Below is an announcement of an event with author and
lecturer Tony Blake, who carries forward research into
practical arithmology, or what some call the qualitative
aspect of number, and how this aspect of number can
connect with our depth of consciousness.
Sorry for any duplication.
John Dale
Forwarded Message Follows:
-----------------------------------
N-LOGUE - intentional conversation - with Anthony Blake
July 5th 1998 Baltimore
How we talk together might seem a perfectly natural thing and nothing we
need question. When we talk together, our concern is nearly always with
what we are talking about or with the people we are talking with. If we
pay attention to how we are talking, it is likely to make us feel
artificial or awkward.
Dialogue is one way of talking together in a different way from the
usual. It gently enables us to become a little more conscious of what is
happening when we talk together. It does this by asking the people
involved to 'suspend' something of the usual ways of talking. This means
to minimise such things as having winners and losers in argument,
indulgence in self expression, socialisation, and so on. It also means
sacrificing our normal, what I call 'dyadic', conversation.
Dyadic conversation is the back-and-forth between two
people. It is the most prevalent form of talking we have.
It is not necessarily adversarial, but it depends very much
on the rehearsal of fixed opinions which are based on
assumptions of which we are usually quite unconscious.
Thus, it rarely serves any 'purpose' beyond confirming our
image of 'self', making us feel good, etc. This is such a
strong pull that it becomes very difficult for us to talk
in a more truly self-aware, self-critical way. As long as
this form prevails, other forms of talking together are
unlikely. Whenever two people involved, their conversation
is almost bound to be polarised. Such conversations can
even make up the total conversation in a group of many
people. Though there are many people, the conversations
remain dyadic, always between two's.
The idea we are proposing is that the actual number of people involved
can determine what kind of conversation they can have. Of course, this
only applies if every one of those involved is equally involved in the
conversation (we can have a group of twenty people but only two speak).
What we call N-logue is where we are having conversations that depend on
how many (N) people are involved. So far, we have largely explored the
first three N-logues.
A 'one-sided conversation' or monalogue is made by one person (please
note the specific spellings) . A two-sided conversation is called a
dyalogue. A three-sided conversation is called a trialogue. These terms
reflect the general term 'dialogue' which, according to David Bohm, has
the meaning 'through' (dia) 'meaning' (logos). The 'logos' or 'logue'
has structure dependent on the number of autonomous agents involved: in
other words, how many people are equally and actively engaged.
If you have some experience of the dialogue process, you may have
noticed that the conversation becomes deeper or more subtle when it
embraces more than two people. The step to having three people is
crucial. Just for a few moments, there can be a three-sided
conversation; even though only one person can speak at a time and what
is said by one person must acknowledge what has just been said by
another.
It is unlikely that conversation in 'real life' will ever provide much
opportunity for either discerning or practising these 'logues'. In the
Middle Ages, scholars had the method of dispute known as the
'dialectic', which I would call a form of 'dyalogue'; but this has
fallen into disuse. We can find people talking in threes calling it
'trialogue' (such as in the book which has Sheldrake talking with two
others) but they are not practising a three-fold discipline. The nearest
example in literature is Heidegger's 'Conversations along a Country
Road'.
The suggestion is, then, that we set ourselves to practise the various
logues as a series of exercises. Each has its own rules and disciplines.
There are variants for each one, and more to be discovered. If you are a
person who dislikes having to conform to rules of any kind, and being
out of polarity, then this will not appeal to you! But, if you can get
yourself to adapt, you may be surprised at how 'creative' you can be and
what beauty you can create!
We will experiment with monalogue, dyalogue, trialogue and tetralogue
(for 1, 2, 3 and 4 people respectively) to the point of attempting
pentalogue (for five people). During the day, we will have two
relatively short sessions of open dialogue. Participants will be
encouraged to invent other forms for themselves and 'give performances'
based on their own disciplines and creativity.
As far as I know, N-logue is not offered anywhere else
(though you will find things that look similar). I believe
it has great promise as a way of bringing out insights
through conversation. Participants will be involved in
developing new forms of communication that may have an
important impact in the world. Those who want further
explanation can find it on my web site (www.duversity.org)
or in my book 'Structures of Meaning'. David Bohm's theory
surrounding dialogue is best found in the collection of
articles and talks brought together as 'On Dialogue'
(Routledge and Kegan Paul).
This will be a one-day event, from 10 am to 5 pm, with breaks for lunch
(bring your own) and coffee. Contact: Karen Stefano, 8 Homewood Hills,
Charles Town, WV 25414; tel. (304) 725 0061, email
registrar@duversity.org
-- Tony Blake