[Dialogue] Secondary Ethics
Charles or Doris Hahn
cdhahn at flash.net
Fri Aug 24 16:19:14 EDT 2007
Frank, we celebrate your being here with Being itself
in history. What a great age 60 is.
Doris Hahn
--- frank bremner <fjbremner at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> Very helpful, Randy. This "fool", "jester", will
> throw in a few comments.Tied in with this is the way
> in which the "resisters" to image change (the
> Boulding paper study) were seen as "naughty". Maybe
> there are images that should have been, and should
> be, resisted. Our friend Dietrich resisted a few in
> Nazi Germany!And a Catholic priest/anthropologist
> (Arbuckle was his surname) a few years ago commented
> that a society's (group's, .....) culture will
> resists change - and its job is to protect the
> society. group etc and resist change - or at least
> question it.This in no way distracts from the issue
> of ambiguity. But that's another
> conversation.CheersFrank BremnerOne day off being a
> sexuagenarian! Now it's the folks UNDER thirty that
> I don't understand - some of the time!Date: Thu, 23
> Aug 2007 03:52:15 -0700From: rcwmbw at yahoo.comTo:
> dialogue at wedgeblade.netSubject: Re: [Dialogue]
> Secondary EthicsNo disrespect intended for Marshall,
> but his reasoning regarding the well in Maliwada
> makes him a prime candidate to be Karl Rove's
> successor. I too was a part of the "sell the well"
> activity, in my case the well in Bayad, not
> Maliwada. The practical problem with that is, in
> the face of short term gain, the funding sources
> sooner or later discover you have no integrity, i.e.
> you do not do what you say you will do, the funding
> dries up, and the reputation follows you around the
> world. But the moral problem is in the
> assumption that appears to be behind a group of
> elites believing they know what's good for everyone.
> "You don't have the ??? (big picture, vocational
> commitment, spiritual depth, or whatever) to know
> what's needed, but I do, and I'll tell you whatever
> I must to get you to do what I've decided you need
> to do. I'm a 'spirit person' and you're an ass,
> the 'donkey on the bridge,' an 'infidel.'" From
> this kind of "elitism," the approach becomes
> coercion and manipulation from a "subject" to an
> "object," an "I and it," rather than persuasion
> between two "subjects," an "I and Thou." (Buber) In
> time this infects your internal relations as well
> (elitism within the Order) and the whole system
> becomes corrupt as in Nazi Germany or what this
> country begins to look like after nearly eight years
> of Bush's thinking the American people don't have
> the sense (or whatever) to be trusted with the basic
> freedoms afforded under the Constitution. I
> think Marilyn is onto something when she compares
> primary and secondary integrity to Bonhoeffer's
> understanding of responsibility. For Bonhoeffer,
> responsibility was not a choice between to be free
> OR to be obedient, but to stand in the tension
> between the two. When you collapsed obedience and
> stood only on
> the freedom pole you were the "irresponsible
> genius." So with intergrity--it is not a choice
> between primary OR secondary, but to stand in the
> tension between the two. When you abandon primary
> integrity for a perverted version of secondary
> integrity, you become Bonhoeffer's "irresponsible
> genius." Maybe it plays out this way. If I have
> decided that digging a well in Bayad (or Maliwada)
> is the "necessary deed" and I can't persuade you to
> see it that way so that you provide the funding
> (primary integrity), then I don't become "dissuaded"
> by your argument and end my quest. Instead, if I
> believe it's really necessary, I go find someone
> else who will see it my way and commit to pay for it
> (secondary integrity.) History will decide if it
> was indeed necessary. I agree with Dick. I have
> pondered for a long time that we did often
> operate from a perverted understanding of secondary
> integrity and that it did hurt our effectiveness
> externally and our morale internally as an Order.
> I'm glad we're talking about it now. Perhaps some
> more "fools" will "rush in" to participate in this
> conversation. Randy WilliamsMarilyn R Crocker
> <marilyncrocker at juno.com> wrote: To:
> dialogue at wedgeblade.net Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007
> 22:07:58 -0400 Subject: Re: [Dialogue] {Disarmed}
> Re: Secondary Ethics Dick et al, My
> understanding of "secondary" integrity (as
> opposed to the rules, regs and legalisms that,for
> me, represent "primary" integrity) is that which
> guides one's actions in accord with the "necessary
> deed" -- the freely responsible action (cf
> Bonhoeffer) which I've never found is a simplistic
> cop out, but rather the result of complex, prayer
> filled discernment. I would be interested to
> know more about your thinking, Dick, that led you to
> conclude this was our movement's most serious
> perversion. With appreciation for the resources
> you bring to our "virtual" collegium room table,
> Marilyn Marilyn R. Crocker, Ed.DCrocker &
> Associates, Inc.123 Sanborn RoadWest Newfield, ME
> 04095(207) 793-3711 On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 18:23:34
> EDT KroegerD at aol.com writes: Here is a
> link to the subject not from the spirit movement.
>
http://ezinearticles.com/?A-Model-of-Ethics-for-Womens-Development&id=654252
> On golden pathways a google search delivered
> only a speech by Mathews in Korea. ( below )
> good luck with that!! In my words, secondary
> integrity means doing whatever is necessary, telling
> story ( even if it is totally untrue) in order to
> ger 'er done. In my opinion, it was our movement's
> most serious perversion, and ultimately did in the
> spirit movement as an organization. Dick Kroeger
> Global
> Priors Council e all-new MailScanner has detected
> a possible fraud attempt from "discover.aol.com"
> claiming to be AOL.com.
>
_______________________________________________Dialogue
> mailing
>
listDialogue at wedgeblade.nethttp://wedgeblade.net/mailman/listinfo/dialogue_wedgeblade.net
>
> Be a better Heartthrob. Get better
> relationship answers from someone who knows.Yahoo!
> Answers - Check it out.
> > _______________________________________________
> Dialogue mailing list
> Dialogue at wedgeblade.net
>
http://wedgeblade.net/mailman/listinfo/dialogue_wedgeblade.net
>
More information about the Dialogue
mailing list