When do you stop thinking and know it

"You're not even listening to me!"

Collage: Dr. Jos Schnurer
Click on the image to enlarge it

Almost everyone in different life situations has probably heard this accusation, whether as a child from their parents, as a pupil in school, during conversations by the fireplace, on a walk or at the beer table. Being able to listen is a quality that is indispensable for human interaction. The ability to listen to yourself and other people has to do with empathy, namely being able to adjust emotionally and intellectually to the thoughts and actions of other people. In order to be able to listen, you need your own attitude as a certainty of your own, stable and proven identity. And it requires an ethical awareness, as expressed as “global ethics” in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: “The recognition of the dignity inherent in all members of the human family and their equal and inalienable rights forms the basis of freedom, justice and of peace in the world ”[i].

To be able to listen means to learn to think for yourself

Only egoists and self-centered people believe that hearing is worth less than speaking, especially when it comes out of your own mouth. In the anthropological, Aristotelian view of human existence, the anthrôpos, the human being, is assigned a middle position between theos, god, and zoon, animal, in the scala naturae. By virtue of his ability to reason, man is able to form general judgments and to distinguish between good and bad. Through his logos, the language, he is able to express feelings, plans, goals and expectations and to be able to communicate with other people. In the philosophical discourse, “energetic speaking” is contrasted with “ecstatic silence” (Michael Hampe), thus shifting from the art of rhetoric to the ability to listen. The humorist Wilhelm Busch put it this way: "Everyone has stupid thoughts, but the wise keep them silent". And the French philosopher and enlightener Voltaire directed the line of sight towards a virtuous and tolerant attitude towards speaking and silence with his wisdom: “Everything you say should be true. But you should not say everything that is true! ”[Ii].

"O, keep silence"

With this request the philosopher Søren Kierkegaard certainly did not want to make people mute; rather, he addressed the initially irritating sentence primarily to the philosophers, of whom on the one hand it is expected that, with their reflection on people and the world, they provide assistance in recognizing themselves and finding their way around the world; on the other hand, philosophers have at all times developed the tendency to write down their reflections as sets of instructions and to bring them to the market. The latter is again to be seen as a warning sign: Because philosophy is mostly understood as a search for truth, philosophers are dependent on making it heard; In a sense, to sit on the “truth chair”, to go to the “truth market” and to find the attention of the “truth consumers”. It is not uncommon for this to result in the output of orders: "It is ordered to change the world instead of explaining it". This dilemma is indicated by the school of thought known as "anti-philosophy". It does not want to abolish thought or truth; Rather, it is the "anti-philosophers" who, in addition to Kierkegaard, also include thinkers such as Leo Schestow, Martin Heidegger, Jacques Derida, Walter Benjamin, Theodor Lessing, Ernst Jünger, Alexander Kojèv, Friedrich Nietzsche, Michail Bachtin, Michail Bulgakov, Richard Wagner, Mashall McLuhan, Gotthold Ephraim Lessing and Clemens Greenberg belong, therefore, to let the thinking begin properly only when the subject is able to detach himself from his own interests in life and the thoughts of his own deliberation, that is, mental distance from the to take one's own existence. “To abolish philosophy as the ultimate source of the consumerist, critical attitude and thereby to free the truth from its commodity form”, this anti-philosophical command is worth taking into account of our questions about ourselves, our existence and our world. With that we should not be silent, as Kierkegaard has imposed on us; but we would come to rest (now and then) and with it to think differently than what traditional philosophy has taught us [iii].

"Real listening is a gift"

The Tübingen media scientist Bernhard Pörksen pleads in the section “TIME TO THINK” [iv] to remember that humans have two ears: a “I-ear” and a “you-ear”. With the former we hear our personal attitudes, behaviors and prejudices and align them with our own ego and world views; with the second we orient ourselves towards the other: "With the you-ear we really hear the other - in his strangeness, his beauty, his horror". In a humane, empathic encounter and in dialogue on an equal footing, it can be possible to talk to one another and listen to one another. If we switch off one of the two ears or if we clog it with selfishness or misunderstood altruism, disturbances and blockages arise in the individual and social system. With his conviction that one can force people to be silent, but never to listen, he justifies with the invitation to learn and experience, to dampen one's own internal noise and the external noise generated by others, to endure the silence and to be positive with it to deal with, to practice, to question the attitudes and attitudes that determine their own truths, and to live with surprises, unexpected, unusual good and bad situations and to make the best of them for a good, successful life for all people.

Is listening a virtue?

To be able to listen means to be free! The value positions that people acquire as cultural and social traditions through education and upbringing include principles as they are established as ethical and generally applicable rules of life for the humane in humans. It is the democratic values: freedom, equality, justice and peacefulness. They do not fall from the sky and are not in the genes, but must be acquired early, steadily and lifelong. “Freedom is not a cake that can be enjoyed, but a muscle that needs to be trained”, this is how the psychologist, writer and television author Ulrich Beer (+ 2011) described this humane challenge. As a political person, it was important to him not only to practice tolerance and moral courage himself, but also to encourage other people to do so; for example by setting up the Eisenbacher Authors' Foundation, with which the Ulrich Beer sponsorship award from the “Eisenbacher Dorfschreiber” is awarded to young authors every five years. Since 2002 he has acted as editor of the series "Lebensformen" at Centaurus Verlag. To a certain extent, his legacy is to be understood as the booklet “Moral Courage” [v], in which the advocacy for one's own freedom and that of other people, actively and consistently, postulates as a prerequisite for a peaceful, common coexistence in our (one?) World becomes. Civil courage as deliberate courage, that is the necessity to learn democracy [vi]. With the poem that Dietrich Bonhoeffer wrote in view of his murder by the National Socialists in 1945, Ulrich Beer clarifies his conception of moral courage: Not anything
but do what is right and dare
not floating in the possible, bravely seize the real,

not in the flight of thoughts, alone in fact is freedom.
Step out of fearful hesitation into the storm of events,

borne only by God's command and your faith,
and freedom will receive your spirit with exultation.

Being able to listen and speak are two sides of the same coin.

Rhêtorikê, oratory, is, as Aristotle put it, a method. And he points out that rhetoric must always be viewed in relation to the addressee and the respective situation, i.e. it must neither be dialectic nor demagogy [vii]. This distinction is important in order not to fall victim to the misunderstanding that speaking can be a means of exploring the ultimate and only correct truth. The rhetoric is thus a technique that enables the zôon politikon, the political creature of man, to get involved communicatively in social life and to take part in public existence. The question of whether it is possible to learn to speak has been tried by speaking teachers and speaking schools at all times; and serious and curious works have emerged, such as “Kral's Practical Rednerschule” as a (self-) course in 14 booklets (Verlagdruckerei E. Senn, Abensberg, 5th, expanded edition 1938), in the introductory remarks on it It is pointed out that “from ancient times up to our time of ocean flights and modern economics () the Bible verse (applies): One recognizes the man by speaking ... Great things were often created in the world through the power of speech, the complete surrender to the sublime Ideals inflame people, thrilled to immortal days ”. This exuberance and the ideological derailment are not what lead the political scientist Joachim Detjen to present a two-volume study and exercise book on political rhetoric. He wants to remedy the widespread deficiency that many people do not have the individual and social ability to express themselves politically appropriately. In doing so, he has both the well-known and common “without me” points of view as well as the everyday “beer table” and “have you heard” opinions in view. For him, political rhetoric is therefore conviction-oriented, scientific communication and therefore part of political education and enlightenment. It's about promoting conversation and speaking skills [viii]. It would also be good to publish a “listening school” to guide you in speaking correctly, intelligently and truthfully.

Self-respect is the art of walking upright.

There are always two parts to self-respect: me and you! This already expresses that the quality of recognizing, having and claiming one's own human dignity must always be linked to the attitude that other individuals and societies have towards me and make possible. All philosophers at all times have defined the "self" as a value in itself. Ever since Plato asked what something is in truth and reality (tí poté estín), the search for one's own identity and human being has been considered and named in ever new variations and thought constructs. So self-esteem has something to do with the individual value of self and life and the cultural identities of people as a whole, and self-confidence, which must be constantly and painstakingly developed, worked out and defended. In philosophical and scientific thinking, self-esteem itself has a referential and self-regulating meaning, which requires observation of oneself and others. It is helpful, if you want to assure yourself of your own self-esteem, to become aware of the biological, anthropological and social as well as personal requirements for self-respect. Because misunderstood, ideologically set and historically developed forms of (so-called) self-esteem can easily (and even self-evident and not problematized) coagulate into negative forms such as egoism, arrogance, overestimation of oneself and notions of superiority. It is good to become aware of the philosophical meaning of the value “respect” and to ask how self-esteem can be distinguished from related terms, how the property is expressed in human nature and represented legally and morally, and what measures to take are to be seized when the ability for self-respect either cannot develop through negative developments or is destroyed and destroyed. It is best to start with the individual, everyday experiences and access the local and global social and political conditions in the world. The philosopher and ethicist Franz Josef Wetz, who teaches at the University of Education in Schwäbisch-Gmünd, goes with his book “Rebellion der self-esteem ”addresses the subject in a practical, educational and didactic way. In a time analysis, he takes on four current crisis situations as “present-day sufferings”: Islamist terror, the global uprisings against incapacitation and state arbitrariness, the overexcited and extensive individualism in Western cultures, and the imbalance in work-life balance. The image of walking upright [ix] is a good and fitting sign of the importance that self-esteem has in people's individual and collective lives [x].

The creative subject

“Be creative - and you will be successful!” - that is the message that sounds wherever people act, move and develop. Creare, creative activity, has had a sweet sound for thousands of years, as well as a promise that creative work will take humanity to unimagined heights, enable emancipation and freedom and lead to an “aestheticization of the social”. In the socially critical, scientific discourse there is a balancing act that moves between fascination, discomfort and distance. The chance as well as the compulsion to be creative bring with them wanted and unwanted requests and challenges. The chair holder for comparative cultural sociology at the European University Viadrina Frankfurt (Oder), Andreas Reckwitz, refers with his study on the (new) invention of creativity to the new (old) experience that creare has a double meaning: “On the one hand, refers they refer to the ability and the reality to dynamically produce new things ..., on the other hand creativity refers to a model of the “creative that ties it back to the modern figure of the artist, to the artistic and aesthetic as a whole”. If it is the case that every person is an artist (Joseph Beuys), or is at least able to create and live aesthetics, we are challenged to be creative; Admittedly not in the sense of acquiring a material ever-more, but of bringing creativity into our center of life. This requires a change of perspective, as formulated by the World Commission “Culture and Development” in 2005: Mankind is called upon to “rethink, reorient and reorganize socially, in short: to find new ways of life” [xi].

Human beings are fundamentally changeable living beings

The traditio humana, as an important strand in historical-anthropological research, assumes that “what is possible for humans is recognizable in what was previously possible for humans, but this is not its ultimate measure. Everything that has been there is possible for people, but by no means everything has already been there ”. In historical anthropology it is about “combining knowledge from and about people from different epochs and cultures into an album of the human for an exploration of the human”, namely “looking back at historically and with regard to currently realized humanities the reflexive To widen the horizon of the present to the variety of possibilities of human existence ”. At the Institute for Educational Sciences at the University of Innsbruck, an understanding of transdisciplinary educational sciences has been cultivated since the 1980s, in which historical anthropology, the history of civilization, historical psychology, psychohistory and a number of other directions of thought that cross the disciplinary systems of the specialist sciences work together. The anthropologist and educational scientist Bernhard Rathmayr (em.), Who teaches in Innsbruck and Bolzano, publishes the series "Conglomerations" in an interdisciplinary research and practical discussion "at the crossroads of the In the present, the unstable relationship between protection and protection for future everyday worlds is to be clarified and, in principle, to remain open ”.The reference to a "relativistic understanding of human beings" stimulates the necessary discourse to expand the awareness of human existence and the efforts to bring anthropological, humanistic, empathic, historical, brain-physiological and human-philosophical aspects into the anthropological debates about human understanding and knowledge [xii].

Transparency does not make you clairvoyant

Wilhelm von Humboldt's formula in his work “On the Difference in the Structure of Human Language and Its Influence on the Spiritual Development of the Human Kind” (1836) wants to make it clear that human freedom also includes being able to or not wanting to understand something . It is about the question of thinking understanding, as this is called in philosophy with the synhesis as moral judgment (Aristotle) ​​and is expressed in the categories of ethics, as the balance of human reason - and as transparency. Symbols and terms are patterns of perception and interpretation for ideologies, opinions and programs for human thought and behavior; but they can also be blind alleys and dead ends. The term “transparency” is used in politics as the democratic basis for freedom of citizens and their rights of co-determination and participation in political and social discourse. When the Berlin Reichstag building, which was built from 1884 to 1894 in the neo-renaissance style and was the seat of the Reichstag of the German Empire until the end of World War I and the parliament of the Weimar Republic until the beginning of National Socialism, became the seat of the German Bundestag from 1991 , a symbol for national unity and democratic transparency should be set with the structural redesign. After long disputes, the design by the English architects Foster was finally implemented to put a glass, walk-on dome on the Reichstag building and thus to symbolize political transparency. Political transparency is postulated as constitutional law in several countries, such as Sweden; the demand for “glasnost” has led to “perestroika”, to change in world politics, and with Transparency International an initiative has been formed that makes abuse of power and corruption public and transparent. The philosopher and media theorist Byung-Chul Han, who comes from South Korea and teaches at the Karlsruhe University of Design, points out that “transparency” can have different meanings and expressions; for example when he provokes: “Only the dead are transparent” [xiii]. He takes up the discourse about the “transparent human being” in the digitized world, who exposes himself (voluntarily consciously and involuntarily unconsciously) to the demands for publicity and transparency, and he calls for a new explanation of “that there are positive, productive spheres of the human existence and togetherness, which the compulsory transparency downright destroys ”. The ego becomes an exhibit and “in the exhibited society every subject is its own advertising object”. The demand for total transparency is, according to Byung-Chul Han, no more and no less than tyranny, which appears with the moral claim to transparency, but does not make clairvoyant and intelligent, but rather selfish and lonely [xiv].

To the value discourse

The concept of values ​​is used in both scientific and everyday contexts, predominantly in the context of economic discourse. The traditional, philosophical (ancient) classifications to the (moral) “good life” are neglected. It is not moral, but material existence that determines consciousness, is a maxim. Thinking about values ​​and striving for universally binding and accepted values ​​that limit individualism, hegemony and egoism to human thought and action and allow them to be overcome, is one of the anthropological challenges, for all people on earth a good, successful, just, thus to ensure humane life. The sociologist (em.) Of the Johann Wolfgang Goethe University in Frankfurt / M., Jürgen Ritsert, also points out that we are still far from this ideal situation. A reflection on values ​​in the form of an essay must inevitably be carried out "in short steps" and "carefully", namely through sustainable definitions, a reflection on the basic structures of statements of fact and value judgments, the examination of problem areas in determining the relationship between value judgments and statements of fact, the assignments for scientific work and the demonstration of connections in people's cultural thinking and acting. So that “interests” do not establish themselves in the value discourse as egoistic, ethnocentric or individualistic (guiding) lines and signposts on the paths through the “swamp” of value designations, conceptions and designations and become, to a certain extent, “primitive”, a sociological viewpoint is helpful . The author formulates it with his "cycle model", the basis of which is philosophical, sociological and lifeworld paradigms and historical ideas. It is the value ideas that determine our everyday life and allow us to cope with general and special problem situations; and it is the interest in knowledge in theory and practice that guides people, lets them think and act, which makes the concept of “value” so worthy of demand, reflection and discussion [xv].

"Cognitive Ease"

The Israeli-American psychologist and university professor Daniel Kahneman and his colleague Vernon L. Smith were awarded the Nobel Prize for Economics in 2002. Kahneman's “Prospect Theory”, which he developed together with Amos Tversky, explains how decision-making comes about in situations of uncertainty and risk. Economic decision theory is particularly applied in behavioral economics. Behind the apparently vague and unspecific statement - "Most impressions and thoughts emerge in our consciousness without our knowing how they got there" - hides the age-old effort to track down people's intuitive thinking. From antiquity, and certainly before and through all times, people have thought about how intellectual cognitive activity, thinking, as dianoia, understanding, comes about. The intellectual, emotional, mental, conscious and unconscious thought processes are subject to phenomena which, according to Kahneman, can be represented in two different categories and thought systems: Intuitive and conscious thinking. The more recent neurological and psychological research results show that "the intuitive system is more influential than it seems to be based on our subjective experience," so it can be seen as the secret author of many decisions and judgments. The psychological theories based on the two (thought) systems of intuitive, fast thinking and rational, slow thinking must not be understood as a shortcoming or degradation of the human intellect; Rather, what is required is an understanding and awareness of how judgments and decision-making processes come about in individual and social action. Only when it is possible to subject the various decisions that make our everyday and collective life necessary to a constructive criticism and to name them in a differentiated language can preventive measures against wrong decisions be taken; trusting that a “decision will be judged on how it came about, and not just on what came out of it” [xvi].

The search for a "culture of (im) calm"

Calm and restlessness are opposites. In human existence they appear as immobility and movement, physically and mentally. Already in ancient Greek philosophy stasis, calm, as akinêsia, immobility, erêmia ”, as solitude, loneliness, concentration, meditation, on the contrary to akinêsia, movement, metabolê, change, had an existential meaning. In the current philosophical discourse, a special form of lifestyle and vitality is ascribed to the quality of keeping calm, inner self, equanimity, equilibrium, composure, self-control, restraint, serenity ... “When knowledge and serenity complement each other, harmony and order are created “[Xvii]. Of course, the ideal of being relaxed and living is often opposed to realities and constraints that cause restlessness, hectic pace, stress, being driven and being overwhelmed. The advice - "You have to change your life" (Peter Sloterdijk) - usually comes as a request that can hardly be fulfilled in everyday life. On closer reflection, however, these anthropological and apparently logical evaluation criteria are opposed to characteristics that identify “restlessness (as) a feeling of being, a world full of fantasies, full of promises and plans”. This refers to a human ability that does not mean standstill and insistence on the existing, but rather puts man's ability to change and change in the foreground. The philosopher Ralf Konersmann from Kiel directs his gaze to this “blind spot”, which expresses “unrest” as a (un) virtue that has to be overcome and is harmful to human existence. With his essay he does not want to warn against the blind rage of making and join in the anthropological complaints of “having or being” (Erich Fromm); Rather, he is primarily concerned with getting to the bottom of the concepts and manageability of the (apparent) opposition between calm and restlessness in the sense of self-enlightenment: “The claim of such a reassurance is less aimed at correcting what is supposedly wrong or wrong than at that Determination of who we ... ourselves are, who we become visible to ourselves and to others through our particular, our own way of speaking, thinking and behavior ”. In doing so, he directs his attention on the one hand to historical, cultural developments about how the properties of calm and unrest are represented; on the other hand, he deals with the supposed, thought and made phenomena of restlessness, indeterminacy and lack of boundaries in the increasingly interdependent and global developing (one?) world. His plea for a genealogy and cultivation of unrest brings to light a whole series of cross-references, parallels and imponderables to the (apparent) opposite, calm. Dealing with the cultural phenomenon “restlessness” is thus determined by how the property is perceived; because unrest is present, in the past, present and future. “It is () inescapability with which the unrest itself endangers the promise it has become [xviii].

Listen to the wordless voice of your own body

The deciphering of the “non-verbal realm” of body language and state of mind cannot be achieved by (only) looking at the possibly triggering external event for a traumatic disorder, but by trying to fathom how blocked energies can be recognized and resolved. "So salvation can be found in the body," says US trauma researcher Peter A. Levine. With the theory and therapy of "Somatic Experiencing" developed by him, a method of "body awareness for trauma resolution", it can succeed that the traumatized person is able to get involved in life again and to recognize that "trauma ( although) is a fact in life; However, it does not have to be a lifelong fate ”. With the book “Language without Words” Peter A. Levine establishes himself as a trauma researcher of stature and as a trend-setting therapist. Because therapeutic knowledge is not only important in the treatment of physical and mental disorders [xix], but can also hold the keys ready for a successful or unsuccessful togetherness in everyday life, it is important to consider the interrelationships between body and mind to take into account the successful and failed communication processes [xx].

Summit hikes

The exciting, anthropological and psychological change of perspective, that mystics are not unique people, but that every person is a unique mystic, seems to open perspectives that have moved people to hopes and what ever since they became aware of their intellect and their humanity in the “global ethics”, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, is expressed as an ideal concept of humanity. The American psychologist Abraham H. Maslow (1908-1970) is considered to be the co-founder of humanistic psychology [xxi]. In the German-speaking, psychological, psychotherapeutic, sociological and development policy discussions, he is primarily known for his “pyramid of needs”, with which he shows people's individual basic needs. When Maslow, in his search for humanity, simply turned the question “What makes people mentally ill?” Up until then, and looked up positively with the question “What distinguishes particularly mentally healthy people?”, He came across a remarkable one Finding: "Mentally particularly healthy people tend to have 'mystical experiences'". Maslow puts traditional relationships and "certainties" to the test; In the social existence of the people he advocates a separation of church and state, but not for an “eradication” of either one or the other institution, because “one-sidedness makes you sick”. The argument about “the essentially religious or transcendent experience” brings the author to the assertion that all “supernatural revelations” transmitted and based on the world religions and religious worldviews can be interpreted as “completely natural, human peak experiences”. In his therapeutic experiences and research he found that “non-theistic religious people” seem to think more religiously, more transcendentally and more mystically than conventionally religious people. [xxii].

"The good, this sentence is clear, is always the bad that is left!"

From Aristotle to Wilhelm Busch, there are tracts, attempts at explanations and recipes on how to make a person live well. One of the magic words is the virtue of "serenity". The effort to find access to and recognition of terms that are in many ways identifiers for human characteristics and human behavior is usually combined with showing images and specimens, and with the request to think outside the box and thus a change of perspective at the established To do or not to do. When approaching the term “serenity”, it makes sense to look for a “locus amoenus”, that is, a desirable, “lovely” and idealized place where it is worthwhile and perhaps only possible to reflect on the virtue that in the mentalities and (supposed as well as actual) constraints of functionalist and rationalist thought and action threatens to perish. In an interdisciplinary symposium in 2010 on the occasion of the retirement of the Munich philosopher Hennig Ottmann, colleagues and companions thought about "serenity" and provided references to the connections with "negative ethics". Thinking about "serenity", such as the propagation of attitudes and behavior and decelerating life are indications that the developments that have arisen in the age of medialized, technologized and capitalized modernity should be changed towards the courage to face life: “Let it be”. The individual contributions convey in a differentiated and convincing way that this change of perspective is in no way to be understood as something that is eternally yesterday and obsolete, but rather shows new, future-oriented, human perspectives with the "courage to let". [Xxiii].

"He who lives has to deal with paradoxes"

With this statement, reference is made to the everyday, individual and social boundary migration of "undecidability of the truth or falsehood of statements". The physician, sociologist and organizational developer from the University of Witten / Herdecke, Fritz B. Simon, takes on the coincidences, logical and illogical paradoxes as they appear in family life, in business and politics.Because our individual everyday life as well as our social existence is determined by highly complex, "logical" paradoxes, we are challenged to develop our thinking and acting beyond simple "either-or principles". “In order to explain the origin of disorder, we have to study the origin of order and to find out what brings about, maintains, changes or dissolves a certain order”. Because in the search for order as in the detection of disorder, incognition work in the same way as cognition, and it is important to consider explicit and implicit states of consciousness. “When right is left and left is right” - this statement can be a call to despair, a resignation parameter, or a structuralist method for an order and organization principle that distinguishes logic from rationality [xxiv].

Future is now

It is the mix of euphoria, optimism and pessimism that characterizes our private and public consciousness and is expressed in moods that range from the “lightness of being” to the “burden of everyday life”. The Swiss environmental and human rights activist Hans A. Pestalozzi (1929 - 2004) calls in his book "Nach uns die Zukunft" (1979) to think and act positively and subversively, i.e. reality with a good deal of active criticism and resilience to spice up: Where would we go / if everyone said / where would we go / and nobody would go / to take a look / where one would come / if one would go ”. The question of how mankind wants to live (in the present and future) cannot be answered with illusions and speculations, but can be thought with visions [xxv]. The dilemma (or also the luck?) That the future cannot really be foreseen, because the human being is a "worldly" living being [xxvi], has to be understood and recognized. That is precisely why man is called upon to reflect on the cultural, intellectual and anthropological logic of the future; not in order to be able to manage the future reliably and accurately in the future, but learn to recognize through reason what opportunities and necessities exist, to know the relationship between people and the future and to work in the search for a good, successful life for all people on earth can [xxvii].


The subjective, neither systematic nor approximately comprehensive, with a view to the literature I have mainly presented on the internet review service www.socialnet.de does not claim to address all aspects of the virtue of listening. Some connections should be shown as an example, how in school and adult education an attention and mindfulness can be generated to learn to listen.

Contact to the author:
Dr. Jos Schnurer
Immelmannstrasse 40
31137 Hildesheim
Tel: 05121 59124
Email: [email protected]

[i] German UNESCO Commission, Human Rights. International documents, Bonn 1981, p. 48
[ii] Jürgen Stock, that would have been thought! How we free ourselves from the trap of entrenched thought patterns, 2011, http://www.socialnet.de/rezensions/11725.php
[iii] Boris Groys, Introduction to Anti-Philosophy, 2009, http://www.socialnet.de/rezensions/8487.php; see also: Heinz von Foerster / Bernhard Pörksen, truth is the invention of a liar. Conversations for Skeptics, 2011, http://www.socialnet.de/rezensions/13980.php; and: Wolfgang Welsch, Homo mundanus. Beyond the anthropic way of thinking of modernity, 2012, http://www.socialnet.de/rezensions/14323.php
[iv] DIE ZEIT, No. 34, August 11, 2016, p. 50
[v] Ulrich Beer, civil courage, 2011, http://www.socialnet.de/rezensions/12604.php
[vi] Wolfgang Beutel / Peter Fauser, eds., Democracy Education. Learning for Civil Society, 2006, http://www.socialnet.de/rezensions/4442.php; and: Hans Berkessel, et al., Ed., Jahrbuch Demokratiepädagogik, 2013, http://www.socialnet.de/rezensions/15225.php
[vii] Otfried Höffe, Aristoteles-Lexikon, Kröner-Verlag, Stuttgart 2005, 640 pp.
[viii] Joachim Detjen, you can speak in a democracy. Study and exercise book on political rhetoric, 2014, http://www.socialnet.de/rezensions/16527.php
[ix] Kurt Bayertz, The upright gait. A history of anthropological thought, 2013, http://www.socialnet.de/rezensions/17706.php
[x] Franz Josef Wetz, self-respect rebellion. Against Humiliation, 2014, http://www.socialnet.de/rezensions/17571.ph
[xi] Andreas Reckwitz, The Invention of Creativity, 2012, http://www.socialnet.de/rezensions/14393.php
[xii] Bernhard Rathmayr, self-compulsion and self-realization. Building blocks for a historical anthropology of occidental people, 2011, http://www.socialnet.de/rezensions/11820.php; as well as: Daniel N. Stern, among others, change processes. An integrative paradigm, 2012, http://www.socialnet.de/rezensions/13911.php
[xiii] The weekly newspaper DIE ZEIT from January 12, 2012
[xiv] Byung-Chul Han, Transparency Society, 2012, http://www.socialnet.de/rezensions/12799.php
[xv] Jürgen Ritsert, value. Why something is dear to us, 2013, http://www.socialnet.de/rezensions/15972.php
[xvi] Daniel Kahneman, Fast Thinking, Slow Thinking, 2012, http://www.socialnet.de/rezensions/17709.php
[xvii] Thomas Strässle, Serenity. About a different attitude to the world, 2013, www.socialnet.de/rezensions/14938.php
[xviii] Ralf Konersmann, The Unrest of the World, 2015, http://www.socialnet.de/rezensions/19459.php
[xix] Eugenio Gaddini, “The I is above all a physical one”. Contributions to psychoanalysis, 2015, http://www.socialnet.de/rezensions/19463.php
[xx] Peter A. Levine, Language without Words - Understanding the messages of our body. The basic book on trauma, self-regulation and finding inner balance, 2011, http://www.socialnet.de/rezensions/11727.php
[xxi] Jürgen Straub, ed., The self-actualizing person. On the humanism of humanistic psychology, 2012, www.socialnet.de/rezensions/13888.php
[xxii] Abraham H. Maslow, Everyone is a mystic. Impulses for the spiritual becoming whole, 2014, http://www.socialnet.de/rezensions/16223.php
[xxiii] Henning Ottmann / Stefano Saracino et al., eds., Gelassenheit - und other attempts at negative ethics, 2014, http://www.socialnet.de/rezensions/18926.php
[xxiv] Fritz B. Simon, when right is left and left is right. Paradox Management in Family, Economy and Politics, 2013, http://www.socialnet.de/rezensions/14542.php
[xxv] Dieter Korczak, ed., “Visions instead of illusions. How do we want to live? ”, 2014, www.socialnet.de/rezensions/18045.php
[xxvi] Wolfgang Welsch, Homo mundanus. Beyond the modern anthropic way of thinking, 2012, www.socialnet.de/rezensions/14323.php
[xxvii] Andreas Hartmann / Oliwia Murawska, eds., Representing the future. On the cultural logic of the future, 2015, http://www.socialnet.de/rezensions/18833.php