Dear Sarah and others
I think it is always very difficult for us to be sure of our own motivation,
however 'pure' we think it is. I guess that's why we are being challenged,
on this list, to provide evidence that we are working out in our practice,
the values we espouse.
When I wrote the 'as well as' bit below, it was responding to the polarity I
picked up from you in an earlier posting about people espousing love and
conviviality in their practice in what you called a 'fluffy bunny' way, and
against that you posited the 'chilling to the bone' honesty you identify in
Alon's postings. So that was what I was picking up and mirroring back; it
was not an intentional exclusion of those who argue cogently, from being
also loving and convivial.
In the light of your later posting about your relationship with Jack, it is
not for me (from far-away New Zealand) to speculate about the dynamics in
the relationships of people I've never met. I've met Jack, Jean and Moira -
oh, and Susie Goff - but I think no-one else on this list. And
interpersonal dynamics can be very fraught, partly because, as I once heard
it expressed, "Meaning is imparted by the receiver of the message, not the
sender." This can lead 'receivers' to interpret quite a different message
from what the sender thought s/he was saying, and result in hurt, confusion
and conflict. We usually don't stop to check whether what we 'heard' is
what the sender was intending to say, and by the time it occurs to us (if it
ever does) that a mixed message has occurred, the damage is done. I wish
you both peace and joy this Christmas, as I wish for all on the list. I
shall take no further part in commenting on the interpersonal relationships
of folk on this list but thought you might find the communication
malfunction bit helpful.
Pai mariri koutou (peaceful thoughts to all)
Pip
-----Original Message-----
From: BERA Practitioner-Researcher
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Sarah
Fletcher
Sent: Monday, 18 December 2006 10:17 p.m.
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Educational
Dear Pip (and Everyone),
I enjoyed your posting and I recognise and hold dear those values of love
and care that you and
others on this list espouse. Do we agree that even those who are claiming to
espouse values of
love and conviviality are sometimes motivated by values different from
these? I have a question as
I read one part of your posting - could you help me check if I have
understood? Where you write
I think we need all perspectives in this discussion - the comments of people
like yourselves who
argue their perspectives cogently, as well as those who promote values of
love and conviviality/
inclusion in their practice.
Do you mean 'and as well as'? This might suggest that those who argue
cogently don't promote
love and conviviality. That's not at all what I experience as I read
postings. Speaking from my own
perspective I aspire to promote love and conviviality and that's what drives
educational mentoring
but I recognise alongside my aspired values I hold other values as I (like
all here) am not perfect!
What I find difficult is when I read the posting from one person asking to
be 'held to account' for
how they lead their life (and some might guess who I mean!) and I have
experience of a different
exercising of the values they claim to espouse having worked closely with
them for many years.
Do I respond in all honesty and love hoping it will help them improve or
quietly keep my silence?
Warm regards to everyone,
Sarah
|