James Fischer writes:

> What happened was that anyone with
> divergent views felt that the big campfire was not for them, and millions of
> tiny campfires were created, around which like-minded folks gathered to
> reinforce their pre-existing biases and exclude anyone who disagreed.

It all comes down, I think, to scale, and what size group can be
sustained for what purpose.  Some years ago I started to read a book
called "Human Scale", by Kirkpatrick Sale (Coward 1980).  My notes say
I got as far as page 316 before I ran out of steam and returned the
book to the library - not being a social scientist, I found the book
rather heavy, in more than just a physical sense.  ;-)

I definitely see more questions than answers with respect to how a
"group" as large as everyone on the planet (or even, everyone rich
enough to have access to the net) can meaningfully interact!

But, on to your statement that has me concerned:

> Anyone still employed by an institution in any professional
> capacity cannot educate us with their own personal experience, as they risk
> sparking "argument" from a beekeeper, and no matter how hard one tries, one
> can never explain without seeming condescending to someone. So, institutions
> now prohibit wide swaths of people from participating in public forums of
> any sort. 

Which institutions are making such rules, and for whom?  Isn't the
whole point of tenure to make it possible for professors to engage in
enquiry precisely without the threat of being fired or muzzled?


Anne, backyard beekeeper, Montreal.

             ***********************************************
The BEE-L mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software.  For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html