Listening Deeply

We need to remember that persons often think and act to their own disadvantage as well that of others not because they designed some nefarious way of life, but in the vast majority of instances, because of the faulty inborn human nature that often misleads us, especially during the formative years of our lives.  We sometimes become skittery in our minds, but feel driven nonetheless.  In our late years we acknowledge our early follies, perhaps laughing or deploring the errors of the past that could have been evaded.  Our response is likely motivated by the degree in which our mistakes were modest or extensive in consequence.  It is common for persons to fall into pitiful contexts that rob them of the affirmative gifts for life that lead to benefit in the individual and society – good for the one and the many.  In this human weakness to diversion, persons fall into drug cultures that threaten health and life; break up families threatening society and love quotients; follow oddities of ideas that crowd out truth; doubt responsibility that endangers lives and order in the excesses or omissions in their conduct; and, the list lengthens.  For example, in this last category, the excesses of our driving patterns kill thousands of persons on our highways annually.  The omissions include low turn-out of the electorate on election date, and then to follow with harsh criticism of winning candidates as early as the day after the election.  Life patterns are often contradictory or paradoxical.

Many of us are poorly formed for living our lives in serious and constructive self-evaluated contexts – the self-examined life to truth and benefit.  Insofar as we fail ourselves in these matters we become hypocrites to ourselves, society and God.  We may discover our mistakes too late for repair.  We make excuses blaming follies on youthful exuberance, perhaps to our education that we engaged only casually, or misbegotten friends, or poor parenting, or this and that, but the responsibility for life is our own.  The young person taking that on consciously is well ahead of the pack in the search for the good life – both personally and socially.  Serious philosophers of history enlarge implications of this paragraph.

One of the monstrous omissions that make hypocrites of us is the high regard we hold for communication, but the poor ways we use it and respond to it.  The problem is exacerbated in the decline of education both in the home and the school on the accent of effective language and its delivery to others about ourselves and life.  We do not seem to understand that we need others to understand ourselves – and they may need us for their benefit.  This is important to parenting our children, or taking on counseling with others.  Currently the literature is accenting the decline in meaningful communication in the texting of truncated messages, and the undeveloped meaning in the habit uses of electronic systems.  It is presumed that we are talking or reading about meaningful matters, and listening or reading substantive language.  To follow so much of the media materials its substance is unimportant, even contrary, for life.  But our habits of serious intent in reading and listening precludes even that useful and available to us.  Decades ago a study revealed that the common reading of most college graduates did not exceed the level of The Reader’s Digest.  That does not disparage the Digest, which offered affirmative stories of life, but it was modest in its sophistication, and persons were more taken by its humor than the more substantive material that included a book condensation at the close of each issue.  Since the hey-day of the Digest, the popular tendency has declined so to offer less useful context.  Serious production of language for reading and listening, writing and speaking – and that for the cultivation of the advancement of life quality and purpose – now gains even less attention than formerly.  We often use language cryptically.  There is little time for listening and reading – presumably. 

Evaluators of media are rather widely agreed that much of production is unworthy of the industry and the public to which that production is aimed and provided.  The providers counter with the conclusion that this is what the public gives attention, and they are in the business of communication for profit and market share.  That there is a large contingency that believes in the ideals of purpose for material demanding attentive listening and reading is true.  Faith needs considerably larger market share of our time.