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, jzhess@gmail.com

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 http://IncentiveReform.org > > 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: > > > http://lists.thataway.org/scripts/wa-THATAWAY.exe?SUBED1=TRANSPARTISAN&A=1 >

############################

To unsubscribe from the TRANSPARTISAN list: write to: mailto:TRANSPARTISAN-SIGNOFF-REQUEST@LISTS.THATAWAY.ORG or click the following link: http://lists.thataway.org/scripts/wa-THATAWAY.exe?SUBED1=TRANSPARTISAN&A=1