that way. The interrupted thought will often never be communicated and the knowledge attached to it will be lost, our loss of learning less.
Our reality is a minute fraction of the realities around us. If we want to enjoy them, we better include them, not oppose them.
Very nice post. I just stumbled upon your blog and wanted to say that I’ve really enjoyed browsing your blog posts. In any case I’ll be subscribing to your feed and I hope you write again soon!