Hello everyone! Here is a BB post written by a peer; I value her insight and depth of thinking. She wrote this from a discussion her and I had. She has since referred to me as (A). Enjoy her discourse-making…
As stated in class, I can support the idea of every interaction or lack of interaction being a form of collaboration. Collaboration is a far reaching and all-encompassing idea. Here is the reservation that I have with arguments that pose that every interaction (or lack thereof) should not necessarily be classified as collaborative and I will use global warming as my lens:
Often we hear that we share the earth and that we are all responsible for protecting it. We say that automotive exhaust in China is melting the polar ice cap and that we can buy carbon credits to offset our own usage. We say that we must be globally-conscious and reduce, reuse, and recycle. We say that damage done today may not be repairable tomorrow. We say that damage done today may be repairable tomorrow, if we act right now. We say that sewage washed into the ocean from storms in California can end up on the shores of Chile. We “say” all of these things and we “hear” all of these things. So, the bottom line is that how we live, have lived, and will (not) live and how we use our resources now and how we have used them in the past and how we use them in the future are all interconnected. We think about it, we talk about, and we are all (every single human being on the planet) engaged in the use of some degree of global resource(s).So, on one level or another – even if we are not engaged in a direct conversation about the topic with someone at a particularly given point in time- we are engaged in a larger conversation about the common goal of the quality of the future of the survival of our species… either by omission or commission.
So, the question was posed, “If everything is collaborative, why have the word?” The answer to that question is”degrees.” We have varying degrees of collaboration. We have a person (or group of people) in a position of power interacting and reacting to a subordinate group or person to achieve a mutually beneficial goal. We have equal parties doing the same thing. We have people working against one another wherein the shared goal is the advancement of self at the expense of the other.We have people who may, for all intensive purposes, be ignorant of the existence of one another and yet they too share the purpose of advancement of self either at the expense of another or without thought of another and so on.
The point I am trying to make is that we cannot say we are all connected and responsible for ourselves, our children, and our grandchildren, etc. when it is convenient only to change our position when it does not suit our argument. If we are all responsible to one degree or another for the survival of our race and we are all connected by virtue of sharing a planet and we are all in constant dialogue by the very act of living – then the energy that is transmitted through exchanges cannot be destroyed – it merely changes form (Rudolf Clausius – FirstLaw of Thermodynamics). In this case, I am suggesting that energy is changing form from a discussion on global warming to an experience in a Writing Center. This same energy can change form again to a discussion on Shakespeare.
In essence, the energy of every conversation held with/by/about Shakespeare through quill, pen, stage, or time is still floating about in the collective collaborative consciousness of mankind and it continues to influence both those who have and those who have not heard of him. Likewise, the residual energy of the collaborative tutoring session that lasted thirty minutes and just “ended” may be the source for the spark of genius and/or invention that causes a new revolution of human thought/existence so by extension and default the collaboration continues on long after the physical manifestation of the session has ceased. As a result, mankind is always collaborating with itself individually and collectively and continually and the window of existence is always shifting (Joe Overton – The Overton Window) and the energy is ever present to varying degrees.
In nutshell, I am posing that when Person (A) collaborates with Person (B) and when, later on, Person (B) collaborates with Person (C) by extension and default Person (A) is also a part of the collaborative equation between (B) and (C) because of theinfluence the first exchange between (A) and (B) had on (B).