Dear Pip,

Many thanks!

Yes, indeed, I too have struggled with the implications and paradoxes of the
'golden rule', especially with regard to the contradiction in my upbringing
between being expected both to be supremely competitive and to put others'
interests before my own. A telling moment for me came when a 'religious
education teacher' (and our local Parish Vicar) told us boys - 'the cream of
the A1 stream' - that the crucifix symbolized 'I' crossed out (and we'd go
to Hell if we didn't cross ourselves out).

The question that I was for long 'obsessed' by (in 'OCD' terms) was 'how do
you apply the golden rule to a bully?'

Ultimately, I think the paradoxes of the 'golden rule' arise - you've
guessed it - from objective (axiomatic) definitions of 'self' and 'other'.
They are of the same ilk as the Cretan liar parodox, which arises when a
Cretan informs you that all Cretans are liars.

I'm attaching my 'dangerously heretical' 'Chapter 3' from 'Inclusional
Nature', in which I resolve the paradox through the concept of the 'complex
self' - 'self as and as a dynamic inclusion of neighbourhood, with both
local (particular) and non-local (everywhere) aspects. The symbol of the
crucifix becomes 'I' crossed through (transfigured) with love (receptivity -
where this also implies acknowledgement of inner and outer distinctions).
'Positive' now becomes understood as a dynamic inclusion of 'negative'
(receptive, gravitational) by 'informative' (responsive, electromagnetic)
and the alienation of receptivity as subtractivity ('evil darkness',
'Achilles Heel') is obviated.

In another message, responding to Marie, I'm attaching chapter 4 of
'Inclusional Nature' in which I describe the 'sharing circle' approach to
'education for diversity', which I think also relates to your issues below.
Maybe 'create space for one another's authentic becoming', becomes the
'golden rule'.


Warmest

Alan






----- Original Message -----
From: Pip/Bruce Ferguson <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: 04 January 2007 21:39
Subject: Re: My Achilles Heal - Testimony of a 'Gifted' Child


Dear Alan and others

I, too, have found your 'gifted child' story very moving and helpful.  It is
great to see the way that you have moved from your personal experience to
more general principles for opening up education to be more inclusive, and
to overcome the 'Cartesian dualism' that has permeated Western thinking for
way too long, I believe.  That is why I have enjoyed working in a Maori
university recently, where the concepts of integration of
self-mind-body-spirit-other seem to be so much better apprehended.  I thank
Sarah for her posting of the University of Hawaii handbook.  It picks up a
Pacific idea of teaching/learning linguistically, that the two are
inseparable and not either-or.  In Maori, the word for teacher is 'kaiako'
and learner is 'akonga', both built around the root 'ako' which is to learn.
So there is not a sense that one has one position (of superiority) and the
other inferiority; as I understand the concept, both are engaged together in
learning, bringing different perspectives and experience to the exercise,
but both benefit in the growth of their knowledge.  I may be taking the
linguistic concept too far here; must remember to check it out with Maori
friends when I meet them next.

But the other thing that Alan's story has encouraged me to do is to reflect,
in public, on the growth of my own knowledge, and the tensions I still
experience as a teacher/learner.  I used to believe in the Golden Rule - "do
unto others as you would have others do unto you."  In theory, it sounds
fine...until I reflect that the way I would have others do unto me, may not
work for some at all well!  For example, when I am feeling emotionally upset
I just want my husband to give me a cuddle and show he is there for me - he,
on the other hand, wants to sort my problem out cognitively!  His way of
'doing unto others as he would like others to do unto him' just does not
work well for me (and it's taken us a while to sort that sort of thing out!
grin).  So, in the classroom, if I have a question when being taught, I like
to ask the teacher then and there to sort out the query, rather than wait
until the end of the lesson (if ever) to resolve my confusion.  I invite
student questions when teaching, so that students don't continue through the
session in a state of confusion.  Do unto others?  But in the past twenty
years we have had more Asian students in our classes, and for many of them,
to ask questions in class is to imply that the teacher has not taught well.
Out of deference, they prefer to hold their questions to the end of the
session and ask them privately so that I do not lose face.  So there is
immediately a cultural clash between my 'doing unto others' and theirs.  It
is these kinds of clashes that have made me expand my understanding of the
Golden Rule, so perhaps it is more like "Do unto others as they would have
you do unto them."

But then, there's another conflict.  What if they would want me to behave in
ways that are at variance with my value system?  What, for instance, if they
come from a tight class/caste system that means they are more comfortable
with my treating them differently from other students in the class?  New
Zealanders are, in general, not much into class systems - we're more "Jack
is as good as his master" if there's even a master in the picture!  So what
is the virtuous way of proceding here?  My values of egalitarianism clash
with my students' values of strict protocol/meritocracy/whatever.  Whose
values rule then?  I think it is just such a clash of values that Jack
articulates so honestly in "The Growth of Educational Knowledge" where he
makes space for Peggy Kok to share her story (drat, I appear to have loaned
out my copy! So I can't quote verbatim...but I have used the quote so often
that I can remember the gist.  Peggy is talking about the clash she
experienced between her Singaporean values of discipline and hierarchy, and
Jack's advocation of justice and truth.  She says something like 'finding
peace at last' in resolving to stay with her Singaporean values rather than
taking on those that Jack was advocating, or at least coming to some kind of
synthesis of the two - Jack, perhaps you can assist here?  Or others who
have the book to hand.

I guess my resolution to these kinds of cultural or other clashes with my
students is to articulate clearly my own values; to encourage them to
articulate theirs; for us both to consider carefully whether there is room
for compromise or synthesis in the two sets of values, and if not, to try to
proceed with respect for each other's views, bearing in mind the power
differential that teachers may have vis-à-vis students.  The truism
'different strokes for different folks' I think captures the essence of the
situation and takes the Golden Rule beyond 'do to me as I would do to you'
so that it becomes more like 'help me to do to you as you would want me to,
and I will do the same with you in our interrelationships.'  I think this
kind of respect was evident on the list in an earlier discussion between
Alon and others, where Alon was describing why he thinks in the way that he
does, and inviting others to consider that position and respond to it.  He
did not expect others to behave as he does, legitimate though that behaviour
is; he was explaining clearly how he sees things and inviting others to
understand and respect that position.  I think this is an honest and healthy
way forward, when our ways of being and doing differ.

Well, this is a long posting - thanks, Alan, for your honesty in sharing
your own story, and I know I'm only at the beginning of a long road in
resolving the Golden Rule variation I've described above.  Exciting being a
kaiako/akonga, isn't it!  There is always such room for growth.

Warm regards to all
Pip Bruce Ferguson