Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2001 15:12:31 +0100 Subject: Re: HAB: Re: Re: Re: samizdat From: "Stefan Szczelkun" <stefan-AT-szczelkun.greatxscape.net> Antti M Kauppinen wrote on the 14th: "Why is physical presence and hearing the other's voice (rather than reading what she writes) so important - can Habermas's framework accommodate that? " In London I've been getting the Hab list samizdat mailings interleaved with mailings from members of Re-evaluation co-counselling members in New York. These lifeworld co-counsellors caught up in the WTC drama are reporting how they are using their 'listening skills' both to deal with their own trauma around the events and to also, experimentally, go out in the street and listen to others. These mailings revealed to me another dimension of communications in response to a real crisis to the hard arguments coming through the Hab discussion list. The oral is important because it is integral with a somatic / sensory understanding. Habermasian theory and academicism as a discursive whole does not allow us to think much (yet?) about the quality of listening and what that entails. Nor on the other hand how trauma intefers with clear thinking. This is of course part of 'therapeutic discourse' but this does seem sidelined to the much more forefronted literary discourses of critical theory. How do we conceive of the therapeutic as integral to the argument? How do we conceive of this process from within academia which is historically so framed by the traditional detachements of science and good taste? How do we understand 'listening' outside of the sytemically tied professional forms of counselling, therapy and psychoanalysis? It seems like most of the really key things that humans have to come to understandings about are surrounded by a dense and confusing cloud of painful emotions, whether these are a need to avenge the wrongs of American imperialist military arrogance or the need to revenge the outrage done to American pride and security (the families of those who have lost members do not seem the most vocal in calling for WAR with its implication of death and destruction to many more innocents) or even the ubiquitous hurts of all our early years. Any liberatory theory of communication needs to prioritise an understanding of what process we need to undertake to see through this cloud. And in a way that can be participated in by all humans on a global scale. Stefan London ---------- >From: Antti M Kauppinen <amkauppi-AT-cc.helsinki.fi> >To: habermas-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu >Subject: Re: HAB: Re: Re: Re: samizdat >Date: Fri, Sep 14, 2001, 1:19 am > --- from list habermas-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005