In Prase of Dissent

[Avonia]

Stormy, I thought of you when I read this article in the most recent issue of ODE magainze: Ode Magazine : In praise of dissent

It's interesting to think of the SDA progressive forum as a place for those wishing to be good dissenters. Whether they be Adventists, former Adventists, or others.

Mercer has an interesting way of describing the difference between just being difficult and tearing stuff down, and creative dissent - or nurturing dissent.

Enjoy - my dissenting friend!

 

[Joe67]

Stormy, I thought of you when I read this article in the most recent issue of ODE magainze: Ode Magazine : In praise of dissent

It's interesting to think of the SDA progressive forum as a place for those wishing to be good dissenters. Whether they be Adventists, former Adventists, or others.

Mercer has an interesting way of describing the difference between just being difficult and tearing stuff down, and creative dissent - or nurturing dissent.

Enjoy - my dissenting friend!

Avonia,

The title of Progressive/Moderate/Former Adventists attracted me to this forum.

This title leads me to visualize growth and leadership for the PMs without cynicism and skepticism, and recapitulation for the Formers.

The way a musical arrangement is organized with its theme, development and recapitulation.

John 17:3-6
3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.

4 I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do.

5 And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.

6 I have manifested thy name unto the men which thou gavest me out of the world: thine they were, and thou gavest them me; and they have kept thy word.KJV

Joe

 

[StormyOne]

Stormy, I thought of you when I read this article in the most recent issue of ODE magainze: Ode Magazine : In praise of dissent

It's interesting to think of the SDA progressive forum as a place for those wishing to be good dissenters. Whether they be Adventists, former Adventists, or others.

Mercer has an interesting way of describing the difference between just being difficult and tearing stuff down, and creative dissent - or nurturing dissent.

Enjoy - my dissenting friend!

thank you for sharing the article.... and yes I will continue to enjoy dissenting...

 

[sentipente]

Good article. Tough duty.

 

[Laodicean]

the bravery of dissent is only evidenced when there is no supporting body for the dissenter; i.e., Galileo, Martin Luther..... It is easy for one to dissent within Group A if he/she feels that Group B holds the same opinions as the dissenter. Then one can peck away from the outside of Group A, feeling safe that there are others, far greater in number, who hold the same view as the "dissenter."

 

[StormyOne]

the bravery of dissent is only evidenced when there is no supporting body for the dissenter; i.e., Galileo, Martin Luther..... It is easy for one to dissent within Group A if he/she feels that Group B holds the same opinions as the dissenter. Then one can peck away from the outside of Group A, feeling safe that there are others, far greater in number, who hold the same view as the "dissenter."

It is easy to dissent you say if there is support somewhere? A person who is truly a dissenter doesn't mind going it alone....

 

[AzA]

Furthermore, those who remain Adventists and dissent remain Adventists. And operate both within and without. It is their duality that makes them valuable.

One of the characteristics Mercer mentioned was that very facility with both the insular group and its wider context: broad allegiance doesn't mean particular disloyalty.

I particularly appreciated one of the exemplars, former State Dept officer John Kiesling, because Kiesling's vocal dissent was predicated on awareness of global responses to changing US policies. He could only express a knowledgeable opinion on the global context and policy impacts because he knew and worked with the global community. And he only made the effort to articulate the information back to the US because as an official he deeply valued US ideals. He did have peers in the State Department, but he was the first to vocalize his dissent publicly, and the first to resign. Another officer did the same two weeks later, and other dissenters stayed behind.

But it sure is odd to hear dissent being devalued on the basis that a dissenter may have peers. Under any other circumstance we recognize the value of being in community and criticize people who abandon the social for the solipsistic.

 

[AzA]

For the record, Galileo and Luther both had several predecessors.

Galileo was preceded in heliocentrism by Aristarchus, Copernicus, and Kepler; and Luther in Catholic reform by Huss, Wycliffe, Tyndale, and too many others who were not cool enough to be named but were precocious enough to be killed.

This is standard. Innovations are the crest in a wave, and the energy has often built for years. Dissenters play their part.

 

[Joe67]

Here is a picture of dissent.

Mark 5:2-5
2 And when he was come out of the ship, immediately there met him out of the tombs a man with an unclean spirit,

3 Who had his dwelling among the tombs; and no man could bind him, no, not with chains:

4 Because that he had been often bound with fetters and chains, and the chains had been plucked asunder by him, and the fetters broken in pieces: neither could any man tame him.

5 And always, night and day, he was in the mountains, and in the tombs, crying, and cutting himself with stones. KJV

Then, at the Father's appointed moment:

Mark 5:6
6 But when he saw Jesus afar off, he ran and worshipped him, KJV

Joe

 

[Laodicean]

It is easy to dissent you say if there is support somewhere? A person who is truly a dissenter doesn't mind going it alone....

I agree. I'm not knocking dissent. I'm only making a distinction between the brave dissenter and the mean-spirited, disgruntled, toxic dissenter, or the dissenter who disagrees because dissent is cool, and "cool" is the majority opinion.

 

[Laodicean]

But it sure is odd to hear dissent being devalued on the basis that a dissenter may have peers. Under any other circumstance we recognize the value of being in community and criticize people who abandon the social for the solipsistic.

Dissent is not being devalued by me, AzA. I was merely making a distinction between the bravery of dissent and the regular old run-of-the-mill opinionated dissent, which many times such opinions would wilt and die under the blaze of mockery and ridicule, if such opposition should come from more than a few.

Consider Group A to be a small circle within Group B, a large and extensive circle. Without judging any particular person, it is a fact that there are those from group A who feel their dissent is brave when, in fact, their dissent stems from an awareness that they have Group B's consensus to support them. In fact, some may dissent because they just want to be "cool."

We cannot judge whose dissent is of this variety and whose isn't. So all we can do is be aware that there is indeed such a quagmire that exists and hopefully avoid it as far as possible when we dissent.

 

[Laodicean]

For the record, Galileo and Luther both had several predecessors.

Galileo was preceded in heliocentrism by Aristarchus, Copernicus, and Kepler; and Luther in Catholic reform by Huss, Wycliffe, Tyndale, and too many others who were not cool enough to be named but were precocious enough to be killed.

Galileo, Luther, and company were all practically lone dissenters in their time and place. They were not all together in one place and time.

This is standard. Innovations are the crest in a wave, and the energy has often built for years. Dissenters play their part.

Once again, I agree that dissent is an integral part of change, good and/or bad. We need dissent. I was merely addressing another aspect of dissent, not to diminish the valid aspect presented by the author.

 

[Laodicean]

Here is a picture of dissent.

Mark 5:2-5
2 And when he was come out of the ship, immediately there met him out of the tombs a man with an unclean spirit,

3 Who had his dwelling among the tombs; and no man could bind him, no, not with chains:

4 Because that he had been often bound with fetters and chains, and the chains had been plucked asunder by him, and the fetters broken in pieces: neither could any man tame him.

5 And always, night and day, he was in the mountains, and in the tombs, crying, and cutting himself with stones. KJV

Then, at the Father's appointed moment:

Mark 5:6
6 But when he saw Jesus afar off, he ran and worshipped him, KJV

Joe

And here is yet another aspect of dissent. Thanks for broadening the horizon, Joe.

 

[StormyOne]

I agree. I'm not knocking dissent. I'm only making a distinction between the brave dissenter and the mean-spirited, disgruntled, toxic dissenter, or the dissenter who disagrees because dissent is cool, and "cool" is the majority opinion.

ahhh ok.... thanks for clarifying....

 

[AzA]

Galileo, Luther, and company were all practically lone dissenters in their time and place. They were not all together in one place and time.

And what of it? Is company only company when localized by space or time?
If so, then every prophet that ever lived was a lone ranger.

But God said to Elijah, "I have 7,000 who have not bowed the knee."

 

[Laodicean]

And what of it? Is company only company when localized by space or time?
If so, then every prophet that ever lived was a lone ranger.

But God said to Elijah, "I have 7,000 who have not bowed the knee."

I wasn't trying to start an argument, AzA. Just sharing another aspect of the dissent conversation. I don't have to be wrong in order for the author of the article to be right, nor does the author have to be wrong in order for me to be right. Of course, if you see that I'm woefully off course with my proffer, then please say on. I am open to be corrected.

 

[Joe67]

And what of it? Is company only company when localized by space or time?
If so, then every prophet that ever lived was a lone ranger.

But God said to Elijah, "I have 7,000 who have not bowed the knee."

AzA,

Yet, their hearts were broken when their ministry, to the people of the Lord, who they loved, was despised and rejected and the Lord was held in contempt.

The prophets of the Lord, who suffered in ministry, loved those to whom they ministered the warnings and guidance and the promises of the Lord to heal and restore them after they were reproved.

Joe

 

[AzA]

I don't have to be wrong in order for the author of the article to be right, nor does the author have to be wrong in order for me to be right.

This is absolutely true, and that's why I've questioned the assumption that dissent is a lone affair, or is in anyway less useful when it is not.

The loner-supreme idea -- along with the scientific examples you added -- perpetuates the "great man" theory in which one person unilaterally discovers something brand new and further reports do not acknowledge either precedents or compadres.

Stormy is right when he says that the kind of character the article speaks of would "go it alone" even if they were in fact the only ones who believed as they did. But in fact we each build on and adapt to the contributions of others, whether we know them or work in the same era or not.

I passed by a comment today on Harry Connick Jr.'s work in New Orleans. He was aware of Brad Pitt's work in the area but even though they have several people in a common network, and are doing the same work in the same city, they have never met. They are not in communication, but neither of them is efforting alone because the effort of one opens up additional possibilities for the other. The question is whether dissenters or observers can zoom out far enough to see that.

The article also spoke about experiments in which planted dissenters were able to infuse their group with diversity whether specific opinions were changed or not -- but their reward nevertheless was peer mockery and isolation.

Perhaps you and I have very different concepts of bravery and compliance.

 

[AzA]

AzA,

Yet, their hearts were broken when their ministry, to the people of the Lord, who they loved, was despised and rejected and the Lord was held in contempt.

The prophets of the Lord, who suffered in ministry, loved those to whom they ministered the warnings and guidance and the promises of the Lord to heal and restore them after they were reproved.

Joe

Absolutely -- you serve because you love. If you don't love, you have no reason to take the beating.

 

[AzA]

The Christian martyrs from the AD 30s through the late 1700s come to mind.