Dear all - I'm still thinking about Pete's posting in the context of our discussion of objectivity and
subjectivity:
For me, the problem's not the 'objectivity/subjectivity' thing but more the
'reification of consciousness' (and of 'the other') thing. You know the
quote, because it formed the basis of my MA dissertation late last century
i.e.
".... the Enlightenment project of liberating humanity from myth and the
unknown has, by becoming an end in itself, turned into its opposite - a new
and more powerful force of domination. The old terror before the unknown
becomes a new terror: the fear of anything that cannot be calculated,
standardised, manipulated or instrumentalised. Enlightenment progress in
scientific- technological knowledge (=power), while creating the objective
possibility for a truly free society, leads to the domination of external
nature, society and inner nature. What Lukacs analysed as the reification
of consciousness was the price the potential subjects of liberation paid
for the progressive overcoming of material necessity. Throughout the course
of Western civilisation, the rationality of myth, as well as the
Enlightenment which replaced it as reason only to become a myth itself,
exposes Western reason as a destructive force. Reason abstracts,
conceptualises, and seeks to reduce the concrete and the non-identical to
identity, to destroy the otherness of the other. Horkheimer and Adorno
locate the irrationality of what Weber analysed as rationalisation at its
deepest source - the identity logic which is the fundamental structure of
Western reason. Human liberation could be conceived, if at all, only as a
complete break with mere formal rationality and instrumental reason ...."
(Roderick (1986)'Habermas and the Foundations of Critical Theory' drawing
on Horkheimer and Adorno's 'Dialectic of Enlightenment' - page 40).
I do agree about the danger of destroying the otherness of the other and I think Alan's idea of
inclusionality with its relationally dynamic logic offers a way of avoiding this destruction. I'm
exploring the implications of a living inclusional logic for my own life and work and presenting my
latest thoughts at the Cultures in Resistance conference this Wednesday where I'm using the idea
of cultures in resistance for the first time.
Cultures in Resistance
How are living educational theories being produced and legitimated in the boundaries of cultures
in resistance?
http://www.jackwhitehead.com/jack/jwmanchester170308.htm
Here's a very rough draft of the keynote for the International Conference on Teacher Research a
week on Friday where I'm using the idea of combining voices in an inclusional perspective for the
first time. It is still in the creative phase of writing and will need to be improved through critical
evaluations. Do please help to strengthen the content and its validity through the exercise of your
critical evaluations as I seek to enhance the validity of explanations of educational influences
within the social and other formations that dynamically include us.
Combining Voices
http://www.jackwhitehead.com/aerictr08/jwictr08keyDR303.htm
Love Jack.
|