My personal favourite definition (though a bit of a generalisation i suspect).

Democrats, B/P, consequences world politics

Republicans S/W, isolationist tendencies, especially the ‘Tea Party side of the party (makes me laugh always get a picture of ‘that Woman’ at the Mad Hatters tea party, some would say that truth is stranger than fiction…..)

I like the perceiving/judging, perceiving is very much about reading the situation first, then forming a judgement on the facts that have been obtained, whereas the judging first is classic S/W (the old saying that when you point ‘the finger’ one pointing, three pointing back at you and one to heaven, a case of the log in your own eye).

I think when designing any space ‘the big picture’ is remembering that not all people are like you or me, some are messy, some loud, some considerate etc, really difficult, but then if it was easy we would do a two week course in LA rather than 4 years (inc MA) plus another 2 for Chartership!

The first paragraph, never really thought of that, but yep so true. So with that knowledge you could catch your self and stop the mean thing when temptation arrises. Though personally as i get older the effort required to be mean just does not seem worth it, the old rule of ‘don’t let the sun go down on your anger’ works best, and anyway making up is always nice.

And yes there is even benefit to self interest when giving, though the ‘widows mite’ shows its not how, but the proportion and the way we give. (whether financially or emotionally). Though we all have bad days and are grumpy and mean, just have to recognise that in each other, forgive and laugh it off, a bit of good old English self deprecation does the trick normally.

Brill idea, can see a scheme there!

It is interesting how the Dalai Lama explains compassion and loving kindness:

“Compassion is said to be the empathetic wish that aspires to see the object of compassion, the sentient being, free from suffering. Loving kindness is the aspiration that wishes happiness upon others.”

And how he explains how attachment can lead to negative consequences:

“…we experience a sense of closeness toward people who are dear to us. We feel a sense of compassion and empathy for them. We also have strong love for these people, but often this love or compassion is grounded in self-referential considerations: “So-and-so is my friend,” “my spouse,” “my child,” and so on. What happens with this kind of love or compassion, which may be strong, is that it is tinged with attachment because it involves self-referential considerations. Once there is attachment there is also the potential for anger and hatred to arise. Attachment goes hand in hand with anger and hatred. For example, if one’s compassion toward someone is tinged with attachment, it can easily turn into its emotional opposite due to the slightest incident. Then instead of wishing that person to be happy, you might wish that person to be miserable.”

The Dalai Lama also gives an example of how thinking of self reduces your horizons, while thinking of others expands them:

“…the moment you think only of yourself, the focus of your whole mind narrows, and because of this narrow focus uncomfortable things can appear huge and bring you fear and discomfort and a sense of feeling overwhelmed by misery. The moment you think of others with a sense of caring, however, your mind widens. Within that wider angle, your own problems appear to be of no significance, and this makes a big difference. If you have a sense of caring for others, you will manifest a kind of inner strength in spite of your own difficult situations and problems. With this strength, your problems will seem less significant and bothersome. By going beyond your own problems and taking care of others, you gain inner strength, self-confidence, courage, and a greater sense of calm. This is a clear example of how one’s way of thinking can really make a difference.”

So in a sense, there is a real benefit to be gained from thinking of others, perhaps this is the sort of self-interest you were thinking of in the first example?

You are right, giving is wonderful in every circumstance if someone in need benefits. And perhaps like children we all need to learn to share as adults a little by little until it is easy for us:

“Children are just learning that it feels good to give and that it’s fun to share with friends. You can sow the seeds of sharing by encouraging these displays of generosity and by gently discouraging your child’s less-charitable impulses.”

Tom, perhaps an exercise in sharing might best done in a community garden by children and adults taking turns in growing and sharing produce that they have cooked? So with the attachment and detachment garden we also need a community garden and outdoor kitchen/dining area.

Sharing, yes you are right Christine sharing on the face of it seems easy, but when the veil of beneficiaries is removed then all we are left with is a feeling of unease as to who actually benefits and whether its no more than self interested manipulation.
I have thought long and hard over the years about this paradox, and have come to the conclusion that sometimes we give out of self interest, but give non the less, and sometimes we do give with the goal of being truly altruistic (a good way is anonymously). Either way is sharing what we have to another.

So what is the best way? With thought about the consequences, your attitude not of boastfulness but of humility (ie here but the grace of God etc). Anonymity, though if one has a faith, one could argue that that person will always have their own interest at heart. But does that really matter?

So if you believe that humans are ultimately driven by the selfish gene, then self interest will be at the core of ‘sharing’, though with that knowledge then one could really test one’e self for true altruism.

The bottom line is that why bother judging this or that, just do it, you’ll feel better and it may well encourage the receiver to give to someone else in need.

And what better way than sharing knowledge (even if its a bit misguided in my case, sometimes).

(Just had Spitfire fly over, a reminder of the ultimate sacrifice).

Thomas, yep gardens seem to slow people down, and if you really want to think, you want to be in a pleasant environment, often by the sea or on land in natures bosom. It works.

Tom there is a movie in that, Maybe the ‘small still voice’ is now the ‘plain anonymous comment’
Just off to catch a plane and see a Mr Spielberg.

Anon

“In the weeks following Irwin’s death, at least ten stingrays were found dead and mutilated, with their tails cut off, on the beaches of Queensland, prompting speculation that they had been killed by fans of Irwin as an act of revenge. However Bill Turner, chairman of Queensland fishing information service Sunfish, said the claims were ridiculous. “To tie this into what happened with Steve is just ridiculous,” he said. “I’ve been seeing this for the 50 years that I’ve been fishing.” [105] Michael Hornby, a friend of the late naturalist and executive director of Irwin’s Wildlife Warrior fund, condemned any revenge killings. “We just want to make it very clear that we will not accept and not stand for anyone who’s taken a form of retribution. That’s the last thing Steve would want,” he said.

Although Thomas’ description of the relationship between the garden,the gardener and contemplation suggested to me that perhaps there is a model to resolve even these seeming complexities.

Tom I enjoy blogging too: and a one-way conversation would certainly be much less rewarding than the interaction of multi-part conversation. Hmmm, an alien intelligence? Vivre la difference, it is productive of so many insights! So I suppose that answers the question of the benefits of a shared virtual space.