This is http://www.essayz.com/a9308131.htm         
Previous-Essay      <== This-Essay ==>     Following-Essay
Click HERE on this line to find essays via Your-Key-Words.
{Most frequent wordstarts of each essay will be put here.}
==========================================================
%PARADIGM GUIDE ASSUMPTION ATTITUDE LEAD REASON GOD+930813
%RATIONAL MERIT RESPECT EXPERIENCE DIVORCE SEX LOVE+930813
%DICHOTOMY TEST CAUSE EFFECT META-THEORY DECIDE ACT 930813

     Paradigms  are  what motivate,  lead,  and guide  our
formulations of    assumptions,     attitudes,    reasons,
rationalizations,   theories,  and testing of our  beliefs
against  our experiences,  and the experiences of  others.
Paradigms  are meta-theories which motivate,   lead,   and
guide our testing of lower level theories.

     For  any  theory  to have  integrity  and  merit  our
respect,   it must be possible to test the theory  against
our  experiences  and the experiences of  others---and  to
prove the theory to be false,  misleading, disintegrative,
alienative,   incoherent  or otherwise  not  meriting  our
respect or support.   A  theory which sets up rules  under
which  its  flaws  cannot be exposed does  not  merit  our
respect or support.

     If  any paradigm or meta-theory is of such  a  nature
that  it  excludes the possibility of disproving the meta-
theory  in terms of human experiences---that  theory  does
not merit respect.   It  is arrogant in  claiming to  have
ultimate authority and to merit ultimate  respect  without
respect for the consequences to the people who respect the
theory and allow it to:   motivate,  lead, and guide their
formulations   of   assumptions,    attitudes,    reasons,
rationalizations,   lower level theories,  and testing  of
the  meta-theory.    Such a paradigm or meta-theory should
be  regarded  as  an idol, and those  who  worship  such a
paradigm  or  meta-theory should properly be  regarded  as
lost  in  idolatry.   They are probably playing  collusive
games  of mutual self deception in the manner  of  addicts
and their supportive codependents.

     The divorce of a paradigm or meta-theory from testing
in   terms   of  open  and  honest  dialogue   about   the
experiential  consequences for people who show high levels
of respect for the paradigm  or  meta-theory---is  an evil
divorce which leads to much  alienation and suffering from
which  worshipers of  the paradigm or  meta-theory  cannot
learn anything of  value;  because the idolaters cannot be
honest about the consequences of their idolatry.   Such  a
divorce between theory and experience  create  dichotomies
and blockages  to:   human  talk,   listening,   dialogue,
communication,  conversation, conversions,  learning,  and
correction of errors in the light of tragic mistakes made.

     People  who set up some  commandments,   injunctions,
prohibitions,  scriptures, laws, rules, regulations, moral
codes  and  their  like as meriting ultimate  respect  and
worship---in the absence of  open and honest consideration
of the experiential consequences  of such ultimate respect
and worship---are idolaters worshiping false gods who lead
them into all kinds of dishonesty, collusions,  addictions
and  codependent support of  their idols.     Every  meta-
theory and paradigm needs to be tested in the light of the
experiences  of  people who  show  the  highest  level  of
respect  for  it;  and in the light of the experiences  of
other  people who are victims of the  people who show  the
highest level of respect for the meta-theory or paradigm.

     These   considerations  are  relevant  to  the   wise
examination  of  the  experiential  consequences  of   the
paradigms and meta-theories of many  religious leaders and
fundamentalists of all kinds of foci all around the planet
earth.    By their fruits shall we know the nature of  our
leaders.

     To evaluate our leaders we need to ask questions such
as the following:

     Do they promote integration, or disintegration?

     Do they promote healing or sickness?

     Do    they   work   to   generate   alienation,    or
reconciliation?

     Do they work for creative conflict resolution,  or to
perpetuate unresolved conflicts?

     Do they  seek to share authority  and  power,  or  to
retain for themselves authority and power?

     Do they  seek to be in control, or to participate  in
open and honest dialogue with people who are fundamentally
different from them?

     Do they behave in ways which are consistent with what
they say, or is there a lack of integrity as regards their
talk and behavior;  between what they say they are working
to do, and what they actually cause to occur?

     Is  their  sincerity  the  kind  of  sincerity  which
characterizes participants in deceptive collusive games of
mutual self deception---in the manner of addicts and their
supportive codependents?

     Do   our  leaders  promote  personal   and   communal
integrity  in  balanced  ways intimately  related  to  our
experiences,   or  do they lead  us  toward  personal  and
communal  disintegration  in unbalanced ways  due to their
exclusive obsessions with exclusive idols?

                                                                                                                               
                         (c) 2005 by Paul A. Smith in      
                    (On Being Yourself, Whole and Healthy)  
                                                                                                                               
==========================================================