![\"\"](\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/81\/2018\/04\/Hierarchy-of-Disagreement.jpg\")
<\/a><\/p>\n\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
The other day I saw an image called the \u201cHierarchy of Disagreement.\u201d It was developed by Paul Graham, described on the web as \u201ca programmer, essayist, and venture capitalist.\u201d I know nothing else of him beside the image and the essay \u201cHow to Disagree<\/a>\u201d that the image is based on.<\/p>\n I find it pretty good, actually very good. Would that people paid a little more attention to it and other pointers about how to seek the truth of a matter a bit more than merely trying to \u201cwin\u201d an argument.<\/p>\n However, for this reflection what caught my attention was the third from the bottom point, that is the antepenultimate (I think that\u2019s the right word) worst way to argue about something. That is to argue against \u201ctone.\u201d As a way to distract people from the actual argument, I understand, and agree that\u2019s a problem. It can be a way of throwing dust in people\u2019s eyes. Merely distracting people, again, rather than seeking the truth of the matter.<\/p>\n However, that\u2019s not the end of the matter for \u201ctone.\u201d For one thing if your tone is snotty, well, people aren\u2019t actually likely to hear your argument. This is a point some of my friends do not seem to get. \u00a0I figure it falls into the \u201csometimes being right is not enough\u201d category. Respect matters. And, no, its not that it shouldn\u2019t be. Respect matters. So tone is a two-way street in that sense. It\u2019s lousy as a part of an argument. But, it can derail an argument before it gets going, as well. A word to the wise.<\/p>\n And, there\u2019s something else to note that is carried within that holding up the importance of tone. And this is the thing that I\u2019m more concerned about in the moment.<\/p>\n Over time I have discovered my online persona is a bit nicer than I am in what I have heard called \u201cmeatworld.\u201d Apparently, this is worth noting, as more people appear to be a little less kind when dealing with others online than they are in the world.<\/p>\n Now I\u2019m not arguing against anger being expressed. There are lots of things to be angry about. Nor, am I disdaining the aggressive pursuit of one\u2019s goal or ideal or whatever. If it is important and true, well, putting some real energy into presenting it makes all the sense in the world.<\/p>\n But, too often the online social encounter, as someone I read online noted, has become 24\/7 road rage. People appear to love to hate. And oh my do we get it out on the interwebs. It can make me despair of our human condition. We get one step removed from face to face and we seem too often to degenerate into snotty adolescents, except worse.<\/p>\n Some raise the question, is this in fact who we really are behind some mask of civility? Is bad behavior on full display a mere one step from immediate public accountability evidence of something deeper, and darker about our human condition? Me, while I can see how some might believe that, I actually don\u2019t think so. But, I also don\u2019t think we\u2019re necessarily kind and loving at core, either. I don\u2019t think we\u2019re all at core \u201cgood,\u201d either.<\/p>\n There\u2019s that story I\u2019ve mostly heard presented as \u201cAmerican Indian\u201d wisdom, sometime attributed to a Cherokee elder, giving it a feel of gravitas. Actually it appears to trace to the late Fundamentalist Christian evangelist Billy Graham. It goes that we have two wolves living within our hearts. One is evil. The other is good. The punchline the one that will win is the one we feed. Perhaps you know it?<\/p>\n Now, I think we\u2019re vastly more complicated than the dualistic division at the heart implied in that story. There\u2019s more to us. We are a world of possibility. But, the narrowness of the story noted, there is a truth within it.<\/p>\n And here\u2019s the truth. We are what we think, we are what we do.<\/p>\n Nearing death Aldous Huxley said, \u201cIt\u2019s rather embarrassing to have given one\u2019s entire life to pondering the human predicament and to find that in the end one has little more to say than, \u2018Try to be a little kinder.\u2019\u201d I think kindness is a key to many thing.<\/p>\n The Dalai Lama once famously declared, \u201cMy religion is very simple. My religion is kindness.\u201d I\u2019ve thought a lot about that declaration of kindness as a religion. There are a host of false approximations. Sentimentality for one. Pity for another. And in Buddhist<\/a> circles when speaking of \u201cnear-enemies\u201d of our higher aspirations note an expectation of some pay-off is still one more. I find this last one really interesting. The truth of the matter is that the kindness I believe the Dalai Lama is pointing to, the kindness I am thinking of represents a possibility always present within our human hearts.<\/p>\n So, what is this kindness? Merriam-Webster defines kindness as the quality or state of being To use a Buddhist term, I believe kindness is bodhisattva action<\/a>. It is the manifestation of the generous heart in the world. The reason why it isn\u2019t about something transactional, that looking for some pay-off falls short is that it is rooted in the profound realization that we are all of us intimates, all of us connected. Sympathy is seeing into that connection. Wishing to be helpful follows. Generosity is sharing with the family where no one is excluded from the family.<\/p>\n Now, kindness, while as natural as natural can be, is also just one among a number of contending possibilities in our lives. We do not have two wolves in our hearts, we have a whole pack of wolves living within us. So, if the wolf we feed wins, if we are what we do, what follows?<\/p>\n There are a host of quotes about how to do this. Stephen Covey in his one time best selling 7 Habits of Highly Effective People<\/em>, which raged through management circles during my active ministerial life, famously said \u201cSow a thought, reap an action; sow an action, reap a habit; sow a habit, reap a character; sow a character, reap a destiny.\u201d In all likelihood he wsas drawing upon Mohandas Gandhi, who told us, \u201cYour beliefs become your thoughts. Your thoughts become your words. Your words become your habits. Your habits become your values. Your values become your destiny.\u201d<\/p>\n The truth is we can find variations on this going back to Ralph Waldo Emerson, to Laozi, to Gautama Siddhartha who is quoted in the Majjhima Nikaya (19)<\/em> telling us \u201cWhatever a monk keeps pursuing with his thinking and pondering, that becomes the inclination of his awareness.\u201d<\/p>\n
\n\u201ckind,\u201d which isn\u2019t especially helpful by itself. So, turning to \u201ckind,\u201d we find sympathy or helpfulness. Another dictionary speaks of kindness as generosity. For me kindness is the state of sympathy for the other, a desire to helpfulness, and most of all it means generosity of heart.<\/p>\n