Listen up; I’ve got all the answers.
We all think we’re so smart. We believe we have the answers and everyone else is wrong. We say there are two sides to every story but we don’t act as though we believe it. Perhaps that’s because we really don’t.
During an election people have this tendency to dig their heels in and cement themselves into the position that supports what they think they know and understand.
We think we are the better person with more understanding. We think we have the market on being human or intelligence or seeing the bigger picture. We blab and stab and grab at any bit of information we can to back up what we think we already know.
Even as we read these words our tendency is to agree with what I’m writing but in the back of our minds we are replacing the word “We” for “Them”, our opposition.
This happens in politics, it happens in church, it happens in friendships and families.
This morning, as I crack open my Bible I find a verse out of Roman’s that slaps me in the face enough to cause a red mark on my cheek.
“Do not set your mind on high things, but associated with the humble. Do not be wise in your own opinion.”
Even now, some of us will read that verse and believe we’ve got one up on the opposition.
I am convinced that I know very little and am just as desperate as the next guy when it comes to having a corner on the knowledge market.
God help us.
4 Comments
Leave a comment
It seems that people tend to think that the purpose of communication is the transfer of knowledge, when it is really for the transfer of insight. Knowledge is inherently personal. Until an idea is based on insight, it cannot be considered knowledge. However, people are used to thinking of knowledge as being about essences and not artifacts, so it is easy to discard knowledge that is personal.
Another thing is a fear that if knowledge is a personal thing, then it has no meaning, or it is irrelevant to oneself. But I think that if people recognize the personal nature of knowledge, then they will understand that, to share it, it must be made personal to the audience.
So, the lesson is to be humble in how your knowledge relates to others, but be passionate about how your knowledge relates to you. Then efforts of persuasion will be based on sincere demonstration and communication.
Perhaps the knowledge market is not the best place to do business. I see you as trading in the insight market. I may often disagree with a you a lot about the meaning of your insights, your insights help me find my own meaning, and that is more important than a mere transfer of knowledge.
Ben, I really appreciate what you said, how you said it and I love your last couple of sentences. I agree.
It seems that people tend to think that the purpose of communication is the transfer of knowledge, when it is really for the transfer of insight. Knowledge is inherently personal. Until an idea is based on insight, it cannot be considered knowledge. However, people are used to thinking of knowledge as being about essences and not artifacts, so it is easy to discard knowledge that is personal.
Another thing is a fear that if knowledge is a personal thing, then it has no meaning, or it is irrelevant to oneself. But I think that if people recognize the personal nature of knowledge, then they will understand that, to share it, it must be made personal to the audience.
So, the lesson is to be humble in how your knowledge relates to others, but be passionate about how your knowledge relates to you. Then efforts of persuasion will be based on sincere demonstration and communication.
Perhaps the knowledge market is not the best place to do business. I see you as trading in the insight market. I may often disagree with a you a lot about the meaning of your insights, your insights help me find my own meaning, and that is more important than a mere transfer of knowledge.
Ben, I really appreciate what you said, how you said it and I love your last couple of sentences. I agree.