Hal wrote:
> [...]
> It would be interesting to have a group where disagreements
> were essentially forbidden. Talk about groupthink! Would
> it be a cult? Would the members be brainwashed? Or would
> this be the ultimate in rationality?
This could be interesting. How about forming a discussion
list where, instead people stating opinions and then arguing,
they would bring up points of controversy, which list members
would then have to reach consensus on? For example, someone
might submit a point of political controversy; list members
would then attempt to reply without disagreement. Initial
replies might take the form of a statement of facts we all
know to be true, from these tentative steps would be taken to
reach a conclusion.
BM
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 10:00:02 MDT