blog traffic analysis
This is http://www.essayz.com/b0205103.htm Previous-Essay <== This-Essay ==> Following-Essay Click HERE on this line to find essays via Your-Key-Words. {Most frequent wordstarts of each essay will be put here.} ========================================================== %SORTS REFRAMES ASKS RESPONDS ANSWERS QUESTIONS+020510 %SOMEONE DOMINATE WHO SELECTED CHOSEN VOLUNTEERED+020510 %CALLED PROPHET LEADER PRESIDENT KING DICTATOR LORD+020510 %COMMANDMENTS PRESCRIPTIONS PROSCRIPTIONS LAWS RULE+020510 %WILL POWER CONCENTRATED CORRUPTION DEMAND ADDICTS+020510 %INCOHERENT INTEGRITY HEALTHY HEALING DISEASE ILL 020510 Much depends upon how each person/community: sorts out, frames, re-frames, asks, and responds to questions such as: 1. Is it God's Will that someone or some select group be dominant? IF SO, who or which group should be dominant? 2. What is God's Will regarding how we should respond to people who believe that it is God's Will that someone or some select group be dominant; and that it is they who should be dominant? 3. Is it God's Will that We Dominate people who believe that it is God's Will that they, rather than we, should Be Dominant? 4. How can people who have been coerced into believing-incoherent-sets-of-beliefs --- thereafter think coherently about dilemmas and conflicts within which they find themselves; e.g., due to rapid and/or imperceptibly-slow environmental changes? 5. How can we tell the differences between (important paradoxical truths which are essential to promoting and facilitating integrity/integration) --- and (enforced-incoherent-sets-of-beliefs-which-undermine-both- personal-and-communal-integrity)? 6. Can domineering people help us to think, feel and behave coherently --- with both personal and communal integrity? How so? 7. What are the likely consequences of forcing people to feel, think, believe, and behave --- in terms of (enforced-incoherent-sets-of-beliefs-which-undermine-both- personal-and-communal-integrity)? 8. In the presence of domineering people, how are we to resolve differing/conflicting responses to the first question; i.e., to the question: "1. Is it God's Will that some one or some select group be dominant? IF SO, who or which group should be dominant?" 9. How have the world's greatest religious leaders suggested that we respond to questions such as these? 10. How have the dominant ostensible modern followers of the greatest religious leaders often responded to the teachings and role-modeling of their ostensible primary leaders? Domineering people are more prone to create and/or manage crises and/or emergencies --- than to work quietly behind the scenes as peacemakers in mitigating the probability that there will be crises and/or emergencies. Domineering people are not motivated to be, and/or led to be, true peace-makers; they are more likely to seek out or create roles as coercive peace-keepers --- threatening the use of weapons of mass destruction; weapons which they have called "Peacekeepers". Domineering people are not motivated to be in, and/or led to engage in, true conflict-resolution. They are more likely to seek out or create roles as coercive winners-of- battles over "evil enemies" --- whom they see as the creators of the conflicts --- which must be "resolved" by winning "Just-Wars" --- which they as winners they retrospectively define as "Just"; regardless of the suffering of the vulnerable victims of their wars. Our dilemma is that we are often confronted with about half of the relevant population on each side of a contentious issue; most on each side having become domineering during the contentious steps leading up to the present moment. 1. We can choose to support side "A" and have about half of the relevant population as enemies. 2. We can choose to support side "B" and have about half of the relevant population as enemies. 3. We can choose to sit on the sidelines and be the focus of attention of of the supporters of both side "A" and side "B" --- who try to get us to join their side in their holy war. 4. Or, we can choose to be against having to be domineering --- and so threaten the collusive games of mutual self deception of MOST of the population. Options #1 and #2 leave us with about HALF of the population "against" us. Option #3 leaves us with MOST of the population courting our favor. Option #4 leaves us with MOST of the population being "against" us. Few choose to take the risks of option #4. Those who choose option #3, at some point eventually chose either option #1 or #2 --- which consequently leads to war of some kind; because supporters of "A" and "B" are not kind to each other; since they do not truly want to transcend domination; they want to succeed at being domineering! (c) 2005 by Paul A. Smith in (On Being Yourself, Whole and Healthy) ==========================================================