No really?

This is about abstraction, then contradiction as evidence of untruth=a truth.

If I have said it once I have said it at least once; CONTEXT.

We have de facto a priori truths that are in effect theory’s based on experience. I do not think of them as my opinion however. My foot going forward is an assumed certainty, in that it will meet matter and continue my walking. I am trusting looks are not deceiving and not even knowing it.

I don’t know I trust some joke is not being pulled, my next foot falling through some illusion, like a trap in the jungle. My mind is quite closed as to my belief seeming as fact but having the potential of illusion. I trust I have not been drugged and am imagining where my next step is actually going. We can keep going on in this way regarding the first example that popped into my mind. It did that probably because it is such a universal belief we most all have, but would get only into an existential circulating pool if we argued about it as a belief I have but you do not, since you know where your next step is going.

Why am I talking about this today? What determined my interest on this topic? It was a post about liberal legendary open-mindedness and conservative strong willed closed opinion. Sometimes I am bugged about the false dichotomies that are used regarding generalized abstractions that then go on to prove a point philosophically, believing a questionable belief is proven truth.

In the case mentioned, if a liberal holds an opinion they are proven as deceptive to some; cause they are not being open minded. Then conservative opinion does not face this same criterion. Are these alleged opposites merely on a polar continuum? Might they actually be on a circle rather than a line? How about a triangle with closed mindedness being one point, and liberal, all the rest of the whole?

It is my assumption that we all have both conservative and liberal tendencies. They are conserved for some functional reason. One can argue endlessly over false dichotomies (the talking heads on cable news often do) because they are insolvable, being that one or both sides are not honestly in any full context.

Should I be open minded about where my next foot is landing on the sidewalk? Most likely not, unless there are some unknowns I am blindly waking into. But unfortunately I do not know of them and experience has suggested I need not have a concern. If someone points out that I am not being open minded about my opinion, am I then a proven conservative or dishonest liberal?

Like the sidewalk analogy, experientially we are guided into many beliefs, by experience and our particular place in family and culture, that are nowhere near as certain as cement. But we are sure they are!

The cliches over left and right are often such a morass of misunderstanding that arguing over them is often tantamount to poking your own brain out of your head and using it as a soccer ball. Really pointless, because neither side is willing to hear with the ears of the other. On those occasions they may try, can that try be honest? Is our upbringing going to raise its hand and shout to our mouths; I know the true answer!? But I’ll give you a listen for respect and courtesy in giving understanding a try, and not knowingly, subconsciously, cherry pick what bounces through my ears.

I read another tag yesterday that was going around in anti-government circles all in a fuss over some couples cheating on our taxes. This couple allegedly did not wish to work, were found to be illegal aliens, and on, in that welfare state big bad government huff so opinion pulling on the right.

While I was reading this post the TV news was on, an investigative show, talking about 200 billion in no bid contracts that seem to have gone out to what amounts to war profiteers who got the job by personal and political contacts, thus having that lack of oversight and accountability now infamous as cronyism in the supposedly conservative administration.

Point being; who is really getting away with what and what is the true context and scale? Why does one inflame ones emotions and yet the other keep off the radar? Doth we sense the scent of cognitive dissonance?

Liberals are not exempt from cognitive dissonance, or being false to ones convictions but not owning up in awareness to that reality. This is a departure example, but I knew of someone who was always excited over a relative of theirs getting off of drug addiction. That is something to be excited about, but this was perhaps the fifth time I had heard this same response to that persons getting “clean”.

Well my experience about these things tells me this; I quit smoking over thirty years ago, and drinking alcohol over twenty, when I met one criterion in myself. That threshold was an absolute surety of a new power of control in me, one that can overpower addiction. It is what I call spiritual transformation, in that your spirit arrives at a higher place (life’s Love) that can overcome the chronic addictive failure one has known. Some higher step, places you in an overview that will not bargain with physical pleas from the addiction to give in and enjoy yourself; you deserve it after all. You poor suffering one you. No. You become joyful in ending something “externals” control over you. Freedom rings!

So whenever I hear of those leaving addictions, I probe if some new understanding has occurred in their lives, do you notice other new and healthy qualities emerging? If not, I become doubtful, hopeful but cautious. I have found all to likely the addicted one is telling you what you would like to hear from them. This is especially important to note on the addictions that are so immediately a threat to self and others.

Some of us are more concerned of cultural oil addiction than others. Some of us are rewarded in stock dividends by our oil addiction. The environment may be passing a deadly threshold, where our very reason to acknowledge such a pivot point may be compromised by the addictions apparent benefits to identity and immediate security. The security we often spend most attention on.

Instead of arguing opinions, standing our ground as if it guaranteed holiness, or being indifferent about conflicting interest, not knowing our own interest is dependent on those very conflicts, maybe we should learn to listen differently.

Maybe we should understand that no ones interest is separate from any others. See that their hearts are just as real as our own. Maybe we should find the deeper dimensions to honesty, looking into myself and wonder; why do I believe that so emphatically, or why have I payed no attention to the others viewpoint?

We have a mind to gain and only misunderstanding to lose.

It is one addiction where we do if we so declare, get to chose.

To live more near to honestly than deception.