 |
Based on a "win-lose"
scenario where opinions are restricted to the starting positions. |
|
Functionally a process of tossing
opinions back and forth in order to see whose views "win out". |
|
The "discussion" process is
designed to narrow the options. |
|
The "discussion" is a
deliberate process designed to preserve the status quo, designated as the appropriate
option under social control-over paradigms. |
|
A discussion takes place between
parties who are not seen as equals. |
|
A discussion demands that the mental
models of each party are not put on the table for examination. |
|
Currents of selective thought are
presented. |
|
The problem most often remains or is
shifted to another problematic level. |
|
A discussion involves processes of
"shaming", "one-upsmanship" and "official think". |
|
|
The initial assumption in a dialog is
that the process should reflect both the love of truth and the pursuit
of it. |
|
The attitude reflects the view
"let the truth be what it is, whether it fits our view or not". |
|
The purpose of a dialog is to produce
something which reflects a more accurate appraisal of reality that transcends the previous
understanding of both parties in the dialog. |
|
A dialog involves temporary suspension
of our paradigms, because the love of truth means more than any one perspective. |
|
A dialog honors each party as equals. |
|
Models are put on the table for
consideration. |
|
Currents of collective thought are
explored. |
|
A dialog between parties involves a genuine
spirit of inquiry and freedom from "intellectual ranking" |
|
During dialogs, facilitators can
be employed to "hold the context" of the dialog so that all habitual processes
of "one-upsmanship" are kept at bay. |
|