Dear Boo and Bubble,
The other morning at breakfast, Captain and I were
discussing a recent kerfuffle that caused quite an upheaval in the town of Mt.
Dora, FL, where we are spending our winter.
Apparently, the previous city council voted to uproot some old oak trees
that had for years lined the main streets in the heart of the historic shopping
area. From what we have heard, the
rationale behind this action was that some of the trees were dying and their
root systems were breaking up the sidewalks.
They were to be replaced with palm trees (and, after all, isn’t Florida
known for its palms?) with repair and reconfiguration of the sidewalks to
create more space for pedestrians.
Sounds logical, doesn’t it? Except that there was a faction that LOVED
and ADORED those old oak trees. They
became so emotional about them that it resulted in a rebellion of sorts. Petitions circulated with the title of “Save
Our Trees.” Groups tied ribbons around
the trees as if to mark them for preservation.
In the end, the movement gained political purpose and candidates offered
to run in retaliation. The net result
was the ouster of a majority of the council and the mayor.
The whole incident spawned some contemplation from
Captain as he spooned his scrambled eggs into his mouth. “Why is it that normally reasonable people attach emotionally to
something and it consumes them?”
I’m not sure whether he was sincerely seeking an
answer from me or just being rhetorical, but I gave him one anyway. “Because
emotion is so much more powerful than reason.
I mean, think about it…….when was the last time you heard someone say
that they were overcome with thought….or that their heart exploded from logic?”
Still, it seems so frustrating when things spiral into
an emotional state. It’s sort of like a defenseless
battery against a tsunami. You just have
to let the wave hit and pick up the pieces afterwards.
I did find some interesting advice on the subject of
disagreements in one of the journals of your great, great, great, great grandfather Joseph Benson
Cottrell. Because of his 1880’s writing
style, it’s a little hard to decipher - and probably even more so to implement –
but, I think it’s something we all should consider.
“The
most evident things to mind are such as are vital to life and character. Truth is immediately the illumination of
mind, and not mediately through any verbal statement thereof. What is truth? That which a man troweth –
that which a man thinketh. But there are
variant methods of mind. That which is
intuitive in the reason is ungain sayable; the deductions of the logical
understanding are equally so, provideth, that terms are of the same
significancy to those wguiho have commerce of thought. Whenever, therefore, there is disagreement,
it is wise to forbear, wise to preserve the profoundest respectfulness, and
prove or verify the terms in which the essay of agreement is endeavored; for it
is only as agreement in truth is sought that minds are competent to combined or
co-ordinate action in the discovery of truth; and mind only acts worthily of
truth as it accommodates itself to mind objective from itself, and allows
itself acted upon as well as endeavors for the sake of truth and not for
victory to act upon that with which it is engaged. It is by far a more masterly exhibition of the
qualities of true manhood to preserve the dignity of genuine benevolence in a
failure to agree than to silence an adversary by a pitiless pelting of apparent
syllogisms through mere tact and strategy.”
No comments:
Post a Comment