I've made a commitment to myself to never tell others what they can and can't say.
I came to nostr to avoid an overton window, not to recreate one.
Discussion
I've been fighting my inner judge & victim.
I've found it easy to keep the victim at bay but my inner judge is a little persistent.
I think I've been doing pretty well at keeping my judgements internal & not letting them spill out. It gets easier with time.
Judgement is a double edged sword - it cuts both ways.
I feel that man. The balance I have found is from nonviolent communication. I have an episode on that in my podcast series if you want to check it out 🤙
It's okay for me to have opinions, but I don't enforce them on others with demands. (At least when I am fully present)
Part of the exercise was first trying to understand the difference between a judgement & an observation. Words are tricky things & what feels like a neutral observation to me can be interpreted as a judgement by someone else. In the end even observations felt like a judgement because it has an inferred comparison. It's been an interesting exercise & has drawn my attention to how frequently we judge others & ourselves.
We live in a dualistic reality, a reality full of contrast. I think it's healthy to have preferences but to also respect the preferences of others. I can also have an opinion on anything, I tend to not explore opinions too deeply unless they're relevant to me though. I think holding your preferred outcome in focus while being neutral to how it's achieved is the best approach to living.
I think I've tried looking for your pod before man, but I don't like using Spotify. I think you had something on mushies that caught my attention. What's the name of the pod?
What if we just want people to understand that their reasoning is flawed?
I think it's perfectly acceptable to challenge people with differing opinions, but if approaching a conversation with a predetermined objective to change someone's mind, the outcome will generally be disappointing.
I don't like the modern usage of "opinions" – it implies a certain impulsivity that doesn't require thought. But most actual opinions aren't random: someone likes something or someone based on an informal analysis of their experiences. Some experiences we interpret correctly, some we misunderstand. Some misunderstandings are accidental, while others were intentional. Finally, some intentional misunderstandings are to help us, and others are to deceive and defraud.
It is these intentional deceptions that are the most corrosive. Opinions that rest on them will be backwards, acting against the best interests of those who hold them. I may agree or disagree with someone's philosophy, but when they can't see that they have built a castle on the sand, what else can be said?