A Dialogue About Healthy Dialogue Here in the Nexus

[Ajqij]

Things didn't really need to keep going after post #22 or so...

One love

V, you are a mod here and I will respect your position. So I can honor the attitude of this site, do you mean I should no longer engage with members who ask questions or share their opinions about the thread topic? Or just to complete it with you? I'm happy to end our discussion if you see no value in continuing. Just want to be clear here, okay?

 

[Voidmatrix]

You shared concerns. I addressed them. There was a dialogue. We seemed to come to an understanding. Then it starts going down a weird rabbit hole. Anyone can post here, but I was talking about the dialogue between you and I which I felt wasn't going anywhere. I'm sorry if there was something in it for you, and this is not to be disparaging or condescending.

One love

 

[Ajqij]

You shared concerns. I addressed them. There was a dialogue. We seemed to come to an understanding. Then it starts going down a weird rabbit hole. Anyone can post here, but I was talking about the dialogue between you and I which I felt wasn't going anywhere. I'm sorry if there was something in it for you, and this is not to be disparaging or condescending.

One love

Ok thank you . . . and sorry, but "wierd rabbit hole" feels condescending to me. Why people need to negate what they don't understand or don't believe in is a mystery to me. Take care V.

 

[Voidmatrix]

Ok thank you . . . and sorry, but "wierd rabbit hole" feels condescending to me. Why people need to negate what they don't understand or don't believe in is a mystery to me. Take care V.

Everything other than "Weird rabbit hole" is in your mind. You're assuming a whole lot of things about what I'm thinking without asking for clarification, which you have often made mention of.

Interpret it how you want, feel it how you feel it, I had a feeling you'd interpret it that way and that's why I mentioned I'm not being condescending... because I'm not.

One love

 

[Ajqij]

What if the "truth" is: the "truth" is indescernible/unknowable/nonexistent? Then the closest we get is through being true to and with ourselves.

How about we agree on this wise statement V, rather than assuming we know what is and is not in someone's mind? Blessings to you, thank you for your work and for your involvemenht in the Nexus. No more commentary is needed.

 

[Varallo]

Ajqij, you began this thread by claiming to want healthy dialogue, mutual respect, and open exchange. But let’s be honest, what you’ve actually demonstrated here is a pattern of contradiction, deflection, and subtle antagonism all hidden below a thin layer of philosophical curiosity, or your own made up spiritual wisdom.

Are you genuinely open to discussing this topic or not? Let’s take a look at what’s been going on here.

You say things like, “I’m not looking for agreement,” “I welcome being questioned,” “I’m here to learn.” Then someone does question you, politely and thoughtfully, and you respond with accusations: “That’s dismissive,” “You’re avoiding engagement,” “That’s elitist.” So which is it? Do you want honest but sometimes critical conversation or do you want an applause?

You say you’re against hierarchy but then go on to create one yourself. You say you reject labels like “senior member,” only to then turn around and claim indigenous elders are the “true experts.” Why is your idea of authority immune from challenge, while others in this space are accused of hubris? If you’re against intellectual elitism, why are you engaging in spiritual elitism?

You say “I don’t claim truth,” then follow it with bold assertions like “plants are carriers of infinite intent of the ancestors.” You claim “I’m not calling anyone out,” while directly naming and criticizing how specific members have responded. Are you actually reflecting on what you’re saying or just defending your position at all costs, I mean what’s the point? How does this way of thinking and doing ever helped you or anyone else in life?

You ask things like, “Why would you assume this?” or “Why does hierarchy matter?” And when those questions are answered with clarity and good faith, you either move the goalposts or dismiss their input entirely. Are you really trying to understand the people responding. Right now, it seems you’re not asking to learn, but to win a game you’re playing.

So is this actually about dialogue? I don’t think so, you asked a fair question in your original post: “What does healthy interaction look like?” But what followed was an attempt to dominate the conversation. You criticized every aspect like framing, and intent while refusing to acknowledge how your own behavior might be contributing to the tension. You say things like “respect and reflection, not reaction,” yet nearly every response has been reactive. You claim maturity, but personalize every critique and moralize every disagreement. Even in the same paragraph where you state to be strong and capable to handle criticism you show exactly the opposite. And this goes on and on and on.

So what real dialogue would require from you is to actually listen, because that’s where dialogue starts. If you’re willing to meet others there, and be part of this community great things can happen. Now this tread has become an very good, but sad, example on how NOT to engage in conversation.

Take care

 

[Here&Now]

Now this tread has become an very good, but sad, example on how NOT to engage in conversation.

lol funny how things work out sometimes. I agree that this one got pretty contentious. I guess not all personality types can easily mix.

 

[Voidmatrix]

We get to see the purpose behind it all though by virtue of this thread

lol funny how things work out sometimes. I agree that this one got pretty contentious. I guess not all personality types can easily mix.

Not the first time.

One love

 

[Ajqij]

Ajqij, you began this thread by claiming to want healthy dialogue, mutual respect, and open exchange. But let’s be honest, what you’ve actually demonstrated here is a pattern of contradiction, deflection, and subtle antagonism all hidden below a thin layer of philosophical curiosity, or your own made up spiritual wisdom.

Are you genuinely open to discussing this topic or not? Let’s take a look at what’s been going on here.

You say things like, “I’m not looking for agreement,” “I welcome being questioned,” “I’m here to learn.” Then someone does question you, politely and thoughtfully, and you respond with accusations: “That’s dismissive,” “You’re avoiding engagement,” “That’s elitist.” So which is it? Do you want honest but sometimes critical conversation or do you want an applause?

You say you’re against hierarchy but then go on to create one yourself. You say you reject labels like “senior member,” only to then turn around and claim indigenous elders are the “true experts.” Why is your idea of authority immune from challenge, while others in this space are accused of hubris? If you’re against intellectual elitism, why are you engaging in spiritual elitism?

You say “I don’t claim truth,” then follow it with bold assertions like “plants are carriers of infinite intent of the ancestors.” You claim “I’m not calling anyone out,” while directly naming and criticizing how specific members have responded. Are you actually reflecting on what you’re saying or just defending your position at all costs, I mean what’s the point? How does this way of thinking and doing ever helped you or anyone else in life?

You ask things like, “Why would you assume this?” or “Why does hierarchy matter?” And when those questions are answered with clarity and good faith, you either move the goalposts or dismiss their input entirely. Are you really trying to understand the people responding. Right now, it seems you’re not asking to learn, but to win a game you’re playing.

So is this actually about dialogue? I don’t think so, you asked a fair question in your original post: “What does healthy interaction look like?” But what followed was an attempt to dominate the conversation. You criticized every aspect like framing, and intent while refusing to acknowledge how your own behavior might be contributing to the tension. You say things like “respect and reflection, not reaction,” yet nearly every response has been reactive. You claim maturity, but personalize every critique and moralize every disagreement. Even in the same paragraph where you state to be sting and capable to handle criticism you show exactly the opposite. And this goes on and on and on.

So what real dialogue would require from you is to actually listen, because that’s where dialogue starts. If you’re willing to meet others there, and be part of this community great things can happen. Now this tread has become an very good, but sad, example on how NOT to engage in conversation.

Take care

Okay V, thank you for sharing your perspective. I stand by what I've shared and will continue to encourage positive dialogue, which I believe can rightfully include expressing how certain assumptions feel or come across to me. I'd be happy to engage with you more if you have anything you've learned along with all your evidence for how my approach is flawed.

I'll give you an example you might reflect on . . . one thing I've learned here is that there seems to be a great deal of emphasis on "critical thinking" and that if someone challenges it they better be ready to accept critiscism. Ok, I see that if I make waves I need to be responsible for their effects. Forgive me if I offended you in any way.

Another thing I've learned is that this site isn't nessessarily geared for dialogue in the sense that when views are shared that are not condoned by the senior members, mods, or staff who set the "culture," rather than being curious and asking questions, the mode seems to be to subtly negate what has been shared or point out inconsistencies in people's thinking or framing. What I will learn from this is to be more watchful about how I present certain topics here and perhaps do more disclaiming so as to reduce misunderstandings about my intent. Again, my apologies if I've come across with too much enthusiasm and not enough consideration for potential reactions to what I share. I do tend to be over enthusiastic . . . which I'm not sure I can mitigate.

So what are you learning?

 

[Ajqij]

lol funny how things work out sometimes. I agree that this one got pretty contentious. I guess not all personality types can easily mix.

Nothing has "worked out" yet. I will continue to share how I feel and what my opinions are here . . . and maybe even make a few friends, who once we've been to the mat and back can share a beer and laugh about the bruises we inflicted upon ourselves and each other.

 

[Here&Now]

Another thing I've learned is that this site isn't nessessarily geared for dialogue in the sense that when views are shared that are not condoned by the senior members, mods, or staff who set the "culture," rather than being curious and asking questions, the mode seems to be to subtly negate what has been shared or point out inconsistencies in people's thinking or framing. What I will learn from this is to be more watchful about how I present certain topics here and perhaps do more disclaiming so as to reduce misunderstandings about my intent. Again, my apologies if I've come across with too much enthusiasm and not enough consideration for potential reactions to what I share. I do tend to be over enthusiastic . . . which I'm not sure I can mitigate.

I suppose I can see where you're coming from a little bit, but I think it's always important to "read the room", so to speak. I believe in many things that could be considered batshit crazy by typical standards, but I know better than to come here and state them as a fact without expecting any resistance. It's just the nature of the mysterious and uncertain world we live in. Not everyone will be on board with what you believe is going on, so it can be best to not place overly high expectations on others.

 

[Kobranek]

Communication is always a work in progress and once you feel like you have it nailed down there seems to be someone who brings out an aspect of ones shadow during the difficult times that allows for an opportunity for self exploration and growth.

The implicit message is just as important as the explicit which is what ones shadow seems to convey moreso than what is actually trying to be conveyed.

The building of soft skills helps to navigate and master the art of communication. Using empathy as a tool to bring one back down to relate to the other person that you are trying to communicate with can bring a newfound perspective that may have not been considered before. Trying to dominate, outwit or one up others is self limiting in itself and quite frankly, tiring.

 

[Varallo]

Okay V, thank you for sharing your perspective. I stand by what I've shared and will continue to encourage positive dialogue, which I believe can rightfully include expressing how certain assumptions feel or come across to me. I'd be happy to engage with you more if you have anything you've learned along with all your evidence for how my approach is flawed.

I'll give you an example you might reflect on . . . one thing I've learned here is that there seems to be a great deal of emphasis on "critical thinking" and that if someone challenges it they better be ready to accept critiscism. Ok, I see that if I make waves I need to be responsible for their effects. Forgive me if I offended you in any way.

Another thing I've learned is that this site isn't nessessarily geared for dialogue in the sense that when views are shared that are not condoned by the senior members, mods, or staff who set the "culture," rather than being curious and asking questions, the mode seems to be to subtly negate what has been shared or point out inconsistencies in people's thinking or framing. What I will learn from this is to be more watchful about how I present certain topics here and perhaps do more disclaiming so as to reduce misunderstandings about my intent. Again, my apologies if I've come across with too much enthusiasm and not enough consideration for potential reactions to what I share. I do tend to be over enthusiastic . . . which I'm not sure I can mitigate.

So what are you learning?

Ajqij, we’ve already had this exchange.

You’re repeating the same rhetorical formula, saying you welcome dialogue, then subtly discrediting those who engage with you, while offering apologies that don’t actually take ownership. It’s more of the same.

You say you’re open to criticism, but only if someone comes with “evidence” for why your approach is flawed. That’s not dialogue. It implies you’re not interested in reflection unless it’s backed by proof on your terms.

You then go on to describe how the site “seems” to operate, suggesting that when ideas aren’t condoned by senior members or staff, they’re subtly negated instead of being explored. But let’s not pretend that’s an observation, it’s projection. You’re suggesting there’s a silent system of suppression at play simply because your ideas weren’t met with immediate validation. That’s not fair to the people who did engage with you seriously and in good faith.

And then finally, “So what are you learning?” It sounds like a question, but it’s a rhetorical pivot.

Reflection doesn’t mean explaining again why you’re right. Accountability doesn’t mean apologizing if someone misread you. And dialogue doesn’t mean asking others to prove they understand you, while ignoring their feedback. You say you’ve learned something. That’s great. So now, maybe show it by changing how you engage.

 

[Ajqij]

I suppose I can see where you're coming from a little bit, but I think it's always important to "read the room", so to speak. I believe in many things that could be considered batshit crazy by typical standards, but I know better than to come here and state them as a fact without expecting any resistance. It's just the nature of the mysterious and uncertain world we live in. Not everyone will be on board with what you believe is going on, so it can be best to not place overly high expectations on others.

Thanks for your thoughts and I agree with the importance of reading the room. I also want to say that I never claimed truth or facts about anyhthng I've shared here. (Check out my posts.) I did clearly state my experience of working with Curanderos of Central America over a 20 years period. I don't care what anyone thinks, these folks are experts. Other than that, I'm happy to keep fielding questions and shares and am rather enjoying the interactions, even those that are a bit tough. Cheers!

 

[Ajqij]

Ajqij, we’ve already had this exchange.

You’re repeating the same rhetorical formula, saying you welcome dialogue, then subtly discrediting those who engage with you, while offering apologies that don’t actually take ownership. It’s more of the same.

You say you’re open to criticism, but only if someone comes with “evidence” for why your approach is flawed. That’s not dialogue. It implies you’re not interested in reflection unless it’s backed by proof on your terms.

You then go on to describe how the site “seems” to operate, suggesting that when ideas aren’t condoned by senior members or staff, they’re subtly negated instead of being explored. But let’s not pretend that’s an observation, it’s projection. You’re suggesting there’s a silent system of suppression at play simply because your ideas weren’t met with immediate validation. That’s not fair to the people who did engage with you seriously and in good faith.

And then finally, “So what are you learning?” It sounds like a question, but it’s a rhetorical pivot.

Reflection doesn’t mean explaining again why you’re right. Accountability doesn’t mean apologizing if someone misread you. And dialogue doesn’t mean asking others to prove they understand you, while ignoring their feedback. You say you’ve learned something. That’s great. So now, maybe show it by changing how you engage.

Sure . . . here's the change . . . Sometimes dialogue needs to end and this is one of those times. I find you to be inflexible and lacking in humility. Please don't keep hammering on me, we're done.

 

[Varallo]

Sure . . . here's the change . . . Sometimes dialogue needs to end and this is one of those times. I find you to be inflexible and lacking in humility. Please don't keep hammering on me, we're done.

That is okay Ajqij. If you’re stepping away, I’ll respect that. But just to be clear this was never about “hammering” you, it was about engaging with the ideas you brought forward and how you brought them forward. Dialogue isn’t always comfortable, especially when we’re asked to reflect rather than just be heard. But that discomfort can be where growth actually happens, if we let it.

Either way, take care on your journey.

 

[Here&Now]

Thanks for your thoughts and I agree with the importance of reading the room. I also want to say that I never claimed truth or facts about anyhthng I've shared here. (Check out my posts.) I did clearly state my experience of working with Curanderos of Central America over a 20 years period. I don't care what anyone thinks, these folks are experts. Other than that, I'm happy to keep fielding questions and shares and am rather enjoying the interactions, even those that are a bit tough. Cheers!

Cheers!

I actually joined this thread late and I'm not even sure what kicked all of this off. I'm a little curious what was said that was considered outside the bounds of acceptable conversation. I'll have to check out your posts. 20 years in that position probably affords a lot of opportunity for some atypically-deep mystical experience.

 

[Ajqij]

That is okay Ajqij. If you’re stepping away, I’ll respect that. But just to be clear this was never about “hammering” you, it was about engaging with the ideas you brought forward and how you brought them forward. Dialogue isn’t always comfortable, especially when we’re asked to reflect rather than just be heard. But that discomfort can be where growth actually happens, if we let it.

Either way, take care on your journey.

Tell you what Varallo, if you are curious about what I have to offer about my experiences with DMT and other sacred ceremonies and ritutuals I've experienced in the last two decades with the extraordinary elders of Central America let me know as I would be pleased to engage with you in a way that we both learn something new. To date so far, you've posed far more statements than questions and the questions you did ask, and that I respectfull responded to, were ignored or judged. Like I said, open up and show some humility or stop texting me as I've already stated multiple times that I find your approach unproductive. Blessings.

 

[Jungleheart]

With any social media engagement, it helps to assess the audience and come up with content that they might like. It takes trial and error, I've put hours into posts that got no response. My most popular posts are open ended and popular topics or semi controversial, then I play the role of facilitator in the comments. Super niche topics get less engagement or people who don't agree. This forum is extremely left-brained the and rigor of the discourse is high. Also for some reason trolls flock here so it takes a while to feel new people out.

 

[Ajqij]

Cheers!

I actually joined this thread late and I'm not even sure what kicked all of this off. I'm a little curious what was said that was considered outside the bounds of acceptable conversation. I'll have to check out your posts. 20 years in that position probably affords a lot of opportunity for some atypically-deep mystical experience.

Well, I'm not a new psychonaught that's for darned sure. I've conducted expeditions to sacred sites from Peru to Northern Mexico and spent years living with and communing with the Maya and the Curanderos and Elders there. I've been priviledged to be mentored by them not only on the ways of sacred ceremony, but the ancient Tzolkin calendars they still use today to prepare travelers for how to engage in the terrain between the finite and the infinite. Apparently that is not considered to be "critical thinking" here and based on flawed mental framing by senior members. I'm not being combative, I'm simply standing firm about the deep reverence and respect I have for the masters of the plants who've shown me what few people in modern society can even imagine. (Imagine if you will that there is a way to access the profound wisdom we experience during breakthrough in our everyday lives.) Impossible? Assumptive? I think not. Controversial and requiring exploration? Absolutely.