conversations

when sum1 makes a judgment, i always have the CHOICE to see the truth in what they say or find fault with it. it's not an honest clash of our 'intrinsic beliefs,' it's not a verification of his truth or denial of his falsehood, it's just a choice that I make at that moment. always.

it's different/difficult to think this way, I believe many of us are entrenched in the idea that we have clearheaded, explicit stances (think politics etc) and when someone makes a judgment they are either saying something true or false and we will bring that to light with our reaction/response. but it's not like that. it's always just a choice that you make. a 'yes' or a 'no' almost at your whim, depending on what path you feel like going down at that moment. every. single. time.

so i think a fun exercise to do given this inherent illusion we have in discourse is the following: try to catch yourself. whenever you are about to disagree with what someone says (maybe out of habit of hearing this kind of thing or otherwise), immediately stop and say "yeah," and find SOME inkling of truth in their judgment to bring to light. or on the other side, when you are about to agree with someone because this string of words is one that you have subscribed to (or for whatever other reason), just stop and find something wrong, something to pick at, something to argue against in what was said. you'll find that you can make this swap almost every time (and eventually, with ease), and may be awakened to the malleability of dialectic. agreement is susceptible to whim. choice is beneath reason. it's actually a very grounded, practical way to make that classic 19th century realization that there is no truth.

void 2012.