Discernment Gives Way To Judgement When Preferences Turn Into Prejudices - Grasshopper

This bon mot from The Grasshopper is like an Australian Backscratcher – it gets way “down under.”

I’m of the opinion discernments have value because they let us sort through life’s wheat and chaff so we can tell one from the other. Judgements, on the other hand, prevent us from being ambidextrous, making only wheat right and chaff left out. Judgement determines that chaff is useless and has us ignore its value.

 

We arrive at judgements when the things we like preclude us from letting in anything we don’t. Our preferences become the only things, and the ensuing prejudice prevents us from considering something different. It’s kind of like what philosopher Alan Watts said about new thoughts, “If I think all the time, I won’t have anything to think about except my own thoughts. Now, that would leave me high and dry, and I would become like a library to which the only books being added were books about the books that were already in it.”

 

Judgements keep us from seeing the value of all options. If we only consider our preferences, we prejudice ourselves from reaching an optimum solution. It’s a real sticky wicket.

 

Think of it this way: Discernment is logical; Judgements are prejudicial. Discernment is just a sorting function devoid of emotional prejudice. Discernment allows all the facts to be considered. When things start to go awry is when we prefer one fact over another, thereby leaving the others out. By doing so we prejudice ourselves from seeing the entire landscape, which has us blindly hold on to our little corner of the world. There are not a lot of options in “Smallville.”

 

If you want more options in life, you have to let the bouncer known as prejudice let all the viewpoints in the door. Then you can let discernment do its job and go to work on all the facts, and not be limited by just the ones you prefer.

 

All the best,

John