OK Sara,
My last words are that "you are connecting with me and reaching me".
You are by no means failing. Alon
Quoting "Salyers, Sara M" <[log in to unmask]>:
> Dear Alon (and all),
>
> I very much agree with you about engaging in dialogue rather than
> making propositional assertions. I think your description of the
> requirements of dialog is lovely and very clear. I also agree that
> conducting real dialog can be extremely difficult. From my own
> perspective a major difficulty lies in the fact that it is much
> easier to correct others than to admit my own mistakes or, for that
> matter, admit to an imperfect understanding. I am getting better at
> this, I think.
>
> I once took a course in which the term 'speaking to another's
> listening' was used a lot. (At first I thought it was just American
> jargon! Then I began to understand it.) I still try to do this but
> I'm far from proficient; it takes work to speak to another's
> listening rather than to the listening that *I* want them to have!
> Even harder, for me, is developing my own 'listening' for someone
> else's 'speaking'. (I will assume that the meaning conveys itself
> and won't bore you by unpicking it!) The same course also explored
> the human addiction to being right and turned it upside down by
> insisting that, in each conflict of ideas the participants looked
> only and entirely for their own 'stake-holdings' in being right...
> and then abandoned them. (This did not mean agreeing with the other
> person or abandoning any truth - only abandoning the need to be
> convince the other of your own rightness - and even more
> importantly, of the other's wrongness. It was a fine but profound
> distinction.) That feels incredibly counter-intuitive - especially
> when it seems obvious that other is wrong! But the point was, and
> is, that the direction of the dialog then moved away from
> 'convincing' to genuinely understanding the other viewpoint and, if
> necessary accepting disagreement. I tend to do quite poorly at that,
> by the way! (I should add that this approach by no means precludes
> acting upon one's own convictions. I have, for instance, more than
> one friend who is anti-union. We have shared our perspectives and
> exchanged arguments... and remain in our original positions. This
> weekend, I have been helping with union organization. I will do what
> is necessary to empower my union so that it is in a position of
> strength to negotiate on behalf of the exploited workers on my
> campus. My friends may feel moved to do the opposite. That will be
> challenging for us but I am committed to my affection for them *and*
> to maintaining our friendship.)
>
> One of the things that emerged from this process, for me, was that I
> have become aware of the danger inherent in dialogues where one or
> both parties have no 'listening' for the other. When that happens,
> the conversation moves from inquiry and exploration to a kind of
> sparring match and, when there are others present it can easily
> become a kind of 'exhibition match' with the underlying object of
> establishing a 'winner' who is 'right'. Alon, I am very clear that
> I have failed to speak to or listen from where you actually are. I
> have directed my posts to the place I *thought* you were in - and
> missed! I am so far out of alignment with you, that I can't relate
> your replies to the reflections that I am making. I'm sorry about
> that. But if I continue with this, knowing that I simply do not have
> the required listening for the space you occupy, I won't be
> conversing with you but sparring and I don't want to do that.
>
> So let me simply say these things and be done: For the reasons that
> I have given, I agree with Jack and others that there is something
> that cannot live in the written word but which can be touched -
> however imperfectly - through the medium of video; for the same
> reasons I wholly disagree that this same energy can be experienced
> in written words but *not* through film; I accept that you do not
> agree with me; I do not accept, but do not want to argue further,
> the analogy of a film of you vomiting; *I* cannot define your
> feelings about racism, feelings to which I relate, as ontological
> because I am pedantic about language and they aren't part of an
> inquiry but of a state; *however*, I unconditionally accept that
> they are part of who you choose to be; I share your sense of outrage
> at whatever you perceive as oppressive, dehumanizing and unjust and
> I share your need to say loudly and clearly, 'that is wrong'! So
> far as doing the latter is concerned, I offer one observation from
> a fellow 'opposer'! I also accept the penalty for opposition,
> which is to make opponents of those engaged in the practice I have
> rejected, just as I must accept the polarizing/conflictual dynamic
> which inevitably follows. (The same holds true, of course for those
> 'lesser wrongs' we might think we perceive and criticize.) In other
> words, when we take an adversarial position we are responsible,
> indeed we ourselves have chosen, the opposition we are likely to
> meet. We can accept and be accountable for this if we choose, or we
> can blame the deficiency in ourselves, others or the human condition
> and its capacity for real dialog. Personally, when I stand in
> opposition to anything now, I do not see the resistance and
> rejection I *inevitably* meet as any kind of deficiency, but as the
> operation of a natural law whose consequences are inherent in my own
> choices. I find that empowering, however much I hate it or however
> difficult my situation. It may or may not seem useful to you.
>
> Again, I am sorry for my failure to connect with you and I gladly
> leave you with the last word.
>
> love
>
> Sara
>
> "I have come to a frightening conclusion. I am the decisive element
> in the classroom. It is my personal approach that creates the
> climate. It is my daily mood that makes the weather... I can be a
> tool of torture or an instrument of inspiration. I can humiliate or
> humor, hurt or heal."
> Haim Ginott
> ________________________________________
> From: Practitioner-Researcher
> [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Alon Serper
> [[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Friday, May 20, 2011 10:16 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: How to establish an environment that calls out the most
> and the best of everyone
>
> RE-How often has someone 'picked it up the wrong way'.
>
> You check this. You ask the hearer/reader to clarify back what he/she
> understood or better yet, you see what he/she has understood from the
> reply. If he/she is wrong about what you said, you gently correct
> him/her. The important thing is to engage and dialogue rather than
> make linguistic propositional assertions. This is what a conversation
> is all about, checking how your meanings are being understood and
> adding to them. Whilst doing so, you reflect both individually and as
> group collaboration. You admit mistakes and are open, authentic,
> humble and engaging. It is an art that is very worthwhile mastering.
> But as Gadamer and Collingwood pointed out, we are not ready for it.
> Had we were, I would not have had that much problem with finding
> academic hosts for my post-propositional critical psychology postdoc.
> I worked very hard at it over the last decade. I am checking it and
> doing it now. Alon
>
>
>
> Quoting Deirdre Flood <[log in to unmask]>:
>
>> Hi Alon
>>
>> Thank-you for your response because I've remembered that I've taken
>> something for granted in my own experience in using video with the group I
>> am involved with in Special Olympics that I first noticed at the beginning.
>>
>> You are absolutely right that people do not behave naturally and
>> authentically when filmed when the camera is something that you point at
>> them for the first time or even a couple of times.
>>
>> However, I've been using video on a sustained basis over a period of a year
>> with my group in a fully informed and ethical way with consent from everyone
>> including the athletes themselves. In fact I was able to use video to
>> communicate to the athletes what I was trying to accomplish with that group
>> which involved the production of a training video for volunteers. The use
>> of video assisted me in delivering a multimedia form of my ethics statement
>> precisely because the concern was that some athletes would have difficulty
>> comprehending my plain language ethics statement.
>>
>> What I found is that over time, the camera became a norm in this environment
>> and was literally ignored thereby granting me what I believe was an
>> authentic and natural point of view through the lens of the camera. I could
>> validate this because I knew the group for four years before I introduced
>> the camera and could relate to what normal behaviour looked like. Also
>> because I am part of the group there is a trusting relationship already
>> established and therefore the space is safe because I have control over that
>> recording material and it certainly would not be published without due
>> consideration on the internet.
>>
>> I think that this reservation or consideration thats given to what is
>> published on the internet in visual form is an acknowledgement of the power
>> of the medium itself. We all have no problem communicating across an open
>> forum using email and our words will remain out there forever just the
>> same. However the weight in this principle when applied to a visual
>> expression of ourselves is really not the same because we are communicating
>> more than just words.
>>
>> Showing clips of ourselves out of context absolutely can be a disaster and
>> damaging but so too can words when taken selectively or edited from
>> a narrative of text. That is why I believe its so important to integrate
>> the two together to assist in making the context clear which I think can be
>> done through the way a person approaches their research and the values
>> they espouse.
>>
>> I used an online blog to record my reflective journals on my experience and
>> I found the process to be a fantastic way to express my thoughts and
>> reflections which came in a flow of writing. Making sense of it later is a
>> whole other story though! However if I had to make a video diary I would
>> not have worked for me in the same way.. I would have been thinking about
>> what I looked like not what I was saying. I therefore value writing and
>> the written dialectic because I'm focused on the words and their meanings
>> and sometimes it provides a less complicated frame of reference because
>> there are no other signals confusing my interpretation. However equally
>> sometimes those additional signals are very helpful as it can be difficult
>> to communicate emotion over email for example. How often has someone
>> 'picked it up the wrong way'.
>>
>> For me I guess the context is key and I agree that a therapeutic environment
>> would lend itself to writing and blogging and using video in a very safe
>> space so with an understanding of your context I know where you are coming
>> from.
>>
>> I just think there is a place for video and multimedia forms in research in
>> a blended approach in general and particularly Living educational theory.
>>
>> I look forward to reading about the influences in your research Alon.
>>
>> Take care
>> Best Regards
>> Deirdre
>>
>>
>
|