"Values shouldn't be easy things to hold, and if we can't hold onto ours when they come into conflict with others, then we ought to let them go. But we can't maintain any meaningful sense in the phrase "I believe x to be true" if we also allow not-x to be equally true. Not to get all law-of-noncontradiction on you or anything, but rules are rules. I prefer interlocutors with whom I totally and completely disagree, but who will own the passion of their convictions and translate those into discourse and action, over interlocutors who don't want to disturb the peace of parlor conversation."
--Dr. J
from the blog http://readmorewritemorethinkmorebemore.blogspot.com/
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I love this - I strive for this because 1. it is rarely exercised and 2. the chances for grace and unconditional love are so ripe between two people disagreeing that they have the rare opportunity to forge a bond that, no matter what, cannot be broken, interestingly enough, because it is the common ground that they share.
ReplyDeleteHmmm, maybe I shouldn't leave comments before the coffee has kicked in so I'll just add, "ya know what I'm sayin'?"
what a beautiful comment! i spend time thinking too on the idea of unconditional love, and what it means to operate in it. your suggestion here that holding genuine conversation even in disagreement can be a shared relation of unconditional love is a brilliant insight. i love too your vision of the strength of bonds that can be shared through that relation. thank you!
ReplyDelete