Subject: Help on NetXpress's LISTSERV feature
From: listserv@freelance.com (NetXpress Listserv)
Message-ID: <35c.05061995.2115@freelance.com>
In-Reply-To:
Date: Mon, 05 Jun 1995 21:15:47 -0500
Organization: The Freelance Academy
Welcome to The Free Lance Academy -- home of Slow Reading Lists, and
one of the original hosts of DialogNet.
This is the help file for the DialogNet lists hosted by Free Lance
Academy listserv [listserv@freelance.com]. Another set of DialogNet
lists may be accessed via the Thinknet BBS listserv -- see below for
directions. The software for this listserv is NetXpress by Merlin
Systems, operating as a UUCP gateway in conjunction with a
Synchronet BBS on a 486DX computer running under IBM OS/2. If you
are curious about the meaning of "slow reading," see the little
essay attached to the bottom of this message.
IMPORTANT NOTE: AFTER APRIL 15, THE DOMAIN NAME: dialog.uucp.netcom.com
WILL NO LONGER WORK. MAKE SURE THAT YOU USE ONLY THE FOLLOWING DOMAIN NAME:
freelance.com
COMMANDS:
The following message-commands are supported by the NetXpress
Listserv software:
help
lists
sub
unsub
signoff
who
confirm
INSTRUCTIONS:
To perform any of the above message-commands, send a message to:
listserv@freelance.com
[You may leave the subject line blank (anything written on the
subject line will be ignored by the listserv).]
In the body of the message, type each command on a separate line.
You may send multiple commands in a single message, if you wish.
Except in the case of "help" and "lists", each command must be
followed by the name of the mailing list to which the command
pertains.
Explanation of commands:
help (causes listserv to send you this help file)
lists (causes listserv to send a list of all the mailing lists
hosted by this site)
sub (subscribes your internet address to this
list. Note: do not include brackets -- i.e. < or > -- around
the list name.)
unsub (unsubscribes you from this list)
signoff (same as "unsub")
who (causes listserv to send you a list of the
addresses currently subscribed to this list.)
confirm (causes listserv to send you a message
confirming that you are -- or are not -- subscribed to the
specified list.)
CONTACTING THE LIST OWNER:
If you have any problem, comment or suggestion, please feel free to
contact me at: lance.fletcher@freelance.com. I love receiving
feedback, and I do my best to resolve problems as quickly as
possible.
This NetXpress software is fairly new and, in my experience, its
execution of the above commands, especially "unsub", is somewhat
unreliable. If you ever receive a response from listserv that looks
incorrect -- for example if it tells you that you are not subscribed
to the list and yet you are continuing to receive messages from the
list -- SEND A MESSAGE IMMEDIATELY TO:
lance.fletcher@freelance.com. DO NOT, UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES, SEND
ADMINISTRATIVE MESSAGES TO THE POSTING ADDRESS OF THE LIST. Apart
from the annoyance which this causes for other subscribers, it is
inefficient because I manage a large number of lists at this site
and do not read all the message traffic on every list.
POSTING A MESSAGE:
The posting address for each mailing list is simply the list name,
followed by: @freelance.com
for example: plato@freelance.com
RULES RELATING TO MESSAGE-CONTENT:
Personally, I hate rules. The purpose of the lists at this site is
to foster serious, thoughtful conversation. Where people keep that
purpose in view and address one another with mutual respect, rules
are generally unnecessary. However, breakdowns do happen, and
sometimes people take -- or give -- offense. In that event, here is
what I ask you to remember:
1. You are my guest here. Subscribers who are discourteous or
abusive to other subscribers will soon be former subscribers.
2. In general, obscene language and ad hominem attacks are
forbidden.
3. If you are offended by something contained in a message
posted by somebody else and feel that a response is needed, the best
course of action is to send private e-mail to the author of the
message. If you do not wish to do that, or if it does not achieve
satisfactory results, send private e-mail to me
(lance.fletcher@freelance.com) and I will intervene.
4. Do not, under any circumstances, respond to messages that
you find offensive by posting messages of protest or rebuke on the
list. To the others on the list this is just as offensive as the
originally offending post. It is like shouting, "BE QUIET!" to
somebody in the audience who is talking during a concert.
5. I do not wish to have any discussion of these rules on the
lists which are devoted to specific topics (although I will create a
list on rules if anybody requests it). In my experience, such
discussions are invariably counterproductive with respect to the
main purpose of the list. Subscribers who violate this rule will be
unsubscribed without warning.
ARCHIVES and FTP:
I maintain a file archive which is accessible by gopher or anonymous
ftp, where I plan to store archives of mailing list messages and
relevant files. (This archive is still "still under construction,
so there is not much there as yet.) The address is ftp.std.com, and
the directory is: /ftp/nonprofits/freelance/ (I
believe that the gopher directory may contain a shortcut -- look for
the label "nonprofits.") The freelance directory will ultimately
contain a sub-directory for each mailing list. There is also a
directory named "incoming" where you may upload files that you wish
to add to the archive for general distribution -- however, if you
upload a file there, make sure you notify me by e-mail, because I do
not check it regularly, and uploaded files will be deleted
automatically within about 24 hours unless I approve them.
DialogNet:
DialogNet is one expression of a dream conceived jointly by Kent
Palmer and Lance Fletcher (that's me). Our dream is to create an
online community of philosophical discourse -- that is independent
of the university. At present DialogNet consists of a group of
Internet mailing lists -- mostly but not entirely on philosophical
topics -- which are maintained on two BBSs -- one The Free Lance
Academy, which is owned by Lance Fletcher in Jersey City, NJ, the
other the Thinknet BBS, which is owned by Kent Palmer in Orange
County, CA. In the future, it is our hope that others will join the
DialogNet venture, and we are exploring the possibility of
establishing an Internet host machine with a direct, realtime,
Internet connection -- which would allow us to offer a Web homepage,
telnet logins, etc. If you have an interest in contributing to this
venture (we mainly need a small 486 computer and about $1,000 in
start-up capital), please contact me at: lance.fletcher@freelance.com.
At present, there are about 50 or 60 DialogNet mailing lists. Those
that are not hosted by The Free Lance Academy may be accessed by
sending the "lists" and "help" message-commands to:
listserv@think.net.
ACCESSING THE BBS:
Although The Free Lance Academy BBS is not (yet) accessible by
telnet, you may login by phoning 201-963-6019. The main advantage
of calling the BBS is that you will be able to download a qwk-format
packet containing all the active (i.e. non-archived) messages from
all -- or any -- of the lists that interest you. You will then be
able to read the messages conveniently offline with the aid of a
qwk-format offline reader. (If you are not familiar with
qwk-readers, or need help with telecommunications software, send me
e-mail, and I will assist you -- or you may contact my voice line at
201-963-6090.) The Free Lance Academy mirrors all of the DialogNet
lists hosted by Thinknet -- and likewise Thinknet mirrors the lists
hosted by The Free Lance Academy. The phone number for the Thinknet
BBS is: 714-638-0876.
Lance Fletcher
[last revised: 4-1-95]
SLOW READING LISTS:
The following is adapted from the original announcement of my "slow
reading lists" which was posted in various places on the Internet in
about Feb., 1994.
PURPOSE OF LISTS:
Each of these mailing lists is intended to support serious
philosophical inquiry -- not mere historical scholarship -- but
original, philosophical thinking, generated and sustained by
careful, slow readings of the works of a single philosopher or a
single work of philosophy. These lists are intended to be more
than occasions for talking ABOUT some important thinkers. It is
my hope and intention that the announcement of these lists will
be taken as an invitation to join in conversation WITH some of
the most powerful thinkers who have ever lived. Not merely to
learn what they thought, but to think with them and learn from
them. These lists are also intended to be fun, and anybody who
has a problem with that should not subscribe.
Of course, what actually happens will depend on what the
subscribers do and say. But for me the launching of these slow
reading lists is a kind of experiment, an experiment designed to
explore the hypothesis that this form of computer-mediated
communication may be peculiarly well-suited to fostering the
recovery of a certain art of conversation: that in which
listening holds at least an equal place with speaking.
RESPECT FOR AUTHORIAL INTENT: The idea of authorial intent has
come in for some disparagement in recent years. Let me be clear
that the subscribers to these slow reading lists will be invited
to participate in readings which are supremely respectful of, and
attentive to, authorial intent, however impossible that may be to
ascertain. We will not, I hope, spend our time arguing
abstractly about hermeneutic theory. Instead, I propose that we
use these lists to give a practical demonstration of the power of
respect for authorial intent. Subscribers are invited to explore
the possibility that a respectful reading of books that are
thoughtfully written, whatever their age, is an exceptionally
powerful means for generating new ideas relevant to the issues of
the present day. And we hope to find that reading with respect
for the intent of the authors of our study texts also tends to
generate conversations in which we are attentive and respectful
toward one another.
WHO SHOULD SUBSCRIBE TO THESE LISTS? This invitation is intended
for any person who is willing to live for a time with more
questions than answers. These are not intended to be academic
conversations, at least not in the modern sense of that word.
Persons outside the university environment are very welcome. Our
intention is to conduct readings that are rigorous, yet so
fundamental that no previous interpretation will be presupposed.
If we presuppose any interpretation as given, then to that extent
we are not keeping our promise to think for ourselves. If those
of us who have read a lot already conduct our discussions with
sufficient rigor, I am confident that they will be accessible to
subscribers without professional background; AND the presence of
non-professional subscribers, provided they are not shy about
revealing their ignorance, will be a contribution by helping to
ensure that we do not omit anything that requires thought. I
would be most pleased if the subscribers to these lists were
people united in the conviction that the authors whom we shall
read have something vital to teach us, something that will make a
difference in how we live, and that by reading and conversing we
may teach one another.
WHY A GROUP OF LISTS? To enhance the possibility of generating a
community of discourse. Philosophy is not a single conversation.
It is, I submit, a network of conversations. We move in and out
of these conversations; some are more continuous than others,
some more inclusive than others. One of the things that makes a
network of conversations into a community is the likelihood that
we will encounter some of the same people in different
conversations. If philosophy involves finding connection among
things that seem at first completely diverse, consider the
philosophical power that is available when different people are
able to combine their different perspectives on the same
different conversations.
WHAT DO I MEAN BY "SLOW READING?"
The phase, "slow reading," is taken from Nietzsche. In the preface
to Daybreak he writes:
"A book like this, a problem like this, is in no hurry; we both, I
just as much as my book, are friends of lento. It is not for
nothing that I have been a philologist, perhaps I am a philologist
still, that is to say, A TEACHER OF SLOW READING:- in the end I also
write slowly. Nowadays it is not only my habit, it is also to my
taste - a malicious taste, perhaps? - no longer to write anything
which does not reduce to despair every sort of man who is 'in a
hurry'. For philology is that venerable art which demands of its
votaries one thing above all: to go aside, to take time, to become
still, to become slow - it is a goldsmith's art and connoisseurship
of the WORD which has nothing but delicate, cautious work to do and
achieves nothing if it does not achieve it lento. But precisely for
this reason it is more necessary than ever today, by precisely this
means does it entice and enchant us the most, in the midst of an age
of 'work', that is to say, of hurry, of indecent and perspiring
haste, which wants to 'get everything done' at once, including every
old or new book:- this art does not so easily get anything done, it
teaches to read WELL, that is to say, to read slowly, deeply,
looking cautiously before and aft, with reservations, with doors
left open, with delicate eyes and fingers...My patient friends, this
book desires for itself only perfect readers and philologists: LEARN
to read me well!"
"I AM A TEACHER OF SLOW READING." When I was a classroom teacher I
took this as my motto, and I would quote it to my students at the
beginning of every class. And what I meant was, That is the nature
of philosophy. For me philosophy IS the teaching of slow reading.
How does one begin slow reading? You don't. You discover that you
have already begun. That is the nature of slow reading. It begins,
not with reading, but with slowing. When we begin slow reading, we
have already been reading. We are like travelers who have been
speeding down the highway when we realize that we have not
completely understood a roadsign which we have already passed, and
it suddenly occurs to us that we may be going in the wrong direction.
The first lesson in slow reading is to develop the capacity to
simply be present to the words on the page; to allow the words to
simply BE there, and to take note of the fact that they ARE there --
before deciding what they mean. This is something that most
students are completely unaccustomed to doing. If you doubt this,
make the following test: Read a sentence of eight or ten words to a
group of students -- to anybody -- and ask them to reproduce the
sentence word for word. My experience has been that almost
everybody responds by telling what they thought the sentence meant
-- in different words, not the same -- and in the process, anything
incongruous, perplexing or ambiguous -- anything, in short, which
might be an opening for learning to occur -- tends to be
disregarded. Obviously this is not a lesson that any of us can
claim to have learned sufficiently. We are so preoccupied with
deciding what the sentences we read and hear MEAN, and especially
with deciding whether WE agree or disagree, whether WE approve or
disapprove, that we generally do not pause to take note of what the
sentences SAY. This rush to interpretation and judgment is strongly
encouraged by most of our educational practices.
Even with the best of intentions, most of us find it extraordinarily
hard to "simply be present to the words on the page; to allow the
words to simply BE there, and to take note of the fact that they ARE
there -- before deciding what they mean." Why is that? Well,
perhaps it is because it seems that this is not DOING anything. The
words, we feel, are perfectly capable of being there on the page
without any help from us. They don't need any permission from us to
BE there, so we feel pretty silly pretending that WE are LETTING
them BE there on the page. But remember that many of us also feel
silly standing in front of a painting, just looking at it, without
trying to say what it means.
Perhaps we need to consider again what it is to read. Nowadays most
of us have learned to suppress vocalization as we read, and some of
us can even read without moving our lips, but I am willing to bet
that, for each one of us, when we first learned how to read, reading
meant reading out loud. That is, speaking, REPRODUCING, the words
exactly as they are on the page. In the first moment of reading,
the reader is an actor who unavoidably becomes the voice of the
author. So that is where we begin.
The intention of the teaching of slow reading (which is what I
understand philosophy to be) is to subvert the customary mode of
reading and to afford students (i.e. those who make us the gift of
their listening) some critical access to their own interpretive
activity. The purpose is not, however, to leave students with the
notion that the text means whatever they make it mean. Quite the
contrary! By disclosing to students their own ACT of MEANING, the
practice of slow reading gives students access to authorial intent.
The purpose of the teaching of slow reading is to enter into a
conversation with the authors of great works -- those authors whose
distinction is that they afford us the opportunity to think things
that are worthy of thought.
Here is how I used to approach this sort of thing in a class. When
I would begin to teach a course on one of the important texts in
philosophy, say Plato's Republic, I used to begin by saying, "As you
read this book, I want you to assume that it was written by God."
This often caused a certain amount of consternation and incipient
revolt. Most of the students would suddenly feel that I was trying
to dominate and control their minds. "You mean we have to accept
what this guy says, even if we don't agree? Even if we think he is
wrong?" they would ask.
"Not at all," I would reply. "The purpose of asking you to assume
that the text for the course is written by God is to give you the
opportunity to learn."
"How so?"
"Well, if you are going to learn, and you are going to learn from
the author of this text, then I suppose there must be something you
have to learn from that author. Right?"
"I suppose so."
"And what you have to learn from the author, in this case Plato,
must then be something about which you know less than Plato. It
might even be something about which you have incorrect opinions or
assumptions. Do you agree?"
"Yes."
"Now, when you read a passage in a book and you find the passage
unclear or inconsistent with what you already think, do you
immediately say to yourself, "Here is an opportunity for me to
learn?"
"Well, not always."
"'Not at all,' would be more like it! What most of us do is to say,
'That guy was confused. He is just making fallacious arguments.' Of
course, in the abstract, especially when we are being polite, we say
we 'know' that knowledge is supremely desirable. Somebody who took
us seriously might suppose, therefore, that when the opportunity to
acquire knowledge and get rid of some portion of our ignorance
presented itself we would immediately jump at it, as if it were some
particularly delicious food which we have long craved. But, in
fact, that is not what usually happens, is it? In most cases, when
the opportunity to learn is seen close up it looks distinctly
unattractive. It is bad news. The reason it is bad news is that
the opportunity to learn is always accompanied by the realization
that we have hitherto been ignorant and mistaken. Naturally enough,
we tend to avoid such discomfort by seeking to shift the blame.
'It's not my fault,' we cry, 'It's the author who is mistaken.'
That, then, points us to the purpose of assuming that the author of
our text is God, i.e. a being whose intention may be obscure, but
who does not make mistakes. If we adopt the working hypothesis that
the author of our text is God, and if we act on that hypothesis when
we come to something that appears strange, confusing or wrong,
attributing this to errors or ignorance of the author is not an
available strategy, so we are driven to look first at the
possibility that the confusion reflects our OWN ignorance."
"But what if the author really IS mistaken? I mean, we can pretend
that Plato's dialogues were written by God, but we all know that
that isn't really so, and besides I don't even believe in the
existence of God. So, by accepting your hypothesis, don't we run
the risk of deceiving ourselves and never finding out the truth?"
"Did I ask you to believe anything? To accept anything in the text
as true? Not at all. I am not asking you to BELIEVE anything the
author says. I am asking you to try to THINK what the author
thinks. We are concerned with what we should do when a passage in
the text occurs for us as questionable, and I am suggesting that, by
supposing the author to be God, the perplexity that occurs for us in
the text becomes an occasion for self-examination, an occasion for
the discovery of our own ignorance. Yes, I suppose that, at the end
of the day, after we have finished our slow reading, I might have to
agree that the author of the text was probably a human being capable
of making mistakes, not a god. But if we start out operating on the
assumption that the text was written by God, by the time we reach
the point where we need to consider the author's mistakes, we will
have reached a thorough understanding of the QUESTIONS which the
author meant to ask. If we refuse to assume the author's divinity
even provisionally, we may never get so far. And perhaps that --
the knowledge of the questions -- is the real object of
philosophical inquiry."
Copyright (c) 1994 Lancelot R. Fletcher. Permission to distribute
and reproduce is hereby granted, provided that the author is cited
and the text is not altered. However the author prefers to be
informed in advance of proposed distributions, welcomes comments and
invites dialogue.
Postal address:
The Free Lance Academy
30 Newport Parkway #3406
Jersey City, NJ 07310
USA