Home Page
  • Home
  • Biographical Note
  • Quick Links Wall
    • Only Podcasts . . .
  • Events / Appearances
  • Publications
    • Books
    • Academic Publications
    • Community Publications
    • Book Review Publications
  • Witness Canada's Algonquin Genocide
  • IWagWid: Indigenous Women & Girls with Disabilities
  • Gehl Blogging
    • Gehl Blog Index
    • Subscribe
  • Community Resources
    • Cultural Appropriation Detector
    • Indigenous Knowledge Protection Act
    • Follow the Turtle
    • Ally Bill of Responsibilities
    • My Wampum Bundle
    • Truth that Wampum Tells
    • Genocide: A Personal Manifesto
    • Anishinaabeg Thinking
    • Canadians Need to Know
    • Cupcake Feminism
    • Knowledge is Wholistic
    • The Metaphoric Turtle
    • Oh Canada
    • Treaty Federal Order
  • Contact
  • Home
  • Biographical Note
  • Quick Links Wall
    • Only Podcasts . . .
  • Events / Appearances
  • Publications
    • Books
    • Academic Publications
    • Community Publications
    • Book Review Publications
  • Witness Canada's Algonquin Genocide
  • IWagWid: Indigenous Women & Girls with Disabilities
  • Gehl Blogging
    • Gehl Blog Index
    • Subscribe
  • Community Resources
    • Cultural Appropriation Detector
    • Indigenous Knowledge Protection Act
    • Follow the Turtle
    • Ally Bill of Responsibilities
    • My Wampum Bundle
    • Truth that Wampum Tells
    • Genocide: A Personal Manifesto
    • Anishinaabeg Thinking
    • Canadians Need to Know
    • Cupcake Feminism
    • Knowledge is Wholistic
    • The Metaphoric Turtle
    • Oh Canada
    • Treaty Federal Order
  • Contact
Search by typing & pressing enter

YOUR CART

12/1/2012 5 Comments

This is What I Think; Tell Me What You Think?

Picture
Inherent in every word is an ocean of potential meaning.  People who critique a word usage without understanding the other person’s intended meaning are engaging in idolatrous thought and practice.

People who allow text alone to inform their meaning-making and thinking process really do not value the oral tradition and what it has to offer.

Ascribing negative or positive meaning to a question asked is an act of your agency, not an act of the person who asked the question.  Carefully consider and ascribe your meaning.

When most people learn a new word or concept at first they have a tendency to be reactionary, doubt it, deny it, and sometimes dismiss it as – “oh those academics”; when what is really needed is for them to allow time to pass so they can develop a relationship with the new word or concept.

Linguistic essentialism and those who promote it are not experts in the many and diverse ways that humans communicate.

Theories, models, concepts, and words are not so much reality as they are representations of reality.  People who think and act otherwise engage in idolatrous thought and practice.

Some people do not think conceptually.  They have other gifts.

Learning new knowledge can be emotional.  If you are not angry with your “teacher” it may be because they have yet to teach you something new.

Most people do not reflect on their cognitive process and factor this process into what may be limiting their understanding of a new idea, concept, theory, or model.

Making something with your hands and gifting it to others has medicinal elements inherent.

All people perceive.  There is no such thing as objectivity.  If anything, objectivity is something we sometimes strive for, although we never completely get there.

Heart knowledge, the location where the human spirit emerges in its anthropomorphic form, lacks mind knowledge and thus is not wholistic.

Rational knowledge alone is not complete, nor wholistic; heart knowledge is required.

Not liking particular knowledge should differ from how you feel about the messenger of the knowledge.

When reading a book or article, people really should do so in layers: methodology with method inherent, and the knowledge product.  This is the case even when the author does not offer their approach explicitly.

Through my experience I have learned that those closest to the truth are often times the most ridiculed, undermined, and disenfranchised.  The fact that Canada’s Parliament buildings reside on traditional Algonquin territory, yet the Algonquin were ignored during the historic treaty process, is the best example of this.  Unfortunately, this process of denial is played out daily in many of our relationships.

If you do not go back to your own Indigenous Knowledge – practiced, embodied, and felt – your mind will not be able to read your soul.

Remember, if you want to know who someone really is – pay attention, observe, and watch how they treat others versus merely to how they treat you.  The person may simply want something from you and thus act according to that need versus in a way that is truly them.

State nationalism places genuine subjectivity into a pinhole.  The olympic events is one such avenue into this pin hole.

Women who say things are changing really need to back this up with some long term factual evidence of the change.  They should also qualify for who things have changed.  Otherwise, their comment is both disenfranchising and a barrier to real change.

In understanding and valuing the effects of power, as you move down the ladder of social stratification one must appreciate there are interaction effects, as the total effects of power is far greater than the sum of its parts.

Internalized oppression, the effects of sexism and racism, and the reality of lateral violence are denser as you move down the ladder of social stratification.  Do not assume people at the bottom have a handle on it.

Responsible allyship means refusing to ally with people who are not, or who refuse to be, financially accountable to the allies.

I would rather respect my boundaries and say “no” when I can’t do something for you.  My integrity means much for me.  If this is hurtful, imagine how it would hurt you is I said “yes” and did not come through?

Please like and share this blog.

Chi-Miigwetch

5 Comments
Heather Majaury
12/8/2012 10:39:43 pm

Excellent comments about meaning, relationships and social stratification. Thanks.

Reply
Philip Kienholz
1/2/2013 12:25:23 pm

I agree with, admire, and thank you for much of what you have said here. I am not sure I understand all of it. One passage in particular was not clear to me, at least at first:

"When reading a book or article people really should do so in layers: methodology with method inherent, and the knowledge product. This is the case even when the author does not offer their approach explicitly."

Upon reflection I think this means that a reader "ought to" consider both how the author has arrived at what they say, that is--their method, and then also consider what the author says as a statement in itself--I would surmise that would be its truth and its implications.

This consideration of method could be an important aspect in evaluating the morality of statements. It could lead to judgements based solely on this factor, completely outside of the consideration of truth or fruitfulness of the statement itself. It could preclude consideration of the statement further for its truth or utility, because the author had used a method with which the reader disagreed. But sometimes the value of statements is because they challenge a reader by being outside of the reader's scope of understanding.

A reader might benefit from recursively asking if their rejection of a method was because it is new to them, or if it is morally abhorrent, and if so, what is the cause of that abhorrence. If the rejection is because the method is new to the reader, the reader might well ask, "What is the value of accepting this new method which I have not known before?" If the method is morally abhorrent or of insufficient value then the reader could simply stop and not consider at all the "knowledge product" on any grounds. These thought-out statements try to capture what the mind intuits in a flash. Underlying all this I sense the difficulty of cross-cultural communications, and the historical imposition of one culture onto another that has characterized civilization and its expansion.

One other passage made me pause, and come to disagreement: "Heart knowledge, the location where the human spirit emerges in its anthropomorphic form, lacks mind knowledge and thus is not holistic."

My own Buddhist tradition would say that the universe is made of a loving vibration, and that the heart is the chief way of humans feeding on that loving vibration. Also, that there is only one mind and that it pervades all of creation, including the entire human body. Thus in your formulation, "mind knowledge" could not be excluded from "heart knowledge."

There is a book I want to read soon by one of my favourite authors, Stephen Harrod Buhner, "The Secret Teachings of Plants: The Intelligence of the Heart in the Direct Perception of Nature," the title of which intrigues me along these last lines.

Thanks again for the essay.

Reply
lynn gehl
1/3/2013 09:31:00 pm

Kwey Philip, Thank you for your comments. When I speak of the mind, I am speaking of it in its human form. Further, if I were to add to my discussion of heart knowledge, I would add that the heart is the location of human intelligence. And so I don't think we are in disagreement. Lynn

Reply
Philip Kienholz
1/2/2013 01:11:06 pm

There was another quotation that I have carried around with me for 30 years or so that pertains to the matter of words:

"When a name or designation arises, a reality lies hidden; when a reality reveals itself, a name or designation disappears." Mahasi Sayadaw quoting "a wise saying," in Insight Meditation: Basic and Progressive Stages," in Living Buddhist Masters, Jack Kornfield, Prajna Press, Boulder, 1977, p. 75.

Reply
lynn gehl
1/3/2013 09:31:58 pm

Nice. Lynn

Reply

Your comment will be posted after it is approved.


Leave a Reply.

    RSS Feed

To subscribe to Lynn's Blog: click here
To subscribe to Lynn's Newsletter:  click here
To follow Lynn on her Public Facebook Page: click here
To subscribe to Lynn's YouTube channel:  click here
To book Lynn as a speaker: click here
To contact Lynn: click here
Copyright Dr. Lynn Gehl,  All Rights Reserved

Picture