I’ve been over a few times to see what you had to say. Looking forward to it.Your truth with a capital T statement intrigued me, and it would be interesting to hear it contextualized. Blog on!

taxomony:
1 : the study of the general principles of scientific classification : SYSTEMATICS
2 : CLASSIFICATION; especially : orderly classification of plants and animals according to their presumed natural relationships:^)

I liked Velveteen Rabbi’s post very much. Academic language to wade through or not, what did come though well was how interesting and diverse the session was and how much he took from it.

Realistically Jeff, I’m not knocking Harvard at all (yes, I am knocking academic language).
I think Bloggercon could be fun, millions of bloggers simply couldn’t afford the opportunity to sit face to face. Many are budgeting just to keep their computers running.:^)
I also think your session is timely and interesting to thousands of bloggers and readers.

A lot of bloggers who ‘write about their kitty cats’ have higher EQ’s than a lot of people with high IQ’s.
Blogs aren’t about brillance.
They are about passing information on to others, as you say, telling our stories, giving testimony to our lives.

If statements can’t be understood by the average reader or blogger,then what good are they?
We run the danger in blogging of using our own sub-language derived from the social-techical-mechanical of the net. That’s fine, but like academic language, internet/blogging language doesn’t need to be or remain inclusive or elusive.

Yes, I stand corrected on my translation of anti-authoritarian. Had just gotten off a discussion of sorts about obedience and aqueicence, I was a tad cranky and defensive.
Thanks for clarifying.
Blogs do challenge the powers that be, albeit different powers,and yes Jeff, words do matter.
I’m a human being that goes for the easiest joke sometimes. I can be quite dumb.
I was wrong. My apology.:^(

What I took from Velveteen Rabbi was something that needs to be celebrated - the diversity, the awareness that god-blogs speak to deep need, and do so in ways authority cannot.
I’d have enjoyed being in your discussion with those of different faiths, different stages of seeking.

We are more than ready for realistic ways to classify religious blogs. I happen to think re-classification from current portal categories is cool. “Cool” is reductionist, puerile and cheap, but works for me.

You didn’t muddy the waters, I’m pleased you came over and cleared them. I’m looking forward to seeing others observations and conclusions as well as yours. Thanks Jeff. Blog on!

That’s just one example. The discussion took place at Harvard because that’s where Dave Winer got space. Included were professional thinkers like Jay Rosen, and brilliant bloggers who never went to college, and folks who like to write about their kitty cats.

The comment on “taxonomy” (which is a good word, and if you need to look it up — which I’m betting you actually don’t — then it’s time well-spent) was important. I think meant more than “cool” new names. What we learned is that there isn’t a whole lotta common ground between a blog maintained by someone who is VERY secure within a given faith and one that exists as a means for the blogger to just kind of roam around other faiths. The first kind espouses the truth; the second kind suggests that there is no “Truth.”

So if someone wants to think about religion blogs and what they do (and some people do want to think about those things, so let ‘em), it might help to reframe the question.

Lastly — anti-authoritarian? Gimme a break. You know what Velveteen is talking about.

I live and work next to academia, not inside it. I see the abuse of language all the time. I understand the foolishness of jargon. At the same time, I recognize that there is a use for “big words” sometimes, and that not all statements are made simpler by using simple words.

Take the example “blogging as essentially anti-authoritarian,” which you translate as “we bloggers are rebellious.” Both statements may be true, but they don’t mean the same thing. The distinction is small but important, and it’s hard to understand (for me, at least), which is why words DO matter. (I’d hope a blogger, of all people, would agree that words matter.) The first statement argues that there is something in the medium of blogging that is anti-authoritarian. That doesn’t mean the blogger is. What’s interesting, to me, is that so many aren’t anti-authoritarian or rebellious, that so many love and long for more authority, more tradition, more discipline. And yet by blogging, they keep challenging the powers that be, whether they want to or not.

Hope I haven’t further muddied the waters. I’m writing only because I’m a longtime fan of Bene Diction, and in big part because I know you as a good writer who doesn’t go for the easiest joke.