...meanwhile...musing...

There seems (in theory, that is) to be a fine line between justifiable confidence (combined with authenticity) and arrogance. That distinction sometimes (!) gets lost in practice.

I'm acutely aware of this situation, because I spent the first half of my oh-so-many years infected with insufferable arrogance, and the latter half working to atone for that.

I feel much better now that I've spent thirty years working on purpose to be as humble as I possibly can.

How'm I doing [sigh..I know...I've been listening to people...].

We all have habits ("characteristics") that may be interpreted in various ways. One way is to characterize people with derogatory labels according to our inferences about their characteristics.

"Fault" is a label that we apply to others when our motive is to blame them. I'll leave the source of this need to a later discussion, but the phenomenon is well known.

Many people never consider the connections between authenticity and arrogance, because authenticity is not in their list of committed values; they don't practice it because other methods are more productive for them, so they don't recognize it. If they're uncomfortable (defensive) about their discursive positions, if they sense a possibility of someone discovering that their positions are in any way unjustified or immoral, then it's very much better for them to accuse their supposed antagonist of misdeeds, or to apply some ad hominem personal attack, than to engage in reasonable discourses.

(Not you of course...but does this make good sense to you?)

Even though I know that my ideas aren't true, that doesn't help me much, because unless both parties are are committed to critical and progressive dialogues (that is, examining justifications for coherency rather than truth), interpersonal conflicts of ideas and presumptions are practically impossible to resolve. So many don't get resolved. Some people don't know how to do things any better way than insisting that they know the absolute truth about things - things about which nobody can ever know the absolute truth!

Beliefs aren't facts. Inferences aren't facts. The closest that people ever come to facts is recorded measures of observed data. Everything else is inference!

One consequence of my situation is that I can't discuss my perspectives and be understood by anybody who knows for certain that their already-beliefs are true!For example, I've been judged and blamed by some stemsteemies who clearly believe that I'm someone with sinister motives who's a terrible influence.

I've lived in grief and frustration for most of my life, and I've broken through in dealing with those feelings time and again. They remain my greatest afflictions, but I work to experience rather than repress all my human emotions (including shame, but I'm not ashamed of my emotions! I'm ashamed when I notice that I screwed up. )

And, of course, I'm afraid of making mistakes. I hold myself to particular standards, and I don't like feeling ashamed! So I strive for excellence, and I request assessments from my more reasonable correspondents in order to improve my practices.

Ok. There's a start...over to you.

M