Saturday, 30 October 2010

Debate and Argument - E. de Bono

In our Western culture argument "is the basis of our search for truth and the basis of our adversial system in science, law and politics." (de Bono 1991:5).

The use of argument as the central method of traditional conversation in law, politics and science results in a "strong tendency towards negativity and attack" (de Bono 1991:7).

"By means of argument which manoeuvres matters into a contradictory position, something can be shown to be false." (de Bono 1991:6).

"Let us look at some of the purposes of argument ... Argument can serve to point out errors of fact. It can serve to point out ... inconsistencies. ... Argument can encourage exploration of a subject ... It can present a different set of values ... It can present different experience ... At it best argument might achieve many of these purposes." (de Bono 1991:206)

"At it worst and more usual expression, argument concentrates on proving the opposing case to be false and the people putting it forward to be both stupid and motivated by self-interest."  (de Bono 1991:207)


Dialogue - D. Bohm

http://www.slideshare.net/dgurteen/knowledge-cafe-workshop-may-2008-01
slide 16

Dialogue - Th. Zeldin

http://www.slideshare.net/dgurteen/knowledge-cafe-workshop-may-2008-01
slide 15

Conversation: From Debate to Dialogue - D. Gurteen

http://www.slideshare.net/dgurteen/knowledge-cafe-workshop-may-2008-01
slide 14

Conversation is a meeting of minds - Th. Zeldin

http://www.slideshare.net/dgurteen/knowledge-cafe-workshop-may-2008-01 - slide 12

We need a change in conversation habits ...

... "from confrontational habits to more constructive habits" 

Edward de Bono (1991) I am right, you are wrong. Penguin: London, p. 2

La cara oculta de la luna (far side of the moon) ...

... es el hemisferio de la Luna no observable desde la Tierra (http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cara_oculta_de_la_Luna)

Lo mismo ocurre con nuestra visión de nosotros mismos (the same happens with our view of ourselves).

Friday, 29 October 2010

Spannende Gedanken zu Dialog ...


Derogatory language - view from sociology

Found some interesting statements from sociology about derogatory language:
  •  Sociologists point to derisive language as an indicator of flawed reasoning ...
  • a fundamental axiom of sociology recognizes that derogatory forms of speech make erronious attributions ....
  • Scholars classify the erroneous assumptions as the fundamental attribution error
 Source: http://www.jahsonic.com/Derogatory.html

Would be interesting to look from this point of view also at derisive language in scientific papers and discussion, for example by David Kenneth Johnson:
 

How thinking can alter perception - Nature News 27.10.2010

On Nature online a news article reports about research by Cerf, M. et al. Nature 467, 1104-1108 (2010) which shows how humans can use thinking to alter perception of competing visual images
In the news Dr. Moran Cerf gives an interesting interpretation of his EXPERIMENTS:
  • "The environment offers some reality," he says, "but your own brain can shape it and override it with its internal deliberations." 
The THEORY for this has been developed in the last 40 years within the theory of knowing called Radical Constructivism http://www.univie.ac.at/constructivism/ 

Thursday, 28 October 2010

Passion and Reason - Erasmus of Rotterdam

that the life of man might not be altogether disconsolate and hard to away with, of how much more passion than reason has Jupiter composed us? putting in, as one would say, "scarce half an ounce to a pound." The Praise of Folly (1511) - Translated by John Wilson 1668

Life as a play - Erasmus of Rotterdam

For what is life but a play in which everyone acts a part until the curtain comes down? The Praise of Folly (1511)

Tuesday, 26 October 2010

Neurons as puppet masters

Antonio Damasio & Kaspar Meyer write in Nature 454, 167-168 (10 July 2008) "Convergence–Divergence Zones" (CDZs) – (‘mirror neurons’)  that mirror neurons act not so much as "mirrors" but "more like puppet masters, pulling the strings of various memories." 


The authors are dealing with neurons and brains, my allegory deals with thought and minds: not quite same, right?