A Wolf Among the Sheep

Your avoiding the question and completely ignored mine.

rugadd wrote: Your avoiding the question and completely ignored mine.

Sorry, I did not mean to ignore your question. The reason it was not a PM is because its a public conversation so I posted it to the board.

Br. John wrote: Chicken in the hen house

What does that mean?

When I first read it I wondered if it was meant for the Rant forum, but I went over it a few times.

Really, it reminds me of some creative writing, like a short excerpt from a book. From that angle, I could see it fitting in any number of stories. I sort of want to know more about the characters. Who are they? Why does one speak to the other like this? What happened to them that it came to this?

If it were on the back of a paperback I would want to read the book.

Just my 2 cents.

Kyrin Wyldstar wrote:

Akkarin wrote:
I have considered and pondered what you said, I'm trying not to jump to conclusions which is why I'm asking you what the point was of you posting it, why did you do it?

Why are you asking this?
Haven't you already decided why I posted this in your first reply here?
By your own writing I posted this as an oversight. To be passive aggressive and to have this be all about me, to be self indulgent.

No. I wondered if it was an oversight, because there was no clear subject to be discussed and you said it was for someone in particular and using the word "you" as extensively as you did would imply you were speaking to someone about what they said about you. If this was true it would follow there for that it comes across as passive aggressive and it seems self-indulgent.

You then invalidate what you have concluded is my position as the wolf and relegate me back to the herd by telling me there is nothing I have done that has not already been done by another.

You're talking about things in terms of wolves and sheep, I'm not, maybe if you're interpreting what I said through that lens then what you say is true but that is not the only lens to understand what I'm saying. I am not saying you're a wolf or a sheep, I said that what you 'fight for' is ubiquitous to human experience.

Kyrin wrote: You say you are not trying to jump to conclusions and yet you have already decided exactly who and what I am and why I posted this haven't you? You buy into the paradigm and then you dismiss half of the dichotomy by invalidating the wolf. Have you not?

Nope. The second question that was asked in my original post isn't there to attack or hurt you in any way, it was a request for clarification. Any conclusions depend on the available information at the time, I'm not jumping to conclusions, or deciding what things are exactly, what I said was intentionally indefinite.

Kyrin can you please provide some clarification because I'm kind of lost here, hopefully I've explained the reasoning behind what I've written fairly thoroughly, can you please do the same?

After re-reading the OP a number of times I think this thread does plenty to shed light on concepts such as preconception and attachment.

The language is very direct and confrontational. The first line "You have decided..."immediately evokes an emotional response from me. 'Who are you to know what I have decided?'

Had the entire post been encapsulated within quotation marks and accompanied by a citation (fictitious or otherwise) would it have been interpreted as a direct projection from the writer on to each reader?
Had it been posted anonymously or by someone other than Kyrin would (some of) the responses have been so adversarial?

Like it or not, cognisant of it or not, our minds are structured to rapidly categorise new information and reference it against past experience. When we see who the author of a post is, we subconsciously interpret the post through the lens of our past experience with the author. In general, if we frequently disagree with the author we read with an aim of rebuttal, if we are generally supportive of the writer we are similarly likely to support the writing.

Despite this, we are also endowed with rational ability and self-awareness. We can draw upon these to challenge our own preconceptions and attachments to our own perspectives. I would say that as Jedi we are expected to. It's why, despite having an opinion on a subject, we can genuinely ask a question and be open to an answer which seemingly contrasts our initial impressions.

I generally associate a potentially vague thread as being sort of like a soliloquy, and so I try to respond about how I think the dynamics of that could fit into the Jedi path as I see it.

Proteus wrote:

Who is "we".

Yes that understandably needs some clarification. "We" is everyone who possesses an ego and regularly becomes lost in it for whatever natural reason that occurs. "We" includes you, myself, and everyone else reading along with us and particularly everyone of us who is here to learn about ourselves, or "re-learn" things about ourselves we regularly keep forgetting.

I find this quite a fascinating position you typically take. Why is it you feel you have the authority to speak for "we" as in all of us? How is it that you have come to the conclusion that your subjective experience is so profound that you have the wisdom to decide what we all experience or need or feel or experience?

Akkarin wrote: If this was true it would follow there for that it comes across as passive aggressive and it seems self-indulgent.

You're talking about things in terms of wolves and sheep, I'm not, maybe if you're interpreting what I said through that lens then what you say is true but that is not the only lens to understand what I'm saying. I am not saying you're a wolf or a sheep, I said that what you 'fight for' is ubiquitous to human experience.

Nope. The second question that was asked in my original post isn't there to attack or hurt you in any way, it was a request for clarification. Any conclusions depend on the available information at the time, I'm not jumping to conclusions, or deciding what things are exactly, what I said was intentionally indefinite.

Kyrin can you please provide some clarification because I'm kind of lost here, hopefully I've explained the reasoning behind what I've written fairly thoroughly, can you please do the same?

Why do my words even appear to be self indulgent or passive aggressive to you? What has caused you to come to even that suspicion? What is it that you think I am fighting for that is ubiquitous to human experience?

You seem to continue to make a lot of assumptions about my intent and I'm curious as to why? You have not hurt me in any of your comments and I do not feel attacked. More fascinated as to why you make the conclusions or even the assumptions or at best the inclinations you do about my objectives?

You ask for clarification and I feel I have given it but let me be concise. I posted this to see what peoples individual reactions and comments would be about this dialogue. I purposely used very precise language to make personal to each reader. You say you do not speak in terms of the wolf or the sheep, you obviously do not find them valid, so what terms do you use and why?

Kyrin Wyldstar wrote: How is it that you have come to the conclusion that your subjective experience is so profound that you have the wisdom to decide what we all experience or need or feel or experience?

Well, Is it really so profound though? :laugh: Is it any more profound than, for example, the fact that we all breathe air (something else that all humans do)?

Does one also need authority to talk about how we all breathe air or does one just have to be human to know because that is also an integral feature of being human (something that you and I both share, just like we share the feature of having an ego)? Am I making an incorrect assumption that you are human and that you experience life with thoughts, emotions, and physical senses?

To be fair, you do kind of give an impression when you post that you have a clear hang up with "authority" (and seem to find it in people around the temple who I believe actually do attempt to approach you on an even level), as you tend to take many opportunities to use the term to come off as saying "you're not the boss of me" when nobody ever said they were and ought to be obvious they are not actually trying to. (This is not me making conclusions, like you are charging Akkarin with doing, this is, again, me saying that from this point of view that is actually the impression you give off) Could you explain why it is you (someone who continues on as an apprentice in a temple with the kind of ranking structure it has) do this as regularly as you do?