Definition?

Why is there a need to define? Do we miss something if we don’t define? Where do our definitions come from? What things can be universally defined? How thoroughly should we define? Are there certain things aspects of life that have to be defined, while others don’t? These are questions I have as I learn more about how to be student and how to use my own voice. The questions usually come when I think of a particular thing that I might nod my head to when a professor, tour guide, or a fellow student mention it. I nod to say I know what they are talking about, but sometimes I wonder if really have the authority to nod. I wonder: because I am quick to accept things do I end up “defining” things vaguely - perhaps in Heidi’s example in class of westerner’s tendancy: good or bad? I might know one or two things about Guanyin and nod at her mention, but am I ready to discuss her at length? No.

Defining words and concepts and using them correctly is an obvious necessity if humans are to communicate, especially if we are to join in academic discourse. While people write introductions to explain their context for how they present their ideas (use words, terms) if you use a word in a new way, or change a concept you have to make a really strong argument as to why. And at this point I don’t feel confident that I have enough knowledge to correctly join most conversations even ones related to my studies and am overwhelmed by the eventual prospect. This feeling of inadequacy has flourished in Friends Global World program in which I have to simultaneously and deeply introduce myself to many topics. So, while I understand definition’s benefits, I rebel and question. First, as we all do, whether the current definitions are correct; and second, whether clinging to definition produces narrow mindedness. An example relevant to our studies would be morals.

Do I need to define my morals and thus religion? Some people would answer yes, I must define my morals, usually with the argument that especially in my position of being introduced to a wide variety of teachings, that I cannot understand them without a frame to view through and make comparisons to. While others take to the approach that no teaching, or set of values I could adopt or create would be without flaw, so it is best to continually introduce yourself to different teachings, taking in new parts and adjusting your own view, so that you can better understand people and situations you are applying said morals to.
Do I have a religion? No. Am I looking to find one? I don’t think I am searching for one, but instead, peering into cultures to identify some of their common paths and understand them so I can understand the route of many conflicts of our time. So for now I am taking a lesson from the Dao (the way):

The Dao that can be defined is not the everlasting Dao.

If we consider all religions specific paths, then they all reflect this aspect of the Dao. All of the major religions have different branches, usually formed when followers found they needed to redefine the teachings. I believe that things can be defined but not indefinitely, they must always be reassessed. We shouldn’t fall into habits of thoughtlessly using phrases or words, or following traditions and I must follow this example in my life.