I totally love the image of Socrates typing away one-handed on two keyboards at a time. And as they led him away to drink the hemlock because he’d asked one question too many, he’d still be tap-tapping away on his Blackberry, carrying on a philosophical discussion with Pullman on the notion of the Authority.

In the last decade, it has sprung back as strong and vital as ever in the blogosphere of the the Internet where exchanges take place at near conversational speed, ideas clash without any prior chance of examining their owner’s pedigrees or credentials. Opinions lock in a pure dog fight with nothing but the observers knowledge of technique and tactics to determine who might win or who may lose.

Plato I think would be offended, if not downright terrified by the spectacle, remembering how just such freedom was the death of Socrates.

Socrates, however, would have loved it. He would have taught himself to type one-handed with either hand so he could blog in two places at the same time! Safety and security out the window! Let dialog prevail!

Alas! Socrates would find his work cut out for him as too much of the current blogosphere is not dialog but intermingled monolog–people holding deep conversations with themselves, but rarely interacting progressively from point to point with each other.

I fear in most cases, blogs do not need moderators, they need Socrators. People who steer the boat by setting fairly minimal rules, then asking a lot of highly selective questions.

I think the way through the fray is to pick your own “Socrates” and stand in their retinue. I picked John Granger, but I do like it when he wanders across the square so we can hear what Travis is saying in his group and what they reply.

To both may I say, “Well done, team! Keep Soc[rates]king it to ‘em!”

John has been my guide through HP and I’m so grateful for my dear professor. I enjoy Travis’ insights, too.

Travis’ essyis excellent (would that I weren’t struggling with so much fibromyalgic foggy fatigue). I feel he has an excellent point. Our shared communications have become so vast, fluid and uncontrollable that any idiot can spout his/her dogma, then read by the ignorant and mutated through personal filters to be spread abroad in various forms as “truth.”

I think Rowling has bestowed upon us a shared text of ultimate humanly shared questions, certainly a method of getting conversations started. If people gather around to discuss Harry, they may walk away with more questions than they brought to the table, provoking further searching. Instead of writing dogma, Rowling invites us to truly think yet offers clear clues to guide us. In our present culture, that’s certainly better food than that offered by 26 levels of a popular videogame or an agendized entertainment funneling one to pre-digested answers. This is why people will still be talking about Harry for ages.

Hoping I’m making sense here, off to fix the kitties’ din-din…