Maybe you could go further and discuss how memory is very malleable, and how events can be subject to multiple interpretations. This is true on the level of two individuals relating to one another, all the way up to nations interacting with one another. The pictures we carry in our heads about past events--whether those pictures bring us joy or pain--do not necessarily correspond to some imagined objective reality.
I like Pascal on this: "When we wish to correct with advantage and to show another that he errs, we must notice from what side he views the matter, for on that side it is usually true, and admit that truth to him, but reveal to him the side on which it is false. He is satisfied with that, for he sees that he was not mistaken and that he only failed to see all sides. Now, no one is offended at not seeing everything; but one does not like to be mistaken...”
Ken, my only problem with Pascal here is a pragmatic one. I think this quote estimates a certain wisdom in the opponent. That is not always the case. Especially in our day, or so it would seem to me. That said, I must acknowledge that I've lived in no other historical reality--as far as I know anyway (HAHA)--thus, I cannot speak with any real authority. Maybe we humans have always been so divisive and dense but social media just gives a megaphone to that.
Ken, you are so right. Memory is malleable. Subjective too. So, it seems we are always going to be stuck in a loop of perceived truth about a given event, whether that event involves a couple of people or a couple of nations. The perception may not be the truth, but we act like it is. We bear grudges and respond in kind based on it. Maybe there’s an important point to be made here about memory and humility.
Lots of good thoughts here.
Maybe you could go further and discuss how memory is very malleable, and how events can be subject to multiple interpretations. This is true on the level of two individuals relating to one another, all the way up to nations interacting with one another. The pictures we carry in our heads about past events--whether those pictures bring us joy or pain--do not necessarily correspond to some imagined objective reality.
I like Pascal on this: "When we wish to correct with advantage and to show another that he errs, we must notice from what side he views the matter, for on that side it is usually true, and admit that truth to him, but reveal to him the side on which it is false. He is satisfied with that, for he sees that he was not mistaken and that he only failed to see all sides. Now, no one is offended at not seeing everything; but one does not like to be mistaken...”
--Pensees 1:9
Ken, my only problem with Pascal here is a pragmatic one. I think this quote estimates a certain wisdom in the opponent. That is not always the case. Especially in our day, or so it would seem to me. That said, I must acknowledge that I've lived in no other historical reality--as far as I know anyway (HAHA)--thus, I cannot speak with any real authority. Maybe we humans have always been so divisive and dense but social media just gives a megaphone to that.
Ken, you are so right. Memory is malleable. Subjective too. So, it seems we are always going to be stuck in a loop of perceived truth about a given event, whether that event involves a couple of people or a couple of nations. The perception may not be the truth, but we act like it is. We bear grudges and respond in kind based on it. Maybe there’s an important point to be made here about memory and humility.