I am interested in coming to the conference for three reasons. First, and foremost, I like the people and their ideas, and I enjoy learning what they have been thinking about. I enjoy having a wide range of conversations
with both old friends and newcomers. I did not make it to the ASC
conference last summer, and I missed it. This brings me to the second
point; I do feel a sense of connection, a loyalty I could say, to the
organization, or perhaps more properly to the people who constitute the
organization. Thus the two facets, pleasure for myself and a desire to
contribute.
Thirdly, I have not had an opportunity to experience a conference in the planned format, and am curious to experience it. I like good presentations very much. I enjoy the artform of ideas well thought through and presented so that others can see within hours what has taken months to develop. I like to hear and think, and then after thinking, have a one-to-one conversation.
What might I contribute? I have been thinking about the matter of “domains” over the last year. In particular I note how ephemeral these are, how easily we constitute and reconstitute them as we flow in our doings and conversations. Yet we construct the logics that give credibility to what we say with rules that do not recognize the dynamics of how domains and distinctions arise and disperse. I detect many “domain errors” in how people make claims or arguments. Yet in good conversations, we flow with this dynamic with comfort and ease. The phrase “listening for domain” has taken on a new depth of meaning for me.
