Pattern of the whole
Remember me?
Join us | Get your password | Vision | Topics | Home

Join us | Topics | Home | Collaborative Backbone | Quotes | Teilhard deChardin | Focalpoint | Shared Purpose | NCDD Transpartisan | Mapping | Circle | Pattern

All messages

Sender: Rick Raddatz
Date: Thu, Aug 14, 2014
Msg: 101061

When it comes to healing deep disagreements I think it is very important to use a different timescale when judging results.

E.g., some deep societal disagreements clearly take decades and some centuries.

This also suggests that the method of discussion/deliberation may need to be adjusted as well.

E.g. Getting representatives from across the political spectrum in a single room for a few hours or even a few days is unlikely to produce THE solution to our political divide no matter how well structured.

For such multi-generational problems a more protracted, multi-session approach is needed -- a process where the organizer is more of a detective than a moderator.

To discover the pentanomic theory of government, for example, it took hundreds of discussions over several years.

-Rick Raddatz

> On Jun 17, 2014, at 12:52 PM, Michael Briand wrote: > > LOL. Been there, John, and done that! > > For the record: We do need to be mindful of the "ladder of engagement" and sensitive to the different needs that different people have at different times with regard to involving themselves in discussion of policy and political issues. Each of the existing approaches to dialogue and deliberation makes a contribution to the project of building a more participatory democracy. > > My particular concern is with the resolution of deep disagreement. My disappointment with methods that fail to make progress toward achieving this goal is more a reflection of my own quixotic quest for (to mix a metaphor) the holy grail of such resolution than it is of the more-modest aims that the creators and users of those methods set for themselves. That said, I will repeat the point I made in an earlier post, viz., that I believe most methods are not based on and do not embody well-articulated theories of psychology that speak to questions of personal motivation, interpersonal dynamics, psychic needs, social influences, etc. In contrast, I can imagine, for example, that a method developed with the conscious intent to incorporate Jonathan Haidt's research findings would prove not only effective in appropriate circumstances but would also advance progress in the field more swiftly and surely than approaches lacking such a basis. > > But then, what do I know?... > > Cheers, > > Michael Briand > homo sapiens pussilus > Chico, CA > > > To unsubscribe from the TRANSPARTISAN list, click the following link: >


To unsubscribe from the TRANSPARTISAN list: write to: mailto:TRANSPARTISAN-SIGNOFF-REQUEST@LISTS.THATAWAY.ORG or click the following link:

Anger and partisan rage
Attention Economy
Basic principles for a Transpartisan movement
Collaborative problem solving
Common ground
Community conversations
Conscious business
Creating transpartisan consensus
Crisis of democracy
Dynamic Facilitation
Facilitated conversation/dialogue
For transpartisanism to be successful, people must transform their most basic beliefs
Holding the tension of our differences while working together with respect and an open heart
Integral democracy
Integral politics
Integral thinking
Internet support for dialog and action
Out of Many, One - E Pluribus Unum
Partisan bubbles
Partisan disfunction
Political revolution
Psychological overload
Public choice economics
Science and accurate thinking
Stratified Democracy
Teleology and cultural evolution
Transpartisan alliance on specific issue
Uninvolved citizen
Unity and diversity
Unprecedented new approaches
Us versus Them
Voter ignorance
Weave together a movement of many initiatives
What is "transpartisan"?
Wisdom Council
Wisdom in society
Work together to create an activist vision