----- Original Message -----
From: "Sian Hawthorne" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, July 27, 2001 1:07 PM
Subject: Conference: Dialogue & Difference
> Dialogue & Difference
> An International Conference: 12-14th September 2001, SOAS, University of
> London
>
> About the Conference
>
> Dialogue has been a recurrent theme in the history of European ideas, from
> the Socratic dialogue, often said to be the foundation of the Western
> philosophical tradition of debate, to high profile political summits.
> Inherent within this history is the assumption, as the recent British
> Telecom slogan has it, that it is 'good to talk'. In organising this
> conference, however, we intend to stress the ambiguity of 'dialogue' and
to
> explore its equivocal character. While religious and political leaders
often
> invoke 'dialogue' as a sign of 'good will', representing a disposition to
> openness and democracy, it may just as often be but the wrapping upon
> manipulation or deceit. Dialogue, importantly, was called upon in
precisely
> such a manner during the spread of Western colonialism, and, even in the
> light of such knowledge, is uttered as part of a Western body of theory
and
> discourse.
>
> This hegemony of discourse and language immediately raises pressing issues
> and questions which will be central to the conference: How best can this
> problem of hegemony itself be addressed? Can post-colonial theorising
> provide the means by which dialogue may be 'rethought'? How might
> non-Western languages enter into a dialogue conducted primarily in
English?
> How is dialogue conceptualised in non-Western cultures? Are 'indigenous'
> forms of dialogue, irreducible to European models, capable of evading
> existing power structures and opening a path to mutual understanding
> possible or viable; or, must cross-cultural dialogue necessarily find
itself
> reduced to a Western model of 'movement of the self towards the other'?
Can
> critical theory help us to 'un-say' the 'said' of a monological dialogue?
> Can theories from outside Europe disrupt such dominance? Is European
thought
> able to deconstruct itself so as to welcome other ways of dialogue without
> once more imposing a universal model? Is, in other words, an ethical
> dialogue possible? The conference will focus jointly on specific instances
> within socio-cultural settings, and also upon the broader nature and roots
> of dialogue.
>
> Conference Themes
>
> · The Ethics and Philosophy of Dialogue
> · Dialogue and Difference
> · Cross Cultural Dialogues
> · Is it 'good to talk' or, the Refusal of Dialogue
> · Dialogue and Identity
>
> Conference Fees
>
> Institutions: £50.00
> Students: £25.00
>
> For further information on attending the conference contact:
> [log in to unmask] or visit the web site
> http://www.soas.ac.uk/Religions/dialogue
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
> Sian,
I have been so slack latley, i guess I have been just having fun. Anyway
still haven't done the application but will this evening and I think I wll
hand post it tommorw on the way to work.
Was thinking about this conference on dialgouge. Fun because it's "god to
takl" Good to talk has never been at thing that has appealed to me. In my
world trying to talk was awful because other people could always but you
down with 'fancy' words and I was intimidated, or I got me words back to
front, or never could express myself correctly. Makes me think that there is
class in language and disability in language. For instance at work the other
day although I know I was reight in a certain matter the manager used loads
of language I was not used to and thus I came away thinking cool it's sorted
(intially) later it dawned on that I was had over. Taking it to a religous
element the word of god and his hoy men (the priests etc) has always but the
frea of god in me and the language they speak is well wired , weel not know.
When is everyone getting in touch any idea.
|
