You know sometimes when I ask a question I seem put-out by my own question. As if I were offended that I myself would ask a question that I already know the answer to.
I immediately block the inquiry that would naturally follow with a stand-in. An “obvious” answer quickly available on the closest shelf in my mind.
In other words I’m not always patient, considerate and thoughtful of my own questions. Some part of me is always ready for the “quick draw”. Like a gunslinger.
But this isn’t the Wild West.
And if I do this to myself I’m no doubt doing it to others when “Giving an Answer”.
It seems as if I always want to come to a conclusion as quickly as possible so that I can go on to something else.
Why this hurry?
I’ve always been in a hurry. To my own detriment. Oh well, what I can do? But be aware of it? There are no quick-draw immediate fast-food answers that are relevant to this question. That actually help.
And I’m not saying here that I have a solution to this. I am only reporting what I see. This is a description. I don’t have a prescription.
But perhaps the description IS the prescription.
I have to know that it’s OK not to have all the instant answers to every question. It’s unreasonable to expect that.
And some questions need to be carefully considered EACH TIME they are asked even if I “know” the answer.
That is part of their answer.
The answer for those questions is a process, not a retort.
They are answered by care and consideration itself. The summary conclusion the rational mind so desperately needs for closure is merely the cupcake after the main meal.
The rational mind can’t always be in charge. It can’t always LEAD the charge. Sometimes it is an accessory to the inquiry and should remain in that role.
Isn’t this true on the flip side as well?
Don’t our emotions sometimes lead the charge, muscle-out the intellect and come to quick, horribly skewed, unfair, self-centered myopic conclusions in the kangaroo court of their own inquires?
How do we approach all questions with the heart and the mind working together? Allowing neither to muscle out the other, both supportive of their necessary differences?
Can the intellect be thoughtful and the heart considerate?
Now that’s a question that should be thoughtfully considered…