From a.debakey at yahoo.com Wed Dec 19 00:01:36 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Wed Dec 19 00:07:56 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <019101c841b4$738f50b0$fb76480c@HOME>
Message-ID: <968252.39232.qm@web45809.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Aren't 'we' glad that some one is rising to the challength, no wait, i'software s'kips: some one is rising the "real" t'issue here ;-)
How long does it take a Joy http://tinyurl.com/2h5r5y .... can some one (else) please giv (offr) a joy&full&hand?
HumanimAlan
Susan Clemons <Susan.Joy@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
Maybe so, but I don't join a group so I can spend the majority of my time deleting posts.
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/317122ad/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Wed Dec 19 00:06:20 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Wed Dec 19 00:12:40 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] send 17th
In-Reply-To: <022a01c841b6$5d553e20$b5c16018@DL01>
Message-ID: <978661.56737.qm@web45806.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Don Lay <donlay@knology.net> wrote: They're on the way as of 3:40pm. --- s'harp
TalgKing about deleting s'and @ the b'each: glad we dont have to fumble with those thinkgs anylongershorterwidernarrower: http://tinyurl.com/2lk95k :::::........}}}}}
Humanimalan
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/e9d6ded9/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Wed Dec 19 00:10:59 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Wed Dec 19 00:17:19 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <476846F4.000011.03588@VAIO-584793128F>
Message-ID: <607955.5946.qm@web45812.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Ohhhhhh! Ahhhhhh!
Whaaaaaaaaaaaat a "move", W ill i m
http://www.pathguy.com/chess/PeasantR.htm
Humanimalan
william <w@david-bohm.net> wrote:
v\:* {behavior:url (#default#vml);} v\:* { BEHAVIOR: url (#default#vml) } We could consider setting up a second bohm dialogue list; one with a different style. Would you, Susan, be willing to moderate such a new list?
-------Original Message-------
From: Susan Clemons
Date: 18.12.2007 21:27:51
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Maybe so, but I don't join a group so I can spend the majority of my time deleting posts. If there's anything worth reading in there it doesn't seem to be worth the time to search it out. I mostly just sit and hit delete. I really don't care about "looseness", I would like to have a discussion about beliefs and the positive aspects of self. I keep coming back to the group hoping there will be some kind of change but in all the years it's been here it seems to stay pretty much the same. Like I said, if this is all the people of the list want dialogue to be then I would rather not participate. I may simply change my profile to "no mail" so that I can check back in once in a while, but this same old nonsense of Peter and dl dominating the group seems hardly worth the trouble to read.
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: donald factor
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2007 1:19 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
As the man said, judge not lest ye be judged:-)
I'd stick with it. At least I would be unhappy if you left. So often you say stuff that I would have said, so it saves me the trouble. And anyway some gems have emerged out of the flood of stuff, say between Alan(peter) and Rob and Pat' that actually seem to have added a kind of freshness and/or looseness to the flow. It is a counter to DonL's inexhaustible seriousness or earnestness. Recall that dialogue was not meant to be primarily about content so much as about the nature of the flow or process, its blocks and pathways. And anyway, a lot of the huge batch of recent posts are mercifully brief.
don
On Dec 18, 2007, at 11:53 AM, Susan Clemons wrote:
I for one will not keep participating if this is the style that dialogue is going to take.
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: donald factor
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2007 11:38 AM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Irene, I am surprised. Have you really not spotted who Alan is? He has revealed his identity a number of times already. I think Susan was the first to spot it almost immediately he came on line. It took me a while longer. So far I have no complaint. What he has been doing here, along with Rob and Pat, seems to have opened some doors to a looser approach to it all and I like that. I did, by the way, Google Alan but found nobody.
don
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/26efa6b8/attachment.html
From irenedarcy at gmail.com Wed Dec 19 00:12:16 2007
From: irenedarcy at gmail.com (Irene Darcy)
Date: Wed Dec 19 00:18:36 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Assumptions and Improvisation
In-Reply-To: <186138A9-AA0B-405F-B17F-22C74B9A4A4D@dc.rr.com>
References: <c47283890712160453q5d0112b2kdaed11b0a2da9398@mail.gmail.com>
<20739337-5807-446A-A370-DA2686551E14@dc.rr.com>
<c47283890712181449w322ba692ia82cb86c21c3a93c@mail.gmail.com>
<186138A9-AA0B-405F-B17F-22C74B9A4A4D@dc.rr.com>
Message-ID: <c47283890712181512n3f552a48o731648ec103d2730@mail.gmail.com>
I: I suggest you double check with them. You seem to have confused
'doodling' with 'noodling', and 'noodling' is not as respected as you seem
to think.
On Dec 18, 2007 5:56 PM, donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> wrote:
> From some musician friends, years ago.
> don
>
> On Dec 18, 2007, at 2:49 PM, Irene Darcy wrote:
>
> It is usually called doodling.
>
> I: Just curious, Don. Where did you get that piece of information?
>
> On Dec 16, 2007 2:36 PM, donald factor < DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > When I think of improvisation, I think of the collective improvisation
> > central to jazz, based on the chord and rhythm progressions of a particular
> > song that the group has begun playing. I think of it as a musical dialogue.
> > Individual improvisation is something else. From what little I know about
> > classical improvisation it is simply composing at the piano or other
> > instrument, inventing variations on a pre-existing piece of music or making
> > up a cadenza or such and not writing it down. It is a very different
> > category from jazz improvisation in which each improvised section can never
> > be repeated. Almost anyone who plays an instrument can and does improvise in
> > this sense. It is usually called doodling. I am not much of a pianist, but
> > many times, just for fun, I have played around at the piano in this way, and
> > occasionally have come up with stuff that sounded pretty good. Anyway, to
> > me, all improvisation is based on some pre-existing score or theme.butwhat impresses me most is that jazz musicians seem to be able to do it
> > together aaaand to come up with something fresh and new each time they take
> > off on the same piece. That it, the good ones can do it. I have yet to hear
> > of collective classical improvisation. But maybe you could point me to some.
> >
> > don
> >
> > don
> >
> > On Dec 16, 2007, at 4:53 AM, Irene Darcy wrote:
> >
> > DF's last post on this topic yesterday contained so many enfolded,
> > implied - most likely unintentionally - assumptions, that to answer him,
> > it would take the kind of in depth work a music historian and musicologist
> > could turn into a doctoral dissertation. However, for starters, see
> >
> > http://en.wikipedia.Sorg/wiki/Musical_improvisation<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Musical_improvisation>
> >
> > It compares jazz and classical improvisation traditions.
> >
> > The invention of the printing press, and the cultural assumptions of
> > European society had a great deal to do with relegating the genius of the
> > likes of Bach to the category of the disrespect it has-had for oral
> > tradition.
> >
> > In the Wiki article, Eric Barnhill is mentioned. He is a fellow
> > Dalcrozian, and studied with my Dalcroze teacher. He has his own website
> > with original audio samples. Not mentioned is David Darling, cellist, and
> > his organization Music for People whose purpose is to bring improvisation in
> > all musical genres back to the people. Music for People can also be
> > Googled. His workshops are attended by many, and are presented world wide.
> > Neither is mentioned Paul Winter, currently in residence at St john the
> > Divine here in NYC. I've attended many beautiful improvisation concerts of
> > his. He is in a stylistic category of his own. And a recent acquaintance
> > of mine whose name I'd have to go pull up whose ensemble, The Mad Coyote (I
> > think it's called) can be Googled and who performs in various venues. Just
> > recently here in the Village.
> > Classical musicians are rising up in revolt!
> >
> > In closing, let me say that I have been working on this for many years.
> > Have done a lot of research, and have studied a great many 'methods', both
> > jazz and classical, and some Indian. As I teach myself, I'm putting together
> > my own 'method' that integrates what I consider to be the best of jazz and
> > classical approaches, and intend to include Salsa, if I live that long!
> >
> > --
> > Irene
> > info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
> >
> >
> >
> >
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/ebc88618/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Wed Dec 19 00:20:34 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Wed Dec 19 00:26:55 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <476846F4.000011.03588@VAIO-584793128F>
Message-ID: <148977.21633.qm@web45811.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
william <w@david-bohm.net> wrote:
v\:* {behavior:url (#default#vml);} v\:* { BEHAVIOR: url (#default#vml) } We* could consider setting u..
...I am a bit busy at the moment, Pat, but I'll pick it up again later. For the time being, let me just say that this is leading up to passion. But not exactly the same kind of passion that we have talked about a few years ago. This "new" passion is a further development of the earlier version. It's more like a second order of passion corresponding with the equally "new" second order of suspension. But more later...
William
Re
Member:
"Pass
I
on"?
That 's holding
Some
Pro
Mise
Can you
Ex
Pand
Sum(e)
Bittaschuun
;-)
Humanimalan
* Hey Rob, look, this do'be'loved "we" agagagagain
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/f93cd10a/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Wed Dec 19 00:23:30 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Wed Dec 19 00:29:51 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Assumptions and Improvisation
In-Reply-To: <c47283890712181512n3f552a48o731648ec103d2730@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <117445.72059.qm@web45803.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
There is, to make "matters"
"Worse"
Also: Schnoodling (s'pelling??)
Any x-Lover did inform me not just
H.A.
Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
I: I suggest you double check with them. You seem to have confused 'doodling' with 'noodling', and 'noodling' is not as respected as you seem to think.
On Dec 18, 2007 5:56 PM, donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> wrote:
>From some musician friends, years ago.
don
On Dec 18, 2007, at 2:49 PM, Irene Darcy wrote:
It is usually called doodling.
I: Just curious, Don. Where did you get that piece of information?
On Dec 16, 2007 2:36 PM, donald factor < DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> wrote:
When I think of improvisation, I think of the collective improvisation central to jazz, based on the chord and rhythm progressions of a particular song that the group has begun playing. I think of it as a musical dialogue. Individual improvisation is something else. From what little I know about classical improvisation it is simply composing at the piano or other instrument, inventing variations on a pre-existing piece of music or making up a cadenza or such and not writing it down. It is a very different category from jazz improvisation in which each improvised section can never be repeated. Almost anyone who plays an instrument can and does improvise in this sense. It is usually called doodling. I am not much of a pianist, but many times, just for fun, I have played around at the piano in this way, and occasionally have come up with stuff that sounded pretty good. Anyway, to me, all improvisation is based on some pre-existing score or theme.but what impresses me most
is that jazz musicians seem to be able to do it together aaaand to come up with something fresh and new each time they take off on the same piece. That it, the good ones can do it. I have yet to hear of collective classical improvisation. But maybe you could point me to some.
don
don
On Dec 16, 2007, at 4:53 AM, Irene Darcy wrote:
DF's last post on this topic yesterday contained so many enfolded, implied - most likely unintentionally - assumptions, that to answer him, it would take the kind of in depth work a music historian and musicologist could turn into a doctoral dissertation. However, for starters, see
http://en.wikipedia.Sorg/wiki/Musical_improvisation
It compares jazz and classical improvisation traditions.
The invention of the printing press, and the cultural assumptions of European society had a great deal to do with relegating the genius of the likes of Bach to the category of the disrespect it has-had for oral tradition.
In the Wiki article, Eric Barnhill is mentioned. He is a fellow Dalcrozian, and studied with my Dalcroze teacher. He has his own website with original audio samples. Not mentioned is David Darling, cellist, and his organization Music for People whose purpose is to bring improvisation in all musical genres back to the people. Music for People can also be Googled. His workshops are attended by many, and are presented world wide. Neither is mentioned Paul Winter, currently in residence at St john the Divine here in NYC. I've attended many beautiful improvisation concerts of his. He is in a stylistic category of his own. And a recent acquaintance of mine whose name I'd have to go pull up whose ensemble, The Mad Coyote (I think it's called) can be Googled and who performs in various venues. Just recently here in the Village.
Classical musicians are rising up in revolt!
In closing, let me say that I have been working on this for many years. Have done a lot of research, and have studied a great many 'methods', both jazz and classical, and some Indian. As I teach myself, I'm putting together my own 'method' that integrates what I consider to be the best of jazz and classical approaches, and intend to include Salsa, if I live that long!
--
Irene
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/8772a02d/attachment.html
From irenedarcy at gmail.com Wed Dec 19 00:27:50 2007
From: irenedarcy at gmail.com (Irene Darcy)
Date: Wed Dec 19 00:34:10 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Assumptions and Improvisation
In-Reply-To: <117445.72059.qm@web45803.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
References: <c47283890712181512n3f552a48o731648ec103d2730@mail.gmail.com>
<117445.72059.qm@web45803.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <c47283890712181527t6f5465f4r63a2149a7d86b89d@mail.gmail.com>
Peter-Alan, the only two people who can make me laugh are you and Charlie
Chaplin!
On Dec 18, 2007 6:23 PM, Alan E. DeBakey <a.debakey@yahoo.com> wrote:
> There is, to make "matters"
> "Worse"
> Also: *Schnoodling * (s'pelling??)
> Any x-Lover did inform me not just
>
> H.A.
>
> *Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com>* wrote:
>
> I: I suggest you double check with them. You seem to have confused
> 'doodling' with 'noodling', and 'noodling' is not as respected as you seem
> to think.
>
> On Dec 18, 2007 5:56 PM, donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> wrote:
>
> > >From some musician friends, years ago.
> > don
> >
> > On Dec 18, 2007, at 2:49 PM, Irene Darcy wrote:
> >
> > It is usually called doodling.
> >
> > I: Just curious, Don. Where did you get that piece of information?
> >
> > On Dec 16, 2007 2:36 PM, donald factor < DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > When I think of improvisation, I think of the collective improvisation
> > > central to jazz, based on the chord and rhythm progressions of a particular
> > > song that the group has begun playing. I think of it as a musical dialogue.
> > > Individual improvisation is something else. From what little I know about
> > > classical improvisation it is simply composing at the piano or other
> > > instrument, inventing variations on a pre-existing piece of music or making
> > > up a cadenza or such and not writing it down. It is a very different
> > > category from jazz improvisation in which each improvised section can never
> > > be repeated. Almost anyone who plays an instrument can and does improvise in
> > > this sense. It is usually called doodling. I am not much of a pianist, but
> > > many times, just for fun, I have played around at the piano in this way, and
> > > occasionally have come up with stuff that sounded pretty good. Anyway, to
> > > me, all improvisation is based on some pre-existing score or theme.butwhat impresses me most is that jazz musicians seem to be able to do it
> > > together aaaand to come up with something fresh and new each time they take
> > > off on the same piece. That it, the good ones can do it. I have yet to hear
> > > of collective classical improvisation. But maybe you could point me to some.
> > >
> > > don
> > >
> > > don
> > >
> > > On Dec 16, 2007, at 4:53 AM, Irene Darcy wrote:
> > >
> > > DF's last post on this topic yesterday contained so many enfolded,
> > > implied - most likely unintentionally - assumptions, that to answer him,
> > > it would take the kind of in depth work a music historian and musicologist
> > > could turn into a doctoral dissertation. However, for starters, see
> > >
> > > http://en.wikipedia.Sorg/wiki/Musical_improvisation<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Musical_improvisation>
> > >
> > > It compares jazz and classical improvisation traditions.
> > >
> > > The invention of the printing press, and the cultural assumptions of
> > > European society had a great deal to do with relegating the genius of the
> > > likes of Bach to the category of the disrespect it has-had for oral
> > > tradition.
> > >
> > > In the Wiki article, Eric Barnhill is mentioned. He is a fellow
> > > Dalcrozian, and studied with my Dalcroze teacher. He has his own website
> > > with original audio samples. Not mentioned is David Darling, cellist, and
> > > his organization Music for People whose purpose is to bring improvisation in
> > > all musical genres back to the people. Music for People can also be
> > > Googled. His workshops are attended by many, and are presented world wide.
> > > Neither is mentioned Paul Winter, currently in residence at St john the
> > > Divine here in NYC. I've attended many beautiful improvisation concerts of
> > > his. He is in a stylistic category of his own. And a recent acquaintance
> > > of mine whose name I'd have to go pull up whose ensemble, The Mad Coyote (I
> > > think it's called) can be Googled and who performs in various venues. Just
> > > recently here in the Village.
> > > Classical musicians are rising up in revolt!
> > >
> > > In closing, let me say that I have been working on this for many
> > > years. Have done a lot of research, and have studied a great many
> > > 'methods', both jazz and classical, and some Indian. As I teach myself, I'm
> > > putting together my own 'method' that integrates what I consider to be the
> > > best of jazz and classical approaches, and intend to include Salsa, if I
> > > live that long!
> > >
> > > --
> > > Irene
> > > info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>
> ------------------------------
> Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it
> now.<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=51733/*http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ+>
>
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>
--
Irene
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/0c5b869d/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Wed Dec 19 00:30:37 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Wed Dec 19 00:36:58 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <644282B0-AF77-4D11-8CA7-7C51FDAC7B94@dc.rr.com>
Message-ID: <132829.54978.qm@web45809.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> wrote:
There is a surgeon called deBakey. MIght he have performed the lobotomy?
Goodlord, does i wish, Don, Sir!
http://tinyurl.com/2mk9yn
;-o
Humanimal(i)an
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/be9d106c/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Wed Dec 19 00:37:45 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Wed Dec 19 00:50:47 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Assumptions and Improvisation
In-Reply-To: <c47283890712181527t6f5465f4r63a2149a7d86b89d@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <456306.83702.qm@web45803.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Heeyheeyweey,
I is kiiddin not
But if I got in to
THAT
(schnoodling)
HERE
....... well, lets say so much: do you have aniiiiii idemage what that might get youusmeewee in to;-?
Huhuhumanimalan
Ps: Funni, look, y'our http://tinyurl.com/395cnp .... n here we go a'gain
Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
Peter-Alan, the only two people who can make me laugh are you and Charlie Chaplin!
On Dec 18, 2007 6:23 PM, Alan E. DeBakey < a.debakey@yahoo.com> wrote:
There is, to make "matters"
"Worse"
Also: Schnoodling (s'pelling??)
Any x-Lover did inform me not just
H.A.
Irene Darcy < irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
I: I suggest you double check with them. You seem to have confused 'doodling' with 'noodling', and 'noodling' is not as respected as you seem to think.
On Dec 18, 2007 5:56 PM, donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> wrote:
>From some musician friends, years ago.
don
On Dec 18, 2007, at 2:49 PM, Irene Darcy wrote:
It is usually called doodling.
I: Just curious, Don. Where did you get that piece of information?
On Dec 16, 2007 2:36 PM, donald factor < DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> wrote:
When I think of improvisation, I think of the collective improvisation central to jazz, based on the chord and rhythm progressions of a particular song that the group has begun playing. I think of it as a musical dialogue. Individual improvisation is something else. From what little I know about classical improvisation it is simply composing at the piano or other instrument, inventing variations on a pre-existing piece of music or making up a cadenza or such and not writing it down. It is a very different category from jazz improvisation in which each improvised section can never be repeated. Almost anyone who plays an instrument can and does improvise in this sense. It is usually called doodling. I am not much of a pianist, but many times, just for fun, I have played around at the piano in this way, and occasionally have come up with stuff that sounded pretty good. Anyway, to me, all improvisation is based on some pre-existing score or theme.but what impresses me most
is that jazz musicians seem to be able to do it together aaaand to come up with something fresh and new each time they take off on the same piece. That it, the good ones can do it. I have yet to hear of collective classical improvisation. But maybe you could point me to some.
don
don
On Dec 16, 2007, at 4:53 AM, Irene Darcy wrote:
DF's last post on this topic yesterday contained so many enfolded, implied - most likely unintentionally - assumptions, that to answer him, it would take the kind of in depth work a music historian and musicologist could turn into a doctoral dissertation. However, for starters, see
http://en.wikipedia.Sorg/wiki/Musical_improvisation
It compares jazz and classical improvisation traditions.
The invention of the printing press, and the cultural assumptions of European society had a great deal to do with relegating the genius of the likes of Bach to the category of the disrespect it has-had for oral tradition.
In the Wiki article, Eric Barnhill is mentioned. He is a fellow Dalcrozian, and studied with my Dalcroze teacher. He has his own website with original audio samples. Not mentioned is David Darling, cellist, and his organization Music for People whose purpose is to bring improvisation in all musical genres back to the people. Music for People can also be Googled. His workshops are attended by many, and are presented world wide. Neither is mentioned Paul Winter, currently in residence at St john the Divine here in NYC. I've attended many beautiful improvisation concerts of his. He is in a stylistic category of his own. And a recent acquaintance of mine whose name I'd have to go pull up whose ensemble, The Mad Coyote (I think it's called) can be Googled and who performs in various venues. Just recently here in the Village.
Classical musicians are rising up in revolt!
In closing, let me say that I have been working on this for many years. Have done a lot of research, and have studied a great many 'methods', both jazz and classical, and some Indian. As I teach myself, I'm putting together my own 'method' that integrates what I consider to be the best of jazz and classical approaches, and intend to include Salsa, if I live that long!
--
Irene
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
--
Irene
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/5d9e0d97/attachment.html
From rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk Wed Dec 19 00:46:27 2007
From: rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk (rob mooney)
Date: Wed Dec 19 00:52:47 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poem
In-Reply-To: <20071217.184239.3184.83.ae.dropper@juno.com>
References: <20071217.184239.3184.83.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <BAY123-W39F04F189574C1EBB1EB4FDC630@phx.gbl>
oooh. i think that one might be done
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgDate: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 18:39:51 -0500Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poemFrom: ae.dropper@juno.com
fullness pours out
and it all empties into white
the mounds of it - frozen overnight
worms throw up castsin the fine snow, crystals,
up close you can see
the colors - LOOK
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 20:03:41 +0000 rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> writes:
worms throw up castsin the fine snow
From: DFACTOR@dc.rr.comSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poemDate: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 11:40:52 -0800To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgPat, look at your letter below. Do you know why it has the message from Symantec on it? This is something that keeps turning up on people's e-mails, and it may be some kind of worm or virus.
don
On Dec 17, 2007, at 11:09 AM, ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
This message has been processed by Symantec's AntiVirus Technology.
Unknown00000000.data was not scanned for viruses because too many nested levels of files were found.
For more information on antivirus tips and technology, visit
http://ses.symantec.com/
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
Date: December 17, 2007 11:09:47 AM PST
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poem
Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
fullness pours out
and it all empties into white
the mounds of it - frozen overnight
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 18:23:27 +0000 rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> writes:
fullness pours out
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgDate: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 13:00:04 -0500Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poemFrom: ae.dropper@juno.com
And it all empties into white.
On Sun, 16 Dec 2007 13:43:40 +0000 rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> writes:
Naming plays its oldest game.Somehow out of reach it dancesnine dances to itself. Nine dances
all in couples made of three.
And if we do not leave our light
we will be eaten by it long
before it shines and dies again
so leave our light alone to be.
Run apple certainties under
the spout, what memories they
bind in cankered onion light
from lullabies of thunder.
And we are leaves as always,
fallen from the sunburn tree.
Till shame and calamine find us
shovelling blossom snow
Before the no, before the go,
before the be became, we will
become before the sun
has ever been born below.
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgDate: Sun, 16 Dec 2007 08:12:20 -0500Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poemFrom: ae.dropper@juno.com
Naming plays games with itself.Somewhere out of reach it dancesnine dances by itself
in "couples" made of three.
And if we do not leave our light
we will be eaten by it long
before it shines and dies again
so leave our light alone.
Run apple certainties under
the spout, what memories they
bind in cankered onion light
from lampshades worn as hats.
And we are leaves as always,
fallen from the sunburn tree.
Till shade and calamine find us
shovelling a foot of snow
before the plows
before the dogs....
before the rain and sleet
will come
before the sun
was even born
On Sun, 16 Dec 2007 07:14:42 -0500 "Irene Darcy" <irenedarcy@gmail.com> writes:
I: Word music Improvisation. Have a great day, everybody.
On Dec 16, 2007 4:13 AM, rob mooney < rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
Naming plays games with itself.Somewhere out of reach it dancesnine dances by itself.
And if we do not leave our light
we will be eaten by it long
before it shines.
Run apple certainties under
the spout, what memories they
bind in cankered light.
And we are leaves as always,
fallen from the sunburn tree.
Till shade and calamine find us.
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgDate: Sat, 15 Dec 2007 22:39:03 -0500
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poem
what? (Rob)
the naming plays with itselfsomewhere out of reach of the dance itself.
do our leaves
get eaten by light
before they fall?
we certainly have
to be careful of
skin cancer
and light!
previously,
it was sunburn.
we aren't leaves.
one size
doesn't fit all.
funni, rob, irene
On Sun, 16 Dec 2007 01:48:56 +0000 rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> writes:
what?
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2007 14:54:42 -0500From: irenedarcy@gmail.comTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] noname 2I: We certainly have to be careful of skin cancer and light! Previously, it was sunburn. We aren't leaves. One size doesn't fit all.
On Dec 14, 2007 2:51 PM, rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
do our leaves get eaten by light before they fall?
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgDate: Thu, 13 Dec 2007 21:26:42 -0500
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] noname 2From: ae.dropper@juno.com
DIALOGUE DANCEA dialogue circle of trees, dancing treeswe do not sit in chairs but we stand in the woodswith the light filtering through our autumn leavesand we are dancing - our roots are our feet and our millions of toes, dancing.A wind comes and some of our leaves fallfrom some of our fingers, our million fingers, one for every dancing toe,one explication for every implicationour roots hidden, unknown but known constantly as thatwhich ever refuses namingwhile the naming plays with itselfsomewhere out of reach of the dance itself. -- funny
On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 10:08:46 -0800 donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> writes:
Don't you think though, that maybe a bit of both is even more useful? Just so long as we don't turn the tree - or others - into objects that we "understand" completely. Actually, as I think of it, there is more than one way to understand understanding.
don
On Dec 13, 2007, at 1:10 AM, Alfred Landman wrote:
Hi Irene Darcy. If a brain wants to learn about trees, for instance, thought could simply spend time with them in their natural habitat etc (which is what many traditionally "primitive" people do). Breaking trees into their cellular components and so forth enables genetic manipulation of them, for instance, but this can't be said to "objectively" help one get to know a tree better than simply spending time with them. In fact, it does the precise opposite. This brain can never genuinely know a living organism that you've instrumentalized and objectified like that. AL Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
Subject: Space and Time (Don F)From: ami_kes@juno.com (John A MIKES) Date: Thu, 02 Oct 1997 16:59:24 EDT to: Bohm, Subject Space and TimeDear Don, nice wisdom in your Sep.25 'Space & Time note. Yet:(yourquote):>...<Foucault was right: there is no such epoque as the present one. His, or ours, does not matter. Past reflection does not match live experience.WE are the experiencers, not memory. So: hold your enthusiasm.Also: I was glad: A rare thing on this list a reference to David Bohm!I find this unending exchange "about the list-filling" redundant. In my (not so humble) opinion a list is like love: practice it, don't explain.If it does not live up to your expectations, there are other lists to choose from. Nobody can change BB or anybody else. Accept it or leave it. To explain one's views ABOUT participating: nice, but keep it short. Andhave mercy on the receiving parties: half a dozen posts per day per per- son in exorbitant length, or sometimes 5 consecutive attachments is rude. Who does not have the time to write short, should keep it. Length isnegligent.And to the following exchange I have a plagiarism from Doug Bilodeau, an acclaimed physicist from the JCS-list:(see below) - the 'exchange': *" >JPL:>"Shout, shout, let it all out>these are the things I can do without,>come on, I'm talking to you, come on.." whereupon " >>Wm:>>Pssst... not so loud, I think the others are meditating. William*Not so sure! I refer to my remark on a "no response" to a post:"si tacent clamant": Dough B: corrected me: "or: si tacent dormiunt". From: "Chris Hooley" < chooley@idnsi.net>Subject: Re: purpose of listDate: Fri, 03 Oct 97 18:24:15 PDTTo: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.ukHello All,I've heard nothing from the group for several days. So, I'm sending this message to check for echo. Regards ChrisFrom: "Chris Hooley" <chooley@idnsi.net>Subject: inside outDate: Fri, 03 Oct 97 18:19:50 PDT To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.ukReply-To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk Hello Everyone,I would share another thought that I found interesting. The gastrointestinal track is actually "outside" the body in the sense thatit's a long, open-ended tube. In the same way, "no-thing", which is (or can be seen to be) at the center of every manifested form, is continuous, contiguous to itself. It is "outside" the space/time form though when seenfrom within the form it appears to be isolated like droplets. My intuition is that we can focus (reside *as* attention) either on the form or on the un-form that borders it. The experience of attending to the un-form in-between can't be fullyrepresented, even to ourselves, I think, but experimenting with this viewing angle has been intriguing. Received: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 11:21:50 +0100 (BST)Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 11:19:21 +0100 (BST)From: maximus@dircon.co.uk (Barron Burrow)Subject: Re:intentional dying Extraordinary and moving message you sent us, Don ... Full of the *rightkind* of fight, too, I felt. For the struggle against cancer "intentionaldying" *feels* like the right way to go. And what you say about 'death-rebirth' through finding the right life-rhythms seems absolutely right:> ultradian rhythms. These involved 90 minute to 2 hour >cycles during which the body would, as it were, shift gears. The neural >chemistry changes, hemispheric dominance shifts and the body, during about>twenty minutes of each cycle, does its best to get into a quiet, >self-repair mode. As he put it, the unconscious parts of the organism would >try to go to work without the interference of the conscious mind. Normally,>our culture has trained us to override these cycles in order to get on with >our work. =I think there is great truth in this last remark. I find myself that it's sometimes the hardest thing to just ignore the world, and simply try to getback into touch with one's own internal rhythms; but there's no doubt that with practice you can get better at it. However, sooner or later you forget -- and have to learn the inexplicable and difficult (but ultimately veryrewarding) process all over again. What's difficult about it, I guess, is *acceptance* of dying -- "intentional dying" ... Bimodal-psa. helps me, because it puts me in touch with the deepest source of my own 'unlivedlines' (but there are clearly many ways to get back 'in touch'). I wldn't overdo it, on the email. I understand very well what Matti Vaittenen means when he says, today, " " ... but in a virtual world you donot get your hands dirty, you do not sweat; you just work overtime." But I've decided it's okay to just fade in and out. Because the truth surely is we are as much talking to ourselves as to each other: binary bits are NOTpeople ... On the other hand, I think of the Net in Kleinian analysis terms -- as a kind of substitute 'container'. Just as the mother can soothe away the infant's "nameless dread" so too can this kind of dialogue. There's noobligation to post even weekly -- just fade in and out when the mood takes. So, sorry to see you go, Matti -- but in the end I think the world may go through a phase transition, led by the Net, that gradually puts everythingthe right way round again, and dethrones the present over-emphasis on a top-down culture that *separates* mind and body. So I may fade in and out a lot, but I'm staying with it. Gustava (?) in S. America brought up theenormous problem of world over-population recently; I felt bad that no one responded. It's a diabolical problem -- but one which in Europe seems to have been largely overcome (e.g. Spain and Russia's population is falling --and most other nations in Europe are not being over-populated hand-over-fist). Catholic ideology on birth-control seems hopelessly unrealistic, and the worst effects seem to be in S. America.Don has summed up an incredible eleven years of his life-struggle in oneshort email message, and I feel grateful that he has shared that -- with*me*. It reminds me of something that is so easily forgotten -- our commonhumanity.I can see the irony of having yr message bounced back with a 'fatal error' note :-) On my kitchen table, Don, is a copy of "The Unfolding Meaning" (Routledge, 1987) (it's odd your saying "perseverance furthers" becausesomeone in Australia recently said the same thing)( -- and the other day I re-read yr Introduction, rather neat, I thought. And now here I am speaking to one of its authors! >A couple of feelings guide me, acting as warnings that I'm drifting: on the>one side is the "hope of winning", and on the other is "self pity." >>The affirmations that I'm using aren't self strenghtening, at least>directly; "What could be a better experience than being the unfolding>universe? Having given up, I can relax! Etc." Unfolding meaning, yes, but also knowing how to get in touch with 'unlivedlines' -- parts of oneself one had last been in touch with at the moment ofbirth, for instance. Because without that there is no proper dying; and so no full living either. No? I think Julia has hit on something important when she says:>>is dialogue about facilitating the intentional dying of the ego self?>>julia--
Sounds like? How many syllables? Guess and win prizes with Search Charades!
Sounds like? How many syllables? Guess and win prizes with Search Charades! info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue-- Irene
She said what? About who? Shameful celebrity quotes on Search Star!
Sounds like? How many syllables? Guess and win prizes with Search Charades!
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
She said what? About who? Shameful celebrity quotes on Search Star!
_________________________________________________________________
Fancy some celeb spotting?
https://www.celebmashup.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/e18d0bcc/attachment.html
From rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk Wed Dec 19 00:49:47 2007
From: rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk (rob mooney)
Date: Wed Dec 19 00:56:08 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In-Reply-To: <019901c8410b$8ce34750$f277480c@HOME>
References: <466461.42128.qm@web45814.mail.sp1.yahoo.com><004501c840b7$594becc0$b5c16018@DL01><BAY123-W360C871E5B94A44C7CE328DC620@phx.gbl><00f901c840e0$9e4b5c10$b5c16018@DL01><00a401c840e5$c0be8920$f277480c@HOME><018001c840e7$9f7dbd60$b5c16018@DL01><014901c840e9$ebf72760$f277480c@HOME>
<BAY123-W32BBB589EBA7C32852E6B1DC620@phx.gbl>
<019901c8410b$8ce34750$f277480c@HOME>
Message-ID: <BAY123-W1864345D6F7B620682C8CDC630@phx.gbl>
yes. not one.
From: Susan.Joy@worldnet.att.netTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderDate: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 17:18:08 -0700
Does this question mean you have never read any of my posts?
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: rob mooney
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 1:37 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
anything to report, honey?
From: Susan.Joy@worldnet.att.netTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderDate: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 13:17:54 -0700
Why not investigate that? -- dl
That seems like such a silly question to me dl. I've been investigating that for the last 30 years.
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: Don Lay
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 1:01 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
What if we don't do any of those things but simply live within it? -- Susan
I like that idea! That's the idea of the Greek logos ... which meant reason, ratio, meaning ..., etc. Seems reasonable to me that Bohm like it also. Why not investigate that? -- dl
From: Susan Clemons
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 2:48 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
I mean we all use the word mean, meaning, etc. A philosopher said that the question of meaning is meaningful.
Are we all using some thing that we know not, neither stand under, over or beside? dl
What if we don't do any of those things but simply live within it?
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: Don Lay
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 12:11 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
I mean we all use the word mean, meaning, etc. A philosopher said that the question of meaning is meaningful.
Are we all using some thingK that we know not, neither stand under, over or beside?
Can it be acceptable that meaning is only somethingK manmade, and that otherwise, everything including us is meaningless? Is there meaninglessness?
Is the question of meaning itself meaningless?
I've been trying to give attention to the idea advanced by some thinkers that the Greek logos has been interpreted as meaning. What might that mean? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: rob mooney
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 1:15 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
What is meaning? how do you mean?
From: donlay@knology.netTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderDate: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 09:15:59 -0500
Can one eat them, live off them (too---?)) -- Alan
Does the question of food, etc., imply that man, that we live by bread alone?
Maybe what is important about QT is the idea of meaning. What is the meaning?
What is meaning? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: Alan E. DeBakey
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 9:07 AM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Tea?? Mio dio Al, what are you smoking, drinking, brewing? Like: Does pouring (hot) water over (tea)leaves order - explicated ;-o
Al, I am into "real"-life stuff (examples), all that (particle)theoretical talk gives me goose-bumps ;........}}
Can one eat them, live off them (too---?))
AlanAlfred Landman <landmana@yahoo.com> wrote:
Hi Rob Mooney. T.e.a.
AL.rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
there is asking and saying at any rate
From: Susan.Joy@worldnet.att.netTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderDate: Sun, 16 Dec 2007 14:14:42 -0700
I would say there is definitely mind. Although it might not be what you and I would call mind.
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: Regina Bensch-Coe
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2007 1:57 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In the attached article, the author writes, ?in the 'implicate' order ere is no space, time, causality, matter, or mind.? (Note: I am guessing ?ere? is a typo for ?there?.) In the implicate order there is no space, time, causality, matter, or mind. ?? Is this statement true? Regina??Consciousness and sufism: A new paradigm for western scientistsR.A.Haag (331 West Colonial Highway, Hamilton, VA 20158, USA)Scientists seeking to understand 'consciousness' appear to ignore colleagues who say that the qualities ascribed to external reality only dwell within us and that what we conceive of as 'reality' is enfolded in human consciousness. Reality is a manifestation of our thoughts and not a property of the external world, but involves our presence as conscious observers. The universe achieves a concrete existence as a result of our perceptions. Our concept of the reality created by our brain and senses cause us not only to misunderstand consciousness, but render us unable even to imagine what it might be.Neuroscientists are just beginning to examine the misapprehensions of our senses and how these lead us to act and think as though we have an accurate understanding of consciousness. However we may perceive reality in the waking state of consciousness, it is not the autonomous separate 'things' our senses behold. Pribram and Bohm's holographic analog for the 'implicate' order beyond our senses illustrates how reality is an illusion. They argue that our minds not only enfold matter, but our bodies and the entire material universe as well and that the cosmos, matter, life, and consciousness itself are all projections of 'the ground of all that is', in ways which scientists have yet to discover, though Pribram speculates that the mystics may have discovered a way to see the implicate order, by learning how to 'abrogate the brain's retrieval systems and neuroelectrical codes.' Such scientific speculations challenge many cherished concepts, including language itself, because in the 'implicate' order ere is no space, time, causality, matter, or mind.Because human thought is a by-product of our brain and senses, it is ever changing and limited and, thus, the Sufis say that the old subject-verb-object paradigm is not a valid paradigm for scientists to understand ultimate questions. Our sensory prison and language cause us to live on the surface of things and to not be aware of absolute reality. To understand consciousness, scientists must learn a totally different paradigm. Instead of always trying to satisfy themselves by studying the natural world, scientists must come to learn how to investigate inwardly. They must stop equating sensory experiences with true knowledge, which can be acquired only by directly cognizing infinite existence through focusing attention and energy on a specific point in the heart to activate a hitherto unsuspected capacity or 'knowing'. Knowing humanity in all its hidden dimensions must be the fundamental principle for all endeavors in science and religion. Sufism, the science of Self-knowledge, is the tradition Pribram thought might exist to teach humanity how to abrogate the brain to behold the implicate order.The Sufis say that both true science and true religion are but reciprocal stages of the same search for truth about existence itself. One focuses on what we take to be the 'outer', the other on 'inner' reality, but these are simply artificial boundaries created by our 'feeling' mind. To know the unity underlying science and religion, the reality of existence, requires a different paradigm--heart consciousness. And, Sufism is that reality. Source:http://www.zynet.co.uk/imprint/Tucson/5.htm05.02-- Abstract No:824
Think you know your TV, music and film? Try Search Charades! info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
Everything in one place? All new Windows Live!
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
Think you know your TV, music and film? Try Search Charades!
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
_________________________________________________________________
Get Hotmail on your mobile, text MSN to 63463!
http://mobile.uk.msn.com/pc/mail.aspx
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/874805d4/attachment.html
From rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk Wed Dec 19 00:51:16 2007
From: rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk (rob mooney)
Date: Wed Dec 19 00:57:36 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In-Reply-To: <853595.77218.qm@web45815.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
References: <019901c8410b$8ce34750$f277480c@HOME>
<853595.77218.qm@web45815.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <BAY123-W251C31F18EF23EBC5A4D9ADC630@phx.gbl>
ha! very amusing.
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 16:26:56 -0800From: a.debakey@yahoo.comSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgJoy@worldnet.att.netwrote:
Does this question mean you have never http://tinyurl.com/2pkwvv
any of my posts?
Susan
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
_________________________________________________________________
Telly addicts unite!
http://www.searchgamesbox.com/tvtown.shtml
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/6a4e5719/attachment.html
From irenedarcy at gmail.com Wed Dec 19 00:51:28 2007
From: irenedarcy at gmail.com (Irene Darcy)
Date: Wed Dec 19 00:57:50 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Assumptions and Improvisation
In-Reply-To: <456306.83702.qm@web45803.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
References: <c47283890712181527t6f5465f4r63a2149a7d86b89d@mail.gmail.com>
<456306.83702.qm@web45803.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <c47283890712181551n20fff179k34367065b805fa1a@mail.gmail.com>
I: In terms of content, I have NO idea, but in terms of EFFECT, oh brother,
do I!
On Dec 18, 2007 6:37 PM, Alan E. DeBakey <a.debakey@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Heeyheeyweey,
> I is kiiddin not
> But if I got in to
> THAT
> (schnoodling)
> HERE
>
> ....... well, lets say so much: do you have aniiiiii idemage what that
> might get youusmeewee in to;-?
>
> Huhuhumanimalan
>
> Ps: Funni, look, y'our *http://tinyurl.com/395cnp .... n here we go a'gain
> *
>
>
>
>
> *Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com>* wrote:
>
> Peter-Alan, the only two people who can make me laugh are you and Charlie
> Chaplin!
>
> On Dec 18, 2007 6:23 PM, Alan E. DeBakey < a.debakey@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > There is, to make "matters"
> > "Worse"
> > Also: *Schnoodling * (s'pelling??)
> > Any x-Lover did inform me not just
> >
> > H.A.
> >
> > *Irene Darcy < irenedarcy@gmail.com>* wrote:
> >
> > I: I suggest you double check with them. You seem to have confused
> > 'doodling' with 'noodling', and 'noodling' is not as respected as you seem
> > to think.
> >
> > On Dec 18, 2007 5:56 PM, donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> wrote:
> >
> > > >From some musician friends, years ago.
> > > don
> > >
> > > On Dec 18, 2007, at 2:49 PM, Irene Darcy wrote:
> > >
> > > It is usually called doodling.
> > >
> > > I: Just curious, Don. Where did you get that piece of information?
> > >
> > > On Dec 16, 2007 2:36 PM, donald factor < DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > When I think of improvisation, I think of the collective
> > > > improvisation central to jazz, based on the chord and rhythm progressions
> > > > of a particular song that the group has begun playing. I think of it as a
> > > > musical dialogue. Individual improvisation is something else. From what
> > > > little I know about classical improvisation it is simply composing at the
> > > > piano or other instrument, inventing variations on a pre-existing piece of
> > > > music or making up a cadenza or such and not writing it down. It is a very
> > > > different category from jazz improvisation in which each improvised section
> > > > can never be repeated. Almost anyone who plays an instrument can and does
> > > > improvise in this sense. It is usually called doodling. I am not much of a
> > > > pianist, but many times, just for fun, I have played around at the piano in
> > > > this way, and occasionally have come up with stuff that sounded pretty good.
> > > > Anyway, to me, all improvisation is based on some pre-existing score or
> > > > theme.but what impresses me most is that jazz musicians seem to be
> > > > able to do it together aaaand to come up with something fresh and new each
> > > > time they take off on the same piece. That it, the good ones can do it. I
> > > > have yet to hear of collective classical improvisation. But maybe you could
> > > > point me to some.
> > > > don
> > > >
> > > > don
> > > >
> > > > On Dec 16, 2007, at 4:53 AM, Irene Darcy wrote:
> > > >
> > > > DF's last post on this topic yesterday contained so many enfolded,
> > > > implied - most likely unintentionally - assumptions, that to answer him,
> > > > it would take the kind of in depth work a music historian and musicologist
> > > > could turn into a doctoral dissertation. However, for starters, see
> > > >
> > > > http://en.wikipedia.Sorg/wiki/Musical_improvisation<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Musical_improvisation>
> > > >
> > > > It compares jazz and classical improvisation traditions.
> > > >
> > > > The invention of the printing press, and the cultural assumptions of
> > > > European society had a great deal to do with relegating the genius of the
> > > > likes of Bach to the category of the disrespect it has-had for oral
> > > > tradition.
> > > >
> > > > In the Wiki article, Eric Barnhill is mentioned. He is a fellow
> > > > Dalcrozian, and studied with my Dalcroze teacher. He has his own website
> > > > with original audio samples. Not mentioned is David Darling, cellist, and
> > > > his organization Music for People whose purpose is to bring improvisation in
> > > > all musical genres back to the people. Music for People can also be
> > > > Googled. His workshops are attended by many, and are presented world wide.
> > > > Neither is mentioned Paul Winter, currently in residence at St john the
> > > > Divine here in NYC. I've attended many beautiful improvisation concerts of
> > > > his. He is in a stylistic category of his own. And a recent acquaintance
> > > > of mine whose name I'd have to go pull up whose ensemble, The Mad Coyote (I
> > > > think it's called) can be Googled and who performs in various venues. Just
> > > > recently here in the Village.
> > > > Classical musicians are rising up in revolt!
> > > >
> > > > In closing, let me say that I have been working on this for many
> > > > years. Have done a lot of research, and have studied a great many
> > > > 'methods', both jazz and classical, and some Indian. As I teach myself, I'm
> > > > putting together my own 'method' that integrates what I consider to be the
> > > > best of jazz and classical approaches, and intend to include Salsa, if I
> > > > live that long!
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Irene
> > > > info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> > Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try
> > it now.<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=51733/*http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ+>
> >
> >
> > info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Irene
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>
> ------------------------------
> Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it
> now.<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=51733/*http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ+>
>
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>
--
Irene
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/522fe1fe/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Wed Dec 19 00:58:22 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Wed Dec 19 01:04:43 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Assumptions and Improvisation and Content and
Effect
In-Reply-To: <c47283890712181551n20fff179k34367065b805fa1a@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <879425.55589.qm@web45804.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
One coms w/o the othr (one) ;____?
I had no idemage !
Humanimalan
Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
I: In terms of content, I have NO idea, but in terms of EFFECT, oh brother, do I!
On Dec 18, 2007 6:37 PM, Alan E. DeBakey < a.debakey@yahoo.com> wrote:
Heeyheeyweey,
I is kiiddin not
But if I got in to
THAT
(schnoodling)
HERE
....... well, lets say so much: do you have aniiiiii idemage what that might get youusmeewee in to;-?
Huhuhumanimalan
Ps: Funni, look, y'our http://tinyurl.com/395cnp .... n here we go a'gain
Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
Peter-Alan, the only two people who can make me laugh are you and Charlie Chaplin!
On Dec 18, 2007 6:23 PM, Alan E. DeBakey < a.debakey@yahoo.com> wrote:
There is, to make "matters"
"Worse"
Also: Schnoodling (s'pelling??)
Any x-Lover did inform me not just
H.A.
Irene Darcy < irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
I: I suggest you double check with them. You seem to have confused 'doodling' with 'noodling', and 'noodling' is not as respected as you seem to think.
On Dec 18, 2007 5:56 PM, donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> wrote:
>From some musician friends, years ago.
don
On Dec 18, 2007, at 2:49 PM, Irene Darcy wrote:
It is usually called doodling.
I: Just curious, Don. Where did you get that piece of information?
On Dec 16, 2007 2:36 PM, donald factor < DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> wrote:
When I think of improvisation, I think of the collective improvisation central to jazz, based on the chord and rhythm progressions of a particular song that the group has begun playing. I think of it as a musical dialogue. Individual improvisation is something else. From what little I know about classical improvisation it is simply composing at the piano or other instrument, inventing variations on a pre-existing piece of music or making up a cadenza or such and not writing it down. It is a very different category from jazz improvisation in which each improvised section can never be repeated. Almost anyone who plays an instrument can and does improvise in this sense. It is usually called doodling. I am not much of a pianist, but many times, just for fun, I have played around at the piano in this way, and occasionally have come up with stuff that sounded pretty good. Anyway, to me, all improvisation is based on some pre-existing score or theme.but what impresses me most
is that jazz musicians seem to be able to do it together aaaand to come up with something fresh and new each time they take off on the same piece. That it, the good ones can do it. I have yet to hear of collective classical improvisation. But maybe you could point me to some.
don
don
On Dec 16, 2007, at 4:53 AM, Irene Darcy wrote:
DF's last post on this topic yesterday contained so many enfolded, implied - most likely unintentionally - assumptions, that to answer him, it would take the kind of in depth work a music historian and musicologist could turn into a doctoral dissertation. However, for starters, see
http://en.wikipedia.Sorg/wiki/Musical_improvisation
It compares jazz and classical improvisation traditions.
The invention of the printing press, and the cultural assumptions of European society had a great deal to do with relegating the genius of the likes of Bach to the category of the disrespect it has-had for oral tradition.
In the Wiki article, Eric Barnhill is mentioned. He is a fellow Dalcrozian, and studied with my Dalcroze teacher. He has his own website with original audio samples. Not mentioned is David Darling, cellist, and his organization Music for People whose purpose is to bring improvisation in all musical genres back to the people. Music for People can also be Googled. His workshops are attended by many, and are presented world wide. Neither is mentioned Paul Winter, currently in residence at St john the Divine here in NYC. I've attended many beautiful improvisation concerts of his. He is in a stylistic category of his own. And a recent acquaintance of mine whose name I'd have to go pull up whose ensemble, The Mad Coyote (I think it's called) can be Googled and who performs in various venues. Just recently here in the Village.
Classical musicians are rising up in revolt!
In closing, let me say that I have been working on this for many years. Have done a lot of research, and have studied a great many 'methods', both jazz and classical, and some Indian. As I teach myself, I'm putting together my own 'method' that integrates what I consider to be the best of jazz and classical approaches, and intend to include Salsa, if I live that long!
--
Irene
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
--
Irene
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
--
Irene
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/ac6d015d/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Wed Dec 19 00:54:50 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Wed Dec 19 01:07:53 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In-Reply-To: <BAY123-W1864345D6F7B620682C8CDC630@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <450642.8888.qm@web45813.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Same here, look, i never "read":
http://www.adventuresinece.com/2005_0725BookPhotos50003.JPG
Hum Al
rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
.hmmessage P { margin:0px; padding:0px } body.hmmessage { FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY:Tahoma } yes. not one.
---------------------------------
From: Susan.Joy@worldnet.att.net
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 17:18:08 -0700
.ExternalClass .EC_hmmessage P {padding-right:0px;padding-left:0px;padding-bottom:0px;padding-top:0px;} .ExternalClass EC_BODY.hmmessage {font-size:10pt;font-family:Tahoma;} Does this question mean you have never read any of my posts?
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: rob mooney
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 1:37 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
anything to report, honey?
---------------------------------
From: Susan.Joy@worldnet.att.net
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 13:17:54 -0700
.ExternalClass .EC_hmmessage P {padding-right:0px;padding-left:0px;padding-bottom:0px;padding-top:0px;} .ExternalClass EC_BODY.hmmessage {font-size:10pt;font-family:Tahoma;} Why not investigate that? -- dl
That seems like such a silly question to me dl. I've been investigating that for the last 30 years.
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: Don Lay
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 1:01 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
What if we don't do any of those things but simply live within it? -- Susan
I like that idea! That's the idea of the Greek logos ... which meant reason, ratio, meaning ..., etc. Seems reasonable to me that Bohm like it also. Why not investigate that? -- dl
From: Susan Clemons
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 2:48 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
I mean we all use the word mean, meaning, etc. A philosopher said that the question of meaning is meaningful.
Are we all using some thing that we know not, neither stand under, over or beside? dl
What if we don't do any of those things but simply live within it?
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: Don Lay
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 12:11 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
I mean we all use the word mean, meaning, etc. A philosopher said that the question of meaning is meaningful.
Are we all using some thingK that we know not, neither stand under, over or beside?
Can it be acceptable that meaning is only somethingK manmade, and that otherwise, everything including us is meaningless? Is there meaninglessness?
Is the question of meaning itself meaningless?
I've been trying to give attention to the idea advanced by some thinkers that the Greek logos has been interpreted as meaning. What might that mean? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: rob mooney
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 1:15 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
What is meaning?
how do you mean?
---------------------------------
From: donlay@knology.net
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 09:15:59 -0500
Can one eat them, live off them (too---?)) -- Alan
Does the question of food, etc., imply that man, that we live by bread alone?
Maybe what is important about QT is the idea of meaning. What is the meaning?
What is meaning? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: Alan E. DeBakey
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 9:07 AM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Tea?? Mio dio Al, what are you smoking, drinking, brewing? Like: Does pouring (hot) water over (tea)leaves order - explicated ;-o
Al, I am into "real"-life stuff (examples), all that (particle)theoretical talk gives me goose-bumps ;........}}
Can one eat them, live off them (too---?))
Alan
Alfred Landman <landmana@yahoo.com> wrote:
Hi Rob Mooney. T.e.a.
AL.
rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
.ExternalClass .EC_hmmessage P {padding-right:0px;padding-left:0px;padding-bottom:0px;padding-top:0px;} .ExternalClass EC_BODY.hmmessage {font-size:10pt;font-family:Tahoma;} there is asking and saying at any rate
---------------------------------
From: Susan.Joy@worldnet.att.net
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2007 14:14:42 -0700
.ExternalClass .EC_hmmessage P {padding-right:0px;padding-left:0px;padding-bottom:0px;padding-top:0px;} .ExternalClass EC_BODY.hmmessage {font-size:10pt;font-family:Tahoma;} I would say there is definitely mind. Although it might not be what you and I would call mind.
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: Regina Bensch-Coe
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2007 1:57 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In the attached article, the author writes, ?in the 'implicate' order ere is no space, time, causality, matter, or mind.? (Note: I am guessing ?ere? is a typo for ?there?.)
In the implicate order there is no space, time, causality, matter, or mind. ?? Is this statement true?
Regina
??
Consciousness and sufism: A new paradigm for western scientists
R.A.Haag (331 West Colonial Highway, Hamilton, VA 20158, USA)
Scientists seeking to understand 'consciousness' appear to ignore colleagues who say that the qualities ascribed to external reality only dwell within us and that what we conceive of as 'reality' is enfolded in human consciousness. Reality is a manifestation of our thoughts and not a property of the external world, but involves our presence as conscious observers. The universe achieves a concrete existence as a result of our perceptions. Our concept of the reality created by our brain and senses cause us not only to misunderstand consciousness, but render us unable even to imagine what it might be.
Neuroscientists are just beginning to examine the misapprehensions of our senses and how these lead us to act and think as though we have an accurate understanding of consciousness. However we may perceive reality in the waking state of consciousness, it is not the autonomous separate 'things' our senses behold. Pribram and Bohm's holographic analog for the 'implicate' order beyond our senses illustrates how reality is an illusion. They argue that our minds not only enfold matter, but our bodies and the entire material universe as well and that the cosmos, matter, life, and consciousness itself are all projections of 'the ground of all that is', in ways which scientists have yet to discover, though Pribram speculates that the mystics may have discovered a way to see the implicate order, by learning how to 'abrogate the brain's retrieval systems and neuroelectrical codes.' Such scientific speculations challenge many cherished concepts, including language itself, because in
the 'implicate' order ere is no space, time, causality, matter, or mind.
Because human thought is a by-product of our brain and senses, it is ever changing and limited and, thus, the Sufis say that the old subject-verb-object paradigm is not a valid paradigm for scientists to understand ultimate questions. Our sensory prison and language cause us to live on the surface of things and to not be aware of absolute reality. To understand consciousness, scientists must learn a totally different paradigm. Instead of always trying to satisfy themselves by studying the natural world, scientists must come to learn how to investigate inwardly. They must stop equating sensory experiences with true knowledge, which can be acquired only by directly cognizing infinite existence through focusing attention and energy on a specific point in the heart to activate a hitherto unsuspected capacity or 'knowing'. Knowing humanity in all its hidden dimensions must be the fundamental principle for all endeavors in science and religion. Sufism, the science of
Self-knowledge, is the tradition Pribram thought might exist to teach humanity how to abrogate the brain to behold the implicate order.
The Sufis say that both true science and true religion are but reciprocal stages of the same search for truth about existence itself. One focuses on what we take to be the 'outer', the other on 'inner' reality, but these are simply artificial boundaries created by our 'feeling' mind. To know the unity underlying science and religion, the reality of existence, requires a different paradigm--heart consciousness. And, Sufism is that reality.
Source:
http://www.zynet.co.uk/imprint/Tucson/5.htm
05.02-- Abstract No:824
---------------------------------
Think you know your TV, music and film? Try Search Charades!
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
---------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Everything in one place
All new Windows Live!
---------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Think you know your TV, music and film? Try Search Charades!
---------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Think you know your TV, music and film? Try Search Charades!
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/07d8fb22/attachment.html
From rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk Wed Dec 19 01:01:40 2007
From: rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk (rob mooney)
Date: Wed Dec 19 01:08:01 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In-Reply-To: <03a501c84114$78c7a3c0$b5c16018@DL01>
References: <016201c840e6$ded1b440$b5c16018@DL01><C38C3C99.FA94%lynne@lifedirectionscoach.com><c47283890712171353j95c274bj9096a97ab64953bc@mail.gmail.com><035301c840fb$4d1463d0$b5c16018@DL01>
<c47283890712171432w7e5a633ej7673469675579782@mail.gmail.com>
<03a501c84114$78c7a3c0$b5c16018@DL01>
Message-ID: <BAY123-W173CB36371D1797F0A9CCDDC5C0@phx.gbl>
"poems are epiphanic documents and show the writer in the process of making their discoveries, so that the reader can re-enact and re-live them, not merely feel their after effects or learn the poet's wise conclusions."
(Don patterson)
I expect this goes for C++, painting, music, dancing, sculpture, photography, millenery, etc. Maybe even when Don F chooses a tee shirt...
From: donlay@knology.netTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderDate: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 20:22:32 -0500
ISmeaningfulTM to say the answer to these questions is yes, and to say that Bohm, talking about infinite subtlety and when he says it is as far "in there" inside the atom as it is "out there" through the universe substantiates the view I'm trying to learn how to explicate.
Where or what is the personal identity while being sensitive enough to "hear" the direction that amounts to improv?
Once again, my programming friend says there is no identity movement while writing code. If there was, he would be unable to write code because C++, he says, is not the language appropriate for the personal identity. That is, personal identity simply has no meaning in the Visual Basic or C++ language.
Are you aware of Irene's personal identity movement while doing improv? -- dl
\
From: Irene Darcy
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 5:32 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
I: We're getting into the idea of Nada Brahma, now. And to say more, I'd have to go get my book.It would have been more accurate to say one creates a time-space line when one moves, I think. Why do all the good things happen at once? I'm working on Bach Goldberg. My Eurhythmics teacher is giving a three day workshop soon on what an improviser can learn from them, and I'm preparing for it. I would love to have heard Bach sit down and jam with Paquito d'Rivera; throw in Sidney Bechet for good measure on clarinet, and Eugene Ysaye on violin.
On Dec 17, 2007 5:22 PM, Don Lay <donlay@knology.net> wrote:
I: Every time you move you are creating explicate time-space.
What about the idea that every time you move, you are using time and space?
Is there time and space absent homo-sappo, prior to homo-sappo? Perhaps more precisely, is there some actuality indicated by time and space that is prior to homo-sappo? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: Irene Darcy
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 4:53 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
I: Every time you move you are creating explicate time-space. And imagination has its place when it's not out of balance.
On Dec 17, 2007 4:47 PM, Lynne Tolk < lynne@lifedirectionscoach.com> wrote:
To be or not to be? Is there a choice? Is the question the problem? What about yes? (form is emptiness, emptiness is form; explicate is implicate is explicate?)
On 12/17/07 12:56 PM, "Don Lay" <donlay@knology.net> wrote:
the old old thought occurs -- no us? -- RobMaybe. I've been using the idea of imagination, thought to think of the identity of things including us.I think I'm beginning to understand something like the idea of all this that is as unknown and thought equating with the imaged known, with the language or knowing system of imagination.It's a bit spooky to think that us is not. That is, the notness or non being must be addressed. The anxiety does not go away simply by acting and pretending it is not there. Maybe one way to avoid the anxiety of non being is to understand the idea that relative being is part of the whole of Being. dl http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message ----- From: rob mooney <mailto:rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 2:37 PMSubject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderThe thought occurs -- since we all use time, space, etc., how could there be no space? the old old thought occurs -- no us?
From: donlay@knology.netTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderDate: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:05:03 -0500if there is no space time tea cake etc aren't we wasting our... um... breathThe thought occurs -- since we all use time, space, etc., how could there be no space? Maybe we could say that it is only a useful concept and use while being aware that it is limited.Would that be in the direction of unlimited experience? -- dl -- Irene
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogueinfo: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue-- Irene
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
_________________________________________________________________
Fancy some celeb spotting?
https://www.celebmashup.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071219/2b9658c5/attachment.html
From rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk Wed Dec 19 01:06:27 2007
From: rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk (rob mooney)
Date: Wed Dec 19 01:12:48 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In-Reply-To: <382459E1-E035-43C4-94F6-8E81D22C36B8@dc.rr.com>
References: <376217.5644.qm@web45812.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
<013a01c840e3$24c34530$b5c16018@DL01>
<BAY123-W7B97CD182F3C04B886551DC620@phx.gbl>
<382459E1-E035-43C4-94F6-8E81D22C36B8@dc.rr.com>
Message-ID: <BAY123-W4B13472186517A98DDC8FDC5C0@phx.gbl>
happy solstice Don F. (and God bless us each and everyone, especially tiny url)
From: DFACTOR@dc.rr.comSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderDate: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 17:59:15 -0800To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgI was waiting for a "merry christmas" at at the end of this.
Dancer and Vixen
On Dec 17, 2007, at 12:01 PM, rob mooney wrote:
yes. and breathing and sensing and meaning and joy take time and space
From: donlay@knology.netTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderDate: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:29:29 -0500
Time and space is used when language is used to talk about space and time. Words evolved to accommodate the view that space and time are useful. -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: Alan E. DeBakey
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 2:09 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
USING time, space.... Please, Donlay, give us an example how Donlay "uses" ... time?.... space?.... ;-)
AlanDon Lay <donlay@knology.net> wrote:
if there is no space time tea cake etc aren't we wasting our... um... breath
The thought occurs -- since we all use time, space, etc., how could there be no space? Maybe we could say that it is only a useful concept and use while being aware that it is limited.
Would that be in the direction of unlimited experience? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: rob mooney
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 1:09 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
if there is no space time tea cake etc aren't we wasting our... um... breath
From: donlay@knology.netTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderDate: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 08:52:41 -0500
"is there space, time causality in the implicate order",
If one reads something like Bohm's "wholeness and the implicate order' I think that it is fairly clear that things like space and time can be explicated out of the implicate order (in which they are implicated). -- Jeff
Hi Jeff.
Does the question imply space or time by using the idea expressed by "in"?
If so, does this imply the language we use is not adequate to address the meaning of the question? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: Jeff Webb
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 8:30 AM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Hi,I would like to comment on the issue: is there space, time causality in the implicate order.If one reads something like Bohm's "wholeness and the implicate order' I think that it is fairly clear that things like space and time can be explicated out of the implicate order (in which they are implicated). So the statement "in the implicate order (t)here in no space, time causality, matter, or mind' seems to me to indicate that the maker of this statement has completely misunderstood Bohms notion of the implicate order.I'm sure that others on this list will be able to add more details.Jeff>> In the attached article, the author writes, ?in the> 'implicate' order ere is no space, time, causality,> matter, or mind.? (Note: I am guessing ?ere? is a typo for> ?there?.)>> In the implicate order there is no space, time, causality,> matter, or mind. ?? Is this statement true?>> Regina>>> ??>info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
She said what? About who? Shameful celebrity quotes on Search Star!
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogueinfo: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
Sounds like? How many syllables? Guess and win prizes with Search Charades!
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
_________________________________________________________________
Who's friends with who and co-starred in what?
http://www.searchgamesbox.com/celebrityseparation.shtml
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071219/d5f67876/attachment.html
From irenedarcy at gmail.com Wed Dec 19 01:07:31 2007
From: irenedarcy at gmail.com (Irene Darcy)
Date: Wed Dec 19 01:13:52 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Assumptions and Improvisation and Content and
Effect
In-Reply-To: <879425.55589.qm@web45804.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
References: <c47283890712181551n20fff179k34367065b805fa1a@mail.gmail.com>
<879425.55589.qm@web45804.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <c47283890712181607pb944deeu258cc0454146e2@mail.gmail.com>
I: I can just IMAGE-ine.
On Dec 18, 2007 6:58 PM, Alan E. DeBakey <a.debakey@yahoo.com> wrote:
> One coms w/o the othr (one) ;____?
>
> I had no idemage !
>
> Humanimalan
>
> *Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com>* wrote:
>
> I: In terms of content, I have NO idea, but in terms of EFFECT, oh
> brother, do I!
>
> On Dec 18, 2007 6:37 PM, Alan E. DeBakey < a.debakey@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Heeyheeyweey,
> > I is kiiddin not
> > But if I got in to
> > THAT
> > (schnoodling)
> > HERE
> >
> > ....... well, lets say so much: do you have aniiiiii idemage what that
> > might get youusmeewee in to;-?
> >
> > Huhuhumanimalan
> >
> > Ps: Funni, look, y'our *http://tinyurl.com/395cnp .... n here we go
> > a'gain*
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > *Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com>* wrote:
> >
> > Peter-Alan, the only two people who can make me laugh are you and
> > Charlie Chaplin!
> >
> > On Dec 18, 2007 6:23 PM, Alan E. DeBakey < a.debakey@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > > There is, to make "matters"
> > > "Worse"
> > > Also: *Schnoodling * (s'pelling??)
> > > Any x-Lover did inform me not just
> > >
> > > H.A.
> > >
> > > *Irene Darcy < irenedarcy@gmail.com>* wrote:
> > >
> > > I: I suggest you double check with them. You seem to have confused
> > > 'doodling' with 'noodling', and 'noodling' is not as respected as you seem
> > > to think.
> > >
> > > On Dec 18, 2007 5:56 PM, donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > >From some musician friends, years ago.
> > > > don
> > > >
> > > > On Dec 18, 2007, at 2:49 PM, Irene Darcy wrote:
> > > >
> > > > It is usually called doodling.
> > > >
> > > > I: Just curious, Don. Where did you get that piece of information?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Dec 16, 2007 2:36 PM, donald factor < DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > When I think of improvisation, I think of the collective
> > > > > improvisation central to jazz, based on the chord and rhythm progressions
> > > > > of a particular song that the group has begun playing. I think of it as a
> > > > > musical dialogue. Individual improvisation is something else. From what
> > > > > little I know about classical improvisation it is simply composing at the
> > > > > piano or other instrument, inventing variations on a pre-existing piece of
> > > > > music or making up a cadenza or such and not writing it down. It is a very
> > > > > different category from jazz improvisation in which each improvised section
> > > > > can never be repeated. Almost anyone who plays an instrument can and does
> > > > > improvise in this sense. It is usually called doodling. I am not much of a
> > > > > pianist, but many times, just for fun, I have played around at the piano in
> > > > > this way, and occasionally have come up with stuff that sounded pretty good.
> > > > > Anyway, to me, all improvisation is based on some pre-existing score or
> > > > > theme.but what impresses me most is that jazz musicians seem to be
> > > > > able to do it together aaaand to come up with something fresh and new each
> > > > > time they take off on the same piece. That it, the good ones can do it. I
> > > > > have yet to hear of collective classical improvisation. But maybe you could
> > > > > point me to some.
> > > > > don
> > > > >
> > > > > don
> > > > >
> > > > > On Dec 16, 2007, at 4:53 AM, Irene Darcy wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > DF's last post on this topic yesterday contained so many
> > > > > enfolded, implied - most likely unintentionally - assumptions, that to
> > > > > answer him, it would take the kind of in depth work a music historian and
> > > > > musicologist could turn into a doctoral dissertation. However, for
> > > > > starters, see
> > > > >
> > > > > http://en.wikipedia.Sorg/wiki/Musical_improvisation<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Musical_improvisation>
> > > > >
> > > > > It compares jazz and classical improvisation traditions.
> > > > >
> > > > > The invention of the printing press, and the cultural assumptions
> > > > > of European society had a great deal to do with relegating the genius of the
> > > > > likes of Bach to the category of the disrespect it has-had for oral
> > > > > tradition.
> > > > >
> > > > > In the Wiki article, Eric Barnhill is mentioned. He is a fellow
> > > > > Dalcrozian, and studied with my Dalcroze teacher. He has his own website
> > > > > with original audio samples. Not mentioned is David Darling, cellist, and
> > > > > his organization Music for People whose purpose is to bring improvisation in
> > > > > all musical genres back to the people. Music for People can also be
> > > > > Googled. His workshops are attended by many, and are presented world wide.
> > > > > Neither is mentioned Paul Winter, currently in residence at St john the
> > > > > Divine here in NYC. I've attended many beautiful improvisation concerts of
> > > > > his. He is in a stylistic category of his own. And a recent acquaintance
> > > > > of mine whose name I'd have to go pull up whose ensemble, The Mad Coyote (I
> > > > > think it's called) can be Googled and who performs in various venues. Just
> > > > > recently here in the Village.
> > > > > Classical musicians are rising up in revolt!
> > > > >
> > > > > In closing, let me say that I have been working on this for many
> > > > > years. Have done a lot of research, and have studied a great many
> > > > > 'methods', both jazz and classical, and some Indian. As I teach myself, I'm
> > > > > putting together my own 'method' that integrates what I consider to be the
> > > > > best of jazz and classical approaches, and intend to include Salsa, if I
> > > > > live that long!
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Irene
> > > > > info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------------------
> > > Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try
> > > it now.<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=51733/*http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ+>
> > >
> > >
> > > info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Irene
> > info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> > Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try
> > it now.<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=51733/*http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ+>
> >
> >
> > info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Irene
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>
> ------------------------------
> Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it
> now.<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=51733/*http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ+>
>
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>
--
Irene
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/88b0edf3/attachment.html
From rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk Wed Dec 19 01:08:16 2007
From: rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk (rob mooney)
Date: Wed Dec 19 01:14:37 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In-Reply-To: <8E62992E-CB4A-4FD0-B267-A050FBAE608A@dc.rr.com>
References: <439325.58372.qm@web57411.mail.re1.yahoo.com><476679F0.60003@siit.tu.ac.th>
<003101c840b4$1a0909b0$b5c16018@DL01>
<BAY123-W316D168A86355AA8647C79DC620@phx.gbl>
<00e501c840df$bb92bda0$b5c16018@DL01>
<BAY123-W3205646DF39FCB075F9CE5DC620@phx.gbl>
<1F7DA20A-E59A-4220-978F-3AA284BBD26C@dc.rr.com>
<BAY123-W17D702155BD553E462636EDC620@phx.gbl>
<8E62992E-CB4A-4FD0-B267-A050FBAE608A@dc.rr.com>
Message-ID: <BAY123-W3142D1739711E2E101EA09DC5C0@phx.gbl>
and where would that be Don? over the rainbow? through the looking glass? in a dialogue?
From: DFACTOR@dc.rr.comSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderDate: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 18:00:22 -0800To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgOR My Space.
don
On Dec 17, 2007, at 12:04 PM, rob mooney wrote:
why would I single you out Don?
From: DFACTOR@dc.rr.comSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderDate: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 11:42:14 -0800To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgShould be me, no?
X
On Dec 17, 2007, at 11:37 AM, rob mooney wrote:
The thought occurs -- since we all use time, space, etc., how could there be no space? the old old thought occurs -- no us?
From: donlay@knology.netTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderDate: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:05:03 -0500
if there is no space time tea cake etc aren't we wasting our... um... breath
The thought occurs -- since we all use time, space, etc., how could there be no space? Maybe we could say that it is only a useful concept and use while being aware that it is limited.
Would that be in the direction of unlimited experience? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: rob mooney
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 1:09 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
if there is no space time tea cake etc aren't we wasting our... um... breath
From: donlay@knology.netTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderDate: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 08:52:41 -0500
"is there space, time causality in the implicate order",
If one reads something like Bohm's "wholeness and the implicate order' I think that it is fairly clear that things like space and time can be explicated out of the implicate order (in which they are implicated). -- Jeff
Hi Jeff.
Does the question imply space or time by using the idea expressed by "in"?
If so, does this imply the language we use is not adequate to address the meaning of the question? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: Jeff Webb
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 8:30 AM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Hi,I would like to comment on the issue: is there space, time causality in the implicate order.If one reads something like Bohm's "wholeness and the implicate order' I think that it is fairly clear that things like space and time can be explicated out of the implicate order (in which they are implicated). So the statement "in the implicate order (t)here in no space, time causality, matter, or mind' seems to me to indicate that the maker of this statement has completely misunderstood Bohms notion of the implicate order.I'm sure that others on this list will be able to add more details.Jeff>> In the attached article, the author writes, ?in the> 'implicate' order ere is no space, time, causality,> matter, or mind.? (Note: I am guessing ?ere? is a typo for> ?there?.)>> In the implicate order there is no space, time, causality,> matter, or mind. ?? Is this statement true?>> Regina>>> ??>info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
She said what? About who? Shameful celebrity quotes on Search Star!
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
Everything in one place? All new Windows Live!
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
Sounds like? How many syllables? Guess and win prizes with Search Charades!
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
_________________________________________________________________
Who's friends with who and co-starred in what?
http://www.searchgamesbox.com/celebrityseparation.shtml
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071219/4c52bebc/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Wed Dec 19 01:09:00 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Wed Dec 19 01:15:21 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Assumptions and Improvisation and Content and
Effect
In-Reply-To: <c47283890712181607pb944deeu258cc0454146e2@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <826092.3722.qm@web45803.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
http://tinyurl.com/2fluav
Dig it al an'.....
Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
I: I can just IMAGE-ine.
On Dec 18, 2007 6:58 PM, Alan E. DeBakey <a.debakey@yahoo.com> wrote:
One coms w/o the othr (one) ;____?
I had no idemage !
Humanimalan
Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
I: In terms of content, I have NO idea, but in terms of EFFECT, oh brother, do I!
On Dec 18, 2007 6:37 PM, Alan E. DeBakey < a.debakey@yahoo.com> wrote:
Heeyheeyweey,
I is kiiddin not
But if I got in to
THAT
(schnoodling)
HERE
....... well, lets say so much: do you have aniiiiii idemage what that might get youusmeewee in to;-?
Huhuhumanimalan
Ps: Funni, look, y'our http://tinyurl.com/395cnp .... n here we go a'gain
Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
Peter-Alan, the only two people who can make me laugh are you and Charlie Chaplin!
On Dec 18, 2007 6:23 PM, Alan E. DeBakey < a.debakey@yahoo.com> wrote:
There is, to make "matters"
"Worse"
Also: Schnoodling (s'pelling??)
Any x-Lover did inform me not just
H.A.
Irene Darcy < irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
I: I suggest you double check with them. You seem to have confused 'doodling' with 'noodling', and 'noodling' is not as respected as you seem to think.
On Dec 18, 2007 5:56 PM, donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> wrote:
>From some musician friends, years ago.
don
On Dec 18, 2007, at 2:49 PM, Irene Darcy wrote:
It is usually called doodling.
I: Just curious, Don. Where did you get that piece of information?
On Dec 16, 2007 2:36 PM, donald factor < DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> wrote:
When I think of improvisation, I think of the collective improvisation central to jazz, based on the chord and rhythm progressions of a particular song that the group has begun playing. I think of it as a musical dialogue. Individual improvisation is something else. From what little I know about classical improvisation it is simply composing at the piano or other instrument, inventing variations on a pre-existing piece of music or making up a cadenza or such and not writing it down. It is a very different category from jazz improvisation in which each improvised section can never be repeated. Almost anyone who plays an instrument can and does improvise in this sense. It is usually called doodling. I am not much of a pianist, but many times, just for fun, I have played around at the piano in this way, and occasionally have come up with stuff that sounded pretty good. Anyway, to me, all improvisation is based on some pre-existing score or theme.but what impresses me most
is that jazz musicians seem to be able to do it together aaaand to come up with something fresh and new each time they take off on the same piece. That it, the good ones can do it. I have yet to hear of collective classical improvisation. But maybe you could point me to some.
don
don
On Dec 16, 2007, at 4:53 AM, Irene Darcy wrote:
DF's last post on this topic yesterday contained so many enfolded, implied - most likely unintentionally - assumptions, that to answer him, it would take the kind of in depth work a music historian and musicologist could turn into a doctoral dissertation. However, for starters, see
http://en.wikipedia.Sorg/wiki/Musical_improvisation
It compares jazz and classical improvisation traditions.
The invention of the printing press, and the cultural assumptions of European society had a great deal to do with relegating the genius of the likes of Bach to the category of the disrespect it has-had for oral tradition.
In the Wiki article, Eric Barnhill is mentioned. He is a fellow Dalcrozian, and studied with my Dalcroze teacher. He has his own website with original audio samples. Not mentioned is David Darling, cellist, and his organization Music for People whose purpose is to bring improvisation in all musical genres back to the people. Music for People can also be Googled. His workshops are attended by many, and are presented world wide. Neither is mentioned Paul Winter, currently in residence at St john the Divine here in NYC. I've attended many beautiful improvisation concerts of his. He is in a stylistic category of his own. And a recent acquaintance of mine whose name I'd have to go pull up whose ensemble, The Mad Coyote (I think it's called) can be Googled and who performs in various venues. Just recently here in the Village.
Classical musicians are rising up in revolt!
In closing, let me say that I have been working on this for many years. Have done a lot of research, and have studied a great many 'methods', both jazz and classical, and some Indian. As I teach myself, I'm putting together my own 'method' that integrates what I consider to be the best of jazz and classical approaches, and intend to include Salsa, if I live that long!
--
Irene
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
--
Irene
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
--
Irene
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
--
Irene
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/4c5bd602/attachment.html
From irenedarcy at gmail.com Wed Dec 19 01:14:06 2007
From: irenedarcy at gmail.com (Irene Darcy)
Date: Wed Dec 19 01:20:27 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Assumptions and Improvisation and Content and
Effect
In-Reply-To: <826092.3722.qm@web45803.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
References: <c47283890712181607pb944deeu258cc0454146e2@mail.gmail.com>
<826092.3722.qm@web45803.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <c47283890712181614j6a5b197fve3cbc17b05aac3d4@mail.gmail.com>
I: One more sobering, fragmenting, thing to deal with. Somebody, somehow,
needs to counter it.
On Dec 18, 2007 7:09 PM, Alan E. DeBakey <a.debakey@yahoo.com> wrote:
> *http://tinyurl.com/2fluav*
> **
> *Dig it al an'.....*
>
>
> *Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com>* wrote:
>
> I: I can just IMAGE-ine.
>
> On Dec 18, 2007 6:58 PM, Alan E. DeBakey <a.debakey@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > One coms w/o the othr (one) ;____?
> >
> > I had no idemage !
> >
> > Humanimalan
> >
> > *Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com>* wrote:
> >
> > I: In terms of content, I have NO idea, but in terms of EFFECT, oh
> > brother, do I!
> >
> > On Dec 18, 2007 6:37 PM, Alan E. DeBakey < a.debakey@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Heeyheeyweey,
> > > I is kiiddin not
> > > But if I got in to
> > > THAT
> > > (schnoodling)
> > > HERE
> > >
> > > ....... well, lets say so much: do you have aniiiiii idemage what that
> > > might get youusmeewee in to;-?
> > >
> > > Huhuhumanimalan
> > >
> > > Ps: Funni, look, y'our *http://tinyurl.com/395cnp .... n here we go
> > > a'gain *
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > *Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com>* wrote:
> > >
> > > Peter-Alan, the only two people who can make me laugh are you and
> > > Charlie Chaplin!
> > >
> > > On Dec 18, 2007 6:23 PM, Alan E. DeBakey < a.debakey@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > There is, to make "matters"
> > > > "Worse"
> > > > Also: *Schnoodling * (s'pelling??)
> > > > Any x-Lover did inform me not just
> > > >
> > > > H.A.
> > > >
> > > > *Irene Darcy < irenedarcy@gmail.com>* wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I: I suggest you double check with them. You seem to have confused
> > > > 'doodling' with 'noodling', and 'noodling' is not as respected as you seem
> > > > to think.
> > > >
> > > > On Dec 18, 2007 5:56 PM, donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > >From some musician friends, years ago.
> > > > > don
> > > > >
> > > > > On Dec 18, 2007, at 2:49 PM, Irene Darcy wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > It is usually called doodling.
> > > > >
> > > > > I: Just curious, Don. Where did you get that piece of
> > > > > information?
> > > > >
> > > > > On Dec 16, 2007 2:36 PM, donald factor < DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > When I think of improvisation, I think of the collective
> > > > > > improvisation central to jazz, based on the chord and rhythm progressions
> > > > > > of a particular song that the group has begun playing. I think of it as a
> > > > > > musical dialogue. Individual improvisation is something else. From what
> > > > > > little I know about classical improvisation it is simply composing at the
> > > > > > piano or other instrument, inventing variations on a pre-existing piece of
> > > > > > music or making up a cadenza or such and not writing it down. It is a very
> > > > > > different category from jazz improvisation in which each improvised section
> > > > > > can never be repeated. Almost anyone who plays an instrument can and does
> > > > > > improvise in this sense. It is usually called doodling. I am not much of a
> > > > > > pianist, but many times, just for fun, I have played around at the piano in
> > > > > > this way, and occasionally have come up with stuff that sounded pretty good.
> > > > > > Anyway, to me, all improvisation is based on some pre-existing score or
> > > > > > theme.but what impresses me most is that jazz musicians seem to
> > > > > > be able to do it together aaaand to come up with something fresh and new
> > > > > > each time they take off on the same piece. That it, the good ones can do it.
> > > > > > I have yet to hear of collective classical improvisation. But maybe you
> > > > > > could point me to some.
> > > > > > don
> > > > > >
> > > > > > don
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Dec 16, 2007, at 4:53 AM, Irene Darcy wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > DF's last post on this topic yesterday contained so many
> > > > > > enfolded, implied - most likely unintentionally - assumptions, that to
> > > > > > answer him, it would take the kind of in depth work a music historian and
> > > > > > musicologist could turn into a doctoral dissertation. However, for
> > > > > > starters, see
> > > > > >
> > > > > > http://en.wikipedia.Sorg/wiki/Musical_improvisation<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Musical_improvisation>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It compares jazz and classical improvisation traditions.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The invention of the printing press, and the cultural
> > > > > > assumptions of European society had a great deal to do with relegating the
> > > > > > genius of the likes of Bach to the category of the disrespect it has-had
> > > > > > for oral tradition.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In the Wiki article, Eric Barnhill is mentioned. He is a fellow
> > > > > > Dalcrozian, and studied with my Dalcroze teacher. He has his own website
> > > > > > with original audio samples. Not mentioned is David Darling, cellist, and
> > > > > > his organization Music for People whose purpose is to bring improvisation in
> > > > > > all musical genres back to the people. Music for People can also be
> > > > > > Googled. His workshops are attended by many, and are presented world wide.
> > > > > > Neither is mentioned Paul Winter, currently in residence at St john the
> > > > > > Divine here in NYC. I've attended many beautiful improvisation concerts of
> > > > > > his. He is in a stylistic category of his own. And a recent acquaintance
> > > > > > of mine whose name I'd have to go pull up whose ensemble, The Mad Coyote (I
> > > > > > think it's called) can be Googled and who performs in various venues. Just
> > > > > > recently here in the Village.
> > > > > > Classical musicians are rising up in revolt!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In closing, let me say that I have been working on this for many
> > > > > > years. Have done a lot of research, and have studied a great many
> > > > > > 'methods', both jazz and classical, and some Indian. As I teach myself, I'm
> > > > > > putting together my own 'method' that integrates what I consider to be the
> > > > > > best of jazz and classical approaches, and intend to include Salsa, if I
> > > > > > live that long!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Irene
> > > > > > info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ------------------------------
> > > > Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try
> > > > it now.<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=51733/*http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ+>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Irene
> > > info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------------------
> > > Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try
> > > it now.<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=51733/*http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ+>
> > >
> > >
> > > info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Irene
> > info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> > Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try
> > it now.<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=51733/*http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ+>
> >
> >
> > info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Irene
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>
> ------------------------------
> Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it
> now.<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=51733/*http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ+>
>
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>
--
Irene
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/a29e4008/attachment.html
From rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk Wed Dec 19 01:15:05 2007
From: rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk (rob mooney)
Date: Wed Dec 19 01:21:25 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <1DF60B92-466C-4F19-9BB7-3A8583D658AB@dc.rr.com>
References: <439325.58372.qm@web57411.mail.re1.yahoo.com><476679F0.60003@siit.tu.ac.th><007701c840c1$3c9f5580$b5c16018@DL01><009501c840c9$c9da9a10$b5c16018@DL01><00ae01c840cb$c07ac830$b5c16018@DL01>
<BAY123-W879FB36B103BA98E4068CDC620@phx.gbl>
<010801c840e1$de342e00$b5c16018@DL01>
<BAY123-W350E74A4BF40EED8D77188DC620@phx.gbl>
<0B6839C7-B24F-4F22-A7A3-2354F8D15B6B@dc.rr.com>
<BAY123-W378C54AF712FEB739B63DEDC620@phx.gbl>
<1DF60B92-466C-4F19-9BB7-3A8583D658AB@dc.rr.com>
Message-ID: <BAY123-W211A0D57827E6DA9A95FEBDC5C0@phx.gbl>
i don't think it necessarily has to spoil it. with poetry anyway Don Patterson or Ruth Padel will go into the fricatives and the consonal rhymes and assonance and all the rest and the general affect (usually for me) is - oh, I see. So the understanding is furthered. I expect a grasp of geology probably adds to the appreciation of a landscape? Dunno - what do you think?
From: DFACTOR@dc.rr.comSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity MovementDate: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 18:15:47 -0800To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgBut some part of you does. The question is: does looking for that part spoil it all?
don
On Dec 17, 2007, at 12:42 PM, rob mooney wrote:
Don Patterson the English poet says that you can think of poems as something like a natural object, produced by us (or midwifed or something) out of our naturalness. I'm not sure you have to understand a hill or a spider or a waterfall to love it
From: DFACTOR@dc.rr.comSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity MovementDate: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 12:31:21 -0800To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgI don't understand many of my favorite poems. I don't understand a lot of my favorite art.
But some part of me must. The conscious part, the ego, is not the whole thing. There is
more, always morel.
don
On Dec 17, 2007, at 11:59 AM, rob mooney wrote:
dl: Surely a poem need not be understood in order to have meaning, be meaningful? dl I think this is important. not just poems. many meaningful things.
She said what? About who? Shameful celebrity quotes on Search Star!
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
_________________________________________________________________
Telly addicts unite!
http://www.searchgamesbox.com/tvtown.shtml
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071219/7d6a980a/attachment.html
From rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk Wed Dec 19 01:17:30 2007
From: rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk (rob mooney)
Date: Wed Dec 19 01:23:51 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <DC320204-5FAA-48B5-8B7E-7DBF1F14EEC0@dc.rr.com>
References: <439325.58372.qm@web57411.mail.re1.yahoo.com><476679F0.60003@siit.tu.ac.th><007701c840c1$3c9f5580$b5c16018@DL01><009501c840c9$c9da9a10$b5c16018@DL01><00ae01c840cb$c07ac830$b5c16018@DL01><BAY123-W879FB36B103BA98E4068CDC620@phx.gbl><010801c840e1$de342e00$b5c16018@DL01><BAY123-W350E74A4BF40EED8D77188DC620@phx.gbl>
<0B6839C7-B24F-4F22-A7A3-2354F8D15B6B@dc.rr.com>
<BAY123-W378C54AF712FEB739B63DEDC620@phx.gbl>
<028201c840f2$bed78dc0$b5c16018@DL01>
<DC320204-5FAA-48B5-8B7E-7DBF1F14EEC0@dc.rr.com>
Message-ID: <BAY123-W9CF810AFD84CBA506BBC9DC5C0@phx.gbl>
i don't think art bears meaning it just is meaning probably this goes for everything else to.
- - i mean
From: DFACTOR@dc.rr.comSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity MovementDate: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 18:17:16 -0800To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSee what I mean?
don
On Dec 17, 2007, at 1:21 PM, Don Lay wrote:
I'm not sure you have to understand a hill or a spider or a waterfall to love it
On the view that understand means to stand under an articulated view, maybe we could appreciate a poetic explication even though that which is explicated might have no usual cultural meaning, no every day meaning.
Maybe the rhyme or cadence could be a bearer of meaning when word definitions, limitations cannot.
Maybe much of music is this way also, and also dance as art, perhaps even design in graphic art.
Then the question: what does music explicate (Irene), what does graphic and/or color design, dance, etc., explicate?
And what is explicated by the poetry created by Pat and Rob? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: rob mooney
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 3:42 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Don Patterson the English poet says that you can think of poems as something like a natural object, produced by us (or midwifed or something) out of our naturalness. I'm not sure you have to understand a hill or a spider or a waterfall to love it
From: DFACTOR@dc.rr.comSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity MovementDate: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 12:31:21 -0800To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgI don't understand many of my favorite poems. I don't understand a lot of my favorite art.
But some part of me must. The conscious part, the ego, is not the whole thing. There is
more, always morel.
don
On Dec 17, 2007, at 11:59 AM, rob mooney wrote:
dl: Surely a poem need not be understood in order to have meaning, be meaningful? dl I think this is important. not just poems. many meaningful things.
She said what? About who? Shameful celebrity quotes on Search Star!
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
_________________________________________________________________
Who's friends with who and co-starred in what?
http://www.searchgamesbox.com/celebrityseparation.shtml
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071219/ca54424b/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Wed Dec 19 01:20:58 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Wed Dec 19 01:27:18 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Assumptions and Improvisation and Content and
Effect
In-Reply-To: <c47283890712181614j6a5b197fve3cbc17b05aac3d4@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <179578.53058.qm@web45816.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
The whirds of another sm art sus pend or:
I didn't mean coping with the sense of detachment. I meant how to cope with
the tendency to suspend more and more; what you call "layered" suspension
(resulting in a sense of "detachment" for lack of a better word). You see,
at some point it starts getting a bit anti-social. When you are always
suspending, people are not getting their expected responses anymore. Usually
the reason for someone to say something or do something is to get a response
This is also the case when someone utters an insult, or attempt to hurt
you: they usually do this because they are disappointed or angry; and they
want a reaction that shows they have touched you. Now, if you are always in
suspense mode then the attempted hurt doesn't work, because there is no
reaction on your side. At first glance this is perhaps not a bad thing
because it usually prevents the situation from escalating. However, there
is another aspect to this, which is that the attempted hurt could be
regarded as a form of communication; they are trying to say something. If
you don't respond, don't react (as a result of suspension) then you are
effectively refusing to communicate on this level. You may be willing to
communicate on a different level but that channel is not open both ways. The
point is, you are denying communication on the channel on which it is
invited.
So, what do you say to this? Because i am assuming it is not actually your
intention to deny communication. You are probably in compassion mode, which
however is not the channel open to whoever wants to touch you. Have you
reached a point where you would consider suspending suspension, out of
compassion, and give the person the feeling of having touched you? Would you
like to comment before i go further? You realize, of course, where this is
leading up to.
(annos decembros osevenos)
Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
I: One more sobering, fragmenting, thing to deal with. Somebody, somehow, needs to counter it.
http://tinyurl.com/2fluav
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/a89d6c9b/attachment.html
From irenedarcy at gmail.com Wed Dec 19 01:25:59 2007
From: irenedarcy at gmail.com (Irene Darcy)
Date: Wed Dec 19 01:32:21 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <BAY123-W211A0D57827E6DA9A95FEBDC5C0@phx.gbl>
References: <439325.58372.qm@web57411.mail.re1.yahoo.com>
<009501c840c9$c9da9a10$b5c16018@DL01>
<00ae01c840cb$c07ac830$b5c16018@DL01>
<BAY123-W879FB36B103BA98E4068CDC620@phx.gbl>
<010801c840e1$de342e00$b5c16018@DL01>
<BAY123-W350E74A4BF40EED8D77188DC620@phx.gbl>
<0B6839C7-B24F-4F22-A7A3-2354F8D15B6B@dc.rr.com>
<BAY123-W378C54AF712FEB739B63DEDC620@phx.gbl>
<1DF60B92-466C-4F19-9BB7-3A8583D658AB@dc.rr.com>
<BAY123-W211A0D57827E6DA9A95FEBDC5C0@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <c47283890712181625r7ebeea39k74e812cec7c1cc0f@mail.gmail.com>
I: When I go to a concert, if I have actually tried to write a canon or a
fugue, and have studied how it's done, I respond to both the meaning and the
workmanship of the piece. I hear so much more. Baroque audiences were so
well versed in this that they could recognize and appreciate every step of
the way, the theme which was stated and repeated once in a simple form at
the beginning, then elaborated as the piece went along. They applauded a
great variation the way baseball fans cheer for a homerun. Same thing when
you go to the Apollo Theater. The audience knows.
On Dec 18, 2007 7:15 PM, rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
> i don't think it necessarily has to spoil it. with poetry anyway Don
> Patterson or Ruth Padel will go into the fricatives and the consonal rhymes
> and assonance and all the rest and the general affect (usually for me) is -
> oh, I see. So the understanding is furthered. I expect a grasp of geology
> probably adds to the appreciation of a landscape? Dunno - what do you think?
>
> ------------------------------
> From: DFACTOR@dc.rr.com
> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
> Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 18:15:47 -0800
> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>
> But some part of you does. The question is: does looking for that part
> spoil it all?
> don
>
> On Dec 17, 2007, at 12:42 PM, rob mooney wrote:
>
> Don Patterson the English poet says that you can think of poems as
> something like a natural object, produced by us (or midwifed or something)
> out of our naturalness. I'm not sure you have to understand a hill or a
> spider or a waterfall to love it
>
> ------------------------------
> From: DFACTOR@dc.rr.com
> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
> Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 12:31:21 -0800
> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>
> I don't understand many of my favorite poems. I don't understand a lot of
> my favorite art. But some part of me must. The conscious part, the ego, is
> not the whole thing. There is
> more, always morel.
>
> don
>
> On Dec 17, 2007, at 11:59 AM, rob mooney wrote:
>
> dl: Surely a poem need not be understood in order to *have meaning*, *be
> meaningful*? dl
>
> I think this is important. not just poems. many meaningful things.
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/0211e74b/attachment.html
From rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk Wed Dec 19 01:29:11 2007
From: rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk (rob mooney)
Date: Wed Dec 19 01:35:32 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <062001c8412b$6f5f12c0$b5c16018@DL01>
References: <439325.58372.qm@web57411.mail.re1.yahoo.com><476679F0.60003@siit.tu.ac.th><007701c840c1$3c9f5580$b5c16018@DL01><009501c840c9$c9da9a10$b5c16018@DL01><00ae01c840cb$c07ac830$b5c16018@DL01><BAY123-W879FB36B103BA98E4068CDC620@phx.gbl>
<010801c840e1$de342e00$b5c16018@DL01>
<BAY123-W350E74A4BF40EED8D77188DC620@phx.gbl>
<062001c8412b$6f5f12c0$b5c16018@DL01>
Message-ID: <BAY123-W16E8AE638BF5DDE8487711DC5C0@phx.gbl>
this is good stuff Don. you seem to be saying IT IS without acting or pretending
From: donlay@knology.netTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity MovementDate: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 23:06:58 -0500
I think this is important. not just poems. many meaningful things. -- Rob
Me too! I believe it is ultimately important!
DB says that nothing can be without meaning. Of course, the question ... What is meaning? !!
I believe folk wisdom holds that meaning is what is meant to be, and maybe this means what is intended.
Thus, we say the whole of Being is whatever IT intends to be ... or what it is intending.
What's that?
Look around. Feel it, listen to it, taste it ... etc. This is it, whatever IT IS, this is it simply because there is no other actuality. Is there? -- dl
From: rob mooney
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 2:59 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
dl: Surely a poem need not be understood in order to have meaning, be meaningful? dl I think this is important. not just poems. many meaningful things.
From: donlay@knology.netTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity MovementDate: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:20:21 -0500
Rob: I think so and also maybe even when acting and pretending
dl: Maybe so. Thought, however, presents the idea that what we act and pretend is the known, the repeated, but there is always the new, maybe New Being that is experienced as not the same old known roles, etc.
Rob: I also have no idea what Pat meant but I know that a poet is allowed to say stuff I don't understand
dl: Surely a poem need not be understood in order to have meaning, be meaningful? dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: rob mooney
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 1:20 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Could it be that one more participates in this that is when not acting and pretending the social identity? I think soand also maybe even when acting and pretending I also have no idea what Pat meant but I know that a poet is allowed to say stuff I don't understand
From: donlay@knology.netTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity MovementDate: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 11:42:02 -0500
I can feel those final grains of self aggrandizement flying out of my pores from the morning readings. -- Funny
Does the experience of "self aggrandizement flying out of my pores " precede the experience of the identity processes being suspended, being held in suspension?
If so, then maybe the meaning of "self aggrandizement flying out of my pores " might be that identity has limited meaning.
Then what is the meaning of someone talking about "self aggrandizement flying out of my pores "? Could it be to demonstrate meaning?
Could it be that one more participates in this that is when not acting and pretending the social identity?
Resonance anyone? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: Don Lay
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 11:27 AM
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
When the identity movement is suspended, experience of being does not cease.
Then, it becomes clear that ontic intelligence does not have to be personalized as Bohm indicates, I believe in the interview with Weber.
Watching the identity movement (thought), awareness of the identity thought may and does at times suspend the identity processes.
Maybe we should say when awareness clearly presents the reasoning that identity processes are not needed, then that awareness suspends the unneeded processes. Later, when awareness of need occurs, then the identity processes recur.
It appears that the I identity is not needed for identity suspension. That's the way it seems to me, to this identity when the identity processes are present.
Resonance anyone ..., all you outer identities "out there"? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
Sounds like? How many syllables? Guess and win prizes with Search Charades!
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
Messenger on the move. Text MSN to 63463 now!
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
_________________________________________________________________
Telly addicts unite!
http://www.searchgamesbox.com/tvtown.shtml
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071219/f438bc4f/attachment.html
From Susan.Joy at worldnet.att.net Wed Dec 19 01:32:53 2007
From: Susan.Joy at worldnet.att.net (Susan Clemons)
Date: Wed Dec 19 01:39:21 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
References: <019101c841b4$738f50b0$fb76480c@HOME>
<476846F4.000011.03588@VAIO-584793128F>
Message-ID: <024c01c841d6$b51b2140$fb76480c@HOME>
But wouldn't the second group be made up of mainly the same people? I have long thought of how to move the dialogue into a different style. One that more people would be interested in. However, like everyone else, I'm just as stumped about how to make that happen. Not to mention the time element. I'm working 2 jobs right now so don't know if I would have time to moderate a group. But if you've got some ideas William I'm willing to listen and consider it.
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: william
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2007 3:17 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
We could consider setting up a second bohm dialogue list; one with a different style. Would you, Susan, be willing to moderate such a new list?
-------Original Message-------
From: Susan Clemons
Date: 18.12.2007 21:27:51
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Maybe so, but I don't join a group so I can spend the majority of my time deleting posts. If there's anything worth reading in there it doesn't seem to be worth the time to search it out. I mostly just sit and hit delete. I really don't care about "looseness", I would like to have a discussion about beliefs and the positive aspects of self. I keep coming back to the group hoping there will be some kind of change but in all the years it's been here it seems to stay pretty much the same. Like I said, if this is all the people of the list want dialogue to be then I would rather not participate. I may simply change my profile to "no mail" so that I can check back in once in a while, but this same old nonsense of Peter and dl dominating the group seems hardly worth the trouble to read.
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: donald factor
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2007 1:19 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
As the man said, judge not lest ye be judged:-)
I'd stick with it. At least I would be unhappy if you left. So often you say stuff that I would have said, so it saves me the trouble. And anyway some gems have emerged out of the flood of stuff, say between Alan(peter) and Rob and Pat' that actually seem to have added a kind of freshness and/or looseness to the flow. It is a counter to DonL's inexhaustible seriousness or earnestness. Recall that dialogue was not meant to be primarily about content so much as about the nature of the flow or process, its blocks and pathways. And anyway, a lot of the huge batch of recent posts are mercifully brief.
don
On Dec 18, 2007, at 11:53 AM, Susan Clemons wrote:
I for one will not keep participating if this is the style that dialogue is going to take.
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: donald factor
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2007 11:38 AM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Irene, I am surprised. Have you really not spotted who Alan is? He has revealed his identity a number of times already. I think Susan was the first to spot it almost immediately he came on line. It took me a while longer. So far I have no complaint. What he has been doing here, along with Rob and Pat, seems to have opened some doors to a looser approach to it all and I like that. I did, by the way, Google Alan but found nobody.
don
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
------------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/df523b52/attachment.html
From rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk Wed Dec 19 01:36:15 2007
From: rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk (rob mooney)
Date: Wed Dec 19 01:42:36 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <3EBA7B2B-7C02-41C3-9D28-91A5E9AC2957@dc.rr.com>
References: <c47283890712171641y2ec41796od299cfcf973a43b1@mail.gmail.com>
<58782.82899.qm@web45801.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
<c47283890712171656x5f4d8dew38a2f8078b4fed92@mail.gmail.com>
<3EBA7B2B-7C02-41C3-9D28-91A5E9AC2957@dc.rr.com>
Message-ID: <BAY123-W935356443FCC0A7D1DC93DC5C0@phx.gbl>
Irene, for don's sake just look at the links and go to tinyurl.com. You can make all you want
god
From: DFACTOR@dc.rr.comSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity MovementDate: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 00:12:33 -0800To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgIrene, for god's sake just look at the links and go to tinyurl.com. You can make all you want
don
On Dec 17, 2007, at 4:56 PM, Irene Darcy wrote:
I: Imag-ineg, sounds of applause.
On Dec 17, 2007 7:52 PM, Alan E. DeBakey <a.debakey@yahoo.com > wrote:
Irene Darcy < irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
I: Don Laying http://tinyurl.com/35olm2 How lovely.
(Top in strigKing disdance).
-- Irene
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
_________________________________________________________________
Who's friends with who and co-starred in what?
http://www.searchgamesbox.com/celebrityseparation.shtml
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071219/24791b09/attachment.html
From irenedarcy at gmail.com Wed Dec 19 01:41:58 2007
From: irenedarcy at gmail.com (Irene Darcy)
Date: Wed Dec 19 01:48:18 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <BAY123-W16E8AE638BF5DDE8487711DC5C0@phx.gbl>
References: <439325.58372.qm@web57411.mail.re1.yahoo.com>
<476679F0.60003@siit.tu.ac.th> <007701c840c1$3c9f5580$b5c16018@DL01>
<009501c840c9$c9da9a10$b5c16018@DL01>
<00ae01c840cb$c07ac830$b5c16018@DL01>
<BAY123-W879FB36B103BA98E4068CDC620@phx.gbl>
<010801c840e1$de342e00$b5c16018@DL01>
<BAY123-W350E74A4BF40EED8D77188DC620@phx.gbl>
<062001c8412b$6f5f12c0$b5c16018@DL01>
<BAY123-W16E8AE638BF5DDE8487711DC5C0@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <c47283890712181641je29040boeb7cccac299fabf6@mail.gmail.com>
I: Rob, you cut off dl's message you're responding to. Please don't.
On Dec 18, 2007 7:29 PM, rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
> this is good stuff Don. you seem to be saying IT IS without acting or
> pretending
>
> ------------------------------
> From: donlay@knology.net
> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
> Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 23:06:58 -0500
>
>
> I think this is important. not just poems. many meaningful things. -- Rob
>
> Me too! I believe it is ultimately important!
>
> DB says that nothing can be without *meaning*. Of course, the question
> ... What is meaning? !!
>
> I believe folk wisdom holds that *meaning* is what is *meant to be*, and
> maybe this *means* what is *intended*.
>
> Thus, we say the whole of Being is whatever *IT* *intends to be ... or
> what it is intending.*
>
> What's that?
>
> Look around. Feel it, listen to it, taste it ... etc. This is it,
> whatever IT IS, this is it simply because there is no other actuality. Is
> there? -- dl
>
>
>
> *From:* rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk>
>
> *To:* bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> *Sent:* Monday, December 17, 2007 2:59 PM
> *Subject:* RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
>
> dl: Surely a poem need not be understood in order to *have meaning*, *be
> meaningful*? dl
>
> I think this is important. not just poems. many meaningful things.
>
> ------------------------------
> From: donlay@knology.net
> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
> Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:20:21 -0500
>
> Rob: I think so and also maybe even when acting and pretending
> **
> dl: Maybe so. Thought, however, presents the idea that what we *act and
> pretend* is the *known*, the *repeated*, but there is always the *new,
> maybe New Being* that is experienced as not the same old known roles, etc.
>
> Rob: I also have no idea what Pat meant but I know that a poet is allowed
> to say stuff I don't understand
>
> dl: Surely a poem need not be understood in order to *have meaning*, *be
> meaningful*? dl
>
> http://www.knology.net/~donlay/ <http://www.knology.net/%7Edonlay/>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk>
> *To:* bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> *Sent:* Monday, December 17, 2007 1:20 PM
> *Subject:* RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
>
> Could it be that one more participates in *this that is* when not *acting
> and pretending* the *social identity*?
>
> I think so
> and also maybe even when acting and pretending
>
> I also have no idea what Pat meant but I know that a poet is allowed to
> say stuff I don't understand
>
>
> ------------------------------
> From: donlay@knology.net
> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
> Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 11:42:02 -0500
>
> I can feel those final grains of self aggrandizement flying out of my
> pores from the morning readings. -- Funny
>
> Does the experience of "self aggrandizement flying out of my pores "
> precede the experience of the *identity processes* being suspended, being
> held in suspension?
>
> If so, then maybe *the meaning* of "self aggrandizement flying out of my
> pores " might be that *identity* has *limited** meaning*.
>
> Then what is the *meaning* of someone talking about "self aggrandizement
> flying out of my pores "? Could it be to demonstrate *meaning*?
>
> Could it be that one more participates in *this that is* when not *acting
> and pretending* the *social identity*?
>
> Resonance anyone? -- dl
>
>
> http://www.knology.net/~donlay/ <http://www.knology.net/%7Edonlay/>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Don Lay <donlay@knology.net>
> *To:* bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> *Sent:* Monday, December 17, 2007 11:27 AM
> *Subject:* [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
>
> When the *identity movement* is suspended, experience of being does not
> cease.
>
> Then, it becomes clear that *ontic intelligence* does not have to be *
> personalized* as Bohm indicates, I believe in the interview with Weber.
>
> *Watching* the *identity movement (thought)*, *awareness of* the identity
> thought may and does at times *suspend* the *identity processes*.
>
> Maybe we should say when awareness clearly presents the reasoning that *identity
> processes* are not needed, then that awareness suspends the
> unneeded processes. Later, when awareness of need occurs, then the *identity
> processes* recur.
>
> It appears that the *I* *identity* is not needed for *identity*suspension. That's the way it seems to me, to this
> *identity* when the *identity processes* are present.
>
> Resonance anyone ..., all you outer *identities* "out there"? -- dl
>
>
> http://www.knology.net/~donlay/ <http://www.knology.net/%7Edonlay/>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> <http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue>
>
>
--
Irene
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/c780f236/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Wed Dec 19 01:46:06 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Wed Dec 19 01:52:27 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <024c01c841d6$b51b2140$fb76480c@HOME>
Message-ID: <793973.83710.qm@web45805.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Susan Clemons <Susan.Joy@worldnet.att.net> wrote: v\:* { BEHAVIOR: url (#default#vml) } v\:* { BEHAVIOR: url (#default#vml) } But wouldn't the second group be made up of mainly the same people? .... o, no, not NECESSARILY -- see tas--, we (hi rob) could makeupmakeup
(hi pretend'n'act'or'don) the one or other(one), could we not (h-I-rene...) ;->
humanimalan
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/7e239c3b/attachment.html
From irenedarcy at gmail.com Wed Dec 19 01:49:08 2007
From: irenedarcy at gmail.com (Irene Darcy)
Date: Wed Dec 19 01:55:29 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Some Bohm Quotes on Images
Message-ID: <c47283890712181649q61d3f37brc78d8c4a2992dff1@mail.gmail.com>
------------------------------
Literally, imagination means 'the ability to make mental images' which
imitate the forms of real things.
There may be another language. There may be an image language. TAS 89
You could say that the earliest thoughts before there was language would
probably have involved images. TAS 94
Thought works by representation ? by a symbol and by a representation...You
can use simplified images as symbols.
Q: This level below the verbal, is it another system of symbols ? pictures,
perhaps?
B: There's a kind of preverbal symbol, and there may be others that we don't
know about. Language is on top of all this. But when we learn to talk we
forget this, and we don't recognize that these symbols are still part of our
thought. They seem to be something else.
Q: Is this what you were speaking about earlier in terms of bringing these
things up into the verbal and understanding them?
B: At least getting a look at them...We are learning. I'm trying to say
that here is something we didn't know about this process. It may be
relevant, it may not. The fact that we know it may turn out to be helpful
in some context. And we may be able to observe some of it by bringing it
up. By bringing it into words we might get a connection to some of the
other aspects of the process and get a better feeling for how it is
working. One of the troubles is that this thought process is going on and
we don't know at all how it's working. And when we don't know how it is
working we very quickly regard it as something else: as non-thought.
Q: What we're doing is making a better map.
B: Yes.
TAS 95 -97
Then, of course, dreams are certainly images. Will look for latest research
on images as language. Of course, gesture is a kind of imaging (Hearing
Gesture' by Goldin) Autistic children are often brilliant, as are
dyslexics. So if I read Bohm correctly, by not exploring the role of
imaging in thinking, we run the risk of holding an invalid assumption, and
acting on it. Not to mention ignoring a potentially valuable resource.
More quotes later on imagination and representation.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/56952cf5/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Wed Dec 19 01:52:20 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Wed Dec 19 01:58:41 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <c47283890712181641je29040boeb7cccac299fabf6@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <545546.69180.qm@web45811.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Mmmmmm
Funni mst hav a feast
A:
rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
Irene, for don's sake just look at the links and go to tinyurl.com. You can make all you want
god
followed at once by
B:
Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
I: Rob, you cut off dl's message you're responding to. Please don't.
~
.
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/08e05936/attachment.html
From rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk Wed Dec 19 01:53:43 2007
From: rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk (rob mooney)
Date: Wed Dec 19 02:00:05 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our Poem
In-Reply-To: <20071218.131023.3184.121.ae.dropper@juno.com>
References: <20071218.131023.3184.121.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <BAY123-W12A10B7D09F7CE0185C216DC5C0@phx.gbl>
Fullness pours out what I see
it does not seem
it all empties into white
the mounds of it - frozen overnight
in the fine snow, crystals,
worms throw up casts.
On my screen I see it blackbut I know up close you can see
the colors - LOOK- there is no black intransmittedlight.
_________________________________________________________________
Who's friends with who and co-starred in what?
http://www.searchgamesbox.com/celebrityseparation.shtml
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071219/2e278788/attachment.html
From irenedarcy at gmail.com Wed Dec 19 01:58:12 2007
From: irenedarcy at gmail.com (Irene Darcy)
Date: Wed Dec 19 02:04:32 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <545546.69180.qm@web45811.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
References: <c47283890712181641je29040boeb7cccac299fabf6@mail.gmail.com>
<545546.69180.qm@web45811.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <c47283890712181658j13e7d506gab14e12862fe1997@mail.gmail.com>
I: Ha, ha, ha! You're running Peter-AlanEd and Chaplin a close third.
On Dec 18, 2007 7:52 PM, Alan E. DeBakey <a.debakey@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Mmmmmm
> Funni mst hav a feast
>
> A:
>
> rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
> Irene, for don's sake just look at the links and go to tinyurl.com. You
> can make all you want
>
> god
>
> followed at once by
>
> B:
>
> Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I: Rob, you cut off dl's message you're responding to. Please don't.
>
>
>
> ~
> .
>
> ------------------------------
>
> <http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue>
>
>
--
Irene
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/9de777fe/attachment.html
From rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk Wed Dec 19 02:02:48 2007
From: rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk (rob mooney)
Date: Wed Dec 19 02:09:09 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Assumptions and Improvisation
In-Reply-To: <c47283890712181512n3f552a48o731648ec103d2730@mail.gmail.com>
References: <c47283890712160453q5d0112b2kdaed11b0a2da9398@mail.gmail.com>
<20739337-5807-446A-A370-DA2686551E14@dc.rr.com>
<c47283890712181449w322ba692ia82cb86c21c3a93c@mail.gmail.com>
<186138A9-AA0B-405F-B17F-22C74B9A4A4D@dc.rr.com>
<c47283890712181512n3f552a48o731648ec103d2730@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BAY123-W2085836969B9D4B4AFDFFDDC5C0@phx.gbl>
i should jolly well think not! far too much like canoodling.
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 18:12:16 -0500From: irenedarcy@gmail.comTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Assumptions and ImprovisationI: I suggest you double check with them. You seem to have confused 'doodling' with 'noodling', and 'noodling' is not as respected as you seem to think.
On Dec 18, 2007 5:56 PM, donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> wrote:
>From some musician friends, years ago.
don
On Dec 18, 2007, at 2:49 PM, Irene Darcy wrote:
It is usually called doodling. I: Just curious, Don. Where did you get that piece of information?
On Dec 16, 2007 2:36 PM, donald factor < DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> wrote:
When I think of improvisation, I think of the collective improvisation central to jazz, based on the chord and rhythm progressions of a particular song that the group has begun playing. I think of it as a musical dialogue. Individual improvisation is something else. From what little I know about classical improvisation it is simply composing at the piano or other instrument, inventing variations on a pre-existing piece of music or making up a cadenza or such and not writing it down. It is a very different category from jazz improvisation in which each improvised section can never be repeated. Almost anyone who plays an instrument can and does improvise in this sense. It is usually called doodling. I am not much of a pianist, but many times, just for fun, I have played around at the piano in this way, and occasionally have come up with stuff that sounded pretty good. Anyway, to me, all improvisation is based on some pre-existing score or theme.but what impresses me most is that jazz musicians seem to be able to do it together aaaand to come up with something fresh and new each time they take off on the same piece. That it, the good ones can do it. I have yet to hear of collective classical improvisation. But maybe you could point me to some.
don
don
On Dec 16, 2007, at 4:53 AM, Irene Darcy wrote:
DF's last post on this topic yesterday contained so many enfolded, implied - most likely unintentionally - assumptions, that to answer him, it would take the kind of in depth work a music historian and musicologist could turn into a doctoral dissertation. However, for starters, see http://en.wikipedia.Sorg/wiki/Musical_improvisation
It compares jazz and classical improvisation traditions. The invention of the printing press, and the cultural assumptions of European society had a great deal to do with relegating the genius of the likes of Bach to the category of the disrespect it has-had for oral tradition. In the Wiki article, Eric Barnhill is mentioned. He is a fellow Dalcrozian, and studied with my Dalcroze teacher. He has his own website with original audio samples. Not mentioned is David Darling, cellist, and his organization Music for People whose purpose is to bring improvisation in all musical genres back to the people. Music for People can also be Googled. His workshops are attended by many, and are presented world wide. Neither is mentioned Paul Winter, currently in residence at St john the Divine here in NYC. I've attended many beautiful improvisation concerts of his. He is in a stylistic category of his own. And a recent acquaintance of mine whose name I'd have to go pull up whose ensemble, The Mad Coyote (I think it's called) can be Googled and who performs in various venues. Just recently here in the Village. Classical musicians are rising up in revolt!In closing, let me say that I have been working on this for many years. Have done a lot of research, and have studied a great many 'methods', both jazz and classical, and some Indian. As I teach myself, I'm putting together my own 'method' that integrates what I consider to be the best of jazz and classical approaches, and intend to include Salsa, if I live that long! -- Irene
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
_________________________________________________________________
Who's friends with who and co-starred in what?
http://www.searchgamesbox.com/celebrityseparation.shtml
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071219/96553969/attachment.html
From irenedarcy at gmail.com Wed Dec 19 02:08:14 2007
From: irenedarcy at gmail.com (Irene Darcy)
Date: Wed Dec 19 02:14:36 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Assumptions and Improvisation
In-Reply-To: <BAY123-W2085836969B9D4B4AFDFFDDC5C0@phx.gbl>
References: <c47283890712160453q5d0112b2kdaed11b0a2da9398@mail.gmail.com>
<20739337-5807-446A-A370-DA2686551E14@dc.rr.com>
<c47283890712181449w322ba692ia82cb86c21c3a93c@mail.gmail.com>
<186138A9-AA0B-405F-B17F-22C74B9A4A4D@dc.rr.com>
<c47283890712181512n3f552a48o731648ec103d2730@mail.gmail.com>
<BAY123-W2085836969B9D4B4AFDFFDDC5C0@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <c47283890712181708k53670502y74064c791c60a143@mail.gmail.com>
I:
Encore, encore, more, more, more.
On Dec 18, 2007 8:02 PM, rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
> i should jolly well think not! far too much like canoodling.
>
> ------------------------------
> Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 18:12:16 -0500
> From: irenedarcy@gmail.com
> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Assumptions and Improvisation
>
>
> I: I suggest you double check with them. You seem to have confused
> 'doodling' with 'noodling', and 'noodling' is not as respected as you seem
> to think.
>
> On Dec 18, 2007 5:56 PM, donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> wrote:
>
> >From some musician friends, years ago.
> don
>
> On Dec 18, 2007, at 2:49 PM, Irene Darcy wrote:
>
> It is usually called doodling.
>
> I: Just curious, Don. Where did you get that piece of information?
>
> On Dec 16, 2007 2:36 PM, donald factor < DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> wrote:
>
>
> When I think of improvisation, I think of the collective improvisation
> central to jazz, based on the chord and rhythm progressions of a particular
> song that the group has begun playing. I think of it as a musical dialogue.
> Individual improvisation is something else. From what little I know about
> classical improvisation it is simply composing at the piano or other
> instrument, inventing variations on a pre-existing piece of music or making
> up a cadenza or such and not writing it down. It is a very different
> category from jazz improvisation in which each improvised section can never
> be repeated. Almost anyone who plays an instrument can and does improvise in
> this sense. It is usually called doodling. I am not much of a pianist, but
> many times, just for fun, I have played around at the piano in this way, and
> occasionally have come up with stuff that sounded pretty good. Anyway, to
> me, all improvisation is based on some pre-existing score or theme.butwhat impresses me most is that jazz musicians seem to be able to do it
> together aaaand to come up with something fresh and new each time they take
> off on the same piece. That it, the good ones can do it. I have yet to hear
> of collective classical improvisation. But maybe you could point me to some.
>
> don
>
> don
>
> On Dec 16, 2007, at 4:53 AM, Irene Darcy wrote:
>
> DF's last post on this topic yesterday contained so many enfolded,
> implied - most likely unintentionally - assumptions, that to answer him,
> it would take the kind of in depth work a music historian and musicologist
> could turn into a doctoral dissertation. However, for starters, see
>
> http://en.wikipedia.Sorg/wiki/Musical_improvisation<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Musical_improvisation>
>
> It compares jazz and classical improvisation traditions.
>
> The invention of the printing press, and the cultural assumptions of
> European society had a great deal to do with relegating the genius of the
> likes of Bach to the category of the disrespect it has-had for oral
> tradition.
>
> In the Wiki article, Eric Barnhill is mentioned. He is a fellow
> Dalcrozian, and studied with my Dalcroze teacher. He has his own website
> with original audio samples. Not mentioned is David Darling, cellist, and
> his organization Music for People whose purpose is to bring improvisation in
> all musical genres back to the people. Music for People can also be
> Googled. His workshops are attended by many, and are presented world wide.
> Neither is mentioned Paul Winter, currently in residence at St john the
> Divine here in NYC. I've attended many beautiful improvisation concerts of
> his. He is in a stylistic category of his own. And a recent acquaintance
> of mine whose name I'd have to go pull up whose ensemble, The Mad Coyote (I
> think it's called) can be Googled and who performs in various venues. Just
> recently here in the Village.
> Classical musicians are rising up in revolt!
>
> In closing, let me say that I have been working on this for many years.
> Have done a lot of research, and have studied a great many 'methods', both
> jazz and classical, and some Indian. As I teach myself, I'm putting together
> my own 'method' that integrates what I consider to be the best of jazz and
> classical approaches, and intend to include Salsa, if I live that long!
>
> --
> Irene
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> Sounds like? How many syllables? Guess and win prizes with Search
> Charades! <http://www.searchcharades.com>
>
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>
--
Irene
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/fa67536c/attachment.html
From rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk Wed Dec 19 02:08:54 2007
From: rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk (rob mooney)
Date: Wed Dec 19 02:15:16 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <c47283890712181641je29040boeb7cccac299fabf6@mail.gmail.com>
References: <439325.58372.qm@web57411.mail.re1.yahoo.com>
<476679F0.60003@siit.tu.ac.th> <007701c840c1$3c9f5580$b5c16018@DL01>
<009501c840c9$c9da9a10$b5c16018@DL01>
<00ae01c840cb$c07ac830$b5c16018@DL01>
<BAY123-W879FB36B103BA98E4068CDC620@phx.gbl>
<010801c840e1$de342e00$b5c16018@DL01>
<BAY123-W350E74A4BF40EED8D77188DC620@phx.gbl>
<062001c8412b$6f5f12c0$b5c16018@DL01>
<BAY123-W16E8AE638BF5DDE8487711DC5C0@phx.gbl>
<c47283890712181641je29040boeb7cccac299fabf6@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BAY123-W150CBE15C832D75770BDCDDC5C0@phx.gbl>
no I didn't Irene.
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 19:41:58 -0500From: irenedarcy@gmail.comTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity MovementI: Rob, you cut off dl's message you're responding to. Please don't.
On Dec 18, 2007 7:29 PM, rob mooney < rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
this is good stuff Don. you seem to be saying IT IS without acting or pretending
From: donlay@knology.netTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 23:06:58 -0500
I think this is important. not just poems. many meaningful things. -- Rob
Me too! I believe it is ultimately important!
DB says that nothing can be without meaning. Of course, the question ... What is meaning? !!
I believe folk wisdom holds that meaning is what is meant to be, and maybe this means what is intended.
Thus, we say the whole of Being is whatever IT intends to be ... or what it is intending.
What's that?
Look around. Feel it, listen to it, taste it ... etc. This is it, whatever IT IS, this is it simply because there is no other actuality. Is there? -- dl
From: rob mooney
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 2:59 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
dl: Surely a poem need not be understood in order to have meaning, be meaningful? dl I think this is important. not just poems. many meaningful things.
From: donlay@knology.netTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:20:21 -0500
Rob: I think so and also maybe even when acting and pretending
dl: Maybe so. Thought, however, presents the idea that what we act and pretend is the known, the repeated, but there is always the new, maybe New Being that is experienced as not the same old known roles, etc.
Rob: I also have no idea what Pat meant but I know that a poet is allowed to say stuff I don't understand
dl: Surely a poem need not be understood in order to have meaning, be meaningful? dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: rob mooney
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 1:20 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Could it be that one more participates in this that is when not acting and pretending the social identity? I think so and also maybe even when acting and pretending I also have no idea what Pat meant but I know that a poet is allowed to say stuff I don't understand
From: donlay@knology.netTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 11:42:02 -0500
I can feel those final grains of self aggrandizement flying out of my pores from the morning readings. -- Funny
Does the experience of "self aggrandizement flying out of my pores " precede the experience of the identity processes being suspended, being held in suspension?
If so, then maybe the meaning of "self aggrandizement flying out of my pores " might be that identity has limited meaning.
Then what is the meaning of someone talking about "self aggrandizement flying out of my pores "? Could it be to demonstrate meaning?
Could it be that one more participates in this that is when not acting and pretending the social identity?
Resonance anyone? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: Don Lay
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 11:27 AM
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
When the identity movement is suspended, experience of being does not cease.
Then, it becomes clear that ontic intelligence does not have to be personalized as Bohm indicates, I believe in the interview with Weber.
Watching the identity movement (thought), awareness of the identity thought may and does at times suspend the identity processes.
Maybe we should say when awareness clearly presents the reasoning that identity processes are not needed, then that awareness suspends the unneeded processes. Later, when awareness of need occurs, then the identity processes recur.
It appears that the I identity is not needed for identity suspension. That's the way it seems to me, to this identity when the identity processes are present.
Resonance anyone ..., all you outer identities "out there"? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
-- Irene
_________________________________________________________________
Free games, great prizes - get gaming at Gamesbox.
http://www.searchgamesbox.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071219/6e17784d/attachment.html
From irenedarcy at gmail.com Wed Dec 19 02:15:36 2007
From: irenedarcy at gmail.com (Irene Darcy)
Date: Wed Dec 19 02:21:57 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <BAY123-W150CBE15C832D75770BDCDDC5C0@phx.gbl>
References: <439325.58372.qm@web57411.mail.re1.yahoo.com>
<009501c840c9$c9da9a10$b5c16018@DL01>
<00ae01c840cb$c07ac830$b5c16018@DL01>
<BAY123-W879FB36B103BA98E4068CDC620@phx.gbl>
<010801c840e1$de342e00$b5c16018@DL01>
<BAY123-W350E74A4BF40EED8D77188DC620@phx.gbl>
<062001c8412b$6f5f12c0$b5c16018@DL01>
<BAY123-W16E8AE638BF5DDE8487711DC5C0@phx.gbl>
<c47283890712181641je29040boeb7cccac299fabf6@mail.gmail.com>
<BAY123-W150CBE15C832D75770BDCDDC5C0@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <c47283890712181715o786bbc2fqfc77f5af96f716df@mail.gmail.com>
I: It's the 'good stuff' you cut off. I have no idea what it's referring
to.
Time out. Gotta dispose of old microwave.
On Dec 18, 2007 8:08 PM, rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
> no I didn't Irene.
>
> ------------------------------
> Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 19:41:58 -0500
> From: irenedarcy@gmail.com
>
> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
>
> I: Rob, you cut off dl's message you're responding to. Please don't.
>
> On Dec 18, 2007 7:29 PM, rob mooney < rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>
> this is good stuff Don. you seem to be saying IT IS without acting or
> pretending
>
> ------------------------------
> From: donlay@knology.net
> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
> Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 23:06:58 -0500
>
>
> I think this is important. not just poems. many meaningful things. -- Rob
>
> Me too! I believe it is ultimately important!
>
> DB says that nothing can be without *meaning*. Of course, the question
> ... What is meaning? !!
>
> I believe folk wisdom holds that *meaning* is what is *meant to be*, and
> maybe this *means* what is *intended*.
>
> Thus, we say the whole of Being is whatever *IT* *intends to be ... or
> what it is intending.*
>
> What's that?
>
> Look around. Feel it, listen to it, taste it ... etc. This is it,
> whatever IT IS, this is it simply because there is no other actuality. Is
> there? -- dl
>
>
>
> *From:* rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk>
>
> *To:* bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> *Sent:* Monday, December 17, 2007 2:59 PM
> *Subject:* RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
>
> dl: Surely a poem need not be understood in order to *have meaning*, *be
> meaningful*? dl
>
> I think this is important. not just poems. many meaningful things.
>
> ------------------------------
> From: donlay@knology.net
> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
> Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:20:21 -0500
>
> Rob: I think so and also maybe even when acting and pretending
> **
> dl: Maybe so. Thought, however, presents the idea that what we *act and
> pretend* is the *known*, the *repeated*, but there is always the *new,
> maybe New Being* that is experienced as not the same old known roles, etc.
>
> Rob: I also have no idea what Pat meant but I know that a poet is allowed
> to say stuff I don't understand
>
> dl: Surely a poem need not be understood in order to *have meaning*, *be
> meaningful*? dl
>
> http://www.knology.net/~donlay/ <http://www.knology.net/%7Edonlay/>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk>
> *To:* bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> *Sent:* Monday, December 17, 2007 1:20 PM
> *Subject:* RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
>
> Could it be that one more participates in *this that is* when not *acting
> and pretending* the *social identity*?
>
> I think so
> and also maybe even when acting and pretending
>
> I also have no idea what Pat meant but I know that a poet is allowed to
> say stuff I don't understand
>
>
> ------------------------------
> From: donlay@knology.net
> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
> Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 11:42:02 -0500
>
> I can feel those final grains of self aggrandizement flying out of my
> pores from the morning readings. -- Funny
>
> Does the experience of "self aggrandizement flying out of my pores "
> precede the experience of the *identity processes* being suspended, being
> held in suspension?
>
> If so, then maybe *the meaning* of "self aggrandizement flying out of my
> pores " might be that *identity* has *limited** meaning*.
>
> Then what is the *meaning* of someone talking about "self aggrandizement
> flying out of my pores "? Could it be to demonstrate *meaning*?
>
> Could it be that one more participates in *this that is* when not *acting
> and pretending* the *social identity*?
>
> Resonance anyone? -- dl
>
>
> http://www.knology.net/~donlay/ <http://www.knology.net/%7Edonlay/>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Don Lay <donlay@knology.net>
> *To:* bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> *Sent:* Monday, December 17, 2007 11:27 AM
> *Subject:* [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
>
> When the *identity movement* is suspended, experience of being does not
> cease.
>
> Then, it becomes clear that *ontic intelligence* does not have to be *
> personalized* as Bohm indicates, I believe in the interview with Weber.
>
> *Watching* the *identity movement (thought)*, *awareness of* the identity
> thought may and does at times *suspend* the *identity processes*.
>
> Maybe we should say when awareness clearly presents the reasoning that *identity
> processes* are not needed, then that awareness suspends the
> unneeded processes. Later, when awareness of need occurs, then the *identity
> processes* recur.
>
> It appears that the *I* *identity* is not needed for *identity*suspension. That's the way it seems to me, to this
> *identity* when the *identity processes * are present.
>
> Resonance anyone ..., all you outer *identities* "out there"? -- dl
>
>
> http://www.knology.net/~donlay/ <http://www.knology.net/%7Edonlay/>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> <http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue>
>
>
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/1b5e4504/attachment.html
From DFACTOR at dc.rr.com Wed Dec 19 02:47:33 2007
From: DFACTOR at dc.rr.com (donald factor)
Date: Wed Dec 19 02:53:57 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Assumptions and Improvisation
In-Reply-To: <c47283890712181512n3f552a48o731648ec103d2730@mail.gmail.com>
References: <c47283890712160453q5d0112b2kdaed11b0a2da9398@mail.gmail.com>
<20739337-5807-446A-A370-DA2686551E14@dc.rr.com>
<c47283890712181449w322ba692ia82cb86c21c3a93c@mail.gmail.com>
<186138A9-AA0B-405F-B17F-22C74B9A4A4D@dc.rr.com>
<c47283890712181512n3f552a48o731648ec103d2730@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <98B63FBF-3114-4757-A200-C95AE54B810E@dc.rr.com>
Right. it was noodling. But, no, it was the sort of thing that I used
to do and on occasion come up with something that sounced like real
music.
don
On Dec 18, 2007, at 3:12 PM, Irene Darcy wrote:
> I: I suggest you double check with them. You seem to have
> confused 'doodling' with 'noodling', and 'noodling' is not as
> respected as you seem to think.
>
> On Dec 18, 2007 5:56 PM, donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> wrote:
> >From some musician friends, years ago.
>
> don
>
> On Dec 18, 2007, at 2:49 PM, Irene Darcy wrote:
>
>> It is usually called doodling.
>>
>> I: Just curious, Don. Where did you get that piece of information?
>>
>> On Dec 16, 2007 2:36 PM, donald factor < DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> wrote:
>>
>> When I think of improvisation, I think of the collective
>> improvisation central to jazz, based on the chord and rhythm
>> progressions of a particular song that the group has begun
>> playing. I think of it as a musical dialogue. Individual
>> improvisation is something else. From what little I know about
>> classical improvisation it is simply composing at the piano or
>> other instrument, inventing variations on a pre-existing piece of
>> music or making up a cadenza or such and not writing it down. It
>> is a very different category from jazz improvisation in which each
>> improvised section can never be repeated. Almost anyone who plays
>> an instrument can and does improvise in this sense. It is usually
>> called doodling. I am not much of a pianist, but many times, just
>> for fun, I have played around at the piano in this way, and
>> occasionally have come up with stuff that sounded pretty good.
>> Anyway, to me, all improvisation is based on some pre-existing
>> score or theme.but what impresses me most is that jazz musicians
>> seem to be able to do it together aaaand to come up with something
>> fresh and new each time they take off on the same piece. That it,
>> the good ones can do it. I have yet to hear of collective
>> classical improvisation. But maybe you could point me to some.
>>
>> don
>>
>> don
>>
>> On Dec 16, 2007, at 4:53 AM, Irene Darcy wrote:
>>
>>> DF's last post on this topic yesterday contained so many
>>> enfolded, implied - most likely unintentionally - assumptions,
>>> that to answer him, it would take the kind of in depth work a
>>> music historian and musicologist could turn into a doctoral
>>> dissertation. However, for starters, see
>>>
>>> http://en.wikipedia.Sorg/wiki/Musical_improvisation
>>>
>>>
>>> It compares jazz and classical improvisation traditions.
>>>
>>> The invention of the printing press, and the cultural assumptions
>>> of European society had a great deal to do with relegating the
>>> genius of the likes of Bach to the category of the disrespect
>>> it has-had for oral tradition.
>>>
>>> In the Wiki article, Eric Barnhill is mentioned. He is a fellow
>>> Dalcrozian, and studied with my Dalcroze teacher. He has his own
>>> website with original audio samples. Not mentioned is David
>>> Darling, cellist, and his organization Music for People whose
>>> purpose is to bring improvisation in all musical genres back to
>>> the people. Music for People can also be Googled. His workshops
>>> are attended by many, and are presented world wide. Neither is
>>> mentioned Paul Winter, currently in residence at St john the
>>> Divine here in NYC. I've attended many beautiful improvisation
>>> concerts of his. He is in a stylistic category of his own. And
>>> a recent acquaintance of mine whose name I'd have to go pull up
>>> whose ensemble, The Mad Coyote (I think it's called) can be
>>> Googled and who performs in various venues. Just recently here
>>> in the Village.
>>> Classical musicians are rising up in revolt!
>>>
>>> In closing, let me say that I have been working on this for many
>>> years. Have done a lot of research, and have studied a great
>>> many 'methods', both jazz and classical, and some Indian. As I
>>> teach myself, I'm putting together my own 'method' that
>>> integrates what I consider to be the best of jazz and classical
>>> approaches, and intend to include Salsa, if I live that long!
>>>
>>> --
>>> Irene
>>>
>>> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>>
>>
>
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/83aeeecb/attachment.html
From donlay at knology.net Wed Dec 19 02:48:14 2007
From: donlay at knology.net (Don Lay)
Date: Wed Dec 19 02:54:26 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Some Bohm Quotes on Images
References: <c47283890712181649q61d3f37brc78d8c4a2992dff1@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <004701c841e1$38c4d590$b5c16018@DL01>
So if I read Bohm correctly, by not exploring the role of imaging in thinking, we run the risk of holding an invalid assumption, and acting on it. Not to mention ignoring a potentially valuable resource. -- Irene
That's my understanding also. -- dl
From: Irene Darcy
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2007 7:49 PM
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Some Bohm Quotes on Images
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Literally, imagination means 'the ability to make mental images' which imitate the forms of real things.
There may be another language. There may be an image language. TAS 89
You could say that the earliest thoughts before there was language would probably have involved images. TAS 94
Thought works by representation ? by a symbol and by a representation...You can use simplified images as symbols.
Q: This level below the verbal, is it another system of symbols ? pictures, perhaps?
B: There's a kind of preverbal symbol, and there may be others that we don't know about. Language is on top of all this. But when we learn to talk we forget this, and we don't recognize that these symbols are still part of our thought. They seem to be something else.
Q: Is this what you were speaking about earlier in terms of bringing these things up into the verbal and understanding them?
B: At least getting a look at them...We are learning. I'm trying to say that here is something we didn't know about this process. It may be relevant, it may not. The fact that we know it may turn out to be helpful in some context. And we may be able to observe some of it by bringing it up. By bringing it into words we might get a connection to some of the other aspects of the process and get a better feeling for how it is working. One of the troubles is that this thought process is going on and we don't know at all how it's working. And when we don't know how it is working we very quickly regard it as something else: as non-thought.
Q: What we're doing is making a better map.
B: Yes.
TAS 95 -97
Then, of course, dreams are certainly images. Will look for latest research on images as language. Of course, gesture is a kind of imaging (Hearing Gesture' by Goldin) Autistic children are often brilliant, as are dyslexics. So if I read Bohm correctly, by not exploring the role of imaging in thinking, we run the risk of holding an invalid assumption, and acting on it. Not to mention ignoring a potentially valuable resource.
More quotes later on imagination and representation.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/9e42151e/attachment.html
From DFACTOR at dc.rr.com Wed Dec 19 02:54:23 2007
From: DFACTOR at dc.rr.com (donald factor)
Date: Wed Dec 19 03:00:48 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In-Reply-To: <BAY123-W173CB36371D1797F0A9CCDDC5C0@phx.gbl>
References: <016201c840e6$ded1b440$b5c16018@DL01><C38C3C99.FA94%lynne@lifedirectionscoach.com><c47283890712171353j95c274bj9096a97ab64953bc@mail.gmail.com><035301c840fb$4d1463d0$b5c16018@DL01>
<c47283890712171432w7e5a633ej7673469675579782@mail.gmail.com>
<03a501c84114$78c7a3c0$b5c16018@DL01>
<BAY123-W173CB36371D1797F0A9CCDDC5C0@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <3E9D0B23-6B50-42F9-9418-DE9F46921C62@dc.rr.com>
As I said, Art Acts. And there are all kinds of art. But there is no
such animal as good art or bad art. There is only art and non-art.
don
On Dec 18, 2007, at 4:01 PM, rob mooney wrote:
> "poems are epiphanic documents and show the writer in the process
> of making their discoveries, so that the reader can re-enact and re-
> live them, not merely feel their after effects or learn the poet's
> wise conclusions."
>
> (Don patterson)
>
> I expect this goes for C++, painting, music, dancing, sculpture,
> photography, millenery, etc. Maybe even when Don F chooses a tee
> shirt...
>
>
> From: donlay@knology.net
> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
> Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 20:22:32 -0500
>
> ISmeaningfulTM to say the answer to these questions is yes, and to
> say that Bohm, talking about infinite subtlety and when he says it
> is as far "in there" inside the atom as it is "out there" through
> the universe substantiates the view I'm trying to learn how to
> explicate.
>
> Where or what is the personal identity while being sensitive enough
> to "hear" the direction that amounts to improv?
>
> Once again, my programming friend says there is no identity
> movement while writing code. If there was, he would be unable to
> write code because C++, he says, is not the language appropriate
> for the personal identity. That is, personal identity simply has
> no meaning in the Visual Basic or C++ language.
>
> Are you aware of Irene's personal identity movement while doing
> improv? -- dl
>
>
> \
> From: Irene Darcy
> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 5:32 PM
> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
>
> I: We're getting into the idea of Nada Brahma, now. And to say
> more, I'd have to go get my book.
>
> It would have been more accurate to say one creates a time-space
> line when one moves, I think.
>
> Why do all the good things happen at once? I'm working on Bach
> Goldberg. My Eurhythmics teacher is giving a three day workshop
> soon on what an improviser can learn from them, and I'm preparing
> for it. I would love to have heard Bach sit down and jam with
> Paquito d'Rivera; throw in Sidney Bechet for good measure on
> clarinet, and Eugene Ysaye on violin.
>
> On Dec 17, 2007 5:22 PM, Don Lay <donlay@knology.net> wrote:
> I: Every time you move you are creating explicate time-space.
>
> What about the idea that every time you move, you are using time
> and space?
>
> Is there time and space absent homo-sappo, prior to homo-sappo?
> Perhaps more precisely, is there some actuality indicated by time
> and space that is prior to homo-sappo? -- dl
>
> http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Irene Darcy
> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 4:53 PM
> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
>
> I: Every time you move you are creating explicate time-space. And
> imagination has its place when it's not out of balance.
>
> On Dec 17, 2007 4:47 PM, Lynne Tolk <
> lynne@lifedirectionscoach.com> wrote:
> To be or not to be? Is there a choice? Is the question the
> problem? What about yes? (form is emptiness, emptiness is form;
> explicate is implicate is explicate?)
>
>
>
> On 12/17/07 12:56 PM, "Don Lay" <donlay@knology.net> wrote:
>
> the old old thought occurs -- no us? -- Rob
>
> Maybe. I've been using the idea of imagination, thought to think
> of the identity of things including us.
>
> I think I'm beginning to understand something like the idea of all
> this that is as unknown and thought equating with the imaged known,
> with the language or knowing system of imagination.
>
> It's a bit spooky to think that us is not. That is, the notness or
> non being must be addressed. The anxiety does not go away simply
> by acting and pretending it is not there.
>
> Maybe one way to avoid the anxiety of non being is to understand
> the idea that relative being is part of the whole of Being. dl
>
>
> http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: rob mooney <mailto:rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk>
> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 2:37 PM
> Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
>
> The thought occurs -- since we all use time, space, etc., how could
> there be no space?
>
> the old old thought occurs -- no us?
>
>
>
> From: donlay@knology.net
> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
> Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:05:03 -0500
>
> if there is no space time tea cake etc aren't we wasting our...
> um... breath
>
> The thought occurs -- since we all use time, space, etc., how could
> there be no space? Maybe we could say that it is only a useful
> concept and use while being aware that it is limited.
>
> Would that be in the direction of unlimited experience? -- dl
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Irene
>
>
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>
>
>
> --
> Irene
>
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>
> Everything in one place. All new Windows Live!
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/21564b3a/attachment-0001.html
From DFACTOR at dc.rr.com Wed Dec 19 02:56:21 2007
From: DFACTOR at dc.rr.com (donald factor)
Date: Wed Dec 19 03:02:44 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In-Reply-To: <BAY123-W3142D1739711E2E101EA09DC5C0@phx.gbl>
References: <439325.58372.qm@web57411.mail.re1.yahoo.com><476679F0.60003@siit.tu.ac.th>
<003101c840b4$1a0909b0$b5c16018@DL01>
<BAY123-W316D168A86355AA8647C79DC620@phx.gbl>
<00e501c840df$bb92bda0$b5c16018@DL01>
<BAY123-W3205646DF39FCB075F9CE5DC620@phx.gbl>
<1F7DA20A-E59A-4220-978F-3AA284BBD26C@dc.rr.com>
<BAY123-W17D702155BD553E462636EDC620@phx.gbl>
<8E62992E-CB4A-4FD0-B267-A050FBAE608A@dc.rr.com>
<BAY123-W3142D1739711E2E101EA09DC5C0@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <9CE6CCB0-CC80-480A-983E-472D2D8F98D1@dc.rr.com>
What? You don't know My Space? Try Googling it. There is also Face
Book but My Space is even closer to home.
don
On Dec 18, 2007, at 4:08 PM, rob mooney wrote:
> and where would that be Don? over the rainbow? through the looking
> glass? in a dialogue?
>
> From: DFACTOR@dc.rr.com
> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
> Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 18:00:22 -0800
> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>
> OR My Space.
>
> don
>
> On Dec 17, 2007, at 12:04 PM, rob mooney wrote:
>
> why would I single you out Don?
>
> From: DFACTOR@dc.rr.com
> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
> Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 11:42:14 -0800
> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>
> Should be me, no?
> X
> On Dec 17, 2007, at 11:37 AM, rob mooney wrote:
>
> The thought occurs -- since we all use time, space, etc., how could
> there be no space?
>
> the old old thought occurs -- no us?
>
>
>
> From: donlay@knology.net
> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
> Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:05:03 -0500
>
> if there is no space time tea cake etc aren't we wasting our...
> um... breath
>
> The thought occurs -- since we all use time, space, etc., how could
> there be no space? Maybe we could say that it is only a useful
> concept and use while being aware that it is limited.
>
> Would that be in the direction of unlimited experience? -- dl
>
>
>
> http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: rob mooney
> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 1:09 PM
> Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
>
> if there is no space time tea cake etc aren't we wasting our...
> um... breath
>
> From: donlay@knology.net
> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
> Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 08:52:41 -0500
>
> "is there space, time causality in the implicate order",
>
> If one reads something like Bohm's "wholeness and the implicate
> order' I
> think that it is fairly clear that things like space and time can be
> explicated out of the implicate order (in which they are
> implicated). -- Jeff
>
> Hi Jeff.
>
> Does the question imply space or time by using the idea expressed
> by "in"?
>
> If so, does this imply the language we use is not adequate to
> address the meaning of the question? -- dl
>
>
> http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Jeff Webb
> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 8:30 AM
> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
>
> Hi,
>
> I would like to comment on the issue: is there space, time
> causality in
> the implicate order.
>
> If one reads something like Bohm's "wholeness and the implicate
> order' I
> think that it is fairly clear that things like space and time can be
> explicated out of the implicate order (in which they are
> implicated). So
> the statement "in the implicate order (t)here in no space, time
> causality, matter, or mind' seems to me to indicate that the maker of
> this statement has completely misunderstood Bohms notion of the
> implicate order.
>
> I'm sure that others on this list will be able to add more details.
>
> Jeff
> >
> > In the attached article, the author writes, ?in the
> > 'implicate' order ere is no space, time, causality,
> > matter, or mind.? (Note: I am guessing ?ere? is a
> typo for
> > ?there?.)
> >
> > In the implicate order there is no space, time,
> causality,
> > matter, or mind. ?? Is this statement true?
> >
> > Regina
> >
> >
> > ??
> >
>
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>
> She said what? About who? Shameful celebrity quotes on Search Star!
>
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>
> Everything in one place? All new Windows Live!
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>
> Sounds like? How many syllables? Guess and win prizes with Search
> Charades!
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>
> Sounds like? How many syllables? Guess and win prizes with Search
> Charades!
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/f68115b6/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Wed Dec 19 02:56:42 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Wed Dec 19 03:03:03 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Some Bohm Quotes on Images
In-Reply-To: <004701c841e1$38c4d590$b5c16018@DL01>
Message-ID: <4018.59711.qm@web45803.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
What's your bet?
Does the neuro-syneptic fire(storm) in a baby(or prior) get ignited by & fueled with'in:
Words or Idemages?
O, I can SEE what you mean, A.
Don Lay <donlay@knology.net> wrote:
So if I read Bohm correctly, by not exploring the role of imaging in thinking, we run the risk of holding an invalid assumption, and acting on it. Not to mention ignoring a potentially valuable resource. -- Irene
That's my understanding also. -- dl
From: Irene Darcy
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2007 7:49 PM
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Some Bohm Quotes on Images
---------------------------------
Literally, imagination means 'the ability to make mental images' which imitate the forms of real things.
There may be another language. There may be an image language. TAS 89
You could say that the earliest thoughts before there was language would probably have involved images. TAS 94
Thought works by representation ? by a symbol and by a representation...You can use simplified images as symbols.
Q: This level below the verbal, is it another system of symbols ? pictures, perhaps?
B: There's a kind of preverbal symbol, and there may be others that we don't know about. Language is on top of all this. But when we learn to talk we forget this, and we don't recognize that these symbols are still part of our thought. They seem to be something else.
Q: Is this what you were speaking about earlier in terms of bringing these things up into the verbal and understanding them?
B: At least getting a look at them...We are learning. I'm trying to say that here is something we didn't know about this process. It may be relevant, it may not. The fact that we know it may turn out to be helpful in some context. And we may be able to observe some of it by bringing it up. By bringing it into words we might get a connection to some of the other aspects of the process and get a better feeling for how it is working. One of the troubles is that this thought process is going on and we don't know at all how it's working. And when we don't know how it is working we very quickly regard it as something else: as non-thought.
Q: What we're doing is making a better map.
B: Yes.
TAS 95 -97
Then, of course, dreams are certainly images. Will look for latest research on images as language. Of course, gesture is a kind of imaging (Hearing Gesture' by Goldin) Autistic children are often brilliant, as are dyslexics. So if I read Bohm correctly, by not exploring the role of imaging in thinking, we run the risk of holding an invalid assumption, and acting on it. Not to mention ignoring a potentially valuable resource.
More quotes later on imagination and representation.
---------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/47980620/attachment.html
From DFACTOR at dc.rr.com Wed Dec 19 02:59:01 2007
From: DFACTOR at dc.rr.com (donald factor)
Date: Wed Dec 19 03:05:23 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Assumptions and Improvisation and Content and
Effect
In-Reply-To: <826092.3722.qm@web45803.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
References: <826092.3722.qm@web45803.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <3A665539-574B-4820-B1E4-FFB5BD1DA265@dc.rr.com>
Hmmm. The Daily Me, how might DonL respond to that? What might its
front page look like?
Or the daily Krauss? Or any of us others? The Daily Other might be
good. That would report on
all the bad guys.
don
don
On Dec 18, 2007, at 4:09 PM, Alan E. DeBakey wrote:
> http://tinyurl.com/2fluav
>
> Dig it al an'.....
>
>
> Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
> I: I can just IMAGE-ine.
>
> On Dec 18, 2007 6:58 PM, Alan E. DeBakey <a.debakey@yahoo.com> wrote:
> One coms w/o the othr (one) ;____?
>
> I had no idemage !
>
> Humanimalan
>
> Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
> I: In terms of content, I have NO idea, but in terms of EFFECT, oh
> brother, do I!
>
> On Dec 18, 2007 6:37 PM, Alan E. DeBakey < a.debakey@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Heeyheeyweey,
> I is kiiddin not
> But if I got in to
> THAT
> (schnoodling)
> HERE
>
> ....... well, lets say so much: do you have aniiiiii idemage what
> that might get youusmeewee in to;-?
>
> Huhuhumanimalan
>
> Ps: Funni, look, y'our http://tinyurl.com/395cnp .... n here we go
> a'gain
>
>
>
>
> Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
> Peter-Alan, the only two people who can make me laugh are you and
> Charlie Chaplin!
>
> On Dec 18, 2007 6:23 PM, Alan E. DeBakey < a.debakey@yahoo.com> wrote:
> There is, to make "matters"
> "Worse"
> Also: Schnoodling (s'pelling??)
> Any x-Lover did inform me not just
>
> H.A.
>
>
> Irene Darcy < irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
> I: I suggest you double check with them. You seem to have
> confused 'doodling' with 'noodling', and 'noodling' is not as
> respected as you seem to think.
>
> On Dec 18, 2007 5:56 PM, donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> wrote:
> >From some musician friends, years ago.
>
> don
>
> On Dec 18, 2007, at 2:49 PM, Irene Darcy wrote:
>
>> It is usually called doodling.
>>
>> I: Just curious, Don. Where did you get that piece of information?
>>
>> On Dec 16, 2007 2:36 PM, donald factor < DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> wrote:
>>
>> When I think of improvisation, I think of the collective
>> improvisation central to jazz, based on the chord and rhythm
>> progressions of a particular song that the group has begun
>> playing. I think of it as a musical dialogue. Individual
>> improvisation is something else. From what little I know about
>> classical improvisation it is simply composing at the piano or
>> other instrument, inventing variations on a pre-existing piece of
>> music or making up a cadenza or such and not writing it down. It
>> is a very different category from jazz improvisation in which each
>> improvised section can never be repeated. Almost anyone who plays
>> an instrument can and does improvise in this sense. It is usually
>> called doodling. I am not much of a pianist, but many times, just
>> for fun, I have played around at the piano in this way, and
>> occasionally have come up with stuff that sounded pretty good.
>> Anyway, to me, all improvisation is based on some pre-existing
>> score or theme.but what impresses me most is that jazz musicians
>> seem to be able to do it together aaaand to come up with something
>> fresh and new each time they take off on the same piece. That it,
>> the good ones can do it. I have yet to hear of collective
>> classical improvisation. But maybe you could point me to some.
>>
>> don
>>
>> don
>>
>> On Dec 16, 2007, at 4:53 AM, Irene Darcy wrote:
>>
>>> DF's last post on this topic yesterday contained so many
>>> enfolded, implied - most likely unintentionally - assumptions,
>>> that to answer him, it would take the kind of in depth work a
>>> music historian and musicologist could turn into a doctoral
>>> dissertation. However, for starters, see
>>>
>>> http://en.wikipedia.Sorg/wiki/Musical_improvisation
>>>
>>>
>>> It compares jazz and classical improvisation traditions.
>>>
>>> The invention of the printing press, and the cultural assumptions
>>> of European society had a great deal to do with relegating the
>>> genius of the likes of Bach to the category of the disrespect
>>> it has-had for oral tradition.
>>>
>>> In the Wiki article, Eric Barnhill is mentioned. He is a fellow
>>> Dalcrozian, and studied with my Dalcroze teacher. He has his own
>>> website with original audio samples. Not mentioned is David
>>> Darling, cellist, and his organization Music for People whose
>>> purpose is to bring improvisation in all musical genres back to
>>> the people. Music for People can also be Googled. His workshops
>>> are attended by many, and are presented world wide. Neither is
>>> mentioned Paul Winter, currently in residence at St john the
>>> Divine here in NYC. I've attended many beautiful improvisation
>>> concerts of his. He is in a stylistic category of his own. And
>>> a recent acquaintance of mine whose name I'd have to go pull up
>>> whose ensemble, The Mad Coyote (I think it's called) can be
>>> Googled and who performs in various venues. Just recently here
>>> in the Village.
>>> Classical musicians are rising up in revolt!
>>>
>>> In closing, let me say that I have been working on this for many
>>> years. Have done a lot of research, and have studied a great
>>> many 'methods', both jazz and classical, and some Indian. As I
>>> teach myself, I'm putting together my own 'method' that
>>> integrates what I consider to be the best of jazz and classical
>>> approaches, and intend to include Salsa, if I live that long!
>>>
>>> --
>>> Irene
>>>
>>> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>>
>>
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
> Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.
> Try it now.
>
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>
>
>
> --
> Irene
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
> Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.
> Try it now.
>
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>
>
>
> --
> Irene
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
> Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.
> Try it now.
>
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>
>
>
> --
> Irene
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>
> Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.
> Try it now.
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/af6856fb/attachment.html
From DFACTOR at dc.rr.com Wed Dec 19 02:59:58 2007
From: DFACTOR at dc.rr.com (donald factor)
Date: Wed Dec 19 03:06:19 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Assumptions and Improvisation and Content and
Effect
In-Reply-To: <c47283890712181614j6a5b197fve3cbc17b05aac3d4@mail.gmail.com>
References: <c47283890712181607pb944deeu258cc0454146e2@mail.gmail.com>
<826092.3722.qm@web45803.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
<c47283890712181614j6a5b197fve3cbc17b05aac3d4@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <D05E70BC-DF58-4300-B24E-1B381BF310CA@dc.rr.com>
On Dec 18, 2007, at 4:14 PM, Irene Darcy wrote:
> I: One more sobering, fragmenting, thing to deal with. Somebody,
> somehow, needs to counter it.
>
> What or whom would you suggest?
don
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/72dfde26/attachment.html
From DFACTOR at dc.rr.com Wed Dec 19 03:01:17 2007
From: DFACTOR at dc.rr.com (donald factor)
Date: Wed Dec 19 03:07:39 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <BAY123-W211A0D57827E6DA9A95FEBDC5C0@phx.gbl>
References: <439325.58372.qm@web57411.mail.re1.yahoo.com><476679F0.60003@siit.tu.ac.th><007701c840c1$3c9f5580$b5c16018@DL01><009501c840c9$c9da9a10$b5c16018@DL01><00ae01c840cb$c07ac830$b5c16018@DL01>
<BAY123-W879FB36B103BA98E4068CDC620@phx.gbl>
<010801c840e1$de342e00$b5c16018@DL01>
<BAY123-W350E74A4BF40EED8D77188DC620@phx.gbl>
<0B6839C7-B24F-4F22-A7A3-2354F8D15B6B@dc.rr.com>
<BAY123-W378C54AF712FEB739B63DEDC620@phx.gbl>
<1DF60B92-466C-4F19-9BB7-3A8583D658AB@dc.rr.com>
<BAY123-W211A0D57827E6DA9A95FEBDC5C0@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <78D0172D-690E-490C-9348-31D02D2D4545@dc.rr.com>
I don't think it is knowledge so much as caring.
That is where the dance is
And there is only the dance.
don
On Dec 18, 2007, at 4:15 PM, rob mooney wrote:
> i don't think it necessarily has to spoil it. with poetry anyway
> Don Patterson or Ruth Padel will go into the fricatives and the
> consonal rhymes and assonance and all the rest and the general
> affect (usually for me) is - oh, I see. So the understanding is
> furthered. I expect a grasp of geology probably adds to the
> appreciation of a landscape? Dunno - what do you think?
>
> From: DFACTOR@dc.rr.com
> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
> Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 18:15:47 -0800
> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>
> But some part of you does. The question is: does looking for that
> part spoil it all?
>
> don
>
> On Dec 17, 2007, at 12:42 PM, rob mooney wrote:
>
> Don Patterson the English poet says that you can think of poems as
> something like a natural object, produced by us (or midwifed or
> something) out of our naturalness. I'm not sure you have to
> understand a hill or a spider or a waterfall to love it
>
> From: DFACTOR@dc.rr.com
> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
> Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 12:31:21 -0800
> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>
> I don't understand many of my favorite poems. I don't understand a
> lot of my favorite art.
> But some part of me must. The conscious part, the ego, is not the
> whole thing. There is
> more, always morel.
>
> don
>
> On Dec 17, 2007, at 11:59 AM, rob mooney wrote:
>
> dl: Surely a poem need not be understood in order to have meaning,
> be meaningful? dl
>
> I think this is important. not just poems. many meaningful things.
>
>
> She said what? About who? Shameful celebrity quotes on Search Star!
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>
> Messenger on the move. Text MSN to 63463 now!
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/be47a332/attachment.html
From DFACTOR at dc.rr.com Wed Dec 19 03:03:47 2007
From: DFACTOR at dc.rr.com (donald factor)
Date: Wed Dec 19 03:10:10 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <BAY123-W9CF810AFD84CBA506BBC9DC5C0@phx.gbl>
References: <439325.58372.qm@web57411.mail.re1.yahoo.com><476679F0.60003@siit.tu.ac.th><007701c840c1$3c9f5580$b5c16018@DL01><009501c840c9$c9da9a10$b5c16018@DL01><00ae01c840cb$c07ac830$b5c16018@DL01><BAY123-W879FB36B103BA98E4068CDC620@phx.gbl><010801c840e1$de342e00$b5c16018@DL01><BAY123-W350E74A4BF40EED8D77188DC620@phx.gbl>
<0B6839C7-B24F-4F22-A7A3-2354F8D15B6B@dc.rr.com>
<BAY123-W378C54AF712FEB739B63DEDC620@phx.gbl>
<028201c840f2$bed78dc0$b5c16018@DL01>
<DC320204-5FAA-48B5-8B7E-7DBF1F14EEC0@dc.rr.com>
<BAY123-W9CF810AFD84CBA506BBC9DC5C0@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <64880621-EDF0-476D-BD36-DE8903A61BE0@dc.rr.com>
On Dec 18, 2007, at 4:17 PM, rob mooney wrote:
> i don't think art bears meaning it just is meaning probably this
> goes for everything else to.
>
> - - i mean
But art jumps out of the stream like a trout.
don
From irenedarcy at gmail.com Wed Dec 19 03:07:06 2007
From: irenedarcy at gmail.com (Irene Darcy)
Date: Wed Dec 19 03:13:27 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Some Bohm Quotes on Images
In-Reply-To: <4018.59711.qm@web45803.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
References: <004701c841e1$38c4d590$b5c16018@DL01>
<4018.59711.qm@web45803.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <c47283890712181807x3e838520s9124460358c13670@mail.gmail.com>
I: Am researching current teaching websites. FINALLY there is recognition
that thinking in pictures, in sounds, in kinesthesia, all are valid, and
that concentration on verbal learning is nothing more than a cultural
assumption. Imagine the girl child of 50 years ago who preferred Lincoln
Logs to doll dresses, who could see instantly, and just needed some parts
filled in, but wasn't understood by her teachers. Wonder if such a child
made her own dolls. This is 'whole to dotted line-part' thinking as Native
Americans do. I'll post urls when I'm done. Or if you're interested, just
Google 'visual thinking'.
On Dec 18, 2007 8:56 PM, Alan E. DeBakey <a.debakey@yahoo.com> wrote:
> What's your bet?
>
> Does the neuro-syneptic fire(storm) in a baby(or prior) get ignited by &
> fueled with'in:
>
> Words or Idemages?
>
> *O, I can SEE what you mean, A.*
> **
> **
>
>
> *Don Lay <donlay@knology.net>* wrote:
>
> So if I read Bohm correctly, by not exploring the role of imaging in
> thinking, we run the risk of holding an invalid assumption, and acting on
> it. Not to mention ignoring a potentially valuable resource. -- Irene
>
> That's my understanding also. -- dl
> <http://www.knology.net/%7Edonlay/>
>
> *From:* Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com>
> *To:* bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> *Sent:* Tuesday, December 18, 2007 7:49 PM
> *Subject:* [Bohm_Dialogue] Some Bohm Quotes on Images
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> Literally, imagination means 'the ability to make mental images' which
> imitate the forms of real things.
>
> There may be another language. There may be an image language. TAS 89
>
> You could say that the earliest thoughts before there was language would
> probably have involved images. TAS 94
>
> Thought works by representation ? by a symbol and by a
> representation...You can use simplified images as symbols.
> Q: This level below the verbal, is it another system of symbols ?
> pictures, perhaps?
> B: There's a kind of preverbal symbol, and there may be others that we
> don't know about. Language is on top of all this. But when we learn to
> talk we forget this, and we don't recognize that these symbols are still
> part of our thought. They seem to be something else.
> Q: Is this what you were speaking about earlier in terms of bringing
> these things up into the verbal and understanding them?
> B: At least getting a look at them...We are learning. I'm trying to say
> that here is something we didn't know about this process. It may be
> relevant, it may not. The fact that we know it may turn out to be helpful
> in some context. And we may be able to observe some of it by bringing it
> up. By bringing it into words we might get a connection to some of the
> other aspects of the process and get a better feeling for how it is
> working. One of the troubles is that this thought process is going on and
> we don't know at all how it's working. And when we don't know how it is
> working we very quickly regard it as something else: as non-thought.
> Q: What we're doing is making a better map.
> B: Yes.
> TAS 95 -97
>
>
> Then, of course, dreams are certainly images. Will look for latest
> research on images as language. Of course, gesture is a kind of imaging
> (Hearing Gesture' by Goldin) Autistic children are often brilliant, as are
> dyslexics. So if I read Bohm correctly, by not exploring the role of
> imaging in thinking, we run the risk of holding an invalid assumption, and
> acting on it. Not to mention ignoring a potentially valuable resource.
>
> More quotes later on imagination and representation.
> ------------------------------
>
>
>
>
--
Irene
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/fcfcb048/attachment.html
From DFACTOR at dc.rr.com Wed Dec 19 03:12:52 2007
From: DFACTOR at dc.rr.com (donald factor)
Date: Wed Dec 19 03:19:16 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <024c01c841d6$b51b2140$fb76480c@HOME>
References: <019101c841b4$738f50b0$fb76480c@HOME>
<476846F4.000011.03588@VAIO-584793128F>
<024c01c841d6$b51b2140$fb76480c@HOME>
Message-ID: <6DDF7FFF-7F0E-4D96-BD7A-1A1A2BD15CCB@dc.rr.com>
There are loads of other discussion groups, some much bigger than
this one. Just search Google groups or the Yahoo version. But I have
yet to find any that are more interesting than this one over time. If
you are thinking of teaching or sharing knowledge then a website is
okay but a blog is is even better. With a blog you can get immediate
feedback and so on. But there are millions of these. So something
really special is required.
don
On Dec 18, 2007, at 4:32 PM, Susan Clemons wrote:
> But wouldn't the second group be made up of mainly the same
> people? I have long thought of how to move the dialogue into a
> different style. One that more people would be interested in.
> However, like everyone else, I'm just as stumped about how to make
> that happen. Not to mention the time element. I'm working 2 jobs
> right now so don't know if I would have time to moderate a group.
> But if you've got some ideas William I'm willing to listen and
> consider it.
>
> Susan
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: william
> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2007 3:17 PM
> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
>
> We could consider setting up a second bohm dialogue list; one with
> a different style. Would you, Susan, be willing to moderate such a
> new list?
>
>
>
> -------Original Message-------
>
> From: Susan Clemons
> Date: 18.12.2007 21:27:51
> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
>
> Maybe so, but I don't join a group so I can spend the majority of
> my time deleting posts. If there's anything worth reading in there
> it doesn't seem to be worth the time to search it out. I mostly
> just sit and hit delete. I really don't care about "looseness", I
> would like to have a discussion about beliefs and the positive
> aspects of self. I keep coming back to the group hoping there will
> be some kind of change but in all the years it's been here it seems
> to stay pretty much the same. Like I said, if this is all the
> people of the list want dialogue to be then I would rather not
> participate. I may simply change my profile to "no mail" so that I
> can check back in once in a while, but this same old nonsense of
> Peter and dl dominating the group seems hardly worth the trouble to
> read.
>
> Susan
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: donald factor
> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2007 1:19 PM
> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
>
> As the man said, judge not lest ye be judged:-)
>
> I'd stick with it. At least I would be unhappy if you left. So
> often you say stuff that I would have said, so it saves me the
> trouble. And anyway some gems have emerged out of the flood of
> stuff, say between Alan(peter) and Rob and Pat' that actually seem
> to have added a kind of freshness and/or looseness to the flow. It
> is a counter to DonL's inexhaustible seriousness or earnestness.
> Recall that dialogue was not meant to be primarily about content so
> much as about the nature of the flow or process, its blocks and
> pathways. And anyway, a lot of the huge batch of recent posts are
> mercifully brief.
>
> don
>
> On Dec 18, 2007, at 11:53 AM, Susan Clemons wrote:
>
> I for one will not keep participating if this is the style that
> dialogue is going to take.
>
> Susan
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: donald factor
> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2007 11:38 AM
> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
>
> Irene, I am surprised. Have you really not spotted who Alan is? He
> has revealed his identity a number of times already. I think Susan
> was the first to spot it almost immediately he came on line. It
> took me a while longer. So far I have no complaint. What he has
> been doing here, along with Rob and Pat, seems to have opened some
> doors to a looser approach to it all and I like that. I did, by
> the way, Google Alan but found nobody.
>
> don
>
>
>
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>
>
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>
>
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/a6f0e8e7/attachment.html
From DFACTOR at dc.rr.com Wed Dec 19 03:15:57 2007
From: DFACTOR at dc.rr.com (donald factor)
Date: Wed Dec 19 03:22:20 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <c47283890712181625r7ebeea39k74e812cec7c1cc0f@mail.gmail.com>
References: <439325.58372.qm@web57411.mail.re1.yahoo.com>
<009501c840c9$c9da9a10$b5c16018@DL01>
<00ae01c840cb$c07ac830$b5c16018@DL01>
<BAY123-W879FB36B103BA98E4068CDC620@phx.gbl>
<010801c840e1$de342e00$b5c16018@DL01>
<BAY123-W350E74A4BF40EED8D77188DC620@phx.gbl>
<0B6839C7-B24F-4F22-A7A3-2354F8D15B6B@dc.rr.com>
<BAY123-W378C54AF712FEB739B63DEDC620@phx.gbl>
<1DF60B92-466C-4F19-9BB7-3A8583D658AB@dc.rr.com>
<BAY123-W211A0D57827E6DA9A95FEBDC5C0@phx.gbl>
<c47283890712181625r7ebeea39k74e812cec7c1cc0f@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <361B1C71-DCE0-42F1-840C-805F86C74524@dc.rr.com>
But there is a big difference between composing and improvising. The
first is meant to last and the second is by definition a one off.
Although improvising is probably a necessary first stage of
composing. Unless you are Mozart.
don
On Dec 18, 2007, at 4:25 PM, Irene Darcy wrote:
> I: When I go to a concert, if I have actually tried to write a
> canon or a fugue, and have studied how it's done, I respond to both
> the meaning and the workmanship of the piece. I hear so much
> more. Baroque audiences were so well versed in this that they
> could recognize and appreciate every step of the way, the theme
> which was stated and repeated once in a simple form at the
> beginning, then elaborated as the piece went along. They applauded
> a great variation the way baseball fans cheer for a homerun. Same
> thing when you go to the Apollo Theater. The audience knows.
>
> On Dec 18, 2007 7:15 PM, rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
> i don't think it necessarily has to spoil it. with poetry anyway
> Don Patterson or Ruth Padel will go into the fricatives and the
> consonal rhymes and assonance and all the rest and the general
> affect (usually for me) is - oh, I see. So the understanding is
> furthered. I expect a grasp of geology probably adds to the
> appreciation of a landscape? Dunno - what do you think?
>
> From: DFACTOR@dc.rr.com
> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
> Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 18:15:47 -0800
>
> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>
> But some part of you does. The question is: does looking for that
> part spoil it all?
>
> don
>
> On Dec 17, 2007, at 12:42 PM, rob mooney wrote:
>
> Don Patterson the English poet says that you can think of poems as
> something like a natural object, produced by us (or midwifed or
> something) out of our naturalness. I'm not sure you have to
> understand a hill or a spider or a waterfall to love it
>
> From: DFACTOR@dc.rr.com
> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
> Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 12:31:21 -0800
> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>
> I don't understand many of my favorite poems. I don't understand a
> lot of my favorite art.
> But some part of me must. The conscious part, the ego, is not the
> whole thing. There is
> more, always morel.
>
> don
>
> On Dec 17, 2007, at 11:59 AM, rob mooney wrote:
>
> dl: Surely a poem need not be understood in order to have meaning,
> be meaningful? dl
>
> I think this is important. not just poems. many meaningful things.
>
>
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/f4ee5768/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Wed Dec 19 03:21:53 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Wed Dec 19 03:28:15 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <6DDF7FFF-7F0E-4D96-BD7A-1A1A2BD15CCB@dc.rr.com>
Message-ID: <856978.41430.qm@web45809.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Its out there, Don
You just "gotta" look (hard/er) ;-}}
I am currently part of a handful or so, and some of them really blow my mind. Talking about which: blows my mind how someone could only limit himherselves to this list, and that for years. That strikes me (tastes like) eating for 10 years all ways and for each meal hotdogs, and then, on 'top' served by chefs like lays.... just some food for thinkg.
Humanimalan
donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> wrote:
But I have yet to find any that are more interesting than this one over time
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/652b6045/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Wed Dec 19 03:35:23 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Wed Dec 19 03:48:27 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Some Bohm Quotes on Images
In-Reply-To: <c47283890712181807x3e838520s9124460358c13670@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <149286.46568.qm@web45809.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
keep screwing a'round
with'in this one, kath
firstime ii see you
diving (drowing) in to some
(un)real pregnanti stuff
;-)
http://tinyurl.com/38dobz
humanimal
Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
I: Am researching current teaching websites. FINALLY there is recognition that thinking in pictures, in sounds, in kinesthesia, all are valid, and that concentration on verbal learning is nothing more than a cultural assumption. Imagine the girl child of 50 years ago who preferred Lincoln Logs to doll dresses, who could see instantly, and just needed some parts filled in, but wasn't understood by her teachers. Wonder if such a child made her own dolls. This is 'whole to dotted line-part' thinking as Native Americans do. I'll post urls when I'm done. Or if you're interested, just Google 'visual thinking'.
On Dec 18, 2007 8:56 PM, Alan E. DeBakey <a.debakey@yahoo.com> wrote:
What's your bet?
Does the neuro-syneptic fire(storm) in a baby(or prior) get ignited by & fueled with'in:
Words or Idemages?
O, I can SEE what you mean, A.
Don Lay <donlay@knology.net > wrote:
So if I read Bohm correctly, by not exploring the role of imaging in thinking, we run the risk of holding an invalid assumption, and acting on it. Not to mention ignoring a potentially valuable resource. -- Irene
That's my understanding also. -- dl
From: Irene Darcy
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2007 7:49 PM
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Some Bohm Quotes on Images
---------------------------------
Literally, imagination means 'the ability to make mental images' which imitate the forms of real things.
There may be another language. There may be an image language. TAS 89
You could say that the earliest thoughts before there was language would probably have involved images. TAS 94
Thought works by representation ? by a symbol and by a representation...You can use simplified images as symbols.
Q: This level below the verbal, is it another system of symbols ? pictures, perhaps?
B: There's a kind of preverbal symbol, and there may be others that we don't know about. Language is on top of all this. But when we learn to talk we forget this, and we don't recognize that these symbols are still part of our thought. They seem to be something else.
Q: Is this what you were speaking about earlier in terms of bringing these things up into the verbal and understanding them?
B: At least getting a look at them...We are learning. I'm trying to say that here is something we didn't know about this process. It may be relevant, it may not. The fact that we know it may turn out to be helpful in some context. And we may be able to observe some of it by bringing it up. By bringing it into words we might get a connection to some of the other aspects of the process and get a better feeling for how it is working. One of the troubles is that this thought process is going on and we don't know at all how it's working. And when we don't know how it is working we very quickly regard it as something else: as non-thought.
Q: What we're doing is making a better map.
B: Yes.
TAS 95 -97
Then, of course, dreams are certainly images. Will look for latest research on images as language. Of course, gesture is a kind of imaging (Hearing Gesture' by Goldin) Autistic children are often brilliant, as are dyslexics. So if I read Bohm correctly, by not exploring the role of imaging in thinking, we run the risk of holding an invalid assumption, and acting on it. Not to mention ignoring a potentially valuable resource.
More quotes later on imagination and representation.
---------------------------------
--
Irene
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/73c6ce29/attachment.html
From Susan.Joy at worldnet.att.net Wed Dec 19 03:55:01 2007
From: Susan.Joy at worldnet.att.net (Susan Clemons)
Date: Wed Dec 19 04:01:24 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] moderate to immoderate, more and less
References: <001d01c555bc$3ee2a2e0$0502a8c0@DESKTOP1>
Message-ID: <030f01c841ea$8cfaf9b0$fb76480c@HOME>
Except this seems to be about a face to face group which leaves out the idea of an internet group where there can be spamming and trolling. Spamming and trolling are neither interesting or respectful.
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: Allan
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2005 4:59 PM
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] moderate to immoderate, more and less
A dialogue group must be open. It must be available to the input of all opinions and individuals from all kinds of cultural and ideational backgrounds.. Silencing
certain people and allowing others to speak....is that really how you want
to conduct affairs?? That seems to me to be closed-minded. Certainly, people can choose what they want to accept or dismiss. Accepting or rejecting a person altogether, is a different matter. Acceptance fosters understanding. Isn't that what we are here for? Peter may test the boundaries, and doesn't growth occur at the edges?
As a matter of freedom of speech, freedom of expression, we should not censor another's ideas by banning them from the forum.
The only rule there should be is that posts containing abusive content gets deleted. We can keep this respectful while remaining
challenging, right?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/f9b31331/attachment.html
From irenedarcy at gmail.com Wed Dec 19 04:00:12 2007
From: irenedarcy at gmail.com (Irene Darcy)
Date: Wed Dec 19 04:06:34 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Some Bohm Quotes on Images
In-Reply-To: <149286.46568.qm@web45809.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
References: <c47283890712181807x3e838520s9124460358c13670@mail.gmail.com>
<149286.46568.qm@web45809.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <c47283890712181900t4ad36a56n8a0999612d2fb31e@mail.gmail.com>
I: I'm inspired, and I shall keep digging in it. And theorizing. And keep
posting what I find. Meanwhile, please keep posting images that convey an
idea or a thought, that won't - you know what. It was the early stuff Zoe
did, followed by all the rest that began to open my eyes. I get a physical
feeling visually when I see it; it literally feels like I'm grabbing the
whole picture, a whole thought, with my eyes at one glance. God, I just got
the image of swallowing a fish whole, its tail still wriggling as it went
down the hatch!
Then, Michael thought that way, and the Navajo - the weavers don't use
patterns, and dyslexic friends, and, and, and,.........I can't believe that
DB wouldn't explore this, and revise what he thought needed it. It's
awkward for someone who hasn't done it before, like me, but all is grist for
the mill of understanding and meaning. ATM I'm going to bed. You guys, try
to keep it down tonight so I can sleep, please!
On Dec 18, 2007 9:35 PM, Alan E. DeBakey <a.debakey@yahoo.com> wrote:
> keep screwing a'round
> with'in this one, kath
>
> firstime ii see you
> diving (drowing) in to some
> (un)real pregnanti stuff
>
> ;-)
>
> *http://tinyurl.com/38dobz*
>
> humanimal
>
>
> *Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com>* wrote:
>
> I: Am researching current teaching websites. FINALLY there is
> recognition that thinking in pictures, in sounds, in kinesthesia, all are
> valid, and that concentration on verbal learning is nothing more than a
> cultural assumption. Imagine the girl child of 50 years ago who preferred
> Lincoln Logs to doll dresses, who could see instantly, and just needed some
> parts filled in, but wasn't understood by her teachers. Wonder if such a
> child made her own dolls. This is 'whole to dotted line-part' thinking as
> Native Americans do. I'll post urls when I'm done. Or if you're
> interested, just Google 'visual thinking'.
>
> On Dec 18, 2007 8:56 PM, Alan E. DeBakey <a.debakey@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > What's your bet?
> >
> > Does the neuro-syneptic fire(storm) in a baby(or prior) get ignited by &
> > fueled with'in:
> >
> > Words or Idemages?
> >
> > *O, I can SEE what you mean, A.*
> > **
> > **
> >
> >
> > *Don Lay <donlay@knology.net >* wrote:
> >
> > So if I read Bohm correctly, by not exploring the role of imaging in
> > thinking, we run the risk of holding an invalid assumption, and acting on
> > it. Not to mention ignoring a potentially valuable resource. -- Irene
> >
> > That's my understanding also. -- dl
> > <http://www.knology.net/%7Edonlay/>
> >
> > *From:* Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com>
> > *To:* bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> > *Sent:* Tuesday, December 18, 2007 7:49 PM
> > *Subject: *[Bohm_Dialogue] Some Bohm Quotes on Images
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> > Literally, imagination means 'the ability to make mental images' which
> > imitate the forms of real things.
> >
> > There may be another language. There may be an image language. TAS 89
> >
> > You could say that the earliest thoughts before there was language would
> > probably have involved images. TAS 94
> >
> > Thought works by representation ? by a symbol and by a
> > representation...You can use simplified images as symbols.
> > Q: This level below the verbal, is it another system of symbols ?
> > pictures, perhaps?
> > B: There's a kind of preverbal symbol, and there may be others that we
> > don't know about. Language is on top of all this. But when we learn to
> > talk we forget this, and we don't recognize that these symbols are still
> > part of our thought. They seem to be something else.
> > Q: Is this what you were speaking about earlier in terms of bringing
> > these things up into the verbal and understanding them?
> > B: At least getting a look at them...We are learning. I'm trying to
> > say that here is something we didn't know about this process. It may be
> > relevant, it may not. The fact that we know it may turn out to be helpful
> > in some context. And we may be able to observe some of it by bringing it
> > up. By bringing it into words we might get a connection to some of the
> > other aspects of the process and get a better feeling for how it is
> > working. One of the troubles is that this thought process is going on and
> > we don't know at all how it's working. And when we don't know how it is
> > working we very quickly regard it as something else: as non-thought.
> > Q: What we're doing is making a better map.
> > B: Yes.
> > TAS 95 -97
> >
> >
> > Then, of course, dreams are certainly images. Will look for latest
> > research on images as language. Of course, gesture is a kind of imaging
> > (Hearing Gesture' by Goldin) Autistic children are often brilliant, as are
> > dyslexics. So if I read Bohm correctly, by not exploring the role of
> > imaging in thinking, we run the risk of holding an invalid assumption, and
> > acting on it. Not to mention ignoring a potentially valuable resource.
> >
> > More quotes later on imagination and representation.
> > ------------------------------
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Irene
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>
> ------------------------------
> Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=51734/*http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping>
>
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>
--
Irene
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/7af5794e/attachment.html
From donlay at knology.net Wed Dec 19 04:03:19 2007
From: donlay at knology.net (Don Lay)
Date: Wed Dec 19 04:09:30 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Language as Pollution
References: <20071218.131023.3184.130.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <010a01c841eb$b5499ec0$b5c16018@DL01>
Where there is focus on function, on "what the words do in there" (which is what distinguished bohm dialogue from everyday group talk) there is a perceiving of [the movement of] thought rather than a perceiving with thought. -- funny
It seems that when perceiving the movement of thought and suspending reflexive reaction to it, then something like the experience of infinity occurs. Maybe better is to say it is the experience of non local actuality.
Maybe it is non local movement, meaning movement which is far more subtle than the movement between localized imagined thingKs. If the universe is actually alive, maybe the suspension of the reflexes when experiencing thought movement is the door to experience of the life of the universe, to wholeness. -- dl
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2007 11:00 AM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Language as Pollution
It seems difficult to focus on "what the words do 'in there' ", focus on function. (dl)
Where there is focus on function, on "what the words do in there" (which is what distinguished bohm dialogue from everyday group talk) there is a perceiving of [the movement of] thought rather than a perceiving with thought.
--funny
On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 09:21:52 -0500 "Don Lay" <donlay@knology.net> writes:
[was Our poemeaning]
Bohm's primary concern was about language, about the virtual impossibility of people, especially groups of people, talking together about thihngs that really mattered to them. That was where he felt the problem lies. We can dance together an sing together, and we can appreciate each others pictures. But when we want to go a little deeper we need language and that's where the trouble starts. -- df
This seems very important and also very hard to give attention. One reason is that language becomes reflexive and mechanical and occurs without much, if any, attention.
It seems difficult to focus on "what the words do 'in there' ", focus on function.
Part of the problem seems to be that word use is image use in the sense that "words are images" and to work well, images must be shared. That people must use identical or similar imagery for words.
Doesn't the idea of word/image/identity begin with Plato? -- dl
From: donald factor
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2007 2:40 AM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poemeaning
On Dec 17, 2007, at 1:51 PM, Irene Darcy wrote:
I: Uh oh. Watch out. Zoe got in trouble with her images; they became a little riskay.
I want to know how to shrink images to the size allowable on this list. I PROMISE to use discretion.
PLease do.That is, use discretion.. In this context here and now we are treading on what might become very hot water, and i would hate to see history repeat itself once again.
It is easy to shrink images. If you have photoshop go to image/size and shrink the picture to the size you want. Then save it as a jpeg. If you don't have photoshop then get graphic converter. This is a shareware program for Mac that lets you convert graphics in all sort so ways. Just go to image/ size and make it what you want then save it as a jpeg. it will tell you its size in kbytes or megabytes. Keep it at the low end of kilobytes and you will probably be okay. But remember, Bohm's primary concern was about language, about the virtual impossibility of people, especially groups of people, talking together about thihngs that really mattered to them. That was where he felt the problem lies. We can dance together an sing together, and we can appreciate each others pictures. But when we want to go a little deeper we need language and that's where the trouble starts. Pictures, music, movement are far less likely to lead to controversies that cause fragmentation. And recall how the idea of a graphic online dialogue didn't really work, mainly because it didn't allow anything to develop much beyond the initial show-and-tell sharing which tended to become a game of showing how clever the sender was and howsome of them they could use pictures to put others down.
don
On Dec 17, 2007 4:46 PM, Alan E. DeBakey <a.debakey@yahoo.com> wrote:
How kind (of youus) not to http://tinyurl.com/2rw772 rules, for a brake ;-))
Ps: to "do" (dobe?)...... howhat??
A.L.A.N.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/d0c55545/attachment.html
From donlay at knology.net Wed Dec 19 04:23:38 2007
From: donlay at knology.net (Don Lay)
Date: Wed Dec 19 04:29:58 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poem
References: <20071217.184239.3184.83.ae.dropper@juno.com>
<BAY123-W39F04F189574C1EBB1EB4FDC630@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <013801c841ee$8fafe3b0$b5c16018@DL01>
I've heard said that it takes a real pro to know when it's done, when to quit.
I recall an old-timer saying it takes three people to do a good portrait. One to sit, one to paint, and the third one to swat the artist over the head when he's done enough.
It seems the same with landscapes, still lifes, and maybe also with poems. What about music, dance?
Maybe the idea is attention to economy. -- dl
From: rob mooney
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2007 6:46 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poem
oooh. i think that one might be done
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 18:39:51 -0500
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poem
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
fullness pours out
and it all empties into white
the mounds of it - frozen overnight
worms throw up casts
in the fine snow, crystals,
up close you can see
the colors - LOOK
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 20:03:41 +0000 rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> writes:
worms throw up casts
in the fine snow
------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: DFACTOR@dc.rr.com
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poem
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 11:40:52 -0800
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Pat, look at your letter below. Do you know why it has the message from Symantec on it? This is something that keeps turning up on people's e-mails, and it may be some kind of worm or virus.
don
On Dec 17, 2007, at 11:09 AM, ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
This message has been processed by Symantec's AntiVirus Technology.
Unknown00000000.data was not scanned for viruses because too many nested levels of files were found.
For more information on antivirus tips and technology, visit
http://ses.symantec.com/
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
Date: December 17, 2007 11:09:47 AM PST
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poem
Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
fullness pours out
and it all empties into white
the mounds of it - frozen overnight
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 18:23:27 +0000 rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> writes:
fullness pours out
------------------------------------------------------------------
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 13:00:04 -0500
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poem
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
And it all empties into white.
On Sun, 16 Dec 2007 13:43:40 +0000 rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> writes:
Naming plays its oldest game.
Somehow out of reach it dances
nine dances to itself. Nine dances
all in couples made of three.
And if we do not leave our light
we will be eaten by it long
before it shines and dies again
so leave our light alone to be.
Run apple certainties under
the spout, what memories they
bind in cankered onion light
from lullabies of thunder.
And we are leaves as always,
fallen from the sunburn tree.
Till shame and calamine find us
shovelling blossom snow
Before the no, before the go,
before the be became, we will
become before the sun
has ever been born below.
--------------------------------------------------------------
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2007 08:12:20 -0500
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poem
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
Naming plays games with itself.
Somewhere out of reach it dances
nine dances by itself
in "couples" made of three.
And if we do not leave our light
we will be eaten by it long
before it shines and dies again
so leave our light alone.
Run apple certainties under
the spout, what memories they
bind in cankered onion light
from lampshades worn as hats.
And we are leaves as always,
fallen from the sunburn tree.
Till shade and calamine find us
shovelling a foot of snow
before the plows
before the dogs....
before the rain and sleet
will come
before the sun
was even born
On Sun, 16 Dec 2007 07:14:42 -0500 "Irene Darcy" <irenedarcy@gmail.com> writes:
I: Word music Improvisation. Have a great day, everybody.
On Dec 16, 2007 4:13 AM, rob mooney < rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
Naming plays games with itself.
Somewhere out of reach it dances
nine dances by itself.
And if we do not leave our light
we will be eaten by it long
before it shines.
Run apple certainties under
the spout, what memories they
bind in cankered light.
And we are leaves as always,
fallen from the sunburn tree.
Till shade and calamine find us.
--------------------------------------------------------
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2007 22:39:03 -0500
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poem
what? (Rob)
the naming plays with itself
somewhere out of reach
of the dance itself.
do our leaves
get eaten by light
before they fall?
we certainly have
to be careful of
skin cancer
and light!
previously,
it was sunburn.
we aren't leaves.
one size
doesn't fit all.
funni, rob, irene
On Sun, 16 Dec 2007 01:48:56 +0000 rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> writes:
what?
----------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2007 14:54:42 -0500
From: irenedarcy@gmail.com
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] noname 2
I: We certainly have to be careful of skin cancer and light! Previously, it was sunburn. We aren't leaves. One size doesn't fit all.
On Dec 14, 2007 2:51 PM, rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
do our leaves get eaten by light before they fall?
------------------------------------------------
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2007 21:26:42 -0500
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] noname 2
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
DIALOGUE DANCE
A dialogue circle of trees, dancing trees
we do not sit in chairs but we stand in the woods
with the light filtering through our autumn leaves
and we are dancing - our roots are our feet
and our millions of toes, dancing.
A wind comes and some of our leaves fall
from some of our fingers,
our million fingers, one for every dancing toe,
one explication for every implication
our roots hidden, unknown
but known constantly as that
which ever refuses naming
while the naming plays with itself
somewhere out of reach
of the dance itself.
-- funny
On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 10:08:46 -0800 donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> writes:
Don't you think though, that maybe a bit of both is even more useful? Just so long as we don't turn the tree - or others - into objects that we "understand" completely. Actually, as I think of it, there is more than one way to understand understanding.
don
On Dec 13, 2007, at 1:10 AM, Alfred Landman wrote:
Hi Irene Darcy. If a brain wants to learn about trees, for instance, thought could simply spend time with them in their natural habitat etc (which is what many traditionally "primitive" people do). Breaking trees into their cellular components and so forth enables genetic manipulation of them, for instance, but this can't be said to "objectively" help one get to know a tree better than simply spending time with them. In fact, it does the precise opposite. This brain can never genuinely know a living organism that you've instrumentalized and objectified like that. AL
Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
Subject: Space and Time (Don F)
From: ami_kes@juno.com (John A MIKES)
Date: Thu, 02 Oct 1997 16:59:24 EDT
to: Bohm, Subject Space and Time
Dear Don, nice wisdom in your Sep.25 'Space & Time note. Yet:(your
quote):
>...<
Foucault was right: there is no such epoque as the present one. His, or
ours, does not matter. Past reflection does not match live experience.
WE are the experiencers, not memory. So: hold your enthusiasm.
Also: I was glad: A rare thing on this list a reference to David Bohm!
I find this unending exchange "about the list-filling" redundant. In my
(not so humble) opinion a list is like love: practice it, don't explain.
If it does not live up to your expectations, there are other lists to
choose from. Nobody can change BB or anybody else. Accept it or leave it.
To explain one's views ABOUT participating: nice, but keep it short. And
have mercy on the receiving parties: half a dozen posts per day per per-
son in exorbitant length, or sometimes 5 consecutive attachments is rude.
Who does not have the time to write short, should keep it. Length is
negligent.
And to the following exchange I have a plagiarism from Doug Bilodeau, an
acclaimed physicist from the JCS-list:(see below) - the 'exchange':
*
" >JPL:
>"Shout, shout, let it all out
>these are the things I can do without,
>come on, I'm talking to you, come on.." whereupon
" >>Wm:
>>Pssst... not so loud, I think the others are meditating.
William
*
Not so sure! I refer to my remark on a "no response" to a post:
"si tacent clamant": Dough B: corrected me: "or: si tacent dormiunt".
From: "Chris Hooley" < chooley@idnsi.net>
Subject: Re: purpose of list
Date: Fri, 03 Oct 97 18:24:15 PDT
To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Hello All,
I've heard nothing from the group for several days. So, I'm sending this
message to check for echo.
Regards
Chris
From: "Chris Hooley" <chooley@idnsi.net>
Subject: inside out
Date: Fri, 03 Oct 97 18:19:50 PDT
To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Hello Everyone,
I would share another thought that I found interesting.
The gastrointestinal track is actually "outside" the body in the sense that
it's a long, open-ended tube. In the same way, "no-thing", which is (or
can be seen to be) at the center of every manifested form, is continuous,
contiguous to itself. It is "outside" the space/time form though when seen
from within the form it appears to be isolated like droplets.
My intuition is that we can focus (reside *as* attention) either on the
form or on the un-form that borders it.
The experience of attending to the un-form in-between can't be fully
represented, even to ourselves, I think, but experimenting with this
viewing angle has been intriguing.
Received: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 11:21:50 +0100 (BST)
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 11:19:21 +0100 (BST)
From: maximus@dircon.co.uk (Barron Burrow)
Subject: Re:intentional dying
Extraordinary and moving message you sent us, Don ... Full of the *right
kind* of fight, too, I felt. For the struggle against cancer "intentional
dying" *feels* like the right way to go. And what you say about
'death-rebirth' through finding the right life-rhythms seems absolutely right:
> ultradian rhythms. These involved 90 minute to 2 hour
>cycles during which the body would, as it were, shift gears. The neural
>chemistry changes, hemispheric dominance shifts and the body, during about
>twenty minutes of each cycle, does its best to get into a quiet,
>self-repair mode. As he put it, the unconscious parts of the organism would
>try to go to work without the interference of the conscious mind. Normally,
>our culture has trained us to override these cycles in order to get on with
>our work. =
I think there is great truth in this last remark. I find myself that it's
sometimes the hardest thing to just ignore the world, and simply try to get
back into touch with one's own internal rhythms; but there's no doubt that
with practice you can get better at it. However, sooner or later you forget
-- and have to learn the inexplicable and difficult (but ultimately very
rewarding) process all over again. What's difficult about it, I guess, is
*acceptance* of dying -- "intentional dying" ... Bimodal-psa. helps me,
because it puts me in touch with the deepest source of my own 'unlived
lines' (but there are clearly many ways to get back 'in touch').
I wldn't overdo it, on the email. I understand very well what Matti
Vaittenen means when he says, today, " " ... but in a virtual world you do
not get your hands dirty, you do not sweat; you just work overtime." But
I've decided it's okay to just fade in and out. Because the truth surely is
we are as much talking to ourselves as to each other: binary bits are NOT
people ... On the other hand, I think of the Net in Kleinian analysis terms
-- as a kind of substitute 'container'. Just as the mother can soothe away
the infant's "nameless dread" so too can this kind of dialogue. There's no
obligation to post even weekly -- just fade in and out when the mood takes.
So, sorry to see you go, Matti -- but in the end I think the world may go
through a phase transition, led by the Net, that gradually puts everything
the right way round again, and dethrones the present over-emphasis on a
top-down culture that *separates* mind and body. So I may fade in and out a
lot, but I'm staying with it. Gustava (?) in S. America brought up the
enormous problem of world over-population recently; I felt bad that no one
responded. It's a diabolical problem -- but one which in Europe seems to
have been largely overcome (e.g. Spain and Russia's population is falling --
and most other nations in Europe are not being over-populated
hand-over-fist). Catholic ideology on birth-control seems hopelessly
unrealistic, and the worst effects seem to be in S. America.
Don has summed up an incredible eleven years of his life-struggle in one
short email message, and I feel grateful that he has shared that -- with
*me*. It reminds me of something that is so easily forgotten -- our common
humanity.
I can see the irony of having yr message bounced back with a 'fatal error'
note :-) On my kitchen table, Don, is a copy of "The Unfolding Meaning"
(Routledge, 1987) (it's odd your saying "perseverance furthers" because
someone in Australia recently said the same thing)( -- and the other day I
re-read yr Introduction, rather neat, I thought. And now here I am speaking
to one of its authors!
>A couple of feelings guide me, acting as warnings that I'm drifting: on the
>one side is the "hope of winning", and on the other is "self pity."
>
>The affirmations that I'm using aren't self strenghtening, at least
>directly; "What could be a better experience than being the unfolding
>universe? Having given up, I can relax! Etc."
Unfolding meaning, yes, but also knowing how to get in touch with 'unlived
lines' -- parts of oneself one had last been in touch with at the moment of
birth, for instance. Because without that there is no proper dying; and so
no full living either. No?
I think Julia has hit on something important when she says:
>
>is dialogue about facilitating the intentional dying of the ego self?
>
>julia
--
------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------
Sounds like? How many syllables? Guess and win prizes with Search Charades!
----------------------------------------------------------
Sounds like? How many syllables? Guess and win prizes with Search Charades!
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
--
Irene
----------------------------------------------------------------
She said what? About who? Shameful celebrity quotes on Search Star!
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Sounds like? How many syllables? Guess and win prizes with Search Charades!
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
She said what? About who? Shameful celebrity quotes on Search Star!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Everything in one place. All new Windows Live!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/607b5a97/attachment.html
From jeff at siit.tu.ac.th Wed Dec 19 04:50:34 2007
From: jeff at siit.tu.ac.th (Jeff Webb)
Date: Wed Dec 19 04:57:54 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In-Reply-To: <4767AA92.000007.03588@VAIO-584793128F>
References: <476792D9.5070705@siit.tu.ac.th>
<4767AA92.000007.03588@VAIO-584793128F>
Message-ID: <4768950A.8090006@siit.tu.ac.th>
William:
Thanks for your thought provoking response.
Another way of referring to the implicate order is to call it an
order of infinite degree (Bohm and Peat discuss this in "Science Order
and Creativity")
I do not agree that space-time, because it is 4-dimensional is no longer
a Cartesian order. Cartesian order is more general than a three
dimensional Cartesian coordinate system, I would say, because the idea
of separate points in space (the defining notion of the Cartesian order)
can be extended to an abstract space of more than three dimensions. But
what does that mean? An example is this: If there are two points in 3-D
space with coordinates (w1,x1,y1) and (w2,x2,y2), the distance between
the two points is the square root of (w1-w2)^2 + (x1 - x2)^2 + (y1 -
y2)^2 (eg the distance between (1,1,1) and (2,2,2) is square root of 3).
If a fourth dimension is introduced, two points in 4-D space are
(w1,x1,y1,z1) and (w2,x2,y2,z2). The "distance" between them, which is
not a distance in 3-D space, can still be defined, simply by extending
the pattern of the 3-D case to get: square root of (w1-w2)^2 + (x1 -
x2)^ + (y1 - y2)^2 + (z1 - z2)^2 . This kind of thing can, also by
extension, be done for 4, 5, or any number of dimensions. But at no time
do we leave the Cartesian order when formally extending the notions
developed for 3-D space to space of higher dimension, even though things
can no longer be visualized in the same way once we go beyond three
dimensions.
In relativity the space-time points are points in 4-dimensional space,
but still in the Cartesian order. Bohm says as much in one or more of
his books ( e.g. "Science Order and Creativity"). He explicitly states
that both relativity and quantum mechanics, despite the revolutionary
new ideas that they introduced, did not, when they were expressed
mathematically, go beyond the Cartesian order. That is, the mathematical
expression did not go beyond the Cartesian order. Bohm felt that this
was one of the reasons that quantum mechanics was not properly
understood. The actual notions introduced called, he said, for a new
order that went beyond the Cartesian order, and he proposed that the
implicate order as a possible new order to do just this. More discussion
is required to explain why the implicate order is not a Cartesian order,
but I do not want to make this posting any longer than it is already.
Expressing the implicate order mathematcally, as far as I know, is a
task that still requires a lot more work. Bohm and Basil Hiley did work
on this and Hiley and others continued the work after Bohm's death. I am
not sure what the current status is.
As for describing non-locality as a 5th dimension, I do not think that
this is adequate. If the 5th dimension is part of a 5-dimensional
Cartesian order, then it will not be sufficient to explain non-locality,
since non-locality is one of the very features of quantum mechanics
that is very difficult to explain through a Cartesian order. This is
because non-locality is a connection between distant points that is
instantaneous (a violation of relativity that Einstein strongly
disliked), although the points are separated in space they are
intimitely connected such that no time is required to make the
connection. The Cartesian order of separate points is starting to break
down here.
Jeff
william wrote:
> >It seems to me that Bohm was trying to go beyond the word "in" in this
> >context, when he introduced the notion of the implicate order. In his
> >language space and time are enfolded into the implicate order, he did
> >not say that space and time are simply "in" the implicate order. It is
> >this, I think that he was trying to go beyond. For example he said that
> >the implicate order is a new order in physics that may be necessary to
> >understand quantum theory more deeply than the prevalent cartesian order
> >(in which reality is analysed into points whose positions can be
> >represented by coordinates - in this order "in", such as in "in" a box
> >works well).
> >
> >Jeff
>
> Perhaps another way to look at it would be to assume that the
> implicate is a complex order out of which space and time unfold as a
> form of simplification.
> Physicists like to think in terms of "fields" or "dimensions". For
> instance, if we say that the implicate order has an undefined
> multiplicity of "dimensions" then from this multiplicity we
> could extract three of them; and the result would be a 3-dimensional
> world. This is what we experience as "space" and what is also known as
> the Cartesian order. If we extract a fourth "dimension" then we get
> what we experience as "spacetime", which already goes beyond the
> Cartesian order.
> So the multiplicity is at least four, but the question is how many
> more "dimensions" are there? How much more could we extract from the
> multiplicity? There are occasional signs of what we call "non-local"
> events, suggesting there could be a fifth "dimension" beyond our
> 4-dimensional spacetime experience. I know Bohm was working on
> this but i don't know how far he got with it. At the moment, this
> 5-dimensional non-locallity thing still appears to be very much in an
> early stage of development.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by *MailScanner* <http://www.mailscanner.info/>, and is
> believed to be clean.
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
From ae.dropper at juno.com Wed Dec 19 05:49:07 2007
From: ae.dropper at juno.com (ae.dropper@juno.com)
Date: Wed Dec 19 05:52:36 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] The good stuff - was Suspensiopn of ...
Message-ID: <20071218.234913.3184.149.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Look around. Feel it, listen to it, taste it ... etc. This is it,
whatever IT IS, this is it simply because there is no other actuality.
Is there? -- dl
On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 20:15:36 -0500 "Irene Darcy" <irenedarcy@gmail.com>
writes:
I: It's the 'good stuff' you cut off. I have no idea what it's
referring to.
Time out. Gotta dispose of old microwave.
On Dec 18, 2007 8:08 PM, rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
no I didn't Irene.
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 19:41:58 -0500
From: irenedarcy@gmail.com
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
I: Rob, you cut off dl's message you're responding to. Please don't.
On Dec 18, 2007 7:29 PM, rob mooney < rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
this is good stuff Don. you seem to be saying IT IS without acting or
pretending
From: donlay@knology.net
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 23:06:58 -0500
I think this is important. not just poems. many meaningful things. -- Rob
Me too! I believe it is ultimately important!
DB says that nothing can be without meaning. Of course, the question ...
What is meaning? !!
I believe folk wisdom holds that meaning is what is meant to be, and
maybe this means what is intended.
Thus, we say the whole of Being is whatever IT intends to be ... or what
it is intending.
What's that?
Look around. Feel it, listen to it, taste it ... etc. This is it,
whatever IT IS, this is it simply because there is no other actuality.
Is there? -- dl
From: rob mooney
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 2:59 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
dl: Surely a poem need not be understood in order to have meaning, be
meaningful? dl
I think this is important. not just poems. many meaningful things.
From: donlay@knology.net
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:20:21 -0500
Rob: I think so and also maybe even when acting and pretending
dl: Maybe so. Thought, however, presents the idea that what we act and
pretend is the known, the repeated, but there is always the new, maybe
New Being that is experienced as not the same old known roles, etc.
Rob: I also have no idea what Pat meant but I know that a poet is
allowed to say stuff I don't understand
dl: Surely a poem need not be understood in order to have meaning, be
meaningful? dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: rob mooney
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 1:20 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Could it be that one more participates in this that is when not acting
and pretending the social identity?
I think so
and also maybe even when acting and pretending
I also have no idea what Pat meant but I know that a poet is allowed to
say stuff I don't understand
From: donlay@knology.net
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 11:42:02 -0500
I can feel those final grains of self aggrandizement flying out of my
pores from the morning readings. -- Funny
Does the experience of "self aggrandizement flying out of my pores "
precede the experience of the identity processes being suspended, being
held in suspension?
If so, then maybe the meaning of "self aggrandizement flying out of my
pores " might be that identity has limited meaning.
Then what is the meaning of someone talking about "self aggrandizement
flying out of my pores "? Could it be to demonstrate meaning?
Could it be that one more participates in this that is when not acting
and pretending the social identity?
Resonance anyone? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: Don Lay
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 11:27 AM
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
When the identity movement is suspended, experience of being does not
cease.
Then, it becomes clear that ontic intelligence does not have to be
personalized as Bohm indicates, I believe in the interview with Weber.
Watching the identity movement (thought), awareness of the identity
thought may and does at times suspend the identity processes.
Maybe we should say when awareness clearly presents the reasoning that
identity processes are not needed, then that awareness suspends the
unneeded processes. Later, when awareness of need occurs, then the
identity processes recur.
It appears that the I identity is not needed for identity suspension.
That's the way it seems to me, to this identity when the identity
processes are present.
Resonance anyone ..., all you outer identities "out there"? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/c60f7cd4/attachment.html
From landmana at yahoo.com Wed Dec 19 06:02:16 2007
From: landmana at yahoo.com (Alfred Landman)
Date: Wed Dec 19 06:08:40 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In-Reply-To: <4768950A.8090006@siit.tu.ac.th>
Message-ID: <99683.15267.qm@web57405.mail.re1.yahoo.com>
Hi Jeff Webb. We are open again, today. And there is a line from Bertolt Brecht -- "What kind of times are they when/ A talk about trees is almost a crime/ Because it implies silence about so many horrors." In a sense we are always living in a time, such a space. The problem is that you always-also must write poems about trees and flowers and love and beauty just so that you have a background from which you can recognize why the horrors are such a crime. And if you are going to write or read a poem or see a painting "about" a tree or flower or a rooftop water-tower it might as well be a poem or a painting that you recognize as a deep and moving experience. As Dylan says it may be the devil or the lord but you've got to serve somebody! Well it may be the workers or the rulers but you've got to serve somebody. It might be the CEO or it might be the union. It maybe a choice between family, neighborhood, or your fellow workers, but you got to serve somebody. That is the plan.
That is the game. AL
Jeff Webb <jeff@siit.tu.ac.th> wrote:
William:
Thanks for your thought provoking response.
Another way of referring to the implicate order is to call it an
order of infinite degree (Bohm and Peat discuss this in "Science Order
and Creativity")
I do not agree that space-time, because it is 4-dimensional is no longer
a Cartesian order. Cartesian order is more general than a three
dimensional Cartesian coordinate system, I would say, because the idea
of separate points in space (the defining notion of the Cartesian order)
can be extended to an abstract space of more than three dimensions. But
what does that mean? An example is this: If there are two points in 3-D
space with coordinates (w1,x1,y1) and (w2,x2,y2), the distance between
the two points is the square root of (w1-w2)^2 + (x1 - x2)^2 + (y1 -
y2)^2 (eg the distance between (1,1,1) and (2,2,2) is square root of 3).
If a fourth dimension is introduced, two points in 4-D space are
(w1,x1,y1,z1) and (w2,x2,y2,z2). The "distance" between them, which is
not a distance in 3-D space, can still be defined, simply by extending
the pattern of the 3-D case to get: square root of (w1-w2)^2 + (x1 -
x2)^ + (y1 - y2)^2 + (z1 - z2)^2 . This kind of thing can, also by
extension, be done for 4, 5, or any number of dimensions. But at no time
do we leave the Cartesian order when formally extending the notions
developed for 3-D space to space of higher dimension, even though things
can no longer be visualized in the same way once we go beyond three
dimensions.
In relativity the space-time points are points in 4-dimensional space,
but still in the Cartesian order. Bohm says as much in one or more of
his books ( e.g. "Science Order and Creativity"). He explicitly states
that both relativity and quantum mechanics, despite the revolutionary
new ideas that they introduced, did not, when they were expressed
mathematically, go beyond the Cartesian order. That is, the mathematical
expression did not go beyond the Cartesian order. Bohm felt that this
was one of the reasons that quantum mechanics was not properly
understood. The actual notions introduced called, he said, for a new
order that went beyond the Cartesian order, and he proposed that the
implicate order as a possible new order to do just this. More discussion
is required to explain why the implicate order is not a Cartesian order,
but I do not want to make this posting any longer than it is already.
Expressing the implicate order mathematcally, as far as I know, is a
task that still requires a lot more work. Bohm and Basil Hiley did work
on this and Hiley and others continued the work after Bohm's death. I am
not sure what the current status is.
As for describing non-locality as a 5th dimension, I do not think that
this is adequate. If the 5th dimension is part of a 5-dimensional
Cartesian order, then it will not be sufficient to explain non-locality,
since non-locality is one of the very features of quantum mechanics
that is very difficult to explain through a Cartesian order. This is
because non-locality is a connection between distant points that is
instantaneous (a violation of relativity that Einstein strongly
disliked), although the points are separated in space they are
intimitely connected such that no time is required to make the
connection. The Cartesian order of separate points is starting to break
down here.
Jeff
william wrote:
> >It seems to me that Bohm was trying to go beyond the word "in" in this
> >context, when he introduced the notion of the implicate order. In his
> >language space and time are enfolded into the implicate order, he did
> >not say that space and time are simply "in" the implicate order. It is
> >this, I think that he was trying to go beyond. For example he said that
> >the implicate order is a new order in physics that may be necessary to
> >understand quantum theory more deeply than the prevalent cartesian order
> >(in which reality is analysed into points whose positions can be
> >represented by coordinates - in this order "in", such as in "in" a box
> >works well).
> >
> >Jeff
>
> Perhaps another way to look at it would be to assume that the
> implicate is a complex order out of which space and time unfold as a
> form of simplification.
> Physicists like to think in terms of "fields" or "dimensions". For
> instance, if we say that the implicate order has an undefined
> multiplicity of "dimensions" then from this multiplicity we
> could extract three of them; and the result would be a 3-dimensional
> world. This is what we experience as "space" and what is also known as
> the Cartesian order. If we extract a fourth "dimension" then we get
> what we experience as "spacetime", which already goes beyond the
> Cartesian order.
> So the multiplicity is at least four, but the question is how many
> more "dimensions" are there? How much more could we extract from the
> multiplicity? There are occasional signs of what we call "non-local"
> events, suggesting there could be a fifth "dimension" beyond our
> 4-dimensional spacetime experience. I know Bohm was working on
> this but i don't know how far he got with it. At the moment, this
> 5-dimensional non-locallity thing still appears to be very much in an
> early stage of development.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by *MailScanner* , and is
> believed to be clean.
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/7359269e/attachment.html
From DFACTOR at dc.rr.com Wed Dec 19 06:18:37 2007
From: DFACTOR at dc.rr.com (donald factor)
Date: Wed Dec 19 06:25:03 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In-Reply-To: <99683.15267.qm@web57405.mail.re1.yahoo.com>
References: <99683.15267.qm@web57405.mail.re1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <FE4D0161-E077-48CA-9466-5C6A4B338120@dc.rr.com>
I think you are right, but I wouldn't limit it to a body. Of course,
a purpose, doesn't quite work either. Service, though, means
something; it has value and is intentional, and it has significance.
But about what? That seems to always be the question.
don
On Dec 18, 2007, at 9:02 PM, Alfred Landman wrote:
> Hi Jeff Webb. We are open again, today. And there is a line from
> Bertolt Brecht -- "What kind of times are they when/ A talk about
> trees is almost a crime/ Because it implies silence about so many
> horrors." In a sense we are always living in a time, such a space.
> The problem is that you always-also must write poems about trees
> and flowers and love and beauty just so that you have a background
> from which you can recognize why the horrors are such a crime. And
> if you are going to write or read a poem or see a painting "about"
> a tree or flower or a rooftop water-tower it might as well be a
> poem or a painting that you recognize as a deep and moving
> experience. As Dylan says it may be the devil or the lord but
> you've got to serve somebody! Well it may be the workers or the
> rulers but you've got to serve somebody. It might be the CEO or it
> might be the union. It maybe a choice between family, neighborhood,
> or your fellow workers, but you got to serve somebody. That is the
> plan. That is the game. AL
>
>
> Jeff Webb <jeff@siit.tu.ac.th> wrote:
> William:
>
> Thanks for your thought provoking response.
>
> Another way of referring to the implicate order is to call it an
> order of infinite degree (Bohm and Peat discuss this in "Science Order
> and Creativity")
>
> I do not agree that space-time, because it is 4-dimensional is no
> longer
> a Cartesian order. Cartesian order is more general than a three
> dimensional Cartesian coordinate system, I would say, because the idea
> of separate points in space (the defining notion of the Cartesian
> order)
> can be extended to an abstract space of more than three dimensions.
> But
> what does that mean? An example is this: If there are two points in
> 3-D
> space with coordinates (w1,x1,y1) and (w2,x2,y2), the distance between
> the two points is the square root of (w1-w2)^2 + (x1 - x2)^2 + (y1 -
> y2)^2 (eg the distance between (1,1,1) and (2,2,2) is square root
> of 3).
> If a fourth dimension is introduced, two points in 4-D space are
> (w1,x1,y1,z1) and (w2,x2,y2,z2). The "distance" between them, which is
> not a distance in 3-D space, can still be defined, simply by extending
> the pattern of the 3-D case to get: square root of (w1-w2)^2 + (x1 -
> x2)^ + (y1 - y2)^2 + (z1 - z2)^2 . This kind of thing can, also by
> extension, be done for 4, 5, or any number of dimensions. But at no
> time
> do we leave the Cartesian order when formally extending the notions
> developed for 3-D space to space of higher dimension, even though
> things
> can no longer be visualized in the same way once we go beyond three
> dimensions.
>
>
>
> In relativity the space-time points are points in 4-dimensional space,
> but still in the Cartesian order. Bohm says as much in one or more of
> his books ( e.g. "Science Order and Creativity"). He explicitly states
> that both relativity and quantum mechanics, despite the revolutionary
> new ideas that they introduced, did not, when they were expressed
> mathematically, go beyond the Cartesian order. That is, the
> mathematical
> expression did not go beyond the Cartesian order. Bohm felt that this
> was one of the reasons that quantum mechanics was not properly
> understood. The actual notions introduced called, he said, for a new
> order that went beyond the Cartesian order, and he proposed that the
> implicate order as a possible new order to do just this. More
> discussion
> is required to explain why the implicate order is not a Cartesian
> order,
> but I do not want to make this posting any longer than it is already.
>
> Expressing the implicate order mathematcally, as far as I know, is a
> task that still requires a lot more work. Bohm and Basil Hiley did
> work
> on this and Hiley and others continued the work after Bohm's death.
> I am
> not sure what the current status is.
>
>
> As for describing non-locality as a 5th dimension, I do not think that
> this is adequate. If the 5th dimension is part of a 5-dimensional
> Cartesian order, then it will not be sufficient to explain non-
> locality,
> since non-locality is one of the very features of quantum mechanics
> that is very difficult to explain through a Cartesian order. This is
> because non-locality is a connection between distant points that is
> instantaneous (a violation of relativity that Einstein strongly
> disliked), although the points are separated in space they are
> intimitely connected such that no time is required to make the
> connection. The Cartesian order of separate points is starting to
> break
> down here.
>
> Jeff
>
> william wrote:
> > >It seems to me that Bohm was trying to go beyond the word "in"
> in this
> > >context, when he introduced the notion of the implicate order.
> In his
> > >language space and time are enfolded into the implicate order,
> he did
> > >not say that space and time are simply "in" the implicate order.
> It is
> > >this, I think that he was trying to go beyond. For example he
> said that
> > >the implicate order is a new order in physics that may be
> necessary to
> > >understand quantum theory more deeply than the prevalent
> cartesian order
> > >(in which reality is analysed into points whose positions can be
> > >represented by coordinates - in this order "in", such as in "in"
> a box
> > >works well).
> > >
> > >Jeff
> >
> > Perhaps another way to look at it would be to assume that the
> > implicate is a complex order out of which space and time unfold as a
> > form of simplification.
> > Physicists like to think in terms of "fields" or "dimensions". For
> > instance, if we say that the implicate order has an undefined
> > multiplicity of "dimensions" then from this multiplicity we
> > could extract three of them; and the result would be a 3-dimensional
> > world. This is what we experience as "space" and what is also
> known as
> > the Cartesian order. If we extract a fourth "dimension" then we get
> > what we experience as "spacetime", which already goes beyond the
> > Cartesian order.
> > So the multiplicity is at least four, but the question is how many
> > more "dimensions" are there? How much more could we extract from the
> > multiplicity? There are occasional signs of what we call "non-local"
> > events, suggesting there could be a fifth "dimension" beyond our
> > 4-dimensional spacetime experience. I know Bohm was working on
> > this but i don't know how far he got with it. At the moment, this
> > 5-dimensional non-locallity thing still appears to be very much
> in an
> > early stage of development.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > This message has been scanned for viruses and
> > dangerous content by *MailScanner* , and is
> > believed to be clean.
> >
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> --
> >
> >
> > info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
> >
>
>
>
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>
> Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo!
> Search.
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/f24e24ce/attachment.html
From w at david-bohm.net Wed Dec 19 12:19:57 2007
From: w at david-bohm.net (william)
Date: Wed Dec 19 12:26:27 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
References: <024c01c841d6$b51b2140$fb76480c@HOME>
Message-ID: <4768FE5D.000015.03588@VAIO-584793128F>
>But wouldn't the second group be made up of mainly the same people?
Some people will want to be on both lists; others will prefer one over the
other, whatever the case may be.
>I have long thought of how to move the dialogue into a different style.
>One that more people would be interested in. However, like everyone
>else, I'm just as stumped about how to make that happen. Not to
>mention the time element. I'm working 2 jobs right now so don't
>know if I would have time to moderate a group. But if you've got
>some ideas William I'm willing to listen and consider it.
You could ask someone to be your backup. If at any time you are busy with
something else then your backup can probably do it on your behalf. Perhaps
Don Factor would like to be your backup. The second list would have to be
different from the current one otherwise there is no point in doing it. I
suggest to open a discussion, perhaps offline, with whoever is interested.
But I think you should coordinate it with Don Factor to decide in what way
the two lists shall distinguish themselves from each other; each should have
another emphasis. Ideally, the two lists should be complementary to each
other although some overlap is probably inevitable. The idea is to enrich
the dialogue culture and make it more open to people with diverse interests.
The current list has developed a special jargon of its own. There are
probably many people interested in Bohm dialogue but find it difficult to
join a what at first glance appears to be a crazy bunch. My suggestion is to
make the new list an alternative to the old one, perhaps by being a bit more
conventional with regard to use of language and style.
----- Original Message -----
From: william
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2007 3:17 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
We could consider setting up a second bohm dialogue list; one with a
different style. Would you, Susan, be willing to moderate such a new list?
-------Original Message-------
From: Susan Clemons
Date: 18.12.2007 21:27:51
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Maybe so, but I don't join a group so I can spend the majority of my time
deleting posts. If there's anything worth reading in there it doesn't seem
to be worth the time to search it out. I mostly just sit and hit delete. I
really don't care about "looseness", I would like to have a discussion about
beliefs and the positive aspects of self. I keep coming back to the group
hoping there will be some kind of change but in all the years it's been here
it seems to stay pretty much the same. Like I said, if this is all the
people of the list want dialogue to be then I would rather not participate.
I may simply change my profile to "no mail" so that I can check back in once
in a while, but this same old nonsense of Peter and dl dominating the group
seems hardly worth the trouble to read.
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: donald factor
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2007 1:19 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
As the man said, judge not lest ye be judged:-)
I'd stick with it. At least I would be unhappy if you left. So often you say
stuff that I would have said, so it saves me the trouble. And anyway some
gems have emerged out of the flood of stuff, say between Alan(peter) and Rob
and Pat' that actually seem to have added a kind of freshness and/or
looseness to the flow. It is a counter to DonL's inexhaustible seriousness
or earnestness. Recall that dialogue was not meant to be primarily about
content so much as about the nature of the flow or process, its blocks and
pathways. And anyway, a lot of the huge batch of recent posts are
mercifully brief.
don
On Dec 18, 2007, at 11:53 AM, Susan Clemons wrote:
I for one will not keep participating if this is the style that dialogue is
going to take.
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: donald factor
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2007 11:38 AM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Irene, I am surprised. Have you really not spotted who Alan is? He has
revealed his identity a number of times already. I think Susan was the first
to spot it almost immediately he came on line. It took me a while longer. So
far I have no complaint. What he has been doing here, along with Rob and Pat
seems to have opened some doors to a looser approach to it all and I like
that. I did, by the way, Google Alan but found nobody.
don
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071219/ffd6ceb5/attachment.html
From w at david-bohm.net Wed Dec 19 13:31:52 2007
From: w at david-bohm.net (william)
Date: Wed Dec 19 13:38:21 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
References: <4768950A.8090006@siit.tu.ac.th>
Message-ID: <47690F38.000017.03588@VAIO-584793128F>
>Another way of referring to the implicate order is to call it an
>order of infinite degree (Bohm and Peat discuss this in "Science Order
>and Creativity")
Yes, except we don't know if there are infinite degrees. I prefer to call it
an order of indefinite degree, meaning the degree is undefined. I know
mathematics has an "infinite" operator, but indefinite is not the same as
infinite. Is there such a thing as an "indefinite" operator?
>I do not agree that space-time, because it is 4-dimensional is no longer
>a Cartesian order. Cartesian order is more general than a three
>dimensional Cartesian coordinate system,
Oh, I see, I was always of the impression that the Cartesian order was a
3-dimensional grid system (x,y,z coordinates) and that the addition of the
fourth dimension (time) was regarded as an extension. That's why i thought
that the addition of time was going beyond Cartesian order ("beyond" in the
sense of extension). Also, "extension" means that the Cartesian order is
still included.
>...
>As for describing non-locality as a 5th dimension, I do not think that
>this is adequate. If the 5th dimension is part of a 5-dimensional
>Cartesian order, then it will not be sufficient to explain non-locality,
>since non-locality is one of the very features of quantum mechanics
>that is very difficult to explain through a Cartesian order...
But wouldn't that be a good enough reason for pushing the Cartesian order
back into its original 3 dimensions? We could then say that the
4-dimensional spacetime enfolds the Cartesian order. I am also not very
happy with the idea of a "point" in the fourth dimension. Could we not
introduce some notion of "implication parameter"?
>...This is because non-locality is a connection between distant points
>that is instantaneous (a violation of relativity that Einstein strongly
>disliked), although the points are separated in space they are
>intimitely connected such that no time is required to make the
>connection. The Cartesian order of separate points is starting to break
>down here.
Yes, that's why i think the spatial order should be regarded as "implied" in
the higher degree orders. I mean, in the sense that everything beyond three
dimensions should be viewed as "implicate order" from which the spatial
order can be explicated (unfolded).
But is it true that non-locality only refers to instant connection between
separated points in space? Instant means t=0, right? Intuitively, i would
say the terminology is somewhat misleading. I tend to think of 'locality' as
a point in space. Therefore, 'non-locality' would suggest no points in space
(no spatial difference). But we are not talking of "no spatial difference"
but of "no temporal difference". Would, it therefore not be more appropriate
to speak of non-temporality rather than non-locality?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071219/103c8b74/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Wed Dec 19 13:53:07 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Wed Dec 19 13:59:34 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In-Reply-To: <47690F38.000017.03588@VAIO-584793128F>
Message-ID: <506985.77198.qm@web45802.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Herr william v H, you appear to have time(-space) for
all those X & Y & Zsss, now, might this a good
time-space be not do get a bit in to the
(deeper)space-time of your 2nd-generation stuff passion,
recently announced for shipping (just in time, and,
again, space, for XxL-mas) ;->
HumanimAlan
Ps: & goooood morningtimespace to all of you fellowhighumans on this mmmmarvelessmore list.... more more mmmore, later, but 1st a bit" duschen" [just ran 2 bridges]... and you know, I only like to smell representibly ;;--))
william <w@david-bohm.net> wrote:
v\:* {behavior:url (#default#vml);} v\:* { BEHAVIOR: url (#default#vml) } >Another way of referring to the implicate order is to call it an
>order of infinite degree (Bohm and Peat discuss this in "Science Order
>and Creativity")
Yes, except we don't know if there are infinite degrees. I prefer to call it an order of indefinite degree, meaning the degree is undefined. I know mathematics has an "infinite" operator, but indefinite is not the same as infinite. Is there such a thing as an "indefinite" operator?
>I do not agree that space-time, because it is 4-dimensional is no longer
>a Cartesian order. Cartesian order is more general than a three
>dimensional Cartesian coordinate system,
Oh, I see, I was always of the impression that the Cartesian order was a 3-dimensional grid system (x,y,z coordinates) and that the addition of the fourth dimension (time) was regarded as an extension. That's why i thought that the addition of time was going beyond Cartesian order ("beyond" in the sense of extension). Also, "extension" means that the Cartesian order is still included.
>...
>As for describing non-locality as a 5th dimension, I do not think that
>this is adequate. If the 5th dimension is part of a 5-dimensional
>Cartesian order, then it will not be sufficient to explain non-locality,
>since non-locality is one of the very features of quantum mechanics
>that is very difficult to explain through a Cartesian order...
But wouldn't that be a good enough reason for pushing the Cartesian order back into its original 3 dimensions? We could then say that the 4-dimensional spacetime enfolds the Cartesian order. I am also not very happy with the idea of a "point" in the fourth dimension. Could we not introduce some notion of "implication parameter"?
>...This is because non-locality is a connection between distant points
>that is instantaneous (a violation of relativity that Einstein strongly
>disliked), although the points are separated in space they are
>intimitely connected such that no time is required to make the
>connection. The Cartesian order of separate points is starting to break
>down here.
Yes, that's why i think the spatial order should be regarded as "implied" in the higher degree orders. I mean, in the sense that everything beyond three dimensions should be viewed as "implicate order" from which the spatial order can be explicated (unfolded).
But is it true that non-locality only refers to instant connection between separated points in space? Instant means t=0, right? Intuitively, i would say the terminology is somewhat misleading. I tend to think of 'locality' as a point in space. Therefore, 'non-locality' would suggest no points in space (no spatial difference). But we are not talking of "no spatial difference" but of "no temporal difference". Would, it therefore not be more appropriate to speak of non-temporality rather than non-locality?
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071219/001267b2/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Wed Dec 19 13:58:40 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Wed Dec 19 14:05:08 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order & Don(e)(p)Lays
In-Reply-To: <FE4D0161-E077-48CA-9466-5C6A4B338120@dc.rr.com>
Message-ID: <918796.83462.qm@web45803.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
mmmm, this one 's tasti
ok, before i jump
in the st all
here a bit/e
food for thinkg
for break fast
for youus:
http://tinyurl.com/2vcd5e
Nowshower
Thenhen(eggs)
PlaygroundLaygrid later...
donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> wrote:
I think you are right, but I wouldn't limit it to a body. Of course, a purpose, doesn't quite work either. Service, though, means something; it has value and is intentional, and it has significance. But about what? That seems to always be the question.
don
On Dec 18, 2007, at 9:02 PM, Alfred Landman wrote:
Hi Jeff Webb. We are open again, today. And there is a line from Bertolt Brecht -- "What kind of times are they when/ A talk about trees is almost a crime/ Because it implies silence about so many horrors." In a sense we are always living in a time, such a space. The problem is that you always-also must write poems about trees and flowers and love and beauty just so that you have a background from which you can recognize why the horrors are such a crime. And if you are going to write or read a poem or see a painting "about" a tree or flower or a rooftop water-tower it might as well be a poem or a painting that you recognize as a deep and moving experience. As Dylan says it may be the devil or the lord but you've got to serve somebody! Well it may be the workers or the rulers but you've got to serve somebody. It might be the CEO or it might be the union. It maybe a choice between family, neighborhood, or your fellow workers, but you got to serve somebody. That is the
plan. That is the game. AL
Jeff Webb <jeff@siit.tu.ac.th> wrote:
William:
Thanks for your thought provoking response.
Another way of referring to the implicate order is to call it an
order of infinite degree (Bohm and Peat discuss this in "Science Order
and Creativity")
I do not agree that space-time, because it is 4-dimensional is no longer
a Cartesian order. Cartesian order is more general than a three
dimensional Cartesian coordinate system, I would say, because the idea
of separate points in space (the defining notion of the Cartesian order)
can be extended to an abstract space of more than three dimensions. But
what does that mean? An example is this: If there are two points in 3-D
space with coordinates (w1,x1,y1) and (w2,x2,y2), the distance between
the two points is the square root of (w1-w2)^2 + (x1 - x2)^2 + (y1 -
y2)^2 (eg the distance between (1,1,1) and (2,2,2) is square root of 3).
If a fourth dimension is introduced, two points in 4-D space are
(w1,x1,y1,z1) and (w2,x2,y2,z2). The "distance" between them, which is
not a distance in 3-D space, can still be defined, simply by extending
the pattern of the 3-D case to get: square root of (w1-w2)^2 + (x1 -
x2)^ + (y1 - y2)^2 + (z1 - z2)^2 . This kind of thing can, also by
extension, be done for 4, 5, or any number of dimensions. But at no time
do we leave the Cartesian order when formally extending the notions
developed for 3-D space to space of higher dimension, even though things
can no longer be visualized in the same way once we go beyond three
dimensions.
In relativity the space-time points are points in 4-dimensional space,
but still in the Cartesian order. Bohm says as much in one or more of
his books ( e.g. "Science Order and Creativity"). He explicitly states
that both relativity and quantum mechanics, despite the revolutionary
new ideas that they introduced, did not, when they were expressed
mathematically, go beyond the Cartesian order. That is, the mathematical
expression did not go beyond the Cartesian order. Bohm felt that this
was one of the reasons that quantum mechanics was not properly
understood. The actual notions introduced called, he said, for a new
order that went beyond the Cartesian order, and he proposed that the
implicate order as a possible new order to do just this. More discussion
is required to explain why the implicate order is not a Cartesian order,
but I do not want to make this posting any longer than it is already.
Expressing the implicate order mathematcally, as far as I know, is a
task that still requires a lot more work. Bohm and Basil Hiley did work
on this and Hiley and others continued the work after Bohm's death. I am
not sure what the current status is.
As for describing non-locality as a 5th dimension, I do not think that
this is adequate. If the 5th dimension is part of a 5-dimensional
Cartesian order, then it will not be sufficient to explain non-locality,
since non-locality is one of the very features of quantum mechanics
that is very difficult to explain through a Cartesian order. This is
because non-locality is a connection between distant points that is
instantaneous (a violation of relativity that Einstein strongly
disliked), although the points are separated in space they are
intimitely connected such that no time is required to make the
connection. The Cartesian order of separate points is starting to break
down here.
Jeff
william wrote:
> >It seems to me that Bohm was trying to go beyond the word "in" in this
> >context, when he introduced the notion of the implicate order. In his
> >language space and time are enfolded into the implicate order, he did
> >not say that space and time are simply "in" the implicate order. It is
> >this, I think that he was trying to go beyond. For example he said that
> >the implicate order is a new order in physics that may be necessary to
> >understand quantum theory more deeply than the prevalent cartesian order
> >(in which reality is analysed into points whose positions can be
> >represented by coordinates - in this order "in", such as in "in" a box
> >works well).
> >
> >Jeff
>
> Perhaps another way to look at it would be to assume that the
> implicate is a complex order out of which space and time unfold as a
> form of simplification.
> Physicists like to think in terms of "fields" or "dimensions". For
> instance, if we say that the implicate order has an undefined
> multiplicity of "dimensions" then from this multiplicity we
> could extract three of them; and the result would be a 3-dimensional
> world. This is what we experience as "space" and what is also known as
> the Cartesian order. If we extract a fourth "dimension" then we get
> what we experience as "spacetime", which already goes beyond the
> Cartesian order.
> So the multiplicity is at least four, but the question is how many
> more "dimensions" are there? How much more could we extract from the
> multiplicity? There are occasional signs of what we call "non-local"
> events, suggesting there could be a fifth "dimension" beyond our
> 4-dimensional spacetime experience. I know Bohm was working on
> this but i don't know how far he got with it. At the moment, this
> 5-dimensional non-locallity thing still appears to be very much in an
> early stage of development.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by *MailScanner* , and is
> believed to be clean.
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071219/990e7779/attachment.html
From donlay at knology.net Wed Dec 19 14:12:42 2007
From: donlay at knology.net (Don Lay)
Date: Wed Dec 19 14:19:03 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
References: <024c01c841d6$b51b2140$fb76480c@HOME>
<4768FE5D.000015.03588@VAIO-584793128F>
Message-ID: <003001c84240$d7e4dee0$b5c16018@DL01>
This seems a good idea, maybe a way dialogue can grow. -- dl
From: william
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2007 6:19 AM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
>But wouldn't the second group be made up of mainly the same people?
Some people will want to be on both lists; others will prefer one over the other, whatever the case may be.
>I have long thought of how to move the dialogue into a different style.
>One that more people would be interested in. However, like everyone
>else, I'm just as stumped about how to make that happen. Not to
>mention the time element. I'm working 2 jobs right now so don't
>know if I would have time to moderate a group. But if you've got
>some ideas William I'm willing to listen and consider it.
You could ask someone to be your backup. If at any time you are busy with something else then your backup can probably do it on your behalf. Perhaps Don Factor would like to be your backup. The second list would have to be different from the current one otherwise there is no point in doing it. I suggest to open a discussion, perhaps offline, with whoever is interested. But I think you should coordinate it with Don Factor to decide in what way the two lists shall distinguish themselves from each other; each should have another emphasis. Ideally, the two lists should be complementary to each other although some overlap is probably inevitable. The idea is to enrich the dialogue culture and make it more open to people with diverse interests. The current list has developed a special jargon of its own. There are probably many people interested in Bohm dialogue but find it difficult to join a what at first glance appears to be a crazy bunch. My suggestion is to make the new list an alternative to the old one, perhaps by being a bit more conventional with regard to use of language and style.
----- Original Message -----
From: william
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2007 3:17 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
We could consider setting up a second bohm dialogue list; one with a different style. Would you, Susan, be willing to moderate such a new list?
-------Original Message-------
From: Susan Clemons
Date: 18.12.2007 21:27:51
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Maybe so, but I don't join a group so I can spend the majority of my time deleting posts. If there's anything worth reading in there it doesn't seem to be worth the time to search it out. I mostly just sit and hit delete. I really don't care about "looseness", I would like to have a discussion about beliefs and the positive aspects of self. I keep coming back to the group hoping there will be some kind of change but in all the years it's been here it seems to stay pretty much the same. Like I said, if this is all the people of the list want dialogue to be then I would rather not participate. I may simply change my profile to "no mail" so that I can check back in once in a while, but this same old nonsense of Peter and dl dominating the group seems hardly worth the trouble to read.
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: donald factor
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2007 1:19 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
As the man said, judge not lest ye be judged:-)
I'd stick with it. At least I would be unhappy if you left. So often you say stuff that I would have said, so it saves me the trouble. And anyway some gems have emerged out of the flood of stuff, say between Alan(peter) and Rob and Pat' that actually seem to have added a kind of freshness and/or looseness to the flow. It is a counter to DonL's inexhaustible seriousness or earnestness. Recall that dialogue was not meant to be primarily about content so much as about the nature of the flow or process, its blocks and pathways. And anyway, a lot of the huge batch of recent posts are mercifully brief.
don
On Dec 18, 2007, at 11:53 AM, Susan Clemons wrote:
I for one will not keep participating if this is the style that dialogue is going to take.
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: donald factor
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2007 11:38 AM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Irene, I am surprised. Have you really not spotted who Alan is? He has revealed his identity a number of times already. I think Susan was the first to spot it almost immediately he came on line. It took me a while longer. So far I have no complaint. What he has been doing here, along with Rob and Pat, seems to have opened some doors to a looser approach to it all and I like that. I did, by the way, Google Alan but found nobody.
don
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
------------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071219/98bae1ee/attachment.html
From Susan.Joy at worldnet.att.net Wed Dec 19 14:24:47 2007
From: Susan.Joy at worldnet.att.net (Susan Clemons)
Date: Wed Dec 19 14:31:19 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
References: <024c01c841d6$b51b2140$fb76480c@HOME>
<4768FE5D.000015.03588@VAIO-584793128F>
Message-ID: <005101c84242$87bd1610$ab76480c@HOME>
Hmmmmmmm........well, it sounds interesting. If anyone is interested in this or has any ideas about it please email me at Susan.Joy@att.net
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: william
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2007 4:19 AM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
>But wouldn't the second group be made up of mainly the same people?
Some people will want to be on both lists; others will prefer one over the other, whatever the case may be.
>I have long thought of how to move the dialogue into a different style.
>One that more people would be interested in. However, like everyone
>else, I'm just as stumped about how to make that happen. Not to
>mention the time element. I'm working 2 jobs right now so don't
>know if I would have time to moderate a group. But if you've got
>some ideas William I'm willing to listen and consider it.
You could ask someone to be your backup. If at any time you are busy with something else then your backup can probably do it on your behalf. Perhaps Don Factor would like to be your backup. The second list would have to be different from the current one otherwise there is no point in doing it. I suggest to open a discussion, perhaps offline, with whoever is interested. But I think you should coordinate it with Don Factor to decide in what way the two lists shall distinguish themselves from each other; each should have another emphasis. Ideally, the two lists should be complementary to each other although some overlap is probably inevitable. The idea is to enrich the dialogue culture and make it more open to people with diverse interests. The current list has developed a special jargon of its own. There are probably many people interested in Bohm dialogue but find it difficult to join a what at first glance appears to be a crazy bunch. My suggestion is to make the new list an alternative to the old one, perhaps by being a bit more conventional with regard to use of language and style.
----- Original Message -----
From: william
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2007 3:17 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
We could consider setting up a second bohm dialogue list; one with a different style. Would you, Susan, be willing to moderate such a new list?
-------Original Message-------
From: Susan Clemons
Date: 18.12.2007 21:27:51
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Maybe so, but I don't join a group so I can spend the majority of my time deleting posts. If there's anything worth reading in there it doesn't seem to be worth the time to search it out. I mostly just sit and hit delete. I really don't care about "looseness", I would like to have a discussion about beliefs and the positive aspects of self. I keep coming back to the group hoping there will be some kind of change but in all the years it's been here it seems to stay pretty much the same. Like I said, if this is all the people of the list want dialogue to be then I would rather not participate. I may simply change my profile to "no mail" so that I can check back in once in a while, but this same old nonsense of Peter and dl dominating the group seems hardly worth the trouble to read.
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: donald factor
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2007 1:19 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
As the man said, judge not lest ye be judged:-)
I'd stick with it. At least I would be unhappy if you left. So often you say stuff that I would have said, so it saves me the trouble. And anyway some gems have emerged out of the flood of stuff, say between Alan(peter) and Rob and Pat' that actually seem to have added a kind of freshness and/or looseness to the flow. It is a counter to DonL's inexhaustible seriousness or earnestness. Recall that dialogue was not meant to be primarily about content so much as about the nature of the flow or process, its blocks and pathways. And anyway, a lot of the huge batch of recent posts are mercifully brief.
don
On Dec 18, 2007, at 11:53 AM, Susan Clemons wrote:
I for one will not keep participating if this is the style that dialogue is going to take.
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: donald factor
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2007 11:38 AM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Irene, I am surprised. Have you really not spotted who Alan is? He has revealed his identity a number of times already. I think Susan was the first to spot it almost immediately he came on line. It took me a while longer. So far I have no complaint. What he has been doing here, along with Rob and Pat, seems to have opened some doors to a looser approach to it all and I like that. I did, by the way, Google Alan but found nobody.
don
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
------------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071219/7ddbc411/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Wed Dec 19 14:49:19 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Wed Dec 19 14:55:52 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] (un)reality-check(outs) & other walsmarts
In-Reply-To: <4768FE5D.000015.03588@VAIO-584793128F>
Message-ID: <148395.5902.qm@web45802.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
This is rich stuff. A "gem" like an 'ol buddi of mine what see/say. Just imagine the group would go (run) with this (ball) for a bit. Just imagine. What a wildream.
Ok, here some questions to the williamwebmaster:
a _ so what would/could a(nother/new) list bring about (produce?) this one, the 'old' one could not in the past 10?years
b_ how and why would, in your eyes/vision, open a 'new' list the dialogue idemages of bohm to a wider pupility(=public)? please explain.
c_ are you somehow trying to say w/o wanting to go 'there': that this list "sucks", and it is due to the way how don (factor) 'runs' it... it, as in: a (work)shop that doesnt make enough 'profit' for the share-holder, no, wait, we are livingdying in the 21st now, they calling it: "stake-holder"
.... just a few to open up the investigation into that shopping(around)business a bit more..... more more more to come.... just re-booting here with a fresh load of fresh carbs(baquette&kaffee) in the, in tas-system
ciao, humanimalan & all-cash-pit
inotweb@juno.com wrote:
Walmart has a policy that it has used frequently which is to open 2 (and
even sometimes 3) stores in a small locality. Then when they have
successfully captured all of the business attention of that locality they
close the second (and third) store[s].
william <w@david-bohm.net> wrote:
You could ask someone to be your backup. If at any time you are busy with something else then your backup can probably do it on your behalf. Perhaps Don Factor would like to be your backup. The second list would have to be different from the current one otherwise there is no point in doing it. I suggest to open a discussion, perhaps offline, with whoever is interested. But I think you should coordinate it with Don Factor to decide in what way the two lists shall distinguish themselves from each other; each should have another emphasis. Ideally, the two lists should be complementary to each other although some overlap is probably inevitable. The idea is to enrich the dialogue culture and make it more open to people with diverse interests. The current list has developed a special jargon of its own. There are probably many people interested in Bohm dialogue but find it difficult to join a what at first glance appears to be a crazy bunch. My suggestion is to make the new list
an alternative to the old one, perhaps by being a bit more conventional with regard to use of language and style.
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071219/9e593f8d/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Wed Dec 19 14:56:35 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Wed Dec 19 15:03:03 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <019101c841b4$738f50b0$fb76480c@HOME>
Message-ID: <812183.6995.qm@web45802.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
is this how the susans and joys of this whirld would like to see dialogue
grow (cultivated:---?)
http://forestry.about.com/library/graphics/fraser2.jpg
ps: donlayers, do you re:call "monoculture"..... rings a bell
pss: merry christmas(tress) everyboind (body&mind), btw
humanimal
Joy@worldnet> wrote:
. I really don't care about "looseness", I would like to have a discussion about beliefs and the positive aspects of self. I keep coming back to the group hoping there will be some kind of change but in all the years it's been here it seems to stay pretty much the same. Like I said, if this is all the people of the list want dialogue to be then I would rather not participate. I may simply change my profile to "no ...
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071219/b2a81419/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Wed Dec 19 15:03:05 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Wed Dec 19 15:09:33 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <003001c84240$d7e4dee0$b5c16018@DL01>
Message-ID: <999944.90194.qm@web45805.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Do we all agree not (:-?) on that Don de'serves another (few) outlet(s).... to get his act of "pretenting&acting" to gether and on stagKe? Would we (hi rob) agree all not: that this would do'be [dobe] the fruits [one of them ani'how] of all of y'our hard labour: One might call it: going in: Coherence (like, again, going in to labour).... like Bohm mentions in that enlightening xample of the laser, where&when (space-time.... here we go again, passion-fruit-william): all beams hug each other in peac n lov n alignmind
humanimal
Don Lay <donlay@knology.net> wrote:
v\:* { BEHAVIOR: url (#default#vml) } v\:* { BEHAVIOR: url (#default#vml) } This seems a good idea, maybe a way dialogue can grow. -- dl (about opening a few more bohm-dialogue-walmarts on this planet..... esp chchchina is HUUUUUGE, folks, lets not forget other colors'n'continents'n'contents'n ... all that guud stffff
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071219/00859c1c/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Wed Dec 19 15:09:48 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Wed Dec 19 15:16:16 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <005101c84242$87bd1610$ab76480c@HOME>
Message-ID: <629888.31745.qm@web45801.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Lady Joy, this little eco-sysmtem (hahahabit-at) aint good (big?) nuff for you to share, with all of us, whats so "hmmmmmmmm... interesting" about williams 'proposals'? Are we now doing one-on-one couching .,.,..,..,.,,,,....,.,.,..,,,, dobe'hindoors ;____]
Now, all THIS is getting interesting INDEED
Ps: Dont really know if i can dare to go a couche with you, frau joy, oneonone, dobehind closet, ooops, closedoors ;-)
100%humanimal (well, ok, may be a bit shy of that)
Susan Clemons <Susan.Joy@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
v\:* { BEHAVIOR: url (#default#vml) } v\:* { BEHAVIOR: url (#default#vml) } Hmmmmmmm........well, it sounds interesting. If anyone is interested in this or has any ideas about it please email me at Susan.Joy@att.net
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: william
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2007 4:19 AM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
>But wouldn't the second group be made up of mainly the same people?
Some people will want to be on both lists; others will prefer one over the other, whatever the case may be.
>I have long thought of how to move the dialogue into a different style.
>One that more people would be interested in. However, like everyone
>else, I'm just as stumped about how to make that happen. Not to
>mention the time element. I'm working 2 jobs right now so don't
>know if I would have time to moderate a group. But if you've got
>some ideas William I'm willing to listen and consider it.
You could ask someone to be your backup. If at any time you are busy with something else then your backup can probably do it on your behalf. Perhaps Don Factor would like to be your backup. The second list would have to be different from the current one otherwise there is no point in doing it. I suggest to open a discussion, perhaps offline, with whoever is interested. But I think you should coordinate it with Don Factor to decide in what way the two lists shall distinguish themselves from each other; each should have another emphasis. Ideally, the two lists should be complementary to each other although some overlap is probably inevitable. The idea is to enrich the dialogue culture and make it more open to people with diverse interests. The current list has developed a special jargon of its own. There are probably many people interested in Bohm dialogue but find it difficult to join a what at first glance appears to be a crazy bunch. My suggestion is to make the new
list an alternative to the old one, perhaps by being a bit more conventional with regard to use of language and style.
----- Original Message -----
From: william
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2007 3:17 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
We could consider setting up a second bohm dialogue list; one with a different style. Would you, Susan, be willing to moderate such a new list?
-------Original Message-------
From: Susan Clemons
Date: 18.12.2007 21:27:51
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Maybe so, but I don't join a group so I can spend the majority of my time deleting posts. If there's anything worth reading in there it doesn't seem to be worth the time to search it out. I mostly just sit and hit delete. I really don't care about "looseness", I would like to have a discussion about beliefs and the positive aspects of self. I keep coming back to the group hoping there will be some kind of change but in all the years it's been here it seems to stay pretty much the same. Like I said, if this is all the people of the list want dialogue to be then I would rather not participate. I may simply change my profile to "no mail" so that I can check back in once in a while, but this same old nonsense of Peter and dl dominating the group seems hardly worth the trouble to read.
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: donald factor
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2007 1:19 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
As the man said, judge not lest ye be judged:-)
I'd stick with it. At least I would be unhappy if you left. So often you say stuff that I would have said, so it saves me the trouble. And anyway some gems have emerged out of the flood of stuff, say between Alan(peter) and Rob and Pat' that actually seem to have added a kind of freshness and/or looseness to the flow. It is a counter to DonL's inexhaustible seriousness or earnestness. Recall that dialogue was not meant to be primarily about content so much as about the nature of the flow or process, its blocks and pathways. And anyway, a lot of the huge batch of recent posts are mercifully brief.
don
On Dec 18, 2007, at 11:53 AM, Susan Clemons wrote:
I for one will not keep participating if this is the style that dialogue is going to take.
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: donald factor
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2007 11:38 AM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Irene, I am surprised. Have you really not spotted who Alan is? He has revealed his identity a number of times already. I think Susan was the first to spot it almost immediately he came on line. It took me a while longer. So far I have no complaint. What he has been doing here, along with Rob and Pat, seems to have opened some doors to a looser approach to it all and I like that. I did, by the way, Google Alan but found nobody.
don
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071219/4fd978bc/attachment.html
From irenedarcy at gmail.com Wed Dec 19 16:58:35 2007
From: irenedarcy at gmail.com (Irene Darcy)
Date: Wed Dec 19 17:05:06 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] moderate to immoderate, more and less
In-Reply-To: <030f01c841ea$8cfaf9b0$fb76480c@HOME>
References: <001d01c555bc$3ee2a2e0$0502a8c0@DESKTOP1>
<030f01c841ea$8cfaf9b0$fb76480c@HOME>
Message-ID: <c47283890712190758y4fda14f1m93980b45160f22e6@mail.gmail.com>
I: I would like to pose a few questions and submit comments for
consideration on this topic.
Susan: Spamming and trolling are neither interesting or respectful.
ME: We don't have that now. And all lists are susceptible to it.
AllanM: We can keep this respectful while remaining challenging, right?
I: Yes, and that shouldn't require a playground supervisor.
Hmmmmmmm........well, it sounds interesting. If anyone is interested in
this or has any ideas about it please email me at Susan.Joy@att.net
K: I don't think this should be done 'privately'. I think it should be
openly and thoroughly discussed here on the list. Not the least of the
issues is how the 'alternative list' proposes to honor Bohm's design and
philosophy.
Susan, specifically how would you describe the responsibilities of a
moderator, and what actions would you take to fulfill them?
William: The second list would have to be different from the current one
otherwise there is no point in doing it. Each should have another emphasis.
The idea is to enrich the dialogue culture and make it more open to people
with diverse interests.
K: I agree that diversity is essential, but I think we have to think really
clearly about this. As an article Peter Allen posted a couple of days ago
pointed out, the internet makes it easy for 'birds of a feather to flock
together', isolate themselves, and insulate themselves against new and
diverse ideas. I fear this can happen in this proposed 'new' group. How
would the group guard against that happening? How can or does the present
group guard against that?
The prime focus as I understand it, is to learn to watch thought in process
so we can question our assumptions and actions in order to make this world a
better place, by using Bohm's map of thinking, and updating it when
necessary. Such focus doesn't exclude anyone but those who don't want to
spend their time doing that. Unless, perhaps, they get the idea that we are
a guru-driven worship group, and it conflicts with their religious beliefs.
W: There are probably many people interested in Bohm dialogue but find it
difficult to join a what at first glance appears to be a crazy bunch.
K: What do you specifically see as constituting 'crazy' in our behavior?
People I have mentioned the list to are initially interested, and ask how
often and what time the group meets online. They want to 'instant message'
so it feels 'real', and they don't want to spend much time doing it. They
absolutely don't want to do it every day for hours at a time like we do.
Once a week is an absolute max. Some have said that it takes a very mature
person to even be attracted to such a dialogue, and that there aren't many
of those/mature people around. Others have said it requires an advanced
level of thinking that most people just don't do.
I have also noticed that newcomers don't get much of a warm welcome, no
orientation, and little encouragement to participate. A little more
attention to their needs might help.
W: My suggestion is to make the new list an alternative to the old one,
perhaps by being a bit more conventional with regard to use of language and
style.
K: 'Conventional' in what way? What specific vocabulary would you omit?
How would you prescribe 'style'? Would you give an example of what you see
as 'ideal' style?
I notice that today we have some scientific input. I'm not a scientist, and
equations are not my strong suite, but I shall read and try to comprehend,
and ask questions because it will add to meaning.
W: The current list has developed a special jargon of its own.
K: Would you please describe the characteristics of this jargon, and give
an example of how you'd like to see it change?
A: Do we all agree not (:-?) on that Don de'serves another (few)
outlet(s).... to get his act of "pretenting&acting" to gether and on stagKe?
K: I'm not religious, but there are some thinkgs that came from the Bible
that form part of my value system. One is the story of the prodigal son,
another is the moat & beam in your eye one. Yet another is the admonition to
'bear one another's burdens'. Or how about the song "Reach Out and Touch
Somebody's Hand, make this world a better place, if you can." Yes, it
requires patience, understanding, forgiveness, and committment.
I hope to hear further comments.
On Dec 18, 2007 9:55 PM, Susan Clemons <Susan.Joy@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> Except this seems to be about a face to face group which leaves out the
> idea of an internet group where there can be spamming and trolling.
> Spamming and trolling are neither interesting or respectful.
>
> Susan
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Allan <allan.mckenna@blueyonder.co.uk>
> *To:* bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> *Sent:* Tuesday, May 10, 2005 4:59 PM
> *Subject:* [Bohm_Dialogue] moderate to immoderate, more and less
>
> A dialogue group must be open. It must be available to the input of all
> opinions and individuals from all kinds of cultural and ideational
> backgrounds.. Silencing
> certain people and allowing others to speak....is that really how you want
>
> to conduct affairs?? That seems to me to be closed-minded. Certainly,
> people can choose what they want to accept or dismiss. Accepting or
> rejecting a person altogether, is a different matter. Acceptance fosters
> understanding. Isn't that what we are here for? Peter may test the
> boundaries, and doesn't growth occur at the edges?
> As a matter of freedom of speech, freedom of expression, we should not
> censor another's ideas by banning them from the forum.
> The only rule there should be is that posts containing abusive content
> gets deleted. We can keep this respectful while remaining
> challenging, right?
>
>
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>
--
Irene
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071219/c4f1c363/attachment.html
From irenedarcy at gmail.com Wed Dec 19 17:02:33 2007
From: irenedarcy at gmail.com (Irene Darcy)
Date: Wed Dec 19 17:09:16 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] The good stuff - was Suspensiopn of ...
In-Reply-To: <20071218.234913.3184.149.ae.dropper@juno.com>
References: <20071218.234913.3184.149.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <c47283890712190802m29813991g884562a8520dec99@mail.gmail.com>
I-K: Thank you for all that work. I shall go read it carefully now. I
skimmed it earlier.
On Dec 18, 2007 11:49 PM, <ae.dropper@juno.com> wrote:
> Look around. Feel it, listen to it, taste it ... etc. This is it,
> whatever IT IS, this is it simply because there is no other actuality. Is
> there? -- dl
>
> On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 20:15:36 -0500 "Irene Darcy" <irenedarcy@gmail.com>
> writes:
>
> I: It's the 'good stuff' you cut off. I have no idea what it's referring
> to.
>
> Time out. Gotta dispose of old microwave.
>
> On Dec 18, 2007 8:08 PM, rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > no I didn't Irene.
> >
> > ------------------------------
> > Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 19:41:58 -0500
> > From: irenedarcy@gmail.com
> >
> > To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> > Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
> >
> > I: Rob, you cut off dl's message you're responding to. Please don't.
> >
> > On Dec 18, 2007 7:29 PM, rob mooney < rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> > this is good stuff Don. you seem to be saying IT IS without acting or
> > pretending
> >
> > ------------------------------
> > From: donlay@knology.net
> > To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> > Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
> > Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 23:06:58 -0500
> >
> >
> > I think this is important. not just poems. many meaningful things. --
> > Rob
> >
> > Me too! I believe it is ultimately important!
> >
> > DB says that nothing can be without *meaning*. Of course, the question
> > ... What is meaning? !!
> >
> > I believe folk wisdom holds that *meaning* is what is *meant to be*, and
> > maybe this *means* what is *intended*.
> >
> > Thus, we say the whole of Being is whatever *IT* *intends to be ... or
> > what it is intending.*
> >
> > What's that?
> >
> > Look around. Feel it, listen to it, taste it ... etc. This is it,
> > whatever IT IS, this is it simply because there is no other actuality. Is
> > there? -- dl
> >
> >
> >
> > *From:* rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk>
> >
> > *To:* bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> > *Sent:* Monday, December 17, 2007 2:59 PM
> > *Subject:* RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
> >
> > dl: Surely a poem need not be understood in order to *have meaning*, *be
> > meaningful*? dl
> >
> > I think this is important. not just poems. many meaningful things.
> >
> > ------------------------------
> > From: donlay@knology.net
> > To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> > Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
> > Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:20:21 -0500
> >
> > Rob: I think so and also maybe even when acting and pretending
> > **
> > dl: Maybe so. Thought, however, presents the idea that what we *act
> > and pretend* is the *known*, the *repeated*, but there is always the *new,
> > maybe New Being* that is experienced as not the same old known roles,
> > etc.
> >
> > Rob: I also have no idea what Pat meant but I know that a poet is
> > allowed to say stuff I don't understand
> >
> > dl: Surely a poem need not be understood in order to *have meaning*, *be
> > meaningful*? dl
> >
> > http://www.knology.net/~donlay/ <http://www.knology.net/%7Edonlay/>
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > *From:* rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk>
> > *To:* bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> > *Sent:* Monday, December 17, 2007 1:20 PM
> > *Subject:* RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
> >
> > Could it be that one more participates in *this that is* when not *acting
> > and pretending* the *social identity*?
> >
> > I think so
> > and also maybe even when acting and pretending
> >
> > I also have no idea what Pat meant but I know that a poet is allowed to
> > say stuff I don't understand
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> > From: donlay@knology.net
> > To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> > Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
> > Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 11:42:02 -0500
> >
> > I can feel those final grains of self aggrandizement flying out of my
> > pores from the morning readings. -- Funny
> >
> > Does the experience of "self aggrandizement flying out of my pores "
> > precede the experience of the *identity processes* being suspended,
> > being held in suspension?
> >
> > If so, then maybe *the meaning* of "self aggrandizement flying out of my
> > pores " might be that *identity* has *limited** meaning*.
> >
> > Then what is the *meaning* of someone talking about "self aggrandizement
> > flying out of my pores "? Could it be to demonstrate *meaning*?
> >
> > Could it be that one more participates in *this that is* when not *acting
> > and pretending* the *social identity*?
> >
> > Resonance anyone? -- dl
> >
> >
> > http://www.knology.net/~donlay/ <http://www.knology.net/%7Edonlay/>
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > *From:* Don Lay <donlay@knology.net>
> > *To:* bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> > *Sent:* Monday, December 17, 2007 11:27 AM
> > *Subject:* [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
> >
> > When the *identity movement* is suspended, experience of being does not
> > cease.
> >
> > Then, it becomes clear that *ontic intelligence* does not have to be *
> > personalized* as Bohm indicates, I believe in the interview with Weber.
> >
> > *Watching* the *identity movement (thought)*, *awareness of* the
> > identity thought may and does at times *suspend* the *identity processes
> > *.
> >
> > Maybe we should say when awareness clearly presents the reasoning that *identity
> > processes* are not needed, then that awareness suspends the
> > unneeded processes. Later, when awareness of need occurs, then the *identity
> > processes* recur.
> >
> > It appears that the *I* *identity* is not needed for *identity*suspension. That's the way it seems to me, to this
> > *identity* when the *identity processes * are present.
> >
> > Resonance anyone ..., all you outer *identities* "out there"? -- dl
> >
> >
> > http://www.knology.net/~donlay/ <http://www.knology.net/%7Edonlay/>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > <http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
--
Irene
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071219/0379e9c4/attachment.html
From irenedarcy at gmail.com Wed Dec 19 18:28:31 2007
From: irenedarcy at gmail.com (Irene Darcy)
Date: Wed Dec 19 18:35:02 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] noname 4 - our forebears struggle with internet
'writealogue'
Message-ID: <c47283890712190928l39ecc2c4j6d7f4678c7c5a24f@mail.gmail.com>
I: This is very interesting. Can we compare and talk about what we think
and what they thought? Do they expand our vision? BTW William, who was
"the gang" you write about? How did they 'terrorize"?
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 1997 12:15:57 +0200
From: heuvel@muc.de (William van den Heuvel)
Subject: Re: au revoir
Precedence: list
To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Paul:
>...and au revoir for now. I've decided to unsubscribe as I really need to
focus on creating a new source of income.
Paavo:
>Unfortunately I cannot follow the dialogue list right now; please take me
off. I hope to return when I have more time.
Good bye Paul, bye Paavo, all the best to you both. Are you really
unsubscribing for that reason or has "the gang" terrorized you off the list?
I hope not. I feel a bit guilty but I also feel the dialogue should be
robust enough to stand up to a little cris!
???is now and then without unsubcribing as soon as it doesn't feel good. We
don't want to slide off into some kind of feel-good sect, do we?
Regards, William
Wed, 8 Oct 1997 19:12:37 +0100 (BST)
Subject: purpose(?) of list
Message-ID: <19971003.064301.6375.0.ami_kes@juno.com>
From: ami_kes@juno.com (John A MIKES)
Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 19:46:37 EDT
to: Chris
I think the exhaustion/apathy is showing after so much 'wisdom' everybody
felt complelled to send in about "the purpose of the list". If we have to
justify, it is too bad. I was hoping to see more reasonable topics ? can
understand those who resigned. John
Wed, 8 Oct 1997 18:43:55 +0100 (BST)
From: Matti Vaittinen <mv12437@uta.fi>
Subject: Re: au revoir
In-Reply-To: <v01550103b057ccae4ea5@[194.158.4.110]> from William van den
Heuvel at "Oct 1, 97 12:15:57 pm"
Date: Sun, 5 Oct 1997 18:19:41 +0300 (EET DST)
or has "the gang" terrorized you off the list? I hope not.
"The gang" caused me a subtle brain damage ... perhaps MBD (Minimal Brain
Damage). Sorry William, sorry Jan, sorry Barron. It wasn't just you, it's
the internet, it's Sarfatti, it's the dialogue - any dialogue: it eats your
brain.
I feel a bit guilty but I also feel the dialogue should be robust enough to
stand up to a little crisis
Any crisis destroys the invaluable brain cells. What we want is peace.
Peace! Peace of mind.
> We don't want to slide off into some kind of feel-good sect, do we?
Dialogue => the survival of the fittest
Dialogue : a never-ending dissatisfaction
" ... I expect to get my hands dirty, to get into sweat,
to work overtime." (Harrison Ford)
" ... but in a virtual world you do not get your hands
dirty, you do not sweat; you just work overtime."
(Matti Vaittinen)
>
> Regards
>
> William
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 11:46:21 +0100
From: Jan Pieter Verhey <jverhey@gyral.com>
Subject: Re: Re RE RE RE intentinal dying
Hello Julia and everybody,
All of which makes me feel.....how can we communicate through and with this
complex multilayered dense web that entwines our words?
I think I understand what you mean. The difficulty of communication via
e-mail is for me that I don't see a face. Although, I have (I wonder how
virtual it is) such a strong feeling about the person that I read between
the lines ! Two years back I had a business contact for months only by
phone, I never met the guy. When I met him, the surprise of how he looked,
so the picture built might be wrong as well !
But for me, the advantage of e-mail communication is that I feel completely
free (and safe) to express ideas, and what others write often inspires me.
In ordinary face-to-face communication, things are different, I feel
different, maybe I AM different ! If I were convicted to spend the rest of
my life behind a pc monitor e-mailing I would get nuts, but I would surely
miss these discussions if this channel was closed ! (or is this
addiction?..)
which leads me to Jan's comment that:
>
Yes, it seems all meaning is like a movie we make after the act of
perception, and after looking at the movie, we look into the real world
again that looks a bit more like the movie we just created, until we
experience the movie of all movies, which we then perceive as reality. This
seams a lifelong proces !
>
>Is there then any Hope??????
Hope and despair-- do they belong ? It seems to go beyond despair also means
going beyond hope ? Maybe the hope-despair (ego) part of us is only a tiny
fragment of the giants that we are !? Now that you explained what Nick meant
(Nick, I almost never understand what your message is -- mind us non-native
english writers !) about "let-it-be", well me think that is the whole trick
! Let it be -- let it come and let it go ! (well, sounds easy enough on
paper again)
Best,
JPL
P.S This process of the incredible difficulty of sharing the meaning of even
one word together or even one phrase is one of the reasons why the long
posts flummox me ther is so much there to unpack i cannot even begin.....
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 16:50:41 +0100
From: Jan Pieter Verhey <jverhey@gyral.com>
Subject: Re: Intentional dying
Hi Nick, you wrote:
>>
>>Don:
>>>I think that the act of perception is equivalent to the making of the
movie. Bohm argued that perception is a high order act of creativity.
That's one
>>>reason why it is so difficult to notice that it is a movie. The noticing
itself is also an act of perception -- just another bit of the movie. No,
not "just another bit of the movie". It's the making of a new kind of movie:
A movie about movies. That's the "high order act of creativity".
>>
>>William
Nick:
>Does this mean that what is going on here has much to do with creativity?
>
>I wonder if there is much perception going on in this writealogue?
I like "writealogue" (better as the alternative of writing a monologue that
is not communicated, like a secret diary). maybe there are more words.
Opnini-alogue, or echo-alogue (as a form of back-activity). I mean, walls
don't say anyhting back, do they .. Or maybe just "squash"
JPL
later
>Nick
>P S
>About creativity a drunkards dream if yu ever did seee one No!
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 14:19:42 -0600
From: "Dr. J. Gustavo Vega Gama" <jgustavo@mindvox.ciateq.mx>
Subject: Re: Re RE RE RE intentinal dying
At 11:46 15/10/97 +0100, you wrote:
>Hello Julia and everybody,
>
All of which makes me feel.....
how can we communicate through and with this complex multilayered dense
web that entwines our words?
>
>I think I understand what you mean. The difficulty of communication via
e-mail is for me that I don't see a face. Although, I have (I wonder how
virtual it is) such a strong feeling about the person that I read between
the lines ! Two years back I had a business contact for months only by
phone, I never met the guy. When I met him, the surprise of how he looked,
so the picture built might be wrong as well !
>
>But for me, the advantage of e-mail communication is that I feel completely
>free (and safe) to express ideas, and what others write often inspires me.
>In ordinary face-to-face communication, things are different, I feel
>different, maybe I AM different ! If I were convicted to spend the rest of
>my life behind a pc monitor e-mailing I would get nuts, but I would surely
>miss these discussions if this channel was closed ! (or is this
addiction?..)
The problem with this kind of comunication is that we "imagine" the other
people, but in fact we do not in touch with them, only as JPL says, we
infere beyond the words the strong feelings, but, maybe we need feelling
ourselves in this group like a family members ?what do you think?
I send a photo of my familiy and me in Mexico City sending a warm "Hi!"
to everybody.
Love Gustavo
> INVITATION - SHOW UP ! along and across SCALES, LISTS, LEVELS, DOMAINS
>
Dear Ken James, and others !!
(in contrast, my silence is 'non excistent' at the moment ( I make a lot of
> noise), really getting extroverted when reading your message).
>
> To go 'beyond words' or areas in synthetic domains is my world. You know
the
> standard quote:
> 'who categorizes for me, who writes or thinks for me'.
>
> This is a way to make aware of the categories and mind sets, mental models
> or metaphors we use or others are in.
>
The Poet Rueckert has painted it marvelously and I can recommed:
>
> R}ckertscher Vers aus der Weisheit der Brahmanen - gefunden bei:
>
> Ernst Cassirer - Symbol, Technik, Sprache -
> Mythischer, aesthetischer, theoretischer Raum (Seite 93 - 117)
> as translated with the help of CLAUDIA ROBINSON
>
VERSION I
>
> He who sets barriers mentally, ones not truly here,
> and then thinks them away, has understood the world for real.
>
> As geometry in its lines, traps space for nought,
> so our thinking in its own laws is caught.
>
> Maps make the world for us visible and great,
> But now the spirit-map we must still await.
>
> For now the spirit wanders in its terrain
> as we directionless through a field insane.
As I do not want to bother anyone with MY passion and impassion I can only
> say that we started to work on the subject:
>
> SEMANTICS; MENTAL MODELS AND REPRESENTATIONS
> with a somehow selforganizing list, just evolving....
>
> And as you mention Tetraktys, PIAGET, JUNGIAN archetypal dimensions and
> "apperception", which link to my worlds of 'appresentation' and
'apprehension', I think maybe we extend somehow the discussion of spacial
representations in an informal list I will manage for some time. It is a
mixed group based of some participants from the WHOLENESS seminar and other
groups, so please tell me or anyone out there, if he wants to join IN !
>
Heiner
Thu, 16 Oct 1997 22:55:03 +0100 (BST)
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 17:09:32 -0400
From: Alan Mann <100352.1663@compuserve.com>
Subject: Confident hopelessness
Hello Conference
I have been away and then ill so I had a massive accumulation of unread
email and I wondered if I could justify the effort and time needed to catch
up. In the end I spent a some pre-dawn hours reading it all. What started
out
as a bit of a chore ended up as what, in retrospect, seems to have been
quite a
powerful dialogue. Running through all the messages at once, without the
usual gaps, came very close to a good face to face dialogue.
I was delighted by many of the messages none more so than those
from Chris which, have the effect of on me of 'making the heart sing '.
This through a combination of the content and the courage to present such
unorthodox 'seeings'. I suppose that reveals my personality type to those
of you skilled in such matters.
Chris said way back in September I had thought that dialogue was a communal
hand-over-hand descent into the self-referent roots of thinking. I had a
somewhat romantic image of people peacefully allowing each other to let go
*without replacing*, to leave spoken parts of "self" behind, in short, to
allow the accumulation of contextual meaning to fall away, to die to the
meaningful self in order to see what remained. In practice, however, this
is apparently not the case.
Later he followed up with the image of the rich man crawling his unladen
camel through the eye of the needle. Well, the above describes exactly how I
try
to approach Dialogue. I also to agree that ' In practice, it is usually not
the case'.
Why not? My experience of groups is that they almost invariably end up in
discussion. It is as though we pay lip service to the possibility indicated
in the
above paragraph but fail to allow its development. As though the idea of
'no world view' is too threatening or the prospect of functioning from 'not
knowing' unnacceptable or absurd.
I wondered if the process of dialogue gets me to the place or space in
which the question arises, the centre, and then the question or subject, the
content, pulls me off centre again; back into the off centre self. Away from
what Jan, I think, pointed to as where or what we are already. A pull of
content against
process. This seemed like something Chris was saying about the possibility
we are 'designed' to function in a limbo between the life and death of self.
Barron said
> What if these defences could be lowered to the point where one could be as
spiritually and emotionally open to the other person as with oneself -- and
go on doing so? That would open up the possibility of continual
regeneration, surely, the experience of a kind of immortality. No longer
love's labours lost, but instead Love's labours glossed.
Yes, that too seemed to be getting to the heart of it and I empathised with
Paul's
need for a background of understandind of what we are about when he said:
>Not rules, just a succinct overview of what we're about, so that the next
>time I run for HELP there's something there to remind me!
That is what lies behind my meeting blackboard which summarises the
'principles'.
This has been a bit of a ramble through what I found to be a wonderful
'in basket', an acknowledgment of all your signals and evidence of
'listening'. Thank you Don for the wonderful survival story.
Julia asked "is dialogue about facillitating the intentional dying of the
ego self?" I have always thought so. In fact the little newletters we run
in parallel with the meetings used to carry a banner credo which said -
Meetings are held, etc.,..........and are open to anyone interested in the
possibility of working
out whether, through the process of dialogue, transformation of
consciousness, awakening to what we really are, or whatever we want to call
it, can come about.
I receive some very heavy flak for holding to what many regard as an
unrealistically lofty aspiration but persist in what I now see, thanks to
Chris, as
confident hopelessness.
I am back in Sydney for a few days and see there are another 40 or so
messages waiting so this is no doubt well out of date.
Best wishes to all
Alan
--
Irene
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071219/a6c07be2/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Wed Dec 19 18:53:32 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Wed Dec 19 19:00:02 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] noname 4 - our forebears struggle with internet
'writealogue'
In-Reply-To: <c47283890712190928l39ecc2c4j6d7f4678c7c5a24f@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <970613.88595.qm@web45802.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Goodnoon Ka -- at it, again? Trying, force&fully, to lov a grup to gether ;_)
Do feel/fill you hav to (re)pro(duce)create peace n harmony a'round here ;-?
And that, your child&hood tech'n'ology of ssssssoft(en)ballin
Will keep 'em all hahahappi & playin a'looooooonK mmmm,no,nnnnnIcelie?
humanimal
Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
I: This is very interesting. Can we compare and talk about what we think and what they thought? Do they expand our vision? BTW William, who was "the gang" you write about? How did they 'terrorize"?
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 1997 12:15:57 +0200
From: heuvel@muc.de (William van den Heuvel)
Subject: Re: au revoir
Precedence: list
To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Paul:
>...and au revoir for now. I've decided to unsubscribe as I really need to focus on creating a new source of income.
Paavo:
>Unfortunately I cannot follow the dialogue list right now; please take me off. I hope to return when I have more time.
Good bye Paul, bye Paavo, all the best to you both. Are you really unsubscribing for that reason or has "the gang" terrorized you off the list? I hope not. I feel a bit guilty but I also feel the dialogue should be robust enough to stand up to a little cris!
???is now and then without unsubcribing as soon as it doesn't feel good. We don't want to slide off into some kind of feel-good sect, do we?
Regards, William
Wed, 8 Oct 1997 19:12:37 +0100 (BST)
Subject: purpose(?) of list
Message-ID: <19971003.064301.6375.0.ami_kes@juno.com>
From: ami_kes@juno.com (John A MIKES)
Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 19:46:37 EDT
to: Chris
I think the exhaustion/apathy is showing after so much 'wisdom' everybody felt complelled to send in about "the purpose of the list". If we have to justify, it is too bad. I was hoping to see more reasonable topics ? can understand those who resigned. John
Wed, 8 Oct 1997 18:43:55 +0100 (BST)
From: Matti Vaittinen <mv12437@uta.fi>
Subject: Re: au revoir
In-Reply-To: <v01550103b057ccae4ea5@[ 194.158.4.110]> from William van den Heuvel at "Oct 1, 97 12:15:57 pm"
Date: Sun, 5 Oct 1997 18:19:41 +0300 (EET DST)
or has "the gang" terrorized you off the list? I hope not.
"The gang" caused me a subtle brain damage ... perhaps MBD (Minimal Brain Damage). Sorry William, sorry Jan, sorry Barron. It wasn't just you, it's the internet, it's Sarfatti, it's the dialogue - any dialogue: it eats your brain.
I feel a bit guilty but I also feel the dialogue should be robust enough to stand up to a little crisis
Any crisis destroys the invaluable brain cells. What we want is peace. Peace! Peace of mind.
> We don't want to slide off into some kind of feel-good sect, do we?
Dialogue => the survival of the fittest
Dialogue : a never-ending dissatisfaction
" ... I expect to get my hands dirty, to get into sweat,
to work overtime." (Harrison Ford)
" ... but in a virtual world you do not get your hands
dirty, you do not sweat; you just work overtime."
(Matti Vaittinen)
>
> Regards
>
> William
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 11:46:21 +0100
From: Jan Pieter Verhey <jverhey@gyral.com>
Subject: Re: Re RE RE RE intentinal dying
Hello Julia and everybody,
All of which makes me feel.....how can we communicate through and with this complex multilayered dense web that entwines our words?
I think I understand what you mean. The difficulty of communication via
e-mail is for me that I don't see a face. Although, I have (I wonder how
virtual it is) such a strong feeling about the person that I read between
the lines ! Two years back I had a business contact for months only by
phone, I never met the guy. When I met him, the surprise of how he looked,
so the picture built might be wrong as well !
But for me, the advantage of e-mail communication is that I feel completely
free (and safe) to express ideas, and what others write often inspires me.
In ordinary face-to-face communication, things are different, I feel
different, maybe I AM different ! If I were convicted to spend the rest of
my life behind a pc monitor e-mailing I would get nuts, but I would surely
miss these discussions if this channel was closed ! (or is this addiction?..)
which leads me to Jan's comment that:
>
Yes, it seems all meaning is like a movie we make after the act of
perception, and after looking at the movie, we look into the real world again that looks a bit more like the movie we just created, until we experience the movie of all movies, which we then perceive as reality. This seams a lifelong proces !
>
>Is there then any Hope??????
Hope and despair-- do they belong ? It seems to go beyond despair also means going beyond hope ? Maybe the hope-despair (ego) part of us is only a tiny fragment of the giants that we are !? Now that you explained what Nick meant (Nick, I almost never understand what your message is -- mind us non-native english writers !) about "let-it-be", well me think that is the whole trick ! Let it be -- let it come and let it go ! (well, sounds easy enough on paper again)
Best,
JPL
P.S This process of the incredible difficulty of sharing the meaning of even one word together or even one phrase is one of the reasons why the long posts flummox me ther is so much there to unpack i cannot even begin.....
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 16:50:41 +0100
From: Jan Pieter Verhey <jverhey@gyral.com>
Subject: Re: Intentional dying
Hi Nick, you wrote:
>>
>>Don:
>>>I think that the act of perception is equivalent to the making of the
movie. Bohm argued that perception is a high order act of creativity. That's one
>>>reason why it is so difficult to notice that it is a movie. The noticing
itself is also an act of perception -- just another bit of the movie. No, not "just another bit of the movie". It's the making of a new kind of movie: A movie about movies. That's the "high order act of creativity".
>>
>>William
Nick:
>Does this mean that what is going on here has much to do with creativity?
>
>I wonder if there is much perception going on in this writealogue?
I like "writealogue" (better as the alternative of writing a monologue that
is not communicated, like a secret diary). maybe there are more words.
Opnini-alogue, or echo-alogue (as a form of back-activity). I mean, walls
don't say anyhting back, do they .. Or maybe just "squash"
JPL
later
>Nick
>P S
>About creativity a drunkards dream if yu ever did seee one No!
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 14:19:42 -0600
From: "Dr. J. Gustavo Vega Gama" < jgustavo@mindvox.ciateq.mx>
Subject: Re: Re RE RE RE intentinal dying
At 11:46 15/10/97 +0100, you wrote:
>Hello Julia and everybody,
>
All of which makes me feel.....
how can we communicate through and with this complex multilayered dense
web that entwines our words?
>
>I think I understand what you mean. The difficulty of communication via e-mail is for me that I don't see a face. Although, I have (I wonder how virtual it is) such a strong feeling about the person that I read between the lines ! Two years back I had a business contact for months only by phone, I never met the guy. When I met him, the surprise of how he looked, so the picture built might be wrong as well !
>
>But for me, the advantage of e-mail communication is that I feel completely
>free (and safe) to express ideas, and what others write often inspires me.
>In ordinary face-to-face communication, things are different, I feel
>different, maybe I AM different ! If I were convicted to spend the rest of
>my life behind a pc monitor e-mailing I would get nuts, but I would surely
>miss these discussions if this channel was closed ! (or is this addiction?..)
The problem with this kind of comunication is that we "imagine" the other
people, but in fact we do not in touch with them, only as JPL says, we
infere beyond the words the strong feelings, but, maybe we need feelling
ourselves in this group like a family members ?what do you think?
I send a photo of my familiy and me in Mexico City sending a warm "Hi!"
to everybody.
Love Gustavo
> INVITATION - SHOW UP ! along and across SCALES, LISTS, LEVELS, DOMAINS
>
Dear Ken James, and others !!
(in contrast, my silence is 'non excistent' at the moment ( I make a lot of
> noise), really getting extroverted when reading your message).
>
> To go 'beyond words' or areas in synthetic domains is my world. You know the
> standard quote:
> 'who categorizes for me, who writes or thinks for me'.
>
> This is a way to make aware of the categories and mind sets, mental models
> or metaphors we use or others are in.
>
The Poet Rueckert has painted it marvelously and I can recommed:
>
> R}ckertscher Vers aus der Weisheit der Brahmanen - gefunden bei:
>
> Ernst Cassirer - Symbol, Technik, Sprache -
> Mythischer, aesthetischer, theoretischer Raum (Seite 93 - 117)
> as translated with the help of CLAUDIA ROBINSON
>
VERSION I
>
> He who sets barriers mentally, ones not truly here,
> and then thinks them away, has understood the world for real.
>
> As geometry in its lines, traps space for nought,
> so our thinking in its own laws is caught.
>
> Maps make the world for us visible and great,
> But now the spirit-map we must still await.
>
> For now the spirit wanders in its terrain
> as we directionless through a field insane.
As I do not want to bother anyone with MY passion and impassion I can only
> say that we started to work on the subject:
>
> SEMANTICS; MENTAL MODELS AND REPRESENTATIONS
> with a somehow selforganizing list, just evolving....
>
> And as you mention Tetraktys, PIAGET, JUNGIAN archetypal dimensions and
> "apperception", which link to my worlds of 'appresentation' and 'apprehension', I think maybe we extend somehow the discussion of spacial representations in an informal list I will manage for some time. It is a mixed group based of some participants from the WHOLENESS seminar and other groups, so please tell me or anyone out there, if he wants to join IN !
>
Heiner
Thu, 16 Oct 1997 22:55:03 +0100 (BST)
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 17:09:32 -0400
From: Alan Mann <100352.1663@compuserve.com>
Subject: Confident hopelessness
Hello Conference
I have been away and then ill so I had a massive accumulation of unread
email and I wondered if I could justify the effort and time needed to catch
up. In the end I spent a some pre-dawn hours reading it all. What started out
as a bit of a chore ended up as what, in retrospect, seems to have been quite a
powerful dialogue. Running through all the messages at once, without the usual gaps, came very close to a good face to face dialogue.
I was delighted by many of the messages none more so than those
from Chris which, have the effect of on me of 'making the heart sing '.
This through a combination of the content and the courage to present such unorthodox 'seeings'. I suppose that reveals my personality type to those of you skilled in such matters.
Chris said way back in September I had thought that dialogue was a communal hand-over-hand descent into the self-referent roots of thinking. I had a somewhat romantic image of people peacefully allowing each other to let go *without replacing*, to leave spoken parts of "self" behind, in short, to allow the accumulation of contextual meaning to fall away, to die to the meaningful self in order to see what remained. In practice, however, this is apparently not the case.
Later he followed up with the image of the rich man crawling his unladen
camel through the eye of the needle. Well, the above describes exactly how I try
to approach Dialogue. I also to agree that ' In practice, it is usually not the case'.
Why not? My experience of groups is that they almost invariably end up in
discussion. It is as though we pay lip service to the possibility indicated in the
above paragraph but fail to allow its development. As though the idea of 'no world view' is too threatening or the prospect of functioning from 'not
knowing' unnacceptable or absurd.
I wondered if the process of dialogue gets me to the place or space in
which the question arises, the centre, and then the question or subject, the content, pulls me off centre again; back into the off centre self. Away from what Jan, I think, pointed to as where or what we are already. A pull of content against
process. This seemed like something Chris was saying about the possibility we are 'designed' to function in a limbo between the life and death of self.
Barron said
> What if these defences could be lowered to the point where one could be as spiritually and emotionally open to the other person as with oneself -- and go on doing so? That would open up the possibility of continual regeneration, surely, the experience of a kind of immortality. No longer love's labours lost, but instead Love's labours glossed.
Yes, that too seemed to be getting to the heart of it and I empathised with Paul's
need for a background of understandind of what we are about when he said:
>Not rules, just a succinct overview of what we're about, so that the next
>time I run for HELP there's something there to remind me!
That is what lies behind my meeting blackboard which summarises the
'principles'.
This has been a bit of a ramble through what I found to be a wonderful
'in basket', an acknowledgment of all your signals and evidence of
'listening'. Thank you Don for the wonderful survival story.
Julia asked "is dialogue about facillitating the intentional dying of the
ego self?" I have always thought so. In fact the little newletters we run in parallel with the meetings used to carry a banner credo which said - Meetings are held, etc.,..........and are open to anyone interested in the possibility of working
out whether, through the process of dialogue, transformation of consciousness, awakening to what we really are, or whatever we want to call it, can come about.
I receive some very heavy flak for holding to what many regard as an
unrealistically lofty aspiration but persist in what I now see, thanks to Chris, as
confident hopelessness.
I am back in Sydney for a few days and see there are another 40 or so messages waiting so this is no doubt well out of date.
Best wishes to all
Alan
--
Irene
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071219/a9cb044b/attachment.html
From irenedarcy at gmail.com Wed Dec 19 18:57:38 2007
From: irenedarcy at gmail.com (Irene Darcy)
Date: Wed Dec 19 19:04:08 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] noname 4 - our forebears struggle with internet
'writealogue'
In-Reply-To: <970613.88595.qm@web45802.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
References: <c47283890712190928l39ecc2c4j6d7f4678c7c5a24f@mail.gmail.com>
<970613.88595.qm@web45802.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <c47283890712190957v184d225cj29c4e1b2b54cb041@mail.gmail.com>
I: Image - jumping from frying pan into fire; think before you leap - Not
Winston Churchill - peace in our time.
On Dec 19, 2007 12:53 PM, Alan E. DeBakey <a.debakey@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Goodnoon Ka -- at it, again? Trying, force&fully, to lov a grup to gether
> ;_)
>
> Do feel/fill you hav to (re)pro(duce)create peace n harmony a'round here
> ;-?
>
> And that, your child&hood tech'n'ology of ssssssoft(en)ballin
>
> Will keep 'em all hahahappi & playin a'looooooonK mmmm,no,nnnnnIcelie?
>
> humanimal
>
>
> *Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com>* wrote:
>
>
> I: This is very interesting. Can we compare and talk about what we think
> and what they thought? Do they expand our vision? BTW William, who was
> "the gang" you write about? How did they 'terrorize"?
>
> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 1997 12:15:57 +0200
> From: heuvel@muc.de (William van den Heuvel)
> Subject: Re: au revoir
> Precedence: list
> To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
> Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
>
> Paul:
> >...and au revoir for now. I've decided to unsubscribe as I really need to
> focus on creating a new source of income.
>
> Paavo:
> >Unfortunately I cannot follow the dialogue list right now; please take me
> off. I hope to return when I have more time.
>
> Good bye Paul, bye Paavo, all the best to you both. Are you really
> unsubscribing for that reason or has "the gang" terrorized you off the list?
> I hope not. I feel a bit guilty but I also feel the dialogue should be
> robust enough to stand up to a little cris!
> ???is now and then without unsubcribing as soon as it doesn't feel good.
> We don't want to slide off into some kind of feel-good sect, do we?
>
> Regards, William
>
> Wed, 8 Oct 1997 19:12:37 +0100 (BST)
> Subject: purpose(?) of list
> Message-ID: <19971003.064301.6375.0.ami_kes@juno.com>
> From: ami_kes@juno.com (John A MIKES)
> Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 19:46:37 EDT
>
> to: Chris
> I think the exhaustion/apathy is showing after so much 'wisdom' everybody
> felt complelled to send in about "the purpose of the list". If we have to
> justify, it is too bad. I was hoping to see more reasonable topics ? can
> understand those who resigned. John
>
> Wed, 8 Oct 1997 18:43:55 +0100 (BST)
> From: Matti Vaittinen <mv12437@uta.fi>
>
> Subject: Re: au revoir
> In-Reply-To: <v01550103b057ccae4ea5@[ 194.158.4.110]> from William van den
> Heuvel at "Oct 1, 97 12:15:57 pm"
> Date: Sun, 5 Oct 1997 18:19:41 +0300 (EET DST)
>
> or has "the gang" terrorized you off the list? I hope not.
>
> "The gang" caused me a subtle brain damage ... perhaps MBD (Minimal
> Brain Damage). Sorry William, sorry Jan, sorry Barron. It wasn't just you,
> it's the internet, it's Sarfatti, it's the dialogue - any dialogue: it eats
> your brain.
>
> I feel a bit guilty but I also feel the dialogue should be robust enough
> to stand up to a little crisis
>
> Any crisis destroys the invaluable brain cells. What we want is
> peace. Peace! Peace of mind.
>
> > We don't want to slide off into some kind of feel-good sect, do we?
>
> Dialogue => the survival of the fittest
>
> Dialogue : a never-ending dissatisfaction
>
> " ... I expect to get my hands dirty, to get into sweat,
> to work overtime." (Harrison Ford)
>
> " ... but in a virtual world you do not get your hands
> dirty, you do not sweat; you just work overtime."
> (Matti Vaittinen)
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > William
>
> Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 11:46:21 +0100
> From: Jan Pieter Verhey <jverhey@gyral.com>
> Subject: Re: Re RE RE RE intentinal dying
>
> Hello Julia and everybody,
>
> All of which makes me feel.....how can we communicate through and with
> this complex multilayered dense web that entwines our words?
>
> I think I understand what you mean. The difficulty of communication via
> e-mail is for me that I don't see a face. Although, I have (I wonder how
> virtual it is) such a strong feeling about the person that I read between
> the lines ! Two years back I had a business contact for months only by
> phone, I never met the guy. When I met him, the surprise of how he looked,
> so the picture built might be wrong as well !
>
> But for me, the advantage of e-mail communication is that I feel
> completely
> free (and safe) to express ideas, and what others write often inspires me.
>
> In ordinary face-to-face communication, things are different, I feel
> different, maybe I AM different ! If I were convicted to spend the rest of
> my life behind a pc monitor e-mailing I would get nuts, but I would surely
>
> miss these discussions if this channel was closed ! (or is this
> addiction?..)
>
> which leads me to Jan's comment that:
> >
> Yes, it seems all meaning is like a movie we make after the act of
> perception, and after looking at the movie, we look into the real world
> again that looks a bit more like the movie we just created, until we
> experience the movie of all movies, which we then perceive as reality. This
> seams a lifelong proces !
> >
> >Is there then any Hope??????
>
> Hope and despair-- do they belong ? It seems to go beyond despair also
> means going beyond hope ? Maybe the hope-despair (ego) part of us is only a
> tiny fragment of the giants that we are !? Now that you explained what Nick
> meant (Nick, I almost never understand what your message is -- mind us
> non-native english writers !) about "let-it-be", well me think that is the
> whole trick ! Let it be -- let it come and let it go ! (well, sounds easy
> enough on paper again)
>
> Best,
> JPL
>
> P.S This process of the incredible difficulty of sharing the meaning of
> even one word together or even one phrase is one of the reasons why the long
> posts flummox me ther is so much there to unpack i cannot even begin.....
>
> Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 16:50:41 +0100
> From: Jan Pieter Verhey <jverhey@gyral.com>
> Subject: Re: Intentional dying
>
> Hi Nick, you wrote:
> >>
> >>Don:
> >>>I think that the act of perception is equivalent to the making of the
> movie. Bohm argued that perception is a high order act of creativity.
> That's one
> >>>reason why it is so difficult to notice that it is a movie. The
> noticing
> itself is also an act of perception -- just another bit of the movie. No,
> not "just another bit of the movie". It's the making of a new kind of movie:
> A movie about movies. That's the "high order act of creativity".
> >>
> >>William
>
> Nick:
> >Does this mean that what is going on here has much to do with creativity?
> >
> >I wonder if there is much perception going on in this writealogue?
>
> I like "writealogue" (better as the alternative of writing a monologue
> that
> is not communicated, like a secret diary). maybe there are more words.
> Opnini-alogue, or echo-alogue (as a form of back-activity). I mean, walls
> don't say anyhting back, do they .. Or maybe just "squash"
>
> JPL
>
> later
> >Nick
> >P S
> >About creativity a drunkards dream if yu ever did seee one No!
>
> Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 14:19:42 -0600
> From: "Dr. J. Gustavo Vega Gama" < jgustavo@mindvox.ciateq.mx>
> Subject: Re: Re RE RE RE intentinal dying
>
> At 11:46 15/10/97 +0100, you wrote:
> >Hello Julia and everybody,
> >
> All of which makes me feel.....
> how can we communicate through and with this complex multilayered dense
> web that entwines our words?
> >
> >I think I understand what you mean. The difficulty of communication via
> e-mail is for me that I don't see a face. Although, I have (I wonder how
> virtual it is) such a strong feeling about the person that I read between
> the lines ! Two years back I had a business contact for months only by
> phone, I never met the guy. When I met him, the surprise of how he looked,
> so the picture built might be wrong as well !
> >
> >But for me, the advantage of e-mail communication is that I feel
> completely
> >free (and safe) to express ideas, and what others write often inspires
> me.
> >In ordinary face-to-face communication, things are different, I feel
> >different, maybe I AM different ! If I were convicted to spend the rest
> of
> >my life behind a pc monitor e-mailing I would get nuts, but I would
> surely
> >miss these discussions if this channel was closed ! (or is this
> addiction?..)
>
> The problem with this kind of comunication is that we "imagine" the other
> people, but in fact we do not in touch with them, only as JPL says, we
> infere beyond the words the strong feelings, but, maybe we need feelling
> ourselves in this group like a family members ?what do you think?
> I send a photo of my familiy and me in Mexico City sending a warm "Hi!"
> to everybody.
>
> Love Gustavo
>
> > INVITATION - SHOW UP ! along and across SCALES, LISTS, LEVELS, DOMAINS
> >
> Dear Ken James, and others !!
> (in contrast, my silence is 'non excistent' at the moment ( I make a lot
> of
> > noise), really getting extroverted when reading your message).
> >
> > To go 'beyond words' or areas in synthetic domains is my world. You know
> the
> > standard quote:
> > 'who categorizes for me, who writes or thinks for me'.
> >
> > This is a way to make aware of the categories and mind sets, mental
> models
> > or metaphors we use or others are in.
> >
> The Poet Rueckert has painted it marvelously and I can recommed:
> >
> > R}ckertscher Vers aus der Weisheit der Brahmanen - gefunden bei:
> >
> > Ernst Cassirer - Symbol, Technik, Sprache -
> > Mythischer, aesthetischer, theoretischer Raum (Seite 93 - 117)
> > as translated with the help of CLAUDIA ROBINSON
> >
> VERSION I
> >
> > He who sets barriers mentally, ones not truly here,
> > and then thinks them away, has understood the world for real.
> >
> > As geometry in its lines, traps space for nought,
> > so our thinking in its own laws is caught.
> >
> > Maps make the world for us visible and great,
> > But now the spirit-map we must still await.
> >
> > For now the spirit wanders in its terrain
> > as we directionless through a field insane.
>
> As I do not want to bother anyone with MY passion and impassion I can only
> > say that we started to work on the subject:
> >
> > SEMANTICS; MENTAL MODELS AND REPRESENTATIONS
> > with a somehow selforganizing list, just evolving....
> >
> > And as you mention Tetraktys, PIAGET, JUNGIAN archetypal dimensions and
> > "apperception", which link to my worlds of 'appresentation' and
> 'apprehension', I think maybe we extend somehow the discussion of spacial
> representations in an informal list I will manage for some time. It is a
> mixed group based of some participants from the WHOLENESS seminar and other
> groups, so please tell me or anyone out there, if he wants to join IN !
> >
> Heiner
>
> Thu, 16 Oct 1997 22:55:03 +0100 (BST)
> Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 17:09:32 -0400
> From: Alan Mann <100352.1663@compuserve.com>
> Subject: Confident hopelessness
>
> Hello Conference
> I have been away and then ill so I had a massive accumulation of unread
> email and I wondered if I could justify the effort and time needed to
> catch
> up. In the end I spent a some pre-dawn hours reading it all. What started
> out
> as a bit of a chore ended up as what, in retrospect, seems to have been
> quite a
> powerful dialogue. Running through all the messages at once, without the
> usual gaps, came very close to a good face to face dialogue.
>
> I was delighted by many of the messages none more so than those
> from Chris which, have the effect of on me of 'making the heart sing '.
> This through a combination of the content and the courage to present such
> unorthodox 'seeings'. I suppose that reveals my personality type to those
> of you skilled in such matters.
>
> Chris said way back in September I had thought that dialogue was a
> communal hand-over-hand descent into the self-referent roots of thinking. I
> had a somewhat romantic image of people peacefully allowing each other to
> let go *without replacing*, to leave spoken parts of "self" behind, in
> short, to allow the accumulation of contextual meaning to fall away, to die
> to the meaningful self in order to see what remained. In practice, however,
> this is apparently not the case.
>
> Later he followed up with the image of the rich man crawling his unladen
> camel through the eye of the needle. Well, the above describes exactly how
> I try
> to approach Dialogue. I also to agree that ' In practice, it is usually
> not the case'.
> Why not? My experience of groups is that they almost invariably end up in
> discussion. It is as though we pay lip service to the possibility
> indicated in the
> above paragraph but fail to allow its development. As though the idea of
> 'no world view' is too threatening or the prospect of functioning from 'not
> knowing' unnacceptable or absurd.
>
> I wondered if the process of dialogue gets me to the place or space in
> which the question arises, the centre, and then the question or subject,
> the content, pulls me off centre again; back into the off centre self. Away
> from what Jan, I think, pointed to as where or what we are already. A pull
> of content against
> process. This seemed like something Chris was saying about the
> possibility we are 'designed' to function in a limbo between the life and
> death of self.
>
> Barron said
> > What if these defences could be lowered to the point where one could be
> as spiritually and emotionally open to the other person as with oneself --
> and go on doing so? That would open up the possibility of continual
> regeneration, surely, the experience of a kind of immortality. No longer
> love's labours lost, but instead Love's labours glossed.
>
> Yes, that too seemed to be getting to the heart of it and I empathised
> with Paul's
> need for a background of understandind of what we are about when he said:
>
> >Not rules, just a succinct overview of what we're about, so that the next
>
> >time I run for HELP there's something there to remind me!
>
> That is what lies behind my meeting blackboard which summarises the
> 'principles'.
>
> This has been a bit of a ramble through what I found to be a wonderful
> 'in basket', an acknowledgment of all your signals and evidence of
> 'listening'. Thank you Don for the wonderful survival story.
>
> Julia asked "is dialogue about facillitating the intentional dying of the
>
> ego self?" I have always thought so. In fact the little newletters we run
> in parallel with the meetings used to carry a banner credo which said -
> Meetings are held, etc.,..........and are open to anyone interested in the
> possibility of working
> out whether, through the process of dialogue, transformation of
> consciousness, awakening to what we really are, or whatever we want to call
> it, can come about.
>
> I receive some very heavy flak for holding to what many regard as an
> unrealistically lofty aspiration but persist in what I now see, thanks to
> Chris, as
> confident hopelessness.
>
> I am back in Sydney for a few days and see there are another 40 or so
> messages waiting so this is no doubt well out of date.
> Best wishes to all
> Alan
>
>
> --
> Irene
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>
> ------------------------------
> Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=51438/*http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs>
>
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>
--
Irene
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071219/b71ecafe/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Wed Dec 19 19:03:45 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Wed Dec 19 19:10:16 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] The good stuff - was http://tinyurl.com/yvwvq8
In-Reply-To: <c47283890712190802m29813991g884562a8520dec99@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <414040.69897.qm@web45811.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
http://tinyurl.com/yvwvq8
that 'said'... now:
why
2 whys, well, make that 3:
1_ why now
2_why did Kath skim the Math earliar
n 3_ why "work".... handing out http://tinyurl.com/23g68a ;-)
humaimal
Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
I-K: Thank you for all that work. I shall go read it carefully now. I skimmed it earlier.
On Dec 18, 2007 11:49 PM, < ae.dropper@juno.com> wrote:
Look around. Feel it, listen to it, taste it ... etc. This is it, whatever IT IS, this is it simply because there is no other actuality. Is there? -- dl
On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 20:15:36 -0500 "Irene Darcy" <irenedarcy@gmail.com> writes:
I: It's the 'good stuff' you cut off. I have no idea what it's referring to.
Time out. Gotta dispose of old microwave.
On Dec 18, 2007 8:08 PM, rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
no I didn't Irene.
---------------------------------
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 19:41:58 -0500
From: irenedarcy@gmail.com
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
I: Rob, you cut off dl's message you're responding to. Please don't.
On Dec 18, 2007 7:29 PM, rob mooney < rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
this is good stuff Don. you seem to be saying IT IS without acting or pretending
---------------------------------
From: donlay@knology.net
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 23:06:58 -0500
I think this is important. not just poems. many meaningful things. -- Rob
Me too! I believe it is ultimately important!
DB says that nothing can be without meaning. Of course, the question ... What is meaning? !!
I believe folk wisdom holds that meaning is what is meant to be, and maybe this means what is intended.
Thus, we say the whole of Being is whatever IT intends to be ... or what it is intending.
What's that?
Look around. Feel it, listen to it, taste it ... etc. This is it, whatever IT IS, this is it simply because there is no other actuality. Is there? -- dl
From: rob mooney
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 2:59 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
dl: Surely a poem need not be understood in order to have meaning, be meaningful? dl
I think this is important. not just poems. many meaningful things.
---------------------------------
From: donlay@knology.net
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:20:21 -0500
Rob: I think so and also maybe even when acting and pretending
dl: Maybe so. Thought, however, presents the idea that what we act and pretend is the known, the repeated, but there is always the new, maybe New Being that is experienced as not the same old known roles, etc.
Rob: I also have no idea what Pat meant but I know that a poet is allowed to say stuff I don't understand
dl: Surely a poem need not be understood in order to have meaning, be meaningful? dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: rob mooney
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 1:20 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Could it be that one more participates in this that is when not acting and pretending the social identity?
I think so
and also maybe even when acting and pretending
I also have no idea what Pat meant but I know that a poet is allowed to say stuff I don't understand
---------------------------------
From: donlay@knology.net
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 11:42:02 -0500
I can feel those final grains of self aggrandizement flying out of my pores from the morning readings. -- Funny
Does the experience of "self aggrandizement flying out of my pores " precede the experience of the identity processes being suspended, being held in suspension?
If so, then maybe the meaning of "self aggrandizement flying out of my pores " might be that identity has limited meaning.
Then what is the meaning of someone talking about "self aggrandizement flying out of my pores "? Could it be to demonstrate meaning?
Could it be that one more participates in this that is when not acting and pretending the social identity?
Resonance anyone? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: Don Lay
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 11:27 AM
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
When the identity movement is suspended, experience of being does not cease.
Then, it becomes clear that ontic intelligence does not have to be personalized as Bohm indicates, I believe in the interview with Weber.
Watching the identity movement (thought), awareness of the identity thought may and does at times suspend the identity processes.
Maybe we should say when awareness clearly presents the reasoning that identity processes are not needed, then that awareness suspends the unneeded processes. Later, when awareness of need occurs, then the identity processes recur.
It appears that the I identity is not needed for identity suspension. That's the way it seems to me, to this identity when the identity processes are present.
Resonance anyone ..., all you outer identities "out there"? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
---------------------------------
--
Irene
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071219/408271be/attachment.html
From ae.dropper at juno.com Wed Dec 19 18:18:20 2007
From: ae.dropper at juno.com (ae.dropper@juno.com)
Date: Wed Dec 19 19:12:13 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] staying with "good stuff"
Message-ID: <20071219.131021.3184.156.ae.dropper@juno.com>
this is good stuff Don. you seem to be saying IT IS without acting or
pretending (rob)
On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 11:02:33 -0500 "Irene Darcy" <irenedarcy@gmail.com>
writes:
I-K: Thank you for all that work. I shall go read it carefully now. I
skimmed it earlier.
On Dec 18, 2007 11:49 PM, < ae.dropper@juno.com> wrote:
Look around. Feel it, listen to it, taste it ... etc. This is it,
whatever IT IS, this is it simply because there is no other actuality.
Is there? -- dl
On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 20:15:36 -0500 "Irene Darcy" <irenedarcy@gmail.com>
writes:
I: It's the 'good stuff' you cut off. I have no idea what it's
referring to.
Time out. Gotta dispose of old microwave.
On Dec 18, 2007 8:08 PM, rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
no I didn't Irene.
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 19:41:58 -0500
From: irenedarcy@gmail.com
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
I: Rob, you cut off dl's message you're responding to. Please don't.
On Dec 18, 2007 7:29 PM, rob mooney < rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
this is good stuff Don. you seem to be saying IT IS without acting or
pretending
From: donlay@knology.net
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 23:06:58 -0500
I think this is important. not just poems. many meaningful things. -- Rob
Me too! I believe it is ultimately important!
DB says that nothing can be without meaning. Of course, the question ...
What is meaning? !!
I believe folk wisdom holds that meaning is what is meant to be, and
maybe this means what is intended.
Thus, we say the whole of Being is whatever IT intends to be ... or what
it is intending.
What's that?
Look around. Feel it, listen to it, taste it ... etc. This is it,
whatever IT IS, this is it simply because there is no other actuality.
Is there? -- dl
From: rob mooney
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 2:59 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
dl: Surely a poem need not be understood in order to have meaning, be
meaningful? dl
I think this is important. not just poems. many meaningful things.
From: donlay@knology.net
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:20:21 -0500
Rob: I think so and also maybe even when acting and pretending
dl: Maybe so. Thought, however, presents the idea that what we act and
pretend is the known, the repeated, but there is always the new, maybe
New Being that is experienced as not the same old known roles, etc.
Rob: I also have no idea what Pat meant but I know that a poet is
allowed to say stuff I don't understand
dl: Surely a poem need not be understood in order to have meaning, be
meaningful? dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: rob mooney
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 1:20 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Could it be that one more participates in this that is when not acting
and pretending the social identity?
I think so
and also maybe even when acting and pretending
I also have no idea what Pat meant but I know that a poet is allowed to
say stuff I don't understand
From: donlay@knology.net
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 11:42:02 -0500
I can feel those final grains of self aggrandizement flying out of my
pores from the morning readings. -- Funny
Does the experience of "self aggrandizement flying out of my pores "
precede the experience of the identity processes being suspended, being
held in suspension?
If so, then maybe the meaning of "self aggrandizement flying out of my
pores " might be that identity has limited meaning.
Then what is the meaning of someone talking about "self aggrandizement
flying out of my pores "? Could it be to demonstrate meaning?
Could it be that one more participates in this that is when not acting
and pretending the social identity?
Resonance anyone? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: Don Lay
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 11:27 AM
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
When the identity movement is suspended, experience of being does not
cease.
Then, it becomes clear that ontic intelligence does not have to be
personalized as Bohm indicates, I believe in the interview with Weber.
Watching the identity movement (thought), awareness of the identity
thought may and does at times suspend the identity processes.
Maybe we should say when awareness clearly presents the reasoning that
identity processes are not needed, then that awareness suspends the
unneeded processes. Later, when awareness of need occurs, then the
identity processes recur.
It appears that the I identity is not needed for identity suspension.
That's the way it seems to me, to this identity when the identity
processes are present.
Resonance anyone ..., all you outer identities "out there"? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
--
Irene
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071219/1322c7f2/attachment.html
From ae.dropper at juno.com Wed Dec 19 18:25:41 2007
From: ae.dropper at juno.com (ae.dropper@juno.com)
Date: Wed Dec 19 19:12:16 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our Poem
Message-ID: <20071219.131021.3184.157.ae.dropper@juno.com>
The pieces shimmer with
belonging in their
temporary seats
On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 00:53:43 +0000 rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk>
writes:
Fullness pours out what I see
it does not seem
it all empties into white
the mounds of it - frozen overnight
in the fine snow, crystals,
worms throw up casts.
On my screen I see it black
but I know up close you can see
the colors - LOOK
- there is no black in
transmitted
light.
Sounds like? How many syllables? Guess and win prizes with Search
Charades!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071219/0832842d/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Wed Dec 19 19:07:51 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Wed Dec 19 19:14:22 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] noname 4 - our forebears struggle with internet
'writealogue'
In-Reply-To: <c47283890712190957v184d225cj29c4e1b2b54cb041@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <806180.85543.qm@web45805.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Talking a bout Fire n Fr yings:
Kath some how feelin heat that her supporTASystem might bee goin
Through
A little
Melt
Down
And that she might 'lose' all her "friends' (endorphins etc, see Bohm on that)
That she has been iiiiii nvestingtong in so heavilie ovr the pppppp ast
(Ps: 'ast' in german: branch, twig....)
Klownon
Humanimalian
Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
I: Image - jumping from frying pan into fire; think before you leap - Not Winston Churchill - peace in our time.
On Dec 19, 2007 12:53 PM, Alan E. DeBakey < a.debakey@yahoo.com> wrote:
Goodnoon Ka -- at it, again? Trying, force&fully, to lov a grup to gether ;_)
Do feel/fill you hav to (re)pro(duce)create peace n harmony a'round here ;-?
And that, your child&hood tech'n'ology of ssssssoft(en)ballin
Will keep 'em all hahahappi & playin a'looooooonK mmmm,no,nnnnnIcelie?
humanimal
Irene Darcy < irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
I: This is very interesting. Can we compare and talk about what we think and what they thought? Do they expand our vision? BTW William, who was "the gang" you write about? How did they 'terrorize"?
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 1997 12:15:57 +0200
From: heuvel@muc.de (William van den Heuvel)
Subject: Re: au revoir
Precedence: list
To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Paul:
>...and au revoir for now. I've decided to unsubscribe as I really need to focus on creating a new source of income.
Paavo:
>Unfortunately I cannot follow the dialogue list right now; please take me off. I hope to return when I have more time.
Good bye Paul, bye Paavo, all the best to you both. Are you really unsubscribing for that reason or has "the gang" terrorized you off the list? I hope not. I feel a bit guilty but I also feel the dialogue should be robust enough to stand up to a little cris!
???is now and then without unsubcribing as soon as it doesn't feel good. We don't want to slide off into some kind of feel-good sect, do we?
Regards, William
Wed, 8 Oct 1997 19:12:37 +0100 (BST)
Subject: purpose(?) of list
Message-ID: <19971003.064301.6375.0.ami_kes@juno.com >
From: ami_kes@juno.com (John A MIKES)
Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 19:46:37 EDT
to: Chris
I think the exhaustion/apathy is showing after so much 'wisdom' everybody felt complelled to send in about "the purpose of the list". If we have to justify, it is too bad. I was hoping to see more reasonable topics ? can understand those who resigned. John
Wed, 8 Oct 1997 18:43:55 +0100 (BST)
From: Matti Vaittinen <mv12437@uta.fi>
Subject: Re: au revoir
In-Reply-To: <v01550103b057ccae4ea5@[ 194.158.4.110]> from William van den Heuvel at "Oct 1, 97 12:15:57 pm"
Date: Sun, 5 Oct 1997 18:19:41 +0300 (EET DST)
or has "the gang" terrorized you off the list? I hope not.
"The gang" caused me a subtle brain damage ... perhaps MBD (Minimal Brain Damage). Sorry William, sorry Jan, sorry Barron. It wasn't just you, it's the internet, it's Sarfatti, it's the dialogue - any dialogue: it eats your brain.
I feel a bit guilty but I also feel the dialogue should be robust enough to stand up to a little crisis
Any crisis destroys the invaluable brain cells. What we want is peace. Peace! Peace of mind.
> We don't want to slide off into some kind of feel-good sect, do we?
Dialogue => the survival of the fittest
Dialogue : a never-ending dissatisfaction
" ... I expect to get my hands dirty, to get into sweat,
to work overtime." (Harrison Ford)
" ... but in a virtual world you do not get your hands
dirty, you do not sweat; you just work overtime."
(Matti Vaittinen)
>
> Regards
>
> William
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 11:46:21 +0100
From: Jan Pieter Verhey <jverhey@gyral.com>
Subject: Re: Re RE RE RE intentinal dying
Hello Julia and everybody,
All of which makes me feel.....how can we communicate through and with this complex multilayered dense web that entwines our words?
I think I understand what you mean. The difficulty of communication via
e-mail is for me that I don't see a face. Although, I have (I wonder how
virtual it is) such a strong feeling about the person that I read between
the lines ! Two years back I had a business contact for months only by
phone, I never met the guy. When I met him, the surprise of how he looked,
so the picture built might be wrong as well !
But for me, the advantage of e-mail communication is that I feel completely
free (and safe) to express ideas, and what others write often inspires me.
In ordinary face-to-face communication, things are different, I feel
different, maybe I AM different ! If I were convicted to spend the rest of
my life behind a pc monitor e-mailing I would get nuts, but I would surely
miss these discussions if this channel was closed ! (or is this addiction?..)
which leads me to Jan's comment that:
>
Yes, it seems all meaning is like a movie we make after the act of
perception, and after looking at the movie, we look into the real world again that looks a bit more like the movie we just created, until we experience the movie of all movies, which we then perceive as reality. This seams a lifelong proces !
>
>Is there then any Hope??????
Hope and despair-- do they belong ? It seems to go beyond despair also means going beyond hope ? Maybe the hope-despair (ego) part of us is only a tiny fragment of the giants that we are !? Now that you explained what Nick meant (Nick, I almost never understand what your message is -- mind us non-native english writers !) about "let-it-be", well me think that is the whole trick ! Let it be -- let it come and let it go ! (well, sounds easy enough on paper again)
Best,
JPL
P.S This process of the incredible difficulty of sharing the meaning of even one word together or even one phrase is one of the reasons why the long posts flummox me ther is so much there to unpack i cannot even begin.....
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 16:50:41 +0100
From: Jan Pieter Verhey <jverhey@gyral.com>
Subject: Re: Intentional dying
Hi Nick, you wrote:
>>
>>Don:
>>>I think that the act of perception is equivalent to the making of the
movie. Bohm argued that perception is a high order act of creativity. That's one
>>>reason why it is so difficult to notice that it is a movie. The noticing
itself is also an act of perception -- just another bit of the movie. No, not "just another bit of the movie". It's the making of a new kind of movie: A movie about movies. That's the "high order act of creativity".
>>
>>William
Nick:
>Does this mean that what is going on here has much to do with creativity?
>
>I wonder if there is much perception going on in this writealogue?
I like "writealogue" (better as the alternative of writing a monologue that
is not communicated, like a secret diary). maybe there are more words.
Opnini-alogue, or echo-alogue (as a form of back-activity). I mean, walls
don't say anyhting back, do they .. Or maybe just "squash"
JPL
later
>Nick
>P S
>About creativity a drunkards dream if yu ever did seee one No!
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 14:19:42 -0600
From: "Dr. J. Gustavo Vega Gama" < jgustavo@mindvox.ciateq.mx>
Subject: Re: Re RE RE RE intentinal dying
At 11:46 15/10/97 +0100, you wrote:
>Hello Julia and everybody,
>
All of which makes me feel.....
how can we communicate through and with this complex multilayered dense
web that entwines our words?
>
>I think I understand what you mean. The difficulty of communication via e-mail is for me that I don't see a face. Although, I have (I wonder how virtual it is) such a strong feeling about the person that I read between the lines ! Two years back I had a business contact for months only by phone, I never met the guy. When I met him, the surprise of how he looked, so the picture built might be wrong as well !
>
>But for me, the advantage of e-mail communication is that I feel completely
>free (and safe) to express ideas, and what others write often inspires me.
>In ordinary face-to-face communication, things are different, I feel
>different, maybe I AM different ! If I were convicted to spend the rest of
>my life behind a pc monitor e-mailing I would get nuts, but I would surely
>miss these discussions if this channel was closed ! (or is this addiction?..)
The problem with this kind of comunication is that we "imagine" the other
people, but in fact we do not in touch with them, only as JPL says, we
infere beyond the words the strong feelings, but, maybe we need feelling
ourselves in this group like a family members ?what do you think?
I send a photo of my familiy and me in Mexico City sending a warm "Hi!"
to everybody.
Love Gustavo
> INVITATION - SHOW UP ! along and across SCALES, LISTS, LEVELS, DOMAINS
>
Dear Ken James, and others !!
(in contrast, my silence is 'non excistent' at the moment ( I make a lot of
> noise), really getting extroverted when reading your message).
>
> To go 'beyond words' or areas in synthetic domains is my world. You know the
> standard quote:
> 'who categorizes for me, who writes or thinks for me'.
>
> This is a way to make aware of the categories and mind sets, mental models
> or metaphors we use or others are in.
>
The Poet Rueckert has painted it marvelously and I can recommed:
>
> R}ckertscher Vers aus der Weisheit der Brahmanen - gefunden bei:
>
> Ernst Cassirer - Symbol, Technik, Sprache -
> Mythischer, aesthetischer, theoretischer Raum (Seite 93 - 117)
> as translated with the help of CLAUDIA ROBINSON
>
VERSION I
>
> He who sets barriers mentally, ones not truly here,
> and then thinks them away, has understood the world for real.
>
> As geometry in its lines, traps space for nought,
> so our thinking in its own laws is caught.
>
> Maps make the world for us visible and great,
> But now the spirit-map we must still await.
>
> For now the spirit wanders in its terrain
> as we directionless through a field insane.
As I do not want to bother anyone with MY passion and impassion I can only
> say that we started to work on the subject:
>
> SEMANTICS; MENTAL MODELS AND REPRESENTATIONS
> with a somehow selforganizing list, just evolving....
>
> And as you mention Tetraktys, PIAGET, JUNGIAN archetypal dimensions and
> "apperception", which link to my worlds of 'appresentation' and 'apprehension', I think maybe we extend somehow the discussion of spacial representations in an informal list I will manage for some time. It is a mixed group based of some participants from the WHOLENESS seminar and other groups, so please tell me or anyone out there, if he wants to join IN !
>
Heiner
Thu, 16 Oct 1997 22:55:03 +0100 (BST)
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 17:09:32 -0400
From: Alan Mann <100352.1663@compuserve.com>
Subject: Confident hopelessness
Hello Conference
I have been away and then ill so I had a massive accumulation of unread
email and I wondered if I could justify the effort and time needed to catch
up. In the end I spent a some pre-dawn hours reading it all. What started out
as a bit of a chore ended up as what, in retrospect, seems to have been quite a
powerful dialogue. Running through all the messages at once, without the usual gaps, came very close to a good face to face dialogue.
I was delighted by many of the messages none more so than those
from Chris which, have the effect of on me of 'making the heart sing '.
This through a combination of the content and the courage to present such unorthodox 'seeings'. I suppose that reveals my personality type to those of you skilled in such matters.
Chris said way back in September I had thought that dialogue was a communal hand-over-hand descent into the self-referent roots of thinking. I had a somewhat romantic image of people peacefully allowing each other to let go *without replacing*, to leave spoken parts of "self" behind, in short, to allow the accumulation of contextual meaning to fall away, to die to the meaningful self in order to see what remained. In practice, however, this is apparently not the case.
Later he followed up with the image of the rich man crawling his unladen
camel through the eye of the needle. Well, the above describes exactly how I try
to approach Dialogue. I also to agree that ' In practice, it is usually not the case'.
Why not? My experience of groups is that they almost invariably end up in
discussion. It is as though we pay lip service to the possibility indicated in the
above paragraph but fail to allow its development. As though the idea of 'no world view' is too threatening or the prospect of functioning from 'not
knowing' unnacceptable or absurd.
I wondered if the process of dialogue gets me to the place or space in
which the question arises, the centre, and then the question or subject, the content, pulls me off centre again; back into the off centre self. Away from what Jan, I think, pointed to as where or what we are already. A pull of content against
process. This seemed like something Chris was saying about the possibility we are 'designed' to function in a limbo between the life and death of self.
Barron said
> What if these defences could be lowered to the point where one could be as spiritually and emotionally open to the other person as with oneself -- and go on doing so? That would open up the possibility of continual regeneration, surely, the experience of a kind of immortality. No longer love's labours lost, but instead Love's labours glossed.
Yes, that too seemed to be getting to the heart of it and I empathised with Paul's
need for a background of understandind of what we are about when he said:
>Not rules, just a succinct overview of what we're about, so that the next
>time I run for HELP there's something there to remind me!
That is what lies behind my meeting blackboard which summarises the
'principles'.
This has been a bit of a ramble through what I found to be a wonderful
'in basket', an acknowledgment of all your signals and evidence of
'listening'. Thank you Don for the wonderful survival story.
Julia asked "is dialogue about facillitating the intentional dying of the
ego self?" I have always thought so. In fact the little newletters we run in parallel with the meetings used to carry a banner credo which said - Meetings are held, etc.,..........and are open to anyone interested in the possibility of working
out whether, through the process of dialogue, transformation of consciousness, awakening to what we really are, or whatever we want to call it, can come about.
I receive some very heavy flak for holding to what many regard as an
unrealistically lofty aspiration but persist in what I now see, thanks to Chris, as
confident hopelessness.
I am back in Sydney for a few days and see there are another 40 or so messages waiting so this is no doubt well out of date.
Best wishes to all
Alan
--
Irene
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
--
Irene
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071219/99b35bf4/attachment.html
From irenedarcy at gmail.com Wed Dec 19 19:13:45 2007
From: irenedarcy at gmail.com (Irene Darcy)
Date: Wed Dec 19 19:20:20 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] noname 4 - our forebears struggle with internet
'writealogue'
In-Reply-To: <806180.85543.qm@web45805.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
References: <c47283890712190957v184d225cj29c4e1b2b54cb041@mail.gmail.com>
<806180.85543.qm@web45805.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <c47283890712191013h3f1ed56cy63fc22888218689@mail.gmail.com>
I: Now I KNOW it's you, pit! Here's a BIG cyberhug for you.
On Dec 19, 2007 1:07 PM, Alan E. DeBakey <a.debakey@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Talking a bout Fire n Fr yings:
>
> Kath some how feelin heat that her supporTASystem might bee goin
> Through
> A little
> Melt
> Down
>
> And that she might 'lose' all her "friends' (endorphins etc, see Bohm on
> that)
> That she has been iiiiii nvestingtong in so heavilie ovr the pppppp ast
> (Ps: 'ast' in german: branch, twig....)
>
> Klownon
>
> Humanimalian
>
>
> *Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com>* wrote:
>
> I: Image - jumping from frying pan into fire; think before you leap -
> Not Winston Churchill - peace in our time.
>
> On Dec 19, 2007 12:53 PM, Alan E. DeBakey < a.debakey@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Goodnoon Ka -- at it, again? Trying, force&fully, to lov a grup to
> > gether ;_)
> >
> > Do feel/fill you hav to (re)pro(duce)create peace n harmony a'round here
> > ;-?
> >
> > And that, your child&hood tech'n'ology of ssssssoft(en)ballin
> > Will keep 'em all hahahappi & playin a'looooooonK mmmm,no,nnnnnIcelie?
> >
> > humanimal
> >
> >
> > *Irene Darcy < irenedarcy@gmail.com>* wrote:
> >
> >
> > I: This is very interesting. Can we compare and talk about what we
> > think and what they thought? Do they expand our vision? BTW William, who
> > was "the gang" you write about? How did they 'terrorize"?
> >
> > Date: Wed, 1 Oct 1997 12:15:57 +0200
> > From: heuvel@muc.de (William van den Heuvel)
> > Subject: Re: au revoir
> > Precedence: list
> > To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
> > Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
> >
> > Paul:
> > >...and au revoir for now. I've decided to unsubscribe as I really need
> > to focus on creating a new source of income.
> >
> > Paavo:
> > >Unfortunately I cannot follow the dialogue list right now; please take
> > me off. I hope to return when I have more time.
> >
> > Good bye Paul, bye Paavo, all the best to you both. Are you really
> > unsubscribing for that reason or has "the gang" terrorized you off the list?
> > I hope not. I feel a bit guilty but I also feel the dialogue should be
> > robust enough to stand up to a little cris!
> > ???is now and then without unsubcribing as soon as it doesn't feel good.
> > We don't want to slide off into some kind of feel-good sect, do we?
> >
> > Regards, William
> >
> > Wed, 8 Oct 1997 19:12:37 +0100 (BST)
> > Subject: purpose(?) of list
> > Message-ID: <19971003.064301.6375.0.ami_kes@juno.com >
> > From: ami_kes@juno.com (John A MIKES)
> > Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 19:46:37 EDT
> >
> > to: Chris
> > I think the exhaustion/apathy is showing after so much 'wisdom'
> > everybody felt complelled to send in about "the purpose of the list". If we
> > have to justify, it is too bad. I was hoping to see more reasonable topics
> > ? can understand those who resigned. John
> >
> > Wed, 8 Oct 1997 18:43:55 +0100 (BST)
> > From: Matti Vaittinen <mv12437@uta.fi>
> >
> > Subject: Re: au revoir
> > In-Reply-To: <v01550103b057ccae4ea5@[ 194.158.4.110]> from William van
> > den Heuvel at "Oct 1, 97 12:15:57 pm"
> > Date: Sun, 5 Oct 1997 18:19:41 +0300 (EET DST)
> >
> > or has "the gang" terrorized you off the list? I hope not.
> >
> > "The gang" caused me a subtle brain damage ... perhaps MBD (Minimal
> > Brain Damage). Sorry William, sorry Jan, sorry Barron. It wasn't just you,
> > it's the internet, it's Sarfatti, it's the dialogue - any dialogue: it eats
> > your brain.
> >
> > I feel a bit guilty but I also feel the dialogue should be robust enough
> > to stand up to a little crisis
> >
> > Any crisis destroys the invaluable brain cells. What we want is
> > peace. Peace! Peace of mind.
> >
> > > We don't want to slide off into some kind of feel-good sect, do we?
> >
> > Dialogue => the survival of the fittest
> >
> > Dialogue : a never-ending dissatisfaction
> >
> > " ... I expect to get my hands dirty, to get into sweat,
> > to work overtime." (Harrison Ford)
> >
> > " ... but in a virtual world you do not get your hands
> > dirty, you do not sweat; you just work overtime."
> > (Matti Vaittinen)
> > >
> > > Regards
> > >
> > > William
> >
> > Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 11:46:21 +0100
> > From: Jan Pieter Verhey <jverhey@gyral.com>
> > Subject: Re: Re RE RE RE intentinal dying
> >
> > Hello Julia and everybody,
> >
> > All of which makes me feel.....how can we communicate through and with
> > this complex multilayered dense web that entwines our words?
> >
> > I think I understand what you mean. The difficulty of communication via
> > e-mail is for me that I don't see a face. Although, I have (I wonder how
> > virtual it is) such a strong feeling about the person that I read
> > between
> > the lines ! Two years back I had a business contact for months only by
> > phone, I never met the guy. When I met him, the surprise of how he
> > looked,
> > so the picture built might be wrong as well !
> >
> > But for me, the advantage of e-mail communication is that I feel
> > completely
> > free (and safe) to express ideas, and what others write often inspires
> > me.
> > In ordinary face-to-face communication, things are different, I feel
> > different, maybe I AM different ! If I were convicted to spend the rest
> > of
> > my life behind a pc monitor e-mailing I would get nuts, but I would
> > surely
> > miss these discussions if this channel was closed ! (or is this
> > addiction?..)
> >
> > which leads me to Jan's comment that:
> > >
> > Yes, it seems all meaning is like a movie we make after the act of
> > perception, and after looking at the movie, we look into the real world
> > again that looks a bit more like the movie we just created, until we
> > experience the movie of all movies, which we then perceive as reality. This
> > seams a lifelong proces !
> > >
> > >Is there then any Hope??????
> >
> > Hope and despair-- do they belong ? It seems to go beyond despair also
> > means going beyond hope ? Maybe the hope-despair (ego) part of us is only a
> > tiny fragment of the giants that we are !? Now that you explained what Nick
> > meant (Nick, I almost never understand what your message is -- mind us
> > non-native english writers !) about "let-it-be", well me think that is the
> > whole trick ! Let it be -- let it come and let it go ! (well, sounds easy
> > enough on paper again)
> >
> > Best,
> > JPL
> >
> > P.S This process of the incredible difficulty of sharing the meaning of
> > even one word together or even one phrase is one of the reasons why the long
> > posts flummox me ther is so much there to unpack i cannot even begin.....
> >
> > Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 16:50:41 +0100
> > From: Jan Pieter Verhey <jverhey@gyral.com>
> > Subject: Re: Intentional dying
> >
> > Hi Nick, you wrote:
> > >>
> > >>Don:
> > >>>I think that the act of perception is equivalent to the making of the
> >
> > movie. Bohm argued that perception is a high order act of creativity.
> > That's one
> > >>>reason why it is so difficult to notice that it is a movie. The
> > noticing
> > itself is also an act of perception -- just another bit of the movie.
> > No, not "just another bit of the movie". It's the making of a new kind of
> > movie: A movie about movies. That's the "high order act of creativity".
> > >>
> > >>William
> >
> > Nick:
> > >Does this mean that what is going on here has much to do with
> > creativity?
> > >
> > >I wonder if there is much perception going on in this writealogue?
> >
> > I like "writealogue" (better as the alternative of writing a monologue
> > that
> > is not communicated, like a secret diary). maybe there are more words.
> > Opnini-alogue, or echo-alogue (as a form of back-activity). I mean,
> > walls
> > don't say anyhting back, do they .. Or maybe just "squash"
> >
> > JPL
> >
> > later
> > >Nick
> > >P S
> > >About creativity a drunkards dream if yu ever did seee one No!
> >
> > Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 14:19:42 -0600
> > From: "Dr. J. Gustavo Vega Gama" < jgustavo@mindvox.ciateq.mx>
> > Subject: Re: Re RE RE RE intentinal dying
> >
> > At 11:46 15/10/97 +0100, you wrote:
> > >Hello Julia and everybody,
> > >
> > All of which makes me feel.....
> > how can we communicate through and with this complex multilayered dense
> > web that entwines our words?
> > >
> > >I think I understand what you mean. The difficulty of communication via
> > e-mail is for me that I don't see a face. Although, I have (I wonder how
> > virtual it is) such a strong feeling about the person that I read between
> > the lines ! Two years back I had a business contact for months only by
> > phone, I never met the guy. When I met him, the surprise of how he looked,
> > so the picture built might be wrong as well !
> > >
> > >But for me, the advantage of e-mail communication is that I feel
> > completely
> > >free (and safe) to express ideas, and what others write often inspires
> > me.
> > >In ordinary face-to-face communication, things are different, I feel
> > >different, maybe I AM different ! If I were convicted to spend the rest
> > of
> > >my life behind a pc monitor e-mailing I would get nuts, but I would
> > surely
> > >miss these discussions if this channel was closed ! (or is this
> > addiction?..)
> >
> > The problem with this kind of comunication is that we "imagine" the
> > other
> > people, but in fact we do not in touch with them, only as JPL says, we
> > infere beyond the words the strong feelings, but, maybe we need feelling
> >
> > ourselves in this group like a family members ?what do you think?
> > I send a photo of my familiy and me in Mexico City sending a warm "Hi!"
> > to everybody.
> >
> > Love Gustavo
> >
> > > INVITATION - SHOW UP ! along and across SCALES, LISTS, LEVELS,
> > DOMAINS
> > >
> > Dear Ken James, and others !!
> > (in contrast, my silence is 'non excistent' at the moment ( I make a lot
> > of
> > > noise), really getting extroverted when reading your message).
> > >
> > > To go 'beyond words' or areas in synthetic domains is my world. You
> > know the
> > > standard quote:
> > > 'who categorizes for me, who writes or thinks for me'.
> > >
> > > This is a way to make aware of the categories and mind sets, mental
> > models
> > > or metaphors we use or others are in.
> > >
> > The Poet Rueckert has painted it marvelously and I can recommed:
> > >
> > > R}ckertscher Vers aus der Weisheit der Brahmanen - gefunden bei:
> > >
> > > Ernst Cassirer - Symbol, Technik, Sprache -
> > > Mythischer, aesthetischer, theoretischer Raum (Seite 93 - 117)
> > > as translated with the help of CLAUDIA ROBINSON
> > >
> > VERSION I
> > >
> > > He who sets barriers mentally, ones not truly here,
> > > and then thinks them away, has understood the world for real.
> > >
> > > As geometry in its lines, traps space for nought,
> > > so our thinking in its own laws is caught.
> > >
> > > Maps make the world for us visible and great,
> > > But now the spirit-map we must still await.
> > >
> > > For now the spirit wanders in its terrain
> > > as we directionless through a field insane.
> >
> > As I do not want to bother anyone with MY passion and impassion I can
> > only
> > > say that we started to work on the subject:
> > >
> > > SEMANTICS; MENTAL MODELS AND REPRESENTATIONS
> > > with a somehow selforganizing list, just evolving....
> > >
> > > And as you mention Tetraktys, PIAGET, JUNGIAN archetypal dimensions
> > and
> > > "apperception", which link to my worlds of 'appresentation' and
> > 'apprehension', I think maybe we extend somehow the discussion of spacial
> > representations in an informal list I will manage for some time. It is a
> > mixed group based of some participants from the WHOLENESS seminar and other
> > groups, so please tell me or anyone out there, if he wants to join IN !
> > >
> > Heiner
> >
> > Thu, 16 Oct 1997 22:55:03 +0100 (BST)
> > Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 17:09:32 -0400
> > From: Alan Mann <100352.1663@compuserve.com>
> > Subject: Confident hopelessness
> >
> > Hello Conference
> > I have been away and then ill so I had a massive accumulation of unread
> >
> > email and I wondered if I could justify the effort and time needed to
> > catch
> > up. In the end I spent a some pre-dawn hours reading it all. What
> > started out
> > as a bit of a chore ended up as what, in retrospect, seems to have been
> > quite a
> > powerful dialogue. Running through all the messages at once, without the
> > usual gaps, came very close to a good face to face dialogue.
> >
> > I was delighted by many of the messages none more so than those
> > from Chris which, have the effect of on me of 'making the heart sing '.
> > This through a combination of the content and the courage to present
> > such unorthodox 'seeings'. I suppose that reveals my personality type to
> > those of you skilled in such matters.
> >
> > Chris said way back in September I had thought that dialogue was a
> > communal hand-over-hand descent into the self-referent roots of thinking. I
> > had a somewhat romantic image of people peacefully allowing each other to
> > let go *without replacing*, to leave spoken parts of "self" behind, in
> > short, to allow the accumulation of contextual meaning to fall away, to die
> > to the meaningful self in order to see what remained. In practice, however,
> > this is apparently not the case.
> >
> > Later he followed up with the image of the rich man crawling his unladen
> > camel through the eye of the needle. Well, the above describes exactly
> > how I try
> > to approach Dialogue. I also to agree that ' In practice, it is usually
> > not the case'.
> > Why not? My experience of groups is that they almost invariably end up
> > in
> > discussion. It is as though we pay lip service to the possibility
> > indicated in the
> > above paragraph but fail to allow its development. As though the idea
> > of 'no world view' is too threatening or the prospect of functioning from
> > 'not
> > knowing' unnacceptable or absurd.
> >
> > I wondered if the process of dialogue gets me to the place or space in
> > which the question arises, the centre, and then the question or subject,
> > the content, pulls me off centre again; back into the off centre self. Away
> > from what Jan, I think, pointed to as where or what we are already. A pull
> > of content against
> > process. This seemed like something Chris was saying about the
> > possibility we are 'designed' to function in a limbo between the life and
> > death of self.
> >
> > Barron said
> > > What if these defences could be lowered to the point where one could
> > be as spiritually and emotionally open to the other person as with oneself
> > -- and go on doing so? That would open up the possibility of continual
> > regeneration, surely, the experience of a kind of immortality. No longer
> > love's labours lost, but instead Love's labours glossed.
> >
> > Yes, that too seemed to be getting to the heart of it and I empathised
> > with Paul's
> > need for a background of understandind of what we are about when he
> > said:
> >
> > >Not rules, just a succinct overview of what we're about, so that the
> > next
> > >time I run for HELP there's something there to remind me!
> >
> > That is what lies behind my meeting blackboard which summarises the
> > 'principles'.
> >
> > This has been a bit of a ramble through what I found to be a wonderful
> > 'in basket', an acknowledgment of all your signals and evidence of
> > 'listening'. Thank you Don for the wonderful survival story.
> >
> > Julia asked "is dialogue about facillitating the intentional dying of
> > the
> > ego self?" I have always thought so. In fact the little newletters we
> > run in parallel with the meetings used to carry a banner credo which said -
> > Meetings are held, etc.,..........and are open to anyone interested in the
> > possibility of working
> > out whether, through the process of dialogue, transformation of
> > consciousness, awakening to what we really are, or whatever we want to call
> > it, can come about.
> >
> > I receive some very heavy flak for holding to what many regard as an
> > unrealistically lofty aspiration but persist in what I now see, thanks
> > to Chris, as
> > confident hopelessness.
> >
> > I am back in Sydney for a few days and see there are another 40 or so
> > messages waiting so this is no doubt well out of date.
> > Best wishes to all
> > Alan
> >
> >
> > --
> > Irene
> > info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > <http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=51438/*http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs>
> >
> >
> >
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071219/382f641d/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Wed Dec 19 19:11:19 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Wed Dec 19 19:24:29 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] staying with "good stuff"
In-Reply-To: <20071219.131021.3184.156.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <738740.79088.qm@web45811.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
seem to be
can i has that for lunch ;--O
abc
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
this is good stuff Don. you (seem to be) saying IT IS without acting or pretending (rob)
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071219/e591517e/attachment.html
From irenedarcy at gmail.com Wed Dec 19 19:18:45 2007
From: irenedarcy at gmail.com (Irene Darcy)
Date: Wed Dec 19 19:25:15 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] The good stuff - was http://tinyurl.com/yvwvq8
In-Reply-To: <414040.69897.qm@web45811.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
References: <c47283890712190802m29813991g884562a8520dec99@mail.gmail.com>
<414040.69897.qm@web45811.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <c47283890712191018v1842aa5dt1953f43503e2d31f@mail.gmail.com>
K: Ah, so. You agree that's a possibility.
On Dec 19, 2007 1:03 PM, Alan E. DeBakey <a.debakey@yahoo.com> wrote:
> http://tinyurl.com/yvwvq8
>
> that 'said'... now:
>
>
> why
> 2 whys, well, make that 3:
>
> 1_ why now
> 2_why did Kath skim the Math earliar
> n 3_ why "work".... handing out http://tinyurl.com/23g68a ;-)
>
> humaimal
>
> *Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com>* wrote:
>
> I-K: Thank you for all that work. I shall go read it carefully now. I
> skimmed it earlier.
>
> On Dec 18, 2007 11:49 PM, < ae.dropper@juno.com> wrote:
>
> > Look around. Feel it, listen to it, taste it ... etc. This is it,
> > whatever IT IS, this is it simply because there is no other actuality. Is
> > there? -- dl
> >
> > On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 20:15:36 -0500 "Irene Darcy" <irenedarcy@gmail.com>
> > writes:
> >
> > I: It's the 'good stuff' you cut off. I have no idea what it's
> > referring to.
> >
> > Time out. Gotta dispose of old microwave.
> >
> > On Dec 18, 2007 8:08 PM, rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> > > no I didn't Irene.
> > >
> > > ------------------------------
> > > Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 19:41:58 -0500
> > > From: irenedarcy@gmail.com
> > >
> > > To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> > > Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
> > >
> > > I: Rob, you cut off dl's message you're responding to. Please don't.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Dec 18, 2007 7:29 PM, rob mooney < rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
> > >
> > > this is good stuff Don. you seem to be saying IT IS without acting or
> > > pretending
> > >
> > > ------------------------------
> > > From: donlay@knology.net
> > > To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> > > Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
> > > Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 23:06:58 -0500
> > >
> > >
> > > I think this is important. not just poems. many meaningful things. --
> > > Rob
> > >
> > > Me too! I believe it is ultimately important!
> > >
> > > DB says that nothing can be without *meaning*. Of course, the
> > > question ... What is meaning? !!
> > >
> > > I believe folk wisdom holds that *meaning* is what is *meant to be*,
> > > and maybe this *means* what is *intended*.
> > >
> > > Thus, we say the whole of Being is whatever *IT* *intends to be ... or
> > > what it is intending.*
> > >
> > > What's that?
> > >
> > > Look around. Feel it, listen to it, taste it ... etc. This is it,
> > > whatever IT IS, this is it simply because there is no other actuality. Is
> > > there? -- dl
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > *From:* rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk>
> > >
> > > *To:* bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> > > *Sent:* Monday, December 17, 2007 2:59 PM
> > > *Subject:* RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
> > >
> > > dl: Surely a poem need not be understood in order to *have meaning*,
> > > *be meaningful*? dl
> > >
> > > I think this is important. not just poems. many meaningful things.
> > >
> > > ------------------------------
> > > From: donlay@knology.net
> > > To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> > > Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
> > > Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:20:21 -0500
> > >
> > > Rob: I think so and also maybe even when acting and pretending
> > > **
> > > dl: Maybe so. Thought, however, presents the idea that what we *act
> > > and pretend* is the *known*, the *repeated*, but there is always the *new,
> > > maybe New Being* that is experienced as not the same old known roles,
> > > etc.
> > >
> > > Rob: I also have no idea what Pat meant but I know that a poet is
> > > allowed to say stuff I don't understand
> > >
> > > dl: Surely a poem need not be understood in order to *have meaning*,
> > > *be meaningful*? dl
> > >
> > > http://www.knology.net/~donlay/ <http://www.knology.net/%7Edonlay/>
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > *From:* rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk>
> > > *To:* bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> > > *Sent:* Monday, December 17, 2007 1:20 PM
> > > *Subject:* RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
> > >
> > > Could it be that one more participates in *this that is* when not *acting
> > > and pretending* the *social identity*?
> > >
> > > I think so
> > > and also maybe even when acting and pretending
> > >
> > > I also have no idea what Pat meant but I know that a poet is allowed
> > > to say stuff I don't understand
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------------------
> > > From: donlay@knology.net
> > > To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> > > Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
> > > Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 11:42:02 -0500
> > >
> > > I can feel those final grains of self aggrandizement flying out of my
> > > pores from the morning readings. -- Funny
> > >
> > > Does the experience of "self aggrandizement flying out of my pores "
> > > precede the experience of the *identity processes* being suspended,
> > > being held in suspension?
> > >
> > > If so, then maybe *the meaning* of "self aggrandizement flying out of
> > > my pores " might be that *identity* has *limited** meaning*.
> > >
> > > Then what is the *meaning* of someone talking about "self
> > > aggrandizement flying out of my pores "? Could it be to demonstrate *
> > > meaning*?
> > >
> > > Could it be that one more participates in *this that is* when not *acting
> > > and pretending* the *social identity*?
> > >
> > > Resonance anyone? -- dl
> > >
> > >
> > > http://www.knology.net/~donlay/ <http://www.knology.net/%7Edonlay/>
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > *From:* Don Lay <donlay@knology.net>
> > > *To:* bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> > > *Sent:* Monday, December 17, 2007 11:27 AM
> > > *Subject:* [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
> > >
> > > When the *identity movement* is suspended, experience of being
> > > does not cease.
> > >
> > > Then, it becomes clear that *ontic intelligence* does not have to be *
> > > personalized* as Bohm indicates, I believe in the interview with
> > > Weber.
> > >
> > > *Watching* the *identity movement (thought)*, *awareness of* the
> > > identity thought may and does at times *suspend* the *identity
> > > processes*.
> > >
> > > Maybe we should say when awareness clearly presents the reasoning that
> > > *identity processes* are not needed, then that awareness suspends the
> > > unneeded processes. Later, when awareness of need occurs, then the *identity
> > > processes* recur.
> > >
> > > It appears that the *I* *identity* is not needed for *identity*suspension. That's the way it seems to me, to this
> > > *identity* when the *identity processes * are present.
> > >
> > > Resonance anyone ..., all you outer *identities* "out there"? -- dl
> > >
> > >
> > > http://www.knology.net/~donlay/ <http://www.knology.net/%7Edonlay/>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------------------
> > >
> > > <http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Irene
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>
> ------------------------------
> Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=51734/*http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping>
>
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>
--
Irene
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071219/f5a92b05/attachment.html
From irenedarcy at gmail.com Wed Dec 19 19:21:01 2007
From: irenedarcy at gmail.com (Irene Darcy)
Date: Wed Dec 19 19:27:33 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] staying with "good stuff"
In-Reply-To: <738740.79088.qm@web45811.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
References: <20071219.131021.3184.156.ae.dropper@juno.com>
<738740.79088.qm@web45811.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <c47283890712191021v295e82d8k6c57b7ccab37d7c7@mail.gmail.com>
IK: How about dl commenting on 'seem'?
You still like Bach, pit?
On Dec 19, 2007 1:11 PM, Alan E. DeBakey <a.debakey@yahoo.com> wrote:
> * *
> **
> * seem to be*
> **
> can i has that for lunch ;--O
>
> abc
>
>
> *ae.dropper@juno.com* wrote:
>
> this is good stuff Don. you (*seem to be)* saying IT IS without acting or
> pretending (rob)
>
> ------------------------------
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071219/d25b9160/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Wed Dec 19 19:27:13 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Wed Dec 19 19:33:44 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] noname 4 - our forebears struggle with internet
'writealogue'
In-Reply-To: <c47283890712191013h3f1ed56cy63fc22888218689@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <413519.43894.qm@web45813.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
phonI:?
stupI:d?
senI:le?
.......))
Kath, you knew way before "now".
Whats all your make-uppingpong about?
How about t'ouching some of those tI:ssues, Kath?:
Kath some how feelin heat that her supporTASystem might bee goin
Through
A little
Melt
Down
And that she might 'lose' all her "friends' (endorphins etc, see Bohm on that)
That she has been iiiiii nvestingtong in so heavilie ovr the pppppp ast
you thinkg they will go
a way
just do be cause kath is looking
"the other" way?
(is that a common s't'itch around here ;;--))
humanimalian
Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
I: Now I KNOW it's you, pit! Here's a BIG cyberhug for you.
On Dec 19, 2007 1:07 PM, Alan E. DeBakey < a.debakey@yahoo.com> wrote:
Talking a bout Fire n Fr yings:
Kath some how feelin heat that her supporTASystem might bee goin
Through
A little
Melt
Down
And that she might 'lose' all her "friends' (endorphins etc, see Bohm on that)
That she has been iiiiii nvestingtong in so heavilie ovr the pppppp ast
(Ps: 'ast' in german: branch, twig....)
Klownon
Humanimalian
Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
I: Image - jumping from frying pan into fire; think before you leap - Not Winston Churchill - peace in our time.
On Dec 19, 2007 12:53 PM, Alan E. DeBakey < a.debakey@yahoo.com> wrote:
Goodnoon Ka -- at it, again? Trying, force&fully, to lov a grup to gether ;_)
Do feel/fill you hav to (re)pro(duce)create peace n harmony a'round here ;-?
And that, your child&hood tech'n'ology of ssssssoft(en)ballin
Will keep 'em all hahahappi & playin a'looooooonK mmmm,no,nnnnnIcelie?
humanimal
Irene Darcy < irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
I: This is very interesting. Can we compare and talk about what we think and what they thought? Do they expand our vision? BTW William, who was "the gang" you write about? How did they 'terrorize"?
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 1997 12:15:57 +0200
From: heuvel@muc.de (William van den Heuvel)
Subject: Re: au revoir
Precedence: list
To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Paul:
>...and au revoir for now. I've decided to unsubscribe as I really need to focus on creating a new source of income.
Paavo:
>Unfortunately I cannot follow the dialogue list right now; please take me off. I hope to return when I have more time.
Good bye Paul, bye Paavo, all the best to you both. Are you really unsubscribing for that reason or has "the gang" terrorized you off the list? I hope not. I feel a bit guilty but I also feel the dialogue should be robust enough to stand up to a little cris!
???is now and then without unsubcribing as soon as it doesn't feel good. We don't want to slide off into some kind of feel-good sect, do we?
Regards, William
Wed, 8 Oct 1997 19:12:37 +0100 (BST)
Subject: purpose(?) of list
Message-ID: <19971003.064301.6375.0.ami_kes@juno.com >
From: ami_kes@juno.com (John A MIKES)
Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 19:46:37 EDT
to: Chris
I think the exhaustion/apathy is showing after so much 'wisdom' everybody felt complelled to send in about "the purpose of the list". If we have to justify, it is too bad. I was hoping to see more reasonable topics ? can understand those who resigned. John
Wed, 8 Oct 1997 18:43:55 +0100 (BST)
From: Matti Vaittinen <mv12437@uta.fi>
Subject: Re: au revoir
In-Reply-To: <v01550103b057ccae4ea5@[ 194.158.4.110]> from William van den Heuvel at "Oct 1, 97 12:15:57 pm"
Date: Sun, 5 Oct 1997 18:19:41 +0300 (EET DST)
or has "the gang" terrorized you off the list? I hope not.
"The gang" caused me a subtle brain damage ... perhaps MBD (Minimal Brain Damage). Sorry William, sorry Jan, sorry Barron. It wasn't just you, it's the internet, it's Sarfatti, it's the dialogue - any dialogue: it eats your brain.
I feel a bit guilty but I also feel the dialogue should be robust enough to stand up to a little crisis
Any crisis destroys the invaluable brain cells. What we want is peace. Peace! Peace of mind.
> We don't want to slide off into some kind of feel-good sect, do we?
Dialogue => the survival of the fittest
Dialogue : a never-ending dissatisfaction
" ... I expect to get my hands dirty, to get into sweat,
to work overtime." (Harrison Ford)
" ... but in a virtual world you do not get your hands
dirty, you do not sweat; you just work overtime."
(Matti Vaittinen)
>
> Regards
>
> William
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 11:46:21 +0100
From: Jan Pieter Verhey <jverhey@gyral.com>
Subject: Re: Re RE RE RE intentinal dying
Hello Julia and everybody,
All of which makes me feel.....how can we communicate through and with this complex multilayered dense web that entwines our words?
I think I understand what you mean. The difficulty of communication via
e-mail is for me that I don't see a face. Although, I have (I wonder how
virtual it is) such a strong feeling about the person that I read between
the lines ! Two years back I had a business contact for months only by
phone, I never met the guy. When I met him, the surprise of how he looked,
so the picture built might be wrong as well !
But for me, the advantage of e-mail communication is that I feel completely
free (and safe) to express ideas, and what others write often inspires me.
In ordinary face-to-face communication, things are different, I feel
different, maybe I AM different ! If I were convicted to spend the rest of
my life behind a pc monitor e-mailing I would get nuts, but I would surely
miss these discussions if this channel was closed ! (or is this addiction?..)
which leads me to Jan's comment that:
>
Yes, it seems all meaning is like a movie we make after the act of
perception, and after looking at the movie, we look into the real world again that looks a bit more like the movie we just created, until we experience the movie of all movies, which we then perceive as reality. This seams a lifelong proces !
>
>Is there then any Hope??????
Hope and despair-- do they belong ? It seems to go beyond despair also means going beyond hope ? Maybe the hope-despair (ego) part of us is only a tiny fragment of the giants that we are !? Now that you explained what Nick meant (Nick, I almost never understand what your message is -- mind us non-native english writers !) about "let-it-be", well me think that is the whole trick ! Let it be -- let it come and let it go ! (well, sounds easy enough on paper again)
Best,
JPL
P.S This process of the incredible difficulty of sharing the meaning of even one word together or even one phrase is one of the reasons why the long posts flummox me ther is so much there to unpack i cannot even begin.....
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 16:50:41 +0100
From: Jan Pieter Verhey <jverhey@gyral.com>
Subject: Re: Intentional dying
Hi Nick, you wrote:
>>
>>Don:
>>>I think that the act of perception is equivalent to the making of the
movie. Bohm argued that perception is a high order act of creativity. That's one
>>>reason why it is so difficult to notice that it is a movie. The noticing
itself is also an act of perception -- just another bit of the movie. No, not "just another bit of the movie". It's the making of a new kind of movie: A movie about movies. That's the "high order act of creativity".
>>
>>William
Nick:
>Does this mean that what is going on here has much to do with creativity?
>
>I wonder if there is much perception going on in this writealogue?
I like "writealogue" (better as the alternative of writing a monologue that
is not communicated, like a secret diary). maybe there are more words.
Opnini-alogue, or echo-alogue (as a form of back-activity). I mean, walls
don't say anyhting back, do they .. Or maybe just "squash"
JPL
later
>Nick
>P S
>About creativity a drunkards dream if yu ever did seee one No!
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 14:19:42 -0600
From: "Dr. J. Gustavo Vega Gama" < jgustavo@mindvox.ciateq.mx>
Subject: Re: Re RE RE RE intentinal dying
At 11:46 15/10/97 +0100, you wrote:
>Hello Julia and everybody,
>
All of which makes me feel.....
how can we communicate through and with this complex multilayered dense
web that entwines our words?
>
>I think I understand what you mean. The difficulty of communication via e-mail is for me that I don't see a face. Although, I have (I wonder how virtual it is) such a strong feeling about the person that I read between the lines ! Two years back I had a business contact for months only by phone, I never met the guy. When I met him, the surprise of how he looked, so the picture built might be wrong as well !
>
>But for me, the advantage of e-mail communication is that I feel completely
>free (and safe) to express ideas, and what others write often inspires me.
>In ordinary face-to-face communication, things are different, I feel
>different, maybe I AM different ! If I were convicted to spend the rest of
>my life behind a pc monitor e-mailing I would get nuts, but I would surely
>miss these discussions if this channel was closed ! (or is this addiction?..)
The problem with this kind of comunication is that we "imagine" the other
people, but in fact we do not in touch with them, only as JPL says, we
infere beyond the words the strong feelings, but, maybe we need feelling
ourselves in this group like a family members ?what do you think?
I send a photo of my familiy and me in Mexico City sending a warm "Hi!"
to everybody.
Love Gustavo
> INVITATION - SHOW UP ! along and across SCALES, LISTS, LEVELS, DOMAINS
>
Dear Ken James, and others !!
(in contrast, my silence is 'non excistent' at the moment ( I make a lot of
> noise), really getting extroverted when reading your message).
>
> To go 'beyond words' or areas in synthetic domains is my world. You know the
> standard quote:
> 'who categorizes for me, who writes or thinks for me'.
>
> This is a way to make aware of the categories and mind sets, mental models
> or metaphors we use or others are in.
>
The Poet Rueckert has painted it marvelously and I can recommed:
>
> R}ckertscher Vers aus der Weisheit der Brahmanen - gefunden bei:
>
> Ernst Cassirer - Symbol, Technik, Sprache -
> Mythischer, aesthetischer, theoretischer Raum (Seite 93 - 117)
> as translated with the help of CLAUDIA ROBINSON
>
VERSION I
>
> He who sets barriers mentally, ones not truly here,
> and then thinks them away, has understood the world for real.
>
> As geometry in its lines, traps space for nought,
> so our thinking in its own laws is caught.
>
> Maps make the world for us visible and great,
> But now the spirit-map we must still await.
>
> For now the spirit wanders in its terrain
> as we directionless through a field insane.
As I do not want to bother anyone with MY passion and impassion I can only
> say that we started to work on the subject:
>
> SEMANTICS; MENTAL MODELS AND REPRESENTATIONS
> with a somehow selforganizing list, just evolving....
>
> And as you mention Tetraktys, PIAGET, JUNGIAN archetypal dimensions and
> "apperception", which link to my worlds of 'appresentation' and 'apprehension', I think maybe we extend somehow the discussion of spacial representations in an informal list I will manage for some time. It is a mixed group based of some participants from the WHOLENESS seminar and other groups, so please tell me or anyone out there, if he wants to join IN !
>
Heiner
Thu, 16 Oct 1997 22:55:03 +0100 (BST)
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 17:09:32 -0400
From: Alan Mann <100352.1663@compuserve.com>
Subject: Confident hopelessness
Hello Conference
I have been away and then ill so I had a massive accumulation of unread
email and I wondered if I could justify the effort and time needed to catch
up. In the end I spent a some pre-dawn hours reading it all. What started out
as a bit of a chore ended up as what, in retrospect, seems to have been quite a
powerful dialogue. Running through all the messages at once, without the usual gaps, came very close to a good face to face dialogue.
I was delighted by many of the messages none more so than those
from Chris which, have the effect of on me of 'making the heart sing '.
This through a combination of the content and the courage to present such unorthodox 'seeings'. I suppose that reveals my personality type to those of you skilled in such matters.
Chris said way back in September I had thought that dialogue was a communal hand-over-hand descent into the self-referent roots of thinking. I had a somewhat romantic image of people peacefully allowing each other to let go *without replacing*, to leave spoken parts of "self" behind, in short, to allow the accumulation of contextual meaning to fall away, to die to the meaningful self in order to see what remained. In practice, however, this is apparently not the case.
Later he followed up with the image of the rich man crawling his unladen
camel through the eye of the needle. Well, the above describes exactly how I try
to approach Dialogue. I also to agree that ' In practice, it is usually not the case'.
Why not? My experience of groups is that they almost invariably end up in
discussion. It is as though we pay lip service to the possibility indicated in the
above paragraph but fail to allow its development. As though the idea of 'no world view' is too threatening or the prospect of functioning from 'not
knowing' unnacceptable or absurd.
I wondered if the process of dialogue gets me to the place or space in
which the question arises, the centre, and then the question or subject, the content, pulls me off centre again; back into the off centre self. Away from what Jan, I think, pointed to as where or what we are already. A pull of content against
process. This seemed like something Chris was saying about the possibility we are 'designed' to function in a limbo between the life and death of self.
Barron said
> What if these defences could be lowered to the point where one could be as spiritually and emotionally open to the other person as with oneself -- and go on doing so? That would open up the possibility of continual regeneration, surely, the experience of a kind of immortality. No longer love's labours lost, but instead Love's labours glossed.
Yes, that too seemed to be getting to the heart of it and I empathised with Paul's
need for a background of understandind of what we are about when he said:
>Not rules, just a succinct overview of what we're about, so that the next
>time I run for HELP there's something there to remind me!
That is what lies behind my meeting blackboard which summarises the
'principles'.
This has been a bit of a ramble through what I found to be a wonderful
'in basket', an acknowledgment of all your signals and evidence of
'listening'. Thank you Don for the wonderful survival story.
Julia asked "is dialogue about facillitating the intentional dying of the
ego self?" I have always thought so. In fact the little newletters we run in parallel with the meetings used to carry a banner credo which said - Meetings are held, etc.,..........and are open to anyone interested in the possibility of working
out whether, through the process of dialogue, transformation of consciousness, awakening to what we really are, or whatever we want to call it, can come about.
I receive some very heavy flak for holding to what many regard as an
unrealistically lofty aspiration but persist in what I now see, thanks to Chris, as
confident hopelessness.
I am back in Sydney for a few days and see there are another 40 or so messages waiting so this is no doubt well out of date.
Best wishes to all
Alan
--
Irene
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071219/47b25cda/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Wed Dec 19 19:29:30 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Wed Dec 19 19:36:02 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] The good stuff - was http://tinyurl.com/yvwvq8
In-Reply-To: <c47283890712191018v1842aa5dt1953f43503e2d31f@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <850918.98003.qm@web45810.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Kath, do you feel... sense... suspensense.... the "heat" here?
Tell us about you as a child 'grew' in to a teachr
Etc
Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
K: Ah, so. You agree that's a possibility.
On Dec 19, 2007 1:03 PM, Alan E. DeBakey <a.debakey@yahoo.com > wrote:
http://tinyurl.com/yvwvq8
that 'said'... now:
why
2 whys, well, make that 3:
1_ why now
2_why did Kath skim the Math earliar
n 3_ why "work".... handing out http://tinyurl.com/23g68a ;-)
humaimal
Irene Darcy < irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
I-K: Thank you for all that work. I shall go read it carefully now. I skimmed it earlier.
On Dec 18, 2007 11:49 PM, < ae.dropper@juno.com> wrote:
Look around. Feel it, listen to it, taste it ... etc. This is it, whatever IT IS, this is it simply because there is no other actuality. Is there? -- dl
On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 20:15:36 -0500 "Irene Darcy" <irenedarcy@gmail.com> writes:
I: It's the 'good stuff' you cut off. I have no idea what it's referring to.
Time out. Gotta dispose of old microwave.
On Dec 18, 2007 8:08 PM, rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
no I didn't Irene.
---------------------------------
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 19:41:58 -0500
From: irenedarcy@gmail.com
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
I: Rob, you cut off dl's message you're responding to. Please don't.
On Dec 18, 2007 7:29 PM, rob mooney < rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
this is good stuff Don. you seem to be saying IT IS without acting or pretending
---------------------------------
From: donlay@knology.net
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 23:06:58 -0500
I think this is important. not just poems. many meaningful things. -- Rob
Me too! I believe it is ultimately important!
DB says that nothing can be without meaning. Of course, the question ... What is meaning? !!
I believe folk wisdom holds that meaning is what is meant to be, and maybe this means what is intended.
Thus, we say the whole of Being is whatever IT intends to be ... or what it is intending.
What's that?
Look around. Feel it, listen to it, taste it ... etc. This is it, whatever IT IS, this is it simply because there is no other actuality. Is there? -- dl
From: rob mooney
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 2:59 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
dl: Surely a poem need not be understood in order to have meaning, be meaningful ? dl
I think this is important. not just poems. many meaningful things.
---------------------------------
From: donlay@knology.net
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:20:21 -0500
Rob: I think so and also maybe even when acting and pretending
dl: Maybe so. Thought, however, presents the idea that what we act and pretend is the known, the repeated, but there is always the new, maybe New Being that is experienced as not the same old known roles, etc.
Rob: I also have no idea what Pat meant but I know that a poet is allowed to say stuff I don't understand
dl: Surely a poem need not be understood in order to have meaning, be meaningful? dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: rob mooney
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 1:20 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Could it be that one more participates in this that is when not acting and pretending the social identity?
I think so
and also maybe even when acting and pretending
I also have no idea what Pat meant but I know that a poet is allowed to say stuff I don't understand
---------------------------------
From: donlay@knology.net
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 11:42:02 -0500
I can feel those final grains of self aggrandizement flying out of my pores from the morning readings. -- Funny
Does the experience of "self aggrandizement flying out of my pores " precede the experience of the identity processes being suspended, being held in suspension?
If so, then maybe the meaning of "self aggrandizement flying out of my pores " might be that identity has limited meaning.
Then what is the meaning of someone talking about "self aggrandizement flying out of my pores "? Could it be to demonstrate meaning?
Could it be that one more participates in this that is when not acting and pretending the social identity?
Resonance anyone? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: Don Lay
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 11:27 AM
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
When the identity movement is suspended, experience of being does not cease.
Then, it becomes clear that ontic intelligence does not have to be personalized as Bohm indicates, I believe in the interview with Weber.
Watching the identity movement (thought) , awareness of the identity thought may and does at times suspend the identity processes.
Maybe we should say when awareness clearly presents the reasoning that identity processes are not needed, then that awareness suspends the unneeded processes. Later, when awareness of need occurs, then the identity processes recur.
It appears that the I identity is not needed for identity suspension. That's the way it seems to me, to this identity when the identity processes are present.
Resonance anyone ..., all you outer identities "out there"? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
---------------------------------
--
Irene
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
--
Irene
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071219/38345b82/attachment.html
From irenedarcy at gmail.com Wed Dec 19 19:32:19 2007
From: irenedarcy at gmail.com (Irene Darcy)
Date: Wed Dec 19 19:38:51 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] noname 4 - our forebears struggle with internet
'writealogue'
In-Reply-To: <413519.43894.qm@web45813.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
References: <c47283890712191013h3f1ed56cy63fc22888218689@mail.gmail.com>
<413519.43894.qm@web45813.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <c47283890712191032s649aa054p22dd056b9fb22a6c@mail.gmail.com>
K: Actually, you make me wonder why the idea of friends seems to push pit's
buttons. You know, we never did go into our differences on human nature.
Maybe it's time.
On Dec 19, 2007 1:27 PM, Alan E. DeBakey <a.debakey@yahoo.com> wrote:
> phonI:?
> stupI:d?
> senI:le?
> .......))
>
> Kath, you knew way before "now".
>
> Whats all your make-uppingpong about?
>
> How about t'ouching some of those tI:ssues, Kath?:
>
> *Kath some how feelin heat that her supporTASystem might bee goin*
> *Through*
> *A little*
> *Melt*
> *Down *
> **
> *And that she might 'lose' all her "friends' (endorphins etc, see Bohm on
> that) *
> *That she has been iiiiii nvestingtong in so heavilie ovr the pppppp ast*
>
>
> you thinkg they will go
> a way
> just do be cause kath is looking
> "the other" way?
> (is that a common s't'itch around here ;;--))
>
> humanimalian
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com>* wrote:
>
> I: Now I KNOW it's you, pit! Here's a BIG cyberhug for you.
>
> On Dec 19, 2007 1:07 PM, Alan E. DeBakey < a.debakey@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Talking a bout Fire n Fr yings:
> >
> > Kath some how feelin heat that her supporTASystem might bee goin
> > Through
> > A little
> > Melt
> > Down
> >
> > And that she might 'lose' all her "friends' (endorphins etc, see Bohm on
> > that)
> > That she has been iiiiii nvestingtong in so heavilie ovr the pppppp ast
> > (Ps: 'ast' in german: branch, twig....)
> >
> > Klownon
> >
> > Humanimalian
> >
> >
> > *Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com>* wrote:
> >
> > I: Image - jumping from frying pan into fire; think before you leap -
> > Not Winston Churchill - peace in our time.
> >
> > On Dec 19, 2007 12:53 PM, Alan E. DeBakey < a.debakey@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Goodnoon Ka -- at it, again? Trying, force&fully, to lov a grup to
> > > gether ;_)
> > >
> > > Do feel/fill you hav to (re)pro(duce)create peace n harmony a'round
> > > here ;-?
> > >
> > > And that, your child&hood tech'n'ology of ssssssoft(en)ballin
> > > Will keep 'em all hahahappi & playin a'looooooonK
> > > mmmm,no,nnnnnIcelie?
> > >
> > > humanimal
> > >
> > >
> > > *Irene Darcy < irenedarcy@gmail.com>* wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > I: This is very interesting. Can we compare and talk about what we
> > > think and what they thought? Do they expand our vision? BTW William, who
> > > was "the gang" you write about? How did they 'terrorize"?
> > >
> > > Date: Wed, 1 Oct 1997 12:15:57 +0200
> > > From: heuvel@muc.de (William van den Heuvel)
> > > Subject: Re: au revoir
> > > Precedence: list
> > > To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
> > > Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
> > >
> > > Paul:
> > > >...and au revoir for now. I've decided to unsubscribe as I really
> > > need to focus on creating a new source of income.
> > >
> > > Paavo:
> > > >Unfortunately I cannot follow the dialogue list right now; please
> > > take me off. I hope to return when I have more time.
> > >
> > > Good bye Paul, bye Paavo, all the best to you both. Are you really
> > > unsubscribing for that reason or has "the gang" terrorized you off the list?
> > > I hope not. I feel a bit guilty but I also feel the dialogue should be
> > > robust enough to stand up to a little cris!
> > > ???is now and then without unsubcribing as soon as it doesn't feel
> > > good. We don't want to slide off into some kind of feel-good sect, do we?
> > >
> > > Regards, William
> > >
> > > Wed, 8 Oct 1997 19:12:37 +0100 (BST)
> > > Subject: purpose(?) of list
> > > Message-ID: <19971003.064301.6375.0.ami_kes@juno.com >
> > > From: ami_kes@juno.com (John A MIKES)
> > > Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 19:46:37 EDT
> > >
> > > to: Chris
> > > I think the exhaustion/apathy is showing after so much 'wisdom'
> > > everybody felt complelled to send in about "the purpose of the list". If we
> > > have to justify, it is too bad. I was hoping to see more reasonable topics
> > > ? can understand those who resigned. John
> > >
> > > Wed, 8 Oct 1997 18:43:55 +0100 (BST)
> > > From: Matti Vaittinen <mv12437@uta.fi>
> > >
> > > Subject: Re: au revoir
> > > In-Reply-To: <v01550103b057ccae4ea5@[ 194.158.4.110]> from William van
> > > den Heuvel at "Oct 1, 97 12:15:57 pm"
> > > Date: Sun, 5 Oct 1997 18:19:41 +0300 (EET DST)
> > >
> > > or has "the gang" terrorized you off the list? I hope not.
> > >
> > > "The gang" caused me a subtle brain damage ... perhaps MBD (Minimal
> > > Brain Damage). Sorry William, sorry Jan, sorry Barron. It wasn't just you,
> > > it's the internet, it's Sarfatti, it's the dialogue - any dialogue: it eats
> > > your brain.
> > >
> > > I feel a bit guilty but I also feel the dialogue should be robust
> > > enough to stand up to a little crisis
> > >
> > > Any crisis destroys the invaluable brain cells. What we want is
> > > peace. Peace! Peace of mind.
> > >
> > > > We don't want to slide off into some kind of feel-good sect, do we?
> > >
> > > Dialogue => the survival of the fittest
> > >
> > > Dialogue : a never-ending dissatisfaction
> > >
> > > " ... I expect to get my hands dirty, to get into sweat,
> > > to work overtime." (Harrison Ford)
> > >
> > > " ... but in a virtual world you do not get your hands
> > > dirty, you do not sweat; you just work overtime."
> > > (Matti Vaittinen)
> > > >
> > > > Regards
> > > >
> > > > William
> > >
> > > Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 11:46:21 +0100
> > > From: Jan Pieter Verhey <jverhey@gyral.com>
> > > Subject: Re: Re RE RE RE intentinal dying
> > >
> > > Hello Julia and everybody,
> > >
> > > All of which makes me feel.....how can we communicate through and with
> > > this complex multilayered dense web that entwines our words?
> > >
> > > I think I understand what you mean. The difficulty of communication
> > > via
> > > e-mail is for me that I don't see a face. Although, I have (I wonder
> > > how
> > > virtual it is) such a strong feeling about the person that I read
> > > between
> > > the lines ! Two years back I had a business contact for months only by
> > >
> > > phone, I never met the guy. When I met him, the surprise of how he
> > > looked,
> > > so the picture built might be wrong as well !
> > >
> > > But for me, the advantage of e-mail communication is that I feel
> > > completely
> > > free (and safe) to express ideas, and what others write often inspires
> > > me.
> > > In ordinary face-to-face communication, things are different, I feel
> > > different, maybe I AM different ! If I were convicted to spend the
> > > rest of
> > > my life behind a pc monitor e-mailing I would get nuts, but I would
> > > surely
> > > miss these discussions if this channel was closed ! (or is this
> > > addiction?..)
> > >
> > > which leads me to Jan's comment that:
> > > >
> > > Yes, it seems all meaning is like a movie we make after the act of
> > > perception, and after looking at the movie, we look into the real
> > > world again that looks a bit more like the movie we just created, until we
> > > experience the movie of all movies, which we then perceive as reality. This
> > > seams a lifelong proces !
> > > >
> > > >Is there then any Hope??????
> > >
> > > Hope and despair-- do they belong ? It seems to go beyond despair also
> > > means going beyond hope ? Maybe the hope-despair (ego) part of us is only a
> > > tiny fragment of the giants th