Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2003 19:09:22 -0600
Subject: Re: silence
From: Nathaniel Kuster <cperezh-AT-juno.com>


All,

There must be more ways to communicate than through speaking.  I heard
recently that only 7 percent of what we communicate is communicated
through speech.  Does anyone have the source for this information?

Nathaniel

On Fri, 28 Mar 2003 22:46:54 -0600 Eric <ericandmary-AT-earthlink.net>
writes:
> Steve,
> 
> Maybe I am misunderstanding you, but if you are implying a 
> distinction
> between speaking out as a positive good and silence as acquiescence 
> and
> therefore a negative bad, I don't think we have opened the field 
> wide
> enough to give silence its due philosophically.
> 
> I think we also need to consider what might be called the 
> intractable
> nature of silence, the extent to which it forms a kind of limit
> condition. There is a feeling that even after everything is said 
> and
> done, there still remains something unsaid and undone, and this is
> precisely what I mean by the intractable nature of silence.  Simply 
> put,
> you can't say everything - every articulation of speech remains at 
> least
> partially confined to the conditions of time and space and culture 
> from
> which it first emerged.
> 
> There is a mute legacy of silence which remains inexhaustible. It 
> is
> like a sea into which each of us must dip at times in order to 
> replenish
> ourselves.  It is because of this primordial situation that no one 
> ever
> has the last word.  There remains a linking joined by a silence 
> which is
> not merely an acquiescence, but a remainder and a reminder that not
> everything has been already said.
> 
> Silence is the space around words that makes new thoughts possible.
> Otherwise, everything would be merely repetition.
> 
> Lucretius called it atoms and void.  I am calling it words and 
> silence.
> 
> eric
> 
> 
> 

________________________________________________________________
Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today
Only $9.95 per month!
Visit www.juno.com