Little Shop of Knowledge

This is a technique we used in class as a way to break down the chapter and summarize the essence of each chapter. We wrote ideas once as we read through and then condensed our scribbles into sentences. 



On Dialogue: The word Dialogue comes from Dia (Through) Logos (The Word) talk about the process of dialogue as the first things and expose assumptions that may already be lingering around.​



Dialogue and Thought: Thought is a tacit process that does something but doesn’t recognize itself as having done it (it’s been the source of the problem). It makes us identify with our opinions turning them into “truths” for us, and begins fragmenting the world. (We get nations, religions, etc.)​



Engaging in Dialogue: Don’t set a specific purpose and rules, suspend your assumptions and see where the dialogue takes you.

The Impulse of Necessity: Be aware of the problems that may emerge from the group, some people might want to give up and think it’s not necessary, such impulses come from thought so when they do it’s important to recognize them as the impulses they are and keep going.



Proprioception of Thought: There is a vicious cycle, from intention we get thought from thought we get feeling from feeling we get intention once again, never do we realize that thought may be the origin of an issue. Thought is usually not proprioceptive in the sense that we’re aware of what we’re causing, we usually get a thought and try to deal with it instead of setting it aside for a moment and recognizing that it’s a thought and not our only cone of perception.



Collective Participation: Unlike a mob, collective thought in a dialogue resembles a flow of meaning that goes through people and merges into something new with a life of it’s own. It’s not irrational, and it’s not individual, it’s a different sense to collective meaning.



A New Culture: Dialogue creates shared meaning, shared meaning is a strong bond between people, through Dialogue we can create a culture of mutual understanding and peaceful negotiations.

Difficulties in Dialogue: There will be people that take a dominant and passive role in the group. Notice how each person identifies his self and work through it so that the dialogue has some dynamic and not just meaning being transferred from some individuals into others.



The Vision of Dialogue: Bohm claims that when there isn’t shared meaning there is emptiness in people, by sticking to the process powerful connections will be formed even if there isn’t a “conclusion” (drawing conclusions are never the purpose of dialogue). What if important members of distinct religions and intellectual groups sat to have an honest dialogue?



Sensitivity in Dialogue: There is a different kind of “seriousness” that’s attached to dialogue, as I understood it, dialogue is serious in the way that it is real. Not serious in the way that it’s life or death and that there are conflicts and concerns, but serious in the fact that it’s not just a scheme where ideals are talked about, it’s an honest conversation where you expose your person and principles to others and come clean just as you are. This is extremely powerful since this “realness” this sense that a conversation can change your world perspective is as real as the rest of your life.



Limited Dialogue: There shouldn’t be a facilitator (ideally), the dialogue is a place where anything can be discussed and topics should not be limited to ONE thing, but it’s rather a place to make connections.



Beyond Dialogue: So why all this concern and poetry about dialogue? Dialogue can resemble communion, sharing the same meaning, the same love. As Bohm says “love will go away if we can’t communicate and share meaning”.