Rachel, It just seems that the person gets her sense of self from her clothes, rather than it coming from herself. / Lene On 13-01-2022 14:20, Rachel Hayden wrote: > *CAUTION: *This email originated from outside of JMU. Do not click > links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the > content is safe. > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > (At the risk of being too long-winded.) > > Corinne ~ > > Thank you for the Sapolsky link! This is definitely the kind of thing > filling in the gap of the ToK's Mental Plane with regard to gender, > specifically related to the primate brain. It also points out some > complications at the biological level, when looking from a nice neat > binary point of view. > > One of the questions from a viewer indicates how often we fall into a > propositional/justificatory framework when trying to understand gender > - while Sapolsky uses the word "feel" to talk about transgender > people's experience, the questioner uses "believe." Of course people > do form beliefs about their gender, on the Culture-Person Plane, but > this is also riding on top of the stream of the Experiential Self. > There's this whole underlying Participatory Knowing, to use Vervaekian > terminology.. > > Handedness might be a good analogy - does a left-handed or > ambidextrous person "believe" they're left-handed or ambidextrous? > Well, yes, depending on their culture, but this syntactic > justification emerges from their experiences at a motor control level. > (Interestingly, culture might influence handedness at a functional > level through training someone out of their basic tendency, and > likewise I have had to unlearn certain gendered behaviors.) > Transgender people don't simply believe we are a different sex, which > would indeed be delusional at the propositional level; we are finding > a mismatch at a deep level of our optimal grip on our social > environment. I would describe this as a problem with Relational > Recursive Relevance Realization, in Vervaekian/Henriques-ian terms. > (How do you spell Henriques-ian? Ha.) This is something with tendrils > running all the way from genetics up to culture. > > Lene ~ > > Not having access to this person's Mind 2, I would like to say a few > things. One might ask why this person can't just "be a woman," within > a broader framework of womanhood. I think what we're seeing is a > "Darwinian cultural engine" that has gotten stuck. For a long time in > Modernism, the selective constraint of culture have held sway, and we > had a rigid binary. Now we also have a Post-Modern explosion of > enabling constraint from various individuals, pushing the engine in > the opposite but still stuck direction. My (limited) understanding is > that this type of engine requires opponent processing to function > dynamically, and this has not been happening, partly because we're > locked into a purely propositional understanding of things. A > Metamodernist sensibility might allow a bit of ironic detachment, > while taking seriously the complexification process of gender in > culture. At some point, then, culture would be required to do some > data compression and revise our categorical understanding as needed, > while still recognizing this as contingent. > > The ToK also comes in handy regarding this person's situation. We have > gender expression at the Culture-Person Plane, and one's felt > sense/experience of gender being contributed to strongly by the > Mental, but also recursively contributed to by > anatomical/physiological and cultural factors. So gender identity > cannot just be something one feels and then expresses, although that > is a big part of it. It doesn't exist in an individualist Romantic > vacuum. If our gender categories were different, like in some > societies, then this person's direct experience of gender would be > different to an extent, I believe. This is why the simplistic > arguments over whether clothing has gender are, well, simplistic. > > This is why I personally seek a "line of best fit" with regard to > gender. I am not really a reductionist, not even at the Mental Plane, > and culture still matters. I could have come into this conversation > with, "As someone who identifies as a bigender transfemme," and a list > of pronouns and maybe a flag decal for spice, which might be more > accurate but needlessly complicated, because my > Participatory/Perspectival knowing only demands that I find an optimal > social grip to afford my agency and aspiration. Socially speaking, > womanhood works much much better for my brain and me, and has > enormously reduced the pain of gender dysphoria. For some, a different > fit may be needed. I do share Corinne's amusement around the heavy > moralizing of this identity topic! > > I believe we are pretty far from truly understanding gender (I > certainly don't know what gender is after many years of pondering). I > think getting some structural clarity, and respect for what seems like > a complex issue, will go a long way toward understanding. > > Thanks much! I really appreciate the conversation. My current > understanding has also been informed by direct conversations with John > Vervaeke and Gregg, which I also tremendously appreciate. > > Best, > R > > > > > > On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 12:26 AM Diop, Corinne - diopcj > <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > > Hi Lene, > > My read is that the discomfort is because being called Camille or > wearing a dress can be misunderstood as signs of a binary feminine > identity that doesn't encompass who she/they really are, and that > acknowledgement of her/their nonbinary nature, by themself and by > others, is considered as important. (People nearing the end of > their 20's think it matters that other people know who they are, > like it would be /immoral/ to allow a misread, lol.) > > I heard about Robert Sapolsky somewhere in one of these threads. I > appreciate his no-nonsense approach to this kind of discussion > about sex/gender, as in this video: > > > Robert Sapolsky: Brain Gender > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.youtube.com_watch-3Fv-3D-2DnsQDX-5FOHNE&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=clpN0s8_Cj_VV9IiN7O6ZePg0b3eyn3KPNj961ANKWA&s=plZTE2HqAw2vOZxcbzG3tn5ubR_5XrhUUH2E9-eADOk&e=> > > Warm Regards, > Corinne > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *From:* theory of knowledge society discussion > <[log in to unmask]> on behalf of Lene Rachel Andersen > <[log in to unmask]> > *Sent:* Wednesday, January 12, 2022 11:06 PM > *To:* [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]> > *Subject:* Re: TOK Postmodernism Is Not Inherently Anti-science > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Here is a young woman who is struggling with her identity: > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.huffpost.com_entry_nonbinary-2Dgender-2Drepresentation-5Fn-5F61b8d864e4b06621e42b4b15&d=DwIDaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=P268DJn4g6ezLcqpFbrIaPDXjKjRwGFtJ4_CqUkqLUI&s=WFdwUeOOydC1f7eMYSViplWAtmdaaJvPd8uXv2WoVtA&e= > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.huffpost.com_entry_nonbinary-2Dgender-2Drepresentation-5Fn-5F61b8d864e4b06621e42b4b15&d=DwMDaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=Bgj_mtbPPMvqes5KOegAPm6mSIwm4GWOvZs8fz9dj78&s=aywA9susu-y8YuvtMrkQrvDEaK6ZhpG9FsmDxZ2ZP94&e=>; > can anybody tell what she is actually struggling with? It almost > seems like she gets her identity from her clothes rather than her > having an identity that she expresses through how she dresses; how > do you read it? > > Warmly, > > Lene > > > On 13-01-2022 01:23, Rachel Hayden wrote: >> *CAUTION: *This email originated from outside of JMU. Do not >> click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender >> and know the content is safe. >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> Hello T.R. ~ >> >> Oh, taking estrogen along with testosterone blockers (and >> possibly progesterone) for a significant length of time will >> absolutely diminish muscle mass, especially upper body muscle >> mass, and add fat, along with a host of other changes no typical >> man would want, related I believe to what you refer to as 'sexy.' >> However, I share your concerns about unfair advantages from >> lingering muscle mass, along with bone mass, height, etc. in >> trans women, and I don't think it's okay to just say someone born >> male is a woman now and can compete with women, without serious >> examination of the issue, which I don't think has rightly been >> done. I personally think that raising these concerns is >> justified, and I have done so in other forums. I also share your >> concerns about a black-and-white mentality with regard to this >> issue. Of course, this also relates to issues of whether natal >> women or intersex women who have abnormally high levels of >> testosterone should compete with men, or vice-versa. >> >> I certainly don't have the answers, especially as a >> non-scientist. Fortunately, I find serious competition in sports >> kind of silly, so I have no skin in that particular game. My own >> wrists and arms are tiny compared to what they used to be, >> despite increased weight training, but for me it's all about the >> enjoyment. >> >> Best, >> R >> >> On Wed, Jan 12, 2022 at 2:56 PM T.R. Pickerill >> <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >> >> *CAUTION: *This email originated from outside of JMU. Do not >> click links or open attachments unless you recognize the >> sender and know the content is safe. >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.washingtonpost.com_sports_2022_01_10_lia-2Dthomas-2Dpenn-2Dtransgender-2Dswimmer_&d=DwIDaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=P268DJn4g6ezLcqpFbrIaPDXjKjRwGFtJ4_CqUkqLUI&s=JzE1Omzyl2f5rytF2ir-ylVw2vHaL1WV-3GMupwNXpM&e= >> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.washingtonpost.com_sports_2022_01_10_lia-2Dthomas-2Dpenn-2Dtransgender-2Dswimmer_&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=svoMr-Eo1wttCRx9AehZmeE6DC4t7okRkuzKZr3Oy1M&s=v63p08n6a4Dhf-XayzWBwzJhyMyV1AasCh43GeZsXNo&e=> >> >> As a former athlete I would agree that this is very unfair to >> the women, changing your ‘sexy’ does not change your bone or >> muscle structure. I really don't see why trans rights, which >> I support, has to be something that hurts or infringes on >> women's rights. No reason why a man can't transition to a >> female and still compete in men's sports. The political and >> social climate however seems to insist on all or nothing, >> nuclear option, you are either with us or you are against us >> mentality with very little room for nuance, gray zones or >> attention to fairness and decency. >> >> On Wed, Jan 12, 2022 at 2:43 PM Nicholas Lattanzio >> <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >> >> *CAUTION: *This email originated from outside of JMU. Do >> not click links or open attachments unless you recognize >> the sender and know the content is safe. >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> I second all of what Gregg said there. Not everyone may >> be ready for metamodernism, but you seem to be embodying >> it. Anything that you do in your life from a metamodern >> place of wisdom will be a tremendous accomplishment, and >> I hope you give yourself credit for that. >> >> >> Regards, >> >> Nicholas G. Lattanzio, Psy.D. >> >> On Wed, Jan 12, 2022, 1:04 PM Henriques, Gregg - henriqgx >> <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >> >> This is brilliant stuff, Rachel. Really. I mean I so >> appreciate your capacity to take these really >> complex, arcane academic ideas and internalize them >> and apply them to real issues in the real world with >> real consequences. Warms my heart. >> >> And I love what you say here about your community and >> what kind of healthy leadership, vision and values is >> necessary to ensure, justice, dignity, and well-being >> with integrity. >> >> Best, >> >> G >> >> *From:* theory of knowledge society discussion >> <[log in to unmask]> *On Behalf Of >> *Rachel Hayden >> *Sent:* Wednesday, January 12, 2022 1:52 PM >> *To:* [log in to unmask] >> *Subject:* Re: TOK Postmodernism Is Not Inherently >> Anti-science >> >> *CAUTION: *This email originated from outside of JMU. >> Do not click links or open attachments unless you >> recognize the sender and know the content is safe. >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> Nicholas and Gregg ~ >> >> Thank you very much. I really appreciate that. >> >> I actually think I'd be terrible at writing a book >> about transgender science. This is because 1) I'm not >> trained as a scientist or clinician, and 2) I learned >> just enough about this issue to recognize that, while >> the specifics of the research may turn out to be >> wrong, there was enough convergent evidence to make a >> naturalistic case for some kind of neurobiological >> factor, and that I should proceed with transition on >> that basis. Having learned that, I also realized that >> this type of empirical knowledge couldn't tell me >> much about how to transition, a much more of an >> aspirational, developmental process which must >> include the Culture-Person plane of the ToK - finding >> a sort of "line of best fit" between biology, mind, >> culture, and the transcendent, similar I think to >> Gregg's wisdom stack. So I turned to John Vervaeke, >> who also pointed me toward L.A. Paul and Agnes >> Callard's work on transformation, which helped >> immensely in actualizing the real potential of >> becoming someone with a different set of values and >> salience landscape. Finding Gregg's work later helped >> to put all of my thoughts around this complex issue >> into a more organized format (go figure), which has >> become useful in guiding others toward greater >> reflectiveness. >> >> I would like to write some sort of book around this >> topic, however, perhaps in conjunction with someone >> with a science background. What I would want to do is >> create a better model for gender transition than the >> "decadent Romantic" projections of some kind of >> hypersubjective self, currently in vogue in the trans >> community, and related to general confusion, anger, >> and mental distress in the trans population, not to >> mention this "trans-trender" issue. I'm envisioning >> something like a Hitchhiker's Guide to Your Gender. I >> think that concepts like opponent processing >> machinery between the selective constraints of >> culture and the enabling constraints of individual >> neurobiology/mental idiosyncrasy could be very useful >> for some, as they have been for me, if they were >> explained in accessible ways. Hopefully this would >> help people avoid simplistic ideological dead-ends, >> for example, the tedious binary debate around whether >> clothing has gender or not. Of course, UToK has a lot >> to offer in terms of structuring one's understanding >> (Tree of Knowledge, Experiential/Private/Public >> Selves, etc.). >> >> Best, >> >> R >> >> On Tue, Jan 11, 2022 at 7:24 PM Nicholas Lattanzio >> <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >> >> *CAUTION: *This email originated from outside of >> JMU. Do not click links or open attachments >> unless you recognize the sender and know the >> content is safe. >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> I got way more than I thought I would >> response-wise here. >> >> Lee and Gregg, >> >> Lee, too your point, there are brute facts that >> are still not clearly understood and distinctions >> unmade with clashing social constructs (e.g., >> Columbus statues being taken down being fought >> over because two sides are asserting competing >> narratives as if they are brute facts). So for me >> personally Gregg, I agree with JUST and the ToK >> metamodernism but I can only accept it as a >> theory of ontology until it actually happens, and >> to me it's pretty clear we aren't there yet >> culturally if we have this much apperceive >> baggage attached to all our narratives. To me its >> literally that we have not yet lost our ego on >> the culture plane, and non have truly transcended >> it until we all do. >> >> How we actually get there is a different >> discussion, and I like what Lee's doing and what >> Brandon N is doing. We are seeing the relative >> value of various theoretical systems with values >> and competing forces through that work (and I >> didn't mean to call you out in my OP Lee! I was >> moreso referencing undertones I've seen). >> >> Rachel, >> >> I hope you're doing some writing cuz you got some >> serious knowledge and being fortunate enough to >> possess information literacy, I appreciate the >> degree of brute facts you just dropped on us. >> That's the kind of stuff I want to know that >> helps me clinically work with my transgender >> clients. I need to know what's biological and >> what isn't because if anything is going to define >> any of my beliefs it's that, I can't hold someone >> responsible for their genes, after all. So please >> publish a book or something the market is raw and >> ready for a book like that! Or just write and >> send me info I can use, either is fine.😅 >> >> TR, >> >> I'll have to read your response through a couple >> of times to better respond because you also pack >> a ton of knowledge into what you say. I'm just >> too disorganized of a thinker to really >> understand your writing style after just one pass. >> >> Regards, >> >> Nicholas G. Lattanzio, Psy.D. >> >> On Tue, Jan 11, 2022, 6:07 PM Henriques, Gregg - >> henriqgx <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >> >> Thanks so much for this, Rachel. >> >> Brilliantly stated. >> >> Best, >> >> Gregg >> >> Sent from my iPad >> >> >> >> On Jan 11, 2022, at 6:31 PM, Rachel >> Hayden <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >> >> *CAUTION: *This email originated from >> outside of JMU. Do not click links or >> open attachments unless you recognize the >> sender and know the content is safe. >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> I agree with Lee that the transgender >> issue often takes one side of the "brute >> facts" biology vs. social constructivist >> argument. This corresponds to the ToK's >> biological and culture/person planes of >> existence, and sort of a modernist vs. >> postmodernist cultural war. So you have >> binary biology (albeit with quirks), >> pitted against an understanding that >> various cultures across the world have >> exhibited what would be described as >> "transgender" by our culture, combined >> with a sort of critique of patriarchy, etc. >> >> What often gets left out in this is the >> animal/mental. I'm not a scientist, but >> in the interest of trying to understand >> how my own transgender nature came to be, >> I followed scientists like >> biopsychologist Dana Bevins, Alexandra >> Hall, Robert Sapolsky, and others. What I >> learned is that for transgender people, >> there are factors like genetic gender >> behavioral predispositions and >> non-interference of epigenetics which >> translate to changes in the brains of >> transgender people. Evidence for this >> includes genetic analyses, identical vs. >> fraternal twin studies, links between >> handedness and trans people, 2nd to 4th >> digit ratios, differences in sense of >> smell (prior to hormone treatment), and >> MRI studies. While there has been debate >> about MRI studies on the hypothalamic >> basal nucleus of the stria terminalis >> (BNST), due to possible interference from >> hormone therapy (not sure where this >> debate ended up), differences in >> transgender brains have been noted in >> other areas, such as the putamen, corpus >> callosum, the insula, and the >> corticospinal tract. >> >> I would hope that the inclusion of the >> mental plane would correspond to revised, >> somewhat metamodernist-linked >> understanding which could create some >> space around this and many issues. >> >> Best, >> >> R >> >> On Tue, Jan 11, 2022 at 2:15 PM >> Henriques, Gregg - henriqgx >> <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >> >> Love this conversation and I will not >> add much, but let me just make a note >> that is very relevant to UTOK: >> >> JUST and the ToK System complete >> change this debate. That is, from a >> UTOK perspective, the modern versus >> postmodern debate about knowledge is >> woefully inadequate and poorly framed >> and unresolvable precisely because we >> were missing the necessary pieces. >> >> JUST gives an ontology, a metatheory >> of how knowledge is socially >> constructed. That is completely >> novel, and if you do not have that, >> everything is confused. So JUST is a >> game changer when it comes to the >> social construction of knowledge, >> because it is an ontological theory >> of that knowledge construction. >> >> Then, you get the ToK System advance, >> and that is a game changer also. >> >> So, UTOK clearly gives a metamodern >> sensibility that includes and >> transcends via fundamentally new >> theoretical advances that allow us to >> clean up, clear up and grow up from >> the modern versus postmodern >> confusions regarding the nature of >> human knowledge. That is, if you >> aren’t looking at the modern versus >> postmodern issues via JUST and the >> ToK, you are not looking at them >> clearly. >> >> >> Best, >> Gregg >> >> *From:* theory of knowledge society >> discussion >> <[log in to unmask]> *On >> Behalf Of *lee simplyquality.org >> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__simplyquality.org&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=LFM0nLSfbC-jXV8CctKjRFes9TMn1PHGgRkPUR0f2oE&s=fOU14EQBXub0HGDxbR0jYzZqWspViy1h5C81FEUcCew&e=> >> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 11, 2022 2:10 PM >> *To:* [log in to unmask] >> *Subject:* Re: TOK Postmodernism Is >> Not Inherently Anti-science >> >> *CAUTION: *This email originated from >> outside of JMU. Do not click links or >> open attachments unless you recognize >> the sender and know the content is safe. >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> Nik, >> >> Thanks for this. >> >> Here is my simplistic explanation of >> how I see postmodernism. (And yes, I >> am aware I included column “A” in the >> spreadsheet, and shared my ontology >> on this list). >> >> When I was in grade school we learned >> that: 1) Christopher Columbus >> discovered America, 2) He was a hero >> for doing so, and 3) The world is a >> much better place as a result of his >> discovery. This is a (coherent) >> narrative that is comfortable for >> European Americans to hear. A >> valuable postmodern contribution is >> to recognize that this is only one of >> many possible narratives emerging >> from the interpretation of events, >> and this particular narrative is >> advanced by those in power as a way >> of maintaining power. All of this is >> true. I am critical of postmodernism >> whenever it suggests that “all we >> have is stories, these are all made >> up, go make up your own story, they >> all have equal veracity and value.” >> This is not true. >> >> A key skill in navigating this >> territory is to keep in mind the >> distinction between “brut facts” and >> “Social Constructs”. >> >> See: Exploring Social Constructs >> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wikiversity.org_wiki_Exploring-5FSocial-5FConstructs&d=DwMGaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=IdYu726FU31tcbpPR-eYYDI1T0vDDXcZZFFi9fPRw-g&s=uvx2rmxjXluyPk37bfZmFxTWeVovqwVRe7xfPLdShw0&e=> >> >> With respect to Columbus, the brute >> facts are: 1) A person know as >> Christopher Columbus existed at the >> time. 2) He was on one of three ships >> that travelled from Europe to >> Hispaniola in the year 1492. 3) This >> was a big deal to his European >> sponsors. 4) Colonization began soon >> after, 5) Perhaps millions of >> indigenous people died, 6) Many >> people in North America claim to own >> land, 7) Various history books tell >> selected portions of this story using >> various narrative themes. >> >> Both brute facts (as described above) >> and a variety of social constructs >> (celebrating Columbus Day, various >> celebrations (and protests), many >> stories, books, and text books, …) exist. >> >> This distinction between brute fact >> and social construct is in play now >> in transgender discussions. >> >> Gregg was very helpful in reminding >> us that (the brute facts of sex) sex >> (at birth) is bi-modal, not binary. >> >> Transgender advocates are correct in >> observing that many customs and >> traditions we associate with gender >> (e.g. pink is for girls, …) are >> social constructs, likely advanced by >> those in power to stay in power. The >> discussion gets heated when either >> the brute facts or the social >> constructs are denied or distorted. >> >> Thebirther theories >> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wikipedia.org_wiki_Barack-5FObama-5Fcitizenship-5Fconspiracy-5Ftheories&d=DwMGaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=IdYu726FU31tcbpPR-eYYDI1T0vDDXcZZFFi9fPRw-g&s=ggAEXDUHHyRoVzQMvM_szoumfkaKMQ5FfDruqSA_2bY&e=> (and >> now the “big lie”) are other examples >> of how narratives can be advanced by >> powerful people to gain power, test >> loyalty, or for some other personal >> gain. (And I hope it goes without >> saying that I don’t consider Trump to >> be a postmodern theorist.) >> >> I hope this is clear, accurate, >> useful, and respectful. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Lee Beaumont >> >> On Jan 11, 2022, at 12:01 PM, >> Nicholas Lattanzio >> <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >> >> hat mode >> >> ############################ >> >> 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> >> >> >> ############################ >> >> 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> >> >> >> ############################ >> >> 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> >> > -- > *Lene Rachel Andersen* > Futurist, economist, author & keynote speaker > President of Nordic Bildung and co-founder of the European Bildung > Network > Full member of the Club of Rome > *Nordic Bildung* > Vermlandsgade 51, 2300 Copenhagen S, Denmark > www.nordicbildung.org > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.nordicbildung.org&d=DwMDaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=Bgj_mtbPPMvqes5KOegAPm6mSIwm4GWOvZs8fz9dj78&s=7Y2wC9B0HZny66oih6LjohohEVqcMchSa4fD0NgGkY4&e=> > +45 28 96 42 40 > ############################ > > 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> > -- *Lene Rachel Andersen* Futurist, economist, author & keynote speaker President of Nordic Bildung and co-founder of the European Bildung Network Full member of the Club of Rome *Nordic Bildung* Vermlandsgade 51, 2300 Copenhagen S, Denmark www.nordicbildung.org +45 28 96 42 40 ############################ 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