Dear All
I thought I'd just add to what is being said by saying that I was recenlty told of a place In Japan (think its in Kyoto) where
there are fifteen boulders placed next to each other and it is said that if you can stand amongst them, looking ahead but are able
to see all fifteen then you are spatially connected with the world around you. We are not used to using our eyes laterally, and
so this is not at all as simple as it might seem and yet it is not so impossible either! It is probably a jokey and somewhat
gimmicky tourist thing perhaps and no doubt Alan will tell me that its theory is not quite right either! but it seems both
important and worthwhile to think differently about connectivities... Alan's writings and others here too are always worth those
kinds of engagements and struggles to my mind!
best wishes
Cathie
Dr Cathie Pearce
Research Fellow
ESRI
MMU
tel: 0161 247 2074
Before acting on this email or opening any attachments you should read the
Manchester Metropolitan University's email disclaimer available on its website
http://www.mmu.ac.uk/emaildisclaimer
>>> "Alan Rayner (BU)" <[log in to unmask]> 03/13/09 8:41 AM >>>
Dear Pip,
Many thanks for your kind comments.
Of course, there is an element in what you say that always saddens me as I hear it reflected back to me from all kinds of people
in all kinds of ways. This is the idea that inclusionality is somehow esoteric, far-removed from everyday lives, an intellectual
escapade whose unfamiliar language and logic flies way over the heads of ordinary people. Yet for me, if I might make so bold,
inclusionality represents the 'Mother Space' of Nature that holds all theories and experiences tenderly in place, opening what can
otherwise become their opposing boundaries up so that they can drink each other in, co-creatively. It is not removed from everyday
life, it is about everyday life. By its very nature, inclusionality does not prescriptively preclude (like rationality), it
dynamically includes - but can only do so when allowed to loosen the walls of other-exclusion that define what describe themselves
as 'other theories'. Inclusionality is not a 'special interest alternative theory' of 'one' amongst 'many'. It is what includes
one in many and many in one in the limitless openness of everywhere. Inclusionality is not about extraordinary intellectual
abstraction, it is about life in all its myriad manifestations. It is about opening up, not insulating the preserve of the
intellect. I dare say it is about why Robyn - like all caring people - needs to care for the needs of her complex,
local-in-nonlocal self as she cares for others whose lives flow not only contiguously, alongside and around her unique individual
identity, but continuously, THROUGH her unique, receptive-reflective-responsive individual identity.
Yesterday I felt immensely priviledged to read a poetic, autobiographical piece called 'Zarathustra's Mountain' by Harvey Sarles,
an American Professor of Philosophy and Anthropology whose educational approach, commitment and love for his students to my mind
epitomizes 'living theory' and 'inclusionality', though he does not as yet explicitly make that connection. I edited the piece (by
changing just two words!) in preparation for publication in our journal, 'Transfigural Mathematics'. At the end of the piece I was
moved to add:
"After editorially checking through this piece, Alan Rayner responded:-
Harvey, I must say that I found your piece an immensely evocative read and source of personal solace as I encountered and
recognized so many thoughts and feelings that I have experienced myself whilst 'seeking the truth' of 'inclusionality'. I laughed
out loud several times in recognition, and was moved close to tears in other places. In me, at least, your words resonated deeply.
Increasingly, it seems to me that it is indeed the 'poetic' in us who serves as the 'isthmus' or 'corpus callosum', bringing the
articulate and analytical into natural communion with the silent and intuitive - the transfigurer of words and worlds, who finds
each in the other, through the figure who naturally loves self as neighbourhood and neighbourhood as self."
Warmest
Alan
----- Original Message -----
From: Pip/Bruce Ferguson
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Friday, March 13, 2009 1:01 AM
Subject: Re: The real usefulness of living theory
Hi all, especially Robyn, Jack, Geisha and Alan
Sorry I'm just stopping in and out of these conversations, but family takes precedence at times like these. Robyn, I appreciate
the points you are making about ethics in your practice, but it is also good to read of the families taking advice even if still
giving you resentful-type vibes. That issue of what behaviour you're prepared to tolerate in your professional context is
important - you have rights as well as your families, and it seems to me that in prioritising the latter, you may have made a very
uncomfortable situation for yourself professionally. When I was teaching, I used occasionally to confront students when they used
profanity or foul language, just saying that I'd prefer that they didn't use such language in my classes. This was a way that I
felt I could operate within my own values, while not trespassing on theirs - if they want to swear etc. outside of class, that's
their call, but at least they are being acquainted with the fact that some people don't find that acceptable behaviour. (And in
response to your last email, I wish it WAS hot here - first day I've had to wear a sweater for weeks and weeks but it will be fine
again tomorrow - do I sound like Little Orphan Annie?)
Alan, I always admire the strenuous attempts you make to help those of us who have struggled with inclusionality, to make better
sense of it. I don't think it is in any way a deficiency in either your thinking or your explanations; sometimes there are authors
among us whose work is so focused in their own sphere that it is hard for some to understand (I think of Kereti Rautangata here; a
Maori master carver whose work is way too esoteric for me to understand at present). But I have the most immense respect for both
Kereti and you, as people who are pushing the boundaries in ways that can only benefit knowledge.
And special greetings to Jack, who always works so hard to connect us up, and Geisha, developing your own theories of education
in your own unique context. I'm about to 'sign out' for a while, like Robyn, while I have my family here for this brief period.
Warm regards to all
Pip
From: Practitioner-Researcher [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Robyn Pound
Sent: Friday, 13 March 2009 8:14 a.m.
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: The real usefulness of living theory
Alan, Jack,
I have enjoyed this flurry of engagement. I will go quiet again now because I'm back to work tomorrow and at a study day
in the weekend before summoning the energy to start it all again on Monday.
Jack, I still have those old VHS videos are they any use now? You are right I did learn more about myself from looking at
them with others during the validation exercises.
With regard to you both and Pip who will be just waking up in glorious summer.
Robyn
--- On Thu, 3/12/09, Alan Rayner <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
From: Alan Rayner <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: The real usefulness of living theory
To: [log in to unmask]
Date: Thursday, March 12, 2009, 3:48 PM
Dear Jack and Robyn, I don't know if this will clarify further, but, for me, inclusionality combines the 'bodily contiguity'
(adjacency)of 'alongsidedness'with the 'spatial continuity' of 'natural communion'. This distinctionis very important to
understanding the 'turning point' into inclusionality, as might be evident also in the attached short piece published last year in
'Transfigural Mathematics'. These days, I would therefore add 'continuous' to the list of'relationally dynamic', connective
(=contiguous), reflexive and co-creative. In the 'continuity' lies the 'receptive openness' of Agape that isvital for the [dynamic
loving energy] flow of 'one in the other'. Warmest Alan --On 12 March 2009 14:54 +0000 Jack Whitehead <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >
On 12 Mar 2009, at 12:50, Robyn Pound wrote:> >> Dear Jack,>> Ok, now I have got it. The shift from collaborative dialectic that>>
focuses on living contradictions (in the personal values that are>> emergent through practitioner action research - basis for my>>
research) to inclusionality that you see as relationally dynamic,>> connective, reflexive, co-creative. Jack I always thought it
was>> all those qualities.> > > Hi Robyn - in your inspiring research into alongsideness in health> visiting it was all those
qualities! In your thesis you draw insights> from propositional theories and dialectics in your inclusional> relationships as a
health visitor. What Alan's idea of inclusionality> has enabled me to do, in the creation of my living educational theory,> is to
better understand and communicate the relationally dynamic nature> of space and boundaries in my explanations of educational
influences in> learning. I continue to be motivated by experiences of living> contradictions when I experience my values being
negated and to draw> insights from propositional theories such as those of Amartya Sen> (economic theory of human capability) and
Mohammad Yunus (social> business).> > I like the points you make in response to my point about multi-media> accounts in the March
09 paper;>> 'As I conclude, I am wondering if I have persuaded you that the>> expression of such flows of energy, with values,
require action>> researchers to move beyond limitations of printed text based>> narratives into multi-media accounts of their
values based>> influences in the world?'> where you say:> >> "I cannot be sure however that my interpretation of what I amseeing>>
is the same as your interpretation or even what was intended by the>> actors. But then again does it matter? If my intention in
watching>> the video is to understand for myself and add to the generation of>> my own values for use in practice than what it
meant for the actors>> may not matter. In my view it is the lived experience which carries>> most meaning."> > This is why I
stress the importance of validation groups of peers in> sharing interpretations. I've usually found that a group of peers>
responding to visual narratives helps to strengthen the validity of my> own interpretations. Where I'm making a claim to know
something about my> educational influence in the learning of others, I have found it> important to include in my own narrative the
voices and interpretations> of the others in ways the help to check the validity of my claims about> my influence in the
learning of others.> > You also say:> >> "My real reason for not videoing myself in action is ethical. Not>> only would it change
the dynamic if we videoed ourselves (may be for>> the better!) But it would not be ethical to share the lives of the>> families
who are interesting because of their struggles in a public>> arena. During my research process I shared nearly all the stories>>
that appeared in the thesis with the people concerned. In the same>> way, I shared my counselling case study with the client
before>> submitting it to the examination board. The research stories I>> didn't share with the family were those where my
account of their>> trials would not have been helpful to them at that time - perhaps>> driven them into even more discouragement.
It was my learning from>> our engagement that I was studying."> > I do agree with your ethical considerations here. There are
many> contexts and relationships in which it is inappropriate to video.> However, you may recall a video-clip of you with a baby
and her Mother> where you are sitting on the floor. I believe that this clip can help to> communicate your embodied expressed of
alongsideness. I'm thinking here> of your awareness of:> > * the importance of power relations in the health-visitor- client>
relationship, * the recognition and expression of the value of the other,> * your energy-flowing and life-affirming humour> * your
pleasure in being with the other.> > Love Jack.>>
|
