A starting point for discussion
The idea
Words cannot carry the full richness of sensory and bodily experience, so discussion about decisions cannot replace richer forms of collaboration based on shared action and experience.
Place in the reasoning
AI assessment · Connected to reasoning
Qualifies verbal deliberation by arguing that words cannot convey the full sensory and bodily richness of shared action and experience.
Online discussion needs more than access to technology
This limits what digital discussion and information-sharing can substitute for: shared action and embodied experience may carry forms of collaboration that words do not.
People can find enough agreement to act while still disagreeing
The statement broadens the idea of common action beyond deliberative agreement, emphasizing shared experience as a distinct form of collaboration.
What this means and why it matters
What this means
The authors argue that language leaves out much of what people sense and experience together. They do not say discussion is useless; they say it has limits.
Why it matters
Discussion about decisions may need to sit alongside forms of collaboration that involve shared action and experience.
Conditions & assumptions
Source coverage: The complete Augmented Deliberation chapter from the book, which is updated over time. Other chapters are not included. The chapter argues that shared action and experience can build a deeper shared focus than words alone. It examines the limits of discussion as a form of working together.
Questions this connects to
AI-suggested relationships. Authors have not necessarily responded to one another.
How strong is this claim?
AI assessment · not a probability or a final resolution
The passage makes a broad argument about the limits of language. The excerpt does not report evidence from a study to support it.