[Inquiry] And Passing Away -- Discussion

[Jon Awbrey]

o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o

APA.  Discussion Note 1

o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o

GR = Gary Richmond
JA = Jon Awbrey

The trouble with this distributed existence is that you tend to lose track
of what lists you're on and what lists you're off at any given dot in time --
and those of us who 'are' transdisciplinary and don't just talk about getting
around to it some day have always had trouble seeing the stone-cast barricades
that some folks have thrown up around their wagon trains of thought, so to speak --
but that's another story, for another day.

Morever, my acromnemonic mind is starting to confound the Kaina Stoicheia line
with the Karma Sutra thread -- the relationship between Kama and Karma would
be of course a vastly more interesting topic, but, alas, yet another day --
so I will try to recycle a left-over heading to the present purpose.

Your associations to my initial note tell me that I failed to make
my intended points clear enough, and so I'll attempt to amend that
in the next couple of notes.

Previously, capitalizing and correcting a bit,
for the sake of avoiding any taints of poetry,
that so inflames -- and not in the good way --
some literal minded people, their defense
of icons and images notwitstanding:

JA: Oh, Gary, you can't really think,
    if you reflect for even a second,
    or a third, for a' that, that it
    's the lack of techie knowledgry
    that's standing presently in the
    path of real-live inquiry, can u?
    u who r a veteran of SUO, will u
    honestly imagine that tech was y?

JA: Maybe we should cast an eye or two or three to the self-fullfilling policy
    that says that disciplines cannot be developed through in depth discussions
    in public view, and ask who polices that policy, and why, no matter what gnu
    fangled gee-gaws come down the pike.  Is it not more like that oo deferral of
    responsibility, that same old gambit that renders all questing purely academic?

GR: Jon, you asked:

JA: Is it not more like that oo [infinite] deferral of responsibility,
    that same old gambit that renders all questing purely academic?

GR: No.  It's more like collaborative inquiry (etc.) in an age of
    virtual tools bringing us into contact with folk all over the
    world, etc., etc.  I go to Europe, say, and meet folk whose
    work interests me and who become interested in my work, and
    then we collaborate online, etc.  This is my experience.
    It is very real, and is not "deferral of responsibility"
    but the opposite of that.  It is wholly responsible.

GR: On the other hand, Jon, you seem not to be one who shares this
    collaborative spirit or drive or goal.  Loners and other poets
    will pooh-pooh collaboration and find technology "nothing but",
    etc.  But I don't agree with you one iota in that matter, but
    loved the poetry of especially your last post, and find your
    critique of the status quo compelling (and the formatting of
    the text in your last post, not to mention your language use,
    absolutely brilliant as ever! -- so I see you more as poet
    than anything else -- that was a compliment!)

JA: The collaborations that I've known have all depended on
    the people working together being able to tell each other
    exactly what they think about each of the issues that faced
    the work.  It is true that I can count the number of genuine
    successes at that on the phalanges that God gave me at birth,
    but you presume too much to think you know a blessed thing
    about the number of trials from which that number arises.

JA: Now, that aside, there is indeed a connection between
    the sort of environment in which genuine collaboration
    can survive and that in which true inquiry can thrive,
    and all I'm saying here is the rather obvious fact that,
    as facilitative as new modes of communication might be,
    they are not the critical factor in reaching that aim.
    And the biggest obstacles are the blocks and caltrops
    in the social machineries that human beings have for
    many long ages now been building out of each other.

JA: No blame attaches if the realities of that are too hard to face.
    I'm familiar with the probabilities of what happens after saying
    what I actually think.  It's why poets, which I'm not by the way,
    along with all those pity-pattering esthetes on the playground of
    musementorship, which I am on a good day, long ago learned to give
    folks the easy out of pretending they never got it in the 1st place.
    so they pass through this casino of a world where the highest token
    of respect they can pay another has overwhelming odds of being taken
    for an insult.  Still they keep betting on that card so high and wild ...

Jon Awbrey

o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o
inquiry e-lab: http://stderr.org/pipermail/inquiry/
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o