Picture a situation in which you are expressing
philosophical ideas from your own belief system and someone else responds
with unconstructive language.
One: In your first message:
a) Briefly present (i.e., state) some central claims and ideas from
your own belief system.
b) Describe the unconstructive response(s) you received from others
to these claims.
c) Identify and explain your purpose in the discussion.
d) Describe the effect that the unconstructive language has on the discussion
and on you.
Post this first message in your own Framework area.
Two: Read at least one message from people who have chosen
different frameworks than you (there are four other groups).
Post a reply to each of those other four in which you respond constructively
to their central claims and ideas. Recall that a constructive discussion
does not have to be agreeable or timid. You may fairly and constructively
disagree and point out errors or confusions in another's reasoning.
But you must make an honest effort to show that you understand their
points and position. You must resolve to stick to the issue that they
have set. And you must avoid unconstructive language and techniques
that undermine the growth of dialogue. Be sure to include a statement
of your purpose in a discussion of this sort.
Three: Read all of the responses to
your own original message (Step One). Reply to these if you wish. Do
you think that this exchange is the start of a constructive or unconstructive
discussion? How does it compare to previous experiences with discussion
on these issues? Make sure that you write about this experience in your