Ways of Talking cont.
“That happens in the world
which we often witness in public
debate.
Each of the speakers expresses
himself imperfectly; no one of them
hears much that another says,
such is the preoccupation of
the mind of each;
and the audience who have only
to hear and not to speak, judge
very wisely and superiorly how
wrongheaded and unskillful is
each of the debatersto his own
affair.”
(Emerson, "Nominalist and Realist")
There, that right there, what Emerson
is saying, is the beauty of ongoing
sustainable argument, yes? I check you,
you check me, and the chorus of
spectators checks us both.
How else other wise could I risk my
over-statements & under, half- baked
and burning noggin notions, images and
idiotic point of view?
It makes a difference whether I frame
Emerson’s observation as mere description
(how-IT-is) or, on the other hand, as
judgment if not condemnation: that IT
might be otherwise as if I could better able
express HAP happening hap-ily all by myself
perfectly and also listen to what others say free
from my bias & belief systems, prejudice and
convictions not to mention my terms of desire
always re-configuring if not reforming what the
OTHER says even as it's being said while the
chorus of impartial Howard Cosel commentators
like Jane Goodalls watching our monkey business
stand ready to give badly needed Olympian,
impartial criticism and advice. The committee
of the Whole.
College! Got to love it.
Sustainable & Sustaining
Converse action. Or you
characterize it your way.
Improve my terms and
images.
No comments:
Post a Comment