Jesus tells us to “Bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you.”.
If we actually tried to live this out, what would blogging and social media look like?
I’ll admit that blessing certain folk isn’t my first reaction, but what if it was?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
15 comments:
When I saw him from afar,
I thought he was a monster.
When he got closer,
I thought he was just an animal.
When he got closer,
I recognized that he was a human.
When we were face to face,
I realized that he was my brother.
I’ve said for years that most of the harshness that pervades disagreement online would be eliminated if the conversation was face to face.
Unfortunately I see way too many people who seem to revel in the “from afar” aspect of online discourse. It allows them to view others as the “monster” in a way that face to face won’t allow.
The last three comments I deleted, are an excellent example of why I believe my previous comment has some truth to it. It’s much too easy to spout vitriol when you are a laptop liberal, hiding behind anonymity, the Internet, and a false name, than when you are face to face.
Well I should have allowed the last two comments to stand as a demonstration, I deleted them too quickly.
And I do feel fairly confident in saying that if I can spend extended periods of time in places like North Minneapolis, St. Louis du Nord and it Port-au-Prince, I am reasonably sure I can survive Brooklyn.
Of course it’s interesting that you would malign the entire borough of Brooklyn in an attempt to take a cheap shot at me.
Quite frankly, there's not much difference in how I engage with people face to face than as I do online. But then, I can't speak to how those with whom I engage in person act online. I find it easier to stay on point in face to face discourse, but like online, I won't take crap indefinitely. There is , however, less crap given in person.
I think that when you engage with someone online, there is a tendency to depersonalize them. To treat them in a way that you wouldn’t treat them face-to-face. Yeah you personally may not do that, I know that I try not to do that, but I also know that I’m not always as successful as I would like to be. I think my real point is when you sit down with someone face to face you are dealing with them as an actual individual human being, not as a collection of prejudices and stereotypes.
I’m going to suggest that there is evidence that my thesis has validity being provided in real time v
When I say my piece online, I do have the opportunity to be more selective in the words I use and the manner in which I use them. I can be more specific as regards my intention and meaning. I do this, though, with the idea that another person is on the other end, and to the best of my ability, my hope is that I am understood. How I express myself is only half the battle, with the other half on the person with whom I am engaged. When I am accused of "sounding" like the type of person I am not, I go back over my words and try to figure out how they could have been so badly misconstrued so as to suggest to that other person what is now relayed back to me. I can only assume, when finding no reasonable explanation in the words I chose to use, that the other person is choosing to hear what they need to hear in order to force my words to "sound like" what they claim. It is clear that they choose to regard me in a negative way rather than to assume the best of me. I don't know why that is. I don't know why that must be.
In a face to face, it's a different dynamic. I can't say something and not have it be heard, as I can when I type, delete and re-type with a different choice of words that hopefully better conveys my meaning. It's pretty much let 'er fly and explain myself afterwards. Word choice is more important and it is actually easier to be misunderstood if that choice is poor or thoughtlessly spoken. Then, I could accept that I might "sound that way" (whatever that way is claimed to be), and I could better dissuade the person of that understanding.
I’ve seen too much evidence of the importance on the non verbal in communication to think that this is a superior means of communication to face to face.
I agree that if you are careful and precise in your wording and choices, that you can accurately communicate your thoughts, but I’m not sure that it’s a substitute for a real conversation.
As we’re seeing, it’s much easier to demonize, and dehumanize those who disagree with you in this format than in real life. No normal person spews the kind of vitriol we see face to face.
Once again, I need to remember that these comments make my point before I delete them.
Usually to “diagnose” someone requires some sort of process of establishing some sort of relationship as well as some sort of qualifications. In the absence of those things, I have to applaud your hubris.
I don't dismiss your concerns at all. I would say, however, that the benefit of fact to face over internet discussion is the more human connection. But while it forces civility in one sense...being true that one is less likely to be insulting...it also allows for incivility of another type...intimidation...which in anonymous communication is less powerful. There is a trade-off in any case. Advantages and disadvantages one way or the other. I can engage in discourse with anyone anywhere in the world online, for example, while at the same time be extremely limited in my ability to connect on friendship level.
I will say, however, that I do personally prefer sitting around over coffee or drinks and discussing weighty subjects face to face, even though I am less articulate than I am in print and do not have the greatest powers of recall to clearly support my positions with facts (I can't use hyperlinks).
One of the things I’m learning is how much more effective face to face is than any other option.
I think that if you’re writing a manifesto or something, then the sort of precision and ability to link to sources is the better route, but if a conversation is the goal, this is not the optimal medium.
We see it demonstrated daily. Both from a vitriol level, but also from a leave the conversation hanging level.
This post is asking a question, a question about how seriously we take Jesus’ command, I think you’ve answered that question adequately.
Thank you for demonstrating how seriously you take the command of Jesus.
Although I appreciate, as usual, your willingness to simply make up things about me in order to further your prejudices.
1. While I appreciate it, your obsession with my ass just makes you sound desperate.
2. No, you’re just one of the folk doing the cursing and mistreating.
3. My pointing out the reality that I’m not suggesting that I’m the target of anything but the vitriol of a couple of online trolls won’t make a difference, so I won’t bother.
4. If you don’t feel like your cursing and mistreatment of your enemies is quite up to snuff, you can look for pointers on some high level cursing and mistreating at Dan’s.
Post a Comment