Dear All,
If I am late for work this morning I cannot blame you all, for writing such a gripping flow of postings. I cannot resist putting an appreciative smile at the very least back into the ether. There are so many ideas here that sent me off into thinking bursts. Which to write about?
Robyn
--- On Wed, 10/29/08, Je Kan Adler-Collins <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
From: Je Kan Adler-Collins <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Rationale for Living Theory
To: [log in to unmask]
Date: Wednesday, October 29, 2008, 8:21 PM
Hi Barry, a warm hello from Japan. I second the thoughts contained within your email which is completely keeping with , as I understand it, scholastic approaches to difference. It is nice to be informed at regular intervals of the journey others are taking, however I was looking for a more focused response to the questions others had asked Sarah. Looking at the archives the question you keep asking Sarah has adopted a rhetorical aspect to it. I am wondering how you will be able to critique in such a manner that your scholarship and engagement with the issues of living educational theory is clearly understood when there appears to be a lacking of any evidence from you to show that you are understanding the concepts by offering your own work to support your claims to know from an insider view of knowing. A critique is as much of an educational process and any other enquiry, the weight of evidence to support the critique rests firmly on the
credibility and trust ability of the educational account produced by the author. I am looking forward to seeing your accounts on the list and helping you , with others, clarify meanings and my understandings where appropriate.
Barry, I am intrigued at the idea of impenetrability as a Buddhist teaching on mindfulness suggest that in terms of knowing, when we think we know we are actually solidify the boundaries of our knowing. I remember clearly that my supervisor, prior to my viva defence, reminded me of my knowledge claims and what it was that I claimed to know. He was less than enchanted with me after several moments of truthful reflection on my part, as I responded: “ In truth, after all the years of study, all I can claim to truly know is that one day I will die, and the inescapable truthfulness of my knowing that I do not know.” Smile. I struggle to see living education theory in the light of checks and balances and embrace an open conceptualising of a flow of consciousness that ebbs and flows with the living dynamics of my praxis and enquiry. Perhaps I have a very non Buddhist attachment to the understandings that the concept of my constricted “I” is
contextualized in the power and authority of my own being on one level of understanding and dissolved completely on another level as I construct a different understanding of being in and being part of a living dynamic flow of conscious learning and communication. In my work in Asia, I am finding that my western forms of knowing take themselves so seriously and the joy of exploring knowing without boundaries by consciously seeking to dissolve them opens up for me new understanding and teaching. In Asia there is a great story about an elephant who wanted to get through and small door and no matter what he did with his great strength, he could not pass through the door. Of course there was a wise monk ( as there always is..smile) who said when asked by the elephant; “ Ajarn, How can I pass through the door”. The monk , looking gently in to the elephants eyes answered: “stop thing that you are an elephant!”
Hugs and smile to all the elephants out there..
Je Kan
From: Practitioner-Researcher [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Barry Hymer
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 2:17 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Rationale for Living Theory
Dear Sarah - Are you genuinely trying to arrive at a deep and disinterested understanding of living educational theory? If so, why have you failed to respond to any of the thoughtful, considered, insightful and emotionally congruent responses to your first airing of the request? I see no evidence of an equivalent response in your latest email. I know of no advocate of living theory who insists that it can and should be understood and practised by all practitioners, although it seems to me to speak with great power to those who can approach it with openness, humility and grace. To those who don't, perhaps it remains impenetrable. Perhaps that's a weakness of living theory? You might choose to include this thought in your critique.
All good wishes in Japan,
Barry
Dr Barry Hymer
Director, still thinking uk ltd
Visiting Fellow, Centre for Learning and Teaching (CfLaT), Newcastle University
www.barryhymer.co.uk
"The truly great advances of this generation will be made by those who can make outrageous connections, and only a mind which knows how to play can do that." (Nagle Jackson)
"I'm a playing boy, not a working boy." (Tom, 5)
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.175 / Virus Database: 270.8.3/1748 - Release Date: 26/10/2008 19:53
