Essays

Argue

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

Something the Work teaches that is often overlooked as less important than other, more interesting ideas, is the Confusion of Tongues. One of the illustrations given is that of the Tower of Babel, from the Old Testament story in the book of Genesis. The story tells of a time when the whole earth spoke one language. Then something happened and the Confusion of Tongues became the norm on our planet. The story has an esoteric meaning of interest to us because we imagine that we communicate with other man/ machines. Because imagination satisfies every center, we’re quite happy thinking that when we talk to someone they understand our meaning, as long as they smile and nod and say something somewhat appropriate in response. We also believe that we understand what someone else is saying to us, that their meaning is clear to us, or that we can make it clear without much effort. This whole idea ties in nicely with our imaginary power of understanding. If there is so much understanding and communication in our world why is there so much discord and violence? We have our reasons for this too and they all have to do with how others think and behave, not how we think and behave. Nothing changes and we continually repeat the same horrible things that mankind has been doing for thousands of years. Occasionally we lose all touch with a former era and we start with what we might consider a clean slate. It’s not a clean slate. It’s more of a reset of humankind where our Random Access Memory is wiped clean but the programming of humanity remains the same and we begin the process of repetition again.

In life, it is so difficult to not argue. It is so ingrained in our acquired parts and so well supported that it seems nearly impossible. It can take a long time to learn to not argue. Arguing, rests on the very wrong idea that we can help, assist or otherwise make people develop. This wrong idea leads us to believe they need us to help their development and we can somehow either develop them or assist them in their self-development. I’m confident that if you are thinking about this at all right now there are objections arising in your mind to what I’ve just said. Most people might wonder, why bother? This is because we have several ways of looking at arguments. We’ve found ways to justify arguments so that we can defend them and keep them. Looking through the dictionary I found two definitions for the word argue that are useful for us. The first is, to give reasons or cite evidence in support of an idea, action, theory, typically with the aim of persuading others to share one’s view. On the surface this may seem quite reasonable and harmless. It’s not. Another definition of the word argue that might seem more familiar is to, exchange or express diverging or opposite views, typically in a heated or angry way. Though there may seem a big difference between the two definitions there really isn’t. The seed of the violence expressed in the second definition is already there in the first, but not as obvious. When we see the angry way we are willing to admit that an argument that ends up like that is not what we want. We prefer to stop it before that. How? Well, by arguing properly of course. By persuading them to see the sense of our views before they get negative. Love spells for love

Arguments don’t work with people because an argument assumes the other person is wrong or misinformed. We take it upon ourselves to help them correct their wrong ideas, or adjust them, straighten them out so they can see things properly. The truth is it is a veiled attack on them and they perceive it at the deepest often unconscious level. Unless they can become aware through self-observation they are compelled to react by defending themselves, which is in effect, merely attacking back. When it’s put so bluntly we assure ourselves that’s not what we’re doing even though we can easily acknowledge that others have done so to us in the past. Our motives are always more selfless. We’re doing it for their good because we know better. We call it educating them to save them from themselves and their ignorance or wrong ideas. This is a continuation of lies and illusions that cover our true intent, which is to be right, gain allies and support our own collapsing ego kingdom, the shifting illusion of Imaginary I that’s based on our acquired False Personality. Begin to see arguments for what they really are, attacks on the perceived integrity of another. Because we are self-developing organisms this attacks our true nature and our true integrity which effectively hinders our development. The result is we end up harming those we say we wished to help and walk further into the deepening illusion of our own superiority. None of these things are congruent with the Work aim of raising our level of Being and need to be laid aside as quickly as is possible.

You can make a Difference - Please use the Sharing Options above

Speak from your heart.

About Esoteric Talks

"No good deed goes unpunished."

The person most frequently credited as the originator of the phrase is playwright Clare Boothe Luce. Also credited have been playwright Noel Coward, writer Oscar Wilde, journalist Walter Winchell and the late Washington Post writer Bill Gold. The original idea is probably an ancient proverb.

Appearing cynical on the surface, a closer examination of human nature reveals the False Personality to be incredibly vengeful and petty due to its hubris.

Plato has Socrates say, "An unexamined life is not worth living." The reason no good deed goes unpunished is because most people are living lives not worth living. If you feel a sting that probably means you.