The University of Minnesota Philosophy Department has a tradition of slow reading groups. We take some text and read it, a paragraph or two at a time, addressing any perplexities that come up. People at different levels of sophistication are included, so all sorts of questions are asked. Often, the group moves on with the clear understanding that the difficulties have not been resolved, though nobody can think of anything further to say.
A couple of features of this practice strike me. First, a reading group gives participants a way of seeing each other's ongoing strengths, their long-haul virtues -- and a way of understanding what traits deserve the title "intellectual virtue." Also, with texts from other languages and philosophic cultures, slow reading makes tangible how translation matters and how cultural background matters. One can actually see, over and over, the importance of alternative translations, or the way that a particular bit of history may influence one's reading. Finally, the groups allow for the effortless and natural transfer of bits of information from A to B, at just that moment when B needs those bits of information (contrast lectures).
I have this fantasy: an hour and a half reading group with Bush, Cheney, Edwards, and Kerry. Each reads aloud a paragraph of the rationale for American presence in Iraq. Anyone perplexed about anything gets to comment. 100 million people watch.
Better yet: David Susskind used to do late night talk shows on public issues in which everyone talked until no one had anything more to say. There was no end time. I think, before a country goes to war, that's an appropriate thing to do.
Posted by shea0017 at October 2, 2004 1:59 PM