a thought

God's blessings are positive realities, not merely the absence of their opposites.

On Discussion

The Discussion on Discussions.

My brother and i had a discussion.

Definition of discussion: the action or process of talking about something, typically in order to reach a decision or to exchange ideas.
 I'll usually be referring to discussions on heady things, like the method of sanctification, and rebel things, like why we have standards.
It is usually a dance of trying to sound smart and not actually say anything that would force change in either yourself or your listeners. (this is not cool)
I'm realizing there are about as many aspects to a discussion as to people. (they do happen to be related)

Many have realized, during a discussion, that they have been there before. And like a dreadful deja-vu, they know the exact non-place it will end. Discussion tends to not leave us in a sort of 'meh' place. It becomes a methodical detached presenting and dissecting of ideas on a certain subject. And hardly ever is there a specific ending point. I'm writing to say that it doesn't have to be like that.

The loss of discussion would be a great tragedy. Revolutions have started and things have changed, for the better, i might add, because of discussion.

I see two ways to make discussions non-dreadful.

1) Make it real

2) Make it a game

Maybe the root problem causing unfulfilling discussion is trying to mix these two. We say things that we truly mean but are blown off by something fun. Or we steer around hard or uncomfortably true things because we aren't really being serious.

#1) Make it intentionally real. Verbally decide that 'we are now searching for truth'. Don't be afraid of everybody being quiet and thinking. Don't interrupt others. Listen both to what you think they mean and to how it sounds. Try to find clarity if something was said clumsily. Make sure you understand and were understood. This almost requires one to think about the conversation from a slightly detached perspective. We need to be more vulnerable. How can we refine our beliefs if we are not willing to be wrong? We need to be honest enough to be wrong, humble enough to change, and confident enough to be fine with having settled on what we believe.
          I'm intentionally not defining truth.
I would imagine that discussion in purely this form would be dangerous. It makes one vulnerable, other people are showcased rawly, beliefs are changed, people could be united (which is bad if they are wrong or violent), and several other things i can't think of right now. But this danger is merely potential. And, if the participants perceive their environment to be upbuilding(or in communion with their better natures), i'll assume this potential would lean toward the good.

#2)  Make it a literal game. Debate. Use any cheatery you want to. Try to dominate conversation, slam your opponent personally, misquote him, shift the subject if you are losing, and all other manner of unethical techniques. If everyone intentionally participates, i'm sure it will be alright. This is better if it is about something stupid like Chevy v. Ford. The loser is the one that is backed into a corner and has nothing to say.

Don't feel obliged to appreciate the number of imperative sentences in this post. And please dont dissect the english. I'm a teacher during the week and it is a weekend.

Another Blog Beginnning

and that doesn't mean a new one. It means that this one is beginning again. Third time. :) yea, i don't suggest subscribing.

I guess my excuse for writing would be to give myself practice in both writing and in taking a thought from my head and putting in a form that other people can get it in their heads also. Come to think of it, expecting other people to put your thought into their head is pretty arrogant. So, if you read, and comprehend, my apologies and Thank You.

oh, i should mention. I'm pretty free with my interpretation of the capitalization rules. It's part of my method of expression.

Ok, most of the people who read this have probably written a blog or two. So you should be able to identify with me when i say "the event or thought that jostled a post out of me"

This post's 'event' had to do with the health care system and our country's overabundance of safety precautions.
 Maybe one of you can enlighten me after i tell you my part.

So i was merrily on my way to an orthopedic appointment when i remembered to check my voicemail. My appointment, the one i was going to, was moved, two weeks deeper into the cosmos.

Well, i had driven most of the way there already, so i finished the drive to longingly look at the building i was supposed to be examined in. And on the other side of the building, I happen to notice, was a physiotherapy place. Well, i thought to myself, maybe they can fix me up with some sound advice and knee strengthening exercises(for it is my knee that is busted). Better that than old wives fables and the internet.

Turns out, they, by law, cannot do anything without a 'script', or diagnosis, from a doctor. (lemme rephrase that a couple times)

By law, highly trained individuals couldn't do a thing without consent, expensive consent i might add, from another highly trained individual. //

I cannot do something potentially self harming (getting treatment from an experienced person without a diagnosis from an equally experienced person who just happens to have a different job description) because of a law, even if i want to. I want enough freedom to hurt myself, i believe that is my right! Give me freedom AND give me death//

The physical therapist's hands are tied from trying to help, although he would probably do a very good job.// and finally,

this health care system (and nation and this culture's mindset) is over-specialized.

                                        the end    

peace to all,

wish me luck in keeping this blog refreshed

(note to government terrorist screener. i'm actually non-resistant, so go look over there)

2nd heartbeat

so far, this blogs pulse is about 1beat/2years. I think that classifies as dead. Or never alive.