On 31 Mar 2009, at 16:38, Brian wakeman wrote:

Hello

If you don't mind me commenting.........

1. This is the most clear expression of the three logics, and how the new scholarship is different.

Hi Brian (and all), I'm really pleased that I'm communicating my meanings with some clarity. Many thanks for letting me know - your response is really important in helping me to communicate as clearly as possible.

2. I still wonder if the expressions about life-enhancing energy are understandable to educational researchers, and whether these expressions risk rejection through misunderstanding?
The explication of ontological values is much clearer to me, and I can identify closely with what you are saying.

I'll work on the expression of life-circulating and life-affirming energy. Expressions and representations of energy are usually omitted from the discourse/publications of educational researchers. I think that they do risk rejection through misunderstanding. I usually find the clip of Moira Laidlaw (Happy Birthday Moira) at the end of the lesson with her responses to her students as they stream past her, helps to communicate what I'm meaning by a loving dynamic energy at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z1jEOhxDGno . What I'm trying to do is to show the explanatory power of ontological values in explanations of educational inflluences in learning and to find forms of representation that show that the expression of ontological values are always accompanied by flows of life-circulating/affirming energy.

3. Tieing in LT with 'inclusional' language compounds possible problems of barriers to understanding in my ears.
It's the 'esoteric' nature that appears alien to the discourse of educationalists in schools colleges and other professions.
(I can almost feel the protest and resentment my comments might arouse,........ but I say these things in 'agape', and because I think S-STEP is too important to be 'grounded' or 'washed-up', rejected because of its packaging rather than content.).

I think you are right about 'inclusional' language compounding possible problems of barriers to understanding. I recall the stress I went through in 1971 as my propositional theorising structured my thinking. This was a barrier to my understanding of dialectical thinking. It took me months to overcome the barrier. I found inclusional thinking much easier to comprehend, but this is probably because I was in face-to-face conversations with Alan and didn't have to only rely on the written work. I'm also going to work on communicating the importance of agape in sustaining relationships and extending educational influences in learning. I think Chris Jones has shown the way in combining a language of inclusionality with living theory in a most engaging way and I'm continuing to learn from Chris' dissertation on 'How can I improve my practice as Inclusion Officer working in a Children's Service, at http://www.jackwhitehead.com/cjmaok/cjma.htm .

4. There are three points where typos have slipped through the checker..... but I know I'mm a fine onne to tallk!!

Hope these reactions are helpful....

Every good wish for your travels....

Brian

I'll do another spell check - these small typos can be irritating to read and the more I can correct the better.