Last night I had a dream that I was sat at a table with strangers, as if it were a lunch table during a group retreat somewhere, and an older guy sat next to me and started talking to me about love. Somehow I understood that he was a Christian philosopher, and I told him I didn`t mind him talking to me, but I could assure him that he would not convert me to Christianity. He was unfazed by my words, and proceeded to explain that there are two ways to analyse love. The first is a cool intellectual way, observing that love exists between all of us. Which is a nice thought, he said. And the second way is by breaking consensus. He did not have time to explain fully what he meant before I woke up, but directly after I woke up, and was lying in bed, I started to contemplate this: How can love be analysed by breaking consensus? I came to the conclusion that breaking a consensus view (or putting forward an individual view that is different to the consensus view on something, held by a group of friends you are part of, or your family, or any other group) is a test of love because it is a potential source of conflict. But also it is a demonstration of love, that you love and trust other people enough to openly differ from them, though it should be done respectfully. It further could demonstrate a higher love of Truth and love of the truth inside yourself, equivalent to a high level of self-respect, because if you stay silent when you disagree with a group which you are part of, you are not being true to yourself or to the unfolding universe. But this is not always easy to deal with and practice. Sometimes we pretend it is easier to go with the flow and stay silent, even when going with the flow is actually blocking our private flow.
This post was originally published on Schemattic here.
Centre of the Web 