Silverfox: "I am not complaining...merely showing the issues at hand, as they really are."

OK. Let us grant Silverfox was not complaining. But let us be clear that Silverfox was NOT merely showing the issues at hand, as they really are.. Rather, he was exposing us to the way he (and perhaps his community?) perceives the issues. There is a difference.

Silverfox: "You (Angus) put forth a suggestion regarding a possible method to stay, or allay the conflict. I did not say that it was a bad suggestion...I said that it would not work and proceeded to provide reasons. Reasons based on historical, political and cultural realities. No amount of sane, reasonable dialogue, will simply sweep thousands of years of inherent differences under the rug."

But I did not propose sane, reasonable dialogue. I proposed authentic dialogue. Again there is a difference.

Some TT participants will be unfamiliar with the idea of dialogue, so following is a summary, taken from Bill Isaacs' "Dialogue & The Art of Thinking Together", of the quintessential idea symbolized by the word "dialogue":

Dialogue

“True dialogue is a process by which we seek ‘containers’ capable of holding more and more of our experience”, says William Isaacs, a graduate of Dartmouth and the London School of Economics, who also has a doctorate in philosophy from Oxford University, and whose work in this field has earned respect from Ford, Motorola, and Shell – among many other clients. “We can see this in the experience of a couple that continuously fights and has no ‘space’ to understand the tensions they are feeling. We can imagine the change they might feel if they could walk into the arms of a very wise, understanding friend who could soothe and reassure them by letting them know he (or she) sees the struggle each of them is going through. He (or she) could offer the hope that would motivate them to fight for both their own identity and each other.

“In this latter ‘space’, both people might relax and discover that they had thoughts and feelings they were unaware of and out of contact with because of the immediacy of the battle. They might come to see, indeed, that they had unresolved pain in their hearts that was being triggered by their interaction but that was not initially produced by the other person. Finding in the arms of their wise and understanding friend such a larger psychological and emotional ‘place’ they would be able to relax and start to ‘move further upstream’ to the original source of their difficulties. They would be ‘moving into a larger container’ for their conversations.”

Is it possible that fans of the many opposing sides in the Eastern Mediterranean might discover that they had thoughts and feelings they were unaware of and out of contact with because of the immediacy of the battle?. Is it possible that they might come to see, indeed, that they had unresolved pain in their hearts that was being triggered by their interaction but that was not initially produced by the other person.?

If Silverfox or someone else can respond to this post with as much demonstrated authenticity as Silverfox has responded to other posts of mine (the first of Silverfox's responses to a post of mine was "Fuck off!"), then I certainly would think some exchange of information will have occurred that would be promising. If he or another can make it as reciprocal as possible, we might have a built a basis for discussing the principles of authentic dialogue.