You are currently browsing the category archive for the ‘ES theory’ category.

PES website


CALL FOR PAPERS
74th Annual Meeting 2018

The 74th Annual Meeting of the Philosophy of Education Society (PES) will take place from March 22-26, 2018 in Chicago, Illinois, at the Palmer House Hilton: http://www.palmerhousehiltonhotel.com/

The Program Committee invites papers to be submitted for presentation at the Annual Meeting and for subsequent publication in the PES yearbook, Philosophy of Education 2018.  The Committee also invites proposals for: (1) alternative sessions; and (2) work-in-progress sessions designed to bring participants together to collaborate on developing ideas not yet ready for the regular paper submission process.  Papers and proposals that address the conference theme are specifically encouraged, but all submissions will be considered on an equal basis.

PES 2018 THEME: Education as Formation

In J.M Coetzee’s recent novel, The Schooldays of Jesus, a seven-year old child, Davíd, is delighted to discover upon his return to the Academy of Dance that the school’s pet lamb, Jeremiah, has “grown small” (Coetzee, 2016, p. 238).  David’s parental-figure, Simón, explains what has really happened:

No one in this world grows small, Davíd.   If he has turned small, it is not because Aloysha hasn’t been feeding him, it is because he is not the real Jeremiah.  He is a new Jeremiah who has taken the place of the old Jeremiah because the old Jeremiah has grown up and turned into a sheep.  People find young Jeremiahs endearing, but not old Jeremiahs.  No one wants to cuddle old Jeremiahs.  That is their misfortune (Coetzee, 2016, p. 238).

Here, Simón sums up the fate of all animals: as we age we grow and our growth makes us less adorable and charming.  In the case of human beings, however, aging and growth are accompanied by maturation and wisdom.  With the passage of time comes experience, perspective and, ideally, wisdom.  Life effectively teaches us how to live.  Thus, humans desire to grow up because maturity and wisdom are marks of improved judgment, autonomous self-determination, and the full realization of our humanity.

It is tempting to subordinate youth to maturity, that is, to conceive of the present as a mere preparation for the future.  Yet, as John Dewey demonstrates, the only adequate preparation for the future is to live fully in the present.  Generally speaking, children live in the present more than adults do.  Such an appreciation of childhood, however, can tempt us to devalue maturity: youth is associated with vitality, naiveté and idealism, whereas maturity is associated with lethargy, resignation, and cynicism.  Ultimately, the relation between youth and maturity is more complex; youth and maturity co-exist in the lives of all evolving individuals.  Most of our experiences must be lived before we can understand them.  Given that we can only know retrospectively how current experiences will live on in future ones, we can only discover who we truly are by reflecting on, and seeking to recognize ourselves in, our youthful searching.   We are formed by experiences, and we give form to ourselves through memory, understanding and narrative.

Although the social sciences dominate our understanding of human maturation, philosophy has much to contribute.  For example, philosophers question developmental models proposed by psychologists; they illuminate the problematic process of having to make significant life choices on behalf of one’s future, transformed, self; they ask how it is possible to educate for a more equitable and just society when the educators and educational institutions themselves are a part of the very society that they seek to reform; and they propose their own visions of formation.  Moreover, a philosophical examination of the conceptual link between formation and education has compelling implications for our understanding of and engagement in parenting, teaching, coaching, mentoring, and care-giving.  Accordingly, the Program Committee calls for papers and alternative session proposals for the 2018 PES annual conference that address all aspects of the theme of education as formation.  These include, but are not limited to:

  • Moral perfectionism

  • Formative justice

  • Bildung, Bildungsroman, and  the “coming of age” film

  • Existential, progressive and/or liberal education

  • Democracy and citizenship education

  • Critical theory and critical pedagogies

  • Potentiality, character, growing up, maturity, cultivation, transformation, and/or upbringing

  • Metaphors for human formation such as growing up, circles, narrative, and/or journey

  • Repetition, routine, regimentation, ritual, habit, practice, and training

  • Philosophical biography and/or autobiography

  • Philosophy of/as the art of living

  • Philosophies of childhood, aging, parenting, and/or intergenerational relationships

  • Philosophies founded upon concepts of natality, fate, and/or mortality

  • Psychoanalytic concepts of remembering, regression, irony, mourning, and melancholia

Submissions do not have to address the theme explicitly.  We also encourage submissions that attend to gaps within the field, and/or propose novel ways of thinking about perennial educational concerns.  All papers will go through a formal review process overseen by the program committee.  Papers may be deemed unacceptable on grounds of quality, but they will not be automatically excluded because they do not address the conference theme.

SUBMITTING PAPERS TO THE CONFERENCE

The Program Committee will review only submissions made in accordance with the instructions below. Papers reviewed and accepted by the Program Committee, and invited responses to them, will be published online in the society’s annual yearbook, Philosophy of Education 2018. Past issues can be viewed here:  http://ojs.ed.uiuc.edu/index.php/pes

Program Committee members: Kal Alston, Jason C. Blokhuis, Bob Davis, Kevin Gary, Tal Gilead, David T. Hansen, Chris Higgins, Mark Jonas, Duck-Joo Kwak, Natasha Levinson, Stephanie Mackler, Jennifer Morton, Naoko Saito, Paul Standish, Susan Verducci, David Waddington, Rachel Wahl, Quentin Wheeler-Bell and Douglas Yacek. (Thanks in advance to these colleagues for their service to the Society.) Graduate Assistant: Sara Hardman, Teachers College, Columbia University.

Deadline: Papers and proposals must be submitted electronically to  pes2018submissions@gmail.com no later than November 1, 2017.

Submission instructions appear below:

Submission Formats

Paper Submissions: Papers may not exceed 4,500 words, including footnotes, and must be written in proper PES form (see the  Style Guide). The 4,500-word limit will be strictly enforced. Papers that modestly exceed the 4,500-word limit will be subject to editing. Papers that exceed this limit excessively will be subject to rejection without review or to not being published in the PES yearbook.

Multiple reviewers will review papers blindly. Final decisions on manuscripts rest with the Program Chair. Criteria for review include quality of argument, links to philosophical and philosophy of education literature and to education policy and practice, quality of expression, and significance of the contribution. Please make sure that references to your name, institutional affiliation, or work (e.g., “As I have argued on many occasions…”) are omitted from the paper, including the notes. Your identifying information will not be available to reviewers.

Alternative Presentation Submissions: Proposals may not exceed 1,000 words, including references. If the session being proposed involves multiple presenters, please specify the contribution of each presenter.

Alternative presentation proposals take two general forms:

Alternative Sessions: Examples include roundtables, author meets critics panels, performances, interviews, and panel conversations on issues. Criteria for review include originality and clarity of motivating question or idea, potential interaction with session attendees, and relevance/ importance to educational philosophy and educational policy and practice. Alternative sessions may be scheduled concurrently with paper sessions or in separate time slots.

Work-in-Progress Sessions: These sessions will group scholars with work-in-progress in an informal collaborative setting. Proposals should detail the question or claim being investigated, relevant sources/ resources, likely direction, and mode(s) of analysis. Criteria for review include clarity and significance of the question/ claim, suitability of sources/ resources, suitability of mode(s) of analysis, and potential for thinking anew about issues in the field of educational philosophy.

Submission Process: Submit papers or proposals as a Word attachment to pes2018submissions@gmail.com  by November 1, 2017. In the body of your e-mail, please provide the following contact information:

  • Name
  • Institutional Affiliation
  • Email address
  • Phone number
  • Mailing address

Submissions will be accepted beginning September 15, 2017. An e-mail confirmation that your submission has been received will be sent within two business days.

Note: If you do not receive an email confirmation within two business days of your submission, please contact Megan Laverty atlaverty@tc.edu.

Respondents and Chairs

Members of PES who are interested in serving as session chairs or respondents are invited to contact the Program Chair, Megan Laverty, atlaverty@tc.edu.  Please specify your areas of expertise and provide your full contact information (mailing address, email address, and phone number). For questions concerning the program, please contact Megan Laverty at laverty@tc.edu. We look forward to receiving your submissions.

A note on A/V:

Due to prohibitive costs, PES is unable to provide data projectors, extension cords, or other A/V equipment. Presenters wishing to make use of PowerPoint or other presentation software must make their own arrangements at their own expense.

Presented at the PES Pre-Conference on Indigenous topics, March 2017

 

Is the expression “wisdom philosophy” a tautology, or a contradiction of no consequence? This author subscribes to the view that philosophical practice is, at its core, a quest for wisdom.[1] It is, therefore, not a question of whether but of how it can be made clear to chronically opposed social justice theorists and activists that philosophy has a material say in social change, including concerning the multiply scarred Indigenous/non-Indigenous relationship, which along with law professor Kathleen Mahoney (2015), i’ll insist, is not only historically but currently foundational to Canada.

By arguing for 1) metatheoretical “re-indigenization”[2], e.g. of wisdom as positioned at the heart of philosophical practice, and 2) substantive theoretical “Indigenization”, e.g. of philosophy along ecosocial thinking lines, i present an argument for the very real possibility of long-awaited, mutually sustaining (rather than assimilative) convergences of thought and life for Canada’s Indigenous and non-Indigenous people, and by extension, for philosophy’s continued relevance,[3] including for education, Indigenous and mainstream alike.

I invite Onondaga scholar David Newhouse’s definition of true knowledge as “what helps us to live together well” to step up to a definition of wisdom. For isn’t the latter, rather than traditional epistemological truth or scientific (hence “true”) knowledge, to be attained to, habituated, and relied on if a community is to improve their shared life? I further analyze Nuu-chah-nulth[4] scholar Richard Atleo’s (2005, 2011) tsawalk-principles as ecosocial wisdom that has served his nation well for millennia, and can likewise serve Canadians and humanity as a whole now and in the future. Let us briefly compare the above with European-descended philosophers of environmental orientation.

I side with Jim Lang (2010), who employs Lorraine Code’s (2006) ecological thinking (ET) in his PES 2009 talk to identify educational contexts as, in effect, dynamic social-material ecosystems. Even if quite possibly unbeknownst to or at least unacknowledged (in explicit publications) by these two authors, there exist demonstrable ET resonances with Indigenous philosophies on this continent and elsewhere.[5] Significantly, this allows to “marry”[6] ecologically-minded Western-derived and Indigenous-situated worldviews for an  ecosocially-wise (educational) philosophy.

The understanding that wisdom-searching is indigenous to the philosophical enterprise effects a decisive departure from the “nature-mirroring” detours of Western thought, so aptly deconstructed for their self-serving representationalism by Rorty (1979), a.o., and from the exclusive/exclusionary rationalistic leanings going back to Plato, and never fully transcended, even if resolutely dethroned by a number of revisionist thinkers (see Code, 2006), including Rorty himself, an analytic philosopher by training. The proposed metatheoretical indigenization of wisdom makes like-minded contact with Indigenous wisdom, which some have argued is philosophy proper in an Indigenous paradigm (Cajete, 1994, a.o.); further, the direct practical implementation of said indigenization would correspond with the often noted Indigenous worldview of theory-practice, spirit-mind-body, culture-nature continuity.

As to the substantive theoretical side, the increasingly influential environmental orientation of first-world Canada can be seen as “re-indigenization” by way of earning proper belonging to the land that sustains us, thus by way of touching one’s pre-industrial roots. Then again, it can be seen as “Indigenization” by finding a common language with Indigenous worldviews and peoples, and giving their practice-proven scientific-philosophical insights dignity and worth commensurable with the Euro-American counterparts. Such developments, i propose, are well positioned to effect actual decolonization of thought, and to the extent that the theory-practice link is operationalizable, they can duplicate the recognized be-think-do Indigenous nexus (Atleo, 2005, 2011; Cajete, 1994, a.o.), whereby a professed philosophy is by (Indigenous-paradigm) definition a philosophy as a way of life.

To conclude, the leadership of the re-visioned kind of philosophy in regenerating social interactions would likely quite appropriately suspend Rortyan objections to the role of Kantian philosophy-as-epistemology (per Rorty’s gloss) as the ultimate censor of all scholarship and all of society. It would be organically complemented, and periodically updated, by social justice practice as tactics for the trenches while providing itself an overarching public strategy. If Indigenous/non-Indigenous convergences are realized in thought and life, as projected above, then it would be possible to re-construct in the present time the RCAP-identified “stage of cooperation” (RCAP, 1996) from the time of the fur trade (and earlier), when both local and cross-Atlantic Indigeneities could engage in trade, war and marriage equally fluently and naturally. We can proceed by actualizing a shared respect for the ecosystems that sustain us.

 

REFERENCES

Alfred, Taiaiake (2005) Wasáse: Indigenous Pathways of Action and Freedom. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, Higher Education Division.

Arcilla, René Vincente (2002) Why Aren’t Philosophers and Educators Speaking to Each Other? Educational Theory 52(1), pp.1-11.

Atleo, Umeek E. Richard (2005) Tsawalk: A Nuu-chah-nulth Worldview. Vancouver, BC: UBC Press.

—————- (2011) Principles of Tsawalk: An Indigenous Approach to Global Crisis. Vancouver, BC: UBC Press.

Cajete, Gregory (1994) Look to the Mountain: An Ecology of indigenous Education. Kivaki Press.

Deleuze, Gilles & Félix Guattari ([1991]) What Is Philosophy? Transl. from French by Hugh Tomlinson and Graham Burchell III. Revised edition. Columbia University Press. Originally published as Qu’est-ce que la philosophie? in 1991 by Les éditions de Minuit, Paris; in English in 1994 by Columbia University Press.

Fricker, Miranda (2007) Epistemic Injustice: Power and the Ethics of Knowing. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Government of Canada (1996) Report of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, Volume I: Looking Forward, Looking Back. http://www.collections.gc.ca/webarchives/20071115053257/http://ainc-inac.gc.ca/ch/rcap/sg/sgmm_e.html

Indian Residential Schools Settlement Agreement (2006) http://www.residentialschoolssettlement.ca/settlement.html (May 8, 2006).

Lang, James C. (2010) Educational Epistemic Ecosystems: Re-visioning Educational Contexts on Lorraine Code’s Ecological Thinking. In Philosophy of Education 2010, pp. 180-189. Edited by Gert Biesta. http://ojs.ed.uiuc.edu/index.php/ pes/article/view/3085/1144

Mahoney, Kathleen (2015) “Canada’s Origin Story”. Royal Society of Canada keynote, Victoria, B.C., November 27, 2015.

Rorty, Richard (1979) Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature. NJ: Princeton University Press.

Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples (1996) Report of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples Vols I-V. Canada.

Smith. Linda Tuhiwai (2012) Decolonizing Methodologies: Research and Indigenous Peoples. Zed Books.

Stengel, B. S. (2002). Cause for Worry or Agenda for Action? Educational Theory, 52(3), 281–290.

Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada (2015a) Honouring the Truth, Reconciling for the Future: Summary of the Final Report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada. Winnipeg, Manitoba: TRC. http://www.trc.ca

Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada (2015b) Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada: Calls to Action. Winnipeg, Manitoba: TRC. http://www.trc.ca

Van Kirk, Sylvia (1980) Many Tender Ties: Women in Fur-Trade Society, 1670-1870. Watson & Dwyer.

________________________________________

NOTES

[1] But cf. Deleuze & Guattari, What Is Philosophy? for an alternative, though not strictly opposed view.

[2] Lower-case indigenous is taken to mean “belonging to a place”, whereas capitalized Indigenous refers to who/what is currently/formerly colonized.

[3] Thereby augmenting the fecund possibilities that Barbara Stengel shared in her response to Rene Arcilla’s (2002) famous flagging of the alleged breakdown of the philosopher/educator conversation.

[4] a.k.a. Nootka, which is a preferably avoided label.

[5] In addition to Richard Atleo’s (2005, 2011) Nuu-chah-nulth worldview, see Linda Tuhiwai Smith (2012) for the New Zealand Indigenous context. The similarly “environmental” worldview of the Bushmen of Southern Africa, a.k.a. the San people, Basarwa, is articulately cinematographically portrayed in The Gods Must Be Crazy (1980).

[6] See historian Sylvia van Kirk’s Many Tender Ties re the family histories of the fur trade in the Great Lakes region.

KUDOS for post go to Sam and Tracy’s blog “Fit Is a Feminist Issue”:

…As professional philosophers, it’s second nature for us to ask questions: what does it mean to be fit? What are appropriate measures for the goal? And, from a feminist perspective, in what way(s) does women’s quest for fitness and health contribute to empowerment and/or oppression?.. MORE from “About Fit” page


Sam sent me this link to a BBC article entitled “Girls say they hate their vaginas,” quoting Dr. Naomi Crouch, a gynecologist for adolescent girls. Dr. Crouch says, and I agree, “for a girl to feel that way about any part of her body, let alone a part that is intimate, is really upsetting.” The […]

via “Girls say they hate their vaginas.” WTF? — Fit Is a Feminist Issue

“Indigenize” by getting close to the land we’re born of – How’s that?! 🙂


The question now, is,

  • Knowing that paradigms like the one mapped by Siobhan Senier (2013) existed,
  • whereby dichotomies around alternative gender, human/nature, and now “dis-ability”
  • did not tear the social fabric,
  • how do we, situated in “developed” countries, can best stitch our societies up?

I have no problem coming up with huge bucket list items that are so extreme they seem impossible yet I make them happen, but I lost sight of what I really want from my every day life and it leaves me feeling unfulfilled and discouraged. I’m at a cross-roads now. I will be leaving my […]

via 10 Things I Want From Life — Bucket List Publications

you would have seen this poster in Toronto, i imagine?!

including in the window of variety stores that — by the additional looks of it —

ARE

selling

cigarettes,

whether someone attempted to scratch the merchandize evidence out — see top left above

SOOOooo, …

PPt-as-PDF file


On the eve of Canada’s 150th anniversary an equitable relationship between First Peoples and “settlers”/“newcomers” is still out of reach (cf. findings of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, 2015, and the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, 1996, twenty years apart). Extending law professor Kathleen Mahoney’s “Canada’s origin story” SSHRCC keynote (November 2015), I propose to postpone the “Canada 150” graduation until we’ve taken a make-up “Canada 101” course, addressing whose-ecological-knowledge-counts as a top-priority topic.

I submit that, in conceptualizing the future of this country alternatively to its ongoing, if chronically unacknowledged, colonialism, practice-justified Indigenous knowledges – at their philosophical core – are well worth employing on a par with re-examined(!) European-descended knowledges. Drawing on the work of Indigenous scholars Winona Laduke (1999), Deborah McGregor (2005, 2008), Richard Atleo (2011 & elsewhere), a.o., I compare (non-)Indigenous environmental philosophies in search of coalitional yet diversified, non-colonial thinking and action. “Traditional ecological knowledge” (TEK), a notion introduced by the mainstream for the Indigenous eco-epistemological orientation, but predictably eschued by Indigenous scholars (discussed in McGregor, 2005), is given a two-way upgrade, allowing Indigenous and non-Indigenous knowledges to cross-pollinate or specialize, depending on the case, in informing environmental policy-making.

The study explores the correspondences between epistemological issues of paradigm (in)commensurability (per Kuhn’s “scientific revolution” model) and actual lived experiences of environmental injustices, notably in Canada’s “fourth world” and the global “third world” (see Shiva 1989/2010, a.o.), largely perpetrated by Canada et al.’s “first worlds”. Given the increasingly visible global-scale ecological crisis, which has come to be recognized as related to the industrialized-technologized lifestyle of the (ironically) “developed” world, attention is directed to lessons to be gained from the historically proven sustainable practices of “pre-contact” societies, and their persisting present-day descendants. I, moreover, insist on also looking at Europe’s own pre-Industrial ways of life and underlying worldviews (see, e.g., Lorimer’s 1998 edited volume), from which Western modernity, and even more so current free market economy, have drastically, and ultimately (self-)destructively, departed.

This allows me to argue, on some level critically/pedagogically and on another post-dichotomously/coalitionally, that the notion of TEK is not precluded from reference to what Europe “knew” (no different than world-wide wisdom traditions) and chose to sidestep through its double-edged values of “progress”/“civilization”/“development”. Sampling 25 centuries, there is a record of reverence for nature and “paradigmatic rebellions” (Rorty, 1979) against its subjection in the thought of … Sophocles,… Hildegard von Bingen,… Goethe,… Hans Jonas…

The educational philosophy message is that an up-to-date “Canada 101” epistemology informing public/personal decisions would invite the traditional knowledges of a re-emerging Indigenous North America, while heeding the wake-up calls of contemporary science (Hansen 2009, Schneider 2009, Weaver 2009 on climate) and concurring theoretical stances, without ignoring nature-mindful European (and, likewise, world-wide) legacies. Rather than denying “[economic] growth” (Jackson, 2009), wellbeing (cf. Anishinaabe minobimaatisiiwin “right/good living”) would entail growing together in (ecological) wisdom as far as economy, technology, and overall way-of-life. By ecosystemic interconnectedness, the blueprint for an equitably knowledgeable Canada that is yet to be born calls forth a similarly upgraded Earth.

Keywords: philosophy; systems theory/social systems, cultural imperialism, post-colonialism, policy, ethics, environmental journalism

 REFERENCES

Atleo, E. Richard [a.k.a. Umeek] (2004) Tsawalk: A Nuu-chah-nulth Worldview. Vancouver, Toronto: UBC Press.

———- (2011) Principles of Tsawalk: An Indigenous Approach to Global Crisis. Vancouver, Toronto: UBC Press.

Haraway, Donna (1988) Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of Partial Perspective. Feminist Studies 14(3), pp. 575-599 (Autumn 1988). Appears in S. Harding, ed., The Feminist Standpoint Theory

Reader: Intellectual and Political Controversies. pp. 81-101. New York & London: Routledge.

Carson, Rachel Silent Spring

Code, Lorraine (2006) Ecological Thinking: The Politics of Epistemic Location. Oxford, UK: Oxfod University Press.

Laduke, Winona (1999) All Our Relations: Native Struggles for Land and Life. Cambridge, MA: Southend Press.

Lorimer, David, ed. (1998) The Spirit of Science: From Experiment to Experience. Edinburgh, Scotland: Floris Books.

McGregor, Deborah (2005) Traditional Ecological Knowledge: An Anishnabe Woman’s Perspective. Atlantis 29(2), Spring/Summer 2005, pp.103-109.

———- (2008) Linking Traditional Ecological Knowledge and Western Science: Aboriginal Perspectives from the 2000 State of the Lakes Ecosystem Conference. The Canadian Journal of Native Studies XXVIII, 1(8):139-158.

Rorty, Richard (1979) Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Shiva, Vandana (1989/2010) Staying Alive: Women, Ecology and Development. London: Zed. Republished in 2010 by

South End Press.

———- (1997) Biopiracy: The Plunder of Nature and Knowledge. Boston, MA: South End Press.

PPt-as-PDF file


 

“Truth” – judging by the presumed cognitive extremes of religious/spiritual and epistemological/scientific contexts (Rorty, 1979, 2005) – can be seen, across the board, as the goal of inquiry and the highest distinction awarded in/for understanding and knowing well. This is because truth (best knowledge) potentially serves (in Deweyan terms) the “betterment of life”, which is why human societies have had, in one form or another, a special place for education. When it comes to the work of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission on Residential Schools (TRC, 2015), extending the work of RCAP (1996) and mandated by the ensuing IRS Settlement Agreement (2006), we face the asymmetric truths of a colonial history and present, and the urgent-discomfiting imperative of making space for these in knowing about the past and for the future. I see this as a long-term (in)formal educating-for/by-doing enterprise, attuned to the TRC’s 94 calls-to-action.

TRC’s truths exceed the analytic philosophy mould, descended from the Kantian tradition of “philosophy as epistemology” (per Rorty’s, 1979 diagnosis), whereby mental representation and apodicticity reign supreme. Instead, in their robust social/power situatednesses and investments, said truths demand a composite epistemological-ethical examination, as proposed by Miranda Fricker (2007) for “epistemic injustice” in gendered legal contexts, and earlier pursued more comprehensively by Donna Haraway, Lorraine Code, among many other feminist/revisionist epistemologists. I direct my similarly multimodal discursive lens toward a shared (non)Indigenous future for Canada. My emphatically public-cum-academic educational philosophy project, informed by TRC’s 94 calls-to-action (op.cit.), openly engages the country’s foundational colonial dichotomy to map past-current-future cognitive relationships within and across(non-)Indigenous spaces, along socio-psychological, political-economic, etc. dimensions.

I will argue that there is no direct, neat and easy, causal link between truth andreconciliation. Truth-finding/telling will be politically, educatively, and profoundly humanly vacuous, unless it effectively informs the consistent, continual creation and exercise of upgraded social habits/action. I take up the symbolic revision of “Canada’s Origin Story”, per law professor Kathleen Mahoney’s SSHRCC keynote (November 27, 2015), as a shorthand for the actual re-constituting of Canada. Namely, accepting Indigenous peoples (First Nations, Inuit, Metis) as “co-founding” nations to reinstate them on a par with the currently constitutionally recognized British and French European settlers (in truth, colonizers). This means being/becoming – today, just as in the fur trade that birthed Canada (Innis, 1962; Ray, 1975, 1990), or in the French and Indian Wars (Tehanetorens, 1999) – partners of co-equal epistemic/economic/political agency. Hence, truly confederate – peaceful – nations.

The above, I propose, necessitates a comprehensive, transformative (self)educational project throughout the school-society continuum. It is to re-tune the ways in which and the reasons for which (non)Indigenous actors generate and engage with socially situated, thus ethically charged knowledges about/by/for self and each other, which have been, far too long, conspicuously discrepant. By conducting a hybrid epistemological inquiry, I project the conditions for a likewise multidimensional Canadian past-to-future “truth” of mutual inclusivity. Hide-and-seek need no longer be a colonizer/colonized tactic to circumvent reciprocally problematic truths of the past 500 years. Instead, Canada re-constitutes itself, byand for, the ethical-epistemic-pedagogical truthfulness of strategic mutuality.

REFERENCES

Fricker, Miranda (2007) Epistemic Injustice: Power and the Ethics of Knowing. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Indian Residential Schools Settlement Agreement (May 8, 2006) www.residentialschoolssettlement.ca/settlement.html

Innis, Harold Adam (1962) The Fur Trade in Canada: An Introduction to Canadian Economic History. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Mahoney, Kathleen (2015) “Canada’s Origin Story”. SSHRCC keynote, Victoria, BC, November 27, 2015.

Ray, Arthur J. (1974) Indians in the Fur Trade. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

———- (1990) The Canadian Fur Trade in the Industrial Age. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Rorty, Richard (1979) Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature. NJ: Princeton University Press.

———- (2005) Anticlericalism and Atheism. In Richard Rorty & Gianni Vattimo,The Future of Religion, pp. 29-42. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.

Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples (1996) Report of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples Vols I-V. Canada.

Tehanetorens [Ray Fadden] (1999) Wampum Belts of the Iroquois. Summertown, Tennessee: Book Publishing Company.

Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada (2015a) Honouring the Truth, Reconciling for the Future: Summary of the Final Report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada. Winnipeg, Manitoba: TRC. www.trc.ca

Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada (2015b) Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada: Calls to Action. Winnipeg, Manitoba: TRC. www.trc.ca

 

Weeelll, it is exciting to watch

— at 3:00/3:30 pm-ish, on a mild December Friday afternoon —

how the vote count soars, in front of your eyes

http://www.ontariondp.ca/stoptheselloff

59,744 signatures at 3:25

840 at 4:05

 

SUCCESS to Andrea Horvath’s campaign to stop Hydro One’s privatization!

[announced goal is 60,000 sig’s; the time frame = “a little over a week” yesterday THU]

seems safe to bet that we’ll hit the mark in les than 24h (received emailed link THU around noon)


On Toronto Star’s watch:

  • Thu Oct 29 2015 article by  Queen’s Park Bureau Chief

image caption states:

In his first-ever report to the legislature, Ontario budget watchdog [IF I may, we could have done without this “title”] Stephen LeClair said the sale of 60 per cent of Hydro One would hike the already massive provincial debt by slashing revenue. More…

Calendar

October 2017
M T W T F S S
« Aug    
 1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
3031  

Categories

© CreativeCommonsLicense

Creative Commons License Img

accurate quoting proper attribution by/on ES & of ES