For all of May we are looking at some of the precepts of the Tiep Hien Buddhist Order to see what they might have to say to us, especially about process values. [1]

The third  precept of Tiep Hien Buddhism is:          

3. Do not force others, including children, by any means whatsoever, to adopt your views, whether by authority, threat, money, propaganda, or even education. However, through compassionate dialogue, help others to renounce fanaticism and narrowness.

I always have a lot of trouble with compassionate dialogue. I guess I read too many of the Dialogues of Plato in high school. Plato tells stories of the great debate victories of Socrates. I think we will never know if they are accurate retellings or stories Plato made up to let us know how great his teacher was. In the Dialogues Socrates uses logical proofs to make his point. A fundamental principle of logical proofs is the existence of the proposition. A proposition is a statement that has a determinable truth value – a proposition is either true or false. There are many statements that are not propositions, that you cannot find a value of true or false. There are probably more non-propositions than there are propositions, perhaps infinitely more, just as there are perhaps infinitely more irrational numbers than rational numbers.

A second principle is that if you accept as true any false proposition, you can then prove as true any other false proposition. The great mathematician and logician Bertrand Russell was once challenged, “I accept that one equals two. Prove to me that you are the Pope.”

“That,” replied Russell, “is simplicity itself. The Pope and I are two, therefore the Pope and I are one.”

Less well understood, but the basis of many of Socrates’ crushing victories in the debates of Plato’s dialogues, is the idea that if you accept as true – or false – any statement that is not a proposition, you can then prove as true any other statement, be it a proposition or a non-proposition. And that is what hangs me up. When you are arguing with a fanatic, it is very easy to find a statement that is not provable but that they will assert is true, and then you have them. From there you can prove to them the truth of anything you want. Of course, they probably will not yield because they will not accept the logic – it violates the “truth” of their non-proposition. But even if they did, that is not compassionate dialogue. That is an attempt to be victorious and make your opponent look like a fool, a practice totally devoid of compassion.

Compassion comes when you walk in the other person’s shoes. Compassionate dialogue starts with understanding the concerns of the other. Compassion starts with finding out what outcomes scare the bejeezus out of the other, and understanding what natural forces lead to that concern, before you try and help them see the opposing forces that must be kept in balance and the outcomes that scare the bejeezus out of you that will arise from the forces being out of balance.

And that leads to a question that is my favorite way of starting compassionate dialogue – so much so that I call it The Question. The Question is simply, “What are you afraid of?” If you are willing to ask that and then to listen – really listen – to the answer, you can begin to find common ground. You can begin to understand the concerns which give rise to the narrowness and fanaticism, and build communication over issues, considerations, and constraints instead of positions. You can begin compassionate dialog. Which brings us to the fourth precept:

4. Do not avoid suffering or close your eyes before suffering. Do not lose awareness of the existence of suffering in the life of the world. Find ways to be with those who are suffering by all means, including personal contact and visits, images, and sound. By such means, awaken yourself and others to the reality of suffering in the world.

The concerns behind narrowness and fanaticism are real. They come from the experience, the expectation, or the imagining, of suffering. Being aware of that suffering is a key process value.


[1] In his book Being Peace, Buddhist Monk Thich Nhat Hahn shares the Fourteen Precepts of the Tiep Hien Buddhist Order. Tiep Hien is a particularly Vietnamese order of Buddhism that Hanh thinks might find resonance with some Americans.
 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Tomorrow, Earth Day, will see Marches for Science in many parts of the country. I hope to march myself on our Niantic Bay Boardwalk. Science has its own set of process values that are very much like those of collaborative work. The scientific method is all about how we treat evidence and inference as we look at natural and experimental observations and try to understand something about our Universe. The one value that sometimes seems to be missing from science is how we treat one another in the process. In fact, both historical and fictionalized accounts of scientific debate are rank with stories of scientists criticizing, attacking, and demonizing those who don’t agree with them. The source of this is the same as the source of most human conflict: positions. Once you take a position on anything, including scientific theories, you cannot allow for the possibility of the other position. The whole March for Science movement we will celebrate tomorrow is a perfect case in poin...
Read more
Let’s look more closely at the concept of forces in opposition that must be kept in balance. We talked last week about the three Cs: considerations, concerns, and constraints. Of these, concerns may be the most important. Considerations are the foundation of collaborative work, but no one will be ready to share their considerations until the battles over process values have been won and people are ready to be collaborative. Constraints are critical, but they are found by the proper treatment of evidence and inference. That is perhaps the last battle. Concerns are worries about forces that are acting on the situation. Concerns point to forces that have to be kept in balance. For example, some people are concerned that having a social safety net makes people dependent on the government. Others are concerned that without a safety net people will die, or at a minimum become more of a burden on their neighbors than if early intervention had nipped the problem in the bud. These concer...
Read more
Give a person a fish, you feed them for a day. Teach a person to fish, you feed them for a lifetime. In other words: Give a person content, you give them nothing. Give a person process, you give them everything. This month we are looking at process in some areas besides collaborative work. We are looking at other fields where you have a choice to focus on content or focus on process, to see if valuing process works in those fields. This week we are looking at teaching. Our church is recruiting Sunday School teachers for our summer time schedule. “All curricula and materials are provided. All you have to do is show up and teach.” That’s all. That’s a lot. I used to try and teach Sunday school. Sure, they provided me all the content I needed. But they never provided process. Most of our church’s Sunday School teachers are also teachers. The rest have been teaching Sunday School for so long that they are accomplished teachers. It never occurs to any of them that they need to ...
Read more