JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for FRIENDSOFWISDOM Archives


FRIENDSOFWISDOM Archives

FRIENDSOFWISDOM Archives


FRIENDSOFWISDOM@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

FRIENDSOFWISDOM Home

FRIENDSOFWISDOM Home

FRIENDSOFWISDOM  May 2006

FRIENDSOFWISDOM May 2006

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: Science and Wisdom-Inquiry

From:

Alon Serper <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Group concerned that academia should seek and promote wisdom <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Fri, 26 May 2006 11:48:05 +0100

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (119 lines)

Quoting Jack Whitehead <[log in to unmask]>:

I thought not to intervene but I have to.

I am a humanistic constructing critical psychologist of the human 
subject who infuriated beyond belief by the abstraction of the human 
subject into disembodied propositional theories has decided to 
construct a psychology that is embodied within my own, embodied, 
well-being - something that I critically live, embody and engage with 
every second of my existence.

I have been called and referred to by all kinds of  different names and 
complements by my kind former and present colleagues who wonder about 
my project and claime it an egocentric one, a piece of poetry, a piece 
of insanity and auto-genic work of a clinician.

Still, I should like to say the following back at them.  This is when I 
feel at engaging with them or needing to engage with them for my own 
economic and ontological security.

As you might have suspected, this heuristic practice of self-conveyance 
and self-conceptualisation that I am telling you about is not nave and 
disembodied from my own ontological and ethical needs, aspirations, 
intentions and self-constructing endeavours of and for myself.  How can 
this be? I am myself not merely a psychologist of human existence who 
is endeavouring to conceptualise the human subject and human existence. 
  I am a human being/subject myself who should very like to benefit 
from this practice and work myself and who is having an obligation for 
myself to do so.   One of the fundamental mistakes that I see in my 
field, empirical psychology, is the bizarre need to distance oneself 
from ones work into conceptualising and approaching the human subject 
and human existence.  A need that is deriving from the traditional 
underpinning of the social science and empirical psychology to be 
objective, impersonal and unbiased in their research practices.  This 
is in order to count as scientific, rigorous, disciplined and 
structured. Yet, this is ludicrous, those research endeavours are 
practiced by human beings for human beings and their well-being.  And 
who is more important to me than me?  Who is more important to you than 
you?  Why is this charades of cutting ourselves from our research? Why 
playing it in the first place?  It does not do any good to our 
authenticity and credibility as sincere researchers.  I have my own 
agenda that I wish to promote and act within.  My actions, practices 
and intentions are wholly embodied within this issue of my advocating 
and fulfilling this agenda of mine in the most coherent, convincing, 
suitable and valid manner that I can.  Like in what I take to be a 
worthwhile, productive and trustworthy relationship and 
interrelationship between two parties of the type Buber and Rogers talk 
about, I am trying and seeking to be honest, genuine, sincere and 
authentic with you and to establish these values of genuineness, 
sincerity, trust and authenticity to be the ground rules of our 
presenter/engager-engaging/reader relationship.  This is within an 
intention to establish the element of trust and an accepting 
environment that would get rid of the elements suspense, self-defence 
and hostility that I have suffered from in my past desire to challenge 
the traditional, historical, established and conventional modes of 
practice and engagement of my field as a practitioner within and of 
this field.  I take it that my research account would be far more 
convincing once it is subscribing to these values.

I am therefore saying to you as clearly as I can: my loyalty is to this 
agenda of mine, its development and promotion and to this intention 
alone.    This is what gives the most meaning, gratification and 
productivity to my life, myself and my practices and as such I am 
obligating to it as someone, a human-all-too-human someone, who is 
striving to lead a gratifying existence and to enjoy the greatest 
well-being, ontological security and aesthetic, ethical and authentic 
quality of living in the world that I am capable of.  The latter is my 
passion, my personal obligation to myself.  Why deny it?

In the name of authenticity and a personal self-obligation of myself to 
myself, I'd rather be perceived by others a lunatic than by myself as 
someone who does not fulfil his obligation to himself - that is to lead 
a meaningful and productive existence with integrity and dignity.
Alon Serper

> On 25 May 2006, at 08:52, A.D.M.Rayner wrote:
>
>> 1. The logical premise of inclusional enquiry is that natural form is
>> primarily fluid dynamic (space-including) and hence non-linear,  
>> continually transforming (simultaneously and reciprocally receptive  
>> and responsive), and not completely definable at any scale.
>>
>> 2. The logical premise of rationalistic enquiry is that natural  form is
>> primarily fixed (space-excluding) and hence linear and completely  
>> definable at any scale, so that change (action and reaction in  
>> sequential time) is dependent on the imposition
>> of external force.
>>
>> So the question is: which logical premise and mode of enquiry makes  sense
>> of our full human experience and is actually supported by  
>> contemporary scientific
>> evidence? And which ultimately makes nonsense and is supported only  
>> by belief in a
>> visual illusion, self-sustained by technological development? And  
>> which includes space for emotional response in a dynamic (living)  
>> context?
>
> For me, having experiencing the flow-forms of inclusional enquiries  
> in all our lives and research I'm doing what I can, largely through  
> supporting the flow of your writings through web-space, to embody our 
>  ideas in the cultural influences within which we live and work. We  
> are all working and researching in our different ways and in our  
> different contexts. What surprised me as I pressed the reply-all  
> button to Alan's e-mail was the e-list in the Cc box. Good to see you 
>  all there!  We've all engaged in Monday evening conversations in  
> Bath, the masters programme and/or a doctoral programme in the  
> University. The majority of us already have our living theories of  
> our educational influences in learning flowing through web-space from 
>  http://www.actionresearch.net
>
> Having answered Alan's questions in favour of inclusionality, I'm  
> looking forward to sharing insights into what we are doing and might  
> do, individually and collectively, to enhance understandings of the  
> educational influences of inclusional enquiries.
>
> Love Jack.
>
>

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

March 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
September 2019
August 2019
June 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
October 2018
August 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
February 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
July 2017
June 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
November 2013
October 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
May 2011
April 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager