>A question: what is the value of maintaining a dualism between mind and
>body such that the compassion in the gut is not also in the mind, and vice
>versa? It seems to me, although I could be inaccurate or incomplete, that
>the mind is an emergent phenomenon of the living body. In that specific
>sense, it can be said to be "in" the body. (It's certainly not confined
>to the brain!) Thinking is a bodily function and is regulated, to a
>significant extent, by the same hormonal systems that regulate the other
>bodily functions.
And in LO916 Gerry Starnes answered, in part:
"Back to compassion: perhaps I am wrong about the person's actual
situation. Knowing that and knowing my own experience/response to what I
thought the reality was, and being able to share with the other to bring
the realities back together, both of us can learn about ourselves and the
other. "
I believe the two writers are describing sympathy (I feel what you feel)
rather than compassion. Compassion starts with a sympathetic reaction to
another's plight or experience and, seeing the bigger picture, takes a
supportive action. The action might be to tolerate, foregive or, more
overtly, to interveen. Without action at some level, we are only voyeurs at
a train wreck.
Paul Lindsey
Tracor Aerospace
PEL@eng2.tracor.com
(512)929-2815