Similarities

[SarahJackson]

Someone cannot simply understand the point by telling them directly, instead you must use an arrow and telll them. People are the bulls eye and they are hidden behind the wall of their emotions. You must aim over the wall with your words through analogies and metaphors. The wall is the persons defenses and mind that isn’t ready to hear things directly.

You will find the right connections if you if look for similarities in text.

 

[The Hammer]

Someone cannot simply understand the point by telling them directly, instead you must use an arrow and telll them. People are the bulls eye and they are hidden behind the wall of their emotions. You must aim over the wall with your words through analogies and metaphors. The wall is the persons defenses and mind that isn’t ready to hear things directly.

You will find the right connections if you if look for similarities in text.

Welcome to RF

 

[Ella S.]

I have a question about that.

Let's say that you have religious texts A, B, C, and D. A, B, and C all agree on X, B, C, and D all agree on Y, but A posits !Y (not Y) and D posits !X (not X). According to your process, which conclusion is accurate: X&Y, !X&!Y, !X&Y, or X&!Y, and how do you know?

If we can only affirm the truth of what the texts agree on, and therefore we can't affirm either X or !X or either Y or !Y, then the texts haven't really given us any information at all, have they?

I suspect that the common solution is to try to find some third position, Z, which can be "described as" or "appear to be" either X or !X "depending on how one looks at it." However, wouldn't that technically contradict the texts, and therefore since Z doesn't have any similarities with the texts at all we have to dismiss it?

If not, and I would be interested in why you would say that's not the case, then what if there's also some explanation W that can also be "described as" or "appear to be" what all of the texts describe "depending on how one looks at it?" How do you know whether Z or W is more accurate, if they both fit the readings of the texts?

I actually do believe that there are a lot of similarities between religious texts, and I think those similarities are best explained by a naturalistic worldview. But I could have an argument with other perennialists, such as Hermeticists or Theosophists or ancient astronaut theorists or animists, about why such similarities exist and they would disagree with my explanation.

If similarities alone are enough to make the right connections, do you think we could remedy this conundrum based solely on intertextual analysis? Or do you think the recognition of similarity is merely the beginning of understanding, and more investigation or practice is necessary to find the additional pieces?

 

[ChristineM]

@SarahJackson
Hello and welcome to RF. I hope you enjoy your time here.
Note: The debates in the staff lounge can get a little messy

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Shalom and welcome.

You must aim over the wall with your words through analogies and metaphors.

I think you just killed Humpty Dumpty.

 

[LuisDantas]

Welcome, @SarahJackson

If I may... perhaps a bit of context might help?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Someone cannot simply understand the point by telling them directly, instead you must use an arrow and telll them. People are the bulls eye and they are hidden behind the wall of their emotions. You must aim over the wall with your words through analogies and metaphors. The wall is the persons defenses and mind that isn’t ready to hear things directly.

You will find the right connections if you if look for similarities in text.

Welcome to RF. Very nice to meet you.

 

[McBell]

Welcome, @SarahJackson

If I may... perhaps a bit of context might help?

Sure couldn't hurt...

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

You must aim over the wall with your words through analogies and metaphors

If I may... perhaps a bit of context might help?

Sure couldn't hurt...

Context is the murky sea that pours salt into the wounds of shallow dialogue.

 

[SarahJackson]

Who has the Real power? A billionaire or a man without any money?

Who has more happiness.. the woman who has received gifts her whole life or has given gifts her whole life?

Money is like quicksand

 

[SalixIncendium]

Like sands through the hourglass, so are the days of our lives.

 

[Audie]

I see similarities to vapid
platitudes.

 

[LuisDantas]

Who has the Real power? A billionaire or a man without any money?

Unclear without context.

Who has more happiness.. the woman who has received gifts her whole life or has given gifts her whole life?

That will depend on circunstances.

- How graciously and reliably are the gifts given to her?
- What is expected from her in return?
- How much need - real or perceived - has she of those gifts?
- What does it cost her to give any gifts?

Money is like quicksand

Money is ultimately a convenience, a representation of choices as enabled by community acceptance.

 

[Audie]

Unclear without context.



That will depend on circunstances.

- How graciously and reliably are the gifts given to her?
- What is expected from her in return?
- How much need - real or perceived - has she of those gifts?
- What does it cost her to give any gifts?


Money is ultimately a convenience, a representation of choices as enabled by community acceptance.

Money hasnt sunk me yet.
Those without $ say things similar to
sour grapes.

 

[Quintessence]

Or... just appeal to emotions. That's what advertising and propaganda engines learned decades ago.

In any case, the OP is obviously oversimplifying things a bit, even if the advice can be helpful. Being plain and direct can often be the best way to convey information as often "emotional walls" are simply a non-issue. What is always an issue though, is prior learning. When I took a seminar about being a better teacher years back, one of the things we were encouraged to do was to meet the students where they are at and assess them for their prior knowledge and current perspectives first. What do you think about this thing? Then move on from there. Know what their starting point is, basically. It gives you an idea if you need to revisit some foundations and correct misinformation. Plus it helps emphasize that learning is often a social activity and we all have good knowledge and ideas to contribute.