Thahk you Sarah,
A good artist has to chill to the bone. There is no yes..but. Alon
Quoting Sarah Fletcher <[log in to unmask]>:
> Hi Alon and Everyone
>
> Speaking personally, what inspires me about being a practitioner
> engaged in research with others
> and 'living autonomously while nurturing community' might be my
> definition of con-viviality - is
> the prevalence of good. Yes, there is inhumanity, there is isolation
> and exclusion but for most of
> us most of the time I see a valuing of trust in/reliance on others.
> It leads me to ponder, should we
> be ready to take responsibility to confront inhumanity, not keep
> quiet hoping it won't affect us?
> If we genuinely want to discuss the lives we lead as researchers
> shouldn't we account for not just
> what we know to be good but also what we know harms, not to enjoy
> blaming but to improve life?
>
> e.g. I haven't seen email in this discussion confronting a virulent
> problem of bullying in Academe.
> Do we confront the culture of Academe that can favour a
> self-interested, over-competitive spirit?
>
> I very much liked the posting a couple of days ago about the one
> email that might express what
> others haven't got round to saying and/or which usefully challenges
> norms. When I write about
> standards of judgement on this list it is with that aim. Should we be
> tending to discuss only the
> ideal in standards? I value Alon's postings. They can chill me to
> the bone but they are expressed
> with stark honesty; not a
> fluffy_bunny_isn't_it_wonderful_how_I_only_embody_love_and_inclusion?
> manner where I think Shall I challenge? Shall I hold that person
> accountable? I am questioning how
> possible it is through email to hold someone to account without
> injuring. I wouldn't want to do so.
>
> Warm regards to All
>
> Sarah
>
|