From donfactor at donfactor.demon.co.uk Thu Sep 28 00:23:06 2006 From: donfactor at donfactor.demon.co.uk (Don Factor) Date: Fri Sep 29 01:17:59 2006 Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] "Risky" In-Reply-To: <548.7c23b69.324c2064@aol.com> References: <548.7c23b69.324c2064@aol.com> Message-ID: <E79412F5-ACF0-4073-8C32-1A6355902A30@donfactor.demon.co.uk> I don't know what Stacey says, but it sounds like he is pushing the definition of organisation a lot further than I would. For me, an organisation is something that is put together for a purpose. But in building an organisation the primary purpose is to preserve something. Once this is established the energy of the organisation is turned inward, first to preserving the original purpose and ultimately to preserving the organisation itself. That is the main reason that David Bohm rejected our early attempts to set up some sort of dialogue organisation. He saw this as inevitably treating a part of a much larger process as a whole. It also would have established the idea that there was an officially sanctioned way to understand and to do dialogue. In general, I think, any organisation becomes increasingly like an isolated system that cannot survive for long. I prefer, along with Bakhtin, to think of dialogue as primary. In this approach any utterance inherently includes a request for a response. Even Piaget's egocentric speech of the young child, is looking for a response from some quarter. And Vygotsky's experiments show that all language is implicitly dialectical. So, organisations, in the sense you mention become at best, relatively stable entities that emerge and dissolve in a vast field of communications. Of course, "communication" implies some sort of information that can be understood, so I may need a better term for it, But that's my point of view, as of this moment. These utterances are, by my definition, requests for a response, so, anyone should feel free to do so. please. don On 27 Sep 2006, at 19:43, MarkHarmer@aol.com wrote: > That's why I'm interested in what Stacey has to say about > organisations, namely that the organisation "is" the conversation; > there's nothing else - his work was influenced by Meade and others, > which looked at both the gesture and response as one act of > communication, taken together. Thus the "mind" exists in > communicative interaction. > Anyway, these days, the idea that we are quite literally products > of our cultures, makes it, perhaps, easier to address some of the > incoherence since, initially at least, we don't have to take it > personally. That is, if we can let go of some of the importance we > place on our individual selves. > > _______________________________________________ > 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/20060927/e97b5df7/attachment.html From donfactor at donfactor.demon.co.uk Thu Sep 28 00:46:00 2006 From: donfactor at donfactor.demon.co.uk (Don Factor) Date: Fri Sep 29 01:40:53 2006 Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Death-wish, death-instinct In-Reply-To: <20060927.145252.916.1.franis_franis@juno.com> References: <20060927.145252.916.1.franis_franis@juno.com> Message-ID: <A0C7349B-7DBC-4EFC-A78C-12E95AF654FB@donfactor.demon.co.uk> Found it. Yes, well worth reading again. A lot of his experience is familar. don On 27 Sep 2006, at 22:39, Franis Engel wrote: > that account by Dwight about drowning would be really cool to read > again... Thanks Don! - Franis > >> Twenty five years ago while swimming in the Mediterranean sea on a stormy >> day I experienced what could quantify as a near death experience. While I >> did not have the out of body experience common to the many individuals >> documented by Kubler-Ross and others, you might say I had an out- of-mind. >> Passing through the various stages of dying-I was swimming a mile off shore, >> no chance of rescue and I could no longer lift my arms so in the end I >> surrendered to what appeared to be the ineluctable fact of drowning and >> death. >> >> After the feeling of incredulity, and then rage subsided I let go. I have >> never been able successfully to describe what I felt next. If I remain >> within the context of this dialogue, I could say that it was as if the >> entire TAS lifted away, like a heavy wet sweater and my first sensation >> (which was a thought so my metaphor is imperfect) was: that's all it is! It >> was truly astonishing! And then I experienced the most indescribable >> sensation of euphoria, peace, lightness. Perhaps love may be the word, >> though I feel so chary of that word. Time and space were gone. In fact my >> whole existence up that moment seemed to have been a second. As I said, not >> easy to describe but if I take certain essential attributes of what I >> understand (imperfectly) about TAS along with so much that is expressed >> here, it felt like stepping outside of all that. Perhaps that is why it >> cannot be elucidated since it was potentially beyond thought. I don't know. >> I cannot say with certainty what it was. >> >> I won't tell the whole story, but obviously I didn't die. (Though how would >> any of you know for sure?) When I came to, since I had dropped completely >> into an unconscious state, I repeated all the stages of dying in reverse. I >> felt that wet sweater fit itself once again upon my being and I can tell >> you, I was enraged. Out of my mind actually. I had to be restrained. I felt >> cheated. >> >> The thing is that I think it was possible that somewhere in his mind Bohm >> knew his final minutes were upon him so that it became as Whitman so aptly >> wrote: "the delicious nearby freedom of death." It is feasible that when he >> said to his wife "I feel that I am on the edge of something," that a part of >> his psyche knew and was experiencing what that meant. There seems a point in >> the unfolding from implicate to explicate where the personal psyche knows >> irrefutably, whether or not it has yet risen to the surface of >> consciousness. For myself, that is what I sense is the paradoxical nature of >> choice: we must participate as if we had a choice but afterwards can we ever >> really be absolutely certain that we had one? >> >> Enough. This is what happens when you sit and listen for a long time. When >> you start clicking keys you can?t stop. >> >> Dwight From tangykatt at earthlink.net Thu Sep 28 01:29:42 2006 From: tangykatt at earthlink.net (Kathryn Arizmendi) Date: Fri Sep 29 02:24:59 2006 Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] welcoming content In-Reply-To: <20060927.145252.916.2.franis_franis@juno.com> Message-ID: <C14081A6.32EB%tangykatt@earthlink.net> Thank you, Francis. I am honored. I am glad that my assuming you didn't have the experience wasn't insulting to you! I have met people who reacted that way, and I'm looking for a way to say what I need to say without my listener feeling like I'm putting him-her down. Now, back to work on my Improv - the laundry is done! k On 9/27/06 5:52 PM, "Franis Engel" <franis_franis@juno.com> wrote: > This is cool, Katheryn, reading your writing and how you take me along > what you say as if I do not have the experience. It makes what you're > building accessible, and is great writing. > Yes, I'm thinking of the ability to create new forms of music itself. > >> People keep telling me I must write, >> because there are no guides out there >> to the information I have come across >> and the way I have put it together. > > Yes! Yes! write about it! I'll read what you write and give my feedback, > if you want someone to cheer you on and make observations and > suggestions. I don't have any attachment to being the only "editor" also. > I've written extensively already about very subjective movement-related > disciplines, so I'm familiar with some of the challenges involved. - > Franis > > On Wed, 27 Sep 2006 11:48:21 -0400 Kathryn Arizmendi > <tangykatt@earthlink.net> writes: >> Good Morning, Francis - >> I definitely agree that Bohm Dialog and improvisation are similar. >> Perhaps >> more so than we realize. You mentioned >> ?...A general improvisational form such as blues or jazz does not >> exist in >>> speaking circles?. >> >> I hear the following assumption underlying that statement - all >> music uses >> the same ?built in? structure . Please correct me if that >> assumption is >> inaccurate, and let me know in what way I have misinterpreted - >> Also, >> Please keep in mind that although my statements today are a product >> of a lot >> of input, the ideas will be constantly evolving, depending on more >> input. >> That said - here is my response. >> >> Music actually has myriad, not a single, ?built in? - relationships, >> patterns, structures, just as the universe does. Just as word >> language does. >> The composer-improviser can set up his or her own form if they are >> aware of >> and fluent in musical vocabulary and syntax, and the relationships >> among all >> the various structures, and not inhibited about doing it. Blues and >> jazz >> with their structures are only two of those manifestations. All >> music >> shares the same raw materials, and many of the same structures, but >> not all >> of its manifestations use the same structural model. Different >> cultures and >> historical eras have made different connections and meanings. >> If you are referring to the fact that the Blues and Jazz >> idioms >> pretty much set up a single musical structure they call ?form?, and >> the >> improvisers create variations on that form ? yes. But all music >> doesn't >> work that way. (There are other differences as well.) Musical >> structure in >> classical music, as one example, isn?t restricted to one general >> form. Not >> only has it developed many ways of creating different forms from its >> various >> folded in structures, one is free to find other ways of linking >> musical >> materials to create new ones. Also, the development of musical >> language >> parallels the interaction, and ideas of different cultures, >> resulting in the >> evolving of different pov?s i.e. styles, patterns, individual >> insights that >> comprise them, and attitudes towards improvisation. >> >> So, my point is that a general improvisational form does not >> automatically >> exist in all musical circumstances, and those that exist do not all >> work on >> a rigid, never changing basis. There are many forms, currently >> existent as >> well as potential, waiting for someone to create, vary, and use >> them. Put >> in the context of ensemble improvisation, that brings us even closer >> to >> Bohm-style dialog. >> >> Best, k >> >> >> On 9/25/06 11:15 PM, "Franis Engel" <franis_franis@juno.com> wrote: >> >>> Kathy & Mark, >>> The in-person act of Bohm Dialogue is similiar to improvisation in >> the >>> context/forum of group interaction with spoken language as the >> activity. >>> A general improvisational form such as blues or jazz does not >> exist in >>> speaking circles, so, in a sense, Bohm-style Dialogue is a sort of >>> improvisational speaking circle. >>> - Franis >>> >>> On Tue, 26 Sep 2006 00:26:49 +0200 "william" <w@david-bohm.net> >> writes: >>>> >>>> MarkHarmer >>>>> ... I also think that the group can work with >>>>> some sort of intention, even a "task" (Bohm >>>>> says having a task will undermine the process >>>>> of dialogue, which, in "On Dialogue" is 'to >>>>> discover how thought works'). I personally have >>>>> a bit more trouble with not having a task as >>>>> surely, pragmatically, you'd want to explore >>>>> something specific with a group? >>>> >>>> Well, I would say, wanting to explore something specific is not >>>> compatible >>>> with Bohm's idea of dialogue. It would indeed undermine the >> process. >>>> It >>>> would undermine the discovery aspect of it. When you explore >>>> something >>>> specific then that's what you'll find, but 'discovery' means >>>> something else; >>>> it means you don't know what you are going to find. It is going >> to >>>> be a >>>> surprise... >>>> >>>> William >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> 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 > > _______________________________________________ > > From tubakari at yahoo.com Thu Sep 28 01:56:26 2006 From: tubakari at yahoo.com (Karilen Mays) Date: Fri Sep 29 02:51:19 2006 Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] "Risky" Message-ID: <20060927235626.42331.qmail@web52911.mail.yahoo.com> What a great message! This apparent list of people contributing by email has been alive with freshness lately. I like it! I think most of the fear is to do with the unknown and not existing. Once we are able to investigate - dare I say embrace?- the unkown, fear changes. Or at least it has for me. Fear can arise and exists in the collective consciousness which we can never be separate from, but it is not personal. Not so tightly identified with. Can you not be afraid when fear is present? And I don't think this shift could happen if I said, "self, dont take the unkown and fear so personally!" And I actually tried telling myself, lol, that and continued to suffer attributing the suffering to fear and anxiety. So what we/I find is that upon investigation, and it is especially powerful in a group, like dialogue, then if we are open we can sense these energies without reducing them to labels, like fear and anger. We can use the labels to talk about. they aren't so real any more though. has anyone else had this experience? i know some of you know what i am talking about...though i wont take it personally if you dont respond...trusting in the process of dialogue even on this email list, that the words i type here will serve their purpose threading their way into whatever meaning exists and the responses that arise will continue the flow even if not directed specifically to me. :) i havent read if any Patrick deMare, but what you are saying about the group process which includes hate and impersonal fellowship, Gill, sounds exactly like the development of an individual (me for instance). so why should a group be any different? as i/we awaken we experience aspects of ourself, some of them repressed, like hate, for instance. or in my case recently at least. and as i have been able to hold such experiences and welcome them even, a sense larger than my personal self arises and i feel in communion with the world at large. (it is really diminished sounding as i explain it, but i have to try!) i know this was really long, but it just kinda flowed, so thanks for reading if you made it this far! bubbling with ecstasy along with "you" kari PS- i may reply with more about chaos later. such juiciness here! ----- Original Message ---- From: Gill Wyatt <earthsky@tiscali.co.uk> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2006 7:24:46 AM Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] "Risky" Kari/Don, I am heartened that you don't think people 'hate' dialogue. I think there is a fear ... yes and I have read some of Patrick's work and I've often wondered about his use of the word 'hate' and describing it as part of the passage the group goes through before it acheives dialogue and what he calls 'koinonia' a non-possessive fellowship/sense of community. I like much of Patrick's work but think his Freudian roots explains how he constructs his thoery ... no surprises there. My experience in groups is rather that there is often a descent into chaos after people have stopped being polite (This is different from the 'old' group concept of storming) and each person's chaos will be of their own making, shaped by their personality, experience etc and they might use words like 'hate' or 'fear' and so many others. Maybe it is this descent into chaos that people fear.... Gill -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20060927/216951f6/attachment.html From franis_franis at juno.com Thu Sep 28 08:13:36 2006 From: franis_franis at juno.com (Franis Engel) Date: Fri Sep 29 09:11:30 2006 Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] welcoming content Message-ID: <20060927.231342.1436.1.franis_franis@juno.com> Hi Kathryn, I'm not sure why musicians are so opinionated and defensive, but they are for some reason. I guess because playing an instrument takes so much education, dedication, even talent. It's always a reflection of being in practice also, to stay in shape with doing it. In this situation, there is no way that you could know my experience because you'd never heard me play music. So how could I be miffed at such great writing of yours? So often people who are specialists have completely forgotten how to carry someone from square one along how they are thinking in new ways out on the pioneering forefront. Often specialists have built up so many ground floor assumptions that they can't explain themselves to novices. The way I get around that in writing is to make sure the person knows the general audience for whom the writing is for - people learning from scratch, in this case. Then they have a reason to suspend feeling personally insulted. They're encouraged to put themselves in the position of being a 'beginner.' I have had people say to me, "I understand what you mean, but would someone else?" ...to which I'd reply that I wouldn't want them to second guess someone else's abilities - just their feedback is enough - because I wanted someone with their particular experience to read the simple stuff to make sure it made sense to them. You could take a peek at my website. I think you'd like my "out for improv" idea quite a bit. http://www.franis.org/out4improv/ Essentially I'm giving terms to the elements of music as if it were a story, and then also describing what people do when they improvise. The purpose is so players can recombine them to create new forms, whether they know their instrument or not. The same 'plan' (which can become a new form) can be used over and over indefinitely varying it. Do you and Mark know each other already? Strange how you both showed up here at once and we all figured out we had this unusual music tangent in common. Franis (no c in my weird name) On Wed, 27 Sep 2006 19:29:42 -0400 Kathryn Arizmendi <tangykatt@earthlink.net> writes: > Thank you, Franis. I am honored. I am glad that my assuming you > didn't > have the experience wasn't insulting to you! I have met people who > reacted > that way, and I'm looking for a way to say what I need to say > without my > listener feeling like I'm putting him-her down. > > Now, back to work on my Improv - the laundry is done! k > > > On 9/27/06 5:52 PM, "Franis Engel" <franis_franis@juno.com> wrote: > > > This is cool, Katheryn, reading your writing and how you take me > along > > what you say as if I do not have the experience. It makes what > you're > > building accessible, and is great writing. > > Yes, I'm thinking of the ability to create new forms of music > itself. > > > >> People keep telling me I must write, > >> because there are no guides out there > >> to the information I have come across > >> and the way I have put it together. > > > > Yes! Yes! write about it! I'll read what you write and give my > feedback, > > if you want someone to cheer you on and make observations and > > suggestions. I don't have any attachment to being the only > "editor" also. > > I've written extensively already about very subjective > movement-related > > disciplines, so I'm familiar with some of the challenges involved. > - > > Franis > > > > On Wed, 27 Sep 2006 11:48:21 -0400 Kathryn Arizmendi > > <tangykatt@earthlink.net> writes: > >> Good Morning, Franis - > >> I definitely agree that Bohm Dialog and improvisation are > similar. > >> Perhaps > >> more so than we realize. You mentioned > >> ³...A general improvisational form such as blues or jazz does not > >> exist in > >>> speaking circles². > >> > >> I hear the following assumption underlying that statement - all > >> music uses > >> the same ³built in² structure . Please correct me if that > >> assumption is > >> inaccurate, and let me know in what way I have misinterpreted - > >> Also, > >> Please keep in mind that although my statements today are a > product > >> of a lot > >> of input, the ideas will be constantly evolving, depending on > more > >> input. > >> That said - here is my response. > >> > >> Music actually has myriad, not a single, ³built in² - > relationships, > >> patterns, structures, just as the universe does. Just as word > >> language does. > >> The composer-improviser can set up his or her own form if they > are > >> aware of > >> and fluent in musical vocabulary and syntax, and the > relationships > >> among all > >> the various structures, and not inhibited about doing it. Blues > and > >> jazz > >> with their structures are only two of those manifestations. All > >> music > >> shares the same raw materials, and many of the same structures, > but > >> not all > >> of its manifestations use the same structural model. Different > >> cultures and > >> historical eras have made different connections and meanings. > >> If you are referring to the fact that the Blues and Jazz > >> idioms > >> pretty much set up a single musical structure they call ³form², > and > >> the > >> improvisers create variations on that form yes. But all music > >> doesn't > >> work that way. (There are other differences as well.) Musical > >> structure in > >> classical music, as one example, isnıt restricted to one general > >> form. Not > >> only has it developed many ways of creating different forms from > its > >> various > >> folded in structures, one is free to find other ways of linking > >> musical > >> materials to create new ones. Also, the development of musical > >> language > >> parallels the interaction, and ideas of different cultures, > >> resulting in the > >> evolving of different povıs i.e. styles, patterns, individual > >> insights that > >> comprise them, and attitudes towards improvisation. > >> > >> So, my point is that a general improvisational form does not > >> automatically > >> exist in all musical circumstances, and those that exist do not > all > >> work on > >> a rigid, never changing basis. There are many forms, currently > >> existent as > >> well as potential, waiting for someone to create, vary, and use > >> them. Put > >> in the context of ensemble improvisation, that brings us even > closer > >> to > >> Bohm-style dialog. > >> > >> Best, k > >> > >> > >> On 9/25/06 11:15 PM, "Franis Engel" <franis_franis@juno.com> > wrote: > >> > >>> Kathy & Mark, > >>> The in-person act of Bohm Dialogue is similiar to improvisation > in > >> the > >>> context/forum of group interaction with spoken language as the > >> activity. > >>> A general improvisational form such as blues or jazz does not > >> exist in > >>> speaking circles, so, in a sense, Bohm-style Dialogue is a sort > of > >>> improvisational speaking circle. > >>> - Franis > >>> From MarkHarmer at aol.com Thu Sep 28 09:12:48 2006 From: MarkHarmer at aol.com (MarkHarmer@aol.com) Date: Fri Sep 29 10:07:47 2006 Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] welcoming content Message-ID: <518.61395300.324ccff0@aol.com> Hi - don't *think* we know each other! But there are so many rich experiences for musicians, particularly those who play in groups, music being a temporal thing. The process of "joining in" a group improv, for example: how we sense what's going on in the group, how we fit in, how speed comes into it - join in too soon and cause a musical train wreck, join in too late and the music's over. I think from my audio editing background (I worked for years in BBC radio) that there are also smaller relationships going on between the physics of note formation and how much attention we as animals pay to an initial event (even something 1/10 of a second long) as in physics terms, that first part of a note contains almost all the information we need about the nature of the instrument etc. Same with words, the first 1/10 of a second gives us most of the info about its meaning. I've done some fun stuff with changing these bits of words and how it totally changes the meaning. That's a whole other layer of "stuff" going on, albeit at hugely higher speed... Do you and Mark know each other already? Strange how you both showed up here at once and we all figured out we had this unusual music tangent in common. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20060928/68b7cd9d/attachment.html From donlay at gte.net Thu Sep 28 11:51:24 2006 From: donlay at gte.net (Don Lay) Date: Fri Sep 29 12:46:52 2006 Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Death-wish, death-instinct References: <20060927.145252.916.1.franis_franis@juno.com> <A0C7349B-7DBC-4EFC-A78C-12E95AF654FB@donfactor.demon.co.uk> Message-ID: <000401c6e2e3$af72aea0$2e1c153f@DL01> Anyone know the source of this Whitman quote: "the delicious nearby freedom of death." ? -- Don L From: "Don Factor" <donfactor@donfactor.demon.co.uk> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Death-wish, death-instinct Found it. Yes, well worth reading again. A lot of his experience is familar. don On 27 Sep 2006, at 22:39, Franis Engel wrote: > that account by Dwight about drowning would be really cool to read > again... Thanks Don! - Franis > >> Twenty five years ago while swimming in the Mediterranean sea on a stormy >> day I experienced what could quantify as a near death experience. While I >> did not have the out of body experience common to the many individuals >> documented by Kubler-Ross and others, you might say I had an out- of-mind. >> Passing through the various stages of dying-I was swimming a mile off shore, >> no chance of rescue and I could no longer lift my arms so in the end I >> surrendered to what appeared to be the ineluctable fact of drowning and >> death. >> >> After the feeling of incredulity, and then rage subsided I let go. I have >> never been able successfully to describe what I felt next. If I remain >> within the context of this dialogue, I could say that it was as if the >> entire TAS lifted away, like a heavy wet sweater and my first sensation >> (which was a thought so my metaphor is imperfect) was: that's all it is! It >> was truly astonishing! And then I experienced the most indescribable >> sensation of euphoria, peace, lightness. Perhaps love may be the word, >> though I feel so chary of that word. Time and space were gone. In fact my >> whole existence up that moment seemed to have been a second. As I said, not >> easy to describe but if I take certain essential attributes of what I >> understand (imperfectly) about TAS along with so much that is expressed >> here, it felt like stepping outside of all that. Perhaps that is why it >> cannot be elucidated since it was potentially beyond thought. I don't know. >> I cannot say with certainty what it was. >> >> I won't tell the whole story, but obviously I didn't die. (Though how would >> any of you know for sure?) When I came to, since I had dropped completely >> into an unconscious state, I repeated all the stages of dying in reverse. I >> felt that wet sweater fit itself once again upon my being and I can tell >> you, I was enraged. Out of my mind actually. I had to be restrained. I felt >> cheated. >> >> The thing is that I think it was possible that somewhere in his mind Bohm >> knew his final minutes were upon him so that it became as Whitman so aptly >> wrote: "the delicious nearby freedom of death." It is feasible that when he >> said to his wife "I feel that I am on the edge of something," that a part of >> his psyche knew and was experiencing what that meant. There seems a point in >> the unfolding from implicate to explicate where the personal psyche knows >> irrefutably, whether or not it has yet risen to the surface of >> consciousness. For myself, that is what I sense is the paradoxical nature of >> choice: we must participate as if we had a choice but afterwards can we ever >> really be absolutely certain that we had one? >> >> Enough. This is what happens when you sit and listen for a long time. When >> you start clicking keys you can?t stop. >> >> Dwight From donfactor at donfactor.demon.co.uk Thu Sep 28 11:55:14 2006 From: donfactor at donfactor.demon.co.uk (Don Factor) Date: Fri Sep 29 12:50:12 2006 Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] welcoming content In-Reply-To: <20060927.231342.1436.1.franis_franis@juno.com> References: <20060927.231342.1436.1.franis_franis@juno.com> Message-ID: <D73655CE-79F4-4CA5-A95F-25119590488D@donfactor.demon.co.uk> This raises a question that aroused my curiosity years ago and came up again quite recently. Why are psychotropic drugs and musicians so closely tied together, even in some other cultures? don On 28 Sep 2006, at 07:13, Franis Engel wrote: > Hi Kathryn, > I'm not sure why musicians are so opinionated and defensive, but > they are > for some reason. I guess because playing an instrument takes so much > education, dedication, even talent. It's always a reflection of > being in > practice also, to stay in shape with doing it. > > In this situation, there is no way that you could know my experience > because you'd never heard me play music. So how could I be miffed > at such > great writing of yours? So often people who are specialists have > completely forgotten how to carry someone from square one along how > they > are thinking in new ways out on the pioneering forefront. Often > specialists have built up so many ground floor assumptions that they > can't explain themselves to novices. > > The way I get around that in writing is to make sure the person > knows the > general audience for whom the writing is for - people learning from > scratch, in this case. Then they have a reason to suspend feeling > personally insulted. They're encouraged to put themselves in the > position > of being a 'beginner.' I have had people say to me, "I understand what > you mean, but would someone else?" ...to which I'd reply that I > wouldn't > want them to second guess someone else's abilities - just their > feedback > is enough - because I wanted someone with their particular > experience to > read the simple stuff to make sure it made sense to them. > > You could take a peek at my website. I think you'd like my "out for > improv" idea quite a bit. http://www.franis.org/out4improv/ > Essentially > I'm giving terms to the elements of music as if it were a story, > and then > also describing what people do when they improvise. The purpose is so > players can recombine them to create new forms, whether they know > their > instrument or not. The same 'plan' (which can become a new form) > can be > used over and over indefinitely varying it. > > Do you and Mark know each other already? Strange how you both > showed up > here at once and we all figured out we had this unusual music > tangent in > common. > > Franis (no c in my weird name) > > On Wed, 27 Sep 2006 19:29:42 -0400 Kathryn Arizmendi > <tangykatt@earthlink.net> writes: >> Thank you, Franis. I am honored. I am glad that my assuming you >> didn't >> have the experience wasn't insulting to you! I have met people who >> reacted >> that way, and I'm looking for a way to say what I need to say >> without my >> listener feeling like I'm putting him-her down. >> >> Now, back to work on my Improv - the laundry is done! k >> >> >> On 9/27/06 5:52 PM, "Franis Engel" <franis_franis@juno.com> wrote: >> >>> This is cool, Katheryn, reading your writing and how you take me >> along >>> what you say as if I do not have the experience. It makes what >> you're >>> building accessible, and is great writing. >>> Yes, I'm thinking of the ability to create new forms of music >> itself. >>> >>>> People keep telling me I must write, >>>> because there are no guides out there >>>> to the information I have come across >>>> and the way I have put it together. >>> >>> Yes! Yes! write about it! I'll read what you write and give my >> feedback, >>> if you want someone to cheer you on and make observations and >>> suggestions. I don't have any attachment to being the only >> "editor" also. >>> I've written extensively already about very subjective >> movement-related >>> disciplines, so I'm familiar with some of the challenges involved. >> - >>> Franis >>> >>> On Wed, 27 Sep 2006 11:48:21 -0400 Kathryn Arizmendi >>> <tangykatt@earthlink.net> writes: >>>> Good Morning, Franis - >>>> I definitely agree that Bohm Dialog and improvisation are >> similar. >>>> Perhaps >>>> more so than we realize. You mentioned >>>> ?...A general improvisational form such as blues or jazz does not >>>> exist in >>>>> speaking circles?. >>>> >>>> I hear the following assumption underlying that statement - all >>>> music uses >>>> the same ?built in? structure . Please correct me if that >>>> assumption is >>>> inaccurate, and let me know in what way I have misinterpreted - >>>> Also, >>>> Please keep in mind that although my statements today are a >> product >>>> of a lot >>>> of input, the ideas will be constantly evolving, depending on >> more >>>> input. >>>> That said - here is my response. >>>> >>>> Music actually has myriad, not a single, ?built in? - >> relationships, >>>> patterns, structures, just as the universe does. Just as word >>>> language does. >>>> The composer-improviser can set up his or her own form if they >> are >>>> aware of >>>> and fluent in musical vocabulary and syntax, and the >> relationships >>>> among all >>>> the various structures, and not inhibited about doing it. Blues >> and >>>> jazz >>>> with their structures are only two of those manifestations. All >>>> music >>>> shares the same raw materials, and many of the same structures, >> but >>>> not all >>>> of its manifestations use the same structural model. Different >>>> cultures and >>>> historical eras have made different connections and meanings. >>>> If you are referring to the fact that the Blues and Jazz >>>> idioms >>>> pretty much set up a single musical structure they call ?form?, >> and >>>> the >>>> improvisers create variations on that form yes. But all music >>>> doesn't >>>> work that way. (There are other differences as well.) Musical >>>> structure in >>>> classical music, as one example, isn?t restricted to one general >>>> form. Not >>>> only has it developed many ways of creating different forms from >> its >>>> various >>>> folded in structures, one is free to find other ways of linking >>>> musical >>>> materials to create new ones. Also, the development of musical >>>> language >>>> parallels the interaction, and ideas of different cultures, >>>> resulting in the >>>> evolving of different pov?s i.e. styles, patterns, individual >>>> insights that >>>> comprise them, and attitudes towards improvisation. >>>> >>>> So, my point is that a general improvisational form does not >>>> automatically >>>> exist in all musical circumstances, and those that exist do not >> all >>>> work on >>>> a rigid, never changing basis. There are many forms, currently >>>> existent as >>>> well as potential, waiting for someone to create, vary, and use >>>> them. Put >>>> in the context of ensemble improvisation, that brings us even >> closer >>>> to >>>> Bohm-style dialog. >>>> >>>> Best, k >>>> >>>> >>>> On 9/25/06 11:15 PM, "Franis Engel" <franis_franis@juno.com> >> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Kathy & Mark, >>>>> The in-person act of Bohm Dialogue is similiar to improvisation >> in >>>> the >>>>> context/forum of group interaction with spoken language as the >>>> activity. >>>>> A general improvisational form such as blues or jazz does not >>>> exist in >>>>> speaking circles, so, in a sense, Bohm-style Dialogue is a sort >> of >>>>> improvisational speaking circle. >>>>> - Franis >>>>> > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Sep 28 12:14:13 2006 From: donfactor at donfactor.demon.co.uk (Don Factor) Date: Fri Sep 29 13:09:12 2006 Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Death-wish, death-instinct In-Reply-To: <000401c6e2e3$af72aea0$2e1c153f@DL01> References: <20060927.145252.916.1.franis_franis@juno.com> <A0C7349B-7DBC-4EFC-A78C-12E95AF654FB@donfactor.demon.co.uk> <000401c6e2e3$af72aea0$2e1c153f@DL01> Message-ID: <9B7FE064-80DD-425B-BF49-C0A3882FC285@donfactor.demon.co.uk> Couldn't find it in the 1892 edition of Leaves of Grass. I wouldn't know where else to look, don On 28 Sep 2006, at 10:51, Don Lay wrote: > Anyone know the source of this Whitman quote: "the delicious > nearby freedom of death." ? -- Don L > > > From: "Don Factor" <donfactor@donfactor.demon.co.uk> > Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Death-wish, death-instinct > > > Found it. Yes, well worth reading again. A lot of his experience is > familar. > > don > > On 27 Sep 2006, at 22:39, Franis Engel wrote: > >> that account by Dwight about drowning would be really cool to read >> again... Thanks Don! - Franis >> > > >> Twenty five years ago while swimming in the Mediterranean sea on > a stormy > >> day I experienced what could quantify as a near death experience. > While I > >> did not have the out of body experience common to the many > individuals > >> documented by Kubler-Ross and others, you might say I had an out- > of-mind. > >> Passing through the various stages of dying-I was swimming a mile > off shore, > >> no chance of rescue and I could no longer lift my arms so in the > end I > >> surrendered to what appeared to be the ineluctable fact of > drowning and > >> death. > >> > >> After the feeling of incredulity, and then rage subsided I let > go. I have > >> never been able successfully to describe what I felt next. If I > remain > >> within the context of this dialogue, I could say that it was as > if the > >> entire TAS lifted away, like a heavy wet sweater and my first > sensation > >> (which was a thought so my metaphor is imperfect) was: that's all > it is! It > >> was truly astonishing! And then I experienced the most > indescribable > >> sensation of euphoria, peace, lightness. Perhaps love may be the > word, > >> though I feel so chary of that word. Time and space were gone. In > fact my > >> whole existence up that moment seemed to have been a second. As I > said, not > >> easy to describe but if I take certain essential attributes of > what I > >> understand (imperfectly) about TAS along with so much that is > expressed > >> here, it felt like stepping outside of all that. Perhaps that is > why it > >> cannot be elucidated since it was potentially beyond thought. I > don't know. > >> I cannot say with certainty what it was. > >> > >> I won't tell the whole story, but obviously I didn't die. (Though > how would > >> any of you know for sure?) When I came to, since I had dropped > completely > >> into an unconscious state, I repeated all the stages of dying in > reverse. I > >> felt that wet sweater fit itself once again upon my being and I > can tell > >> you, I was enraged. Out of my mind actually. I had to be > restrained. I felt > >> cheated. > >> > >> The thing is that I think it was possible that somewhere in his > mind Bohm > >> knew his final minutes were upon him so that it became as Whitman > so aptly > >> wrote: "the delicious nearby freedom of death." It is feasible > that when he > >> said to his wife "I feel that I am on the edge of something," > that a part of > >> his psyche knew and was experiencing what that meant. There seems > a point in > >> the unfolding from implicate to explicate where the personal > psyche knows > >> irrefutably, whether or not it has yet risen to the surface of > >> consciousness. For myself, that is what I sense is the > paradoxical nature of > >> choice: we must participate as if we had a choice but afterwards > can we ever > >> really be absolutely certain that we had one? > >> > >> Enough. This is what happens when you sit and listen for a long > time. When > >> you start clicking keys you can?t stop. > >> > >> Dwight > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Rodger.Hyodo at dialogos.com Thu Sep 28 13:39:26 2006 From: Rodger.Hyodo at dialogos.com (Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com) Date: Fri Sep 29 14:34:30 2006 Subject: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] "Risky" In-Reply-To: <20060929100004.7C94023430@web.internal.van-den-heuvel.org> Message-ID: <OFA321AB84.47D2A268-ON852571F7.003E7C83-852571F7.00400913@dialogos.com> Rodger__Interesting point Don. Also, I think all the Russians I know who grew up in the Soviet, standing in lines for their food etc., have no interest in fictional motion pictures of West, re: Finding Nemo, Spiderman, Star Wars, whatever. They say there is no point, no reality, to the film. Yet these people are hardly party-poopers, indeed quite the opposite. They love art, culture, deep dialogue, and having fun._R . Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2006 13:27:20 +0100 From: Don Factor <donfactor@donfactor.demon.co.uk> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] "Risky" . This motion of pure exploration would seem to many much like the religious mindlessness that drove this guy out of Iran and finally to London and for these, they could see this sort of thing as being just as hateful as anything else. don . -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20060928/d50807ef/attachment.html From seancussen at ntlworld.com Thu Sep 28 14:17:20 2006 From: seancussen at ntlworld.com (=?ISO-8859-1?B?U2Xhbg==?= Cussen) Date: Fri Sep 29 15:12:28 2006 Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Death-wish, death-instinct Message-ID: <20060928121722.EKEW23938.aamtaout02-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@smtp.ntlworld.com> > Song of the open road stanza 12 last few lines > From: Don Factor <donfactor@donfactor.demon.co.uk> > Date: 2006/09/28 Thu AM 10:14:13 GMT > To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org > Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Death-wish, death-instinct > > Couldn't find it in the 1892 edition of Leaves of Grass. I wouldn't > know where else to look, > don > On 28 Sep 2006, at 10:51, Don Lay wrote: > > > Anyone know the source of this Whitman quote: "the delicious > > nearby freedom of death." ? -- Don L > > > > > > From: "Don Factor" <donfactor@donfactor.demon.co.uk> > > Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Death-wish, death-instinct > > > > > > Found it. Yes, well worth reading again. A lot of his experience is > > familar. > > > > don > > > > On 27 Sep 2006, at 22:39, Franis Engel wrote: > > > >> that account by Dwight about drowning would be really cool to read > >> again... Thanks Don! - Franis > >> > > > > >> Twenty five years ago while swimming in the Mediterranean sea on > > a stormy > > >> day I experienced what could quantify as a near death experience. > > While I > > >> did not have the out of body experience common to the many > > individuals > > >> documented by Kubler-Ross and others, you might say I had an out- > > of-mind. > > >> Passing through the various stages of dying-I was swimming a mile > > off shore, > > >> no chance of rescue and I could no longer lift my arms so in the > > end I > > >> surrendered to what appeared to be the ineluctable fact of > > drowning and > > >> death. > > >> > > >> After the feeling of incredulity, and then rage subsided I let > > go. I have > > >> never been able successfully to describe what I felt next. If I > > remain > > >> within the context of this dialogue, I could say that it was as > > if the > > >> entire TAS lifted away, like a heavy wet sweater and my first > > sensation > > >> (which was a thought so my metaphor is imperfect) was: that's all > > it is! It > > >> was truly astonishing! And then I experienced the most > > indescribable > > >> sensation of euphoria, peace, lightness. Perhaps love may be the > > word, > > >> though I feel so chary of that word. Time and space were gone. In > > fact my > > >> whole existence up that moment seemed to have been a second. As I > > said, not > > >> easy to describe but if I take certain essential attributes of > > what I > > >> understand (imperfectly) about TAS along with so much that is > > expressed > > >> here, it felt like stepping outside of all that. Perhaps that is > > why it > > >> cannot be elucidated since it was potentially beyond thought. I > > don't know. > > >> I cannot say with certainty what it was. > > >> > > >> I won't tell the whole story, but obviously I didn't die. (Though > > how would > > >> any of you know for sure?) When I came to, since I had dropped > > completely > > >> into an unconscious state, I repeated all the stages of dying in > > reverse. I > > >> felt that wet sweater fit itself once again upon my being and I > > can tell > > >> you, I was enraged. Out of my mind actually. I had to be > > restrained. I felt > > >> cheated. > > >> > > >> The thing is that I think it was possible that somewhere in his > > mind Bohm > > >> knew his final minutes were upon him so that it became as Whitman > > so aptly > > >> wrote: "the delicious nearby freedom of death." It is feasible > > that when he > > >> said to his wife "I feel that I am on the edge of something," > > that a part of > > >> his psyche knew and was experiencing what that meant. There seems > > a point in > > >> the unfolding from implicate to explicate where the personal > > psyche knows > > >> irrefutably, whether or not it has yet risen to the surface of > > >> consciousness. For myself, that is what I sense is the > > paradoxical nature of > > >> choice: we must participate as if we had a choice but afterwards > > can we ever > > >> really be absolutely certain that we had one? > > >> > > >> Enough. This is what happens when you sit and listen for a long > > time. When > > >> you start clicking keys you can?t stop. > > >> > > >> Dwight > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > > _______________________________________________ > > > ----------------------------------------- Email sent from www.ntlworld.com Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information From Rodger.Hyodo at dialogos.com Thu Sep 28 14:21:46 2006 From: Rodger.Hyodo at dialogos.com (Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com) Date: Fri Sep 29 15:16:48 2006 Subject: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] "Risky" In-Reply-To: <20060929100004.7C94023430@web.internal.van-den-heuvel.org> Message-ID: <OF3475F1B8.B50EB42D-ON852571F7.0043B8E2-852571F7.0043E92F@dialogos.com> Rodger __Oddly enough, with that -nothing else- there exists a conscious point of awareness. _R . From: MarkHarmer@aol.com Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] "Risky" To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org . That's why I'm interested in what Stacey has to say about organisations, namely that the organisation "is" the conversation; there's nothing else . . -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20060928/1ad65a67/attachment.html From MarkHarmer at aol.com Thu Sep 28 14:36:03 2006 From: MarkHarmer at aol.com (MarkHarmer@aol.com) Date: Fri Sep 29 15:31:05 2006 Subject: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] "Risky" Message-ID: <c07.5741180.324d1bb3@aol.com> Or, is it a group awareness - and thus the dialogue serves to build our joint sense of awareness of what the organisation "is"? But - yes, there's something inside each of us that recognises what that construction of organisation "is"... It's always at this point that I feel my brain's about to pop... Rodger __Oddly enough, with that -nothing else- there exists a conscious point of awareness. _R . From: MarkHarmer@aol.com Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] "Risky" To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org . That's why I'm interested in what Stacey has to say about organisations, namely that the organisation "is" the conversation; there's nothing else ********************** Do you love the violin? Browse our fabulous fiddles and incredible Incredibows in our online music shop. Everything is sent immediately on payment, there's free postage to the UK and EU, and a 60-day no-quibble guarantee for your complete piece of mind. Visit _http://www.danceofdelight.co.uk_ (http://www.danceofdelight.co.uk/) and you'll find out why our customers love us! Do you love Celtic music? Then you can't miss Slainte, the seven-piece celtic band from Gloucestershire, with a passionate following in the UK, Ireland, Italy and the USA. Free studio videos and mp3 downloads. Meet us all at _http://www.celtmusic.co.uk_ (http://www.celtmusic.co.uk/) Your children deserve the best. If you live in Gloucestershire, then you owe it to yourself to come to a MusicGarden session. You and your children will get to play real musical instruments and lay the foundation for a lifetime of music. Seriously Fun Music Sessions - more at _http://www.musicgarden.co.uk_ (http://www.musicgarden.co.uk/) NEW! What can the ebb and flow of music teach us about organisations? About leadership and strategy? About sustainability and creativity? For organisational consulting and group work with a sound difference, see _http://www.yourmusic.biz_ (http://www.yourmusic.biz/) - building on 24 years of successful organisational learning! COMING SOON Exciting musical instruments from around the world - fairly-traded and fairly-priced in a way that helps communities sustain and develop. Fabulous frogs, delightful djembes and more! Available August 2006 at _http://www.fairtrademusicshop.co.uk_ (http://www.fairtrademusicshop.co.uk/) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20060928/d3f0f0ef/attachment.html From Rodger.Hyodo at dialogos.com Thu Sep 28 15:21:31 2006 From: Rodger.Hyodo at dialogos.com (Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com) Date: Fri Sep 29 16:16:35 2006 Subject: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] music & assumptions In-Reply-To: <20060929100004.7C94023430@web.internal.van-den-heuvel.org> Message-ID: <OF59812BA2.4339EB95-ON852571F7.00445E33-852571F7.004961DB@dialogos.com> Rodger __The music that captivates me is playing with other musicians when no-one decides what to start with -we just start. The musicians can include classical, jazz, flamenco, rock, whatever -- so there is no prefered or dominant style. No one leads. But leading can dance around without warning. The reason I find this captivating is because the music-playing quickly enters a state of mind, so in-the-moment that everyone knows exactly what note, rhythm, tone, is collectively being created. We play for hours, sometimes days - depending on available time. The music can be as serious as any drama, or, witty as a comedy, breaking us into laughter. I found sharing that experience only possible between certain combinations of people. And whether with someone new, or one of the old bunch, over the decades it became apparent that once the experience has happened with someone, it will continue to -just happen- every time. Like true love. Ah oh, there is that word -true-. Anyway alternatively musicians pre-decide what pieces to play before hand, and thats great too -indeed they are usually far more accomplished than I- it just isnt an option for me._R . Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2006 14:33:04 -0700 From: Franis Engel <franis_franis@juno.com> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] music & assumptions To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org . Once you start looking for these qualities of music, then you can begin to notice what they have in common with the way people use language. . -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20060928/8f9e5e42/attachment.html From ae.dropper at juno.com Thu Sep 28 16:33:53 2006 From: ae.dropper at juno.com (ae.dropper@juno.com) Date: Fri Sep 29 17:30:17 2006 Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Death-wish, death-instinct Message-ID: <20060928.103358.3964.49.ae.dropper@juno.com> Anyone know the source of this Whitman quote: "the delicious nearby freedom of death." ? -- Don L Don't know the source but the "delicious freedom" seems so familiar. It seems ongoing. "Fear" of death (as with any "fear) seems to be comprised of two opposing forces, one of them being a "death wish." It seems to be a "vibratory" thing, each "limit" of each "swing," defining the limits of that which "begins & ends," of that which "lives & dies." What "begins & ends" seems to exist within the "confines" of "intelligibility" or language. Otherwise, there's no such thing. "Near death" can mean "Near the sweet edge of intelligibility." pat From donfactor at donfactor.demon.co.uk Thu Sep 28 17:00:52 2006 From: donfactor at donfactor.demon.co.uk (Don Factor) Date: Fri Sep 29 17:56:31 2006 Subject: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] "Risky" In-Reply-To: <c07.5741180.324d1bb3@aol.com> References: <c07.5741180.324d1bb3@aol.com> Message-ID: <1FF1D793-5831-42F2-8CB7-DF6E1200ABB3@donfactor.demon.co.uk> You've got me thinking: organisation, order, do they fit together? An organisation strives to be orderly. But an order, as in a logical order or descriptive order, or more cogently, what Bohm called a generative order, delimits or defines a particular collective, or group activity which could be nothing more than, say a large number of people crossing bridge at rush hour, or perhaps some synchronised swimmers or a choreographed group of dancers, or some other, less, conditional kind of grouping. like a dialogue group? But what if we begin with the suggestion that everyone is always and already connected, at least in so far as their consciousness is concerned. What then do we have? A jumble? Well, yes, maybe, but its not entirely random since all of the parts - people - have some commonality. The question then, our question, would be what this is, or maybe what it means. Now my brain is doing it. don On 28 Sep 2006, at 13:36, MarkHarmer@aol.com wrote: > Or, is it a group awareness - and thus the dialogue serves to build > our joint sense of awareness of what the organisation "is"? But - > yes, there's something inside each of us that recognises what that > construction of organisation "is"... > > It's always at this point that I feel my brain's about to pop... > Rodger __Oddly enough, with that -nothing else- there exists a > conscious point of awareness. _R > . > From: MarkHarmer@aol.com > Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] "Risky" > To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org > . > That's why I'm interested in what Stacey has to say about > organisations, > namely that the organisation "is" the conversation; there's nothing > else > > ********************** > > Do you love the violin? Browse our fabulous fiddles and incredible > Incredibows in our online music shop. Everything is sent > immediately on payment, there's free postage to the UK and EU, and > a 60-day no-quibble guarantee for your complete piece of mind. > Visit http://www.danceofdelight.co.uk and you'll find out why our > customers love us! > > Do you love Celtic music? Then you can't miss Slainte, the seven- > piece celtic band from Gloucestershire, with a passionate following > in the UK, Ireland, Italy and the USA. Free studio videos and mp3 > downloads. Meet us all at http://www.celtmusic.co.uk > > Your children deserve the best. If you live in Gloucestershire, > then you owe it to yourself to come to a MusicGarden session. You > and your children will get to play real musical instruments and lay > the foundation for a lifetime of music. Seriously Fun Music > Sessions - more at http://www.musicgarden.co.uk > > NEW! > > What can the ebb and flow of music teach us about organisations? > About leadership and strategy? About sustainability and creativity? > For organisational consulting and group work with a sound > difference, see http://www.yourmusic.biz - building on 24 years of > successful organisational learning! > > COMING SOON > > Exciting musical instruments from around the world - fairly-traded > and fairly-priced in a way that helps communities sustain and > develop. Fabulous frogs, delightful djembes and more! Available > August 2006 at http://www.fairtrademusicshop.co.uk > > _______________________________________________ > 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/20060928/9817aba9/attachment.html From tubakari at yahoo.com Thu Sep 28 18:36:32 2006 From: tubakari at yahoo.com (Karilen Mays) Date: Fri Sep 29 19:31:34 2006 Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Order, Organisation, etc. Message-ID: <20060928163632.15612.qmail@web52914.mail.yahoo.com> its not that we are merely all connected, but that there is no real separation. i sense an excitement in your message don. i think it is pretty obvious (to me) that there is an underlying, inherent, self-organization embedded in the what we see as chaos. the body, weather patterns, coast lines...see a "pattern"? does this change the way we live? long term and majorly and/or in the moment to moment mundane acts that make up life? i think this perspective (verses the deconstructionist, reductionist, fatalist perspective/s) propels me to live life differently, dare i say more fully, than...something more limiting. like that we are all mechanistic then die, there is no meaning, and etc. this really helps me relax into my realization that there is no other reality than now, it is always now, and time is a construct. the yin and yang, order and chaos are just what is...so given the fact that some of us, no all of us, have the potential to be visionary in our day to day life - so im not saying sit back and "watch the world go to hell in a hand basket" whatever that means...im saying we can "not sweat it." or at least i wont. i have had much energy that was devoted to anxiety that has been effortlessly freed up. of course i had the illusions of putting forth a lot of effort to realize that nothing happens, but that's another email. thanks don! i ahve been wantintg to throw some of this out there, but i have been waiting for the right "time"! love, kari ----- Original Message ---- From: Don Factor <donfactor@donfactor.demon.co.uk> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 8:00:52 AM Subject: Re: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] "Risky" You've got me thinking: organisation, order, do they fit together? An organisation strives to be orderly. But an order, as in a logical order or descriptive order, or more cogently, what Bohm called a generative order, delimits or defines a particular collective, or group activity which could be nothing more than, say a large number of people crossing bridge at rush hour, or perhaps some synchronised swimmers or a choreographed group of dancers, or some other, less, conditional kind of grouping. like a dialogue group? But what if we begin with the suggestion that everyone is always and already connected, at least in so far as their consciousness is concerned. What then do we have? A jumble? Well, yes, maybe, but its not entirely random since all of the parts - people - have some commonality. The question then, our question, would be what this is, or maybe what it means. Now my brain is doing it. don -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20060928/2d6a71b5/attachment.html From franis_franis at juno.com Thu Sep 28 20:22:35 2006 From: franis_franis at juno.com (Franis Engel) Date: Fri Sep 29 21:22:03 2006 Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Death-wish, death-instinct Message-ID: <20060928.112236.1376.0.franis_franis@juno.com> thanks Sean, and welcome. - Franis On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 12:17:20 +0000 =?ISO-8859-1?B?U2Xhbg==?= Cussen <seancussen@ntlworld.com> writes: > > > Song of the open road stanza 12 last few lines > > > From: Don Factor <donfactor@donfactor.demon.co.uk> > > Date: 2006/09/28 Thu AM 10:14:13 GMT > > To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org > > Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Death-wish, death-instinct > > > > Couldn't find it in the 1892 edition of Leaves of Grass. I > wouldn't > > know where else to look, > > don > > On 28 Sep 2006, at 10:51, Don Lay wrote: > > > > > Anyone know the source of this Whitman quote: "the delicious > > > nearby freedom of death." ? -- Don L > > > > > > > > > From: "Don Factor" <donfactor@donfactor.demon.co.uk> > > > Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Death-wish, death-instinct > > > > > > > > > Found it. Yes, well worth reading again. A lot of his > experience is > > > familar. > > > > > > don > > > > > > On 27 Sep 2006, at 22:39, Franis Engel wrote: > > > > > >> that account by Dwight about drowning would be really cool to > read > > >> again... Thanks Don! - Franis > > >> > > > > > > >> Twenty five years ago while swimming in the Mediterranean sea > on > > > a stormy > > > >> day I experienced what could quantify as a near death > experience. > > > While I > > > >> did not have the out of body experience common to the many > > > individuals > > > >> documented by Kubler-Ross and others, you might say I had an > out- > > > of-mind. > > > >> Passing through the various stages of dying-I was swimming a > mile > > > off shore, > > > >> no chance of rescue and I could no longer lift my arms so in > the > > > end I > > > >> surrendered to what appeared to be the ineluctable fact of > > > drowning and > > > >> death. > > > >> > > > >> After the feeling of incredulity, and then rage subsided I > let > > > go. I have > > > >> never been able successfully to describe what I felt next. If > I > > > remain > > > >> within the context of this dialogue, I could say that it was > as > > > if the > > > >> entire TAS lifted away, like a heavy wet sweater and my first > > > sensation > > > >> (which was a thought so my metaphor is imperfect) was: that's > all > > > it is! It > > > >> was truly astonishing! And then I experienced the most > > > indescribable > > > >> sensation of euphoria, peace, lightness. Perhaps love may be > the > > > word, > > > >> though I feel so chary of that word. Time and space were > gone. In > > > fact my > > > >> whole existence up that moment seemed to have been a second. > As I > > > said, not > > > >> easy to describe but if I take certain essential attributes > of > > > what I > > > >> understand (imperfectly) about TAS along with so much that is > > > expressed > > > >> here, it felt like stepping outside of all that. Perhaps that > is > > > why it > > > >> cannot be elucidated since it was potentially beyond thought. > I > > > don't know. > > > >> I cannot say with certainty what it was. > > > >> > > > >> I won't tell the whole story, but obviously I didn't die. > (Though > > > how would > > > >> any of you know for sure?) When I came to, since I had > dropped > > > completely > > > >> into an unconscious state, I repeated all the stages of dying > in > > > reverse. I > > > >> felt that wet sweater fit itself once again upon my being and > I > > > can tell > > > >> you, I was enraged. Out of my mind actually. I had to be > > > restrained. I felt > > > >> cheated. > > > >> > > > >> The thing is that I think it was possible that somewhere in > his > > > mind Bohm > > > >> knew his final minutes were upon him so that it became as > Whitman > > > so aptly > > > >> wrote: "the delicious nearby freedom of death." It is > feasible > > > that when he > > > >> said to his wife "I feel that I am on the edge of something," > > > that a part of > > > >> his psyche knew and was experiencing what that meant. There > seems > > > a point in > > > >> the unfolding from implicate to explicate where the personal > > > psyche knows > > > >> irrefutably, whether or not it has yet risen to the surface > of > > > >> consciousness. For myself, that is what I sense is the > > > paradoxical nature of > > > >> choice: we must participate as if we had a choice but > afterwards > > > can we ever > > > >> really be absolutely certain that we had one? > > > >> > > > >> Enough. This is what happens when you sit and listen for a > long > > > time. When > > > >> you start clicking keys you can?t stop. > > > >> > > > >> Dwight > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > 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 > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > > > ----------------------------------------- > Email sent from www.ntlworld.com > Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software > Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information > > _______________________________________________ > 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 earthsky at tiscali.co.uk Thu Sep 28 22:06:40 2006 From: earthsky at tiscali.co.uk (Gill Wyatt) Date: Fri Sep 29 23:03:34 2006 Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] "Risky" In-Reply-To: <20060927235626.42331.qmail@web52911.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <C141E9E0.96CD%earthsky@tiscali.co.uk> Thank Kari for reading and understanding ... time pressured at the moment so more anon ... wanted you to know!! Gill From: Karilen Mays <tubakari@yahoo.com> Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2006 16:56:26 -0700 (PDT) To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] "Risky" What a great message! This apparent list of people contributing by email has been alive with freshness lately. I like it! I think most of the fear is to do with the unknown and not existing. Once we are able to investigate - dare I say embrace?- the unkown, fear changes. Or at least it has for me. Fear can arise and exists in the collective consciousness which we can never be separate from, but it is not personal. Not so tightly identified with. Can you not be afraid when fear is present? And I don't think this shift could happen if I said, "self, dont take the unkown and fear so personally!" And I actually tried telling myself, lol, that and continued to suffer attributing the suffering to fear and anxiety. So what we/I find is that upon investigation, and it is especially powerful in a group, like dialogue, then if we are open we can sense these energies without reducing them to labels, like fear and anger. We can use the labels to talk about. they aren't so real any more though. has anyone else had this experience? i know some of you know what i am talking about...though i wont take it personally if you dont respond...trusting in the process of dialogue even on this email list, that the words i type here will serve their purpose threading their way into whatever meaning exists and the responses that arise will continue the flow even if not directed specifically to me. :) i havent read if any Patrick deMare, but what you are saying about the group process which includes hate and impersonal fellowship, Gill, sounds exactly like the development of an individual (me for instance). so why should a group be any different? as i/we awaken we experience aspects of ourself, some of them repressed, like hate, for instance. or in my case recently at least. and as i have been able to hold such experiences and welcome them even, a sense larger than my personal self arises and i feel in communion with the world at large. (it is really diminished sounding as i explain it, but i have to try!) i know this was really long, but it just kinda flowed, so thanks for reading if you made it this far! bubbling with ecstasy along with "you" kari PS- i may reply with more about chaos later. such juiciness here! ----- Original Message ---- From: Gill Wyatt <earthsky@tiscali.co.uk> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2006 7:24:46 AM Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] "Risky" Kari/Don, I am heartened that you don't think people 'hate' dialogue. I think there is a fear ... yes and I have read some of Patrick's work and I've often wondered about his use of the word 'hate' and describing it as part of the passage the group goes through before it acheives dialogue and what he calls 'koinonia' a non-possessive fellowship/sense of community. I like much of Patrick's work but think his Freudian roots explains how he constructs his thoery ... no surprises there. My experience in groups is rather that there is often a descent into chaos after people have stopped being polite (This is different from the 'old' group concept of storming) and each person's chaos will be of their own making, shaped by their personality, experience etc and they might use words like 'hate' or 'fear' and so many others. Maybe it is this descent into chaos that people fear.... Gill _______________________________________________ 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/20060928/883e4dff/attachment.html From kirstenschneide at hotmail.com Thu Sep 28 23:20:26 2006 From: kirstenschneide at hotmail.com (kirsten schneide) Date: Sat Sep 30 00:15:37 2006 Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] "Risky" In-Reply-To: <C141E9E0.96CD%earthsky@tiscali.co.uk> Message-ID: <BAY107-F362084568E732FAB23AC53A81B0@phx.gbl> This Chat-Group Subscriber also feels necessitated to announce That time needs/wants to be filled with the dirty dishes of tonight Love & Meaninglessnessmess, Kbot -------------------------- Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld >Thank Kari for reading and understanding ... time pressured at the moment >so >more anon ... wanted you to know!! >Gill > >From: Karilen Mays <tubakari@yahoo.com> >Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org >Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2006 16:56:26 -0700 (PDT) >To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org >Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] "Risky" > > >What a great message! This apparent list of people contributing by email >has >been alive with freshness lately. I like it! > >I think most of the fear is to do with the unknown and not existing. Once >we >are able to investigate - dare I say embrace?- the unkown, fear changes. Or >at least it has for me. >Fear can arise and exists in the collective consciousness which we can >never >be separate from, but it is not personal. Not so tightly identified with. >Can you not be afraid when fear is present? > >And I don't think this shift could happen if I said, "self, dont take the >unkown and fear so personally!" And I actually tried telling myself, lol, >that and continued to suffer attributing the suffering to fear and anxiety. > >So what we/I find is that upon investigation, and it is especially powerful >in a group, like dialogue, then if we are open we can sense these energies >without reducing them to labels, like fear and anger. We can use the labels >to talk about. they aren't so real any more though. > >has anyone else had this experience? i know some of you know what i am >talking about...though i wont take it personally if you dont >respond...trusting in the process of dialogue even on this email list, that >the words i type here will serve their purpose threading their way into >whatever meaning exists and the responses that arise will continue the flow >even if not directed specifically to me. :) > >i havent read if any Patrick deMare, but what you are saying about the >group >process which includes hate and impersonal fellowship, Gill, sounds exactly >like the development of an individual (me for instance). so why should a >group be any different? as i/we awaken we experience aspects of ourself, >some of them repressed, like hate, for instance. or in my case recently at >least. and as i have been able to hold such experiences and welcome them >even, a sense larger than my personal self arises and i feel in communion >with the world at large. (it is really diminished sounding as i explain it, >but i have to try!) > >i know this was really long, but it just kinda flowed, so thanks for >reading >if you made it this far! > >bubbling with ecstasy along with "you" > >kari >PS- i may reply with more about chaos later. such juiciness here! > > >----- Original Message ---- >From: Gill Wyatt <earthsky@tiscali.co.uk> >To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org >Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2006 7:24:46 AM >Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] "Risky" > >Kari/Don, > >I am heartened that you don't think people 'hate' dialogue. I think there >is >a fear ... yes and I have read some of Patrick's work and I've often >wondered about his use of the word 'hate' and describing it as part of the >passage the group goes through before it acheives dialogue and what he >calls >'koinonia' a non-possessive fellowship/sense of community. I like much of >Patrick's work but think his Freudian roots explains how he constructs his >thoery ... no surprises there. > >My experience in groups is rather that there is often a descent into chaos >after people have stopped being polite (This is different from the 'old' >group concept of storming) and each person's chaos will be of their own >making, shaped by their personality, experience etc and they might use >words >like 'hate' or 'fear' and so many others. > >Maybe it is this descent into chaos that people fear.... > >Gill > >_______________________________________________ >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 > >_______________________________________________ > > _________________________________________________________________ Express yourself - download free Windows Live Messenger themes! http://clk.atdmt.com/MSN/go/msnnkwme0020000001msn/direct/01/?href=http://imagine-msn.com/themes/vibe/default.aspx?locale=en-us&source=hmtagline From kirstenschneide at hotmail.com Thu Sep 28 23:28:59 2006 From: kirstenschneide at hotmail.com (kirsten schneide) Date: Sat Sep 30 00:24:05 2006 Subject: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] "Risky" In-Reply-To: <1FF1D793-5831-42F2-8CB7-DF6E1200ABB3@donfactor.demon.co.uk> Message-ID: <BAY107-F32BF485CCBF26E76D6FDE1A81B0@phx.gbl> >You've got me thinking: organisation, order, do they fit together? An >organisation strives to be orderly. But an order, as in a logical order or >descriptive order, or more cogently, what Bohm called a generative order, >delimits or defines a particular collective, or group activity which could >be nothing more than, say a large number of people crossing bridge at >rush hour, or perhaps some synchronised swimmers or a choreographed group >of dancers, or some other, less, conditional kind of grouping. like a >dialogue group? > >But what if we begin with the suggestion that everyone is always and >already connected, at least in so far as their consciousness is concerned. >What then do we have? A jumble? Well, yes, maybe, but its not entirely >random since all of the parts - people - have some commonality. The >question then, our question, would be what this is, or maybe what it >means. Now my brain is doing it. > >don Dear Nowmybrainisdoingitdonf ~ Experience shows the problem of the mind cannot be solved by attacking the citadel itself -the mind is a function of body. (Charles Darwin, The "N" Notebook) ... and yet, a few hundred years later, critters, suckling on bohmian tits, (still) drool... ...togetit.. ...aaaaaaaall.... oooooowell Love & Noevolution, Kirsten -------------------------- Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld _________________________________________________________________ The next generation of Searchsay hello! http://imagine-windowslive.com/minisites/searchlaunch/?locale=en-us&FORM=WLMTAG From tangykatt at earthlink.net Thu Sep 28 23:30:34 2006 From: tangykatt at earthlink.net (Kathryn Arizmendi) Date: Sat Sep 30 00:26:04 2006 Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] "Risky" In-Reply-To: <BAY107-F362084568E732FAB23AC53A81B0@phx.gbl> Message-ID: <C141B73A.332C%tangykatt@earthlink.net> Everything is related, isn't it? If so, nothing is meaningless. On 9/28/06 5:20 PM, "kirsten schneide" <kirstenschneide@hotmail.com> wrote: > > > This Chat-Group Subscriber also feels necessitated to announce > > That time needs/wants to be filled with the dirty dishes of tonight > > > > > > Love & Meaninglessnessmess, Kbot > > -------------------------- > Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld > >> Thank Kari for reading and understanding ... time pressured at the moment >> so >> more anon ... wanted you to know!! >> Gill >> >> From: Karilen Mays <tubakari@yahoo.com> >> Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org >> Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2006 16:56:26 -0700 (PDT) >> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org >> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] "Risky" >> >> >> What a great message! This apparent list of people contributing by email >> has >> been alive with freshness lately. I like it! >> >> I think most of the fear is to do with the unknown and not existing. Once >> we >> are able to investigate - dare I say embrace?- the unkown, fear changes. Or >> at least it has for me. >> Fear can arise and exists in the collective consciousness which we can >> never >> be separate from, but it is not personal. Not so tightly identified with. >> Can you not be afraid when fear is present? >> >> And I don't think this shift could happen if I said, "self, dont take the >> unkown and fear so personally!" And I actually tried telling myself, lol, >> that and continued to suffer attributing the suffering to fear and anxiety. >> >> So what we/I find is that upon investigation, and it is especially powerful >> in a group, like dialogue, then if we are open we can sense these energies >> without reducing them to labels, like fear and anger. We can use the labels >> to talk about. they aren't so real any more though. >> >> has anyone else had this experience? i know some of you know what i am >> talking about...though i wont take it personally if you dont >> respond...trusting in the process of dialogue even on this email list, that >> the words i type here will serve their purpose threading their way into >> whatever meaning exists and the responses that arise will continue the flow >> even if not directed specifically to me. :) >> >> i havent read if any Patrick deMare, but what you are saying about the >> group >> process which includes hate and impersonal fellowship, Gill, sounds exactly >> like the development of an individual (me for instance). so why should a >> group be any different? as i/we awaken we experience aspects of ourself, >> some of them repressed, like hate, for instance. or in my case recently at >> least. and as i have been able to hold such experiences and welcome them >> even, a sense larger than my personal self arises and i feel in communion >> with the world at large. (it is really diminished sounding as i explain it, >> but i have to try!) >> >> i know this was really long, but it just kinda flowed, so thanks for >> reading >> if you made it this far! >> >> bubbling with ecstasy along with "you" >> >> kari >> PS- i may reply with more about chaos later. such juiciness here! >> >> >> ----- Original Message ---- >> From: Gill Wyatt <earthsky@tiscali.co.uk> >> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org >> Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2006 7:24:46 AM >> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] "Risky" >> >> Kari/Don, >> >> I am heartened that you don't think people 'hate' dialogue. I think there >> is >> a fear ... yes and I have read some of Patrick's work and I've often >> wondered about his use of the word 'hate' and describing it as part of the >> passage the group goes through before it acheives dialogue and what he >> calls >> 'koinonia' a non-possessive fellowship/sense of community. I like much of >> Patrick's work but think his Freudian roots explains how he constructs his >> thoery ... no surprises there. >> >> My experience in groups is rather that there is often a descent into chaos >> after people have stopped being polite (This is different from the 'old' >> group concept of storming) and each person's chaos will be of their own >> making, shaped by their personality, experience etc and they might use >> words >> like 'hate' or 'fear' and so many others. >> >> Maybe it is this descent into chaos that people fear.... >> >> Gill >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> > > _________________________________________________________________ > Express yourself - download free Windows Live Messenger themes! > http://clk.atdmt.com/MSN/go/msnnkwme0020000001msn/direct/01/?href=http://imagi > ne-msn.com/themes/vibe/default.aspx?locale=en-us&source=hmtagline > > _______________________________________________ > 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 kirstenschneide at hotmail.com Thu Sep 28 23:44:52 2006 From: kirstenschneide at hotmail.com (kirsten schneide) Date: Sat Sep 30 00:40:01 2006 Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Death-wish, death-instinct In-Reply-To: <20060928.103358.3964.49.ae.dropper@juno.com> Message-ID: <BAY107-F9E89113BBD69ADAD0F921A81B0@phx.gbl> Dear Dropper, would you say: That you are dying Right Now? Love & De'Composure, Kb >Don't know the source but the "delicious freedom" seems so familiar. It >seems >ongoing. > >"Fear" of death (as with any "fear) seems to be comprised of two >opposing forces, one of them being a "death wish." It seems to be a >"vibratory" >thing, each "limit" of each "swing," defining the limits of that which >"begins & ends," of that which "lives & dies." > >What "begins & ends" seems to exist within the "confines" >of "intelligibility" or language. Otherwise, there's no such thing. > >"Near death" can mean "Near the sweet edge of intelligibility." > >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 > >_______________________________________________ > > _________________________________________________________________ Add fun gadgets and colorful themes to express yourself on Windows Live Spaces http://clk.atdmt.com/MSN/go/msnnkwsp0070000001msn/direct/01/?href=http://www.get.live.com/spaces/features From tubakari at yahoo.com Thu Sep 28 23:46:08 2006 From: tubakari at yahoo.com (Karilen Mays) Date: Sat Sep 30 00:41:09 2006 Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] "Risky" In-Reply-To: <C141B73A.332C%tangykatt@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <20060928214608.46265.qmail@web52913.mail.yahoo.com> Yep! even a blanket proclamation of universal meaninglessness contains meaning whether we want to admit that. ----- Original Message ---- From: Kathryn Arizmendi <tangykatt@earthlink.net> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 2:30:34 PM Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] "Risky" Everything is related, isn't it? If so, nothing is meaningless. On 9/28/06 5:20 PM, "kirsten schneide" <kirstenschneide@hotmail.com> wrote: > > > This Chat-Group Subscriber also feels necessitated to announce > > That time needs/wants to be filled with the dirty dishes of tonight > > > > > > Love & Meaninglessnessmess, Kbot > > -------------------------- > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20060928/bbd54cf5/attachment.html From tubakari at yahoo.com Thu Sep 28 23:48:46 2006 From: tubakari at yahoo.com (Karilen Mays) Date: Sat Sep 30 00:43:48 2006 Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Death-wish, death-instinct In-Reply-To: <BAY107-F9E89113BBD69ADAD0F921A81B0@phx.gbl> Message-ID: <20060928214846.27666.qmail@web52906.mail.yahoo.com> I would... but "I" may not be what "you" think "i" am ----- Original Message ---- From: kirsten schneide <kirstenschneide@hotmail.com> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 2:44:52 PM Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Death-wish, death-instinct Dear Dropper, would you say: That you are dying Right Now? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20060928/c06849fc/attachment.html