3 ms·

Only half sarcastic: These blowhard academics are so accustomed to having conversation only to prove they are right and their partner is wrong, when they hit o

• xtian 7y ago
  Bohm was not a blowhard in the slightest.
• jfengel 7y ago
  A big difference between Bohm Dialogue and "normal human conversation" is the size of the group. Bohm recommended 20 to 40. It's rarely done with groups that big, but it is significantly different than the "normal human conversation" around a dinner table of 4 people, or perhaps up to 8. Ordinary conversations larger than that tend to break into different groups, in which each person spends a larger percentage of their time talking and less time listening. Bohm Dialogue is mostly about listening, not conversing. You don't have to "hold up your end" of it, which (supposedly) makes it easier to suspend judgment and engage. It does resemble casual conversation in a lot of other ways, including its free-form nature and the goal of engagement rather than defense. But the numbers change it in kind, not just in size.
• dang 7y ago
  "Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html