Free Interpretation

Imposition, it seems to me, is always present at the outset of violence. And if the opposite of imposition is free interpretation, I believe then, that free interpretation is the seed of nonviolence.

"If the human being is intentionality, then, nonviolence is contributing to the enhancement of that intentionality. To put it simply, if his transformation is hindered by suffering and his basic project is the overcoming of pain and suffering -- then, helping him to alleviate his pain, his suffering, is nonviolence." --from the post, Violence and Nonviolence

In other words, letting the other express his intentionality is the basis of that enhancement -- by giving him his freedom of interpretation and the understanding of the action that is the consequence of that interpretation.

Still, isn't this stretching it?

I do not think so. And to prove it -- to prove it for yourself, that is, try this: the next time you have an argument, especially with someone whose opinion directly opposes your own -- try giving him the benefit of his free interpretation, try accepting his position as it is, just another position; not wrong, not necessarily right either. Just a position. Try understanding his opinion. Try comprehending where he is coming from.

To make this easier, try to see that your position is, also, on the other hand, just another position -- even if it is exactly the opposite of his. This is the only way you can reconcile two opposing views.

Remember, this is also just my interpretation of free interpretation. It may coincide with your own interpretation, or not. Either way, it doesn't make it right, but it doesn't make it wrong either.
•••