AboutLOS2006

HISTORY: In 1992, Leroy Little Bear, former Director of Native Studies at Harvard, approached David Bohm, famed colleague of Einstein, with an idea to bring together a meeting of the minds among quantum physicists, Native American elders and linguists to engage in deep dialogue about the underlying principles of the cosmos, not from an adversarial point of view, but out of mutual respect. The Fetzer Institute sponsored the first four dialogues; later dialogues were sponsored by MIT before SEED began sponsoring these historic annual gatherings beginning in 1999. This year, for the eighth time, the participants will gather in Albuquerque to continue this groundbreaking tradition. The SEED dialogues have established a reputation for an unparalleled depth of sharing among Western and indigenous peoples. The dialogues have been the subject of a documentary film and two entire issues of ReVision Journal.	We have been blessed over the years to have many ceremonial leaders, elders and Indigenous scholars actively engage in dialogue with many of the brightest, most respected (and respectful) minds in the West. Every year has been extraordinary, and every year has its own special quality. This year’s theme comes directly from David Bohm’s beliefs around the discoveries in both relativity theory and quantum theory of the universe as an undivided whole, and how that revelation has or has not yet translated into a coherent society. Bohm felt that if we could understand our own thinking processes and shift our own consciousness toward more wholistic thinking that we could begin to make positive change in the society as a whole. Deep dialogue is one of the processes Bohm recommended for uncovering patterns of mind that have fragmented our consciousness, and to the extent possible, move toward more coherent and wholistic patterns of thought.	“Bohm defined “dialogue” as a free flow of meaning among people in communication. A key difference between dialogue and ordinary conversation is that in the latter, people usually hold relatively fixed positions and argue in favor of their views as they try to convince others to change. In dialogue, however, a person may prefer a certain position, but he or she is ready to listen to others with sufficient sympathy and interest to understand the meaning of others’ position properly, and is also ready to change his or her point of view if there is a good reason to do so. Dialogue implies a very deep change in how the mind works. It is essential that each participant suspend his or her point of view, while holding other points of view in a suspended form and giving full attention to what they mean. In doing so, each participant has to suspend his her own ‘tacit infrastructure’ of ideas. Freedom from the tacit infrastructure of ideas, worldview, and so forth, brings about the true spirit of dialogue.” --Leroy Little Bear

“Bohm defined “dialogue” as a free flow of meaning among people in communication. A key difference between dialogue and ordinary conversation is that in the latter, people usually hold relatively fixed positions and argue in favor of their views as they try to convince others to change. In dialogue, however, a person may prefer a certain position, but he or she is ready to listen to others with sufficient sympathy and interest to understand the meaning of others’ position properly, and is also ready to change his or her point of view if there is a good reason to do so. Dialogue implies a very deep change in how the mind works. It is essential that each participant suspend his or her point of view, while holding other points of view in a suspended form and giving full attention to what they mean. In doing so, each participant has to suspend his her own ‘tacit infrastructure’ of ideas. Freedom from the tacit infrastructure of ideas, worldview, and so forth, brings about the true spirit of dialogue.” --Leroy Little Bear