The title of the thread is something John Holt referred to as a Quaker saying.
He mentions it as part of a story:
John Holt started to learn the Cello as a middle-aged man. At a certain point he met a famous Cellist he admired. They met a few times before the famous man knew he was learning the Cello. At a party the man came over to Holt and said so I hear you play the Cello. John Hold explained how long he had been playing and some of what he was playing, revealing both his limitations but also fairly strong aspirations.
The famous Cellist said something like. Well, we middle-aged people have a number of challenges as learners. To play the Cello requires all sorts of learning and changes on a muscular level (.....). But we have an advantage also. We can find problems and we can find solutions.
Holt was incredibly glad when he heard this and often would think of it in the months and years after. It fit things he was experiencing that were not fully conscious and also things he was conscious of. The short statements met him where he was and were also encouraging.
He spoke to his condition.
Of course relgions have this concept and some caution people about thinking they can just throw 'truths' at someone and the other person will simply get it. Stages, individual problems, individual learning styles and needs, etc.
But.....it seems like most vocal theists do not understand this.
They do not realize that not only are they making a claim about their own knowledge - which may or may not be correct even if the statement is. They are making implicit claims about what you need to hear, when you need to hear it and their abilities to discern this. OR that none of this matters. That simply stating truths should be enough.
So when the receiver gets all these implicit claims, and the 'truths' do not seem to work, they can blame themselves or they can question the understanding - at the very least - of the stater. If this happens enough, it does begin to reflect poorly on the religion itself.
I place this in the religion forum, partly as a tangent from Signal's thread on humility and claims about knowing God. But it can also be used as a criticism against anyone who thinks they know what you need to believe and do - and usually is weak on introspection, interpersonal intuition and skill AND philosophy of language.
He mentions it as part of a story:
John Holt started to learn the Cello as a middle-aged man. At a certain point he met a famous Cellist he admired. They met a few times before the famous man knew he was learning the Cello. At a party the man came over to Holt and said so I hear you play the Cello. John Hold explained how long he had been playing and some of what he was playing, revealing both his limitations but also fairly strong aspirations.
The famous Cellist said something like. Well, we middle-aged people have a number of challenges as learners. To play the Cello requires all sorts of learning and changes on a muscular level (.....). But we have an advantage also. We can find problems and we can find solutions.
Holt was incredibly glad when he heard this and often would think of it in the months and years after. It fit things he was experiencing that were not fully conscious and also things he was conscious of. The short statements met him where he was and were also encouraging.
He spoke to his condition.
Of course relgions have this concept and some caution people about thinking they can just throw 'truths' at someone and the other person will simply get it. Stages, individual problems, individual learning styles and needs, etc.
But.....it seems like most vocal theists do not understand this.
They do not realize that not only are they making a claim about their own knowledge - which may or may not be correct even if the statement is. They are making implicit claims about what you need to hear, when you need to hear it and their abilities to discern this. OR that none of this matters. That simply stating truths should be enough.
So when the receiver gets all these implicit claims, and the 'truths' do not seem to work, they can blame themselves or they can question the understanding - at the very least - of the stater. If this happens enough, it does begin to reflect poorly on the religion itself.
I place this in the religion forum, partly as a tangent from Signal's thread on humility and claims about knowing God. But it can also be used as a criticism against anyone who thinks they know what you need to believe and do - and usually is weak on introspection, interpersonal intuition and skill AND philosophy of language.