From rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk Sun Dec 9 02:30:50 2007
From: rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk (rob mooney)
Date: Sun Dec 9 02:35:04 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Random Bohm quotes on Image
In-Reply-To: <20071204.233326.2428.130.ae.dropper@juno.com>
References: <20071204.233326.2428.130.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <BAY123-W30FB993BC75590F111805FDC6A0@phx.gbl>
on blue buy you
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgDate: Tue, 4 Dec 2007 23:33:14 -0500Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Random Bohm quotes on ImageFrom: ae.dropper@juno.com
Savin nickels savin dimes
Working till the sun don't shine
Lookin forward to happier times
On Blue Bayou
I'm goin back one day
Come what may
To Blue Bayou
Where you sleep all day
And the Catfish play
On Blue Bayou
Oh those fishing boats
With their sails afloat
If I could only see
That familiar sunrise
Through sleepy eyes
How happy I'd be
-- funny
On Tue, 4 Dec 2007 21:01:02 -0500 "Don Lay" <donlay@knology.net> writes:
I'm having a beer, doing this and watching Roy Orbison on Public TV, Black and White Night with k.d. lang singing backup and it almost brings tears to me eyes. That's a couple of very gifted people. -- dl
From: Don Lay
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2007 8:16 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Random Bohm quotes on Image
Not me. -- dl
From: donald factor
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2007 5:30 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Random Bohm quotes on Image
Are you raising the question of the possibility that a Bohm dialogue monoculture - that is, where all the participants in the group share a common content of consciousness - might be incoherent and therefore destructive from the point of view of the rest of the natural world?
don
On Dec 4, 2007, at 1:17 PM, Don Lay wrote:
Hi Al, Is this the sort of thing you reference?
http://www.alternativeradio.org/programs/SHIV007.shtml
Over centuries, communities all over the world have developed knowledge and skills to derive livelihoods from the bounties of nature's diversity. Today, traditional agriculture is being undermined by external inputs and new rules of international trade. Globalization advocates render local knowledge invisible by declaring it non-existent or illegitimate. Monocultures of the mind generate models of production which destroy diversity and legitimize that destruction as progress.
Do we suggest that everyone using and identifying as imagery could lead to extinction as happens with some crops? -- dl
From: Alfred Landman
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2007 1:18 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Random Bohm quotes on Image
Hi Don Lay. You could study mono-cultures and what pests mean to them. You could study mono-cultures and what pests mean. ALDon Lay <donlay@knology.net> wrote:
Map-maker and map are one process ... -- Al
I see this POV.
However, a very common POV says that when the word, map, is used, it does not point to the territory and it does not point to the "maker" of the map. The word map is used to stand for, symbolize, a territory -- not the maker of the map.
What is the meaning of these differing Points of View? Is the meaning that there is fused, con-fused points of views? -- dl
From: Alfred Landman
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2007 7:58 AM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Random Bohm quotes on Image
Hi dl. Map-maker and map are one process; to a lesser extend (lower dimension) two products. ALDon Lay <donlay@knology.net> wrote:
Hi dl. Any territory is nothing but a map. -- AL
Hi Al. I can see how that view might be useful. However, that view does not appear to address what db/thought addresses in db's remarks about the self and especially the identified personal self.
One view is that Bohm means that a map can be made of SOS language. For example, language can create or present a mental scenario in thought or in consciousness, and no "real place on Earth" can be found that the mental scenario actually points to.
Look for example at when people act and pretend being something they are not, just because "in there" in their thought systems, it creates good FEELS like the acting and pretending of fantasy can produce endorphins.
That kind of mental scenario has been treated for millennia as something "made up" by a confused mind, something presented purely by thought and does not re-present imagery "out there" outside the mind that creates it.
Can you see this view that this reasoning points to? -- dl
From: Alfred Landman
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 03, 2007 11:48 AM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Random Bohm quotes on Image
Hi dl. Any territory is nothing but a map. ALDon Lay <donlay@knology.net> wrote:
When Bohm says that "self is a map without a territory", maybe part of the meaning is that when using language to reference a self, then by definition of the way language functions, something like an image is used "in there" in tas or in mind to stand for the individual named.
Clearly, the individual referenced by the image is not identical the image by use of the reason that meaningful use of language requires the use of the image as symbol.
Speaking of insanity, is it not insane to use symbols and then act and pretend they are not symbols, but are the actuality referenced by the symbol?
Is not this what Bohm references with the idea that the "self is a map without a territory"? That is, we use symbols as if they are the actuality.
It seems the significance of the quantum discoveries is that at the quantum level of awareness the symbol is not and cannot be the symbolized.
And doesn't Bohm's use of the self as "a map without a territory" point to the idea that the language symbolism modern man has inherited is based largely upon the notion of the separated observer and observed that the quantum discoveries have shown to be faulty?
Once again, this is difficult to talk about because it seems we all use language reflexively or mechanically without awareness and therefore without much meaning.
Anyone else see this as being meaningful? -- dl
From: Alfred Landman
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 03, 2007 6:16 AM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Random Bohm quotes on Image
Hi donF. DL does assume an "attraction for Bohm", does reference not by whom, though. ALdonald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> wrote:
DL might like to check out this link which may help to answer some of his questions.
But even better would be if he read "Koinonia", In the meanwhile, he might go from this link to the "connections" link to see how Bohm fits in. to what Diversity is up to.
Part two: I don't understand your comment about DonL's question, AL. Is it the question below that you are inquiring about? What is incomplete, and what are the unfounded premises? I am curious. I too, consider DeMare's work of great importance in the furtherance of this dialogue project. Koinonia is a difficult book - it probably tries to bring more territory than a lot of readers want to handle. It may also offer some insight into the sort of stuff that Eric has objected to.
don (donF)
On Dec 2, 2007, at 10:06 AM, Alfred Landman wrote:
Hi DL. Not drawing a line, I am not in a position to survey. As for your other question, it appears to be incomplete or based on an unfounded premise. AL
Don Lay <donlay@knology.net> wrote:
Al, is De Mare mostly known as a therapist or as a theorist/thinker re group dynamics?
What was the attraction for Bohm? -- dl
From: Alfred Landman
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Saturday, December 01, 2007 5:15 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Random Bohm quotes on Image
Hi DL. Thanks. It depends, like anything else, on the frame-work of re-presentation of "self-image" in usage. The idea of liking does not surface here when it comes to going through their work. ALDon Lay <donlay@knology.net> wrote:
Hi Al. Welcome.
Does Bohm's ideas regarding the identified personal self or self-image derive from De Mare?
Evidently, Bohm considers the self and self-image to have limited meaning.
Perhaps because at the level of quantum movement it has no meaning.
What do you like about De Mare/Bohm thought? -- dl
From: Alfred Landman
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Friday, November 30, 2007 8:04 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Random Bohm quotes on Image
Hi fellow listserv-members -
I am new to this group. My interest in the work of Patrick De Mare brought me to David Bohm and his writings. I just finished some of his books and want to join your discussion. Has the body of contributions of this forum over the years taken the ideas and the proposal of dialogue to another level from where Bohm left things off? Can you point me and other readers to any progress in this quest? Thank you.
ALDon Lay <donlay@knology.net> wrote:
What horseshit!
From: william
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Friday, November 30, 2007 7:17 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Random Bohm quotes on Image
>I: I truly, truly hope you are right. I am glad that you escaped the trap.
>Sometimes they refuse to stay where you can confront them. Then what?
Don't worry, he is not going to run away. If he is a fighter then he will face the confrontation. Wait and see...
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogueinfo: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
Be a better sports nut! Let your teams follow you with Yahoo Mobile. Try it now.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogueinfo: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogueinfo: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogueinfo: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogueinfo: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogueinfo: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
Be a better sports nut! Let your teams follow you with Yahoo Mobile. Try it now.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogueinfo: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
Get easy, one-click access to your favorites. Make Yahoo! your homepage.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
_________________________________________________________________
The next generation of MSN Hotmail has arrived - Windows Live Hotmail
http://www.newhotmail.co.uk
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071209/adcdd7ad/attachment.html
From rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk Sun Dec 9 02:38:17 2007
From: rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk (rob mooney)
Date: Sun Dec 9 02:42:31 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Language, Map, and Email Identities
In-Reply-To: <005b01c83751$291f1280$b5c16018@DL01>
References: <703462.40929.qm@web57414.mail.re1.yahoo.com><00e101c835d1$7d56d9e0$b5c16018@DL01><00f001c835da$b015f1f0$b5c16018@DL01><00ff01c835db$dde8a360$b5c16018@DL01><BLU108-W4FA7123AA1099A7E314C6FF6E0@phx.gbl>
<004701c83745$85050930$b5c16018@DL01>
<005b01c83751$291f1280$b5c16018@DL01>
Message-ID: <BAY123-W3525F47A3DC07D22CC0A4BDC6A0@phx.gbl>
Pat (of anyone), if you're reading this, I'd appreciate your thoughts on the above notions re measuring and describing experience with words that are measures and descriptions of experience. -- dl
or i suppose you could just experience the measure and description and be silent. or just be silent. or just be.
From: donlay@knology.netTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Language, Map, and Email IdentitiesDate: Wed, 5 Dec 2007 10:11:48 -0500
Apology retracted because I did not put my paraphrase in quotes.
Eric, you might be very interested in Bohm's remarks regarding the esthetics of science and art in his essay, On the Relationships of Science and Art in On Creativity. I like very much Lee Nichol's thoughts in the Foreword regarding Bohm's ideas of the similarity of perception processes and the processes of abstraction use by both artist and scientist.
They shed light on the processes of suspension that may be practiced in Dialogue. As the artist must suspend the reflex to make a painting in the same old way in order that creative processes may present new formulations, in dialogue we may suspend the usual understanding of dialogue (per Bohm) so that creative processes may present new formulations.
Obviously the "usual understanding of dialogue" is that it is just reflexive, mechanical talk. Bohm says he gives it different meaning which seems to mean that he goes to the origin of the idea of dialogue in the Greek which has something to do with the structure of the universe as Reason and Meaning.
Part of the problems of modern civilization is that both artists and scientists must formulate their discoveries using language that fits the paradigm of physical evolution -- that is we must use the language that has evolved. Even to talk about the inadequacy of language, we must use the inadequate language. Is it possible to see similarity here of using the electron microscope to measure an electron?
My view as artist is that just as science discovered that measuring an electron with an electron measuring device is inadequate because the electron that measures is indivisible from the electron that is measured -- similarly the word that may be used to measure and describe experience is itself a measure of experience.
Pat (of anyone), if you're reading this, I'd appreciate your thoughts on the above notions re measuring and describing experience with words that are measures and descriptions of experience. -- dl
From: Don Lay
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2007 8:48 AM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Language, Map, and Email Identities
Eric, that appears to be a paraphrase of material in On Creativity where Bohm addresses how Scientists and Artists have similar goals, etc. It should not have been in quotation marks. My apology. -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: eric scott nelson
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2007 11:33 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Language, Map, and Email Identities
where can i find "In the same way, scientists do that except the scientists (and the artist says Bohm) intend their language maps to represent "things" in space and time."? is that from "On Dialogue"? what page(s)?-esn
From: donlay@knology.netTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Language, Map, and Email IdentitiesDate: Mon, 3 Dec 2007 13:39:41 -0500
More on this theme:
Rajath and I talked briefly about Googling up some material, maybe from Wikipedia, and then presenting it online as if we (our identity) knew and had that knowledge all along.
It can give a little pleasure "rush". I've done that and noticed the rush, and evidently Rajath had also.
Are we the only ones or are we the only ones able to see that talking about it is a use of db/thought presented in Though as a System? I know, of course, that Pat knows because she has talked about it and pointed it out on list.
Is not that another little example of a self without a territory? And doesn't tas give us a way to talk about that kind of situation without digging deeper the false identity hole? -- dl
From: Don Lay
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 03, 2007 1:31 PM
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Language, Map, and Email Identities
Language can create a mental scenario, something like a map. In a way, that's what novelists do.
The science fiction novelist may construct a language map which may only stand for fantasy.
In the same way, scientists do that except the scientists (and the artist says Bohm) intend their language maps to represent "things" in space and time. Something like that. The map or mental scenario created by the fiction writer only has a make-believe reality. The map is not intended to be used to explore space-time.
I have read two or three little essays regarding how people can "get on line" and create an identity, i.e., create imagery for the imagination of others -- and then become confused about that identity as if it might actually be their identity, what they actually are.
For example, someone could log onto a chat line and create a completely false identity in someone's mind.
In such a case, would it not be adequate to say that was a self identity without a territory
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
Invite your mail contacts to join your friends list with Windows Live Spaces. It's easy! Try it!
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
_________________________________________________________________
Get free emoticon packs and customisation from Windows Live.
http://www.pimpmylive.co.uk
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071209/04bda6ba/attachment.html
From rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk Sun Dec 9 02:42:33 2007
From: rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk (rob mooney)
Date: Sun Dec 9 02:46:48 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Language, Map, and Email Identities
Message-ID: <BAY123-W16ECE3AC18FDEFFF7DE132DC6A0@phx.gbl>
this seems to be about gift economies and generosity
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgDate: Wed, 5 Dec 2007 13:19:24 -0500Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Language, Map, and Email IdentitiesFrom: ae.dropper@juno.com
They shed light on the processes of suspension that may be practiced in Dialogue. (dl)
"Suspension" just grows and grows. Where the surface fruits of "suspension" are appreciated, suspension through the strata begins to show its appeal. The fruits of suspension [of action, which includes speech, in relation to what is read or heard] are
that something unknown surfaces as a possible response. Very satisfying to respond with these. But these too, can be suspended. It may take awhile to be able to do this because the little bit of satisfaction needs to be "invested." Very long story short, with each "reinvestment" something even more amazing surfaces.
Eventually, there comes the curiosity about a kind of 'complete investment'. This is the logical conclusion of Bohm's brilliant but humble and simple proposal of "suspension'.
Along the way of this, and relatively soon though, you will find yourself responding with things you have never heard of before. So the process is never not fun. And there is no rush for the "completion."
-- funny
On Wed, 5 Dec 2007 11:31:00 -0500 ae.dropper@juno.com writes:
Pat (of anyone), if you're reading this, I'd appreciate your thoughts on the above notions re measuring and describing experience with words that are measures and descriptions of experience. -- dl
It's in the hopper.
[Looked up "hopper." Interesting.
"A tank holding a liquid and having a device for releasing its contents through a pipe."
"A box into which a bill to be considered by a legislative body, is dropped."
"A freight car with hinged doors in a sloping bottom."
"A usually funnel-shaped container for delivering material (as grain)."]
-- funny
On Wed, 5 Dec 2007 10:11:48 -0500 "Don Lay" <donlay@knology.net> writes:
Apology retracted because I did not put my paraphrase in quotes.
Eric, you might be very interested in Bohm's remarks regarding the esthetics of science and art in his essay, On the Relationships of Science and Art in On Creativity. I like very much Lee Nichol's thoughts in the Foreword regarding Bohm's ideas of the similarity of perception processes and the processes of abstraction use by both artist and scientist.
They shed light on the processes of suspension that may be practiced in Dialogue. As the artist must suspend the reflex to make a painting in the same old way in order that creative processes may present new formulations, in dialogue we may suspend the usual understanding of dialogue (per Bohm) so that creative processes may present new formulations.
Obviously the "usual understanding of dialogue" is that it is just reflexive, mechanical talk. Bohm says he gives it different meaning which seems to mean that he goes to the origin of the idea of dialogue in the Greek which has something to do with the structure of the universe as Reason and Meaning.
Part of the problems of modern civilization is that both artists and scientists must formulate their discoveries using language that fits the paradigm of physical evolution -- that is we must use the language that has evolved. Even to talk about the inadequacy of language, we must use the inadequate language. Is it possible to see similarity here of using the electron microscope to measure an electron?
My view as artist is that just as science discovered that measuring an electron with an electron measuring device is inadequate because the electron that measures is indivisible from the electron that is measured -- similarly the word that may be used to measure and describe experience is itself a measure of experience.
Pat (of anyone), if you're reading this, I'd appreciate your thoughts on the above notions re measuring and describing experience with words that are measures and descriptions of experience. -- dl
From: Don Lay
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2007 8:48 AM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Language, Map, and Email Identities
Eric, that appears to be a paraphrase of material in On Creativity where Bohm addresses how Scientists and Artists have similar goals, etc. It should not have been in quotation marks. My apology. -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: eric scott nelson
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2007 11:33 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Language, Map, and Email Identities
where can i find "In the same way, scientists do that except the scientists (and the artist says Bohm) intend their language maps to represent "things" in space and time."? is that from "On Dialogue"? what page(s)?-esn
From: donlay@knology.netTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Language, Map, and Email IdentitiesDate: Mon, 3 Dec 2007 13:39:41 -0500
More on this theme:
Rajath and I talked briefly about Googling up some material, maybe from Wikipedia, and then presenting it online as if we (our identity) knew and had that knowledge all along.
It can give a little pleasure "rush". I've done that and noticed the rush, and evidently Rajath had also.
Are we the only ones or are we the only ones able to see that talking about it is a use of db/thought presented in Though as a System? I know, of course, that Pat knows because she has talked about it and pointed it out on list.
Is not that another little example of a self without a territory? And doesn't tas give us a way to talk about that kind of situation without digging deeper the false identity hole? -- dl
From: Don Lay
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 03, 2007 1:31 PM
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Language, Map, and Email Identities
Language can create a mental scenario, something like a map. In a way, that's what novelists do.
The science fiction novelist may construct a language map which may only stand for fantasy.
In the same way, scientists do that except the scientists (and the artist says Bohm) intend their language maps to represent "things" in space and time. Something like that. The map or mental scenario created by the fiction writer only has a make-believe reality. The map is not intended to be used to explore space-time.
I have read two or three little essays regarding how people can "get on line" and create an identity, i.e., create imagery for the imagination of others -- and then become confused about that identity as if it might actually be their identity, what they actually are.
For example, someone could log onto a chat line and create a completely false identity in someone's mind.
In such a case, would it not be adequate to say that was a self identity without a territory
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
Invite your mail contacts to join your friends list with Windows Live Spaces. It's easy! Try it!
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
_________________________________________________________________
Get free emoticon packs and customisation from Windows Live.
http://www.pimpmylive.co.uk
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071209/3e3715b0/attachment.html
From rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk Sun Dec 9 02:44:16 2007
From: rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk (rob mooney)
Date: Sun Dec 9 02:48:30 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Language, Map, and Email Identities
In-Reply-To: <20071205.132756.2428.139.ae.dropper@juno.com>
References: <20071205.132756.2428.139.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <BAY123-W16293A9F19B6C47D1A43FDDC6A0@phx.gbl>
ha ha thanks
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgDate: Wed, 5 Dec 2007 13:26:58 -0500Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Language, Map, and Email IdentitiesFrom: ae.dropper@juno.com
actor factor hopper dropper.
-- funny
On Wed, 5 Dec 2007 09:44:05 -0800 donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> writes:
Also, the name of an old friend of mine who is an actor, but more recently turns out to be a very talented artist.
don
On Dec 5, 2007, at 8:31 AM, ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
It's in the hopper.
[Looked up "hopper." Interesting.
"A tank holding a liquid and having a device for releasing its contents through a pipe."
"A box into which a bill to be considered by a legislative body, is dropped."
"A freight car with hinged doors in a sloping bottom."
"A usually funnel-shaped container for delivering material (as grain)."]
-- funny
_________________________________________________________________
Who's friends with who and co-starred in what?
http://www.searchgamesbox.com/celebrityseparation.shtml
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071209/71d51924/attachment.html
From rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk Sun Dec 9 02:51:48 2007
From: rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk (rob mooney)
Date: Sun Dec 9 02:56:01 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Fwd: Setting the Record Straight on persons
In-Reply-To: <3724CEDB-ED7B-4967-BF67-DACFD399CCA4@dc.rr.com>
References: <ecdf86757f624a869337fffcb46d79be@johnconyers.com>
<E80921FE-3C95-44AD-993D-91D219545BEE@dc.rr.com>
<004e01c8378b$1bdc3fa0$b5c16018@DL01>
<3724CEDB-ED7B-4967-BF67-DACFD399CCA4@dc.rr.com>
Message-ID: <BAY123-W11C9C6010956FC19FFFAD5DC6A0@phx.gbl>
catching up so this might have been said. christus is greek - anointed or something. hair splitting though and many, even the moon died defeated death and rose again on the third day
From: DFACTOR@dc.rr.comSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Fwd: Setting the Record Straight on personsDate: Wed, 5 Dec 2007 15:17:01 -0800To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgI have no idea who your Eugene Weber is, but there was never a Roman god called Christus who defeated death and rose on the third day. There were some gods previous to Jesus who died and were resurrected but none, so far as I know, by that name. If I am wrong please enlighten me.
don
On Dec 5, 2007, at 2:06 PM, Don Lay wrote:
Two millennia ago, people under Roman occupation could become a Roman citizen and therefore have personal rights by professing loyalty oath to Rome and maybe to a Roman god. It is greatly ironical a Jew who it is said professed an interest in truth became identified with the Roman God Christus who it was said, died and went to the grave, fought and there defeated death and rose on the third day (as per UCLA Historian Eugene Weber).
_________________________________________________________________
Celeb spotting ? Play CelebMashup and win cool prizes
https://www.celebmashup.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071209/23505cfc/attachment.html
From rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk Sun Dec 9 02:55:45 2007
From: rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk (rob mooney)
Date: Sun Dec 9 03:00:00 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Random Bohm quotes on Image
In-Reply-To: <211550.21491.qm@web57408.mail.re1.yahoo.com>
References: <673BBE23-A85F-45EB-BD51-853A76A7F493@dc.rr.com>
<211550.21491.qm@web57408.mail.re1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <BAY123-W378FF50988F1D7444FFE83DC6A0@phx.gbl>
wheat salt wine and oil... good measure, packed down, shaken together, running over.
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2007 02:29:54 -0800From: landmana@yahoo.comSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Random Bohm quotes on ImageTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgHi don. Yes.Someone might say this: My --daily-- bread, this is nothing but flour and water. Now try this: Add, introduce, even minutely, some other things in that mix, like a bit salt and yeast, and "all of a sudden" you have a whole 'nother animal. Literally from, as well as in, a whole 'nother dimension. ALdonald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> wrote:
Maybe because some of us are here in order to gain a greater understanding of the "whole thing" rather than to behave as academics who devote their lives to simply studying just one fragment of it.
don
On Dec 5, 2007, at 1:23 PM, Don Lay wrote:
Maybe, but why, for what reason?
That is, seeing that the English word reason derives from the Greek word logos, and that we are subscribed to this that known ad Bohm Dialogue on line, dialogue deriving from the Greek reason -- what reason is involved with Thought as a System and over-population dynamics? -- dl
From: Alfred Landman
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2007 6:12 AM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Random Bohm quotes on Image
Hi dl. You could ask and examine, side by side, Thought-as-a-System and Over-Population-Dynamics. ALDon Lay <donlay@knology.net> wrote:
Maybe, but why? -- dl
http:From: Alfred Landman
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2007 1:18 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Random Bohm quotes on Image
Hi Don Lay. You could study mono-cultures and what pests mean to them. You could study mono-cultures and what pests mean. ALDon Lay <donlay@knology.net> wrote:
Map-maker and map are one process ... -- Al
I see this POV.
However, a very common POV says that when the word, map, is used, it does not point to the territory and it does not point to the "maker" of the map. The word map is used to stand for, symbolize, a territory -- not the maker of the map.
What is the meaning of these differing Points of View? Is the meaning that there is fused, con-fused points of views? -- dl
From: Alfred Landman
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2007 7:58 AM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Random Bohm quotes on Image
Hi dl. Map-maker and map are one process; to a lesser extend (lower dimension) two products. ALDon Lay <donlay@knology.net> wrote:
Hi dl. Any territory is nothing but a map. -- AL
Hi Al. I can see how that view might be useful. However, that view does not appear to address what db/thought addresses in db's remarks about the self and especially the identified personal self.
One view is that Bohm means that a map can be made of SOS language. For example, language can create or present a mental scenario in thought or in consciousness, and no "real place on Earth" can be found that the mental scenario actually points to.
Look for example at when people act and pretend being something they are not, just because "in there" in their thought systems, it creates good FEELS like the acting and pretending of fantasy can produce endorphins.
That kind of mental scenario has been treated for millennia as something "made up" by a confused mind, something presented purely by thought and does not re-present imagery "out there" outside the mind that creates it.
Can you see this view that this reasoning points to? -- dl
From: Alfred Landman
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 03, 2007 11:48 AM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Random Bohm quotes on Image
Hi dl. Any territory is nothing but a map. ALDon Lay <donlay@knology.net> wrote:
When Bohm says that "self is a map without a territory", maybe part of the meaning is that when using language to reference a self, then by definition of the way language functions, something like an image is used "in there" in tas or in mind to stand for the individual named.
Clearly, the individual referenced by the image is not identical the image by use of the reason that meaningful use of language requires the use of the image as symbol.
Speaking of insanity, is it not insane to use symbols and then act and pretend they are not symbols, but are the actuality referenced by the symbol?
Is not this what Bohm references with the idea that the "self is a map without a territory"? That is, we use symbols as if they are the actuality.
It seems the significance of the quantum discoveries is that at the quantum level of awareness the symbol is not and cannot be the symbolized.
And doesn't Bohm's use of the self as "a map without a territory" point to the idea that the language symbolism modern man has inherited is based largely upon the notion of the separated observer and observed that the quantum discoveries have shown to be faulty?
Once again, this is difficult to talk about because it seems we all use language reflexively or mechanically without awareness and therefore without much meaning.
Anyone else see this as being meaningful? -- dl
From: Alfred Landman
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 03, 2007 6:16 AM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Random Bohm quotes on Image
Hi donF. DL does assume an "attraction for Bohm", does reference not by whom, though. ALdonald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> wrote:
DL might like to check out this link which may help to answer some of his questions.
But even better would be if he read "Koinonia", In the meanwhile, he might go from this link to the "connections" link to see how Bohm fits in. to what Diversity is up to.
Part two: I don't understand your comment about DonL's question, AL. Is it the question below that you are inquiring about? What is incomplete, and what are the unfounded premises? I am curious. I too, consider DeMare's work of great importance in the furtherance of this dialogue project. Koinonia is a difficult book - it probably tries to bring more territory than a lot of readers want to handle. It may also offer some insight into the sort of stuff that Eric has objected to.
don (donF)
On Dec 2, 2007, at 10:06 AM, Alfred Landman wrote:
Hi DL. Not drawing a line, I am not in a position to survey. As for your other question, it appears to be incomplete or based on an unfounded premise. AL
Don Lay <donlay@knology.net> wrote:
Al, is De Mare mostly known as a therapist or as a theorist/thinker re group dynamics?
What was the attraction for Bohm? -- dl
From: Alfred Landman
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Saturday, December 01, 2007 5:15 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Random Bohm quotes on Image
Hi DL. Thanks. It depends, like anything else, on the frame-work of re-presentation of "self-image" in usage. The idea of liking does not surface here when it comes to going through their work. ALDon Lay <donlay@knology.net> wrote:
Hi Al. Welcome.
Does Bohm's ideas regarding the identified personal self or self-image derive from De Mare?
Evidently, Bohm considers the self and self-image to have limited meaning.
Perhaps because at the level of quantum movement it has no meaning.
What do you like about De Mare/Bohm thought? -- dl
From: Alfred Landman
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Friday, November 30, 2007 8:04 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Random Bohm quotes on Image
Hi fellow listserv-members -
I am new to this group. My interest in the work of Patrick De Mare brought me to David Bohm and his writings. I just finished some of his books and want to join your discussion. Has the body of contributions of this forum over the years taken the ideas and the proposal of dialogue to another level from where Bohm left things off? Can you point me and other readers to any progress in this quest? Thank you.
ALDon Lay <donlay@knology.net> wrote:
What horseshit!
From: william
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Friday, November 30, 2007 7:17 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Random Bohm quotes on Image
>I: I truly, truly hope you are right. I am glad that you escaped the trap.
>Sometimes they refuse to stay where you can confront them. Then what?
Don't worry, he is not going to run away. If he is a fighter then he will face the confrontation. Wait and see...
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogueinfo: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
Be a better sports nut! Let your teams follow you with Yahoo Mobile. Try it now.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogueinfo: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogueinfo: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogueinfo: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogueinfo: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogueinfo: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
Be a better sports nut! Let your teams follow you with Yahoo Mobile. Try it now.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogueinfo: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
Get easy, one-click access to your favorites. Make Yahoo! your homepage.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogueinfo: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogueinfo: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
_________________________________________________________________
Telly addicts unite!
http://www.searchgamesbox.com/tvtown.shtml
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071209/77f784ad/attachment.html
From rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk Sun Dec 9 03:03:01 2007
From: rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk (rob mooney)
Date: Sun Dec 9 03:07:15 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Unfolding of "layered" suspending - was:
Language, Map, and Email Identities
In-Reply-To: <C37D8CB0.F694%lynne@lifedirectionscoach.com>
References: <c47283890712060842n15458010nb4a4106d0127dffc@mail.gmail.com>
<C37D8CB0.F694%lynne@lifedirectionscoach.com>
Message-ID: <BAY123-W29F6BDB30ED40FAC1FD12ADC6A0@phx.gbl>
please tell me about the Grinch's heart.
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2007 11:25:36 -0700Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Unfolding of "layered" suspending - was: Language, Map, and Email IdentitiesFrom: lynne@lifedirectionscoach.comTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Yes, and yes, again. This is a discovery that is so important to me, probably since so hard won (and I have to keep re-learning!). (I am reminded of the comment, Life is what happens when you make plans.) That attitude of openness, of letting go of expectations is so freeing. I find it in meditation. I find it grappling with Bohm?s ideas or Buddhist ideas (often similar). As my awareness grows, so do my opportunities to suspend. That leads to listening more, actually hearing more. In the process, I seem to expand (like the Grinch?s heart).LynneOn 12/6/07 9:42 AM, "Irene Darcy" <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
I: This is the principle of improvisation, and why the art of improvisation in any area leads to being comfortable with a flexible, changing context in any life context. For instance, I'm finding that the study of musical improvisation is as much brain training as anything else. And it's an attitude.On Dec 6, 2007 11:38 AM, <ae.dropper@juno.com> wrote:
"The principle here is the same as that advanced by Rudolf Steiner when he advised teachers to prepare their lessons painstakingly and then be ready to sacrifice the prepared plan at the dictate of circumstances which may point to an entirely fresh approach to their material." from: THE ART OF GOETHEAN CONVERSATIONThis speaks to what I was saying - except "sacrifice the prepared plan " again and again.The response gets more and more "whole" each time. It draws on more of what the group is saying as a whole. And with a little experience one comes to see the "sacrifices" [of the satisfactions] as "investments" in evermore surprising surprises. Or, one could say that one is "spending" the satisfaction of the response on what further "suspending" might yield in terms of an even more surprising response. Simple suspension alone though has yieldedsurprise from the start. It's just an amazing discovery[the unfolding of this "layered" suspending] for someone really interested in "suspension." Not recommending; just reporting.-- funny >"Suspension" just grows and grows. Where the surface fruits of "suspension" are >appreciated, suspension through the strata begins to show its appeal. The fruits of >suspension [of action, which includes speech, in relation to what is read or heard] are>that something unknown surfaces as a possible response. Very satisfying to respond >with these. But these too, can be suspended. It may take awhile to be able to do this >because the little bit of satisfaction needs to be "invested." Very long story short, with >each "reinvestment" something even more amazing surfaces.>Eventually, there comes the curiosity about a kind of 'complete investment'. This is the >logical conclusion of Bohm's brilliant but humble and simple proposal of "suspension'.>Along the way of this, and relatively soon though, you will find yourself responding with >things you have never heard of before. So the process is never not fun. And there is no >rush for the "completion." >-- funny Is there anyone out there who can make sense out of this? I am sorry "funny" but to me it sounds as if you are drunk or crazy or demented. Or could you possibly be enlightened, or are you an unrecognized artist, or some brilliant genious ahead of his time, or what else could this be? Is there anyway this could be understood as something other than sheer nonsense? Or if you are talking from some higher intelligence could you please come down and try to explain it to this stupid chimpansee?
_________________________________________________________________
The next generation of MSN Hotmail has arrived - Windows Live Hotmail
http://www.newhotmail.co.uk
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071209/cddccba2/attachment.html
From rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk Sun Dec 9 03:07:39 2007
From: rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk (rob mooney)
Date: Sun Dec 9 03:11:52 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Fwd: Setting the Record Straight on persons
In-Reply-To: <4535E026-392E-4CC4-AEED-860B89B16505@dc.rr.com>
References: <009f01c837b1$e44efce0$b5c16018@DL01>
<4757E198.000005.05940@VAIO-584793128F>
<002201c8387a$e9ed55b0$b5c16018@DL01>
<4535E026-392E-4CC4-AEED-860B89B16505@dc.rr.com>
Message-ID: <BAY123-W4159FD16AD7BCCA5083247DC6A0@phx.gbl>
this is dead simple really. just read what you address to the other and apply it to yourself
From: DFACTOR@dc.rr.comSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Fwd: Setting the Record Straight on personsDate: Thu, 6 Dec 2007 19:55:03 -0800To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
On Dec 6, 2007, at 6:43 PM, Don Lay wrote:
dl: Maybe, maybe not, but I'm not the one doing the whining.
Bore us some more about the "last time you saw Dave". Did you see Dave sitting on df's sofa, or df sitting on Dave's soffa?
If you are so bothered by what I'm working at, why not hit delete?
Is this too complicated for you? -- dl
This sort of reply has nothing to do with dialogue or the spirit of dialogue. It is a defensive counter to what you must value as your precious truths or assumptions or business. But this is a dialogue list, not an arena for us to watch you struggling with a lot of ideas the significance of which are beyond question any question. HItting delete has nothing to do with dialogue. In fact it would be destructive of the dialogue, unless it is a last resort. Dialogue, in case you have forgotten, is about vulnerability, not defense. If you feel it is valuable to spend years asking and answering the same questions over and over while ignoring responses that just might enrich your inquiry, why not just just do it in your own time. Instead of writing what sound like childish complaints to those who would really like to go deeper with you.
don
_________________________________________________________________
Who's friends with who and co-starred in what?
http://www.searchgamesbox.com/celebrityseparation.shtml
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071209/5f0080ed/attachment.html
From lynne at lifedirectionscoach.com Sun Dec 9 03:18:38 2007
From: lynne at lifedirectionscoach.com (Lynne Tolk)
Date: Sun Dec 9 03:22:54 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Unfolding of "layered" suspending - was:
Language, Map, and Email Identities
In-Reply-To: <BAY123-W29F6BDB30ED40FAC1FD12ADC6A0@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <C3809E8E.F716%lynne@lifedirectionscoach.com>
It just got bigger, graphically (How The Grinch Stole Christmas by Dr.
Seuss). The Whos down in Whoville celebrated Christmas even after the
Grinch stole all their goodies. Broke through all his assumptions.
On 12/8/07 7:03 PM, "rob mooney" <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
> please tell me about the Grinch's heart.
>
>>
>> Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2007 11:25:36 -0700
>> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Unfolding of "layered" suspending - was:
>> Language, Map, and Email Identities
>> From: lynne@lifedirectionscoach.com
>> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>>
>> Yes, and yes, again. This is a discovery that is so important to me,
>> probably since so hard won (and I have to keep re-learning!). (I am reminded
>> of the comment, Life is what happens when you make plans.) That attitude of
>> openness, of letting go of expectations is so freeing. I find it in
>> meditation. I find it grappling with Bohm?s ideas or Buddhist ideas (often
>> similar). As my awareness grows, so do my opportunities to suspend. That
>> leads to listening more, actually hearing more. In the process, I seem to
>> expand (like the Grinch?s heart).
>>
>> Lynne
>> On 12/6/07 9:42 AM, "Irene Darcy" <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I: This is the principle of improvisation, and why the art of improvisation
>>> in any area leads to being comfortable with a flexible, changing context in
>>> any life context. For instance, I'm finding that the study of musical
>>> improvisation is as much brain training as anything else.
>>> And it's an attitude.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Dec 6, 2007 11:38 AM, <ae.dropper@juno.com> wrote:
>>>> "The principle here is the same as that advanced by Rudolf Steiner when he
>>>> advised teachers to prepare their lessons painstakingly and then be ready
>>>> to sacrifice the prepared plan at the dictate of circumstances which may
>>>> point to an entirely fresh approach to their material."
>>>>
>>>> from: THE ART OF GOETHEAN CONVERSATION
>>>>
>>>> This speaks to what I was saying - except "sacrifice the prepared plan "
>>>> again and again.
>>>>
>>>> The response gets more and more "whole" each time. It draws on more of what
>>>> the group
>>>>
>>>> is saying as a whole. And with a little experience one comes to see the
>>>> "sacrifices"
>>>>
>>>> [of the satisfactions] as "investments" in evermore surprising surprises.
>>>> Or, one
>>>>
>>>> could say that one is "spending" the satisfaction of the response on what
>>>> further
>>>>
>>>> "suspending" might yield in terms of an even more surprising response.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Simple suspension alone though has yielded
>>>>
>>>> surprise from the start. It's just an amazing discovery
>>>>
>>>> [the unfolding of this "layered" suspending] for someone really interested
>>>> in "suspension."
>>>>
>>>> Not recommending; just reporting.
>>>>
>>>> -- funny
>>>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071208/c1863e10/attachment.html
From rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk Sun Dec 9 03:19:46 2007
From: rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk (rob mooney)
Date: Sun Dec 9 03:24:00 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Fwd: Setting the Record Straight on persons
In-Reply-To: <9A9EB8D0-1FE1-43DA-8CAE-FD3EF810BC17@dc.rr.com>
References: <926775.50693.qm@web57410.mail.re1.yahoo.com>
<9A9EB8D0-1FE1-43DA-8CAE-FD3EF810BC17@dc.rr.com>
Message-ID: <BAY123-W2BDA2FA2825750C75A731DC6A0@phx.gbl>
uh. God is a mosquito though, isn't she?
From: DFACTOR@dc.rr.comSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Fwd: Setting the Record Straight on personsDate: Fri, 7 Dec 2007 11:17:23 -0800To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
On Dec 7, 2007, at 10:46 AM, Alfred Landman wrote:
Hi Don. Evening came, and morning followed--the fifth day. Then God said, "Let the earth bring forth all kinds of living creatures: cattle, creeping things, and wild animals of all kinds." And so it happened: God made all kinds of wild animals, all kinds of cattle, and all kinds of creeping things of the earth. God saw how good it was. AL
Hi, AL
I would say that this is true with one exception. Mosquitos. I have heard on good authority that he realized that mosquitos were a mistake, but it was too late to do anything about it,
don
On Dec 6, 2007, at 6:43 PM, Don Lay wrote:
dl: Maybe, maybe not, but I'm not the one doing the whining.
Bore us some more about the "last time you saw Dave". Did you see Dave sitting on df's sofa, or df sitting on Dave's soffa?
If you are so bothered by what I'm working at, why not hit delete?
Is this too complicated for you? -- dl
This sort of reply has nothing to do with dialogue or the spirit of dialogue. It is a defensive counter to what you must value as your precious truths or assumptions or business. But this is a dialogue list, not an arena for us to watch you struggling with a lot of ideas the significance of which are beyond question any question. HItting delete has nothing to do with dialogue. In fact it would be destructive of the dialogue, unless it is a last resort. Dialogue, in case you have forgotten, is about vulnerability, not defense. If you feel it is valuable to spend years asking and answering the same questions over and over while ignoring responses that just might enrich your inquiry, why not just just do it in your own time. Instead of writing what sound like childish complaints to those who would really like to go deeper with you.
doninfo: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
_________________________________________________________________
Who's friends with who and co-starred in what?
http://www.searchgamesbox.com/celebrityseparation.shtml
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071209/452c6d81/attachment.html
From rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk Sun Dec 9 03:24:37 2007
From: rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk (rob mooney)
Date: Sun Dec 9 03:28:51 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Unfolding of "layered" suspending - was:
Language, Map, and Email Identities
In-Reply-To: <20071207.150429.2428.164.ae.dropper@juno.com>
References: <20071207.150429.2428.164.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <BAY123-W13785FEA6EE73153122D21DC6A0@phx.gbl>
funny is close to fond
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgDate: Fri, 7 Dec 2007 15:03:59 -0500Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Unfolding of "layered" suspending - was: Language, Map, and Email IdentitiesFrom: ae.dropper@juno.com
But more on this (perhaps based on the curious idea of "coping").
There are times when I experience what you might be calling "detachment" or something I might legitimately call "detachment." And there are many childhood memories of something I can call "detachment," especially when I was in school.
This "detachment' breaks off into two categories; one is entirely comfortable; the other is not.
The one that is not comfortable is a feeling of not belonging or not feeling like a participant.
How to cope? If it's in a dialogue circle it can be as simple as saying something. Anything.
But this experience is quite rare these days. And quite noticeable for its rarity. And there is a
preference these days to not say something to ease the discomfort but to just observe
what is going on beneath the discomfort.
-- funny
On Fri, 7 Dec 2007 13:06:26 -0500 ae.dropper@juno.com writes:
To identify with a concept of "detachment" it would have to be 'detachment' from a layer that is SO thin that it is viscerally all but indiscernible. Along with this, such "identity" requires imagining a "something" that actually does the "detaching." This is possible - this imagining. But it is clearly an isolated imagining and not a visceral experience.
I LOVE to "play the game." And with simultaneous "watching."
-- funny
On Fri, 7 Dec 2007 13:05:24 +0100 (Westeurop?ische Normalzeit) "william" <w@david-bohm.net> writes:
Ok, now i understand what you were saying. Thanks for the hint. Yes, i think you're right; that's my experience also. But i also noticed that I need to counteract a tendency of feeling detached from the rest of the world, like preferring to quietly watch the game from a distance instead of playing it. Is this tendency also the case with you, and if so how are you coping with this?
-------Original Message-------
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
Date: 06.12.2007 17:34:58
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Unfolding of "layered" suspending - was: Language,Map, and Email Identities
"The principle here is the same as that advanced by Rudolf Steiner when he advised teachers to prepare their lessons painstakingly and then be ready to sacrifice the prepared plan at the dictate of circumstances which may point to an entirely fresh approach to their material."
from: THE ART OF GOETHEAN CONVERSATION
This speaks to what I was saying - except "sacrifice the prepared plan " again and again.
The response gets more and more "whole" each time. It draws on more of what the group
is saying as a whole. And with a little experience one comes to see the "sacrifices"
[of the satisfactions] as "investments" in evermore surprising surprises. Or, one
could say that one is "spending" the satisfaction of the response on what further
"suspending" might yield in terms of an even more surprising response.
Simple suspension alone though has yielded
surprise from the start. It's just an amazing discovery
[the unfolding of this "layered" suspending] for someone really interested in "suspension."
Not recommending; just reporting.
-- funny
>"Suspension" just grows and grows. Where the surface fruits of "suspension" are
>appreciated, suspension through the strata begins to show its appeal. The fruits of
>suspension [of action, which includes speech, in relation to what is read or heard] are
>that something unknown surfaces as a possible response. Very satisfying to respond
>with these. But these too, can be suspended. It may take awhile to be able to do this
>because the little bit of satisfaction needs to be "invested." Very long story short, with
>each "reinvestment" something even more amazing surfaces.
>Eventually, there comes the curiosity about a kind of 'complete investment'. This is the
>logical conclusion of Bohm's brilliant but humble and simple proposal of "suspension'.
>Along the way of this, and relatively soon though, you will find yourself responding with
>things you have never heard of before. So the process is never not fun. And there is no
>rush for the "completion."
>-- funny
Is there anyone out there who can make sense out of this? I am sorry "funny" but to me it sounds as if you are drunk or crazy or demented. Or could you possibly be enlightened, or are you an unrecognized artist, or some brilliant genious ahead of his time, or what else could this be? Is there anyway this could be understood as something other than sheer nonsense? Or if you are talking from some higher intelligence could you please come down and try to explain it to this stupid chimpansee?
_________________________________________________________________
Celeb spotting ? Play CelebMashup and win cool prizes
https://www.celebmashup.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071209/560fa4c9/attachment.html
From rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk Sun Dec 9 03:33:26 2007
From: rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk (rob mooney)
Date: Sun Dec 9 03:37:40 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Unfolding of "layered" suspending - was:
Language, Map, and Email Identities
In-Reply-To: <C3809E8E.F716%lynne@lifedirectionscoach.com>
References: <BAY123-W29F6BDB30ED40FAC1FD12ADC6A0@phx.gbl>
<C3809E8E.F716%lynne@lifedirectionscoach.com>
Message-ID: <BAY123-W39375492F6BE03ED0D6C98DC6A0@phx.gbl>
could you please tell me how it got bigger? i mean under just exactly what circumstances? i'm assuming it happened in a good way and wasn't some horrible low blood pressure thing
Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2007 19:18:38 -0700Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Unfolding of "layered" suspending - was: Language, Map, and Email IdentitiesFrom: lynne@lifedirectionscoach.comTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
It just got bigger, graphically (How The Grinch Stole Christmas by Dr. Seuss). The Whos down in Whoville celebrated Christmas even after the Grinch stole all their goodies. Broke through all his assumptions.On 12/8/07 7:03 PM, "rob mooney" <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
please tell me about the Grinch's heart.
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2007 11:25:36 -0700Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Unfolding of "layered" suspending - was: Language, Map, and Email IdentitiesFrom: lynne@lifedirectionscoach.comTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgYes, and yes, again. This is a discovery that is so important to me, probably since so hard won (and I have to keep re-learning!). (I am reminded of the comment, Life is what happens when you make plans.) That attitude of openness, of letting go of expectations is so freeing. I find it in meditation. I find it grappling with Bohm?s ideas or Buddhist ideas (often similar). As my awareness grows, so do my opportunities to suspend. That leads to listening more, actually hearing more. In the process, I seem to expand (like the Grinch?s heart).LynneOn 12/6/07 9:42 AM, "Irene Darcy" <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
I: This is the principle of improvisation, and why the art of improvisation in any area leads to being comfortable with a flexible, changing context in any life context. For instance, I'm finding that the study of musical improvisation is as much brain training as anything else. And it's an attitude.On Dec 6, 2007 11:38 AM, <ae.dropper@juno.com> wrote:
"The principle here is the same as that advanced by Rudolf Steiner when he advised teachers to prepare their lessons painstakingly and then be ready to sacrifice the prepared plan at the dictate of circumstances which may point to an entirely fresh approach to their material." from: THE ART OF GOETHEAN CONVERSATIONThis speaks to what I was saying - except "sacrifice the prepared plan " again and again.The response gets more and more "whole" each time. It draws on more of what the group is saying as a whole. And with a little experience one comes to see the "sacrifices" [of the satisfactions] as "investments" in evermore surprising surprises. Or, one could say that one is "spending" the satisfaction of the response on what further "suspending" might yield in terms of an even more surprising response. Simple suspension alone though has yieldedsurprise from the start. It's just an amazing discovery[the unfolding of this "layered" suspending] for someone really interested in "suspension." Not recommending; just reporting.-- funny
_________________________________________________________________
The next generation of MSN Hotmail has arrived - Windows Live Hotmail
http://www.newhotmail.co.uk
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071209/914ea748/attachment.html
From lynne at lifedirectionscoach.com Sun Dec 9 06:27:06 2007
From: lynne at lifedirectionscoach.com (Lynne Tolk)
Date: Sun Dec 9 06:31:24 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Unfolding of "layered" suspending - was:
Language, Map, and Email Identities
In-Reply-To: <BAY123-W39375492F6BE03ED0D6C98DC6A0@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <C380CABA.F71C%lynne@lifedirectionscoach.com>
Sorry, I was assuming you were familiar with the story & I should know
better than to make assumptions. It?s a kid?s story with rather bizarre
looking characters (as are all of Dr. Seuss?s characters ? it?s sort of an
art form). The Grinch, who lives on top of a mountain, hates all the humbug
of Christmas, so he gets this idea of going down to the town of Whoville on
Christmas eve & stealing everything to do with the big day ? takes the
trees, presents, decorations, food ? so nothing is left. Then he gets to
the very top of the mountain at dawn, ready to drop his load over the abyss,
and listens for all the grief and wailing. Only he hears the usual singing
& celebrating, instead. And is struck by the possibility that maybe there
is more to Christmas (to the Whos, anyway) than consumerism. It?s such an
astounding thought, that his heart just takes off and grows ? 2 whole sizes.
So he takes all the stuff back, and shares the day with them ? even carves
the roast beast. (I used to watch this every year with my kids.)
Lynne
On 12/8/07 7:33 PM, "rob mooney" <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
> could you please tell me how it got bigger? i mean under just exactly what
> circumstances? i'm assuming it happened in a good way and wasn't some horrible
> low blood pressure thing
>
>>
>> Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2007 19:18:38 -0700
>> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Unfolding of "layered" suspending - was:
>> Language, Map, and Email Identities
>> From: lynne@lifedirectionscoach.com
>> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>>
>> It just got bigger, graphically (How The Grinch Stole Christmas by Dr.
>> Seuss). The Whos down in Whoville celebrated Christmas even after the Grinch
>> stole all their goodies. Broke through all his assumptions.
>>
>>
>> On 12/8/07 7:03 PM, "rob mooney" <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> please tell me about the Grinch's heart.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071208/6cc1a285/attachment.html
From nlivolsi at yahoo.com Sun Dec 9 08:21:34 2007
From: nlivolsi at yahoo.com (Nicholas LiVolsi)
Date: Sun Dec 9 08:25:52 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Random Bohm quotes on Image
In-Reply-To: <BAY123-W30FB993BC75590F111805FDC6A0@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <7571.9253.qm@web35508.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
now, u,b, smo - ken111, cha, cha, chaaaaaaaaaaa........!!!! on blue buy uuuuuuuuuu....,
u,beeeeeeeee, smoooo - kennnn - on blue buy you, money makes the "vurld-go-rounn'd, da vurld-go-rounn'd, moni - mak's da vurld go - round, thank Gad 4 "little......
rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
.hmmessage P { margin:0px; padding:0px } body.hmmessage { FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY:Tahoma }
on blue buy you
---------------------------------
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2007 23:33:14 -0500
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Random Bohm quotes on Image
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
Savin nickels savin dimes
Working till the sun don't shine
Lookin forward to happier times
On Blue Bayou
I'm goin back one day
Come what may
To Blue Bayou
Where you sleep all day
And the Catfish play
On Blue Bayou
Oh those fishing boats
With their sails afloat
If I could only see
That familiar sunrise
Through sleepy eyes
How happy I'd be
-- funny
On Tue, 4 Dec 2007 21:01:02 -0500 "Don Lay" <donlay@knology.net> writes:
I'm having a beer, doing this and watching Roy Orbison on Public TV, Black and White Night with k.d. lang singing backup and it almost brings tears to me eyes. That's a couple of very gifted people. -- dl
From: Don Lay
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2007 8:16 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Random Bohm quotes on Image
Not me. -- dl
From: donald factor
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2007 5:30 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Random Bohm quotes on Image
Are you raising the question of the possibility that a Bohm dialogue monoculture - that is, where all the participants in the group share a common content of consciousness - might be incoherent and therefore destructive from the point of view of the rest of the natural world?
don
On Dec 4, 2007, at 1:17 PM, Don Lay wrote:
Hi Al, Is this the sort of thing you reference?
http://www.alternativeradio.org/programs/SHIV007.shtml
Over centuries, communities all over the world have developed knowledge and skills to derive livelihoods from the bounties of nature's diversity. Today, traditional agriculture is being undermined by external inputs and new rules of international trade. Globalization advocates render local knowledge invisible by declaring it non-existent or illegitimate. Monocultures of the mind generate models of production which destroy diversity and legitimize that destruction as progress.
Do we suggest that everyone using and identifying as imagery could lead to extinction as happens with some crops? -- dl
From: Alfred Landman
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2007 1:18 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Random Bohm quotes on Image
Hi Don Lay. You could study mono-cultures and what pests mean to them. You could study mono-cultures and what pests mean. AL
Don Lay <donlay@knology.net> wrote: Map-maker and map are one process ... -- Al
I see this POV.
However, a very common POV says that when the word, map, is used, it does not point to the territory and it does not point to the "maker" of the map. The word map is used to stand for, symbolize, a territory -- not the maker of the map.
What is the meaning of these differing Points of View? Is the meaning that there is fused, con-fused points of views? -- dl
From: Alfred Landman
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2007 7:58 AM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Random Bohm quotes on Image
Hi dl. Map-maker and map are one process; to a lesser extend (lower dimension) two products. AL
Don Lay <donlay@knology.net> wrote:
Hi dl. Any territory is nothing but a map. -- AL
Hi Al. I can see how that view might be useful. However, that view does not appear to address what db/thought addresses in db's remarks about the self and especially the identified personal self.
One view is that Bohm means that a map can be made of SOS language. For example, language can create or present a mental scenario in thought or in consciousness, and no "real place on Earth" can be found that the mental scenario actually points to.
Look for example at when people act and pretend being something they are not, just because "in there" in their thought systems, it creates good FEELS like the acting and pretending of fantasy can produce endorphins.
That kind of mental scenario has been treated for millennia as something "made up" by a confused mind, something presented purely by thought and does not re-present imagery "out there" outside the mind that creates it.
Can you see this view that this reasoning points to? -- dl
From: Alfred Landman
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 03, 2007 11:48 AM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Random Bohm quotes on Image
Hi dl. Any territory is nothing but a map. AL
Don Lay <donlay@knology.net> wrote: When Bohm says that "self is a map without a territory", maybe part of the meaning is that when using language to reference a self, then by definition of the way language functions, something like an image is used "in there" in tas or in mind to stand for the individual named.
Clearly, the individual referenced by the image is not identical the image by use of the reason that meaningful use of language requires the use of the image as symbol.
Speaking of insanity, is it not insane to use symbols and then act and pretend they are not symbols, but are the actuality referenced by the symbol?
Is not this what Bohm references with the idea that the "self is a map without a territory"? That is, we use symbols as if they are the actuality.
It seems the significance of the quantum discoveries is that at the quantum level of awareness the symbol is not and cannot be the symbolized.
And doesn't Bohm's use of the self as "a map without a territory" point to the idea that the language symbolism modern man has inherited is based largely upon the notion of the separated observer and observed that the quantum discoveries have shown to be faulty?
Once again, this is difficult to talk about because it seems we all use language reflexively or mechanically without awareness and therefore without much meaning.
Anyone else see this as being meaningful? -- dl
From: Alfred Landman
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 03, 2007 6:16 AM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Random Bohm quotes on Image
Hi donF. DL does assume an "attraction for Bohm", does reference not by whom, though. AL
donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> wrote:
DL might like to check out this link which may help to answer some of his questions. But even better would be if he read "Koinonia", In the meanwhile, he might go from this link to the "connections" link to see how Bohm fits in. to what Diversity is up to.
Part two: I don't understand your comment about DonL's question, AL. Is it the question below that you are inquiring about? What is incomplete, and what are the unfounded premises? I am curious. I too, consider DeMare's work of great importance in the furtherance of this dialogue project. Koinonia is a difficult book - it probably tries to bring more territory than a lot of readers want to handle. It may also offer some insight into the sort of stuff that Eric has objected to.
don (donF)
On Dec 2, 2007, at 10:06 AM, Alfred Landman wrote:
Hi DL. Not drawing a line, I am not in a position to survey. As for your other question, it appears to be incomplete or based on an unfounded premise. AL
Don Lay <donlay@knology.net> wrote:
Al, is De Mare mostly known as a therapist or as a theorist/thinker re group dynamics?
What was the attraction for Bohm? -- dl
From: Alfred Landman
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Saturday, December 01, 2007 5:15 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Random Bohm quotes on Image
Hi DL. Thanks. It depends, like anything else, on the frame-work of re-presentation of "self-image" in usage. The idea of liking does not surface here when it comes to going through their work. AL
Don Lay <donlay@knology.net> wrote: Hi Al. Welcome.
Does Bohm's ideas regarding the identified personal self or self-image derive from De Mare?
Evidently, Bohm considers the self and self-image to have limited meaning.
Perhaps because at the level of quantum movement it has no meaning.
What do you like about De Mare/Bohm thought? -- dl
From: Alfred Landman
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Friday, November 30, 2007 8:04 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Random Bohm quotes on Image
Hi fellow listserv-members -
I am new to this group. My interest in the work of Patrick De Mare brought me to David Bohm and his writings. I just finished some of his books and want to join your discussion. Has the body of contributions of this forum over the years taken the ideas and the proposal of dialogue to another level from where Bohm left things off? Can you point me and other readers to any progress in this quest? Thank you.
AL
Don Lay <donlay@knology.net> wrote:
What horseshit!
From: william
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Friday, November 30, 2007 7:17 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Random Bohm quotes on Image
>I: I truly, truly hope you are right. I am glad that you escaped the trap.
>Sometimes they refuse to stay where you can confront them. Then what?
Don't worry, he is not going to run away. If he is a fighter then he will face the confrontation. Wait and see...
---------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Be a better sports nut! Let your teams follow you with Yahoo Mobile. Try it now.
---------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
---------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
---------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
---------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Be a better sports nut! Let your teams follow you with Yahoo Mobile. Try it now.
---------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Get easy, one-click access to your favorites. Make Yahoo! your homepage.
---------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Can you guess the film? Search Charades!
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071208/049fd8f9/attachment.html
From ae.dropper at juno.com Sun Dec 9 16:30:56 2007
From: ae.dropper at juno.com (ae.dropper@juno.com)
Date: Sun Dec 9 16:32:45 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Unfolding of "layered" suspending - was: Language,
Map, and Email Identities
Message-ID: <20071209.103058.2428.187.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Please continue when you get a moment (willam) (just an invitation - not
a necessity - you've already been most helpful). Also Irene had written:
"How does it work for you? Can we compare?"
There has come more clarity about the "layered suspension" thing. For
those interested in detail, it took about 15 "layers" before the clarity
came this time. (It has usually taken about 4 or 5). And it's all about
clarity - "getting to" clarity.
The "absence of clarity" is "layered" as well. These are layers of
evermore subtle and increasingly veiled defenses (untruths about self)
which correspond with the layers of suspension. The subtlety at each
level though - AT that level - breaks into obviousness. The obviousness
is in the bodily sensations. There is a lack of clarity - like sensations
of static. The initial satisfying feelings in the response evolve into a
static sensation and a non satisfaction.
Incidentally, I have found that the only words that "hurt" me are the
words that I say. The words that others say, are never hurtful. They are
music. But that's another story. So it is these "words that I say" that
interest me. I am really very tired of saying words that are hurtful to
me.
It is very clear now that the words that I say that are even remotely
[seeming] defensive [of a clearly untruthful self/world image] maintain
confusion or lack of clarity in my system.
Thus, the "layered" suspension. Because the defenses are "layered" too.
One comes right after another. They get VERY fancy AND, initially (as I
said) quite satisfying and fleetingly pleasurable. Then the "pleasure"
turns to a kind of sour sensation. The thing just FLOPS, upon suspension.
But the CLARITY, when it comes, comes with ..... well, clarity. There
is no flopping or static. The whole body feels clear. These is no
defensive wall anymore between "me" and the person[s] or group to whom
the response is being written.
Incidentally, there is an awareness that the "response" is primarily a
response from me to me - sort of "written on the wind." And that it is
its own reward and complete satisfaction. It is perhaps like a quanta (if
I understand such - complete in itself, a little piece of wholeness).
-- funny
On Sat, 8 Dec 2007 10:51:46 -0500 ae.dropper@juno.com writes:
Would you like to comment before i go further? You realize, of course,
where this is leading up to. (wm)
Please continue. I have no idea where this is leading. Appreciative for
all of it though.
-- funny
On Sat, 8 Dec 2007 11:49:45 +0100 (Westeurop?ische Normalzeit) "william"
<w@david-bohm.net> writes:
I didn't mean coping with the sense of detachment. I meant how to cope
with the tendency to suspend more and more; what you call "layered"
suspension (resulting in a sense of "detachment" for lack of a better
word). You see, at some point it starts getting a bit anti-social. When
you are always suspending, people are not getting their expected
responses anymore. Usually the reason for someone to say something or do
something is to get a response. This is also the case when someone utters
an insult, or attempt to hurt you: they usually do this because they are
disappointed or angry; and they want a reaction that shows they have
touched you. Now, if you are always in suspense mode then the attempted
hurt doesn't work, because there is no reaction on your side. At first
glance this is perhaps not a bad thing because it usually prevents the
situation from escalating. However, there is another aspect to this,
which is that the attempted hurt could be regarded as a form of
communication; they are trying to say something. If you don't respond,
don't react (as a result of suspension) then you are effectively refusing
to communicate on this level. You may be willing to communicate on a
different level but that channel is not open both ways. The point is, you
are denying communication on the channel on which it is invited.
So, what do you say to this? Because i am assuming it is not actually
your intention to deny communication. You are probably in compassion
mode, which however is not the channel open to whoever wants to touch
you. Have you reached a point where you would consider suspending
suspension, out of compassion, and give the person the feeling of having
touched you? Would you like to comment before i go further? You realize,
of course, where this is leading up to.
-------Original Message-------
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
Date: 07.12.2007 21:00:44
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Unfolding of "layered" suspending - was:
Language,Map, and Email Identities
But more on this (perhaps based on the curious idea of "coping").
There are times when I experience what you might be calling "detachment"
or something I might legitimately call "detachment." And there are many
childhood memories of something I can call "detachment," especially when
I was in school.
This "detachment' breaks off into two categories; one is entirely
comfortable; the other is not.
The one that is not comfortable is a feeling of not belonging or not
feeling like a participant.
How to cope? If it's in a dialogue circle it can be as simple as saying
something. Anything.
But this experience is quite rare these days. And quite noticeable for
its rarity. And there is a
preference these days to not say something to ease the discomfort but to
just observe
what is going on beneath the discomfort.
-- funny
On Fri, 7 Dec 2007 13:06:26 -0500 ae.dropper@juno.com writes:
To identify with a concept of "detachment" it would have to be
'detachment' from a layer that is SO thin that it is viscerally all but
indiscernible. Along with this, such "identity" requires imagining a
"something" that actually does the "detaching." This is possible - this
imagining. But it is clearly an isolated imagining and not a visceral
experience.
I LOVE to "play the game." And with simultaneous "watching."
-- funny
On Fri, 7 Dec 2007 13:05:24 +0100 (Westeurop?ische Normalzeit) "william"
<w@david-bohm.net> writes:
Ok, now i understand what you were saying. Thanks for the hint. Yes, i
think you're right; that's my experience also. But i also noticed that I
need to counteract a tendency of feeling detached from the rest of the
world, like preferring to quietly watch the game from a distance instead
of playing it. Is this tendency also the case with you, and if so how are
you coping with this?
-------Original Message-------
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
Date: 06.12.2007 17:34:58
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Unfolding of "layered" suspending - was:
Language,Map, and Email Identities
"The principle here is the same as that advanced by Rudolf Steiner when
he advised teachers to prepare their lessons painstakingly and then be
ready to sacrifice the prepared plan at the dictate of circumstances
which may point to an entirely fresh approach to their material."
from: THE ART OF GOETHEAN CONVERSATION
This speaks to what I was saying - except "sacrifice the prepared plan "
again and again.
The response gets more and more "whole" each time. It draws on more of
what the group
is saying as a whole. And with a little experience one comes to see the
"sacrifices"
[of the satisfactions] as "investments" in evermore surprising surprises.
Or, one
could say that one is "spending" the satisfaction of the response on what
further
"suspending" might yield in terms of an even more surprising response.
Simple suspension alone though has yielded
surprise from the start. It's just an amazing discovery
[the unfolding of this "layered" suspending] for someone really
interested in "suspension."
Not recommending; just reporting.
-- funny
>"Suspension" just grows and grows. Where the surface fruits of
"suspension" are
>appreciated, suspension through the strata begins to show its appeal.
The fruits of
>suspension [of action, which includes speech, in relation to what is
read or heard] are
>that something unknown surfaces as a possible response. Very satisfying
to respond
>with these. But these too, can be suspended. It may take awhile to be
able to do this
>because the little bit of satisfaction needs to be "invested." Very long
story short, with
>each "reinvestment" something even more amazing surfaces.
>Eventually, there comes the curiosity about a kind of 'complete
investment'. This is the
>logical conclusion of Bohm's brilliant but humble and simple proposal of
"suspension'.
>Along the way of this, and relatively soon though, you will find
yourself responding with
>things you have never heard of before. So the process is never not fun.
And there is no
>rush for the "completion."
>-- funny
Is there anyone out there who can make sense out of this? I am sorry
"funny" but to me it sounds as if you are drunk or crazy or demented. Or
could you possibly be enlightened, or are you an unrecognized artist, or
some brilliant genious ahead of his time, or what else could this be? Is
there anyway this could be understood as something other than sheer
nonsense? Or if you are talking from some higher intelligence could you
please come down and try to explain it to this stupid chimpansee?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071209/c036125d/attachment.html
From ae.dropper at juno.com Sun Dec 9 17:19:21 2007
From: ae.dropper at juno.com (ae.dropper@juno.com)
Date: Sun Dec 9 17:20:09 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Fwd: Setting the Record Straight on persons
Message-ID: <20071209.111931.2428.189.ae.dropper@juno.com>
It seems that the messages we send to ourselves get placed in the "out"
box.
-- funny
On Sun, 9 Dec 2007 02:07:39 +0000 rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk>
writes:
this is dead simple really. just read what you address to the other and
apply it to yourself
From: DFACTOR@dc.rr.com
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Fwd: Setting the Record Straight on persons
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2007 19:55:03 -0800
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
On Dec 6, 2007, at 6:43 PM, Don Lay wrote:
dl: Maybe, maybe not, but I'm not the one doing the whining.
Bore us some more about the "last time you saw Dave". Did you see Dave
sitting on df's sofa, or df sitting on Dave's soffa?
If you are so bothered by what I'm working at, why not hit delete?
Is this too complicated for you? -- dl
This sort of reply has nothing to do with dialogue or the spirit of
dialogue. It is a defensive counter to what you must value as your
precious truths or assumptions or business. But this is a dialogue list,
not an arena for us to watch you struggling with a lot of ideas the
significance of which are beyond question any question. HItting delete
has nothing to do with dialogue. In fact it would be destructive of the
dialogue, unless it is a last resort. Dialogue, in case you have
forgotten, is about vulnerability, not defense. If you feel it is
valuable to spend years asking and answering the same questions over and
over while ignoring responses that just might enrich your inquiry, why
not just just do it in your own time. Instead of writing what sound like
childish complaints to those who would really like to go deeper with you.
don
Get closer to the jungle. I'm a Celebrity Get Me Out Of Here!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071209/8377479f/attachment.html
From landmana at yahoo.com Sun Dec 9 17:53:51 2007
From: landmana at yahoo.com (Alfred Landman)
Date: Sun Dec 9 17:58:13 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] staying with a single thought.
In-Reply-To: <c47283890712080735j752e4e5ka099804865826a3e@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <523910.63756.qm@web57401.mail.re1.yahoo.com>
Hi Irene Darcy
Who wrote it?
1 cup butter
250 gr brown sugar
3 oz God
1/2 Implicate Order
759.2 books
1 pinch lovers
75 gr Cha-Cha-Cha
2 pounds sus pension
1/3 teddy-bear
5 medium sleep-less nights
some lemon rind
; for a start.
AL
Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote: Alfred, beautiful. Thank you. Who wrote it, for that person was also given the gift of gold.
On Dec 8, 2007 5:19 AM, Alfred Landman <landmana@yahoo.com > wrote:
Hi Irene Darcy.
It was given to me by the Gods
When I was a little Girl
They give us Presents most ; you know
When we are new ; and small
I kept it in my Hand
I never put it down
I did not dare to eat ; or sleep
For fear it would be gone
I heard such words as "Rich"
When hurrying to school
>From lips at Corners of the Streets
And wrestled with a smile
Rich! 'Twas Myself - was rich
To take the name of Gold
And Gold to own ; in solid Bars
The Difference ; made me bold
AL
Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
the nature of true inquiry.
I: Can we not add to this 'the purpose of true inquiry'?
How about finding out what all those different parts of self have to tell us, then getting them to work together in the interest of physical and mental health. If we are the microcosm of the macrocosm, would that not be essential? And for me, thet requires the balance and ensemble, which implies good, working - not imaginary - relationships, of all who are and all that is.
On Dec 7, 2007 1:38 PM, <ae.dropper@juno.com> wrote:
The most difficult thing to do is to stay with a single thought.
What the thought is, although it matters a lot, is less important
by light years, then the fact of staying with it. This "fact of staying
with a thought," and following it to its progenitors, and continuing 'down
the line' with it through its strata of "generations." is of the nature of true inquiry.
Every true inquiry into thought will lead in the end to an inquiry into self image.
Bohm always left this for last in his seminars and says why he does so too. It is because
there is zero chance that cold inquiry into self image will lead anywhere but into
defensiveness that knows no equal and that the workings of thought as a system
in general must be understood somewhat first - before tackling the BIG ONE.
-- funny
--
Irene
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
--
Irene
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071209/c4a1f39a/attachment.html
From landmana at yahoo.com Sun Dec 9 18:03:31 2007
From: landmana at yahoo.com (Alfred Landman)
Date: Sun Dec 9 18:07:54 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Unfolding of "layered" suspending - was: Language,
Map, and Email Identities
In-Reply-To: <002b01c839a8$398e1180$3777480c@HOME>
Message-ID: <263169.1253.qm@web57406.mail.re1.yahoo.com>
A friend, who was exposed to the words below, comes up with this: "When I started to pay attention to the way I was breathing, things began to go down-hill. But it was not earlier than until when I went after thinking when the ground opened up: for good." AL
Susan Clemons <Susan.Joy@worldnet.att.net> wrote: v\:* { BEHAVIOR: url (#default#vml) } v\:* { BEHAVIOR: url (#default#vml) } Well said William.
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: william
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Saturday, December 08, 2007 3:49 AM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Unfolding of "layered" suspending - was: Language,Map, and Email Identities
I didn't mean coping with the sense of detachment. I meant how to cope with the tendency to suspend more and more; what you call "layered" suspension (resulting in a sense of "detachment" for lack of a better word). You see, at some point it starts getting a bit anti-social. When you are always suspending, people are not getting their expected responses anymore. Usually the reason for someone to say something or do something is to get a response. This is also the case when someone utters an insult, or attempt to hurt you: they usually do this because they are disappointed or angry; and they want a reaction that shows they have touched you. Now, if you are always in suspense mode then the attempted hurt doesn't work, because there is no reaction on your side. At first glance this is perhaps not a bad thing because it usually prevents the situation from escalating. However, there is another aspect to this, which is that the attempted hurt could be regarded as a
form of communication; they are trying to say something. If you don't respond, don't react (as a result of suspension) then you are effectively refusing to communicate on this level. You may be willing to communicate on a different level but that channel is not open both ways. The point is, you are denying communication on the channel on which it is invited.
So, what do you say to this? Because i am assuming it is not actually your intention to deny communication. You are probably in compassion mode, which however is not the channel open to whoever wants to touch you. Have you reached a point where you would consider suspending suspension, out of compassion, and give the person the feeling of having touched you? Would you like to comment before i go further? You realize, of course, where this is leading up to.
-------Original Message-------
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
Date: 07.12.2007 21:00:44
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Unfolding of "layered" suspending - was: Language,Map, and Email Identities
But more on this (perhaps based on the curious idea of "coping").
There are times when I experience what you might be calling "detachment" or something I might legitimately call "detachment." And there are many childhood memories of something I can call "detachment," especially when I was in school.
This "detachment' breaks off into two categories; one is entirely comfortable; the other is not.
The one that is not comfortable is a feeling of not belonging or not feeling like a participant.
How to cope? If it's in a dialogue circle it can be as simple as saying something. Anything.
But this experience is quite rare these days. And quite noticeable for its rarity. And there is a
preference these days to not say something to ease the discomfort but to just observe
what is going on beneath the discomfort.
-- funny
On Fri, 7 Dec 2007 13:06:26 -0500 ae.dropper@juno.com writes:
To identify with a concept of "detachment" it would have to be 'detachment' from a layer that is SO thin that it is viscerally all but indiscernible. Along with this, such "identity" requires imagining a "something" that actually does the "detaching." This is possible - this imagining. But it is clearly an isolated imagining and not a visceral experience.
I LOVE to "play the game." And with simultaneous "watching."
-- funny
On Fri, 7 Dec 2007 13:05:24 +0100 (Westeurop?ische Normalzeit) "william" <w@david-bohm.net> writes:
Ok, now i understand what you were saying. Thanks for the hint. Yes, i think you're right; that's my experience also. But i also noticed that I need to counteract a tendency of feeling detached from the rest of the world, like preferring to quietly watch the game from a distance instead of playing it. Is this tendency also the case with you, and if so how are you coping with this?
-------Original Message-------
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
Date: 06.12.2007 17:34:58
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Unfolding of "layered" suspending - was: Language,Map, and Email Identities
"The principle here is the same as that advanced by Rudolf Steiner when he advised teachers to prepare their lessons painstakingly and then be ready to sacrifice the prepared plan at the dictate of circumstances which may point to an entirely fresh approach to their material."
from: THE ART OF GOETHEAN CONVERSATION
This speaks to what I was saying - except "sacrifice the prepared plan " again and again.
The response gets more and more "whole" each time. It draws on more of what the group
is saying as a whole. And with a little experience one comes to see the "sacrifices"
[of the satisfactions] as "investments" in evermore surprising surprises. Or, one
could say that one is "spending" the satisfaction of the response on what further
"suspending" might yield in terms of an even more surprising response.
Simple suspension alone though has yielded
surprise from the start. It's just an amazing discovery
[the unfolding of this "layered" suspending] for someone really interested in "suspension."
Not recommending; just reporting.
-- funny
>"Suspension" just grows and grows. Where the surface fruits of "suspension" are
>appreciated, suspension through the strata begins to show its appeal. The fruits of
>suspension [of action, which includes speech, in relation to what is read or heard] are
>that something unknown surfaces as a possible response. Very satisfying to respond
>with these. But these too, can be suspended. It may take awhile to be able to do this
>because the little bit of satisfaction needs to be "invested." Very long story short, with
>each "reinvestment" something even more amazing surfaces.
>Eventually, there comes the curiosity about a kind of 'complete investment'. This is the
>logical conclusion of Bohm's brilliant but humble and simple proposal of "suspension'.
>Along the way of this, and relatively soon though, you will find yourself responding with
>things you have never heard of before. So the process is never not fun. And there is no
>rush for the "completion."
>-- funny
Is there anyone out there who can make sense out of this? I am sorry "funny" but to me it sounds as if you are drunk or crazy or demented. Or could you possibly be enlightened, or are you an unrecognized artist, or some brilliant genious ahead of his time, or what else could this be? Is there anyway this could be understood as something other than sheer nonsense? Or if you are talking from some higher intelligence could you please come down and try to explain it to this stupid chimpansee?
---------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071209/91d39fb3/attachment.html
From w at david-bohm.net Sun Dec 9 18:15:56 2007
From: w at david-bohm.net (william)
Date: Sun Dec 9 18:20:19 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Unfolding of "layered" suspending - was: Language,
Map, and Email Identities
References: <20071209.103058.2428.187.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <475C22CC.000001.04276@VAIO-584793128F>
>Please continue when you get a moment (willam) (just an invitation -
>not a necessity - you've already been most helpful). Also Irene had
>written: "How does it work for you? Can we compare?"
I am a bit busy at the moment, Pat, but I'll pick it up again later. For the
time being, let me just say that this is leading up to passion. But not
exactly the same kind of passion that we have talked about a few years ago.
This "new" passion is a further development of the earlier version. It's
more like a second order of passion corresponding with the equally "new"
second order of suspension. But more later...
>
>Incidentally, I have found that the only words that "hurt" me are the words
that I say.
>The words that others say, are never hurtful. They are music. But that's
another story.
>So it is these "words that I say" that interest me. I am really very tired
of saying words
>that are hurtful to me.
But it's the hearing that works, not the saying. Whether words are spoken by
yourself or by someone else doesn't really matter. In both cases you hear
the words, and that is what is causing the reactions. You can misunderstand
what somebody is saying and hear something else. In such a case, the
reaction is to what you mistakenly think the person is saying. Thus,
suspension is suspending the reaction to what you hear. What you hear is of
your own making.
The "second order suspension" is suspending suspension. This is like taking
yourself out of suspension mode and allow the reaction to unfold with all
its consequences. This is almost the same as if there never was suspension,
like ging back to square one, but with a subtle difference. This also gives
rise to a new kind of passion because suspension and passion are very
closely related. Ordinary passion (first order passion) means allowing the
hurt, let it happen without resistence, but also without reaction. However,
this means the attempted hurt is not working as intended. The reaction is
missing. The passion has the effect of making you kind of "transparent" and
this can be frustrating to anyone who wanted to hurt you: it's not working.
This is where the second order passion comes in; you move into second order
suspension and let the reaction react, and the hurt hurt. This second order
passion is almost the same as a mechanical reaction (at least that's what it
looks like on the surface). The reason for doing this is to avoid the
frustration of the other person. A mechanical reaction can quickly escalate
the situation, but frustration with a "transparent" person doesn't help much
either; chances are that the frustration finds someone else. I hope this
makes some sense...
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071209/ff02ed04/attachment.html
From irenedarcy at gmail.com Sun Dec 9 18:25:35 2007
From: irenedarcy at gmail.com (Irene Darcy)
Date: Sun Dec 9 18:29:56 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Unfolding of "layered" suspending - was: Language,
Map, and Email Identities
In-Reply-To: <475C22CC.000001.04276@VAIO-584793128F>
References: <20071209.103058.2428.187.ae.dropper@juno.com>
<475C22CC.000001.04276@VAIO-584793128F>
Message-ID: <c47283890712090925q4610c209q1ed4baacc6c1a24@mail.gmail.com>
I: I, too, am a bit busy atm, and will pick it up later, probably this
evening. It's very important, and seems to fit with the reading I'm doing
on brain plasticity, not to mention sense of self and coherent values.
On Dec 9, 2007 12:15 PM, william <w@david-bohm.net> wrote:
> >Please continue when you get a moment (willam) (just an invitation -
> >not a necessity - you've already been most helpful). Also Irene had
> >written: "How does it work for you? Can we compare?"
>
> I am a bit busy at the moment, Pat, but I'll pick it up again later. For
> the time being, let me just say that this is leading up to passion. But not
> exactly the same kind of passion that we have talked about a few years ago.
> This "new" passion is a further development of the earlier version. It's
> more like a second order of passion corresponding with the equally "new"
> second order of suspension. But more later...
>
> >
> >Incidentally, I have found that the only words that "hurt" me are the
> words that *I* say.
> >The words that others say, are never hurtful. They are music. But that's
> another story.
> >So it is these "words that *I* say" that interest me. I am really very
> tired of saying words
> >that are hurtful to me.
>
> But it's the hearing that works, not the saying. Whether words are spoken
> by yourself or by someone else doesn't really matter. In both cases you hear
> the words, and that is what is causing the reactions. You can misunderstand
> what somebody is saying and hear something else. In such a case, the
> reaction is to what you mistakenly think the person is saying. Thus,
> suspension is suspending the reaction to what you hear. What you hear is of
> your own making.
>
> The "second order suspension" is suspending suspension. This is like
> taking yourself out of suspension mode and allow the reaction to unfold with
> all its consequences. This is almost the same as if there never was
> suspension, like ging back to square one, but with a subtle difference. This
> also gives rise to a new kind of passion because suspension and passion are
> very closely related. Ordinary passion (first order passion) means allowing
> the hurt, let it happen without resistence, but also without reaction.
> However, this means the attempted hurt is not working as intended. The
> reaction is missing. The passion has the effect of making you kind of
> "transparent" and this can be frustrating to anyone who wanted to hurt you:
> it's not working. This is where the second order passion comes in; you move
> into second order suspension and let the reaction react, and the hurt
> hurt. This second order passion is almost the same as a mechanical reaction
> (at least that's what it looks like on the surface). The reason for doing
> this is to avoid the frustration of the other person. A mechanical reaction
> can quickly escalate the situation, but frustration with a "transparent"
> person doesn't help much either; chances are that the frustration finds
> someone else. I hope this makes some sense...
>
>
>
>
>
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>
--
Irene
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071209/86c7881d/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Sun Dec 9 19:12:17 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Sun Dec 9 19:16:39 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Re: Welcome to the "Bohm_Dialogue" mailing list
In-Reply-To: <mailman.0.1197221426.15425.bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org>
Message-ID: <230294.19295.qm@web45805.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Hi -
I just joined. Don't know much about Bohm except what I read at Wiki. I see he wrote a few books. Which one is recommended for a crash-course? Thank you all.
Alan E. DeBakey
bohm_dialogue-request@david-bohm.org wrote:
Welcome to the Bohm_Dialogue@david-bohm.org mailing list! Just to fill
you in and make certain that you agree with the approach we are
taking, let me mention what this group is for and what it isn't for:
It is intended as a place where we can inquire together into David
Bohm's proposals regarding dialogue, the process of thought, wholeness
and other aspects of his philosophical work. Our intention is to
explore his theories, set them alongside other approaches and attempt
to find out how we might proceed from where he left off.
It is not intended as an online dialogue but rather an online group
exploration to be conducted in the spirit of dialogue.
Unlike face-to-face dialogue groups it will be moderated. That is the
moderator will be available to do whatever he or she feels is
necessary to keep the process on course. The moderator will be able to
delete messages that are felt to be inappropriate and to 'unplug' any
participant who persists in disrupting what we hope will be an
exercise in the creative exploration of a complex body of work that we
feel may have potential importance for the future of all of us.
Unfortunately we have found it necessary to handle the list in this
way based on more than ten years of experience struggling with
unmoderated groups.
If you feel unhappy to participate with us under these terms please
unsubscribe now.
To post to this list, send your email to:
bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
General information about the mailing list is at:
http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
If you ever want to unsubscribe or change your options (eg, switch to
or from digest mode, change your password, etc.), visit your
subscription page at:
http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/options/bohm_dialogue/a.debakey%40yahoo.com
You can also make such adjustments via email by sending a message to:
Bohm_Dialogue-request@david-bohm.org
with the word `help' in the subject or body (don't include the
quotes), and you will get back a message with instructions.
You must know your password to change your options (including changing
the password, itself) or to unsubscribe. It is:
Bohm
Normally, Mailman will remind you of your david-bohm.org mailing list
passwords once every month, although you can disable this if you
prefer. This reminder will also include instructions on how to
unsubscribe or change your account options. There is also a button on
your options page that will email your current password to you.
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071209/78694e1c/attachment.html
From ae.dropper at juno.com Sun Dec 9 19:33:10 2007
From: ae.dropper at juno.com (ae.dropper@juno.com)
Date: Sun Dec 9 19:33:20 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Unfolding of "layered" suspending
Message-ID: <20071209.133312.2428.193.ae.dropper@juno.com>
So far, we seem to be talking about quite different things. But I almost
don't want to say this
because it might inhibit the complimentary development in each of our
directions, which development
is totally fascinating to me. But I feel a need to say just this much.
The parallel development though, of these two renderings of recent and
current
experience will hopefully continue along their parallel paths. I truly
want to see this development
continue; yours reads like a real page turner novel - but I have to wait
for the next chapter.
Mine, to me, reads like poetry (because it captures better than I could
have imagined
possible, the actual breakthrough experience. And because of the feedback
there is
confidence that the pointy nose of the clarifying process will continue
its
"breaking through").
And I'll just add that the mutual and back and forth praxis of experience
and
development of the language of the experience has been really in the
forefront
of awareness during the breakthrough process. "Which comes first?"
[Language. Experience]. Can't say at all.
-- funny
>Please continue when you get a moment (willam) (just an invitation -
>not a necessity - you've already been most helpful). Also Irene had
>written: "How does it work for you? Can we compare?"
I am a bit busy at the moment, Pat, but I'll pick it up again later. For
the time being, let me just say that this is leading up to passion. But
not exactly the same kind of passion that we have talked about a few
years ago. This "new" passion is a further development of the earlier
version. It's more like a second order of passion corresponding with the
equally "new" second order of suspension. But more later...
>
>Incidentally, I have found that the only words that "hurt" me are the
words that I say.
>The words that others say, are never hurtful. They are music. But that's
another story.
>So it is these "words that I say" that interest me. I am really very
tired of saying words
>that are hurtful to me.
But it's the hearing that works, not the saying. Whether words are spoken
by yourself or by someone else doesn't really matter. In both cases you
hear the words, and that is what is causing the reactions. You can
misunderstand what somebody is saying and hear something else. In such a
case, the reaction is to what you mistakenly think the person is saying.
Thus, suspension is suspending the reaction to what you hear. What you
hear is of your own making.
The "second order suspension" is suspending suspension. This is like
taking yourself out of suspension mode and allow the reaction to unfold
with all its consequences. This is almost the same as if there never was
suspension, like ging back to square one, but with a subtle difference.
This also gives rise to a new kind of passion because suspension and
passion are very closely related. Ordinary passion (first order passion)
means allowing the hurt, let it happen without resistence, but also
without reaction. However, this means the attempted hurt is not working
as intended. The reaction is missing. The passion has the effect of
making you kind of "transparent" and this can be frustrating to anyone
who wanted to hurt you: it's not working. This is where the second order
passion comes in; you move into second order suspension and let the
reaction react, and the hurt hurt. This second order passion is almost
the same as a mechanical reaction (at least that's what it looks like on
the surface). The reason for doing this is to avoid the frustration of
the other person. A mechanical reaction can quickly escalate the
situation, but frustration with a "transparent" person doesn't help much
either; chances are that the frustration finds someone else. I hope this
makes some sense... (wm)
Please continue when you get a moment (willam) (just an invitation - not
a necessity - you've already been most helpful). Also Irene had written:
"How does it work for you? Can we compare?"
There has come more clarity about the "layered suspension" thing. For
those interested in detail, it took about 15 "layers" before the clarity
came this time. (It has usually taken about 4 or 5). And it's all about
clarity - "getting to" clarity.
The "absence of clarity" is "layered" as well. These are layers of
evermore subtle and increasingly veiled defenses (untruths about self)
which correspond with the layers of suspension. The subtlety at each
level though - AT that level - breaks into obviousness. The obviousness
is in the bodily sensations. There is a lack of clarity - like sensations
of static. The initial satisfying feelings in the response evolve into a
static sensation and a non satisfaction.
Incidentally, I have found that the only words that "hurt" me are the
words that I say. The words that others say, are never hurtful. They are
music. But that's another story. So it is these "words that I say" that
interest me. I am really very tired of saying words that are hurtful to
me.
It is very clear now that the words that I say that are even remotely
[seeming] defensive [of a clearly untruthful self/world image] maintain
confusion or lack of clarity in my system.
Thus, the "layered" suspension. Because the defenses are "layered" too.
One comes right after another. They get VERY fancy AND, initially (as I
said) quite satisfying and fleetingly pleasurable. Then the "pleasure"
turns to a kind of sour sensation. The thing just FLOPS, upon suspension.
But the CLARITY, when it comes, comes with ..... well, clarity. There
is no flopping or static. The whole body feels clear. These is no
defensive wall anymore between "me" and the person[s] or group to whom
the response is being written.
Incidentally, there is an awareness that the "response" is primarily a
response from me to me - sort of "written on the wind." And that it is
its own reward and complete satisfaction. It is perhaps like a quanta (if
I understand such - complete in itself, a little piece of wholeness).
-- funny
On Sat, 8 Dec 2007 10:51:46 -0500 ae.dropper@juno.com writes:
Would you like to comment before i go further? You realize, of course,
where this is leading up to. (wm)
Please continue. I have no idea where this is leading. Appreciative for
all of it though.
-- funny
On Sat, 8 Dec 2007 11:49:45 +0100 (Westeurop?ische Normalzeit) "william"
<w@david-bohm.net> writes:
I didn't mean coping with the sense of detachment. I meant how to cope
with the tendency to suspend more and more; what you call "layered"
suspension (resulting in a sense of "detachment" for lack of a better
word). You see, at some point it starts getting a bit anti-social. When
you are always suspending, people are not getting their expected
responses anymore. Usually the reason for someone to say something or do
something is to get a response. This is also the case when someone utters
an insult, or attempt to hurt you: they usually do this because they are
disappointed or angry; and they want a reaction that shows they have
touched you. Now, if you are always in suspense mode then the attempted
hurt doesn't work, because there is no reaction on your side. At first
glance this is perhaps not a bad thing because it usually prevents the
situation from escalating. However, there is another aspect to this,
which is that the attempted hurt could be regarded as a form of
communication; they are trying to say something. If you don't respond,
don't react (as a result of suspension) then you are effectively refusing
to communicate on this level. You may be willing to communicate on a
different level but that channel is not open both ways. The point is, you
are denying communication on the channel on which it is invited.
So, what do you say to this? Because i am assuming it is not actually
your intention to deny communication. You are probably in compassion
mode, which however is not the channel open to whoever wants to touch
you. Have you reached a point where you would consider suspending
suspension, out of compassion, and give the person the feeling of having
touched you? Would you like to comment before i go further? You realize,
of course, where this is leading up to.
-------Original Message-------
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
Date: 07.12.2007 21:00:44
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Unfolding of "layered" suspending - was:
Language,Map, and Email Identities
But more on this (perhaps based on the curious idea of "coping").
There are times when I experience what you might be calling "detachment"
or something I might legitimately call "detachment." And there are many
childhood memories of something I can call "detachment," especially when
I was in school.
This "detachment' breaks off into two categories; one is entirely
comfortable; the other is not.
The one that is not comfortable is a feeling of not belonging or not
feeling like a participant.
How to cope? If it's in a dialogue circle it can be as simple as saying
something. Anything.
But this experience is quite rare these days. And quite noticeable for
its rarity. And there is a
preference these days to not say something to ease the discomfort but to
just observe
what is going on beneath the discomfort.
-- funny
On Fri, 7 Dec 2007 13:06:26 -0500 ae.dropper@juno.com writes:
To identify with a concept of "detachment" it would have to be
'detachment' from a layer that is SO thin that it is viscerally all but
indiscernible. Along with this, such "identity" requires imagining a
"something" that actually does the "detaching." This is possible - this
imagining. But it is clearly an isolated imagining and not a visceral
experience.
I LOVE to "play the game." And with simultaneous "watching."
-- funny
On Fri, 7 Dec 2007 13:05:24 +0100 (Westeurop?ische Normalzeit) "william"
<w@david-bohm.net> writes:
Ok, now i understand what you were saying. Thanks for the hint. Yes, i
think you're right; that's my experience also. But i also noticed that I
need to counteract a tendency of feeling detached from the rest of the
world, like preferring to quietly watch the game from a distance instead
of playing it. Is this tendency also the case with you, and if so how are
you coping with this?
-------Original Message-------
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
Date: 06.12.2007 17:34:58
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Unfolding of "layered" suspending - was:
Language,Map, and Email Identities
"The principle here is the same as that advanced by Rudolf Steiner when
he advised teachers to prepare their lessons painstakingly and then be
ready to sacrifice the prepared plan at the dictate of circumstances
which may point to an entirely fresh approach to their material."
from: THE ART OF GOETHEAN CONVERSATION
This speaks to what I was saying - except "sacrifice the prepared plan "
again and again.
The response gets more and more "whole" each time. It draws on more of
what the group
is saying as a whole. And with a little experience one comes to see the
"sacrifices"
[of the satisfactions] as "investments" in evermore surprising surprises.
Or, one
could say that one is "spending" the satisfaction of the response on what
further
"suspending" might yield in terms of an even more surprising response.
Simple suspension alone though has yielded
surprise from the start. It's just an amazing discovery
[the unfolding of this "layered" suspending] for someone really
interested in "suspension."
Not recommending; just reporting.
-- funny
>"Suspension" just grows and grows. Where the surface fruits of
"suspension" are
>appreciated, suspension through the strata begins to show its appeal.
The fruits of
>suspension [of action, which includes speech, in relation to what is
read or heard] are
>that something unknown surfaces as a possible response. Very satisfying
to respond
>with these. But these too, can be suspended. It may take awhile to be
able to do this
>because the little bit of satisfaction needs to be "invested." Very long
story short, with
>each "reinvestment" something even more amazing surfaces.
>Eventually, there comes the curiosity about a kind of 'complete
investment'. This is the
>logical conclusion of Bohm's brilliant but humble and simple proposal of
"suspension'.
>Along the way of this, and relatively soon though, you will find
yourself responding with
>things you have never heard of before. So the process is never not fun.
And there is no
>rush for the "completion."
>-- funny
Is there anyone out there who can make sense out of this? I am sorry
"funny" but to me it sounds as if you are drunk or crazy or demented. Or
could you possibly be enlightened, or are you an unrecognized artist, or
some brilliant genious ahead of his time, or what else could this be? Is
there anyway this could be understood as something other than sheer
nonsense? Or if you are talking from some higher intelligence could you
please come down and try to explain it to this stupid chimpansee?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071209/1d9abc23/attachment.html
From ae.dropper at juno.com Sun Dec 9 19:41:01 2007
From: ae.dropper at juno.com (ae.dropper@juno.com)
Date: Sun Dec 9 19:42:24 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Re: Welcome to the "Bohm_Dialogue" mailing list
Message-ID: <20071209.134109.2428.195.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Read On Dialogue. Back it up with Lee Nichol's Wholeness Regained. Google
it.
On Sun, 9 Dec 2007 10:12:17 -0800 (PST) "Alan E. DeBakey"
<a.debakey@yahoo.com> writes:
Hi -
I just joined. Don't know m