I agree that other people judging you doesn’t mean anything. But judgement isn't entirely pointless.
Every judgement I make about others says something about me. It shows me what I value deep down inside even if I refuse to admit it on the surface. Every act of judgement is an opportunity for learning and growth (for the "judge").
I also see judgement as an unconscious defense mechanism for our egos. Which is just to say that it's not something we can just stop doing. Have you tried? So, we may as well make the most of them as learning opportunities.
I usually get into a judging myself about judging knot. What do you mean by "Every act of judgement is an opportunity for learning and growth"?
I think everyone has their own unique sense of taste and those differences will cause judgement. But I think that it's somewhat pointless to argue which taste is superior.
But at the same time, reality has to be considered. Does something work better than something else to accomplish something?
I don't know how the objective and the subjective interplay.
Cool! So, it sounds like we both agree that judgement isn't *completely* pointless. Because as you said, "reality has to be considered. Does something work better than something else to accomplish something?"
I also agree that for mundane things, it's pointless to judge others on their tastes. But we don't just judge on mundane things. And I also think it's important to distinguish between unconscious (subjective) and conscious (objective) judgement because we don't have much control over the former. If any.
For example, if you see someone bigger and taller than you on the street with a knife in his hand turn to look at you right in the eyes with a menacing expression...
your first instinct might be to turn the other way and maybe even run.
But in that moment, just before you turned around, you made a judgement call. For most people, it's instinctive/unconscious because it needs to be a snap judgement for the sake of self-preservation. So even if we said that "judgement is pointless," we can't just stop it from happening. And even if we could, I don't think we should. For survival reasons. And for your jiu jitsu classes (I imagine).
I believe that on a base level, all forms of judgement stem from this self-preservation instinct. That when we're judging others' tastes in sports, for example, we're judging to determine how similar/dissimilar they are to us to determine whether they're more friend or foe.
So, when I said "every act of judgement is an opportunity for learning and growth," I meant we gain information about ourselves and for ourselves. It's not the judgement, itself, but the *need* to judge that highlights for us what criteria we use to identify friends and foes.
Judgement criteria aren't always obvious to us because judgement is often done unconsciously. So, once we're aware of the criteria, then we can refine them to improve any conscious judgements we make. That goes to your point about finding something that works better.
Where taste comes into play is that we each use different criteria, and it's somewhat pointless to compare your criteria with mine and vice versa unless one set of criteria results in significantly better quality judgements. Of course, there's nuance here we already talked about.
So, in terms of "how the objective and the subjective interplay," my view is that the objective is driven by conscious judgement (e.g. logic and reason), while the subjective is driven by unconscious judgement (e.g. feelings and instincts). We can control the former; much less so, the latter. So, while it's pointless to compare which subjective part of taste is superior, there may be value in comparing which objective part of taste is superior because at least we control that.
Sorry, I know I rambled a bit there, so I don't know if any of that made sense. 😅
What if a taste or judgement imparts a net benefit while also boosting ego? Is that good or bad?
It's possible for someone to make a great decision (i.e. judgement call), then boost their ego by insulting others for making bad choices.
Even if we used ego as a qualifier. I'm not sure it's that useful because only the person making the judgement would know for sure whether their judgement increased their own ego. And that also assumes that their ego doesn't blind them from the truth (which it usually does).
I also think we're barking up the wrong tree.
I would further distinguish between a judgement and the *response* to the judgement.
Let's say two skiers, Bob and Dave, see another nearby skier fall down. Maybe Bob judges that skier to be "an idiot." While Dave judges that skier to be "just a beginner." Maybe one of them are right. Maybe neither are. But in response, both lend a hand to help the skier back up.
Does it matter what their judgements were?
Granted, a person like Bob is less likely to help. But if he did anyway, does it matter whether his judgement boosted his ego?
Don't their actions/responses matter more? Besides, actions/responses are observable while ego and the thought-process of judgement are not.
To clarify, I still think judgements serve an important purpose in triggering actions. But I also think a response to a judgement is separate (though often correlated) from the judgement, itself. But it's the response that's "good" or "bad" because that's the part that has material impact.
I agree that other people judging you doesn’t mean anything. But judgement isn't entirely pointless.
Every judgement I make about others says something about me. It shows me what I value deep down inside even if I refuse to admit it on the surface. Every act of judgement is an opportunity for learning and growth (for the "judge").
I also see judgement as an unconscious defense mechanism for our egos. Which is just to say that it's not something we can just stop doing. Have you tried? So, we may as well make the most of them as learning opportunities.
I usually get into a judging myself about judging knot. What do you mean by "Every act of judgement is an opportunity for learning and growth"?
I think everyone has their own unique sense of taste and those differences will cause judgement. But I think that it's somewhat pointless to argue which taste is superior.
But at the same time, reality has to be considered. Does something work better than something else to accomplish something?
I don't know how the objective and the subjective interplay.
Cool! So, it sounds like we both agree that judgement isn't *completely* pointless. Because as you said, "reality has to be considered. Does something work better than something else to accomplish something?"
I also agree that for mundane things, it's pointless to judge others on their tastes. But we don't just judge on mundane things. And I also think it's important to distinguish between unconscious (subjective) and conscious (objective) judgement because we don't have much control over the former. If any.
For example, if you see someone bigger and taller than you on the street with a knife in his hand turn to look at you right in the eyes with a menacing expression...
your first instinct might be to turn the other way and maybe even run.
But in that moment, just before you turned around, you made a judgement call. For most people, it's instinctive/unconscious because it needs to be a snap judgement for the sake of self-preservation. So even if we said that "judgement is pointless," we can't just stop it from happening. And even if we could, I don't think we should. For survival reasons. And for your jiu jitsu classes (I imagine).
I believe that on a base level, all forms of judgement stem from this self-preservation instinct. That when we're judging others' tastes in sports, for example, we're judging to determine how similar/dissimilar they are to us to determine whether they're more friend or foe.
So, when I said "every act of judgement is an opportunity for learning and growth," I meant we gain information about ourselves and for ourselves. It's not the judgement, itself, but the *need* to judge that highlights for us what criteria we use to identify friends and foes.
Judgement criteria aren't always obvious to us because judgement is often done unconsciously. So, once we're aware of the criteria, then we can refine them to improve any conscious judgements we make. That goes to your point about finding something that works better.
Where taste comes into play is that we each use different criteria, and it's somewhat pointless to compare your criteria with mine and vice versa unless one set of criteria results in significantly better quality judgements. Of course, there's nuance here we already talked about.
So, in terms of "how the objective and the subjective interplay," my view is that the objective is driven by conscious judgement (e.g. logic and reason), while the subjective is driven by unconscious judgement (e.g. feelings and instincts). We can control the former; much less so, the latter. So, while it's pointless to compare which subjective part of taste is superior, there may be value in comparing which objective part of taste is superior because at least we control that.
Sorry, I know I rambled a bit there, so I don't know if any of that made sense. 😅
What if the qualifier for taste and judgement is ego? If taste and judgement are used to increase your ego, it's "bad".
What if a taste or judgement imparts a net benefit while also boosting ego? Is that good or bad?
It's possible for someone to make a great decision (i.e. judgement call), then boost their ego by insulting others for making bad choices.
Even if we used ego as a qualifier. I'm not sure it's that useful because only the person making the judgement would know for sure whether their judgement increased their own ego. And that also assumes that their ego doesn't blind them from the truth (which it usually does).
I also think we're barking up the wrong tree.
I would further distinguish between a judgement and the *response* to the judgement.
Let's say two skiers, Bob and Dave, see another nearby skier fall down. Maybe Bob judges that skier to be "an idiot." While Dave judges that skier to be "just a beginner." Maybe one of them are right. Maybe neither are. But in response, both lend a hand to help the skier back up.
Does it matter what their judgements were?
Granted, a person like Bob is less likely to help. But if he did anyway, does it matter whether his judgement boosted his ego?
Don't their actions/responses matter more? Besides, actions/responses are observable while ego and the thought-process of judgement are not.
To clarify, I still think judgements serve an important purpose in triggering actions. But I also think a response to a judgement is separate (though often correlated) from the judgement, itself. But it's the response that's "good" or "bad" because that's the part that has material impact.