Dear Ernie, Geisha, Sara and all... Just off for the first day of the workshop at Durban University of Technology and I couldn't resist sending the quotes below from Martin Buber which have influenced my research.

Ernie - the sentence you have picked out above from Michael Polanyi's works is that one that helped me to move on from my positivist science background into dialectics and then into inclusionality.

Geisha - the quotes I posted yesterday, from Michael Polanyi, were all from his book Personal Knowledge, in the reference I gave with the page numbers.

The quotes from Martin Buber below are all from 'Between Man and Man'.  Martin Buber's I and Thou was one of the most influential texts in my life and continues to inform my understandings of I-You relationships. 

Sara - looking forward to seeing some of your videos....

Love Jack.

Here are the Buber quotes:

Buber, M. (1961) Between Man and Man, London & Glasgow; Fontana.

 “If this educator should ever believe that for the sake of education he has to practise election and arrangement, then he will be guided by another criterion than that of inclination, however legitimate this may be in its  own sphere; he will be guided by the recognition of values which is in his glance as an educator. But even then his selection remains suspended, under constant correction by the special humility of the educator for whom the life and particular being of all his pupils is the decisive factor to which his ‘heirarchic’ recognition is subordinated. For in the manifold variety of the children the variety of creation is placed before him.” (p. 122) 

“The relation in education is one of pure dialogue…..

Trust, trust in the world, because this human being exists – that is the most inward achievement of the relation in education. Because this human being exists, meaninglessness, however hard pressed you are by it, cannot be the real truth. Because this human being exists, in the darkness the light lies hidden, in fear salvation, and in the callousness of one’s fellow-men the great Love.

 Because this human being exists; therefore he must be really there, really facing the child, not merely there in spirit. He may not let himself be represented by a phantom: the death of the phantom would be a catastrophe for the child’s pristine soul. He need possess none of the perfections which the child may dream he possesses; but he must be really there. In order to be and to remain truly present to the child he must have gathered the child’s presence into his own store as one of the bearers of his communion with the world, one of the focuses of his responsibilities for the world. Of course he cannot be continually concerned with the child, either in thought or in deed, not ought he to be. But if he has really gathered the child into his life then that subterranean dialogic, that steady potential presence of the one to the other is established and endures. Then there is really between them, there is mutuality.” (125-126)

 “But however intense the mutuality of giving and taking with which he is bound to his pupil, inclusion cannot be mutual in this case. He experiences the pupil’s being educated, but he pupils cannot experience the educating of the educator. The educator stands at both ends of the common situation, the pupil only at one end. In the moment when the pupil is able to throw himself across and experience from over there, the educative relation would be bust asunder, or change into friendship.

 We call friendship the third form of the dialogical relation, which is based on a concrete and mutual experience of inclusion. It is the true inclusion of one another by human souls.” (128)