Long Line: Looking Back at the Looking Back

This post is part of a series of posts pulled from a piece of writing I completed in November 2012. For more information on this series, see this post.

Context | Looking Back | Transformation | Looking Back at the Looking Back | Questions | On ethics | Letting Go of Nothing | Taking on Subject and Objects | On meaning making | Why the language of causality trouble me | Conceptual versus Empirical | Futuring | Temporality and Time | Brief Note | Back to Time | What to do with the Past | Some tools to help us be | An example from my past | Avoiding Labels | The educational turn | Being and curriculum | Curriculum of Being | Curriculum Futuring | On dispositions as ways of being | Being and pedagogy | Being and technology | Being and the body | References


Looking Back at the Looking Back

After pausing and reviewing the previous section and a quick glance towards where I think I am headed, I am concerned that I may need to pick up the pace. Suffice to say: I have always been a seeker, always searching. My experience with Landmark opened a new universe of possibilities for me and my journey and every day I continue to grasp at the implications of what this all “means.” To do violence to my work over the past four years, Landmark’s programs and courses are all based within Jack Mezirow’s transformative learning theory. Being grounded in Mezirow’s learning theory is the official position of Landmark, but there is plenty of evidence that there are many avenues to this context. Philosophically we can obviously go back to Heidegger, but it begins even farther back. At present much of the Continental tradition is trying to figure out just what this “being” is and what the implications are for the rest of the tradition. Drawing on Marco’s work: because the only way (we think) we can access being is via language, the linguistic turn (Thank you, Wittgenstein) can be used to “get at” being. I wish I could list my reading patterns for the past few years because I know I would be amazed at where I started, where I ended up, how I got there, and what I overlooked.

I think it best for me to now move on. It might be slow going, but you can only look back so much because it limits how far you can see where you are going at present and in the future. In the next section I will lay out a framework for the rest of my inquiry and do my best to attribute the ideas of others where I can (it is so hard to fully accredit the original sources of ideas). I am happy to admit, or succumb to the accusation, that none of what I have written is my own. I would only like to think that in my sharing, in the writing, I may have presented others’ ideas in a new and authentic way.


Popular posts from this blog

Re-Imagining Online Teaching & Learning: A Cognitive Tools Approach

Matthew Arnold: Literature and Science