05-01-2011, 03:42 PM
(05-01-2011, 01:15 PM)zenmaster Wrote:(05-01-2011, 01:03 PM)3DMonkey Wrote: Is it to assume that no other is aware of what I am aware of?Why would you assume that no other is aware of what you're aware of?
By assuming this, one would be less likely to assume an other is "ready" to hear their thoughts. I would not necessarily condone this approach.
There is also a bit of willingness from the questioner to seek deeper insight into a vague answer, but the willingness is entirely subjective by their opinion of the answerer.
(05-01-2011, 01:15 PM)zenmaster Wrote:(05-01-2011, 01:03 PM)3DMonkey Wrote: Or is it simply to be ever in a position of answering direct questions and never insert one's view otherwise?The well considered question always answers itself. Yet the question requires 'will'. Many want answers without having to ask the question. We can't answer (without infringement) what has not been asked because then, as Ra says, you'd be in a position to learn/teach for the student.
I stumble over this truth quite frequently.
Be gentle with me if I missed someone already asking this question.
Are we certain that STO do not lie? or manipulate? or persuade?