While meditation strives for one-pointedness, dialogue attempts to enact multi-pointedness: dialogue focuses on each speaker, with multiple nodes of meaning, intention and response. Rather than transcending "the world," dialogue works with raw materials of the world, creating coherence & meaning out of the blitz of our multitasking 21st-century.We suggest that an integral approach to change-making must engage the rich tapestry of Life-processes and include deeper 'dialogues' - between people, institutions, ecosystems, cultures and the artifactual world. It is only through such ‘deep dialogue’ that we will begin to effectively align our efforts to co-create a more aware & sustainable world.
READ MORE ABOUT DEEP DIALOGUE: HERE
4 comments:
“Our policy choices flow from our politics, our politics flow from our values, and our values flow from our personal stories. If we're going to create a new politics in America and the world, we need to start at the level of story. We need to talk to each other -- and to "the other," the one we think is dead wrong. It's risky, but good hosts make such conversations so safe that people stumble past their fears into a kind of grace. Hosting conversations is not just inviting people over and putting out cookies. It's deeper -- actually, something like meditation."
-- Vicki Robin, in Utne magazine (2004)
The International Journal for Dialogical Science (IJDS) is a peer-reviewed scholarly publication sponsored by the International Society for Dialogical Science (ISDS) and distributed digitally at this Web site.
http://ijds.lemoyne.edu/index.html
In his book International Norms and Decisionmaking: A Punctuated Equilibrium Model(2003), Gary Goertz presents a punctuated equilibrium framework for understanding the nature of policy decision-making by governments as well as a theory of the creation, functioning, and evolution of international norms and institutions.
--D.M
The integral approach here sounds like the formation of new institutions.No doubt that is going to happen,is already happening,but hopefully the people driving the development of 'new paradigm'(for want of a better word,just now)institutions will remember the mistakes made by the old paradigm institutions.Inevitably,new mistakes will be made.However,human nature and universal law are unlikely to change any time soon,so the same old wine will be filling new paradigm flasks.Once we understand the conundrum of paradoxes,we can try to find a middle way.Each to their own,though.Each individual is in a stage/phase of her/his own development,sharing their level of development with others no doubt,but differences and competition can not be avoided.We have yet to come to grips with the innate struggle for survival at the expense of those who by their very nature are destined to not pass on their genes.Individuation cannot be avoided,I think.
Post a Comment