This is http://www.essayz.com/b0007031.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.} ========================================================== %INCOHERENT MESSAGES COMMUNICATIONS+000703 %INCOMPLETE CONFLICT RESOLUTION HELP+000703 %COOPERATION TOGETHER CONNECTIONS+000703 %UNION UNITY HONESTY INTIMACY SIN+000703 %CONFLICT RESOLUTION WAR VIOLENCE EVIL+000703 %CONTENTIOUS DISAGREE FIGHT BATTLE FEAR 000703 Incoherent messages and communications characterize people and communities which cling to conflicts between incompatible attitudes, assumptions, beliefs, values, ideals, principles and affirmations. They do not cohere, hang together, fit together or work together. They do not cooperate in coherent ways. They fragment, splinter, break apart and go their separate ways. They disintegrate. Such people and communities often resort to coercion, violence and collusive games of mutual self deception --- in efforts to achieve appearances of unity, coherence, cooperation, personal integrity and communal integrity. The do not thereby resolve their core dilemmas. Coercion, violence and collusions engender resentments, anger and dishonesty --- which cycle and recycle endlessly in vicious feedback loops of negative consequences --- until conflicts are truly resolved in cooperative ways. Clinging to unresolved conflicts is utterly futile and disintegrative. Why then is clinging so common? Often people do not want to understand, because they fear the truths which are essential to understanding; and fear the freedom which accepting such truths might bring --- with all the associated responsibilities. Familiar conflicts seem to be less threatening. People cling to familiar old conflicts out of fear of new relationships, possibilities, alternative and challenges --- which are new and not familiar, and so are regarded as "fearful". It is difficult for many people to form a consensus about why some people cling to conflicts, because: 1. Those dis-eased people who cling to conflicts --- are fearful of the truths which would be part of any honest consensus. 2. Those healthy people who do not fear the truths which might be integrated into a coherent consensus --- find it hard to conceive of the existing incompatible attitudes, assumptions, beliefs, values, ideals, principles and affirmations which actually dominate the personal and communal lives of those who fearfully cling to their favorite old conflicts. 3. Other people are likely to be unaware of, indifferent to, or distracted away from the issues related to clinging to old familiar conflicts. It is difficult for people who enthusiastically support only their own key ideals, values and principles --- to find ways to resolve tensions/conflicts associated with the complementary words listed in the two columns in the essay previous to this essay. Many enthusiastic people go to extremes and feel moved to affirm what they view as important --- through denials and/or denigrations of other things which are important in complementary ways. Such denials and denigrations engender alienation, block dialogue; and undermine mutual understanding, respect, education and cooperation. It seems natural to them to cling to their familiar old conflicts --- even when there are no sweet fruits for those which cling as vines on the tree of the knowledge of who is good and who is evil. Their self-righteousness blinds them to the futility of the conflicts to which they cling. They know not what they do in their self- imposed ignorance and confusion which flow from their chosen self-righteousness. Now that we and our ancestors have been involved for many years, decades, generations or centuries in protracted conflicts, coercion and/or violence --- we will do well to back away from our traditional attitudes, assumptions, beliefs, values, ideals, principles and affirmations --- to see why we have not been able to grow and work cooperatively with others who are "different"; e.g., our traditional "enemies". Why have our messages been incongruent? How have some of our messages contradicted other of our messages? Have we been saying contradictory things through different channels of communication; e.g., verbal, textual, spoken, eye- contact, facial-expressions, body-language, symbolic- actions, rituals, formal-procedure, choices of languages, contracts, promises, affection, distancing, touching, intimacy, sexuality, friendships, invitations, shunning, excommunications, inclusions, exclusions, forgettings, gifts, thefts, etc. (c) 2005 by Paul A. Smith in (On Being Yourself, Whole and Healthy) ==========================================================