"The group conscience is the collective conscience of the group membership and thus represents substantial unanimity on an issue before definitive action is taken. This is achieved by the group members through the sharing of full information, individual points of view, and the practice of A.A, principles. To be fully informed requires a willingness to listen to minority opinions with an open mind.I especially enjoy reading "wary of dominant opinions..."
On sensitive issues, the group works slowly - discouraging formal motions until a clear sense of its collective view emerges. Placing principles before personalities, the membership is wary of dominant opinions. Its voice is heard when a well-informed group arrives at a decision. The result rests on more than a "yes" or "no" count - precisely because it is the spiritual expression of the group conscience. The term "informed group conscience" implies that pertinent information has been studied and all views have been heard before the group votes."
Thursday, April 30, 2009
What Is An Informed Group Conscience?
Use as you might see fit...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Should a group's elected leaders consider only the opinions expressed at a formal group conscience meeting?
ReplyDeleteYou say "formal" so...
ReplyDeleteAs opposed to a steering committee for ex., if a formal group conscience is a gathering of group members to discuss group business, then I can't see what other opinions could be considered. Or, do you want to consider the vote of an absent member? I don't believe that flies in, oh, say Congress, so it doesn't work here either. Nor do "phone in" votes.
If the issue is important enough, then attendance to cast a vote ought to be required.
Attendance by non-group members does not afford them a vote in another group's business... and... no, you can't join "my" group simply for the sake of casting a vote :)
WOW, "Congress" is exactly the analogy I was wondering about! A Congressman of course is required (ethically at least) to consider and vote in accord with the opinions of his constituents back home who elected him, even if his personal preferences may differ. But our congress is a representative-type government, and I'm wondering if there are similarities to formal group conscience proceedings. As an elected trusted servant, should I consider the opinions of those who elected me even if through their own shortcommings they fail to come to formal group conscience meetings, whether or not I agree with them.
ReplyDeleteI know that we want "more than a "yes" or "no" count". If an "informed group conscience" implies that pertinent information has been studied and all views have been heard before the group votes, can I limit my consideration to only the views expressed at the formal meeting? Or, am I "my brother's keeper."
Very interesting topic! Thank you for your input.
I think it a side issue here, but about the "call-in voter", should I consider his views even if his vote cannot be counted? This may really be a red herring to this discussion; if one or two call-in votes would change the outcome, wouldn't we be way short of substantial unanimity on the issue?
I might like some additional time to consider your thoughts - which I find very interesting... but I have to tell you that what you've now mentioned sounds a lot like what will be happening this weekend at our State Assembly where, as the group GSR, I'll be carrying the vote of my group in matters related to our State's actions in AA.
ReplyDeleteYes, I want to carry the thoughts and opinions of my fellow members but on matters subject to a vote at the Assembly I'd hope that the home group had brought the matter to a group vote which would be what I'd then carry. At the same time I want to keep an open mind because, as happened last Assembly, our group didn't have all the information regarding an issue and I had to vote as I felt they would want me to.
The call in voters I've been witness to were attempting to manipulate the group conscience to fit their personal agenda. Falling short of unanimity wasn't a problem, imho.
Thanks!