Talk:Bohm Dialogue

message: (article was kept post-rewrite)
* Delete. Nothing could possibly redeem this article... It's a primary source quoted in part, no wikification, not even a definition. Pteron 22:28, 15 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  From VfD 

message: *I appreciate the rewrite. It is clear and helpful put in context of David Bohm, specifically, and not as an attempt to define "dialogue" per se. Nancy Glock-Grueneich Oct. 13, 2005
* Delete.  It's an ad for one guy's book, replete with a sign-up email list for new customers.  What makes this noteworthy? Brainhell 04:05, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Follow-up comments

message: If Bohm Dialogue is important outside the subject of Bohm himself, it is how "Bohm Dialogue" is used in today's world.  The best example of this is Peter Senge: http://www.ullerymanagement.com/art_of_dialogue.htm , BUT this IS what the rest of us Dialogue-fans mean when we say "Bohm Dialogue."  We don't mean his "30-Man Meeting," we mean the principles of his communication theory that can be used with organizations today:
*Group memebers doing dialogue suspend judgement on other people's ideas.
*This allows new ideas to emerge, since people aren't worried about their ideas getting attacked.
*This suspension of judgment allows people to build on ideas they otherwise would have rejected, opening up new possibilities in the conversation.
*Having this kind of conversation on a regular basis allows people a much more realistic view of what that organization needs.  In otherwords, dialogue more than anything else is for a whole-group-of-people to learn about it's self. It's a whole-organization mirror.
An example of how someone might use this kind of theory in todays world is the forming of collectives, like worker coops for example: http://mail.antiochsea.edu/~benjamin_galbraith/ .  --BFGalbraith 18:09, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Usage

message: Hello - here is the proposed replacement of the first two paragraphs in the article Bohm Dialogue. The online group was dissatisfied with the phrase "existing form of free association", which prompted the change. Am looking forward to comments.
"Bohm Dialogue” or “Bohmian Dialogue” is a freely-flowing group conversation that may well be one of the most effective ways of investigating the crises that face society, and indeed the whole of human nature and consciousness. Twenty to forty participants sit in a circle, for a few hours during regular meetings, or for a few days in a workshop environment. This is done with no predefined purpose in mind other than that of inquiring into the movement of thought, and exploring the process of “thinking together” collectively. This activity can allow group participants to examine their preconceptions and prejudices, as well as to explore the more general movement of thought. Bohm’s intention regarding the suggested minimum number of participants was to replicate a social/cultural dynamic (rather than a family dynamic). This form of dialogue seeks to enable an awareness of why communicating in the verbal sphere is so much more difficult and conflict-ridden than in all other areas of human activity and endeavor.
Participants in the Bohmian form of dialogue "suspend" their beliefs, opinions, impulses, and judgments while speaking together, in order to see the movement of the group’s thought processes and what their effects may be. According to Dialogue a Proposal [Bohm, Factor, Garrett], this kind of dialogue should not be confused with discussion or debate, both of which, says Bohm, suggest working towards a goal or reaching a decision, rather than simply exploring and learning. Meeting without an agenda or fixed objective is done to create a “free space” for something new to happen.
“. . . it may turn out that such a form of free exchange of ideas and information is of fundamental relevance for transforming culture and freeing it of destructive misinformation, so that creativity can be liberated." David Bohm
Ahalani (talk) 19:15, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Comment Since no-one has apposed your changes ...I would go ahead and make the changes ...BUT you will need references to do that!! /...Buzzzsherman (talk) 20:17, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Comment Horrible = extremely unpleasant; deplorable; disgusting. I'm curious, do you say this because you are a student of Bohm Dialogue and find the article is inaccurate?; are you unfamilar with dialoge and find the concept weird?; are you a writer and find the style and structure inelegant, or...?  (seeking article improvement rather than dismissal) D1doherty (talk) 20:59, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bohm Dialogue proposed changes 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Bohm Dialogue. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120326195557/http://www.boundary.org/bi/ANPA_West/PDF/V7-1_1997.pdf to http://www.boundary.org/bi/ANPA_West/PDF/V7-1_1997.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120326195557/http://www.boundary.org/bi/ANPA_West/PDF/V7-1_1997.pdf to http://www.boundary.org/bi/ANPA_West/PDF/V7-1_1997.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110312044044/http://www.kinfonet.org:80/articles/18-wholeness-regained---revisiting-bohms-dialogue to http://www.kinfonet.org/articles/18-wholeness-regained---revisiting-bohms-dialogue
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:12, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Present defined-"occurring now"-this would apply to his "Dialogue groups" activity of being present to what they are thinking-understanding and communicating.Arnlodg (talk) 18:02, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  See also-Present