Mirror Sites:
CSUDH Habermas UWP

California State University, Dominguez Hills
University of Wisconsin, Parkside
Created: April 27, 2001
Latest update: April 27, 2001
jeannecurran@habermas.org

On Monday, April 30, 2001, Lisa J. Stevens wrote:

hello jeanne:

how are you? i have just had the class discussion from last thursday on my mind. you know that i found some of the opinions that were so vehemently voiced that day offending. i know that it is the right of each citizen to have our own opinion and to practice religion as we please. my question to you, because i struggled on thursday to just keep my mouth shut...because whatever i said would fall on deaf ears anyway, and my opinion is just that....but do you think that my feelings of frustration and "judgment" of others is an example of personal structural violence? Since I have been lead on a path where we are taught that love and tolerance is our code (having read Wise's piece on tolerance....i have been experiencing that cliche in a different light). Am I so arrogant that I think that my way is better?

You know, as I write this I wonder if I am trying to rationalize my utter disgust with a belief system that worships the same priniciples that I try to live my life by, but says you believe what you want, we accept you, but if you don't do it my way....go to hell... even though this is "just" a theory class....no wonder wars are fought over these matters......

Anyway, i worked on an exam question that you put on the site regarding DuBois explanation of the pain of being black in terms of adversalism and mutuality paradigms....Am going to crawl into bed and reread the piece in Farganis, but at this point not exactly clear what double consciousness refers too. I have an idea....it is not in your index....but looking for it got started on hegemony.....I gotta stop, or I will be up all night....so will finsih the answer to question tomorrow.

hope you don't mind me voicing my frustration about only the very end of class on thursday... l&p lisa

On Monday, April 30, 2001, jeanne responded:

Yes, Lisa, I did know that you were offended, as I was, by the "knowingness," for that's what this is really all about. We both feel excluded by the intensity of retribution which excludes us in our peacemaking. How can we "know" for sure? Chris brought this up in class when he said it would be unfair to Christians to send Christ in human form without sending the miracles that might prove that he was in fact Christ. I'm not entirely sure the Church would approve of his theological position, but for purposes of how we know for theory class, I think it will clarify some of our adversarial positions.

A variation on Chris's argument has been used by atheists, who maintain that if God exists, then he gave them a brain to use, and it is simply unfair to punish them for using their cognitive powers against belief in that which cannot be "proven." Now Chris is not an atheist, but notice that the logic of the same argument appealed to him. In the Catholic Church the doctrine is much more carefully guarded in that the Pope will hand down church dogma. These are matters of belief and faith, not of reason and logic.

We cannot reason our belief or disbelief in God, for there is so much in both extraterrestrial life and in spiritual life that we simply do not know. Proof of God's existence always comes down to belief, in that which we cannot know.

Since neither I nor anyone else can provide an answer to your doubts or to those of the "doubting Thomas, " what exactly am I feeling with the "weltschmerz" I described? It was very close to mother-love, to a sense that words, words, words, used in the dominant discourse of the traditional language so limit our imaginary, that if you would each just take the time to hear each other, you would see that you need not make your words fit. We don't have to hear each other in reasoned argument; we can listen in good faith in many ways.

Right after class, in which Bridget pretty much told us that we must believe in Christ, she hugged me and laughed with me and let me see the goodness and love shining through her. I wish I had time to paint her as I saw her then. Words are for word battles, when they're not for poems and love. But words don't always mean the condemnation and conflict they suggest. It is new, our attempting to hear all voices, to live in peace. We have not lost the adversarial paradigm. But as we shift over to mutuality and to hearing the "Other" in good faith, love does grow. And in that I find blessed hope.

On Tuesday, May 1, 2001, very early in the morning, Lisa J. Stevens wrote:

jeanne: thanks for your reply. in it you pointed out that her certainty is essential to her hold on life. you made me realize, that my belief system about God and the "powers that be" and that he is forgiving, loving and passive is essential to my hold on to life. that is why i was offended. i feel that to avoid the adversarial way of life, i need to try to practice letting people use their "words, words, words" and state their beliefs without ME reacting. so in my personal life, this actually was progress, there was a day when i would have just been in her face.....so i feel that learning this and seeing it in my personal life makes the system of adversarilism and mutuality a little clearer in the BIG PICTURE. thank you for that. i also realize that my need to be right is wrapped up in all this and it also pointless if i choose to live in mutuality. i am in Anthropology 314 (language and culture) with Janine Gasco (she speaks of you highly....you sat with her at a Yamanmo event?).

jeanne's comment:

How nice of her! I was with Janine in San Francisco in November at the American Anthropology Association Meetings.

I just finished reading about how in India there are so many languages and division of how they are spoken that are part of the multiethnicity of the nation and that the type of Hindi (for example) that you speak can be a determining factor in the hierarchy in the culture. This has given way for a nonindigenous and formerly colonial language, English, that has maintained itself

jeanne's earlier message:

Lisa, this is why wars are fought. Because we have learned the language of adversarialism. We are still judging, still trying to find the "right" answer. See my picture of Susan, the one in black and white, and what I said about it.

But one thing to remember in all this is that these are words words words, not real, signifiers gone mad. After class I hugged Bridget, and we laughed together. I am as offended by her certainty as you are, because it excludes us from eternal happiness, but her certainty is essential to her hold on life. I need to let her have it on one level, and then hug her and and reach the interpersonal caring on another. It's not linear, it's not rational, but it is how we learn to love.

love and peace, jeanne

On Tuesday morning, May 1, 2001, Lois Cole wrote:

Subject: Not Only for Myself (Identity, Politics and the Law)

I guess I could say that I'm working the night shift as it is 12:07 am. by the computer time as I start my brief thoughts on the subject.

Self-identity should not derive from social, political, economic, and cultural practices and opinions, because these create constsraints against which individuals loose the will to push and excel in many respect.

jeanne's comments:

I think I understand what you're saying, Lois - that social, political, cultural practices are controlled by the dominant discourse, constraining us to limit our imaginary to the worlds they offer. But I think Henry and Milovanovic would point out that our agency acts interdependently with the structural context. Despite the limiting effect of dominant discourse, I don't think we just get to do away with it.

To place any individual or group of people within boundries is to attempt to"reduce the person to sterotype or to the essential element persumed to accompany a particular trait." (pg 50 second paragraph)

jeanne's comments:

Good citation. I hope that others will follow it to this text. This is Minow's way of telling us that dominant discourse is controlling and limits our imaginary.

As individuals, we need the aspiration and motivation of our own determination that is deeply embedded in each of us. Pushing enables individuals to achieve purpose, and to understanding our purpose produces fulfillment, and when individuals are fulfilled we tend to make a positive contribution to those around us -- even to each of the unique and diverse groups in the society.

jeanne's comments:

I think we need a little more clarification on what Minow means by "pushing."

Rabbi Hillel quoted, If I am not for myself, who will be for me? If I am not for others, what am I? And if not now, when?

When we finally 'get it' everything will work like a jigsaw puzzle in our world. But I truly hope we 'get it' before the Messiah comes. He will return and we will know him.

jeanne's comments:

Now I need to send you to Why do some of us feel we may condemn others to Hell? The problem is with the term "know." How shall we handle the many different visions and names by which He shall be known?

So says the Inspired Word of God. We do not know when he will return, no one knows that, not even the angels in heaven, but we will know that it is He without a shadow of doubt One way we will identify him is his unmistakable appearance in the cloud which will be seen by all mankind that are still on earth at the time. (Read Matthew 24: 29-31, please).

Good Morning to you,
Lois Cole

On Tuesday, May 1, 2001, jeanne responded:

Lois, I hear the love and faith. You will need to share with Bridget and Tracy. And because I have come to know you this semester, I believe that love and caring will foster peace. Nonetheless, I must call all of us back to the dilemma that Habermas faces: how shall we live together, with all our different visions and cultures and beliefs? Habermas believes that we can achieve this through reasoned discourse, but I wonder. I think we may most effectively live together by supporting and encouraging the love, by learning to value that love above retribution and reward, by finding the strength of that love itself. For a fuller discussion of this, see Why do some of us feel that we may send others to Hell?

love and peace, and we'll speak of this in class. jeanne

---

---