On 09/13/2016 09:28 PM, Steven A Smith wrote:
they *RARELY* can stand one another... harsh meets harsh and one or both kneejerk response triggers the other kneejerk and well, you know the rest!
Hm. Your statement got me to thinking yesterday. I tend to claim that I like and seek out disagreement. But I admit that it must be the proper type of disagreement. When people disagree in a limiting way, when they _reduce_ the amount of opportunity I see, that turns into harsh meets harsh. But when people disagree in a way that opens up new possibilities, then I get a dopamine flush. The trouble, of course, is that I don't always see whatever new opportunities might have been opened when someone disagrees with me. Part of a good soft-style is to relax into a disagreement, allow it to wash over you, then you can sedately clarify it and see how it might change the landscape. Too often, I find myself at wit's end, trying to _pry_ someone out of what I [mis]interpret as a limiting scope. My angst and arrogance prevent me from using the soft styles. -- ☣ glen ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
