KotiRyhmätKeskusteluLisääAjan henki
Etsi sivustolta
Tämä sivusto käyttää evästeitä palvelujen toimittamiseen, toiminnan parantamiseen, analytiikkaan ja (jos et ole kirjautunut sisään) mainostamiseen. Käyttämällä LibraryThingiä ilmaiset, että olet lukenut ja ymmärtänyt käyttöehdot ja yksityisyydensuojakäytännöt. Sivujen ja palveluiden käytön tulee olla näiden ehtojen ja käytäntöjen mukaista.

Tulokset Google Booksista

Pikkukuvaa napsauttamalla pääset Google Booksiin.

RC Series Bundle: On Dialogue (Routledge…
Ladataan...

RC Series Bundle: On Dialogue (Routledge Classics) (vuoden 2004 painos)

Tekijä: David Bohm

JäseniäKirja-arvostelujaSuosituimmuussijaKeskimääräinen arvioKeskustelut
339675,899 (3.86)-
Never before has there been a greater need for deeper listening and more open communication to cope with the complex problems facing our organizations, businesses and societies. Renowned scientist David Bohm believed there was a better way for humanity to discover meaning and to achieve harmony. He identified creative dialogue, a sharing of assumptions and understanding, as a means by which the individual, and society as a whole, can learn more about themselves and others, and achieve a renewed sense of purpose.… (lisätietoja)
Jäsen:thalgyur
Teoksen nimi:RC Series Bundle: On Dialogue (Routledge Classics)
Kirjailijat:David Bohm
Info:Routledge (2004), Edition: 2, Paperback, 144 pages
Kokoelmat:Oma kirjasto
Arvio (tähdet):
Avainsanoja:-

Teostiedot

On Dialogue (tekijä: David Bohm)

-
Ladataan...

Kirjaudu LibraryThingiin nähdäksesi, pidätkö tästä kirjasta vai et.

Ei tämänhetkisiä Keskustelu-viestiketjuja tästä kirjasta.

englanti (3)  espanja (2)  italia (1)  Kaikki kielet (6)
Näyttää 1-5 (yhteensä 6) (seuraava | näytä kaikki)
SOBRE EL DIÁLOGO

La moderna tecnología ha ido tejiendo una inmensa red de comunicación que pone en contacto instantáneo a las personas de todo el mundo. Sin embargo, nunca como hoy ha habido un sentimiento tan generalizado de que la genuina comunicación está rota.

El presente libro se enfrenta con esta paradoja, y constituye un testimonio apasionante de un proceso intelectual profundo al que David Bohm denomina, simplemente, "diálogo". Este proceso es complejo, y el autor plantea su exposición de manera que pueda servir como manual práctico a la vez que como fuente de información

El diálogo, en opinión de Bohm, constituye un ejercicio multifacético que trasciende, con mucho, las nociones típicas de charla o intercambio de comunicación. El diálogo explora un espectro inusitadamente amplio de la experiencia humana, desde la percepción de valores hasta los factores emocionales, desde las pautas del pensamiento lógico hasta las funciones de la memoria. También implica la forma en que nuestras estructuras neurofisiológicas organizan la experiencia.

Pero, sobre todo, explora la manera en que el pensamiento es generado y sostenido colectivamente: un enfoque que pone en cuestión nuestras creencias más profundas sobre la cultura, la verdad y la identidad.

David Bohm, uno de los físicos y pensadores más eminentes de nuestro tiempo, fue miembro de la Royal Society y profesor del Birkbeck College de la universidad de Londres. Entre sus obras más importantes destacan La totalidad y el orden implicado o Ciencia, orden y creatividad, ambas publicadas por Kairós.

Lee Nichol es un editor y escritor independiente que participó en los famosos grupos de diálogo dirigidos por David Bohm. Nueva Ciencia
  FundacionRosacruz | Feb 11, 2018 |
SOBRE EL DIÁLOGO

La moderna tecnología ha ido tejiendo una inmensa red de
comunicación que pone en contacto instantáneo a las personas de todo
el mundo. Sin embargo, nunca como hoy ha habido un sentimiento tan
generalizado de que la genuina comunicación está rota

El presente libro se enfrenta con esta paradoja, y constituye un
testimonio apasionante de un proceso intelectual profundo al que David
Bohm denomina, simplemente, "diálogo". Este proceso es complejo.,
y el autor plantea su exposición de manera que pueda servir como
manual práctico a la vez que como fuente de información
El diálogo, en opinión de Bohm, constituye un ejercicio multifacético
que trasciende, con mucho, las nociones típicas de charla o
intercambio de comunicación. El diálogo explora un espectro
inusitadamente amplio de la experiencia humana, desde la percepción de
valores hasta los factores emocionales, desde las pautas del
pensamiento lógico hasta las funciones de la memoria. También implica la
forma en que nuestras estructuras neurofisiológicas organizan la ex
periencia. Pero, sobre todo, explora la manera en que el pensamiento
es generado y sostenido colectivamente: un enfoque que pone en
cuestión nuestras creencias más profundas sobre la cultura, la verdad
y la identidad.

David Bohm, uno de los físicos y pensadores más eminentes de
nuestro tiempo, fue miembro de la Royal Society y profesor del
Birkbeck College de la universidad de Londres. Entre sus obras más
importantes destacan La totalidad y el orden implicado y Ciencia,
orden y creatividad, ambas publicadas por Kairós.

Lee Nichol es un editor y escritor independiente que participó en
los famosos grupos de diálogo dirigidos por David Bohm.
  FundacionRosacruz | Aug 20, 2017 |
David Bohm è stato uno dei più noti fisici del Dopoguerra. La ricerca sulla meccanica quantistica, suo principale campo d’interesse, lo condusse a sviluppare una riflessione originale anche sui temi della creatività, della comunicazione e della conoscenza. In questo importante lavoro sul dialogo Bohm propone una via per costruire, in tutti gli ambiti della vita umana, uno scambio comunicativo finalizzato all’accrescimento delle potenzialità creative individuali e collettive. A partire da quest’opera si sono sviluppate e diffuse in tutto il mondo una particolare metodologia e una particolare pratica di dialogo, applicate soprattutto ai gruppi, alle organizzazioni, insomma al “pensare insieme”. Ma più che dare una ricetta per il dialogo, Bohm cerca di mostrare che esso presuppone un atteggiamento nei confronti della realtà, dell’ambiente e dell’essere umano fondato sulla “sospensione” di assunti, presupposti e convinzioni.
  MensCorpore | Sep 9, 2015 |
David Bohm, the author of “On Dialogue,” was apparently recognized as one of the greatest theoretical physicists of the twentieth century. Despite my background in physics, I’d never heard of his contributions to the field, and I’d certainly never heard of his contributions to other fields, including … well, whatever you could call this book. Is it philosophy? Communications? I know it’s not an attempt at literary theory, but some of it seems to resemble it. It fancies itself a visionary way of reimagining and reawakening the power of human communication, but much of it sounds like New Age occultism – spooky and obscurantist, weird and much of it frankly unfounded.

Bohm thinks that following his recommendations will result in a kind of enhanced, unbiased conversation (which he insists on calling “dialogue”) between people that will help foster a common sense of humanity, and that our dialogue with one another has been irrevocably tainted by personal ambition and unexamined prejudices. Because we have these presuppositions, we can only engage in “conversations” (which is somehow very different from dialogue, which is the idealized type of human interaction). How conversation is different from dialogue is never really discussed. The way we can reestablish this most meaningful type of human connection is by letting go of these ambitions and prejudices.

He says that dialogue should ideally begin with no set purpose, no leader, and no hidden assumptions or opinions which will only serve to make you defensive during the course of the dialogue. Now, gentle reader, there is a difference between suspending opinions which might be culturally or religiously biased, which is something I would completely understand doing to open a dialogue fully up, and what Bohm is asking us to do in this book. He seems to want us to sit and listen to absolutely anyone say anything they sincerely believe. But the problem with sincerity is this: it and four dollars will buy you a cup of coffee at Starbucks.

Considering that Bohm is a scientist and is ostensibly on the hunt for something resembling truth about the physical world, this is somewhat disheartening to read. Do I need to suspend my judgments about the absurdity of Holocaust denial when I speak to someone who actually denies historical reality? Or fail to adduce the evidence that the Earth is roughly spherical to a flat Earther while engaged in a conversation with one? For someone who thinks that the scientific endeavor is something other than an utterly futile one, how can someone genuinely think these things? To request that we listen to varying opinions, measure their respective amounts of evidence, and adopt the one that has the most explanatory power all the while maintaining a cool head about those who have very different ideas from our own is a very good idea. Actually engaging people with ridiculous, patently false ideas is another. Not only is it silly, but it’s dangerous. There are some people who should be disabused of their false ideas. In fact, if that’s not the main point of dialogue, it should be one of its major reasons for existing. To say that dialogue shouldn’t be used for the purpose of convincing people of things we know to be true is detrimental to the idea of any kind of human interaction, especially if you believe that some things are true and some things aren’t.

This is mostly a collection of ad hoc work, with only a couple of pieces having been previously published elsewhere. Most of what I spoke about above is found in the first piece, “On Dialogue.” The subsequent pieces serve to expound upon the first in minor, tangential ways, and none of them seemed as egregious as what was set forward in the first piece. If this is the kind of uncritical work that Bohm is known for, I think I can safely bypass his other stuff and regard him for what he is: a physicist who should stick to doing what he knows best. ( )
  kant1066 | Apr 13, 2014 |
The prospect of enhanced humanity. This is the terrain David Bohm explores, analyzing the potential of the form of common dialogue. When we come together to talk, or otherwise to act in common, can each one of us be aware of the subtle fear and pleasure sensations that 'block' the ability to listen freely? By unblocking, can we change the way the thought process occurs collectively? Paying attention. Creating something new together.

Mankind is caught in a web of fragmented and contradictory intentions and actions, bent by culture and infected by personal ambition. Dialogue sheds light on this fragmentation, permitting participants to examine prejudices and their power.

Admittedly influenced by J. Krishnamurti, and lacking any experiential or educational exposure to anthropology, Bohm brings scientific principles to bear on the seemingly intractable incoherence of human thought. He aims the dialogue at the nature of consciousness by removing the "aim", the agendas and programs.

Chapters:
1. On Communication. From essays authored in 1970. People are unable to listen freely to each other. We are blocked by fears and prejudices, and attempts to communicate often causes confusion. "Listening" is more than empathic attention to words, but to the misperception within the hearer due to "blocks" or anesthesia caused by fear and pleasure.

2. On Dialogue. May be used as a primer, drawn from meetings held in Ojai, California 1977-1992. To start a dialogue group, have a discussion/seminar about what dialogue is, and why we do it. Can dialogue alone. Shared meaning holds society together, and every participant benefits. Cf. "discussion". No leader, no set purpose, because everyone has different assumptions and opinions and becomes defensive. Fragmentation-separating, seeing different religions, shades--is a result of defensive thought. "Tacit" --unspoken-- Thought is a tacit process. We do almost everything by tacit knowledge, and the bulk of our interpersonal communication is shared at the tacit level [14]. We communicated this way for a million years and have lost it in the last 5000 years of civilization. Circle sit, facilitator, agenda of no agenda or open to trust, Crucial to the "free" thought not to have to make a decision or have a fixed purpose. [17] The negotiation is not the end, but the beginning. [18] "Suspending assumptions" - neither carried out nor suppressed, neither believed nor disbelieved, nor judged, from the inside, mirroring. The "impulse of necessity", driving certain thoughts to play a more important role, often in conflict. Freedom makes possible a creative perception of new orders of necessity. [23]
Proprioception of Thought. Can Thought be proprioceptive? The point of suspension is to help make proprioception possible.
A New Culture. Society is based on shared meanings, and at present "the society at large has a very incoherent set of meanings." [28]. A genuine culture could arise in which opinions and assumptions are not defended incoherently. Survival depends on it -- shared meaning and coherency.
Difficulties in Dialogue. Attempts can be frustrating, and people come to the dialogue with anxiety, needs, pressure, and incoherence.Without a "rule", say that "we can see the sense of it" where the morphology can be addressed: "give space for each person to talk". Procedures that help. If someone wants the group to adopt or start something, it will lead to conflict. It may be frightening to some if there is no leader and no topic and nothing "to do" [31].
The Vision of Dialogue. The solution is to look at the dialogue. Emotional charges and neurophysiological hatred are fueled by assumptions and people stick to them. That sticking is a "level of contact" they share, and the differences are not so important. Thought process as an extension of the body process and body language showing in it. Hate is a close bond with matching bodies and neurochemicals. [31] The reason for dialogue is bonding --fellowship.Open and trusting, so that intelligence can go to work. Hatred can no longer sustain itself. Depleted violence in the opinions we hold. Intelligence no longer blocked by the animal of defensiveness. Sharing of mind, of consciousness is more important than the content of opinions. Truth does not emerge from limited opinions (which prevent us from even perceiving truth) but from the free movement of the tacit mind. Ecological disaster averted by collective consciousness. Stay with the frustrations of dialogue just as you work to provide support for your family. Dialogue has the quality of the solution in the absence of universal love. Dialogue is foreign to the current structure of science and religion. Bohm repeatedly introduces morphological views. There is no "road" to truth, but we can share all roads and see that they are roads, and limited, and so none of them matters more than the sharing. When or if you see others' thought processes, the thought becomes your own thought. And emotional charges, your own charges, held together. Friendship may come. Another will raise a thought you were having. Thinking together lights up the room, listening, shared meaning. That is the vision.
Sensitivity in Dialogue. Dialogue is not common, although it is necessary for coherence in a society. A way of knowing hoe to come in, how not to. The senses provide information you have to sense through the screen of thought. Consciousness must build a form for what it means, which holds it together. Meaning is the glue; it is not static but flowing among us.Only then can we talk coherently and think together. Defending assumptions blocks sensitivity and we get in our own way. Krishnamurti said that "to be" is to be related [40]. Polarized positions are similar, as rigid structures. A great deal of our life is not serious--society teaches you there are incoherent things and nothing you can do about it, so don't stir yourself up uselessly [41]. In dialogue, you have to be serious. As when Freud was asked about the cancer of the mouth, "This cancer may be fatal, but it is not serious." [41].
Limited Dialogue. No place in the dialogue for hierarchy or authority or special purpose. An empty place where we can talk about anything. Academics are trying to use these principles of dialogue to resolve business problems. Within the framework of assuming the company has to survive, can have a limited kind of dialogue.--how are we thinking, where are the problems coming from, what is the way we have to go.[43] As to whether this type of corporate dialogue only furthers a corrupt system, almost everything is involved in this corrupt game. [44] For society to be working right, all those things have got to work efficiently and coherently.[45] There may be no pat answer. But the point is not the answer or the particular opinions. [46] What is important is the spread of mindfulness, this attitude that slows down destruction, listening, less friction and violence, opening up of judgments and assumptions.
Beyond Dialogue. If we are to survive and have a worthwhile life, we have to deal with the ills of society. But that is just the beginning. There is the possibility for a transformation of the nature of consciousness, both individually and collectively. Has to be done collectively with individual participation -- a communion, a wholeness, koinonia.

3. The Nature of Collective Thought.

The problems of the world, a list almost indefinite and catastrophic. Why have we accepted this state of affairs? [48] Nobody knows what to do or say that has worked out. Underneath the it there is something we don't yet understand about how Thought works. Thought has done all the things we are proudest of.Yet it goes wrong somehow, and produces destruction. This arises from fragmentation--breaking up bits as if they were independent. The source of the breakdown of Thought is always Now. That is what we have to look into.
4. The Problem and the Paradox. From essays authored in 1971.
5. The Observer and the Observed.
6. Suspension, the Body, and Proprioception.
7. Participatory Thought and the Unlimited.


The author was an accomplished physicist (Birkbeck College, University of London), died in 1992. ( )
  keylawk | Jun 21, 2009 |
Näyttää 1-5 (yhteensä 6) (seuraava | näytä kaikki)
ei arvosteluja | lisää arvostelu

Kuuluu näihin kustantajien sarjoihin

Sinun täytyy kirjautua sisään voidaksesi muokata Yhteistä tietoa
Katso lisäohjeita Common Knowledge -sivuilta (englanniksi).
Teoksen kanoninen nimi
Tiedot englanninkielisestä Yhteisestä tiedosta. Muokkaa kotoistaaksesi se omalle kielellesi.
Alkuteoksen nimi
Teoksen muut nimet
Alkuperäinen julkaisuvuosi
Henkilöt/hahmot
Tärkeät paikat
Tärkeät tapahtumat
Kirjaan liittyvät elokuvat
Epigrafi (motto tai mietelause kirjan alussa)
Omistuskirjoitus
Ensimmäiset sanat
Sitaatit
Viimeiset sanat
Erotteluhuomautus
Julkaisutoimittajat
Kirjan kehujat
Alkuteoksen kieli
Tiedot englanninkielisestä Yhteisestä tiedosta. Muokkaa kotoistaaksesi se omalle kielellesi.
Kanoninen DDC/MDS
Kanoninen LCC

Viittaukset tähän teokseen muissa lähteissä.

Englanninkielinen Wikipedia (1)

Never before has there been a greater need for deeper listening and more open communication to cope with the complex problems facing our organizations, businesses and societies. Renowned scientist David Bohm believed there was a better way for humanity to discover meaning and to achieve harmony. He identified creative dialogue, a sharing of assumptions and understanding, as a means by which the individual, and society as a whole, can learn more about themselves and others, and achieve a renewed sense of purpose.

Kirjastojen kuvailuja ei löytynyt.

Kirjan kuvailu
Yhteenveto haiku-muodossa

Current Discussions

-

Suosituimmat kansikuvat

Pikalinkit

Arvio (tähdet)

Keskiarvo: (3.86)
0.5
1
1.5
2 3
2.5
3 10
3.5
4 11
4.5
5 11

Oletko sinä tämä henkilö?

Tule LibraryThing-kirjailijaksi.

 

Lisätietoja | Ota yhteyttä | LibraryThing.com | Yksityisyyden suoja / Käyttöehdot | Apua/FAQ | Blogi | Kauppa | APIs | TinyCat | Perintökirjastot | Varhaiset kirja-arvostelijat | Yleistieto | 203,198,960 kirjaa! | Yläpalkki: Aina näkyvissä