In my attempts at learning, there are two modes of thought that spring to mind.
Firstly, that we can find "answers", and then continue on our way. (Often coming up against our answers again at a later date, and having to open them out again to find that their truth was only partial compared to the later-date understanding arrived at.)
Secondly, that we can remain open but still striving, noting what we see on the way and taking it as what it is.
For instance, instead of saying "the world is flat", the second mode would say "we have assumed the world is flat".
This continual expanding and opening leaves nothing out of the picture - if we are always trying to include rather than exclude, to increase rather than decrease, we will see more of the "complete" picture, and hence be less confused and understand more.
My current ponderings, though, are about teaching vs. learning.
Should one teach? Should one point something out to someone, when according to the two modes described above, my "arrivings", or what I consider to be *the* answers, may really simply be where I have stopped in my own "quest"?
But there must be a point that I can arrive at to consider helping others. Especially if they ask for help. Or perhaps the best form of help one can give another is "look within and discover for yourself".. Perhaps this is the only form of "advice" truly possible if their understanding is to be as deep as the one whose understanding they are interesting in "becoming".
Another question that opens itself for me here is that of self-striving. In order to arrive at a point where I wish to spur myself on continuously, is this an already established germ of the individual (being a part of a greater whole) or perhaps it is a learned (and if this is true, then inspired through the teachings of another) trait. What of "teaching silently" - by this I mean teaching by example, such that rather than words setting the path, we have a physical and living example of something that impresses another so much that they learn just by observing.
>Julian Leviston <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
>> Questions open. Answers close. Consider this statement for me: Openings are
>> better than closings if we wish to evolve.
>I disagree - because you can sit in a cave all day asking questions,
>but in the evening you will still not have changed. It is *finding*
>answers that helps us evolve. And surpisingly, each found answer tends
>to lead to ten new questions.
>Anders Sandberg Towards Ascension!
>GCS/M/S/O d++ -p+ c++++ !l u+ e++ m++ s+/+ n--- h+/* f+ g+ w++ t+ r+ !y