divine focus wrote:There is a difference between judgment and discernment. They are not the same. The absence of judgment is not mindlessness, but objectivity. Judgment involves an absolutist determination of True and False, as if False were as real as True. False does not actually exist on its own, as there is only Truth. Truth may be distorted, but it can't be transformed into a second absolute of False. It may lose truth value, but it will never reach zero.
It would depend how others 'discern' the word 'judgement' as is evidential here.
The reason why i say i do not judge is simply the fact that i mean everyone has their own understanding of their own realisations. I recall having another conversation of the same a while ago with some friends, If one equates 'judging' with 'assuming' then it would mean that all I am saying is from my observations upon peoples sentences, one cannot take them in any other way than face value. Remember I know nothing, so what i read, i read without 'judgement', with an open mind, otherwise i would be stereotyping and grouping and casting aspersions on 'how' people perceive, which i do not. If I were to 'judge' then I would be assuming for example that person A, has said something as a derrogatory stereotype, which incidently does happen here quite a lot, giving evidence that others do in fact group their opinions towards another in a judgement. eg, 'New-age crap' Once someone has that in their head it is almost impossible to 'reason' with them logically.
As quoted above, 'The absence of judgment is not mindlessness, but objectivity', is exactly why i do not judge. One has to always be objective if any kind of understanding, upon any issue can be realised. The only judging one should do, is that of themselves, they should question their own reasons for their own assertions, otherwise we go around in 'blind' circles of muck slinging, as evidential also above. The 'blind' leading the 'blind'!
With regard to true or false as quoted above, there is no right or wrong/true or false, in peoples assertions, just
different UNDERSTANDING. when we all can understand the issues raised by others, then we can all realise truth for ourselves.
I used the word 'judgement' to Dan, in the
context that i knew he would understand, but I am beginning to think he as with many others just simply can not
hear me here. This 'genius' site seems to be home to 'muck slingers' and many a 'foolishness'. Has any one a 'mind' that is not 'clouded' that can converse with me and so come to some level or UNDERSTANDING and realisation between at least two people??. If two can understand an issue
objectively then consciousness between them has a chance here. As it is many make 'subjective' arguments that cannot hold themselves up as each subjective ideal is as equally valid to the respectve individual who said it in their own way of UNDERSTANDING it. I respect anothers understanding and their worth in thinking it as each is as equally as valid as the next. But, do not lack discernment in understanding this. Are you wise? or do you just 'think' you are.
Does any one hear me??
Amandaxxx
Discernment:
–noun 1. the faculty of discerning; discrimination;
acuteness of judgment and
understanding.
Judgement:
noun 1. an act or instance of judging.
2.
the ability to judge,
make a decision, or form an opinion objectively, authoritatively, and wisely, esp. in matters affecting action; good sense; discretion: a man of sound judgment.
I do not 'judge' another from their own understanding but I do have Judgemnent and thus do not assume.
Judge:
. to form a judgment or opinion of; decide upon critically:
You can't judge a book by its cover.
so open the book, or open the others MIND. I am OPEN are you?
