 |
 |
Hi Alon (and Everyone), I have busy writing up research but spurred into writing on the list again as I am interested by Alon's latest posting where you write: 'Atheist, Secular Existentialism ( is a religion in its own right. But one that we are ought to embody as a living theory of an individual's ontology, embodied epistemology and education and ethics, rather preach demagogicaly as propositional theories.' My understanding of Camus (I am thinking about L'Etranger and the death of Meusault's mother) is that he wasn't promoting existentialism as a desirable modus vivandi - rather showing through his writing that this is how life works out. Similarly in La Peste (I majored in Camus's work in my first degree!) this was a not a kind of 'creed' and thus is perhaps misunderstood as being a religion ..? This puts me in mind of the misinterpretation of Machiavelli's work The Prince - Machiavelli had undoubtedly been shown the 'instruments of torture' and was (as I understand it) writing a guide for a patron to illustrate how life operates and not (as is often thought) a guide for how it should. How does this relate to what I have been reading in some of the messages in this PR e-seminar? Perhaps we've had good examples of 'wannabe' aspired to standards of judgement in some cases and these evidentially sometimes differ (in our imperfect world) from the standards of judgement employed in practitioner research. I was very tempted to respond to Jaime's questions about how practitioner research is judged in academe. I very much supported Brian's explanation as an ideal however the ideal is not always even aspired to! Are we asking how practitioner research should be judged and what its impact should be or (evidentially) how is it judged and what is its impact? Warm regards to everyone, Sarah