We can find ourselves in the position of coercing ourselves into embracing falsehoods. I’m not saying we’ll always be able to eliminate this destructive tendency, but it can be critiqued and therefore hopefully diminish in its power over us.
Example: 1) Suspicion reigns when it comes to affirming anything good about us and 2) trust is in strong evidence when it comes to denying anything good about us. There is a two-fold deception operating here that sets us up for “no-win” conclusions and all the devastating implications that go with them. Suspicion and trust in this configuration are monologues and monologues falsify. A dialogical perspective, however, that puts us into contact with other informers than ourselves (nature and the biblical text), recognizes that there is a valid place for trust over suspicion in 1) and suspicion over trust in 2) and this will in turn show us there is indeed something good about us and therefore lead in the direction of a truer picture of who we are.
0 comments:
Post a Comment