Inner Court

I like to call the word “but” a dirty, three-letter word. The definition of the word introduces the concept of a contrasting element. However, we often use it to bring a contrasting element which negates that which came before. In terms of how we think about ourselves, our lives and our choices, this word is often very dangerous psychologically. If you find that you feel guilty about something and wonder if the guilt is fitting or not, you can present the evidence for and against. However, if you pay close attention, very often you will see that some evidence is presented prior to a “but”, and some is presented after the “but”. This is akin to being in a court proceeding and taking some valid evidence and throwing it out, wiping it from the record, favoring some evidence over other evidence. “But” is often used by someone who is trying hard to sway the verdict in one way or the other, biassing the outcome.

The word “and” is really the appropriate conjunction to address these dilemmas in the inner court of accountability and integrity. Each act that we do, or don’t do, has a broad context within which it occurs. Just like a well run court proceeding, all of the contextual information is brought to bear to reach an understanding of what has happened and where the ethical responsibility rests. These include things like the time of day, the people involved, previous relationships, the history, our age, our sense of personal efficacy at the time, our own personal history, traumatic or otherwise. Using the word “and”, allows the information to be brought together on an even ground of reflection.

TRY: Allowing all the evidence and contextual information to be held in awareness as you assess your proper accountability in a situation in your life.