How do you see them?

[DirndlDude]

When communicating with an other, which statement most resembles your perspective of the other's approach?

[Meerie]

Depending on whom I talk to - it can be all of them, really.

Plus the guru approach:
"I don't understand it, please enlighten me".

[DirndlDude]

I chose to allow multiple answers for that reason. I also thought the poll should question my own approach, and I decided on asking about other because reflections would cover both.

[reeay]

It seems like part of the time is spent understanding the self & other's perspective and another part into understanding how the self & other got to that understanding. There is no right or wrong in perspectives. There's a lot of personal distortions imbedded within our perspective of things. So rather than weighing perspectives as definitive facts I like to investigate the 'what' and the 'hows' of someone's (and my own) perspective. I chose the second answer as the most best fit answer bc I think that just having conversations with others changes our perspective and it's possible to get a new understanding just by being exposed to another's perspective. It's like a continuously unfolding process.

[christine10]

Saddly Id have to say .....NONE OF THE ABOVE

and add......

WTF ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?? to the choices!!

Dunno if anybodys from phx or has spent any amount of time here but to me theyr a whole other breed, nobody seems to care about anyone or thing,they seem very intent in deceiving/manipulating and or using anyone who will allow it and dont try to hard to hide the fact so the typical conversation is just bizzare to me, they lack BASIC HUMAN COMMON SENSE and I lived in Las vegas for 26yrs where youd expect people to behave that way and they didnt!!

so THATS why my answer is.............

WTF ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT!!

hehehehe..... felt it needed some splaining Lucy

P.S. And Im really not as jaded or synical as that my sound.....seriously Im not....ask anyone....just noone from phx theyr all crazy....hahahaha

[Meerie]

so THATS why my answer is.............

WTF ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT!!

hehehehe..... felt it needed some splaining Lucy

P.S. And Im really not as jaded or synical as that my sound.....seriously Im not....ask anyone....just noone from phx theyr all crazy....hahahaha

[zenmaster]

None of the above because to me the purpose of communication is to share information. If the related info does not match my experience, given the context, further questions are asked to learn. There has never been a case where honest answers didn't eventually provide sufficient understanding.

Of course there are misunderstandings of varying degrees which may create an impression of incongruence, but that is expected due to different experience and acceptance. That gap or lack of harmony in worldviews indicates learning opportunity.

[reeay]

I don't know Lucy but I see Ernst :p

[christine10]

I don't know Lucy but I see Ernst :p

You guys are too freekin frakin funny....hahahaha

Its from I Love Lucy

ya know how Rickys always saying to Lucy

Lucy you got sum splaining to do......hehehehe

[BrownEye]

When communicating with an other, which statement most resembles your perspective of the other's approach?

Most often taking their perspective puts me in the view point of my past self, or younger self.

Sometimes it is the opposite, and I fully pay attention.

Sometimes they are right where I am now, and I find it best to "team up".

[Tenet Nosce]

None of the above. Teach/learning is reciprocal. Everybody has a piece of the puzzle, and where understanding is incongruent, it is a sign that both parties have something to teach/learn from each other.

[Unbound]

I don't make comparisons of knowing, all communication is sharing.

[BrownEye]

So none of you actually change perspectives as experimentation? Nobody has seen through the eyes of another?

---

Heck just changing the perspective to every set of eyes being me looking in a mirror with a mask on made me way to high to function.

[Unbound]

There is a difference between engaging in dispositionalism and viewing through the eyes of another, and actively judging another in the moment of conversation.

[Tenet Nosce]

So none of you actually change perspectives as experimentation? Nobody has seen through the eyes of another?

I would say that there is no teach/learning unless an effort is made to see another perspective.

Heck just changing the perspective to every set of eyes being me looking in a mirror with a mask on made me way to high to function.

That sounds like a powerful application of the Law of One to me! What have you teach/learned by doing this when engaged in an argument with another person?

Or how about this: Who is looking out through our own mask?

[reeay]

Re: looking at other as mirror... I think it's more helpful to understand my own inner processes than actually understanding perspective of other self.

[Unbound]

That's very along the lines of Guru Yoga.

[Tenet Nosce]

Re: looking at other as mirror... I think it's more helpful to understand my own inner processes than actually understanding perspective of other self.

I wonder what would happen if we gaze upon the other as a mirror of self while simultaneously observing our own inner processes?

[reeay]

Re: looking at other as mirror... I think it's more helpful to understand my own inner processes than actually understanding perspective of other self.

I wonder what would happen if we gaze upon the other as a mirror of self while simultaneously observing our own inner processes?

I've found that to understand/shift the internal processes does make room to better hear other self's perspective. But we still have to be sure to check-in with other self.

[Unbound]

I see all process of communication as fields harmonizing and sharing information together, on all the levels that that happens.

Whenever I meet new people, or interact with people, my first thought is always "How are we facets of the one being? What do we reflect in eachother and what do we exemplify in eachother that the catalyst is bringing attention to?"

I think a lot of the time our interactions have little to do with any attempt to understand and more to do with discovery of the collective self and the way it all moves.

As Ra says, understanding is not of this density.

[DirndlDude]

I seek the quality of choice C for myself and for my other, and meditation brought me to clarify what was different about this choice. I view the other choices as off the beaten path or the narrow path that I would like to follow. Therefore, I ask. My feelings about the answers lean toward the choice A.

[DirndlDude]

When communicating with an other, which statement most resembles your perspective of the other's approach?

Most often taking their perspective puts me in the view point of my past self, or younger self.

Sometimes it is the opposite, and I fully pay attention.

Sometimes they are right where I am now, and I find it best to "team up".

42.3 Questioner: I will attempt to make an analogy. If an animal, shall I say, a bull, in a pen attacks you because you have wandered into his pen, you get out of his way rapidly but you do not blame him. You do not have much of an emotional response other than the response that he might damage you. However, if you encounter another self in his territory and he attacks you, your response may be more of an emotional nature creating physical bodily responses. Am I correct in assuming that when your response to the animal and to the other-self is that of seeing both as Creator and loving both and understanding their action in attacking you is the action of their free will then you have balanced yourself correctly in this area? Is this correct?
Ra: I am Ra. This is basically correct. However, the balanced entity will see in the seeming attack of an other-self the causes of this action which are, in most cases, of a more complex nature than the cause of the attack of the second-density bull as was your example. Thus this balanced entity would be open to many more opportunities for service to a third-density other-self.

42.4 Questioner: Would a perfectly balanced entity feel any emotional response in being attacked by the other-self?
Ra: I am Ra. This is correct. The response is love.

[BrownEye]

the balanced entity will see in the seeming attack of an other-self the causes of this action which are, in most cases, of a more complex nature than the cause of the attack of the second-density bull as was your example.

I applaud your ability to see the "hidden" cause of the issue behind the actions of an other self.