Padriag
Posts: 2633
Joined: 3/30/2005
Status: offline
|
There's an answer to it, but I'm not sure I have the words for it.
People like to make of things more than they are sometimes. Sometimes its to fill a void in their life, sometimes its to justify a belief they cannot give up, sometimes its so they can sleep at night, so they can tell themselves what they are doing is okay. Perhaps its a way to reconcile to differing beliefs they have. Sometimes its just a process of trying to understand a thing. Such is hard to say.
Part of what happened here was a debate about the use of a single word. Some sought clarification in published definitions, in the roots of the word itself, both in language and culture. Some turned to personal definitions, which may have had meaning only to them alone.
All sought to express something that was of value to them.
I've had the good fortune to travel to many places and I have learned a little of many languages. Language is a peculiar thing. It gives us so much more power than often we realize. That simple power to name a thing. To name a thing is to own it, to possess it in a metaphorical way. Sometimes when we argue over such names, we are in part arguing over who has possession of it. I think there was some of that here, though I don't think it was intentional nor done with any malice.
Languages change too, meanings sometimes change. When I was a boy I learned a little Hindi. I am told there are more than 27 dialects of Hindi, and I only learned a little of one. When it is so easy for two groups of people to argue over the meaning of a single word, then it is not so hard to imagine how one language, ancient and old, could be split into so many different dialects. And this also tells us that what happened here has happened before, and will most likely happen again.
Language is about conveying concepts, conveying ideas and values, that's what it was invented for. This the linguists tell us and I know enough about languages to know that it is true. And I also know it is human nature to want to possess things, most especially our beliefs, for they are our dearest possessions.
I spoke before about the origins of humility as a value in western culture, its roots in religion. Religious values and beliefs are among the most powerful and enduring of any beliefs held by man. To this day, no other beliefs or values have monuments made to them as is done for religious beliefs. If humility has its roots in religion, as a religious belief, is it any small wonder then that there are those who would so staunchly defend their concept of it, whatever that may be? Is it any wonder there are others who will just as strongly disagree?
The original post made a statement, a claim that some disagreed with. The orginal post made a strong claim, such things always provoke strong reaction. As in physics so it often is with people, for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. A strong attack provokes a strong defense, a strong claim provokes the strong argument where beliefs collide. These outcomes are predictable, and yet often we are still surprised by them.
Gardenbluebird stated something that was in part her experience, and in part a statement of belief. Setting aside her beliefs I'll answer the simpler question of experience and perhaps with that we can begin this discussion again. I believe there is still something worthwhile to be discussed here.
Have I found it to be true that the best dominants were individuals of quiet fortitude and simple humility?
My answer is no, that has not been my experience. My experience has been that the best dominants were individuals who were well balanced, sometimes loud, and sometimes quiet, sometimes bold and sometimes cautious, sometimes harsh and sometimes gentle, but always confident even in the face of their own fears, always moving towards self-reliance even when accepting the help of another (they would rather you taught them to fish than give them a fish), always in control of themselves even if everything around them is chaos. They lived their lives with joy and without resentment, they were not bitter and they could forgive easily when it was earned. They reveled in the challenges of their life, they were proud of their accomplishments and could laugh at their defeats. They were never ashamed of themselves, not even when they had been foolish. They were full of life, they loved to live. They were, in my own personal view, noble. Noble in victory, noble in defeat, noble in their wrath and noble in their generosity. These are the best men and women I have known. This was and remains my experience. This is what my life has taught me.
_____________________________
Padriag
A stern discipline pervades all nature, which is a little cruel so that it may be very kind - Edmund Spencer
|
RE: Humble Dominants - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread