The constant battle within me is how I speak about truth. I am normally mild mannered and respectful to others when I have to correct a false or incorrect statement. I have been the one who needed correcting and when I have been publicly shamed it hurt emotionally. I don't start out to be wrong and when I have been shown to be wrong I use it as a learning tool. When I am chastised in a condescending way I often come away from the circumstance of a constructive criticism growth opportunity to a defeated inadequate depressed state of being. In lieu of my past experiences I have taken the route of being soft and gentle in my expression of forwarding the truth where it can obviously be shown. The interesting thing is that some folks just don't care whether they are wrong or not in their understanding of the same reality we both share. Over some time I have learned how, and to what degree, to gauge my response when I argue and rebut erroneous information. Some, myself included, see the obviousness of an argument and can admit and/or change our perspective accordingly, while others cannot for the life of me see anything different than the illogic they have embraced. I have learned over time as well that sequencing an argument in a logical form expresses my understanding. Those who choose to ignore logic for the sake of a belief system or because logic is not their process for understanding, I leave them to their thoughts and move on. I speak logic with force and conviction knowing it has the weight of formula and language as it's premise. I do not quietly pronounce my point but I respectfully, with a determined deliverance speak power to truth and let the argument or point of contention rise or fall on the merits of what is real.
No comments:
Post a Comment