Tart....Integration of Conciousness Posted by Sally on August 25, 1999 at 16:30:05:
The Problem of the
Subtle Sybil Effect
By R.C.L.
Chapter Two of Laws of Wisdom
------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------
The underlying reason the big questions are so difficult to answer is
ultimately personal – we are swamped in a plethora of identities,
most of them false. These false personas were imposed upon us from the
outside by society and from the inside by our own muddled thinking.
For most of us there is no single unified self, no uniform field of
continuous consciousness. Our "common sense" notion to the contrary,
that we are one person with a singular identity, is based on a false
assumption. In the words of psychologist Charles Tart, Ph.D.:
We just assume that a given person is relatively consistent with
himself, that he constitutes one person with various characteristics,
traits, and so on. Thus you call yourself by one name, with the
implication that you are indeed one person even though you have a range
of moods and feelings. .... we actually have many quite discrete
subpersonalities, each of which calls itself "I" when it happens to be
activated by appropriate environmental stimuli, but we have no unity of
personality at all except in the sense that all the various
subpersonalities are associated with the same physical body and name.
(1)
As Professor Tart and many others have found, by the time we become
adults our identity is disjointed, fragmented, perhaps even fractal,
like a "Julia Set."(2) We have one series of identities and
personalities inherited from our parents, fashioned to meet their
expectations, or to rebel against them. There is another series of
personalities acquired in the course of schooling, another while
dating, another at work, another in a sport or hobby, etc.
Close observation of yourself will reveal that you are different people
at different times. There is precious little continuity between your
different states of consciousness. When you are one person one moment,
you have usually forgotten that you were a completely different person
a few moments before, and will be yet another person later. You are
consumed by the personality of the moment. The personalities are
isolated from each other by barriers of unawareness. There are defenses
or buffers between the many "I's". There is no underlying actor to play
the part. No one who remembers and coordinates all of the roles.
It's as if a series of different people - acquaintances, not friends -
took turns inhabiting the same body. We are one person when we first
wake up, another person to our children, another to our spouse, another
to our boss, etc. One "I" may make a promise, but the next "I" will not
remember to keep it, or will not want to keep it. We live in a chaotic
world where an endless series of things happen to us that do not fit
together, do not make sense. Many important things seem to be the
result of chance or luck. There is no conscious being there to see
the "big picture" so that it can all make sense. There is no center, no
empty hub uniting the many spokes of the wheel, the many fragments of
self. The conscious states alternate unconnected by inner silence. It
is like hearing foreign words or sentences without any underlying
comprehension. The underlying being who comprehends and integrates is
unconscious. The actor is asleep. The play goes on mechanically,
uncomprehendingly. For such a one the "scientists" are correct, man is
a machine and enlightenment is impossible, or merely a delusion,
another fleeting role.To quote my favorite lawyer, Abraham Lincoln: A
house divided against itself cannot stand.
Since most everyone suffers from weakly-connected consciousness, this
appears to be natural and normal. We only recognize it as a problem in
its most extreme forms, where there is total and complete disconnection
of the different parts of the self. These are the cases where the
different people inhabiting the body are complete strangers to each
other. This is the pathological disorder of multiple personalities made
famous by the case of Sybil.(3) Sybil Dorsett was a woman with sixteen
separate personalities. At first none of them knew or remembered any of
the others. For instance, one personality named Victoria Antoinette
Scharleau was a self-assured, sophisticated, attractive blond, and
another named Mike Dorsett thought she was male, a builder and
carpenter. With multiple personality disorders it is not uncommon for
the shy personality to be shocked to wake up naked in bed with a man
the sexy personality met the night before. One personality shifts with
another and there is no recollection of the prior person. There is a
complete discontinuity of consciousness.
This kind of multiple personality disorder is often caused by extreme
negative events as a child. In Sybil's case, she was tortured and
sexually abused as a young girl. This caused her to break up,
literally, because she could not bear the extreme abuse she was
subjected to. Through years of therapy Sybil was able to confront the
memories and eventually integrate the separate personalities into one.
She became a whole person.
INTEGRATION OF CONSCIOUSNESS
Personality dissociation in its extreme form is obviously a problem
which must be corrected. But the less severe manifestations -
the "subtle Sybil" effect, wherein we are disconnected to a certain
degree - is a problem unknown to most people. Psychology is just
beginning to recognize this as a root problem which underlies many
others.(4) Most people do not know they are shattered. They treat
themselves and others as if they were one person, already fully
integrated and whole. In fact, most people are just integrated enough
to function in society. They are not solid enough to answer the big
questions for themselves, to make sense of their lives, and know who
they are and what they can do.
If we stop to think about the discontinuity - the differences in our
moods and personalities - we just assume it is natural and of no
importance. For instance, who can constantly recall their dream selves,
or who they were in deep sleep - unconsciousness? We accept the
barriers between our waking and sleeping selves as natural, inevitable,
just like the barriers between our left and right brains. We fail to
recognize the significance of the basic discontinuity between waking
and sleep. Even the lack of continuity in waking consciousness - which
occurs to everyone in the course of a day, or even a few minutes - is
accepted as natural. We are sad one minute, then the next we are happy,
in the next reflective, in the next absorbed in music, in the next
answering the phone. When we are with some people we have a submissive
personality, with others a dominant persona comes out. Is there a
conscious being underlying all of these different states of
consciousness? Is there a center unifying the multiple personalities?
For almost everyone the answer is no. Their consciousness is not fully
integrated, and they do not even see this as a problem. How is the
actor to awake?
Recognition that "integration" of multiple selves is a problem is the
critical first step in the solution. It is also the first step to
answering the question of who you are. Only you can discover who you
are, no one can do it for you. The discovery comes from observation of
yourselves - all of them - and then integration into a conscious whole.
This requires bridging the great divide between the waking self and the
sleeping self. The corpus callosum dividing the left and right brains
must be transformed from a wall into a highway. Then you can start to
understand who you are, and begin to integrate all of the many
snapshots of your life into a flowing movie.
Until you attain this continuity, your true identity will elude you.
The meaning of life will remain an enigma wrapped in a mystery. Your
true desires, your real potential, will remain hidden between the
intervals of your many selves. You will be incomplete, asleep.
One reason most of us fail to notice the lack of continuity is that one
or two personalities - and the states of consciousness that go with
them - tend to dominate the other weaker personalities and their
consciousness. They hide the gaps, cover up the problem. Frequently the
dominant personalities are imposed upon us from the outside. The strong
alien personalities - the dominant consciousness states - frequently
overpower and sublimate the other parts of our self, the other states
of consciousness we experience. The weaker states are then forced into
subconsciousness or unconsciousness. They are forgotten, disassociated
from the conscious identity.
One or two of the many personalities act in place of our overall Self.
We do not know the plethora of possible personalities, unified and
integrated in one being. We do not experience a healthy variety of
conscious states. As a result our potential is artificially limited. We
experience only a small slice of life. We see the rest as if through a
glass darkly.
Consciousness of the other parts of our self eventually becomes
forbidden. They are not even recognized when experienced. If they are
consciously experienced, they are promptly forgotten. They
become "altered" states of conscious, momentary lapses of character.
This dissociation and imbalanced dominance of one personality and
consciousness over all others - a kind of psychological cancer -
frequently leads to illnesses, psychological complexes and neurosis.
The underlying being aware of the many sides of self is asleep,
relegated to the unconscious. The strong role has taken over the actor
and prevents him from waking.
For most people the dominant personality is not even their own. It is a
false personality imposed on them from their parents, friends, job or
society. The false personality is a muddled thinker, with no connection
to the other innate capacities of the whole being. The false persona is
not linked with the true Self, it is not naturally a part of the
underlying being. It is instead linked to the cultural consensus, the
mass hypnosis and pseudo-thinking. If the actor should awaken he would
not play that role, he would not accept that thought. People dominated
by false personalities are usually weak, with little energy or
vitality. Usually, only personality which is in connection with a
person's potential - their true inner Self - can vitalize and naturally
make room for the whole Self. Only a real persona can accept and try to
integrate "altered states". The false, unconnected personalities only
block energy. They act as a negative mask to hide true potential,
instead of expressing it.
The recognition and dropping of such lifeless personalities is the
first step in discovering who you really are. It is the first step
in "waking up". As you wake up you begin a conscious journey to
realization of your full potential. There are many ways to wake up,
many procedures. You need to find a procedure which is good for you. In
that way you can move beyond legal study into the actual "practice of
the Law." With an effective method, and adequate teachers and
counselors, you may be lucky enough to wake up. You may be able to tap
your inner essence and develop a true personality.
That is just the beginning, however, not the end. At first, there are
many dangers. You can still be dominated by the first real aspect of
your self that wakes up. The first strong fragment personality to
awaken may try to block the awakening of the rest. Still, it is easier
to awaken to the full dynamics of yourself from out of a true
personality than a false one. The actor once stirred may awaken. Once
awakened, the road to self actualization may be traveled.
Another danger that remains after the journey has begun arises from
cultural restraints and muddled thinking. This can cause you to awaken
only certain socially-acceptable sides of yourself and repress the
rest. You may be afraid of parts of yourself or be prejudiced against
them. For instance, you may have been taught as a child that sex was
bad and so refuse to awaken that part of your human nature. If the real
and awakened personas don't know any better, the phony censor persona
may continue to have real power. Objective, holistic thinking is the
answer. It can counteract the censor, the cultural restraints and
inherited beliefs. Once your real personas are taught to think
straight, they will see through the muddled thinking inherited from the
past. Unlike the false personalities, the real personalities have the
power and courage to act on their thinking. They can transcend the
hindrances of the past. Armed with true thinking, they can overcome the
cultural censor, and liberate all parts of your human potential.
THE CASE OF CHARLES T. TART v. NORMAL CONSCIOUSNESS
Professor Charles Tart is an American scientist and academic who has
thought deeply about these topics. More importantly, he has taken
action and tried hard to clarify and solidify his own consciousness, to
take it out of what he refers to as the "cultural consensual trance" of
so called normal consciousness. His careful scientific research has
shown that what passes for normal or average consciousness is just one
possible form of consciousness among many. He found that normal
consciousness is actually quite limited, subject to many artificial
constraints and disruptions. Professor Tart is one of the pioneering
scientists in the new fields of altered states of consciousness,
hypnosis, cultural consensus trance, multiple personalities,
transpersonal psychology, being and the procedures or technology
of "waking up".
Born in 1937, the son of a musician, Charles Tart grew up as a Lutheran
with deep religious convictions and intellectual interests. As a
precocious teenager his eyes opened to science. A strong conflict then
developed in his soul between the differing world views of science and
religion. The resolution of this conflict has proven to be the driving
force of his life. As a teenager looking at the hypocrisy he saw in
religion, and the strength and elegance of science, he went head-strong
into the modern scientific world. He became particularly fascinated
with electronics, earning a first-class radio telephone license while
still in high school. He also began to read widely in the field of
psychic research or parapsychology. In this one field of science he
found some kind of a link between his new found love for science and
his earlier, deeper thirst for spirituality.
In 1955 he was admitted to the premiere engineering school in the
country, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Then he ran into
calculus and his enthusiasm for engineering began to flounder. At the
same time his high school interest in parapsychology blossomed. He
started a psychic research club at MIT and connected with the dynamic
cultural life of Cambridge. He then had an opportunity to meet many of
the leading psychics and parapsychologists of that time. When he
discovered that you could actually make a living at psychology, he
decided to change career tracks. His ideal was to try to apply the
methods of science to the general field of religion. He wanted to use
science to start separating out the superstitions and nonsense in
religion from the core of important truth. That ideal fired him then
and has remained as one of the main guiding principles of his life. His
opportunity to change came from famed parapsychology scientist Dr.
Rhine, who helped Charles transfer to Duke University in 1957 to major
in psychology.
In the parapsychology labs at Duke he met Judy Bamberger, the girl who
would later become his wife. A few years later at age 22 in these same
labs Charley became the "first American psychedelic guinea pig", taking
mescaline for the sake of science. It all came about quite by accident.
Dr. Ivo Kohler, a Professor from the University of Vienna, was one of
the first scientists in the world to experiment with psychedelic drugs.
He began experiments with mescaline in Vienna, Austria in the nineteen
thirties. These experiments were unknown in the United States.
Professor Kohler was visiting the Duke parapsychology laboratories and
there started talking to a young graduate student named Charley Tart.
Charley had read Aldous Huxley's book on taking mescaline, The Doors of
Perception and was curious about Dr. Kohler's experiments. The
Professor mentioned that although he had tested many subjects from all
nations in Europe, he had never seen any experiments with an American.
Professor Kohler was curious to see if an American would have any
different psychological reactions than Europeans. Charley bravely
volunteered to be the first American test subject. In 1959 psychedelic
drugs were almost totally unheard of (these substances were not
outlawed until the mid nineteen sixties) and the good Professor
happened to be traveling with a large quantity of chemically pure
mescaline sulfate.
After some preparation Charley was given a large dose of the mescaline
which he says tasted like vomit. He sat with Professor Kohler for two
or three hours and nothing happened. The Professor was beginning to
think that Americans were indeed quite different. They were ready to
call it quits, but as one last try, Charley took still more of the
drug. That put him over the edge and all at once his psychological
resistance to the drug broke down. A few moments later he went directly
into the peak of a psychedelic experience. His consciousness expanded
tremendously and he had a deep and profound experience which totally
changed his life. Professor Kohler found that Americans were just like
Europeans. A small step for science, but a giant leap for Charley Tart.
A few years later while a graduate student at the University of North
Carolina in Chapel Hill, Charles again had an opportunity to
participate in one of the first scientific experiments with LSD and
psilocybin. A private foundation began funding a series of experiments
with psychedelic drugs. Naturally enough he volunteered for many of the
tests. Again he had deep and profound experiences with artificially
induced altered states of consciousness. The conflict in his soul
between science and religion was bridged in these scientific
experiments. This proved to be the guiding light for his later
scientific work, where he became the unquestioned leader in the
scientific exploration of spiritual experiences.
Only years later did Professor Tart learn that he had the CIA to thank
for all of the LSD he ingested in those experiments. In the early
nineteen sixties the CIA had set up dummy foundations to secretly fund
research into psychedelic drugs. They wanted to know if there was any
military potential to these strange new psychological drugs. They found
the drugs were powerful, and potentially dangerous, but the experience
of God was found to have no military value. Although not all unwitting
government guinea pigs were as fortunate as Charles Tart, he, at least,
was eternally grateful to the CIA.
In 1963 Charles Tart received his Ph.D. degree from Chapel Hill. His
special interests then were research into personalities, dreams and
hypnosis. Dr. Tart was virtually alone in these fields at the time. His
work has pioneered what has since become known as the study of altered
states of consciousness, consciousness other than the average consensus
trance. By 1969 Charles Tart edited what was to became a landmark book
in consciousness research Altered States of Consciousness. This was the
first publication to bring together scientific research on dreaming,
hypnosis, meditation, yoga, psychedelics and other expanded states of
consciousness. He has since written many other books, including: Open
Mind, Discriminating Mind (1989); Waking Up: Overcoming the Obstacles
to Human Potential (1986); States of Consciousness (1975);
Transpersonal Psychologies (1975) (1990). When not writing books and
researching into these fields, Professor Tart has been a teacher of
Psychology at the University of California in Davis for over thirty
years.
Tart transcends the narrow confines of academia and science, and uses
the scientific methods and independent thinking to tackle the really
big questions. In the process of formulating his own answers, he has
gathered information which helps us realize that "discontinuity of
consciousness" is the essential threshold problem. The problem must be
addressed - we must "self remember" and wake up from out of the
cultural consensual trance - before we can ever know ourselves and find
the answers within. One of the basic procedures he employs is
called "self remembering" or "self observation". It is a process where
you impartially and dispassionately observe the false personalities in
action. His quest for answers necessarily led him beyond the confines
of academia and science into the martial arts, where he now holds a
black belt in Aikido. It also led him into the world of esoteric
spiritual philosophies and psychologies, exemplified by the work of the
great Russian mystic and philosopher, G. I. Gurdjieff.(5) It was
Gurdjieff who first brought the "self remembrance" procedures to the
West.
Charles Tart discovered that there is a basic resistance in our culture
to self observation. We tend to equate self observation with judgmental
self criticism, with feelings of inadequacy, punishment, shame and
guilt. To be effective, self remembrance procedures should be devoid of
all judgments and criticism. It should be a neutral process of
objective, detached observation. This requires tremendous commitment
and honesty. In self observation you essentially try to observe
yourself and your world, no matter what it is, good or bad, ugly or
beautiful, happy or sad. You don't just observe yourself only when you
happen to be doing something you like, or in order to support something
you already believe in. You try to observe yourself in your world to
see what really is.
To convey the kind of commitment required to remember to observe
yourself in all situations, Tart likes to quote a famous American
spiritual leader of sorts, Patrick Henry: Eternal vigilance is the
price of freedom. Tart found from his own experience and from working
with hundreds of others, that if you aren't vigilant about yourself -
with a commitment to knowing reality as it is - you build up fantasies.
You forget yourself, like the actor asleep. You live instead in what he
calls "consensus trance". You are lost in fantasies widely shared in
the culture. Tart's research has shown that although everyone thinks
they are normal, they are actually seriously cut off from the world
around them. As a result people do a lot of stupid things.
Observing the great difficulty of the self observation process,
especially at first, Tart emphasizes the importance of personal
training and group work to begin to use this procedure effectively. But
once the skill is learned, Tart and others have found that it is a
powerful tool to awaken the actor. With it you can begin to integrate
the many roles - the many personalities - into a play where life has
meaning. The actions of the moment then begin to make sense by relation
to the overall drama. The actor begins to know herself, to know the
myth of her life, the plot and potential destiny, and then to write her
own script. Without such an awakening the actor meanders aimlessly
through life. They keep repeating a few lines, a few roles, over and
over, never realizing their full potential.
Tart found that self observation can awaken us from consensus trance.
It allows us to get a much wider idea of who we are, and to dare to
fulfill potentials and dreams we never even knew we had. This is
because the consensus trance into which we were hypnotized as a child
significantly narrows our human potentials. We could be so many things,
but society tries to fit people into preconceived molds. Our self-
concept gets narrow, squeezed and tight.
Tart likes to quote Gurdjieff's observation that a lot of people you
see walking around in the street are dead. They have been so squeezed
in terms of their inner psychological self, that it is all habit and
conditioning, and the essence - the vitality - is dead. Tart was first
exposed to Gurdjieff's ideas in 1966 and his ideas and spiritual
practices of self observation have had a continuing influence on him
ever since. Tart says that he still uses Gurdjieff's "trying to
remember yourself in everyday life" as his principle spiritual practice
today, even though he is no longer involved with Gurdjieff groups.
In my interview with Charles Tart in late 1993, he described in some
detail the process of how as young children we are entranced into the
local cultural consensus in which we were born:
When we are born each of us has the potential to be a human being which
means thousands and thousands of things which could be developed. But
each one of us is born into a particular culture, and a culture is a
group of people who know about certain human potentials which they
think are good and they cultivate them. They draw them out of people
and reinforce them in people. So when a little baby looks at its mother
and its starting to make sounds like "ma ma ma," people smile and
encourage the baby. A given culture knows about other potentials which
they consider animal or evil or something like that, and they actively
discourage them. So if the same little baby looks at its mother and
starts to go "shi shi shit", he doesn't get encouraged, and that kind
of thing.
Any particular culture is also ignorant of all sorts of human
potentials and they don't draw them out of people simply by neglect.
They have no idea its even possible.
In order to survive you have to fit into your culture. The adults who
only want a certain set of potentials developed keep pressing on you,
drawing those out and discouraging the ones they don't like. In a very
real sense, the "essence" of what we are when we are born, to use a
Gurdjieff term, gets shaped and shaped and shaped and eventually
evolves into what Gurdjieff called "false personality." That means as
part of defending yourself against the pressure of adults you come to
adopt their way of thinking. A baby can't really say, "Gee, I've been
born into a weird tribe this time, here's how I'll have to act in order
to get by, but I don't believe a word of it." The baby is pretty
helpless, absolutely dependent upon the giants, the gods and goddesses,
for its survival. So the baby and the child internalize these things,
they start thinking like the culture expects people to think. To the
extent they don't, they feel guilty about it and hide it.
We develop what I call "consensus consciousness" to reflect the fact
that our so-called ordinary state of consciousness, or "normal
consciousness" (which is a culturally-relative term of course) means we
have actually constructed the habits of our thinking and feeling and
perceiving to reflect the consensus of what our culture thinks is
important and good. It is an altered state of consciousness in the
sense that it is not natural. Our ordinary state is not simply the way
consciousness is, it's a semi arbitrary construction, so that you fit
in as normal, bound by the rules of your particular group.
When I talk about this in a neutral way, and want to use this
information scientifically, I use the term "consensus consciousness."
But when I want to emphasize the cost of this process, that there is a
lot of important stuff left out, then I say "consensus trance." I am
using "trance" in the negative sense of the word: a state of less
animation, being controlled by others and what not.
I also asked Professor Tart what methods he had found work best to
allow people to overcome their natural resistances to self observation,
and enable them to awaken from the consensus trance. His answer
expounded upon the theme developed by Gurdjieff as "intentional
suffering."
There are lots of ways [around the resistance to self observation].
Most of them depend on suffering. When things are going well, you don't
tend to question the structure you're locked into. When things start
going badly, usually we blame somebody else: "Its those damn
republicrats in Washington." But when you get a little more mature,
people begin to realize that "maybe I bring something to my suffering,
just maybe its not all the fault of the outside world, but that I
contribute something to it." When people are ready to work with their
suffering like that, when they are ready to look at it more closely and
see how they are creating some of it, then you have an opening for
people to learn things.
The suffering can motivate people to observe themselves, to take mental
snap shots of themselves, and try to figure out what is going on wrong,
what internally is producing the suffering. In self observation you
will undoubtedly see many habits, attitudes and other things about
yourself that you do not like. From an attitude of intentional
suffering and responsibility, these insights into your mental machinery
provide you with the opportunity to change, to escape from your
suffering. As Tart says, we create a lot of our suffering quite
uselessly. Suffering motivates you to change, to escape from the mental
conditioning and false thinking which keeps you entranced, keeps you in
needless suffering. Suffering thus opens up the possibility of real
change.
Charles Tart also speaks of another major way of escape from the
culture trance, the method of "altered states of consciousness".
If you think of your ordinary state of consciousness as a semi-
artificial structure, you can see an altered state as something that
temporarily knocks it to pieces. With many of your habits temporarily
nonfunctional there is a chance for you to perceive in a more unedited,
unconstricted sort of way, a more natural sort of way. Alternatively,
you may go into an altered state which is also arbitrary in some ways,
but is different from your ordinary state, and you realize that there
is a different way of functioning. A lot of our suffering comes from
the fact that we think there is only one way to function, in our
ordinary state of consciousness. As long as you think that, you don't
explore alternative possibilities. But if you have the experience of
functioning in a different state, then when you are stuck in some
situation, you might be able to remember that your state of
consciousness may be making the situation so bad. You might try
changing your state of consciousness to see if that gives you new
possibilities.
The two approaches of suffering and altered states have intrigued
Professor Tart throughout his career. He counsels knowledge of altered
states and looking at your suffering more closely next time, instead of
trying to flee from it. But he does not mean to put all of the emphasis
on suffering. As Tart says: As you begin to observe yo
urself more
closely, you will also begin to see the ways in which you create
happiness in your life, effectiveness, and so forth. That of course is
the carrot, suffering is just the stick.
Gurdjieff, the philosopher much admired by Tart, also spoke of the
average person as being "imprisoned by their own thinking" and stressed
the importance of "objective ratiocination". The way to escape from
this prison of false personality, and attain real life and essence, is
not only by obtaining objective reliable information about yourself
through self observation, but also by correctly processing this
information using clear and objective thinking. Here the Way of the
Lawyer, and Lawyerly thinking can help.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------
1. Charles Tart Transpersonal Psychologies (1975).
2. A "Julia set" and "fractals" are explained in Chapter 6 on Law and
Disorder.
3. Sybil by Flora Rheta Schreiber written in 1973 provides a full
account of the case of Sybil Dorsett and her treatment by Dr. Cornelia
Wilbur. After Sybil's death in 1998 her real name was revealed to be
Shirley Ardell Mason of Lexington, Kentucky.
4. See for instance Multiple Mind (1992) by Gretchen Sliker, Ph.D.;
Evolution of Consciousness (1991) by Robert Ornstein, Ph.D.
5. Gurdjieff's books include: All and Everything: An Objectively
Impartial Criticism of the Life of Man; Meetings With Remarkable Men;
Life Is Real Only Then, When "I AM"; Views From The Real World. Many
books have been written about Gurdjieff and his philosophy, the best of
which is P.D. Ouspensky's In Search of the Miraculous.
Continue with Summer 1999 Classroom Talk or
Post a new discussion in the current Classroom Talk
Archived September 3, 1999