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: Jacob Hess
Subject: Re: Decreasing traffic on the Transpartisan list
Date: Thu, Aug 14, 2014
Msg: 101107

Rather than deciding whether "theoretical"discussions are welcome, Rick - I was suggesting that there are different kinds of theoretical discussion - some of which may not be relevant to the listserv and others very much so - e.g., competing interpretations of dialogue, deliberation and transpartisan work vs. competing interpretations of how other practices institutions and institutions should operate.

Just watched your Tedtalk, Rick - some fascinating stuff! --Jacob

-- Jacob Z. Hess, Ph.D. Co-founder, *All of Life* 801-712-1346,

On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 5:59 PM, Rick Raddatz wrote:

> Jacob, > > Thx for the suggestion in the PS that we maintain the theoretical > discussion here. > > A few months ago I would have agreed with you but I have come to agree > with sandy that a listserv is the wrong medium for such discussion. > > If anyone wants a theoretical fix, just call me at 303-720-9913 during > daylight hours : ) > > - Rick > > P.S. Of course, I only speak for myself. If others want to continue the > theoretical discussion here and convince management that it's the right > thing to do, then I'll participate in that theoretical discussion. > > > > > On Aug 9, 2014, at 11:30 PM, Jacob Hess wrote: > > > > Thanks all, for such thoughtful responses this week. As Sandy, Michael > and others pointed out, listserv (and vacation) traffic varies naturally > for lots of reasons. Equally clear in the comments is the wide variation > in expectations of a listserv (and transpartisan work itself). > > > > Although I'm excited to explore these powerful action proposals David, > Mark and Tom have each raised, I'm personally still a little preoccupied by > the tension between "action" and "talk" itself (or between a > "practice-focus" vs. "intellectual discussion/abstraction"). > > > > I understand how a connection to "action" is often crucial to drawing > citizens into discussion - and appreciate the synergy Tom described, with > "conversation shaping action and action informing the next wave of > action-shaping conversation." What I'm struggling to understand is why > dialogue itself is so often framed as somehow alternative to action or > something other than action. Is it because we're sitting still as we > talk?! (: > > > > I recently started teaching mindfulness meditation to people with > stress-related conditions. One of the barriers that sometimes comes up > with students is that being still and silent can seem an awful lot like > "doing nothing." To those who do it, of course, sitting with oneself in > silence, as Jon Kabat-Zinn often points out, is just about "the hardest > work in the world." > > > > And that's often how transpartisan dialogue-for-understanding feels to > me - the hardest of work - and, I would argue, the most important of > actions. Without it (or without the investment of time and energy to do it > right), it seems to me that so many (other) actions simply may not happen. > Indeed, they may not even be "thinkable." > > > > If that's true, then it might be helpful to make more explicit the > various kinds of actions that constitute this transpartisan movement and > relish the interplay between "collective action" and the "radical act" of > dialogue itself. > > > > My two and a half cents, > > Jacob > > > > p.s. Rick, Michael, I didn't read Sandy as discouraging > theoretical/intellectual exploration in our exchanges - only reminding us > of our beginning intentions as a listserv to tie these kinds of discussions > to the practice of transpartisan work itself. I appreciated hearing from > her why some people have reported distancing themselves from the > conversation. Why not take her feedback seriously and work together to > make this listserv an (even more) welcoming and accessible "watering hole" > for transpartisans of many stripes?...including > theoretical/philosophically-inclined ones! In the spirit of Aristotle's > "practical philosophy," surely thinking carefully together about various > interpretations of practice will continue to be a helpful (and inescapable) > part of high-quality deliberative work? > > > > ############################ > > > > To unsubscribe from the TRANSPARTISAN list: > > write to: mailto:TRANSPARTISAN-SIGNOFF-REQUEST@LISTS.THATAWAY.ORG > > or 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