From ae.dropper at juno.com  Sat Oct 21 01:15:35 2006
From: ae.dropper at juno.com (ae.dropper@juno.com)
Date: Sun Oct 22 02:17:02 2006
Subject: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Ultimate, non ultimate
Message-ID: <20061020.191545.2116.20.ae.dropper@juno.com>

HUMANS ADVANCED IN AN AREA OF BRAIN EVOLUTION. (R)

Making fragmentation possible.    pat



On Fri, 20 Oct 2006 15:26:49 -0400 "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net> writes:
Don L: Do you see how human being is different from all other creatures?
-- dbl

rodger: MOSTLY NO. MOTHERS AND BABIES CALL OUT FOR EACH OTHER WHEN CRISIS
-OR FARMING- SEPARATES THEM. THE BASIC BEHAVIORAL, EMOTIONAL EXPERIENCE
SEEMS TO BE PRETTY MUCH THE SAME. EXCEPT FOR HOW HUMANS ADVANCED IN AN
AREA OF BRAIN EVOLUTION.

Don L:  Ever see another creature in traffic court; court for nonpayment
of child-support; traffric fines?  In school studying for finals? In line
for flu shots? 




----- Original Message ----- 
From: Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com 
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org 
Sent: Friday, October 20, 2006 10:00 AM
Subject: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Ultimate, non ultimate


Rodger__ in answer to:

Don L: Do you not recognize that homo-saps are altered by language,

Rodger: BY ALTERED DO YOU MEAN DIFFERENT? HAVE YOU EVER SPENT MUCH TIME
IN THE WILD, LISTENED TO HOW ANIMALS TELL EACH OTHER OF THE COMINGS AND
GOINGS OF PREDATORS AND FRIENDLY CRITTERS -- ALL THE DIFFERENT SOUNDS
THEY USE -- WHICH ANIMALS NOTIFY THE COMMUNITY OF WHICH VISITORS OR
DANGERS ETC.?

TO ME, ANIMAL SOUNDS QUALIFY AS LANGUAGE. HUMANS SELDOM UNDERSTAND OR
RECOGNIZE ANIMAL LANGUAGE, BUT ANIMALS OFTEN COMPREHEND A RANGE OF
WORDS.ALTHO ANIMALS TEND TO CONFUSE EASILY WHEN HUMANS EXPRESS WORDS
NEUROTICALLY.  

I THINK IT IS NOT SO MUCH A CLEAR LINE OF -WE SPEAK & ANIMALS DONT- AS A
SPECIES GRADIENT; HOW MUCH, WHAT KIND.   

DON L: (homo-saps) are altered by written laws that most people say are
unnatural?

rodger: IS THAT LIKE MOST PEOPLE SAYING WE WOULD FALL OFF THE EDGE OF THE
FLAT EARTH? AN EARTH WHICH WE ALL KNOW IS THE CENTER OF THE UNIVERSE?  

Don L: Do you see how human being is different from all other creatures?
-- dbl

rodger: MOSTLY NO. MOTHERS AND BABIES CALL OUT FOR EACH OTHER WHEN CRISIS
-OR FARMING- SEPARATES THEM. THE BASIC BEHAVIORAL, EMOTIONAL EXPERIENCE
SEEMS TO BE PRETTY MUCH THE SAME. EXCEPT FOR HOW HUMANS ADVANCED IN AN
AREA OF BRAIN EVOLUTION.

GENERALLY IT SEEMS TO ME THAT PEOPLE ARE AT A LOSS AS TO WHAT TO MAKE OF
THIS ADVANCE, SO THEY DRAW UP CONCLUSSIONS ABOUT IT._R
.
.
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 00:39:08 -0400
From: "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net>
Subject: Re: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Ultimate, non ultimate
statements
.
Don L: Do you not recognize that homo-saps are altered by language, by
written laws that most people say are unnatural?  Do you not see
something unnatural about human being? Do you see how human being is
different from all other creatures? -- dbl 




_______________________________________________
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/20061020/dbd6fadb/attachment.html
From ae.dropper at juno.com  Sat Oct 21 17:21:46 2006
From: ae.dropper at juno.com (ae.dropper@juno.com)
Date: Sun Oct 22 18:22:19 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Fragmentation
Message-ID: <20061021.112147.2116.23.ae.dropper@juno.com>

You know, in all the years I've been here I don't remember ever
really talking about fragmentation. It's an incredibly useful
concept. Applies SO MUCH of the poverty of communication
[dialogue, creativity] that occurs SO MUCH of the time in the 
verbal sphere. What is fragmentation as it applies to the way we 
listen to each other? When are we hearing from the 'whole' of what 
someone is saying and when are we hearing from a 'fragment'? And what 
does the hearing from a fragment "accomplish" in terms of "dead ending" 
a creative "thread?" Bohm distinguishes between a fragment and a part. 
A "part" is a "subwhole."

Responding to a "part" of what someone says is not "fragmentation" 
[necessarily]. And responding to a meaning not intended by the speaker
is not fragmentation [necessarily] - if the intended meaning is more or
less
understood.

It seems that a "fragmented" response is essentially a response to "one's
own" [disinherited] thought in the guise of "another's" thought? And then

there is the thought that determines that certain thoughts are "one's
own," 
and certain thoughts are "another's." What is that  thought? What is that
feeling? [because thoughts aren't given the attribute of 'possession'
without an attendant feeling, are they]?

pat




On Fri, 20 Oct 2006 19:15:35 -0400 ae.dropper@juno.com writes:
HUMANS ADVANCED IN AN AREA OF BRAIN EVOLUTION. (R)

Making fragmentation possible.    pat



On Fri, 20 Oct 2006 15:26:49 -0400 "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net> writes:
Don L: Do you see how human being is different from all other creatures?
-- dbl

rodger: MOSTLY NO. MOTHERS AND BABIES CALL OUT FOR EACH OTHER WHEN CRISIS
-OR FARMING- SEPARATES THEM. THE BASIC BEHAVIORAL, EMOTIONAL EXPERIENCE
SEEMS TO BE PRETTY MUCH THE SAME. EXCEPT FOR HOW HUMANS ADVANCED IN AN
AREA OF BRAIN EVOLUTION.

Don L:  Ever see another creature in traffic court; court for nonpayment
of child-support; traffric fines?  In school studying for finals? In line
for flu shots? 




----- Original Message ----- 
From: Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com 
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org 
Sent: Friday, October 20, 2006 10:00 AM
Subject: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Ultimate, non ultimate


Rodger__ in answer to:

Don L: Do you not recognize that homo-saps are altered by language,

Rodger: BY ALTERED DO YOU MEAN DIFFERENT? HAVE YOU EVER SPENT MUCH TIME
IN THE WILD, LISTENED TO HOW ANIMALS TELL EACH OTHER OF THE COMINGS AND
GOINGS OF PREDATORS AND FRIENDLY CRITTERS -- ALL THE DIFFERENT SOUNDS
THEY USE -- WHICH ANIMALS NOTIFY THE COMMUNITY OF WHICH VISITORS OR
DANGERS ETC.?

TO ME, ANIMAL SOUNDS QUALIFY AS LANGUAGE. HUMANS SELDOM UNDERSTAND OR
RECOGNIZE ANIMAL LANGUAGE, BUT ANIMALS OFTEN COMPREHEND A RANGE OF
WORDS.ALTHO ANIMALS TEND TO CONFUSE EASILY WHEN HUMANS EXPRESS WORDS
NEUROTICALLY.  

I THINK IT IS NOT SO MUCH A CLEAR LINE OF -WE SPEAK & ANIMALS DONT- AS A
SPECIES GRADIENT; HOW MUCH, WHAT KIND.   

DON L: (homo-saps) are altered by written laws that most people say are
unnatural?

rodger: IS THAT LIKE MOST PEOPLE SAYING WE WOULD FALL OFF THE EDGE OF THE
FLAT EARTH? AN EARTH WHICH WE ALL KNOW IS THE CENTER OF THE UNIVERSE?  

Don L: Do you see how human being is different from all other creatures?
-- dbl

rodger: MOSTLY NO. MOTHERS AND BABIES CALL OUT FOR EACH OTHER WHEN CRISIS
-OR FARMING- SEPARATES THEM. THE BASIC BEHAVIORAL, EMOTIONAL EXPERIENCE
SEEMS TO BE PRETTY MUCH THE SAME. EXCEPT FOR HOW HUMANS ADVANCED IN AN
AREA OF BRAIN EVOLUTION.

GENERALLY IT SEEMS TO ME THAT PEOPLE ARE AT A LOSS AS TO WHAT TO MAKE OF
THIS ADVANCE, SO THEY DRAW UP CONCLUSSIONS ABOUT IT._R
.
.
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 00:39:08 -0400
From: "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net>
Subject: Re: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Ultimate, non ultimate
statements
.
Don L: Do you not recognize that homo-saps are altered by language, by
written laws that most people say are unnatural?  Do you not see
something unnatural about human being? Do you see how human being is
different from all other creatures? -- dbl 




_______________________________________________
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/20061021/c95c4028/attachment.html
From tangykatt at earthlink.net  Sat Oct 21 18:32:22 2006
From: tangykatt at earthlink.net (Kathryn Arizmendi)
Date: Sun Oct 22 19:32:23 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] new email address
Message-ID: <C15FC3D6.39C1%tangykatt@earthlink.net>

Hi ? What do I have to do to change my email address with this group?
Thanks, k
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061021/831d4505/attachment.html
From donfactor at donfactor.demon.co.uk  Sat Oct 21 18:48:26 2006
From: donfactor at donfactor.demon.co.uk (Don Factor)
Date: Sun Oct 22 19:48:28 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Fragmentation
In-Reply-To: <20061021.112147.2116.23.ae.dropper@juno.com>
References: <20061021.112147.2116.23.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <9F24567B-B253-4148-AF70-9217B9680AB0@donfactor.demon.co.uk>

First, on this subject of fragmentation and for the benefit of those  
who are less familiar with Bohm's work, he made an analogy with a  
watch - an old fashioned wind up watch. He observed that if you take  
a watch apart and lay out all of its parts you (or somebody who knows  
how) can put them back together again, but if you smash the watch  
with a hammer, you end up with fragments. So fragments are defined in  
this context as parts that are broken. The invention of "Nation  
states" was a favourite example of fragmentation. So....

You're right that we just do it and don't think about it, at least  
not directly. But (my favourite word.) like all such subjects no  
matter what one says, there are always a myriad of possible ways of  
understanding it which cannot help but emerge from the listener's own  
life experience - or social conditioning and that colour the  
listener's experience. That is, what you have said here slots into a  
lot of stuff that I have also thought about, so what I hear is not  
just what you said, but how what you said relates to what I have said  
or thought on the subject. This is not a misunderstanding but, I  
think, a necessary part of any act of meaning. It has often been  
mentioned that any actual communication sits somewhere in the space  
between the speaker and the listener, or the writer and reader. It  
does not represent wholly the meaning of either. So It seems you  
can't have one without the other. It seems to me that in  most  
instances it is not possible to listen to another so objectively that  
one's own meanings don't get enmeshed with the speaker's words. Both  
parties are active in any communication even if one remains silent.  
So the question may be whether the presumed misunderstanding is  
intentional or something else.

Also, and this is what I consider the trickiest part of any such  
consideration, is how do we accommodate these ambiguities so that  
they can be understood and dealt with as parts rather than as  
fragments regardless of what we imagine is the other's intention or  
of any reflexive feelings?
don

On 21 Oct 2006, at 16:21, ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:

> You know, in all the years I've been here I don't remember ever
> really talking about fragmentation. It's an incredibly useful
> concept. Applies SO MUCH of the poverty of communication
> [dialogue, creativity] that occurs SO MUCH of the time in the
> verbal sphere. What is fragmentation as it applies to the way we
> listen to each other? When are we hearing from the 'whole' of what
> someone is saying and when are we hearing from a 'fragment'? And what
> does the hearing from a fragment "accomplish" in terms of "dead  
> ending"
> a creative "thread?" Bohm distinguishes between a fragment and a part.
> A "part" is a "subwhole."
>
> Responding to a "part" of what someone says is not "fragmentation"
> [necessarily]. And responding to a meaning not intended by the speaker
> is not fragmentation [necessarily] - if the intended meaning is  
> more or less
> understood.
>
> It seems that a "fragmented" response is essentially a response to  
> "one's own" [disinherited] thought in the guise of "another's"  
> thought? And then
> there is the thought that determines that certain thoughts are  
> "one's own,"
> and certain thoughts are "another's." What is that  thought? What  
> is that feeling? [because thoughts aren't given the attribute of  
> 'possession' without an attendant feeling, are they]?
>
> pat
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, 20 Oct 2006 19:15:35 -0400 ae.dropper@juno.com writes:
> HUMANS ADVANCED IN AN AREA OF BRAIN EVOLUTION. (R)
>
> Making fragmentation possible.    pat
>
>
> On Fri, 20 Oct 2006 15:26:49 -0400 "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net> writes:
> Don L: Do you see how human being is different from all other  
> creatures? -- dbl
>
> rodger: MOSTLY NO. MOTHERS AND BABIES CALL OUT FOR EACH OTHER WHEN  
> CRISIS -OR FARMING- SEPARATES THEM. THE BASIC BEHAVIORAL, EMOTIONAL  
> EXPERIENCE SEEMS TO BE PRETTY MUCH THE SAME. EXCEPT FOR HOW HUMANS  
> ADVANCED IN AN AREA OF BRAIN EVOLUTION.
> Don L:  Ever see another creature in traffic court; court for  
> nonpayment of child-support; traffric fines?  In school studying  
> for finals? In line for flu shots?
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com
> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> Sent: Friday, October 20, 2006 10:00 AM
> Subject: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Ultimate, non ultimate
>
> Rodger__ in answer to:
>
> Don L: Do you not recognize that homo-saps are altered by language,
>
> Rodger: BY ALTERED DO YOU MEAN DIFFERENT? HAVE YOU EVER SPENT MUCH  
> TIME IN THE WILD, LISTENED TO HOW ANIMALS TELL EACH OTHER OF THE  
> COMINGS AND GOINGS OF PREDATORS AND FRIENDLY CRITTERS -- ALL THE  
> DIFFERENT SOUNDS THEY USE -- WHICH ANIMALS NOTIFY THE COMMUNITY OF  
> WHICH VISITORS OR DANGERS ETC.?
>
> TO ME, ANIMAL SOUNDS QUALIFY AS LANGUAGE. HUMANS SELDOM UNDERSTAND  
> OR RECOGNIZE ANIMAL LANGUAGE, BUT ANIMALS OFTEN COMPREHEND A RANGE  
> OF WORDS.ALTHO ANIMALS TEND TO CONFUSE EASILY WHEN HUMANS EXPRESS  
> WORDS NEUROTICALLY.
>
> I THINK IT IS NOT SO MUCH A CLEAR LINE OF -WE SPEAK & ANIMALS DONT-  
> AS A SPECIES GRADIENT; HOW MUCH, WHAT KIND.
>
> DON L: (homo-saps) are altered by written laws that most people say  
> are unnatural?
>
> rodger: IS THAT LIKE MOST PEOPLE SAYING WE WOULD FALL OFF THE EDGE  
> OF THE FLAT EARTH? AN EARTH WHICH WE ALL KNOW IS THE CENTER OF THE  
> UNIVERSE?
>
> Don L: Do you see how human being is different from all other  
> creatures? -- dbl
>
> rodger: MOSTLY NO. MOTHERS AND BABIES CALL OUT FOR EACH OTHER WHEN  
> CRISIS -OR FARMING- SEPARATES THEM. THE BASIC BEHAVIORAL, EMOTIONAL  
> EXPERIENCE SEEMS TO BE PRETTY MUCH THE SAME. EXCEPT FOR HOW HUMANS  
> ADVANCED IN AN AREA OF BRAIN EVOLUTION.
>
> GENERALLY IT SEEMS TO ME THAT PEOPLE ARE AT A LOSS AS TO WHAT TO  
> MAKE OF THIS ADVANCE, SO THEY DRAW UP CONCLUSSIONS ABOUT IT._R
> .
> .
> Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 00:39:08 -0400
> From: "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net>
> Subject: Re: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Ultimate, non ultimate
> statements
> .
> Don L: Do you not recognize that homo-saps are altered by language,  
> by written laws that most people say are unnatural?  Do you not see  
> something unnatural about human being? Do you see how human being  
> is different from all other creatures? -- dbl
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20061021/58a3849e/attachment.html
From donfactor at donfactor.demon.co.uk  Sat Oct 21 18:51:27 2006
From: donfactor at donfactor.demon.co.uk (Don Factor)
Date: Sun Oct 22 19:51:19 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] new email address
In-Reply-To: <C15FC3D6.39C1%tangykatt@earthlink.net>
References: <C15FC3D6.39C1%tangykatt@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <BDB4DC3E-8B76-44A7-8CD1-2AA5EAA6979C@donfactor.demon.co.uk>

Probably the easiest way is to go to the info page listed below.  
Unsubscribe and the resubscribe using your new
address. If you have trouble just let me know and give me your knew  
address.

don

On 21 Oct 2006, at 17:32, Kathryn Arizmendi wrote:

> Hi ? What do I have to do to change my email address with this  
> group?  Thanks, k
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20061021/c0b921c4/attachment.html
From tangykatt at earthlink.net  Sat Oct 21 19:07:38 2006
From: tangykatt at earthlink.net (Kathryn Arizmendi)
Date: Sun Oct 22 20:07:31 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] new email address
In-Reply-To: <BDB4DC3E-8B76-44A7-8CD1-2AA5EAA6979C@donfactor.demon.co.uk>
Message-ID: <C15FCC1A.39C5%tangykatt@earthlink.net>

Thanks.  I?m still ironing out kinks (Gr-r-r-r-) so it?ll be a couple of
days.

Best. k


On 10/21/06 12:51 PM, "Don Factor" <donfactor@donfactor.demon.co.uk> wrote:

> Probably the easiest way is to go to the info page listed below. Unsubscribe
> and the resubscribe using your new
> address. If you have trouble just let me know and give me your knew address.
> 
> don
> 
> On 21 Oct 2006, at 17:32, Kathryn Arizmendi wrote:
> 
>>  Hi ? What do I have to do to change my email address with this group?
>> ?Thanks, k
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20061021/169a40de/attachment.html