bonnernetwork.pbworks.combonnernetwork.pbworks.com/f/Workshop+Final.doc · Web viewAristotle represents one of the most influential philosophical characters in the western world

Summit on Political Engagement

“Friendship, Love, and Justice:

Strategies for Reflection upon

Service and Politics”Summit on Political Engagement

Thursday, June 5

Overview: This workshop has two parts:

First, participants will engage different interpretations of friendship, love, and justice through fragments from Aristotle, the apostle Matthew, Thomas Aquinas, Søren Kierkegaard, Flannery O’Conner, Cornell West and more. Through dialogue, we will connect these historic conversations to Service and Politics within our own communities and organizations.

Second, we will use the reflection on friendship, love, and justice as a guide and model to introduce participants to the process of developing reflection material to use in their own environments. This will include an opportunity to critically reflect upon what did and did not go well during the first half of the workshop.

Category: Curriculum Development, Reflection and Assessment, Community Building, Leading Discussion

Bonner Connection:

Level: Requires engagement with philosophical and religious concepts, although it does not require previous knowledge.

Type: Demonstration, Group Discussion, Lecture, Read and Discuss Small Group Activity, Writing Activity

Focus or Goals of this Guide:

“Friendship, Love and Justice: Strategies for Reflection” page 1

expectation explore experience example expertise

VALUES: community engagement, community building, diversity, social justice, international perspective, spiritual reflection


Head: Reflection on “Friendship, Love, and Justice” and their

connection to Service and Politics Model for creating reflection in particular contexts Ideas for using social media to present, produce, share, and

participate in reflection

Heart: Experience of deep reflection upon service and politics Intimacy with one another and connection on the desire to serve

effectively Experience healthy debate that engages difficult topics/concepts

and develops both brainstorming and personal growth

Hands: Handouts of links to places they can find doing this type of thing,

especially to what the Bonner Foundation has already produced in the way of reflection (including this workshop/reflection)

Guide to using social media to produce reflection Outline of model for creating reflective environments and

materials

Materials:

“Reflection”, “Philosopher’s Worksheet”, and “Alternative Perspective” worksheets (below) Two Flip Charts (for Switch-Swatch Dialogue)

Several Markers Magazine/Newspaper articles for Reflection Creation Small Group Activity Reflection Strategies Workshop Power Point Computer and AV equipment (projector/screen) – if using the Power Point

How to Prepare:

Although the introduction to “Friendship, Love, and Justice” must be brief, the presenter should have some understanding of the more complex philosophical issue. This is preparation for discussion. The more the presenter knows, the better they will be able to facilitate the conversation and/or raise stimulating questions. Ask some philosophy majors or professors to either lead the discussion or give the facilitator some information.

The room should have two flip charts on either side of the front in preparation for the “Debate”. This will work even better if there is a natural divide down the room. Also, participants should be able to easily move into small groups.

Hand out ‘Philosopher’s Worksheet’ before beginning the session.Use of AV equipment and the “Reflection Strategies” PP Presentation are optional but preferred.



How to Do/Brief Outline:The switch-swatch activity will require two helpers to take notes on flip chart paper representing the two sides of the debate: Ancient Philosophy (Aristotle) and Christianity (the Gospel according to Matthew).

The small group activity will include printouts of quotes from other thinkers/authors, Kierkegaard, O’Connor, and Aquinas (you may choose others), to stimulate discussion in smaller groups with a focus on connecting the debate to their own service or political engagement. The “Alternative Perspective” worksheets are attached. These groups should be given a chance to share if they wish.

The outline has the following parts (modify to cover number and time allotted):

1) Aristotle and Christianity on Love 10-14 minutes2) Discussion/Debate (Switch-Swatch) 12-15 minutes3) Small Group Activity: Alternative Perspectives 18-20 minutes4) Transition to Part 2 5-6 minutes5) Present Model for Reflection Creation 15-20 minutes6) Group Activity: Workshop Creation 10 minutes

1) Aristotle on Christianity and Love (Lecture, Group Discussion)Suggested time: 10-14 minutes

Give a brief introduction to yourself and to the workshop at large. Say what the two halves will be but leave a more detailed introduction to Part 2 later.

This workshop is separated into two distinct but related parts. For the first half we are going to have the opportunity to reflect upon service and politics through guided interaction with the philosophical debate surrounding “Friendship, Love, and Justice”. While we are dialoging and examining, keep in mind where we are headed, because in the second half of the workshop I will present a guide for creating reflection materials to use in your own communities or organizations. Thus, the first half, while hopefully fruitful as a discussion in its own right, will function as a model for the presentation in the second half.

This introduction is aimed at letting people know where you are going during the workshop and what they should expect to get out of it.

Give a brief introduction to Aristotle on “Justice” and then its connection to “Friendship and Love”. This will require engagement with Books V, VIII, and IX of the Nicomachean Ethics. Have either Power Point slides or posters of significant quotes that people can refer back to throughout (include on “Philosophers Worksheet”). (2-3 minutes). Discuss: (2-3 minutes).



Give a brief introduction to the Christian complication/”alternative” to Aristotle’s account of Love. Use the Gospel according to Matthew, 5:43-48 (NRSV). Introduce the passage as a part of Jesus’ ‘Sermon on the Mount’. Connect this passage to the discussion of Aristotle thus far. (total time: 2-3 minutes)

Discuss: (2-3 minutes).

(See “Friendship, Love, and Justice Reflection” for quotes and more details/examples/questions. Reflection attached below.)

2) Switch-Swatch (Group Discussion)Suggested time: 12-15 minutes

Divide the room down the middle (into two different “teams”). One team will represent Aristotle in a mock debate and the other will represent the Christian response. Have Charts either on the walls or on easels (preferred) in the front of the room on each side and clearly labeled “Aristotle” and “Christianity”.

For 4-5 minutes have the two sides offer short, one-two sentence arguments in favor of their respective view (i.e. the view of their “philosophy”). Start with one group, allow one comment, and then allow the other side a comment, moving back and forth through the room to different people. Emphasize offering positive comments about respective sides rather than negative comments about the contrary position (though both are acceptable).

Now switch sides. For ease just move the charts from one side of the room to the other. Continue the same process with participants now taking the opposite side. This may last just a minute or two less as many “pros/cons” have already been stated.

Wrap up: Who is frustrated that these are the only two options? What is the limitation of the viewpoints already offered? In what ways do they both fail?

o For example, “Both are written from the viewpoint of the lover rather than beloved, i.e. from the perspective of someone considered ‘loveable’ and their discussion of how to respond to people considered ‘unlovable’.”

Does anyone have any alternatives or overlooked concerns?

3) Small Group Activity: Alternative PerspectivesSuggested time: 18-20 minutes

Divide the participants into smaller groups (no smaller than 3 and no larger than 6). Give each group a previously prepared quotation concerning the debate developed so far (possibilities given in appendix B). Develop a serious of questions for the groups to discuss that will lead them to connect this debate not only to a new voice, but to their own particular service organizations (for examples see the Power Point presentation “Reflection Strategies”). This will allow people to share their own organizations and the work that they do within them, as well as engage the topics of “Friendship, Love, and Justice” and their bearing on politics and service.



Introduce (optional):

The topic of our summit this week is “Connecting service to politics and politics to service”. Therefore I want to spend some time seeing how the concerns of our reflections directly affect our own service and connection to political concerns. So, what we are going to do is… (introduce activity)

The purpose of a brief introduction will be to make sure that the participants are thinking about your goal as they enter into small group discussion. That goal is an opportunity to connect the reflection to their own environments, particularly their service environments.

After allowing each group 10-12 minutes to discuss the provided questions, bring everyone back together. If time permits, allow some of the groups who found the connections they made to be particularly insightful or important to share briefly their discussion with the group. This sharing time will give you flexibility in the timing of the workshop. Extend if you have time to fill and cut off when you need to move on to other things.

4) Transition to Part 2Suggested time: 5-6 minutes

Suggest that it is time to transition from Part 1, the time for reflection, to Part 2. Begin by pointing out the different directions the previous reflection could have gone. The thing it probably lacked was its connection to contemporary political affairs. Some potential connections could have included something of national or world concern:

The Presidential Election: relations between parties, campaign strategies, responses to opposing candidate’s victory, etc.

The War on Terror, what distinguishes lovable from unlovable? How do we gain perspective about an event where we are viewed as the enemy? What does it mean to love or serve the Iraqi people? Insurgents? Should we expect Iraqi people to love us?

Or connections could be local: News of local school/prison/hospital reforms: Who deserves what? What is just? Where

should the community’s money go? Who should it benefit? Response to local crime: What is the proper response? What steps can be taken to

minimize crime? What steps cannot be taken? How do we care for the victims of brutal crime? How do we care for their assailants?

5) Present Model for Reflection CreationSuggested time: 12-15 minutes

Part 6 will not be a comprehensive analysis of all the concerns for creating a website. Instead it will be a survey of the key steps and key concerns. The presentation will be run by a series of slides offering each step in Reflection Creation as well as particular questions or concerns to keep in mind when trying to develop that particular portion of the reflection. Discussion throughout will allow the presenter to connect the presented steps with Part 1 of the reflection. Participants will have an opportunity to offer their own reflection on the process and its success as seen through the model presented on “Friendship, Love, and Justice.”

Step 1: TopicStep 1a: Resources



Step 2: Determine Your GoalStep 3: Create Activities/Brainstorm IdeasStep 4: Develop programming flowStep 5: Write Reflection Content

*See the PP and connected resources (below) for more detailed information on how to plan and run reflection meetings.

(Based upon the Bonner Foundations’s “Train the Trainers” Guide).

Be sure to reflect upon Part 1 to see how each of these steps was implemented.

7) Group Activity: Workshop CreationSuggested time: 8-12 minutes

Find a collection of provocative quotations, news articles, stories, video clips, etc. and provide each group of 4-6 people with a resource (can use same groups as in the previous small group activity or create new groups). Ask the groups to use the Reflection Creation Model to begin developing their own reflection. Remind them to follow the steps, developing a topic, goals, activities, outline, etc. They will only have time to brainstorm so ask them to think quickly and not worry about not getting to each step. Have a group or two share if time permits.



“Friendship, Love, and Justice Reflection”Objective:

Examine the definition of justice through philosophy, theology, and literature Connect that reflection to Bonner Commitments and individual service Connect the debate on justice to current political event

Aristotle represents one of the most influential philosophical characters in the western world. So a discussion of concepts like “Friendship, Love, and Justice” cannot go wrong if it begins here, especially since Aristotle devoted an entire book of the Nicomachean Ethics to justice and two books to friendship.1 As we will briefly see, these two ideas were closely related for Aristotle.

Justice represents, in the EN, proper human interaction whereby each person is given their due, i.e. what their merit deserves. Aristotle saw this as an equal distribution of goods, equality representing the intermediary between unjust excess. He writes,

“If, then, the unjust is unequal, just is equal… if they are not equal, they will not have what is equal, but this is the origin of quarrels and complaints-when either equals have and are awarded unequal shares, or unequals equal shares. Further, this is plain from the fact that awards should be 'according to merit'; for all men agree that what is just in distribution must be according to merit in some sense” (Nicomachean Ethics, V.3).

His description of love and friendship sounds very similar. Between equals, friendships are created on the merit of an equality of exchanged benefits, be it utility, pleasure, or virtue. Justice asserts itself into the situation whenever inequality exists. This can be between equals who exchange a disproportionate amount of benefits, or between unequals who exchange an equal amount of benefit. As we can begin to surmise, love is extended to particular objects because of their particular usefulness, beauty, or virtuous character. Objects lacking these things are not extended love, nor should they. Listen to Aristotle,

“But if one accepts another man as good, and he turns out badly and is seen to do so, must one still love him? Surely it is impossible, since not everything can be loved, but only what is good. What is evil neither can nor should be loved; for it is not one's duty to be a lover of evil, nor to become like what is bad” (Nicomachean Ethics, IX.3).

For Aristolte, virtuous people must love good, wise, and virtuous people. Not only that, but they must hate those who are evil. If one shows love, mercy, and compassion to one’s enemies then they will harm you and your friends. To allow such harm to come to good, wise, and virtuous people is unjust. Therefore, love extends only to good and virtuous people while violence and retribution is the proper response to evil. Justice requires these dispositions.

1. What do you think about the concept of justice as equality, as giving people what they deserve?

1 See Nicomachean Ethics, book V for ‘Justice’ and books VIII and IX for ‘Friendship’.


http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/nicomachaen.html


2. Is there such thing as something/someone that is unlovable? What happens if you extend love to an evil person, to an enemy?

3. What is put at risk if we do not accept Aristotle’s definition of justice?4. Aristotle argues that the need for equality in friendship means many people face

natural obstacles blocking friendship, Kings with their subjects, rich with poor, righteous with unrighteous. Is this right? Do people create friendships across social lines? Across divisions of power?

5. How can such a view of justice and friendship be harmful? Ex. “Much marginalization is created by those in power already. We make people

unlovable by striping them of any meaning, worth, beauty, goodness, power, etc. Then we justify our continued rejection by concepts of love and justice that makes crossing those barriers deplorable.”

It then becomes very important how one defines merit. Aristotle’s concept of justice has been abused for over two-thousand years because the oppressors were the ones in charge of defining key concepts like personhood, worth, and love.

In the West, Christianity has offered the strongest and most direct critique of Aristotle’s account of friendship. The most striking confrontation with the Ancient philosopher comes from the Gospel according to Matthew, in a sermon attributed to Jesus of Nazareth called the ‘Sermon on the Mount’. There, Jesus says,

“You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you” (Matthew 5: 43-44, NIV).

Immediately preceeding that statement, Jesus has a word concerning justice,

“You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.’ But I say to you, ‘Do not resist an evildoer. But if anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other also; and if anyone wants to sue you and take your coat, give your cloak as well; and if anyone forces you to go one mile, go also the second mile. Give to everyone who begs from you, and do not refuse anyone who wants to borrow from you’” (Matt. 5: 38-42, NRSV).

1. Is this completely contrary to Aristotle’s account of friendship and justice?2. What might it mean to ‘Love your enemy’? How does this look? Why would

Aristotle object? Is this different than friendship?3. One of Aristotle’s strongest stances is the voluntary nature of love. A lover seeks

out a beloved because of his/her/its beauty, use, or goodness. However, Christianity appears to phrase love in the form of a command. Can ‘Love’ be commanded?

4. How can such a position be harmful/abused or used to hurt others? Ex. “The idea of a suffering servant calling minorities or oppressed persons to accept

their suffering and await a higher justification.”

“Philosopher’s” Worksheet



Aristotle: 384 BCE – 322 BCE Student of Plato Tutored Alexander the Great Founder of the Peripatetic School of philosophy (Greek for “wandering”, “walking

around”, “itinerant”) and part of the Eudaimonist tradition (Greek for “happiness” or “flourishing life”)

Nicomachean Ethics on Justice (Book V, Section 3):“If, then, the unjust is unequal, just is equal… if they are not equal, they will not have what is equal, but this is the origin of quarrels and complaints-when either equals have and are awarded unequal shares, or unequals equal shares. Further, this is plain from the fact that awards should be 'according to merit'; for all men agree that what is just in distribution must be according to merit in some sense.”

Nicomachean Ethics on Friendship (Book IX, Section 3):“But if one accepts another man as good, and he turns out badly and is seen to do so, must one still love him? Surely it is impossible, since not everything can be loved, but only what is good. What is evil neither can nor should be loved; for it is not one's duty to be a lover of evil, nor to become like what is bad.”

The Gospel according to Matthew: Likely composed around 70 - 90 C.E. First of the four gospels in the NT. A narrative proclaiming the fulfillment of prophecy in

Jesus of Nazareth. The book shares significant portions of information with the other “Synoptic” Gospels, Mark and Luke.

Attributed to Matthew, one of Jesus Disciples (though authorship is unknown). The ‘Sermon on the Mount’ (Matt. 5-7) is largely unique to Matthew’s gospel though

parallels exist in the others, especially Luke’s Sermon on the Plain (6:17–49).

The Gospel According to Matthew on Love/Friendship (Matt. 5:43-44, NIV):“You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I tell you: ‘Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you’.”

The Gospel According to Matthew on Justice (Matt. 5:38-42, NRSV):“You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.’ But I say to you, ‘Do not resist an evildoer. But if anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other also; and if anyone wants to sue you and take your coat, give your cloak as well; and if anyone forces you to go one mile, go also the second mile. Give to everyone who begs from you, and do not refuse anyone who wants to borrow from you’”



Good Resources/LinksBonner Foundation:

http://www.bonner.orgCheck out the Resources Tab and look under “Reflection Resources”You will also find under the Resources tab other Reflection materials and modules.Learning Circles Workshop:

http://www.bonner.org/resources/modules/modules_pdf/BonCurFacilLearnCircles.pdfSample Reflections:

http://www.bonner.org/resources/Reflectionresources/reflectionresources.htmlLeading Reflection Curriculum:

http://www.bonner.org/resources/modules/modules_pdf/BonCurLeadingReflection.pdfWhy Reflection?

http://www.bonner.org/resources/modules/modules_pdf/BonCurServiceBasedReflection.pdf

Civic Reflection Website:http://civicreflection.org/online_tools/

Roosevelt Institute:http://rooseveltinstitution.org/

CIRCLE: Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement:http://www.civicyouth.org/

Go DeeperAristotle: Nicomachean Ethics. Online version:http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/nicomachaen.htmlThomas Aquinas: Summa Theologica. See especially the second part of the second part(SECUNDA SECUNDÆ PARTIS):

http://newadvent.org/summa/Soren Kierkegaard: Works of Love


http://newadvent.org/summa/

http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/nicomachaen.html

http://www.civicyouth.org/

http://rooseveltinstitution.org/

http://civicreflection.org/online_tools/

http://www.bonner.org/resources/modules/modules_pdf/BonCurServiceBasedReflection.pdf

http://www.bonner.org/resources/modules/modules_pdf/BonCurLeadingReflection.pdf

http://www.bonner.org/resources/Reflectionresources/reflectionresources.html

http://www.bonner.org/resources/modules/modules_pdf/BonCurFacilLearnCircles.pdf

http://www.bonner.org/


Alternative Perspectives:Kierkegaard, Works of Love

“When it is the duty to love the men we see, then one must first and foremost give up all fanciful and extravagant ideas about a dream world where the object of love is to be sought and found…Perfection in the object is not perfection in the love. Erotic love is determined by the object; friendship is determined by the object; only love of one’s neighbor is determined by love. Therefore genuine love is recognizable by this, that its object is without any of the more definite qualifications of difference, which means that this love is recognizable only by love.”

Sketch of Søren Kierkegaard. Based on a sketch by Niels Christian Kierkegaard (1806-1882).

Alternative Perspectives:Thomas Aquinas: Summa Theologica, II.II, Question 25, Article 8.

“Love of one's enemies may be understood in three ways. First, as though we were to love our enemies as such: this is perverse, and contrary to charity, since it implies love of that which is evil in another.

“Secondly love of one's enemies may mean that we love them as to their nature, but in general: and in this sense charity requires that we should love our enemies, namely, that in loving God and our neighbor, we should not exclude our enemies from the love given to our neighbor in general.

“Thirdly, love of one's enemies may be considered as specially directed to them, namely, that we should have a special movement of love towards our enemies. Charity does not require this absolutely, because it does not require that we should have a special movement of love to every individual man, since this would be

impossible. Nevertheless charity does require this, in respect of our being prepared in mind, namely, that we should be ready to love our enemies individually, if the necessity were to occur.”



Alternative Perspectives:Cornell West, Interview with Terrence McNally @ alternet.org, 2004

“Prophetic goes back to the Jewish invention of the prophetic in Hebrew scriptures. It has to do with believing fundamentally that he or she who loses sight of the poor insults one’s maker, he or she who is in solidarity with the poor exalts one’s maker. Proverbs 14:31. Biblical folk, you can look it up. For Christians the Old Testament, for Jewish brothers and sisters, the Hebrew scripture.

“[I]t’s about justice. How do you care for the most vulnerable? In the words of Jesus, ‘the least of these,’ in Malcolm X’s language, ‘the ones who are catching hell.’”

Alternative Perspectives:Flannery O’Connor, “A Good Man is Hard to Find”

"Jesus was the only One that ever raised the dead," The Misfit continued, "and He shouldn't have done it. He shown everything off balance. If He did what He said, then it's nothing for you to do but thow away everything and follow Him, and if He didn't, then it's nothing for you to do but enjoy the few minutes you got left the best way you can by killing somebody or burning down his house or doing some other meanness to him. No pleasure but meanness," he said and his voice had become almost a snarl.

"Maybe He didn't raise the dead," the old lady mumbled, not knowing what she was saying and feeling so dizzy that she sank down in the ditch with her legs twisted under her.

"I wasn't there so I can't say He didn't," The Misfit said. "I wisht I had of been there," he said, hitting the ground with his fist. "It ain't right I wasn't there because if I had of been there I would of known. Listen lady," he said in a high voice, "if I had of been there I would of known and I wouldn't be like I am now." His voice seemed about to crack and the grandmother's head cleared for an instant. She saw the man's face twisted close to her own as if he were going to cry and she murmured, "Why you're one of my babies. You're one of my own children !" She reached out and touched him on the shoulder. The Misfit sprang back as if a snake had bitten him and shot her three times through the chest. Then he put his gun down on the ground and took off his glasses and began to clean them.

Thinking through O’Connor’s story:o Who is the Misfit? How is he described? What type of person is he? What might

he represent?o Why does the grandmother recognize the Misfit as her children? What is the

significance of this ‘recognition’?



Alternative Perspectives:Malcolm X – Autobiography of Malcolm X

They call me "a teacher, a fomenter of violence." I would say point blank, "That is a lie. I'm not for wanton violence, I'm for justice." I feel that if white people were attacked by Negroes — if the forces of law prove unable, or inadequate, or reluctant to protect those whites from those Negroes — then those white people should protect and defend themselves from those Negroes, using arms if necessary. And I feel that when the law

fails to protect Negroes from whites' attacks, then those Negroes should use arms if necessary to defend themselves. "Malcolm X advocates armed Negroes!" What was wrong with that? I'll tell you what's wrong. I was a black man talking about physical defense against the white man. The white man can lynch and burn and bomb and beat Negroes — that's all right: "Have patience"..."The customs are entrenched"..."Things will get better.""

Alternative Perspectives:Audre Lorde – Collection of Quotes

“We have to consciously study how to be tender with each other until it becomes a habit because what was native has been stolen from us, the love of Black women for each other.”

“The master's tools will never dismantle the master's house.”

“The erotic is a measure between the beginnings of our sense of self and the chaos of our strongest feelings.”

“Our visions begin with our desires.”

“I write for those women who do not speak, for those who do not have a voice because they were so terrified, because we are taught to respect fear more than ourselves. We've been taught that silence would save us, but it won't.”

“Poetry is not only dream and vision; it is the skeleton architecture of our lives. It lays the foundations for a future of change, a bridge across our fears of what has never been before.”

“When I dare to be powerful - to use my strength in the service of my vision, then it becomes less and less important whether I am afraid.”

“When we create out of our experiences, as feminists of color, women of color, we have to develop those structures that will present and circulate our culture.”


Documents

bonnernetwork.pbworks.combonnernetwork.pbworks.com/f/Workshop+Final.doc · Web viewAristotle represents one of the most influential philosophical characters in the western world