Ah, then we struggle to find common ground, as Mike Mascolo discussed.  But, that is a learned skill and not innate in our species.  I don’t know if you heard Mike’s presentation.  But, simplistically put, it consists of looking at positions we take and which we place in contrast with those of “the other” and find what is it that we and “the other” need.  Then, each searching for how we and they might fulfill those needs.  If we are able to do so, then we have a means of interacting that is potentially cooperative rather than being based upon conflicting and non-negotiable positions.  I believe that is how one might find a way around an inability to participate in “reasoned disclosure.

It is often difficult to bring about and doing so is made easier by practice.

Those, by the way, are Mike’s concepts, not mine, and I acknowledge fully his authorship.
I find that it is not what I want to default to automatically - I must carefully think about what is going on inside of me and consciously decide to seek common ground.

Hope that helps.
I’m no expert at this, by any means, but know from experience that I do better when I try the path of seeking common ground.

Best regards,

Waldemar

Waldemar A Schmidt, PhD, MD
(Perseveret et Percipiunt)
503.631.8044

Strive not to be a success, but rather to be of value. (A Einstein)

> On Jun 23, 2020, at 8:29 PM, Christopher Hadnagy <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> 
> Waldemar,
>  
> I cannot argue the sentiment but what if the ability to accept reasoned disclosure doesn’t exist?
>  
>  
> From: tree of knowledge system discussion <[log in to unmask]> on behalf of Waldemar Schmidt <[log in to unmask]>
> Reply-To: tree of knowledge system discussion <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Tuesday, June 23, 2020 at 11:25 PM
> To: "[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Transdisciplinary Philosophy of Science Paradigm
>  
> Chris: the power of reasoned discourse is greater than that of denial.
>  
> Waldemar A Schmidt, PhD, MD
> (Perseveret et Percipiunt)
> 503.631.8044
> 
> Strive not to be a success, but rather to be of value. (A Einstein)
> 
> 
>> On Jun 23, 2020, at 6:57 PM, Christopher Hadnagy <[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>>  
>> I am not nearly as smart or educated as most in this group. But this topic resonates with me.  I see this from both angles.  This new society has helped us be more loving and understanding of those who have differences, whether that is sexual preference or beliefs etc.  Go back to the 70-80’s and it was such a different world.
>>  
>> At the same time this new generation MUST be so accepting of anything I feel it actually hurts us in many ways. There is so much fear to say or do the wrong thing that often times I feel the power of healthy debate is ruined.  Just the other day I had a conversation with my daughter about the difference in a true BLM movement and the looting and rioting we see.  And she was quick to label me as a “privileged white male with no understanding”.  All I tried to do was make a point that after hundreds of years of oppression and hurt you can truly try to empathize with the pain and suffering and legitimate anger of those now fearing law enforcement.  But that does not justify burning, looting and ruing the lives of people of any color that were not part of those atrocities. 
>>  
>> Times of open debate where you can walk away and knowingly disagree with out being disagreeable seem to have ended.  I had this fascinating conversation with a teacher in a university here where she had to change survey’s she sent out cause they had “male/female” choices and those who were trans got upset. So she added that. Then the nonbinaries got upset. So she added that. Then there was the pans and others… the end result was out of sheer exhaustion she just threw it away and no longer sends it.
>>  
>> Anyhow, even in writing this I am so worried that I am saying something that seems insensitive and wrong.
>>  
>> All of this to say, I read your email and I agree – we are losing this ability and I feel it is just going to hurt us not help us.
>> Chris
>>  
>>  
>>  
>> From: tree of knowledge system discussion <[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> on behalf of Liz Swan <[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
>> Reply-To: tree of knowledge system discussion <[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
>> Date: Tuesday, June 23, 2020 at 12:19 PM
>> To: "[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>" <[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
>> Subject: Re: Transdisciplinary Philosophy of Science Paradigm
>>  
>> Andrea,
>>  
>> As an American, I certainly like your view of Americans and think we sometimes sort of live up to it... 
>>  
>> A friend sent me this article from NYT today <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.nytimes.com_2020_06_22_opinion_trump-2Dprotest-2Dgen-2Dz.html-3FreferringSource-3DarticleShare&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=ojq0cmMR9dlHXwjQnkZ37DJSQmVZmtAwIWhyfih0IS8&s=5DS9g0j0V9zUod9xicM7jZC64i3_091EsZWrY26ce0Q&e=>. My worry is that the American spirit of being able to engage and discuss and argue intellectually might be eroding in younger generations (those in college now). My students at CU Boulder are extremely uncomfortable in casual, meant to be fun debates in the classroom, tiptoe around or altogether avoid difficult subjects like race, and I've heard instructors say they too "shut down" uncomfortable discussions in the classroom so no one gets hurt. It's viscerally disturbing to me. 
>>  
>> I like your version of "the American way" much more and think it's ultimately more productive in getting ideas on the table for rejection or negotiation. 
>>  
>> Liz
>>  
>> 
>> LIZ SWAN, PHD
>>  
>> Psychology Today <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.psychologytoday.com_us_experts_liz-2Dstillwaggon-2Dswan-2Dphd&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=ojq0cmMR9dlHXwjQnkZ37DJSQmVZmtAwIWhyfih0IS8&s=k8Aa7HKbbzsP4vzyVFDB2RjliYl_qPArHbsGZSPtpNY&e=> blogs: "The Philosopher is In" and "College Confidential"
>> Swan Real Estate LLC <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>> 200-Hour RYT Yoga Instructor
>>  
>>  
>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 9:24 AM Andrea Zagaria <[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>>> Mmm. It`s sad when people are not interested in fostering a dialogue.
>>>  
>>> As a European myself, I have to acknowledge an important fact: we may have a great philosophical tradition, but often we are very narrow minded and we are not very able to connect theory with practice.
>>> The "american way", in this regard, is very much better. Better communication, better connection between theory and practice, more clarity in explanations. Many europeans think, often unconsciously, the more obscure you are, the more profound. They also like idiosyncrasies and the ego_biased tendecy to the paternity of a theory, rather than its content. Such an idiocy. 
>>> That is the reason why, in my opinion, Lacanian psychoanalysis has many followers in Europe, much less in America (at least as far as I know).
>>>  
>>>  
>>> Andrea 
>>>  
>>>  
>>> Il mar 23 giu 2020 16:18 Henriques, Gregg - henriqgx <[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> ha scritto:
>>>> Hi Andrea,
>>>>   Yes, I am familiar with her work. It is interesting and I tried to engage her in an exchange to see the overlap between our systems. She was a reviewer of the Periodic Table of Behavior paper. My take was that there were clear ways to line up our visions (although I did note to myself that there appeared to be a problematic dualism that you note). Anyway, she did not seem terribly interested in fostering a dialogue. She was not a fan of how I was connecting to behaviorism and she did not feel like I had done my homework on European theorists. At least that was my read. Joe M. was in on the exchange. He can pipe in if he sees it differently.
>>>>  
>>>> Anyway, I think she has developed a cool system. I just don’t think it quite goes deep enough into the descriptive metaphysical issues of mind and matter to get quite the right lay of the land.
>>>>  
>>>> Best,
>>>> Gregg
>>>>  
>>>> From: tree of knowledge system discussion <[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> On Behalf Of Andrea Zagaria
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2020 9:27 AM
>>>> To: [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>>>> Subject: Transdisciplinary Philosophy of Science Paradigm
>>>>  
>>>> Hi TOK list, 
>>>> As my target article about evolutionary psychology as a meta-theory continues to be commented on, I bumped into a comment by Jana Uher. 
>>>> She developed a unifying framework named TPS-P (Transdisciplinary Philosophy of Science Paradigm for  Research on Individuals) Here a link for a summary: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__researchonindividuals.org_&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=CRcGTlHYL9OMfWWNXgmFChNPWNWx8XK2mz8N1F6_srQ&s=_-Eofte28lk8OoDaFH8FNr7H5WWDFXb6wdt74WyB_Hk&e=  <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__researchonindividuals.org_&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=PteCbF0_3SxYaCXICP5v7TZuEkSegG4Wve5qaszPOs8&s=ue8DIMAoaBDPSljWFGn0PKlYnHPRyaMgoovlsVqv6rE&e=>
>>>> I still have to study it properly, for now what I find not convincing is her characterization of psychical vs physical, with spatiality as a defining feature of physical and not of psychical. It seems, to my eyes, a classic dualistic cartesian distinction: RES COGITANS (mind) vs RES EXTENSA (matter). (https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__researchonindividuals.org_tps-2Dparadigm-5Fmetatheoretical.htm&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=CRcGTlHYL9OMfWWNXgmFChNPWNWx8XK2mz8N1F6_srQ&s=xaNmlmXWpnT4pKWd8HeIIzCkjFwMTbd8qIKyFWK4I10&e=  <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__researchonindividuals.org_tps-2Dparadigm-5Fmetatheoretical.htm&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=PteCbF0_3SxYaCXICP5v7TZuEkSegG4Wve5qaszPOs8&s=9GUmoJJG6dA4ncoz_j1cuSWAYHuPoJpN6zPUxFPGkQ4&e=>)
>>>>  
>>>> As Gregg points out, thinking about the ultimate unit of physics as matter is now out-dated;  it is better to think of Energy-Matter-Information.
>>>>  
>>>> Are you familiar with her work? Any thoughts about it? 
>>>>  
>>>> Andrea
>>>>  
>>>> P.S. I found out this morning that also Mike (Mascolo) published a commentary on my article. I just looked over it, and still have to read it properly, but thanks Mike….
>>>> ############################
>>>> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask] <mailto:mailto:[log in to unmask]> or click the following link:http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1 <http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1>
>>>> ############################ 
>>>> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask] <mailto:mailto:[log in to unmask]> or click the following link:http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1 <http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1>
>>> ############################ 
>>> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask] <mailto:mailto:[log in to unmask]> or click the following link:http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1 <http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1>
>> ############################ 
>> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask] <mailto:mailto:[log in to unmask]> or click the following link:http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1 <http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1>
>> All information transmitted hereby is intended only for the use of the addressee(s) named above and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution of confidential and privileged information is prohibited. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient(s) or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you must not read this transmission and that disclosure, copying, printing, distribution or use of any of the information contained in or attached to this transmission is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately notify the sender by return e-mail and delete the original transmission and its attachments without reading or saving in any manner. Thank you. ############################
>> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask] <mailto:mailto:[log in to unmask]> or click the following link:http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1 <http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1>
>  
> ############################ 
> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask] <mailto:mailto:[log in to unmask]> or click the following link:http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1 <http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1>All information transmitted hereby is intended only for the use of the addressee(s) named above and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution of confidential and privileged information is prohibited. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient(s) or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you must not read this transmission and that disclosure, copying, printing, distribution or use of any of the information contained in or attached to this transmission is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately notify the sender by return e-mail and delete the original transmission and its attachments without reading or saving in any manner. Thank you. ############################
> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask] <mailto:mailto:[log in to unmask]> or click the following link:http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1 <http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1>

############################

To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list:
write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]
or click the following link:
http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1