From dfactor at dc.rr.com Thu Nov 9 00:36:23 2006
From: dfactor at dc.rr.com (donald factor)
Date: Fri Nov 10 01:40:10 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] robust dialogue and the middle way
In-Reply-To: <20061108.000943.1128.1.franis_franis@juno.com>
References: <20061108.000943.1128.1.franis_franis@juno.com>
Message-ID: <AEAB3921-9FC9-423D-881A-6F6D5E2BA779@dc.rr.com>
Gotcha, ii wasis pack.
pon
On Nov 8, 2006, at 8:02 AM, Franis Engel wrote:
> Any oneofus can beact asif youme are whatITis.
> NOW i mage in, me taking twentythirtyfifty different posts to say
> this?
> If anypodies does any enuff, gonna hit on somegold sometime.
> IMHO, txt msging chil'
> - is just hard to read - and English is my native language.
> hey - we can do anything we want now that Don's away!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061108/ad1745d1/attachment.html
From Susan.Joy at worldnet.att.net Thu Nov 9 00:38:45 2006
From: Susan.Joy at worldnet.att.net (Susan Clemons)
Date: Fri Nov 10 01:42:37 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Introductions and language
References: <BAY22-F109D9CAE42B892EB109614A5F10@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <039601c7038f$09783cf0$da78480c@HOME>
Hi Kathy. This all sounds very interesting. I looked back in my archives
to see if I could find any of our previous conversations on Native American
language. I found one that was really long. At one time we didn't have an
archive for the list so Don F. asked me if I would post some of our more
interesting conversations to a web site. So I started a web site and posted
a few things but then got busy with other things and didn't do much with it.
Since the dialogue I found on NA was so long I thought the easiest way to
share it was to post it to the site I started. If you look in the archives
under 2005 the first 6 links (dated between May 3 and May 15) are to threads
that were about verby language and quite a bit of discussion about Native
American Language. Actually they were one big long thread but I decided
they would be easier to read (and to post) if I broke them up a little.
Here's the link:
http://naturallythriving.home.att.net/archives.htm
And quite a few of the other threads that are posted are about language,
metaphor and story.
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: "Morgan Jett" <griffyn23@hotmail.com>
To: <bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org>
Sent: Wednesday, November 08, 2006 6:19 AM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Introductions and language
> Susan, You have no idea how delighted I am that we met! How I wish I had
> known you when Michael and I were in Cave Creek! He was finishing up his
> MA in creative wriing here at New School when the cancer struck, and we
> literally fled to Mayo in Scottsdale, hoping for a liver transplant.
> While there, we went to Tucson. Simon Ortiz wanted Michael to come there
> for his PhD. Unfortunately, Michael crossed over, but I have those
> memories. Michael grew up in Clifton where his father worked for Phelps
> Dodge; the first Indian to get a job above ground.
>
> I am so sorry about your car accident. You have a great hospital in
> Tucson, though. One of our transplant support group came to us from
> there. I hope you have a full recovery.
>
> You are not too far from Dine/Navajo Community College. The tuition is
> next to nothing, and you can stay in the dorms. Go there and study.
> There is a marvellous teacher of Navajo language named Martha Jackson.
> Another one name OJ whom you should stay away from. One named Ben -
> Littlehorse, I think. I can go to the website and pull it up. Ben is
> great! The study of the language is not complete without living the life
> with them. Avery Denny is a hatathli/medicine man whom I did an
> independent study under, oh - gosh - if you do that, maybe I'll come out
> and do it again, too. I really loved it. Denny used to tell me when and
> where certain ceremonies were being held so I could go. Harry Walters, the
> head of the museum, when I meet again I'll just put my arms around him and
> cry. I do so miss it!
>
> I'd love to read your posts on the language. All you say about nouns and
> verbs is true, but upon studying Bohm, I realized that there is a more
> basic connection - that is, how the language reflects the world view of
> connection and relationship as beauty - hozhoon - all my relations. One
> single lo-o-o-o-og word embodies what we call a noun, verb, and all its
> descriptive properties. And the selection of the properties is more
> complete and complex than anything we have in English. Actually, I find
> that our words for our grammar and syntax aren't really adequate to think
> about Navajo because they activate our experiences of English, and we
> erroneously expect Navajo to follow suit. But - we have no other words,
> so we try to translate. I find it a much more precise language than
> English. Vincent Craig, the Navajo comedian, once compared it to "mental
> television" because one word can describe physical features, movement,
> 1st/2nd/3rd person, and singular, plural (2), plural (3 or more). That's
> also why I refuse to be told I can't use images. Also, we use verbal
> imagery all the time. With these new resources, a new language HAS to
> develop.
>
> "recently people have begun to realize more and more that it might be
> possible to have a "true" dialogue in this format."
> Yes, actually, it never occurred to me NOT to dialog. After all, we've
> "dialogued" through snail mail for a long time. Any time two people try
> to communicate, a broad definition of dialog happens - not Bohm - but why
> should it be any different?
>
> As for "intellectual discussion", I totally agree. Sometimes, some of the
> posts I see remind me of the poem Jabberwocky! Totally severed from
> action and the rest of the world. My wonderful teacher Frances used to
> say "you have all there is. It's what you do with it that counts." She
> was SO right.
>
> So, Susan - I think the true spirit of Bohm is the creative - mechanical
> interplay, finally to result in new perceptions, new connections. As our
> options expand for exchange with wonderful people around the globe, the
> closer I feel, we get to what Bohm really envisioned. Especially if it's
> not restricted to those who have money to buy and support computers. So -
> upward and onward. Let's not fear that we aren't "doing Bohm". He
> believed that everything is in flux, and a man of his brilliance would
> have flowed with the new opportunitites evolving.
>
> I still have my Navajo books downstairs in storage where I put them when I
> lost Michael. Maybe soon I'll go down there and get the titles of the
> ones I think you might be interested in. Also, the NCC bookstore has a
> lot of great stuff, and will order things for you. And the library there
> is rich with their cultural material.
>
> If I ever learn how to get pictures to an acceptable size, I'll send you
> photos of my life with the Navajo.
>
> Hozhoon, k
>
>
>
>
>>From: "Susan Clemons" <Susan.Joy@worldnet.att.net>
>>Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>>To: <bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org>
>>Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Introductions and language
>>Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2006 13:29:15 -0700
>>
>>Hi Kathy. Thanks for introducing yourself. I'll reciprocate with a
>>little information on me. I'm single, no children, just turned 55 and
>>live in Tucson, AZ. I currently work at home doing CAD drawings (computer
>>aided drafting) for the construction industry and working with graphics.
>>I've been a member of this group for 3 or 4 years now (can't remember
>>exactly when I joined).
>>
>>Back at the end of June I was in a car accident and ended up with a broken
>>right arm. They tell me that because it was broken close to the shoulder
>>it caused a lot of problems that aren't associated with most breaks.
>>Because of this the healing process has been long and taken a lot of my
>>energy. I would say I'm about 70% back to normal now. I still have a few
>>problems that will take a couple more months (so they say) for me to clear
>>up.
>>
>>I'm very interested in your experience with the Navajo. I'm very
>>interested in language and particularly Native American Language. I grew
>>up in Oklahoma among a large population of Native Americans and have had a
>>number of Native American friends. I've posted quite a bit of my ideas
>>about the differences in NA language and English in the past. The biggest
>>difference having to do with verbs. I have come to understand that in
>>the Western world we have come to think of processes as "things"/objects
>>and this has created a lot of problems in our thought process. Where as
>>the NA's have what I think of as a more verby language that is process
>>oriented. In fact, many of the NA languages as well as some Eastern
>>languages don't even have nouns. I have found a huge difference in
>>learning to think in verby terms (process oriented rather than object
>>oriented) in my own thought processes.
>>
>>When it comes to forging a new path in Dialogue, I think the group may be
>>only at the beginning of realizing and dealing with this. When I first
>>joined the list it was not considered an actual dialogue because it was
>>not face to face, and many people didn't believe that it was possible to
>>have an actual dialogue in this format. It was considered to be simply a
>>list started with the intentions of exploring Bohm's ideas done "in the
>>spirit" of dialogue. And you may have noticed that's still it's
>>definition. But recently people have begun to realize more and more that
>>it might be possible to have a "true" dialogue in this format. Personally
>>I think it's not only possible but that we do it on this list all the
>>time. For myself, I'm not nearly as interested in an intellectual
>>discussion of Bohms ideas as I am in actually doing Dialogue here in this
>>format of the internet. Like you, I feel that we are pioneers in this
>>area.
>>
>>Susan
>>
>>
>>----- Original Message ----- From: "Morgan Jett" <griffyn23@hotmail.com>
>>To: <bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org>
>>Sent: Tuesday, November 07, 2006 12:50 PM
>>Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Passion, Compassion, and Principles
>>
>>
>>>Hi Susan - No we haven't met. I don't mind at all giving information
>>>about myself. I'm Kathy, 71 year old retired bilingual Spanish and music
>>>teacher and composer, originally from Florida, with 35 years of service,
>>>10 years in Puerto Rico, and over 40 years living in NYC. I was also one
>>>of the first teachers to be trained in conflict resolution. I have 2
>>>sons by a Puerto Rican father, and raised them alone/working mother, the
>>>whole bit, here in NYC. I taught in both the South Bronx and the Upper
>>>West Side. I lost my last husband, a Navajo with whom I lived on the
>>>ancestral land in the Navajo Nation, on Dec. 25, right after 9 - 11. I
>>>also had the privilege and delight of studying Navajo language,
>>>literature, traditions and culture at Dine College/Navajo Community
>>>College. Navajo world view is SO compatible with Bohm. That's one
>>>reason I'm so pro-Bohm and dialog. I am also a co-moderator on another
>>>list, which is why, like you, I am somewhat familiar with internet
>>>protocol and needs.
>>>
>>>I appreciate your thoughtful, candid response. Now I would like to
>>>reciprocate.
>>>
>>>S: I do not envy Don F. his job of being moderator and I know from past
>>>experience that he has struggled with this issue. I think most of us
>>>have.
>>>
>>>K: I absolutely agree. He is every inch a scholar and a gentleman. If
>>>requested, with acceptable guidelines in place, I'd be happy to help him
>>>co-moderate, or in any way I could. I can't think of a better way to use
>>>my time, except to get my face-to-face group started. Zoe also knows and
>>>has accepted that I have said I will be the first to call her on any
>>>actions I find inappropriate, as everyone else has the right to do.
>>>
>>>S: But I also know that it isn't going to do much good to pursue this
>>>conversation until Don gets to
>>>>Calif. and gets back on line. He will be facing 100's of posts on his
>>>>return and could miss the important parts of the discussion trying to
>>>>weed through the posts.
>>>
>>>K: That also sounds reasonable to me.
>>>
>>>S: he (Peter) spams the list -
>>>K: that should go in the guidelines and principles.I think, as should any
>>>other experiences that have been disruptive in the past.
>>>
>>>S: Peter has been given every chance -
>>>K: here's where we diverge. I'm convinced he's not Peter, but if proven
>>>wrong, I'll claim responsibility for my error, and help boot him with
>>>proper procedure, if he violates guidelines.
>>>
>>>S: I have come to learn that, as you have mentioned, principles and
>>>guidelines do seem to be necessary
>>>K: Yes, and I deliberately chose the terminology hoping it was more
>>>compatible with the original aims of Dialog. The terms are also open to
>>>suggestion and change.
>>>
>>>S: I would be happy with any guidelines that say no trolling and no
>>>spam. I would also agree with you that the guidelines should be posted
>>>K: Thank you. We need to list specifics that we consider trolling. I
>>>testified to how it happened, and I know Don F will not deny it. He has
>>>a log of all our correspondence on the subject, as I do.
>>>
>>>S: and anyone that we do not know for certain is Peter deserves a warning
>>>before being unsubscribed.
>>>K: I had a lot of experience and training in documenting children's
>>>undesirable behavior. I'd be happy to put that knowledge to use here.
>>>
>>>S: I don't know if Zoe (or Kris) were ever confronted with people's
>>>suspicions that they were Peter or not and given the chance to respond.
>>>But I do think they deserved to be openly told what people
>>>>think.
>>>K: I did not see that happen, and Zoe is very hurt that things were
>>>handled this way. If anyone else has proof to the contrary about ZOE -
>>>NOT Peter or Kris - both she and the rest of us should receive it, and
>>>Zoe given a chance to respond.
>>>
>>>S: As you will discover, open honest communication is important to me.
>>>K: I do see that, and am very comfortable dialoging with you. I hope we
>>>can work together with interested others to develop and implement these
>>>principles and guidelines.
>>>
>>>We are definitely forging a new path in Bohm, required by a new era in
>>>the technological development of communication. It has been a pleasure
>>>dialoging with you. If you are near or ever in NYC, please let me know.
>>>I'd love to meet you.
>>>
>>>Hozhoon, Kathryn Morgan Jett Arizmendi (just so you'll know the
>>>identities I currently use!)
>>>(picture Kathy smiling happily)
>>>
From Susan.Joy at worldnet.att.net Thu Nov 9 00:39:51 2006
From: Susan.Joy at worldnet.att.net (Susan Clemons)
Date: Fri Nov 10 01:43:37 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] robust dialogue and the middle way
References: <20061108.000943.1128.1.franis_franis@juno.com>
<AEAB3921-9FC9-423D-881A-6F6D5E2BA779@dc.rr.com>
Message-ID: <03a501c7038f$307bb9d0$da78480c@HOME>
That was quick! Don't you usually stay in England for Christmas?
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: donald factor
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Wednesday, November 08, 2006 4:36 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] robust dialogue and the middle way
Gotcha, ii wasis pack.
pon
On Nov 8, 2006, at 8:02 AM, Franis Engel wrote:
Any oneofus can beact asif youme are whatITis.
NOW i mage in, me taking twentythirtyfifty different posts to say this?
If anypodies does any enuff, gonna hit on somegold sometime.
IMHO, txt msging chil'
- is just hard to read - and English is my native language.
hey - we can do anything we want now that Don's away!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
info:
www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
dialogue facilitator:
facilitator@david-bohm.net
Administrator of the mailing list:
admin@david-bohm.net
_______________________________________________
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061108/5cbcc718/attachment.html
From griffyn23 at hotmail.com Thu Nov 9 01:01:53 2006
From: griffyn23 at hotmail.com (Morgan Jett)
Date: Fri Nov 10 02:05:42 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Introductions and language
In-Reply-To: <039601c7038f$09783cf0$da78480c@HOME>
Message-ID: <BAY22-F135D94AE1ABF3FACA87629A5F00@phx.gbl>
Hi Susan - just found your post. I'm trying to sort out all the emails,
delete ,etc. Thanks for the link. k
>From: "Susan Clemons" <Susan.Joy@worldnet.att.net>
>Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>To: <bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org>
>Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Introductions and language
>Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2006 16:38:45 -0700
>
>Hi Kathy. This all sounds very interesting. I looked back in my archives
>to see if I could find any of our previous conversations on Native American
>language. I found one that was really long. At one time we didn't have an
>archive for the list so Don F. asked me if I would post some of our more
>interesting conversations to a web site. So I started a web site and
>posted a few things but then got busy with other things and didn't do much
>with it.
>
>Since the dialogue I found on NA was so long I thought the easiest way to
>share it was to post it to the site I started. If you look in the archives
>under 2005 the first 6 links (dated between May 3 and May 15) are to
>threads that were about verby language and quite a bit of discussion about
>Native American Language. Actually they were one big long thread but I
>decided they would be easier to read (and to post) if I broke them up a
>little.
>
>Here's the link:
>http://naturallythriving.home.att.net/archives.htm
>
>And quite a few of the other threads that are posted are about language,
>metaphor and story.
>
>Susan
>
>
>----- Original Message ----- From: "Morgan Jett" <griffyn23@hotmail.com>
>To: <bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org>
>Sent: Wednesday, November 08, 2006 6:19 AM
>Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Introductions and language
>
>
>>Susan, You have no idea how delighted I am that we met! How I wish I had
>>known you when Michael and I were in Cave Creek! He was finishing up his
>>MA in creative wriing here at New School when the cancer struck, and we
>>literally fled to Mayo in Scottsdale, hoping for a liver transplant. While
>>there, we went to Tucson. Simon Ortiz wanted Michael to come there for
>>his PhD. Unfortunately, Michael crossed over, but I have those memories.
>>Michael grew up in Clifton where his father worked for Phelps Dodge; the
>>first Indian to get a job above ground.
>>
>>I am so sorry about your car accident. You have a great hospital in
>>Tucson, though. One of our transplant support group came to us from
>>there. I hope you have a full recovery.
>>
>>You are not too far from Dine/Navajo Community College. The tuition is
>>next to nothing, and you can stay in the dorms. Go there and study. There
>>is a marvellous teacher of Navajo language named Martha Jackson. Another
>>one name OJ whom you should stay away from. One named Ben - Littlehorse,
>>I think. I can go to the website and pull it up. Ben is great! The
>>study of the language is not complete without living the life with them.
>>Avery Denny is a hatathli/medicine man whom I did an independent study
>>under, oh - gosh - if you do that, maybe I'll come out and do it again,
>>too. I really loved it. Denny used to tell me when and where certain
>>ceremonies were being held so I could go. Harry Walters, the head of the
>>museum, when I meet again I'll just put my arms around him and cry. I do
>>so miss it!
>>
>>I'd love to read your posts on the language. All you say about nouns and
>>verbs is true, but upon studying Bohm, I realized that there is a more
>>basic connection - that is, how the language reflects the world view of
>>connection and relationship as beauty - hozhoon - all my relations. One
>>single lo-o-o-o-og word embodies what we call a noun, verb, and all its
>>descriptive properties. And the selection of the properties is more
>>complete and complex than anything we have in English. Actually, I find
>>that our words for our grammar and syntax aren't really adequate to think
>>about Navajo because they activate our experiences of English, and we
>>erroneously expect Navajo to follow suit. But - we have no other words,
>>so we try to translate. I find it a much more precise language than
>>English. Vincent Craig, the Navajo comedian, once compared it to "mental
>>television" because one word can describe physical features, movement,
>>1st/2nd/3rd person, and singular, plural (2), plural (3 or more). That's
>>also why I refuse to be told I can't use images. Also, we use verbal
>>imagery all the time. With these new resources, a new language HAS to
>>develop.
>>
>>"recently people have begun to realize more and more that it might be
>>possible to have a "true" dialogue in this format."
>>Yes, actually, it never occurred to me NOT to dialog. After all, we've
>>"dialogued" through snail mail for a long time. Any time two people try
>>to communicate, a broad definition of dialog happens - not Bohm - but why
>>should it be any different?
>>
>>As for "intellectual discussion", I totally agree. Sometimes, some of the
>>posts I see remind me of the poem Jabberwocky! Totally severed from
>>action and the rest of the world. My wonderful teacher Frances used to
>>say "you have all there is. It's what you do with it that counts." She
>>was SO right.
>>
>>So, Susan - I think the true spirit of Bohm is the creative - mechanical
>>interplay, finally to result in new perceptions, new connections. As our
>>options expand for exchange with wonderful people around the globe, the
>>closer I feel, we get to what Bohm really envisioned. Especially if it's
>>not restricted to those who have money to buy and support computers. So -
>>upward and onward. Let's not fear that we aren't "doing Bohm". He
>>believed that everything is in flux, and a man of his brilliance would
>>have flowed with the new opportunitites evolving.
>>
>>I still have my Navajo books downstairs in storage where I put them when I
>>lost Michael. Maybe soon I'll go down there and get the titles of the
>>ones I think you might be interested in. Also, the NCC bookstore has a
>>lot of great stuff, and will order things for you. And the library there
>>is rich with their cultural material.
>>
>>If I ever learn how to get pictures to an acceptable size, I'll send you
>>photos of my life with the Navajo.
>>
>>Hozhoon, k
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>From: "Susan Clemons" <Susan.Joy@worldnet.att.net>
>>>Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>>>To: <bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org>
>>>Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Introductions and language
>>>Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2006 13:29:15 -0700
>>>
>>>Hi Kathy. Thanks for introducing yourself. I'll reciprocate with a
>>>little information on me. I'm single, no children, just turned 55 and
>>>live in Tucson, AZ. I currently work at home doing CAD drawings
>>>(computer aided drafting) for the construction industry and working with
>>>graphics. I've been a member of this group for 3 or 4 years now (can't
>>>remember exactly when I joined).
>>>
>>>Back at the end of June I was in a car accident and ended up with a
>>>broken right arm. They tell me that because it was broken close to the
>>>shoulder it caused a lot of problems that aren't associated with most
>>>breaks. Because of this the healing process has been long and taken a lot
>>>of my energy. I would say I'm about 70% back to normal now. I still
>>>have a few problems that will take a couple more months (so they say) for
>>>me to clear up.
>>>
>>>I'm very interested in your experience with the Navajo. I'm very
>>>interested in language and particularly Native American Language. I grew
>>>up in Oklahoma among a large population of Native Americans and have had
>>>a number of Native American friends. I've posted quite a bit of my ideas
>>>about the differences in NA language and English in the past. The
>>>biggest difference having to do with verbs. I have come to understand
>>>that in the Western world we have come to think of processes as
>>>"things"/objects and this has created a lot of problems in our thought
>>>process. Where as the NA's have what I think of as a more verby language
>>>that is process oriented. In fact, many of the NA languages as well as
>>>some Eastern languages don't even have nouns. I have found a huge
>>>difference in learning to think in verby terms (process oriented rather
>>>than object oriented) in my own thought processes.
>>>
>>>When it comes to forging a new path in Dialogue, I think the group may be
>>>only at the beginning of realizing and dealing with this. When I first
>>>joined the list it was not considered an actual dialogue because it was
>>>not face to face, and many people didn't believe that it was possible to
>>>have an actual dialogue in this format. It was considered to be simply a
>>>list started with the intentions of exploring Bohm's ideas done "in the
>>>spirit" of dialogue. And you may have noticed that's still it's
>>>definition. But recently people have begun to realize more and more that
>>>it might be possible to have a "true" dialogue in this format.
>>>Personally I think it's not only possible but that we do it on this list
>>>all the time. For myself, I'm not nearly as interested in an
>>>intellectual discussion of Bohms ideas as I am in actually doing Dialogue
>>>here in this format of the internet. Like you, I feel that we are
>>>pioneers in this area.
>>>
>>>Susan
>>>
>>>
>>>----- Original Message ----- From: "Morgan Jett" <griffyn23@hotmail.com>
>>>To: <bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org>
>>>Sent: Tuesday, November 07, 2006 12:50 PM
>>>Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Passion, Compassion, and Principles
>>>
>>>
>>>>Hi Susan - No we haven't met. I don't mind at all giving information
>>>>about myself. I'm Kathy, 71 year old retired bilingual Spanish and music
>>>>teacher and composer, originally from Florida, with 35 years of service,
>>>>10 years in Puerto Rico, and over 40 years living in NYC. I was also
>>>>one of the first teachers to be trained in conflict resolution. I have
>>>>2 sons by a Puerto Rican father, and raised them alone/working mother,
>>>>the whole bit, here in NYC. I taught in both the South Bronx and the
>>>>Upper West Side. I lost my last husband, a Navajo with whom I lived on
>>>>the ancestral land in the Navajo Nation, on Dec. 25, right after 9 - 11.
>>>> I also had the privilege and delight of studying Navajo language,
>>>>literature, traditions and culture at Dine College/Navajo Community
>>>>College. Navajo world view is SO compatible with Bohm. That's one
>>>>reason I'm so pro-Bohm and dialog. I am also a co-moderator on another
>>>>list, which is why, like you, I am somewhat familiar with internet
>>>>protocol and needs.
>>>>
>>>>I appreciate your thoughtful, candid response. Now I would like to
>>>>reciprocate.
>>>>
>>>>S: I do not envy Don F. his job of being moderator and I know from past
>>>>experience that he has struggled with this issue. I think most of us
>>>>have.
>>>>
>>>>K: I absolutely agree. He is every inch a scholar and a gentleman. If
>>>>requested, with acceptable guidelines in place, I'd be happy to help him
>>>>co-moderate, or in any way I could. I can't think of a better way to
>>>>use my time, except to get my face-to-face group started. Zoe also
>>>>knows and has accepted that I have said I will be the first to call her
>>>>on any actions I find inappropriate, as everyone else has the right to
>>>>do.
>>>>
>>>>S: But I also know that it isn't going to do much good to pursue this
>>>>conversation until Don gets to
>>>>>Calif. and gets back on line. He will be facing 100's of posts on his
>>>>>return and could miss the important parts of the discussion trying to
>>>>>weed through the posts.
>>>>
>>>>K: That also sounds reasonable to me.
>>>>
>>>>S: he (Peter) spams the list -
>>>>K: that should go in the guidelines and principles.I think, as should
>>>>any other experiences that have been disruptive in the past.
>>>>
>>>>S: Peter has been given every chance -
>>>>K: here's where we diverge. I'm convinced he's not Peter, but if proven
>>>>wrong, I'll claim responsibility for my error, and help boot him with
>>>>proper procedure, if he violates guidelines.
>>>>
>>>>S: I have come to learn that, as you have mentioned, principles and
>>>>guidelines do seem to be necessary
>>>>K: Yes, and I deliberately chose the terminology hoping it was more
>>>>compatible with the original aims of Dialog. The terms are also open to
>>>>suggestion and change.
>>>>
>>>>S: I would be happy with any guidelines that say no trolling and no
>>>>spam. I would also agree with you that the guidelines should be posted
>>>>K: Thank you. We need to list specifics that we consider trolling. I
>>>>testified to how it happened, and I know Don F will not deny it. He has
>>>>a log of all our correspondence on the subject, as I do.
>>>>
>>>>S: and anyone that we do not know for certain is Peter deserves a
>>>>warning before being unsubscribed.
>>>>K: I had a lot of experience and training in documenting children's
>>>>undesirable behavior. I'd be happy to put that knowledge to use here.
>>>>
>>>>S: I don't know if Zoe (or Kris) were ever confronted with people's
>>>>suspicions that they were Peter or not and given the chance to respond.
>>>>But I do think they deserved to be openly told what people
>>>>>think.
>>>>K: I did not see that happen, and Zoe is very hurt that things were
>>>>handled this way. If anyone else has proof to the contrary about ZOE -
>>>>NOT Peter or Kris - both she and the rest of us should receive it, and
>>>>Zoe given a chance to respond.
>>>>
>>>>S: As you will discover, open honest communication is important to me.
>>>>K: I do see that, and am very comfortable dialoging with you. I hope
>>>>we can work together with interested others to develop and implement
>>>>these principles and guidelines.
>>>>
>>>>We are definitely forging a new path in Bohm, required by a new era in
>>>>the technological development of communication. It has been a pleasure
>>>>dialoging with you. If you are near or ever in NYC, please let me know.
>>>>I'd love to meet you.
>>>>
>>>>Hozhoon, Kathryn Morgan Jett Arizmendi (just so you'll know the
>>>>identities I currently use!)
>>>>(picture Kathy smiling happily)
>>>>
>
>_______________________________________________
>info:
>www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>
>dialogue facilitator:
>facilitator@david-bohm.net
>
>Administrator of the mailing list:
>admin@david-bohm.net
>
>_______________________________________________
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
Add a Yahoo! contact to Windows Live Messenger for a chance to win a free
trip!
http://www.imagine-windowslive.com/minisites/yahoo/default.aspx?locale=en-us&hmtagline
From donfactor at donfactor.demon.co.uk Thu Nov 9 01:02:47 2006
From: donfactor at donfactor.demon.co.uk (donald factor)
Date: Fri Nov 10 02:06:34 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] robust dialogue and the middle way
In-Reply-To: <03a501c7038f$307bb9d0$da78480c@HOME>
References: <20061108.000943.1128.1.franis_franis@juno.com>
<AEAB3921-9FC9-423D-881A-6F6D5E2BA779@dc.rr.com>
<03a501c7038f$307bb9d0$da78480c@HOME>
Message-ID: <D5928225-545B-48B7-86E8-10F5D05E00D0@donfactor.demon.co.uk>
Yes but my son is getting married in LA so we came out early.
don
On Nov 8, 2006, at 11:39 PM, Susan Clemons wrote:
> That was quick! Don't you usually stay in England for Christmas?
>
> Susan
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: donald factor
> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> Sent: Wednesday, November 08, 2006 4:36 PM
> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] robust dialogue and the middle way
>
> Gotcha, ii wasis pack.
>
> pon
>
>
> On Nov 8, 2006, at 8:02 AM, Franis Engel wrote:
>
>> Any oneofus can beact asif youme are whatITis.
>> NOW i mage in, me taking twentythirtyfifty different posts to say
>> this?
>> If anypodies does any enuff, gonna hit on somegold sometime.
>> IMHO, txt msging chil'
>> - is just hard to read - and English is my native language.
>> hey - we can do anything we want now that Don's
>> away!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> info:
> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
> post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>
> dialogue facilitator:
> facilitator@david-bohm.net
>
> Administrator of the mailing list:
> admin@david-bohm.net
>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> info:
> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
> post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>
> dialogue facilitator:
> facilitator@david-bohm.net
>
> Administrator of the mailing list:
> admin@david-bohm.net
>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061109/f5f14ca7/attachment.html
From griffyn23 at hotmail.com Thu Nov 9 01:05:31 2006
From: griffyn23 at hotmail.com (Morgan Jett)
Date: Fri Nov 10 02:09:21 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] robust dialogue and the middle way
In-Reply-To: <03a501c7038f$307bb9d0$da78480c@HOME>
Message-ID: <BAY22-F20311B1CC3C57362DF2F8BA5F00@phx.gbl>
Hi - how was the trib? k
>From: "Susan Clemons" <Susan.Joy@worldnet.att.net>
>Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>To: <bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org>
>Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] robust dialogue and the middle way
>Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2006 16:39:51 -0700
>
>That was quick! Don't you usually stay in England for Christmas?
>
>Susan
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: donald factor
> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> Sent: Wednesday, November 08, 2006 4:36 PM
> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] robust dialogue and the middle way
>
>
> Gotcha, ii wasis pack.
>
>
> pon
>
>
>
>
> On Nov 8, 2006, at 8:02 AM, Franis Engel wrote:
>
>
> Any oneofus can beact asif youme are whatITis.
>
> NOW i mage in, me taking twentythirtyfifty different posts to say
>this?
>
> If anypodies does any enuff, gonna hit on somegold sometime.
>
> IMHO, txt msging chil'
>
> - is just hard to read - and English is my native language.
>
> hey - we can do anything we want now that Don's away!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> info:
> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
> post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>
> dialogue facilitator:
> facilitator@david-bohm.net
>
> Administrator of the mailing list:
> admin@david-bohm.net
>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>info:
>www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>
>dialogue facilitator:
>facilitator@david-bohm.net
>
>Administrator of the mailing list:
>admin@david-bohm.net
>
>_______________________________________________
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
All-in-one security and maintenance for your PC. Get a free 90-day trial!
http://clk.atdmt.com/MSN/go/msnnkwlo0050000002msn/direct/01/?href=http://www.windowsonecare.com/?sc_cid=msn_hotmail
From Susan.Joy at worldnet.att.net Thu Nov 9 01:11:42 2006
From: Susan.Joy at worldnet.att.net (Susan Clemons)
Date: Fri Nov 10 02:15:31 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] robust dialogue and the middle way
References: <C177B818.385C%earthsky@tiscali.co.uk>
Message-ID: <03b101c70393$a3872f50$da78480c@HOME>
Hi Gill. It's nice to meet you. I understand the current desire among many
of you to explore the PKZ phenomena. When I first joined the list the same
discussion was going on. I jumped right in, eager to explore it. And it
was a very similar one to what you are all proposing right now. Although at
that time Peter was an active member of the group and he was included in the
discussion. In the beginning I sounded much like you and some of the others
right now.
But as time went by and I realized everyone was exploring the subject except
Peter I began to feel differently. Peter's response was mostly just to
ignore any kind of idea of exploring an introspection into himself, all he
was interested in was goading the rest of us. Rather than use suspension he
would flood us with brief posts about the world being made up of carrot and
stick mentality and we should all recognize that the only solution was total
chaos. When he became determined to spam the group with anywhere from 75 to
100 nonsense messages of 1 or 2 lines each every day regardless of how any
of us felt (and I'm pretty sure it was because of how we felt) the decision
(after much agonizing) was made to ban him. At that point I was ready for
him to be banned. He mostly just trolled for recruits for his OD site and
spammed us for not being interested. He also seems to have a fixation with
male authority figures and chose Don F. to flame as a surrogate authority.
It was this very phenomena and exploring it here on this list as well as
exploring it on a couple of other lists that had similar problems that
caused me to come to the conclusions that I gave to Kathy in my post to her.
In order for anything to cohere there needs to be at least a loose and
flexible structure. Here's a link to some of the thoughts I have had about
the structure and purpose of Bohm Dialogue in one of our previous
discussions:
http://naturallythriving.home.att.net/purpose.htm
When it comes to K and Z, as I told Kathy, I don't know what happened with
them but it sounds like Zoe feels she was banned without any warning and
without any group discussion. If that's true, then I would say that I think
anyone we suspect of being a troll or of spamming or who we suspect is
Peter, deserves to at least be told of our feelings and be given a chance to
speak for themselves.
And, no, I don't worry about how many posts I make per day or how long they
are. I used to worry about that. But then I decided that the purpose of
dialogue is to dialogue. You can't do that without posting. A healthy
dialogue is going to have lots of posts. I've learned to deal with it by
learning to know which people are definitely going to have something to say
that I'm interested in responding to and not. On my busy days I skip
through the posts and read only a few people or if there's a good thread
going I will read only that thread. And, yes, sometimes I miss a lot doing
that but it's better than the alternative of not being a part of all of
this.
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gill Wyatt" <earthsky@tiscali.co.uk>
To: <bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org>
Sent: Wednesday, November 08, 2006 9:36 AM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] robust dialogue and the middle way
Hi Joachim, Kari and all others involved in this theme!
I appreciated you checking re whether you had understood me ...
What I intended in my post was to highlight awareness, compassion AND
challenge. I perhaps didn't emphasise the AND enough. I think it is only
within this paradoxical place of dualities that we can find a response and
the action that transcends our cultural assumptions.
I love that we have broadened and deepened our exploration here. I too have
wondered about leaving after I had deleted another 50-75 messages in one
day! Yet the possibility of reaching out or calling forth (I like that term)
dialogue here excites me. There isn't a dialogue group near where I
currently live in Devon, UK that I am aware of so this possibility here
matters to me.
I so agree with those of you who have highlighted what do we need to learn
from the PKZ manifestation. What is it in us ... I hesitated about saying
'us', is there an 'us' ... Um, I guess there is ...so what is it in us, in
me that calls forth this type of chaotic or disconnected response from PKZ.
I know sometimes I can only pay attention to me, to what I want or need and
I sometimes loose my connection and thus my caring of other people. Is it
that until I can minimise this within me I will attract that response from
others?
And hi Susan, I'm new since you were here before and I have very much
appreciated reading your emails.
I do wish sometimes there weren't so many ... Does anybody else struggle? As
a result I know I feel rather bad when I very occasionally have sent three
or so in one day ...
Gill
on 7/11/06 21:55, Joachim Faust at joachimfaust@earthlink.net wrote:
> Inspired by by Gill's, Kari's, Lynne's, Pat's and Franis' recent
> posts: In Gill's post, there is the dichotomy between being able
> to "challenge" and being "compassionate/aware." It is hard to be
> both at the same time, and to find the
> balanced "middle way" between the two ( I hope I am not totally
> misunderstanding you, Gill). Pat has talked about
> words whose meaning turns out to be the opposite after deeper
> exploration (the passion/patience/compassion-
> example). And as far as Peter Krauss and the trolls go, there is the
> same issue: on the one hand, you want to
> protect the dialogue from destructive forces, but on the other hand,
> you don't want to overprotect and cut off potential
> sources of creative renewal (from both the outside and the
> periphery). Again, the challenge is to find a sustainable
> balance.
>
> I would say, we are not doing too well on this list as far as this
> balance is concerned. Case in point: it is fascinating to me
> how much power Peter Krauss actually has on this list, even now, when
> at least
> apparently, all his incarnations are banned. Most recently, in a
> truly Hamletian fashion, we even managed to channel the ghost of
> his father,
> the ostensible SS officer :)
>
> I can't help it, but I think there is something important "Peter"
> and "Kirsten" have to tell us, but we are not listening.
> Would it be possible to think about what this could be, without (or
> before) letting them back in?
> My intuition is that once we understand and consider their message on
> a deep level, they will go away. Or they will simply
> do "their act" in an orderly manner, just like Gary and Pine in
> Franis' marvelous story about her hometown Bolinas.
>
> On a more abstract level, could these problems be caused by a
> propensity toward dualistic (or dichotomous) thinking/feeling,
> that is, an "either/or-thinking": either "in" or "out," either
> "core," or "periphery," either "active" or "passive," etc., without
> being open to look for the liberating middle way.
>
> Anyway, I would like to reiterate Kari's observation/question:
> "People who aren't open tend to stop the flow on some level. Is that
> the case here?"
>
> Thanks,
>
> Joachim
>
>
>
> On 08.11.2006, at 05:00, bohm_dialogue-request@david-bohm.org wrote:
>
>> I do so appreciate lines of inquiry like this. Flexible, open, and
>> obviously sincere. The question for me is what is the intention of
>> this listserv? Everyone is asked to agree to certain terms. If we
>> want to stay true to the intention (inquiry in the spirit of David
>> Bohm or something I believe it is) of the list, then we should have
>> no problem ousting those who aren't on board with that. It is
>> nothing personal; it's just terms of use. If we believe in creating
>> a container and a core possibly, then maybe we should work on that
>> before challenging ourselves by letting the more chaotic ones in.
>> Anyone who has experienced in person dialogue knows the value of
>> having people present and participating who are sensitive,
>> supportive, and open to questioning (their own, but is there any
>> difference really) assumptions and opinions. People who aren't open
>> tend to stop the flow on some level. Another question might be is
>> that the case here as well?
>>
>> Great post Lynne!
>>
>> kari
>
> Hi Rodger,
>
> Back on line after a busy weekend!
>
> Yes I can see what you mean, what you said here kind of warmed me or
> enheartened me! I guess I have found some of the language orientated
> discussions a bit cold, hard, mechanical ... And I am drawn more to
> what I call heart-balanced being. Its about caring and being
> compassionate and also aware and being willing to challenge. And
> finding a response and action that is not embedded within the same
> cultural assumptions. I find so often the response or action taken to
> a situation maintains the same culture.
>
> Anyway its something to aim for ...
>
> Um ... I can see core and periphery within an individual I think as
> you suggest.
>
> For me just responding doesn?t mean you become part of the core I
> think it is something to do with how you are received and whether you
> are responded to and what the response is.
>
> Gill
>
>
> on 4/11/06 14:29, Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com at
> Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com wrote:
>
> Rodger __hi Gill, I firmly believe that if you see-sense something
> missing in a group process it is because no one else sees it as
> clearly as you do -- therefore you are the missing link._R
> .
>
> Joachim Faust
> joachimfaust@earthlink.net
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> info:
> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
> post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>
> dialogue facilitator:
> facilitator@david-bohm.net
>
> Administrator of the mailing list:
> admin@david-bohm.net
>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
_______________________________________________
info:
www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
dialogue facilitator:
facilitator@david-bohm.net
Administrator of the mailing list:
admin@david-bohm.net
_______________________________________________
From Susan.Joy at worldnet.att.net Thu Nov 9 01:15:42 2006
From: Susan.Joy at worldnet.att.net (Susan Clemons)
Date: Fri Nov 10 02:19:29 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] robust dialogue and the middle way
References: <20061108.000943.1128.1.franis_franis@juno.com><AEAB3921-9FC9-423D-881A-6F6D5E2BA779@dc.rr.com><03a501c7038f$307bb9d0$da78480c@HOME>
<D5928225-545B-48B7-86E8-10F5D05E00D0@donfactor.demon.co.uk>
Message-ID: <03c901c70394$33102e10$da78480c@HOME>
Congratulations. It sounds like you're going to have some very busy holidays.
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: donald factor
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Wednesday, November 08, 2006 5:02 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] robust dialogue and the middle way
Yes but my son is getting married in LA so we came out early.
don
On Nov 8, 2006, at 11:39 PM, Susan Clemons wrote:
That was quick! Don't you usually stay in England for Christmas?
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: donald factor
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Wednesday, November 08, 2006 4:36 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] robust dialogue and the middle way
Gotcha, ii wasis pack.
pon
On Nov 8, 2006, at 8:02 AM, Franis Engel wrote:
Any oneofus can beact asif youme are whatITis.
NOW i mage in, me taking twentythirtyfifty different posts to say this?
If anypodies does any enuff, gonna hit on somegold sometime.
IMHO, txt msging chil'
- is just hard to read - and English is my native language.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061108/62677b89/attachment.html
From ae.dropper at juno.com Thu Nov 9 01:55:32 2006
From: ae.dropper at juno.com (ae.dropper@juno.com)
Date: Fri Nov 10 03:00:27 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] ... subtle fear & pleasure sensations that block
ability to listen freely
Message-ID: <20061108.195537.3608.1.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Chapter One from On Dialogue attached ...
pat
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 26112 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061108/660a7190/attachment.obj
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 15495 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061108/660a7190/attachment-0001.obj
From griffyn23 at hotmail.com Thu Nov 9 02:02:28 2006
From: griffyn23 at hotmail.com (Morgan Jett)
Date: Fri Nov 10 03:06:14 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] robust dialogue and the middle way
In-Reply-To: <BAY22-F1748B734B1F14B28D03634A5F10@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <BAY22-F201F239770BB1AAA014D7BA5F00@phx.gbl>
J: My intuition is that once we understand and consider their message on a
deep level, they will go away. Or they will simply do "their act" in an
orderly manner, just like Gary and Pine in Franis' marvelous story about
her hometown Bolinas.
K: Somehow I missed this comment.
I know that Zoe won't go away. How? Because I've gotten to know Zoe. I
repeat, I don't know Peter, and I'm not talking about Kris. I'm talking
about Zoe. I want to remind you that there is no real proof that Zoe, Kris,
and Peter are the same person. I repeat that my daily interaction and
extensive conversations with Zoe don't match up in the least with the
character sketches the group has pieced together of Peter.
I guarantee that Zoe is someone who asks difficult questions, is passionate
about Bohm, and being human, could irritate someone. ( She has irritated me.
Who hasn't irritated people or been irritated by them?) That's exactly
what we have been doing. Some of us have irritated each other, and we have
managed to reach out and get beyond it. We really need to learn how to do
that, and get better and better at it. If a new language is to be
developed, this is where we need to start. Supportive, but tough in our
questioning. Words that don't put down or accuse, yet question and point
out contradictions.
And listen and hear everyone. Many posts have suggested that was missing
with the PKZ 3-in-1, so maybe if that happens, "they'll just be quiet". On
the other hand, one mediator skill is to reflect back in your own words what
you think the irritating person has said, and they must either ok it, or say
it a clearer way until understanding is reached. Often what the angry one
had interpreted as a putdown had been misunderstood.
I, in this moment, promise that I will strive to ask the tough questions to
get at the larger truth in the spirit of koinoina and compassion. I cannot
promise I will be perfect. I cannot promise I won't be irritating. I do
not expect anyone else to be perfect. But it is not my intent to hurt
anyone. Please state on the board what you are offended about, and I will
stay with you and the situation until we see it through. If it is
disruptive to the group, we can work it out privately. We may come to an
agreement to disagree, and that's ok. All to be done as courteously as
possible.
Who will join me? k
From: Joachim Faust <joachimfaust@earthlink.net>
Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] robust dialogue and the middle way
Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2006 15:55:01 -0600
Inspired by by Gill's, Kari's, Lynne's, Pat's and Franis' recent posts: In
Gill's post, there is the dichotomy between being able
to "challenge" and being "compassionate/aware." It is hard to be both at
the same time, and to find the
balanced "middle way" between the two ( I hope I am not totally
misunderstanding you, Gill). Pat has talked about
words whose meaning turns out to be the opposite after deeper exploration
(the passion/patience/compassion-
example). And as far as Peter Krauss and the trolls go, there is the same
issue: on the one hand, you want to
protect the dialogue from destructive forces, but on the other hand, you
don't want to overprotect and cut off potential
sources of creative renewal (from both the outside and the periphery).
Again, the challenge is to find a sustainable
balance.
I would say, we are not doing too well on this list as far as this balance
is concerned. Case in point: it is fascinating to me
how much power Peter Krauss actually has on this list, even now, when at
least
apparently, all his incarnations are banned. Most recently, in a truly
Hamletian fashion, we even managed to channel the ghost of his father,
the ostensible SS officer :)
>From: "Morgan Jett" <griffyn23@hotmail.com>
>Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] robust dialogue and the middle way
>Date: Wed, 08 Nov 2006 09:00:57 -0600
>
>yesyesyesyesyesyesyesyesyesyesyesyesyesyesyesyesyesyes!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>But it doesn't have to be that way! k
>
>When Kris was on the list, I deliberately began to use some of his/er way
>of speaking as an indication that I would attempt to enter his-er world of
>meaning. Like the experiences I have had actually walking in and out of
>other realities (NOT drug or substance related - never have, but that's a
>topic for another time and place), I do not find it unsettling to do this.
>And the PKZ syndrome is a symbol for all people who do not share my
>culture, my language and/or experiential background. Kris can use English
>with the best of us.
>To me, the truly educated person can walk into and out of any world (I draw
>the line at a Manson cult, tho), and establish some kind of rapport. But
>one has to indicate that up front - step one. As we began to relate, I
>saw things in Zoe and Kris that the others didn't see, and I am the richer
>for it.
>
>I believe Bohm says that what happens on the individual level is a
>miniature version of what's happening on a world level. And we see
>ourselves reflecting
>
>I guess I'm really saying, Give all the "thems" in the world, and us a
>chance - starting with Zoe. k
>
>
>>From: Joachim Faust <joachimfaust@earthlink.net>
>>Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>>To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>>Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] robust dialogue and the middle way
>>Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2006 15:55:01 -0600
>>
>>Inspired by by Gill's, Kari's, Lynne's, Pat's and Franis' recent posts:
>>In Gill's post, there is the dichotomy between being able
>>to "challenge" and being "compassionate/aware." It is hard to be both at
>>the same time, and to find the
>>balanced "middle way" between the two ( I hope I am not totally
>>misunderstanding you, Gill). Pat has talked about
>>words whose meaning turns out to be the opposite after deeper exploration
>>(the passion/patience/compassion-
>>example). And as far as Peter Krauss and the trolls go, there is the same
>>issue: on the one hand, you want to
>>protect the dialogue from destructive forces, but on the other hand, you
>>don't want to overprotect and cut off potential
>>sources of creative renewal (from both the outside and the periphery).
>>Again, the challenge is to find a sustainable
>>balance.
>>
>>I would say, we are not doing too well on this list as far as this
>>balance is concerned. Case in point: it is fascinating to me
>>how much power Peter Krauss actually has on this list, even now, when at
>>least
>>apparently, all his incarnations are banned. Most recently, in a truly
>>Hamletian fashion, we even managed to channel the ghost of his father,
>>the ostensible SS officer :)
>>
>>I can't help it, but I think there is something important "Peter" and
>>"Kirsten" have to tell us, but we are not listening.
>>Would it be possible to think about what this could be, without (or
>>before) letting them back in?
>>My intuition is that once we understand and consider their message on a
>>deep level, they will go away. Or they will simply
>>do "their act" in an orderly manner, just like Gary and Pine in Franis'
>>marvelous story about her hometown Bolinas.
>>
>>On a more abstract level, could these problems be caused by a propensity
>>toward dualistic (or dichotomous) thinking/feeling,
>>that is, an "either/or-thinking": either "in" or "out," either "core," or
>>"periphery," either "active" or "passive," etc., without
>>being open to look for the liberating middle way.
>>
>>Anyway, I would like to reiterate Kari's observation/question: "People
>>who aren't open tend to stop the flow on some level. Is that
>>the case here?"
>>
>>Thanks,
>>
>>Joachim
>>
>>
>>
>>On 08.11.2006, at 05:00, bohm_dialogue-request@david-bohm.org wrote:
>>
>>>I do so appreciate lines of inquiry like this. Flexible, open, and
>>>obviously sincere. The question for me is what is the intention of this
>>>listserv? Everyone is asked to agree to certain terms. If we want to
>>>stay true to the intention (inquiry in the spirit of David Bohm or
>>>something I believe it is) of the list, then we should have no problem
>>>ousting those who aren't on board with that. It is nothing personal;
>>>it's just terms of use. If we believe in creating a container and a core
>>>possibly, then maybe we should work on that before challenging ourselves
>>>by letting the more chaotic ones in. Anyone who has experienced in
>>>person dialogue knows the value of having people present and
>>>participating who are sensitive, supportive, and open to questioning
>>>(their own, but is there any difference really) assumptions and
>>>opinions. People who aren't open tend to stop the flow on some level.
>>>Another question might be is that the case here as well?
>>>
>>>Great post Lynne!
>>>
>>>kari
>>
>>Hi Rodger,
>>
>>Back on line after a busy weekend!
>>
>>Yes I can see what you mean, what you said here kind of warmed me or
>>enheartened me! I guess I have found some of the language orientated
>>discussions a bit cold, hard, mechanical ... And I am drawn more to what
>>I call heart-balanced being. Its about caring and being compassionate and
>>also aware and being willing to challenge. And finding a response and
>>action that is not embedded within the same cultural assumptions. I find
>>so often the response or action taken to a situation maintains the same
>>culture.
>>
>>Anyway its something to aim for ...
>>
>>Um ... I can see core and periphery within an individual I think as you
>>suggest.
>>
>>For me just responding doesn’t mean you become part of the core I think
>>it is something to do with how you are received and whether you are
>>responded to and what the response is.
>>
>>Gill
>>
>>
>>on 4/11/06 14:29, Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com at Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com
>>wrote:
>>
>>Rodger __hi Gill, I firmly believe that if you see-sense something
>>missing in a group process it is because no one else sees it as clearly
>>as you do -- therefore you are the missing link._R
>>.
>>
>>Joachim Faust
>>joachimfaust@earthlink.net
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>info:
>>www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>>
>>post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>>
>>dialogue facilitator:
>>facilitator@david-bohm.net
>>
>>Administrator of the mailing list:
>>admin@david-bohm.net
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>
>>
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Find a local pizza place, music store, museum and more…then map the best
>route! http://local.live.com?FORM=MGA001
>
>_______________________________________________
>info:
>www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>
>dialogue facilitator:
>facilitator@david-bohm.net
>
>Administrator of the mailing list:
>admin@david-bohm.net
>
>_______________________________________________
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
All-in-one security and maintenance for your PC. Get a free 90-day trial!
http://clk.atdmt.com/MSN/go/msnnkwlo0050000002msn/direct/01/?href=http://www.windowsonecare.com/?sc_cid=msn_hotmail
From Susan.Joy at worldnet.att.net Thu Nov 9 02:04:39 2006
From: Susan.Joy at worldnet.att.net (Susan Clemons)
Date: Fri Nov 10 03:08:27 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] ... subtle fear & pleasure sensations that
blockability to listen freely
References: <20061108.195537.3608.1.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <001901c7039b$09345fb0$da78480c@HOME>
I'm not sure what kind of word attachment this is Pat, but I can't open it.
It needs to be a word.doc for me to be able to open it with the version of
word that I have.
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: <ae.dropper@juno.com>
To: <bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org>
Sent: Wednesday, November 08, 2006 5:55 PM
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] ... subtle fear & pleasure sensations that
blockability to listen freely
> Chapter One from On Dialogue attached ...
>
> pat
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> info:
> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
> post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>
> dialogue facilitator:
> facilitator@david-bohm.net
>
> Administrator of the mailing list:
> admin@david-bohm.net
>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
>
From griffyn23 at hotmail.com Thu Nov 9 02:04:43 2006
From: griffyn23 at hotmail.com (Morgan Jett)
Date: Fri Nov 10 03:08:33 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] ... subtle fear & pleasure sensations that
blockability to listen freely
In-Reply-To: <20061108.195537.3608.1.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <BAY22-F2570C8413FF26878BDA336A5F00@phx.gbl>
Thanks, Pat. Is there some way we can archive this kind of info so it will
be accessible whenever we and/or new people want it? k
>From: ae.dropper@juno.com
>Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] ... subtle fear & pleasure sensations that
>blockability to listen freely
>Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2006 19:55:32 -0500
>
>Chapter One from On Dialogue attached ...
>
>pat
><< BohmOnDialoguescannedChaponeAntiqueOlive.wps >>
><< BohmOnDialoguescannedChaponeAntiqueOlive.wps.rtf >>
>_______________________________________________
>info:
>www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>
>dialogue facilitator:
>facilitator@david-bohm.net
>
>Administrator of the mailing list:
>admin@david-bohm.net
>
>_______________________________________________
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
Get FREE company branded e-mail accounts and business Web site from
Microsoft Office Live
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/mcrssaub0050001411mrt/direct/01/
From Susan.Joy at worldnet.att.net Thu Nov 9 02:10:39 2006
From: Susan.Joy at worldnet.att.net (Susan Clemons)
Date: Fri Nov 10 03:14:26 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] ... subtle fear & pleasure sensations
thatblockability to listen freely
References: <BAY22-F2570C8413FF26878BDA336A5F00@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <003201c7039b$dfe4b370$da78480c@HOME>
Never mind Pat....I was able to get the works copy to open.
I can post these to the web site.
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: "Morgan Jett" <griffyn23@hotmail.com>
To: <bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org>
Sent: Wednesday, November 08, 2006 6:04 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] ... subtle fear & pleasure sensations
thatblockability to listen freely
> Thanks, Pat. Is there some way we can archive this kind of info so it
> will be accessible whenever we and/or new people want it? k
>
>
>>From: ae.dropper@juno.com
>>Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>>To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>>Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] ... subtle fear & pleasure sensations that
>>blockability to listen freely
>>Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2006 19:55:32 -0500
>>
>>Chapter One from On Dialogue attached ...
>>
>>pat
>
>
>><< BohmOnDialoguescannedChaponeAntiqueOlive.wps >>
>
>
>><< BohmOnDialoguescannedChaponeAntiqueOlive.wps.rtf >>
>
>
>>_______________________________________________
>>info:
>>www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>>
>>post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>>
>>dialogue facilitator:
>>facilitator@david-bohm.net
>>
>>Administrator of the mailing list:
>>admin@david-bohm.net
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>
>>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get FREE company branded e-mail accounts and business Web site from
> Microsoft Office Live
> http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/mcrssaub0050001411mrt/direct/01/
>
> _______________________________________________
> info:
> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
> post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>
> dialogue facilitator:
> facilitator@david-bohm.net
>
> Administrator of the mailing list:
> admin@david-bohm.net
>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
From donfactor at donfactor.demon.co.uk Thu Nov 9 02:23:15 2006
From: donfactor at donfactor.demon.co.uk (donald factor)
Date: Fri Nov 10 03:27:07 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] robust dialogue and the middle way
In-Reply-To: <BAY22-F20311B1CC3C57362DF2F8BA5F00@phx.gbl>
References: <BAY22-F20311B1CC3C57362DF2F8BA5F00@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <630C9DCA-DF1B-4C3E-84DB-D60F162B42E8@donfactor.demon.co.uk>
The trib was as usual long and tiring. But it gave me a chance to dig
into a fascinating book by Michael Frayne called The Human Touch. It
deals with a lot of the stuff that we've been considering but he is
doing it on his own. He writes very well though and it makes a very
entertaining read. Then we we had to rush out this morning to get me
a suit for the wedding. My first new one for maybe twenty years. The
moths got my old ones.\
Anyway, I have just plowed through all the posts and it has been
great. Tons on food for thought - not TAS. Maybe I ought to go away
more often. At present I am cosidering puting togher some ideas
gleened from from a close reading of the PKZ posts. Which reminds me,
those of you who have been around for a while seem to have foregotten
the fourth member of the triumvirate or is it trinity?. Gasinsystem.
The acronym ought to be PKGCZ. I wonder if anyone would like to fill
this in with some vowels.
On Nov 8, 2006, at 4:05 PM, Morgan Jett wrote:
> Hi - how was the trib? k
>
>
>> From: "Susan Clemons" <Susan.Joy@worldnet.att.net>
>> Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>> To: <bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org>
>> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] robust dialogue and the middle way
>> Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2006 16:39:51 -0700
>>
>> That was quick! Don't you usually stay in England for Christmas?
>>
>> Susan
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: donald factor
>> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>> Sent: Wednesday, November 08, 2006 4:36 PM
>> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] robust dialogue and the middle way
>>
>>
>> Gotcha, ii wasis pack.
>>
>>
>> pon
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Nov 8, 2006, at 8:02 AM, Franis Engel wrote:
>>
>>
>> Any oneofus can beact asif youme are whatITis.
>>
>> NOW i mage in, me taking twentythirtyfifty different posts to
>> say this?
>>
>> If anypodies does any enuff, gonna hit on somegold sometime.
>>
>> IMHO, txt msging chil'
>>
>> - is just hard to read - and English is my native language.
>>
>> hey - we can do anything we want now that Don's
>> away!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> ---------
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> info:
>> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>>
>> post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>>
>> dialogue facilitator:
>> facilitator@david-bohm.net
>>
>> Administrator of the mailing list:
>> admin@david-bohm.net
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>>
>
>
>> _______________________________________________
>> info:
>> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>>
>> post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>>
>> dialogue facilitator:
>> facilitator@david-bohm.net
>>
>> Administrator of the mailing list:
>> admin@david-bohm.net
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> All-in-one security and maintenance for your PC. Get a free 90-day
> trial! http://clk.atdmt.com/MSN/go/msnnkwlo0050000002msn/direct/01/?
> href=http://www.windowsonecare.com/?sc_cid=msn_hotmail
>
> _______________________________________________
> info:
> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
> post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>
> dialogue facilitator:
> facilitator@david-bohm.net
>
> Administrator of the mailing list:
> admin@david-bohm.net
>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
From griffyn23 at hotmail.com Thu Nov 9 02:25:18 2006
From: griffyn23 at hotmail.com (Morgan Jett)
Date: Fri Nov 10 03:29:06 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] robust dialogue and the middle way
In-Reply-To: <03b101c70393$a3872f50$da78480c@HOME>
Message-ID: <BAY22-F2194F674A1E0819D511BC4A5F00@phx.gbl>
Hi Susan. Your inclusion of details helped fill out the reasons for the
feelings about Peter. Spamming deserves banning, bouncing, or whatever one
calls it. In guidelines that group members agree to, it should be stated
that such actions will result in bouncing without warning.
By the way, is there some technological way to filter out spam before it
hits the list? That would settle it.
All Zoe is asking is a chance to speak, be heard, and judged on her own
merits, not on suspicion of being one of the "Three Faces of Eve". Peter no
longer has access to the group. Kris has been very quiet, and even if he
weren't, I made it clear to him/her some time ago that I am speaking only
for the principles involved with Zoe. And even then, I am only talking
about the Zoe I know.
Thank you for hearing and dialoging. I believe we are on the same page.
k
>From: "Susan Clemons" <Susan.Joy@worldnet.att.net>
>Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>To: <bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org>
>Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] robust dialogue and the middle way
>Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2006 17:11:42 -0700
>
>Hi Gill. It's nice to meet you. I understand the current desire among
>many of you to explore the PKZ phenomena. When I first joined the list the
>same discussion was going on. I jumped right in, eager to explore it. And
>it was a very similar one to what you are all proposing right now.
>Although at that time Peter was an active member of the group and he was
>included in the discussion. In the beginning I sounded much like you and
>some of the others right now.
>
>But as time went by and I realized everyone was exploring the subject
>except Peter I began to feel differently. Peter's response was mostly just
>to ignore any kind of idea of exploring an introspection into himself, all
>he was interested in was goading the rest of us. Rather than use
>suspension he would flood us with brief posts about the world being made up
>of carrot and stick mentality and we should all recognize that the only
>solution was total chaos. When he became determined to spam the group with
>anywhere from 75 to 100 nonsense messages of 1 or 2 lines each every day
>regardless of how any of us felt (and I'm pretty sure it was because of how
>we felt) the decision (after much agonizing) was made to ban him. At that
>point I was ready for him to be banned. He mostly just trolled for
>recruits for his OD site and spammed us for not being interested. He also
>seems to have a fixation with male authority figures and chose Don F. to
>flame as a surrogate authority.
>
>It was this very phenomena and exploring it here on this list as well as
>exploring it on a couple of other lists that had similar problems that
>caused me to come to the conclusions that I gave to Kathy in my post to
>her. In order for anything to cohere there needs to be at least a loose and
>flexible structure. Here's a link to some of the thoughts I have had about
>the structure and purpose of Bohm Dialogue in one of our previous
>discussions:
>http://naturallythriving.home.att.net/purpose.htm
>
>When it comes to K and Z, as I told Kathy, I don't know what happened with
>them but it sounds like Zoe feels she was banned without any warning and
>without any group discussion. If that's true, then I would say that I
>think anyone we suspect of being a troll or of spamming or who we suspect
>is Peter, deserves to at least be told of our feelings and be given a
>chance to speak for themselves.
>
>And, no, I don't worry about how many posts I make per day or how long they
>are. I used to worry about that. But then I decided that the purpose of
>dialogue is to dialogue. You can't do that without posting. A healthy
>dialogue is going to have lots of posts. I've learned to deal with it by
>learning to know which people are definitely going to have something to say
>that I'm interested in responding to and not. On my busy days I skip
>through the posts and read only a few people or if there's a good thread
>going I will read only that thread. And, yes, sometimes I miss a lot doing
>that but it's better than the alternative of not being a part of all of
>this.
>
>Susan
>
>
>----- Original Message ----- From: "Gill Wyatt" <earthsky@tiscali.co.uk>
>To: <bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org>
>Sent: Wednesday, November 08, 2006 9:36 AM
>Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] robust dialogue and the middle way
>
>
>Hi Joachim, Kari and all others involved in this theme!
>
>I appreciated you checking re whether you had understood me ...
>
>What I intended in my post was to highlight awareness, compassion AND
>challenge. I perhaps didn't emphasise the AND enough. I think it is only
>within this paradoxical place of dualities that we can find a response and
>the action that transcends our cultural assumptions.
>
>I love that we have broadened and deepened our exploration here. I too have
>wondered about leaving after I had deleted another 50-75 messages in one
>day! Yet the possibility of reaching out or calling forth (I like that
>term)
>dialogue here excites me. There isn't a dialogue group near where I
>currently live in Devon, UK that I am aware of so this possibility here
>matters to me.
>
>I so agree with those of you who have highlighted what do we need to learn
>from the PKZ manifestation. What is it in us ... I hesitated about saying
>'us', is there an 'us' ... Um, I guess there is ...so what is it in us, in
>me that calls forth this type of chaotic or disconnected response from PKZ.
>I know sometimes I can only pay attention to me, to what I want or need and
>I sometimes loose my connection and thus my caring of other people. Is it
>that until I can minimise this within me I will attract that response from
>others?
>
>And hi Susan, I'm new since you were here before and I have very much
>appreciated reading your emails.
>
>I do wish sometimes there weren't so many ... Does anybody else struggle?
>As
>a result I know I feel rather bad when I very occasionally have sent three
>or so in one day ...
>
>Gill
>
>
>on 7/11/06 21:55, Joachim Faust at joachimfaust@earthlink.net wrote:
>
>>Inspired by by Gill's, Kari's, Lynne's, Pat's and Franis' recent
>>posts: In Gill's post, there is the dichotomy between being able
>>to "challenge" and being "compassionate/aware." It is hard to be
>>both at the same time, and to find the
>>balanced "middle way" between the two ( I hope I am not totally
>>misunderstanding you, Gill). Pat has talked about
>>words whose meaning turns out to be the opposite after deeper
>>exploration (the passion/patience/compassion-
>>example). And as far as Peter Krauss and the trolls go, there is the
>>same issue: on the one hand, you want to
>>protect the dialogue from destructive forces, but on the other hand,
>>you don't want to overprotect and cut off potential
>>sources of creative renewal (from both the outside and the
>>periphery). Again, the challenge is to find a sustainable
>>balance.
>>
>>I would say, we are not doing too well on this list as far as this
>>balance is concerned. Case in point: it is fascinating to me
>>how much power Peter Krauss actually has on this list, even now, when
>>at least
>>apparently, all his incarnations are banned. Most recently, in a
>>truly Hamletian fashion, we even managed to channel the ghost of
>>his father,
>>the ostensible SS officer :)
>>
>>I can't help it, but I think there is something important "Peter"
>>and "Kirsten" have to tell us, but we are not listening.
>>Would it be possible to think about what this could be, without (or
>>before) letting them back in?
>>My intuition is that once we understand and consider their message on
>>a deep level, they will go away. Or they will simply
>>do "their act" in an orderly manner, just like Gary and Pine in
>>Franis' marvelous story about her hometown Bolinas.
>>
>>On a more abstract level, could these problems be caused by a
>>propensity toward dualistic (or dichotomous) thinking/feeling,
>>that is, an "either/or-thinking": either "in" or "out," either
>>"core," or "periphery," either "active" or "passive," etc., without
>>being open to look for the liberating middle way.
>>
>>Anyway, I would like to reiterate Kari's observation/question:
>>"People who aren't open tend to stop the flow on some level. Is that
>>the case here?"
>>
>>Thanks,
>>
>>Joachim
>>
>>
>>
>>On 08.11.2006, at 05:00, bohm_dialogue-request@david-bohm.org wrote:
>>
>>>I do so appreciate lines of inquiry like this. Flexible, open, and
>>>obviously sincere. The question for me is what is the intention of
>>>this listserv? Everyone is asked to agree to certain terms. If we
>>>want to stay true to the intention (inquiry in the spirit of David
>>>Bohm or something I believe it is) of the list, then we should have
>>>no problem ousting those who aren't on board with that. It is
>>>nothing personal; it's just terms of use. If we believe in creating
>>>a container and a core possibly, then maybe we should work on that
>>>before challenging ourselves by letting the more chaotic ones in.
>>>Anyone who has experienced in person dialogue knows the value of
>>>having people present and participating who are sensitive,
>>>supportive, and open to questioning (their own, but is there any
>>>difference really) assumptions and opinions. People who aren't open
>>>tend to stop the flow on some level. Another question might be is
>>>that the case here as well?
>>>
>>>Great post Lynne!
>>>
>>>kari
>>
>>Hi Rodger,
>>
>>Back on line after a busy weekend!
>>
>>Yes I can see what you mean, what you said here kind of warmed me or
>>enheartened me! I guess I have found some of the language orientated
>>discussions a bit cold, hard, mechanical ... And I am drawn more to
>>what I call heart-balanced being. Its about caring and being
>>compassionate and also aware and being willing to challenge. And
>>finding a response and action that is not embedded within the same
>>cultural assumptions. I find so often the response or action taken to
>>a situation maintains the same culture.
>>
>>Anyway its something to aim for ...
>>
>>Um ... I can see core and periphery within an individual I think as
>>you suggest.
>>
>>For me just responding doesnąt mean you become part of the core I
>>think it is something to do with how you are received and whether you
>>are responded to and what the response is.
>>
>>Gill
>>
>>
>>on 4/11/06 14:29, Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com at
>>Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com wrote:
>>
>>Rodger __hi Gill, I firmly believe that if you see-sense something
>>missing in a group process it is because no one else sees it as
>>clearly as you do -- therefore you are the missing link._R
>>.
>>
>>Joachim Faust
>>joachimfaust@earthlink.net
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>info:
>>www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>>
>>post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>>
>>dialogue facilitator:
>>facilitator@david-bohm.net
>>
>>Administrator of the mailing list:
>>admin@david-bohm.net
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>
>>
>
>_______________________________________________
>info:
>www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>
>dialogue facilitator:
>facilitator@david-bohm.net
>
>Administrator of the mailing list:
>admin@david-bohm.net
>
>_______________________________________________
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>info:
>www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>
>dialogue facilitator:
>facilitator@david-bohm.net
>
>Administrator of the mailing list:
>admin@david-bohm.net
>
>_______________________________________________
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
Get FREE company branded e-mail accounts and business Web site from
Microsoft Office Live
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/mcrssaub0050001411mrt/direct/01/
From griffyn23 at hotmail.com Thu Nov 9 02:34:04 2006
From: griffyn23 at hotmail.com (Morgan Jett)
Date: Fri Nov 10 03:37:51 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] robust dialogue and the middle way
In-Reply-To: <630C9DCA-DF1B-4C3E-84DB-D60F162B42E8@donfactor.demon.co.uk>
Message-ID: <BAY22-F1044608405E73B9D5FCFBCA5F00@phx.gbl>
Hi Don - missed your voice. Good to have you back. Congratulations and
best wishes to the couple.
When you feel like it, I'm curious about "Gas". I figured it was just
another name for Peter. Maybe he used it for certain moods.
I'm interested in the details because they give concrete information on
which to make evaluations and decisions.
Actually, maybe we could sell it as a novel and use the money for a Bohm
philanthropy!
Best, k (smiling and happy you're back)
>From: donald factor <donfactor@donfactor.demon.co.uk>
>Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] robust dialogue and the middle way
>Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2006 17:23:15 -0800
>
>The trib was as usual long and tiring. But it gave me a chance to dig into
>a fascinating book by Michael Frayne called The Human Touch. It deals with
>a lot of the stuff that we've been considering but he is doing it on his
>own. He writes very well though and it makes a very entertaining read.
>Then we we had to rush out this morning to get me a suit for the wedding.
>My first new one for maybe twenty years. The moths got my old ones.\
>
>Anyway, I have just plowed through all the posts and it has been great.
>Tons on food for thought - not TAS. Maybe I ought to go away more often.
>At present I am cosidering puting togher some ideas gleened from from a
>close reading of the PKZ posts. Which reminds me, those of you who have
>been around for a while seem to have foregotten the fourth member of the
>triumvirate or is it trinity?. Gasinsystem. The acronym ought to be PKGCZ.
>I wonder if anyone would like to fill this in with some vowels.
>
>On Nov 8, 2006, at 4:05 PM, Morgan Jett wrote:
>
>>Hi - how was the trib? k
>>
>>
>>>From: "Susan Clemons" <Susan.Joy@worldnet.att.net>
>>>Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>>>To: <bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org>
>>>Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] robust dialogue and the middle way
>>>Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2006 16:39:51 -0700
>>>
>>>That was quick! Don't you usually stay in England for Christmas?
>>>
>>>Susan
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: donald factor
>>> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>>> Sent: Wednesday, November 08, 2006 4:36 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] robust dialogue and the middle way
>>>
>>>
>>> Gotcha, ii wasis pack.
>>>
>>>
>>> pon
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Nov 8, 2006, at 8:02 AM, Franis Engel wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Any oneofus can beact asif youme are whatITis.
>>>
>>> NOW i mage in, me taking twentythirtyfifty different posts to say
>>>this?
>>>
>>> If anypodies does any enuff, gonna hit on somegold sometime.
>>>
>>> IMHO, txt msging chil'
>>>
>>> - is just hard to read - and English is my native language.
>>>
>>> hey - we can do anything we want now that Don's
>>>away!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>---------
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> info:
>>> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>>>
>>> post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>>>
>>> dialogue facilitator:
>>> facilitator@david-bohm.net
>>>
>>> Administrator of the mailing list:
>>> admin@david-bohm.net
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>info:
>>>www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>>>
>>>post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>>>
>>>dialogue facilitator:
>>>facilitator@david-bohm.net
>>>
>>>Administrator of the mailing list:
>>>admin@david-bohm.net
>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>
>>>
>>
>>_________________________________________________________________
>>All-in-one security and maintenance for your PC. Get a free 90-day
>>trial! http://clk.atdmt.com/MSN/go/msnnkwlo0050000002msn/direct/01/?
>>href=http://www.windowsonecare.com/?sc_cid=msn_hotmail
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>info:
>>www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>>
>>post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>>
>>dialogue facilitator:
>>facilitator@david-bohm.net
>>
>>Administrator of the mailing list:
>>admin@david-bohm.net
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>
>>
>
>_______________________________________________
>info:
>www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>
>dialogue facilitator:
>facilitator@david-bohm.net
>
>Administrator of the mailing list:
>admin@david-bohm.net
>
>_______________________________________________
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
Stay in touch with old friends and meet new ones with Windows Live Spaces
http://clk.atdmt.com/MSN/go/msnnkwsp0070000001msn/direct/01/?href=http://spaces.live.com/spacesapi.aspx?wx_action=create&wx_url=/friends.aspx&mkt=en-us
From griffyn23 at hotmail.com Thu Nov 9 02:42:48 2006
From: griffyn23 at hotmail.com (Morgan Jett)
Date: Fri Nov 10 03:46:37 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] ... subtle fear & pleasure sensations that
blockability to listen freely
In-Reply-To: <20061108.195537.3608.1.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <BAY22-F9760985A759436D1E4295A5F00@phx.gbl>
I can open it, but it's in some kind of unintelligible symbols. Horrors!
Peter must have gotten in it somehow! (joke)
I tried Word plain text and HTML.
Actually, I think Peter's website has some of it posted. Can we copy it
from there and put it on Susan's site? Also DonL has some Bohm on his site,
too, i believe. k
>From: ae.dropper@juno.com
>Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] ... subtle fear & pleasure sensations that
>blockability to listen freely
>Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2006 19:55:32 -0500
>
>Chapter One from On Dialogue attached ...
>
>pat
><< BohmOnDialoguescannedChaponeAntiqueOlive.wps >>
><< BohmOnDialoguescannedChaponeAntiqueOlive.wps.rtf >>
>_______________________________________________
>info:
>www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>
>dialogue facilitator:
>facilitator@david-bohm.net
>
>Administrator of the mailing list:
>admin@david-bohm.net
>
>_______________________________________________
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
Try Search Survival Kits: Fix up your home and better handle your cash with
Live Search!
http://imagine-windowslive.com/search/kits/default.aspx?kit=improve&locale=en-US&source=hmtagline
From dfactor at dc.rr.com Thu Nov 9 02:54:33 2006
From: dfactor at dc.rr.com (donald factor)
Date: Fri Nov 10 03:58:21 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] robust dialogue and the middle way
In-Reply-To: <03b101c70393$a3872f50$da78480c@HOME>
References: <C177B818.385C%earthsky@tiscali.co.uk>
<03b101c70393$a3872f50$da78480c@HOME>
Message-ID: <B8BC4D12-84C9-4C92-8D94-596686648C18@dc.rr.com>
Hi Susan,
Thanks for this, it saves me having to post pretty much same thing. I
am referring here to your first three paragraphs.
But was it Peter? Or was it a.a. gasinsytstem who, so far as I can
see is the same person but this is just for the record. Gas was
peter's second go around. We had to close the list down after Peter's
first invasion, And that's when we took the radical step of
moderating the list. Or am I confused?
Regarding Zoe, I still have my doubts as I do about Kirsten being
the same person as Peter. But I understood that following on from a
conversation that I had off-list with Kathy that she invited Zoe to
drop us a line and explain what her intentions and interests in the
Bohm list were, in other words to tell us why she thought it was
unfair of us to disconnect her. I thought that this would clarify any
unclarity. But apparently, this suggestion made Zoe very angry, and
she has not written such a letter or communicated with either me,
William or Franis, so far as I know.
If what I say here is at all accurate, then I wonder why Kathy is
pushing this. I would have thought that it should be up to Zoe to
make the next move.
don
On Nov 8, 2006, at 4:11 PM, Susan Clemons wrote:
> Hi Gill. It's nice to meet you. I understand the current desire
> among many of you to explore the PKZ phenomena. When I first
> joined the list the same discussion was going on. I jumped right
> in, eager to explore it. And it was a very similar one to what you
> are all proposing right now. Although at that time Peter was an
> active member of the group and he was included in the discussion.
> In the beginning I sounded much like you and some of the others
> right now.
>
> But as time went by and I realized everyone was exploring the
> subject except Peter I began to feel differently. Peter's response
> was mostly just to ignore any kind of idea of exploring an
> introspection into himself, all he was interested in was goading
> the rest of us. Rather than use suspension he would flood us with
> brief posts about the world being made up of carrot and stick
> mentality and we should all recognize that the only solution was
> total chaos. When he became determined to spam the group with
> anywhere from 75 to 100 nonsense messages of 1 or 2 lines each
> every day regardless of how any of us felt (and I'm pretty sure it
> was because of how we felt) the decision (after much agonizing) was
> made to ban him. At that point I was ready for him to be banned.
> He mostly just trolled for recruits for his OD site and spammed us
> for not being interested. He also seems to have a fixation with
> male authority figures and chose Don F. to flame as a surrogate
> authority.
>
> It was this very phenomena and exploring it here on this list as
> well as exploring it on a couple of other lists that had similar
> problems that caused me to come to the conclusions that I gave to
> Kathy in my post to her. In order for anything to cohere there
> needs to be at least a loose and flexible structure. Here's a link
> to some of the thoughts I have had about the structure and purpose
> of Bohm Dialogue in one of our previous discussions:
> http://naturallythriving.home.att.net/purpose.htm
>
> When it comes to K and Z, as I told Kathy, I don't know what
> happened with them but it sounds like Zoe feels she was banned
> without any warning and without any group discussion. If that's
> true, then I would say that I think anyone we suspect of being a
> troll or of spamming or who we suspect is Peter, deserves to at
> least be told of our feelings and be given a chance to speak for
> themselves.
>
> And, no, I don't worry about how many posts I make per day or how
> long they are. I used to worry about that. But then I decided
> that the purpose of dialogue is to dialogue. You can't do that
> without posting. A healthy dialogue is going to have lots of
> posts. I've learned to deal with it by learning to know which
> people are definitely going to have something to say that I'm
> interested in responding to and not. On my busy days I skip
> through the posts and read only a few people or if there's a good
> thread going I will read only that thread. And, yes, sometimes I
> miss a lot doing that but it's better than the alternative of not
> being a part of all of this.
>
> Susan
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gill Wyatt"
> <earthsky@tiscali.co.uk>
> To: <bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 08, 2006 9:36 AM
> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] robust dialogue and the middle way
>
>
> Hi Joachim, Kari and all others involved in this theme!
>
> I appreciated you checking re whether you had understood me ...
>
> What I intended in my post was to highlight awareness, compassion AND
> challenge. I perhaps didn't emphasise the AND enough. I think it is
> only
> within this paradoxical place of dualities that we can find a
> response and
> the action that transcends our cultural assumptions.
>
> I love that we have broadened and deepened our exploration here. I
> too have
> wondered about leaving after I had deleted another 50-75 messages
> in one
> day! Yet the possibility of reaching out or calling forth (I like
> that term)
> dialogue here excites me. There isn't a dialogue group near where I
> currently live in Devon, UK that I am aware of so this possibility
> here
> matters to me.
>
> I so agree with those of you who have highlighted what do we need
> to learn
> from the PKZ manifestation. What is it in us ... I hesitated about
> saying
> 'us', is there an 'us' ... Um, I guess there is ...so what is it in
> us, in
> me that calls forth this type of chaotic or disconnected response
> from PKZ.
> I know sometimes I can only pay attention to me, to what I want or
> need and
> I sometimes loose my connection and thus my caring of other people.
> Is it
> that until I can minimise this within me I will attract that
> response from
> others?
>
> And hi Susan, I'm new since you were here before and I have very much
> appreciated reading your emails.
>
> I do wish sometimes there weren't so many ... Does anybody else
> struggle? As
> a result I know I feel rather bad when I very occasionally have
> sent three
> or so in one day ...
>
> Gill
>
>
> on 7/11/06 21:55, Joachim Faust at joachimfaust@earthlink.net wrote:
>
>> Inspired by by Gill's, Kari's, Lynne's, Pat's and Franis' recent
>> posts: In Gill's post, there is the dichotomy between being able
>> to "challenge" and being "compassionate/aware." It is hard to be
>> both at the same time, and to find the
>> balanced "middle way" between the two ( I hope I am not totally
>> misunderstanding you, Gill). Pat has talked about
>> words whose meaning turns out to be the opposite after deeper
>> exploration (the passion/patience/compassion-
>> example). And as far as Peter Krauss and the trolls go, there is the
>> same issue: on the one hand, you want to
>> protect the dialogue from destructive forces, but on the other hand,
>> you don't want to overprotect and cut off potential
>> sources of creative renewal (from both the outside and the
>> periphery). Again, the challenge is to find a sustainable
>> balance.
>>
>> I would say, we are not doing too well on this list as far as this
>> balance is concerned. Case in point: it is fascinating to me
>> how much power Peter Krauss actually has on this list, even now, when
>> at least
>> apparently, all his incarnations are banned. Most recently, in a
>> truly Hamletian fashion, we even managed to channel the ghost of
>> his father,
>> the ostensible SS officer :)
>>
>> I can't help it, but I think there is something important "Peter"
>> and "Kirsten" have to tell us, but we are not listening.
>> Would it be possible to think about what this could be, without (or
>> before) letting them back in?
>> My intuition is that once we understand and consider their message on
>> a deep level, they will go away. Or they will simply
>> do "their act" in an orderly manner, just like Gary and Pine in
>> Franis' marvelous story about her hometown Bolinas.
>>
>> On a more abstract level, could these problems be caused by a
>> propensity toward dualistic (or dichotomous) thinking/feeling,
>> that is, an "either/or-thinking": either "in" or "out," either
>> "core," or "periphery," either "active" or "passive," etc., without
>> being open to look for the liberating middle way.
>>
>> Anyway, I would like to reiterate Kari's observation/question:
>> "People who aren't open tend to stop the flow on some level. Is that
>> the case here?"
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Joachim
>>
>>
>>
>> On 08.11.2006, at 05:00, bohm_dialogue-request@david-bohm.org wrote:
>>
>>> I do so appreciate lines of inquiry like this. Flexible, open, and
>>> obviously sincere. The question for me is what is the intention of
>>> this listserv? Everyone is asked to agree to certain terms. If we
>>> want to stay true to the intention (inquiry in the spirit of David
>>> Bohm or something I believe it is) of the list, then we should have
>>> no problem ousting those who aren't on board with that. It is
>>> nothing personal; it's just terms of use. If we believe in creating
>>> a container and a core possibly, then maybe we should work on that
>>> before challenging ourselves by letting the more chaotic ones in.
>>> Anyone who has experienced in person dialogue knows the value of
>>> having people present and participating who are sensitive,
>>> supportive, and open to questioning (their own, but is there any
>>> difference really) assumptions and opinions. People who aren't open
>>> tend to stop the flow on some level. Another question might be is
>>> that the case here as well?
>>>
>>> Great post Lynne!
>>>
>>> kari
>>
>> Hi Rodger,
>>
>> Back on line after a busy weekend!
>>
>> Yes I can see what you mean, what you said here kind of warmed me or
>> enheartened me! I guess I have found some of the language orientated
>> discussions a bit cold, hard, mechanical ... And I am drawn more to
>> what I call heart-balanced being. Its about caring and being
>> compassionate and also aware and being willing to challenge. And
>> finding a response and action that is not embedded within the same
>> cultural assumptions. I find so often the response or action taken to
>> a situation maintains the same culture.
>>
>> Anyway its something to aim for ...
>>
>> Um ... I can see core and periphery within an individual I think as
>> you suggest.
>>
>> For me just responding doesn?t mean you become part of the core I
>> think it is something to do with how you are received and whether you
>> are responded to and what the response is.
>>
>> Gill
>>
>>
>> on 4/11/06 14:29, Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com at
>> Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com wrote:
>>
>> Rodger __hi Gill, I firmly believe that if you see-sense something
>> missing in a group process it is because no one else sees it as
>> clearly as you do -- therefore you are the missing link._R
>> .
>>
>> Joachim Faust
>> joachimfaust@earthlink.net
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> info:
>> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>>
>> post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>>
>> dialogue facilitator:
>> facilitator@david-bohm.net
>>
>> Administrator of the mailing list:
>> admin@david-bohm.net
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> info:
> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
> post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>
> dialogue facilitator:
> facilitator@david-bohm.net
>
> Administrator of the mailing list:
> admin@david-bohm.net
>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> info:
> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
> post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>
> dialogue facilitator:
> facilitator@david-bohm.net
>
> Administrator of the mailing list:
> admin@david-bohm.net
>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
From donfactor at donfactor.demon.co.uk Thu Nov 9 03:15:49 2006
From: donfactor at donfactor.demon.co.uk (donald factor)
Date: Fri Nov 10 04:19:35 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] ... subtle fear & pleasure sensations that block
ability to listen freely
In-Reply-To: <20061108.195537.3608.1.ae.dropper@juno.com>
References: <20061108.195537.3608.1.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <4EE7E0A1-9967-4567-9B49-2AACEA29787D@donfactor.demon.co.uk>
I can open the second of the attachments but not the first. The
second one appears to be numbered 1 through 5, but there is only
text up through 4, with the number 5 left dangling.
The other one would not open in word or in my text editor.
don
On Nov 8, 2006, at 4:55 PM, ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
> <Bohm On Dialogue scanned Chap oneAntique Olive.wps.rtf>
From donfactor at donfactor.demon.co.uk Thu Nov 9 03:12:46 2006
From: donfactor at donfactor.demon.co.uk (donald factor)
Date: Fri Nov 10 04:27:26 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] robust dialogue and the middle way
In-Reply-To: <B8BC4D12-84C9-4C92-8D94-596686648C18@dc.rr.com>
References: <C177B818.385C%earthsky@tiscali.co.uk>
<03b101c70393$a3872f50$da78480c@HOME>
<B8BC4D12-84C9-4C92-8D94-596686648C18@dc.rr.com>
Message-ID: <426A24DF-3841-44CD-A451-D1ADEEC5EE2D@donfactor.demon.co.uk>
For anyone who is iinterested, here is one of gas/peter's fairly
typical contribuition. The format is the original
don
\
gooadogod frau joy
der knackpunkt ist
the breaking-point is:
there aint no "design/er"
youus is "st(r)uck" with(in)
how youus "come"
f.e.:
the prain is
pretty&ugly&munch
'composed' of 3
components:
a - r-complex
b - limbic system
c - neo-cortex
one is "built"
on "top" of the other
the "higher" one
didoes not have
the ability to
over-ride the "lower"
...and even so in
munch of "modern" liidii
[= life&&&death]
the r-complex, f.e.,
is a prain in the
ass'umption : : :
youus gotta liidii
with'in thit
ok, back to doing
"serious" workg t'here
ciao bone/head/s
thinksgpoweredbygaspoweredbythinkgs
> And by the Peter, both hardware and software can be changed
or we
> would still be using the same computers and the same programs that
> were first invented.
>
> Susan
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: gasinsystem
> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2005 6:58 AM
> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] )(
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> susansusansusan
> joyjoyjoy
> which planet
> is you living dying
> on/off
>
> pu&re is
> does come
> "hard-wired"
> thit is (in) y'our
> gegegegenes (hardware)
> this is (in) "y'our"
> thinkg/s (der,die,TAS: software)
>
> whow is the susanjoys
> trying to fool
> besides herselves
>
>
>
> didoes you see
>
> what the ii printed
>
> yesterdaight:
>
> "...The PET scans showed increased activity in the brain's dorsal
> striatum, an enjoyment centre, when a player punished a cheater,
even if
> he had to use his own money to inflict punishment...."
>
>
>
>
>
> more&less later, maybe
> other thinkgs screwing
> around with the i this a.m.
> ciao bone-heads
>
>
>
>
> > The idea of punishment/reward is just exactly that.....an
idea.
> You
> > talk about it as though it is an attribute of physical
reality. But
> > it's an idea. It's something we make up and then assign to
> > ourselves. So it's an interpretation that has become an
assumption.
> > Anything you interpret as punishment/reward will create the
> > experience of punishment/reward. The moment you interpret
that same
> > event as something else, it becomes something else.
> > For instance, when I was growing up my mother believed in
the use
> of
> > heavy punishment as a way to "teach" children. I interpreted my
> > mother's punishments with words like ...bad, painful, etc. and so
> > when I was punished, I felt punished....I felt bad, pain, etc.
> > However, I had a brother who understood that as long as he didn't
> > interpret what she was doing as punishment, he didn't have to
feel
> > bad, painful, etc. So her punishment didn't work with him and
he had
> > far more freedom than the rest of us.
> > People talk about pain/pleasure as though they are
attributes of
> > physical reality. But they are interpretations. Something we
assign
> > to our experience. This is easily recognizable with people
who have
> > learned to flip them around and gain pleasure from what most
of us
> > would call pain. The experiments I have done with pain have
shown me
> > that if I don't assign the idea of pain to a sensation, but
simply
> > notice it as a sensation, I don't experience pain.
> > So, what is PURE punishment/reward? What would that be?
> >
> > Susan
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: gasinsystem
> > To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> > Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2005 6:16 AM
> > Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] )(
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > susanjoy, guten morgen
> >
> > can you show youus
> >
> > ANY thinkg that is NOT
> >
> > fundawo'mentally rooted
> >
> > with'in PU&RE
> >
> > punish&reward
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > gas
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > )(
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > info:
> > www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
> >
> > post to:
> > dialogue@david-bohm.net
> >
> > dialogue facilitator:
> > facilitator@david-bohm.net
> >
> > Administrator of the mailing list:
> > admin@david-bohm.net
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > info:
> > www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
> >
> > post to:
> > dialogue@david-bohm.net
> >
> > dialogue facilitator:
> > facilitator@david-bohm.net
> >
> > Administrator of the mailing list:
> > admin@david-bohm.net
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> info:
> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
> post to:
> dialogue@david-bohm.net
>
> dialogue facilitator:
> facilitator@david-bohm.net
>
> Administrator of the mailing list:
> admin@david-bohm.net
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> _______________________________________________
> info:
> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
> post to:
> dialogue@david-bohm.net
>
> dialogue facilitator:
> facilitator@david-bohm.net
>
> Administrator of the mailing list:
> admin@david-bohm.net
>
> _______________________________________________
>
___________
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061108/c1084d0b/attachment.html
From griffyn23 at hotmail.com Thu Nov 9 04:16:45 2006
From: griffyn23 at hotmail.com (Morgan Jett)
Date: Fri Nov 10 05:20:45 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] robust dialogue and the middle way
In-Reply-To: <B8BC4D12-84C9-4C92-8D94-596686648C18@dc.rr.com>
Message-ID: <BAY22-F2046AB87420BB422762AF4A5F00@phx.gbl>
this suggestion made Zoe very angry
Hi Don -
Zoe objected because of the word "acceptable". She doesn't object to the
principle of being heard. But that was clarified after you and I spoke.
Then someone posted something like "...would anyone stand up for her". And
I responded "I would", and the ball was rolling. I can find that post, if
you like, but it will take me a while. I have several hundred to go
through.
Actually, I believe that Zoe plans to make that statement. I told her you
were going on vacation, and she wanted you as well as William to be part of
this. i believe the procedure is for her to address it specifically to the
administrator who is William? Correct me if I'm wrong.
Do you want her to wait until after the wedding? best, k
>From: donald factor <dfactor@dc.rr.com>
>Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] robust dialogue and the middle way
>Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2006 17:54:33 -0800
>
>Hi Susan,
>
>Thanks for this, it saves me having to post pretty much same thing. I am
>referring here to your first three paragraphs.
>But was it Peter? Or was it a.a. gasinsytstem who, so far as I can see is
>the same person but this is just for the record. Gas was peter's second go
>around. We had to close the list down after Peter's first invasion, And
>that's when we took the radical step of moderating the list. Or am I
>confused?
>
>Regarding Zoe, I still have my doubts as I do about Kirsten being the
>same person as Peter. But I understood that following on from a
>conversation that I had off-list with Kathy that she invited Zoe to drop
>us a line and explain what her intentions and interests in the Bohm list
>were, in other words to tell us why she thought it was unfair of us to
>disconnect her. I thought that this would clarify any unclarity. But
>apparently, this suggestion made Zoe very angry, and she has not written
>such a letter or communicated with either me, William or Franis, so far as
>I know.
>
>If what I say here is at all accurate, then I wonder why Kathy is pushing
>this. I would have thought that it should be up to Zoe to make the next
>move.
>
>don
>
>
>On Nov 8, 2006, at 4:11 PM, Susan Clemons wrote:
>
>>Hi Gill. It's nice to meet you. I understand the current desire among
>>many of you to explore the PKZ phenomena. When I first joined the list
>>the same discussion was going on. I jumped right in, eager to explore
>>it. And it was a very similar one to what you are all proposing right
>>now. Although at that time Peter was an active member of the group and
>>he was included in the discussion. In the beginning I sounded much like
>>you and some of the others right now.
>>
>>But as time went by and I realized everyone was exploring the subject
>>except Peter I began to feel differently. Peter's response was mostly
>>just to ignore any kind of idea of exploring an introspection into
>>himself, all he was interested in was goading the rest of us. Rather
>>than use suspension he would flood us with brief posts about the world
>>being made up of carrot and stick mentality and we should all recognize
>>that the only solution was total chaos. When he became determined to
>>spam the group with anywhere from 75 to 100 nonsense messages of 1 or 2
>>lines each every day regardless of how any of us felt (and I'm pretty
>>sure it was because of how we felt) the decision (after much agonizing)
>>was made to ban him. At that point I was ready for him to be banned.
>>He mostly just trolled for recruits for his OD site and spammed us for
>>not being interested. He also seems to have a fixation with male
>>authority figures and chose Don F. to flame as a surrogate authority.
>>
>>It was this very phenomena and exploring it here on this list as well as
>>exploring it on a couple of other lists that had similar problems that
>>caused me to come to the conclusions that I gave to Kathy in my post to
>>her. In order for anything to cohere there needs to be at least a loose
>>and flexible structure. Here's a link to some of the thoughts I have had
>>about the structure and purpose of Bohm Dialogue in one of our previous
>>discussions:
>>http://naturallythriving.home.att.net/purpose.htm
>>
>>When it comes to K and Z, as I told Kathy, I don't know what happened
>>with them but it sounds like Zoe feels she was banned without any warning
>>and without any group discussion. If that's true, then I would say that
>>I think anyone we suspect of being a troll or of spamming or who we
>>suspect is Peter, deserves to at least be told of our feelings and be
>>given a chance to speak for themselves.
>>
>>And, no, I don't worry about how many posts I make per day or how long
>>they are. I used to worry about that. But then I decided that the
>>purpose of dialogue is to dialogue. You can't do that without posting.
>>A healthy dialogue is going to have lots of posts. I've learned to deal
>>with it by learning to know which people are definitely going to have
>>something to say that I'm interested in responding to and not. On my
>>busy days I skip through the posts and read only a few people or if
>>there's a good thread going I will read only that thread. And, yes,
>>sometimes I miss a lot doing that but it's better than the alternative of
>>not being a part of all of this.
>>
>>Susan
>>
>>
>>----- Original Message ----- From: "Gill Wyatt" <earthsky@tiscali.co.uk>
>>To: <bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org>
>>Sent: Wednesday, November 08, 2006 9:36 AM
>>Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] robust dialogue and the middle way
>>
>>
>>Hi Joachim, Kari and all others involved in this theme!
>>
>>I appreciated you checking re whether you had understood me ...
>>
>>What I intended in my post was to highlight awareness, compassion AND
>>challenge. I perhaps didn't emphasise the AND enough. I think it is only
>>within this paradoxical place of dualities that we can find a response
>>and
>