Conversation versus Doctrine
Feb. 4th, 2002 09:30 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
Joe, who I am (from time to time) proud to have as a friend, has written an interesting piece on why he prefers conversations to books.
I don't agree with everything he's written, but it's definitely thought provoking.
I don't agree with everything he's written, but it's definitely thought provoking.
no subject
Date: 2002-02-04 10:10 am (UTC)Seems like the most applicable verb
Date: 2002-02-05 02:30 am (UTC)Works for me.
Re: Seems like the most applicable verb
Date: 2002-02-05 05:40 am (UTC)I disagree
Date: 2002-02-05 05:47 am (UTC)"Something that is taught" sounds active to me, by the way.
Re: I disagree
Date: 2002-02-05 05:51 am (UTC)No, 'something that is taught' concerns only the thing that is taught, not how it is taught, and not how the indoctrination (a specialised form of communication) happens.
You never said that
Date: 2002-02-05 06:10 am (UTC)I thought the point of your article was that you preferred forms of communication that led to further thoughts and suggestions for self-education. Leaving aside the fact that I think that many books do this very well, I don't see anything in your piece that says that books don't have the power to indoctrinate.
From what little I know about brainwashing and rabble-rousing, it tends to be works that are full of statement (as general as possible) and forthrightness, with no room for questioning, that are the most effective at making people simply believe.
Conversations might lead to people blindly following you, but if you're encouraging them to think it seems less likely.
Re: You never said that
Date: 2002-02-05 06:19 am (UTC)Books *might* have the power to indoctrinate, sure. Like you say, if they are about general statements, and general statements can brainwash, then sure. But that topic is not an inherent part of my post, nor does it even interest me. :)
I like conversation because I like conversation. Lots of the time, I'm not even trying to win people over, because I recognise the purpose in dissent and individuality.
The fun is often in the argument, rather than the conclusion, too. Books, OTOH, present arguments and conclusions, and there's no way to continue the conversation outside the book.
The inability to continue the conversation is the thrust of my post and behind my dislike of books. Not the possibility that they can indoctrinate.