I never thought about this. I’ve been focusing on results rather than process. Definitely worth thinking about.

Just for the record, explaining how you go about what you do, how you reach conclusions, what your thought processes look like, all seem to me to be teaching by example. Then making them useful as guidelines for others that may not even know where to start.

I guess this is not as direct as other approaches might be, but I think we all learn and want to learn in a variety of ways. Especially when one way or another does not appear to be ‘working’.

Your process seems to work well for you. Could work well for others, too?

Yes, I have lots more to say about this. I’m not sure it’s useful to people though. I like to write posts that have things in them that people can use immediately. (A friend and I used to have a blog where we were re-working psychotherapy and this was the outlet for my theoretical interests).

But I do care about this stuff and I care because I think it makes a difference in people’s lives. Most especially the issue of response-ability (doing what we can with what we’ve got) and this not becoming blaming the victim.

I can see I’ll have to think this through. I’d really like to right about this. I’ll have a go and see if I end up with stuff that I think is useful for people.

Thanks for your suggestion.

Maybe you could write a post about the idea you presented ‘excessively individualistic or reductionist’, since you seem to have something more to say?

It’s my impatience. Not with individuals (usually, certainly not with Tom) but with the terms of the debate. Some questions are so misconceived they just waste so much time on approaches that can’t lead anywhere. I want to jump up and down and say, “Stop wasting time, this is important, there’s a way to look at this that is productive”.

I tend to only comment on what touches me or I see as an important topic or issue. So I may be more prone to this type of reaction because of this.

Fortunately Tom (and Albert at Urban Monk and Wade at The Middle Way) respond well. They engage on the issues and are genuinely interested in moving the debate forward.

I try to (and think so far that I’ve succeeded) never attack people but only issues and the way they are presented. I do regard anger as good and useful - so long as it is directed at reconfiguring an issue or problem not at attacking people.

My impatience is most often hooked by presentations of things that are excessively individualistic or reductionist. I could go on at length about what I mean by this but this is already a long comment.

Please feel free to get back to me if you want to talk about this more. Thanks for taking the time to comment once again.

The articles you write seem to reflect for me anyway, the real you. You come across as sincere and concerned. Sometimes at Tom’s site you seem ready for a fight. I’m just wondering why that is?

PS. I find myself in that mode to by the way.(laughing)