Chat GBT - Chapter 2 Toward collectivity: Self as multiple voices

 

Shared knowledge or common sense lies at the core of any successful society.(Saul, 2001: 19)

I want to elaborate the uses of the form of play called irony, given that it serves the double function of allowing the particular sort of language game and the opportunity to create my own sub / version of reality-as-common sense.(McWilliam, 1999: 177)

 

Introduction: Self as multiple voices And  

Section 2.1 Voices and subjectivities

The introduction of the chapter discusses the author's exploration of their own voice/voices, aiming to understand them in the context of their experiences and influences. The author clarifies that they are not attempting to create a universal model but rather seeking to explain one way of comprehending their choices and actions. They emphasize the importance of flexibility and freedom within discursive space, rooted in cultural values and ideological perspectives.

The author talks about how they communicate differently with various people, leading to a sense of being differently-coherent rather than an autonomous entity. They present four observations to guide their discussion:

1. They recognize that, as a single human organism, they have a voice.
2. They perceive themselves as having multiple voices and choices in what they say and when.
3. Discursive restrictions in some settings limit their freedom and the range of voices they can use.
4. They are both discursively restricted and produced within discourse.

The chapter then delves into the concept of "voices" representing different subjectivities and discourses that influence the author's thinking. They reject traditional and liberal humanist views of the self as self-actuating agents and instead emphasize the role of discourse in shaping subjectivity. The author introduces three voices – Ernest (rooted in mathematics and physical sciences), Hélène (representing post-structuralist and postmodern analysis of discourse and power), and Karl (focused on social justice).

Ernest is comfortable with postmodernism but values reason and logic as cultural products. Hélène, a post-structuralist, is aware of the influence of discursive assumptions on life and embraces a playful and ironic tone. Karl emphasizes social justice but is somewhat underdeveloped, with the author attributing this to their upbringing.

The chapter concludes by expressing the author's mission to make critical and postmodern theory accessible to teachers and parents who may have naive philosophical understandings and contribute to envisioning social change. The author speaks on behalf of their three voices – Ernest, Hélène, and Karl – in this mission.

Voices from mathematics, science, and philosophy

In this section, the author discusses their first voice, named Ernest, which originates from mathematics and the sciences, especially shaped by the logical thinking they learned during the 1960s and 70s. Ernest's perspective is deeply influenced by mathematical concepts, like ideals and asymptotes.

The author reflects on how they learned about the distinction between an ideal circle (existing only in the imagination) and a perfect circle (a real-world approximation of the ideal). They mention the concept of an asymptote, a straight line that a curve never actually reaches, with the point of intersection referred to as infinity. This concept initially seemed difficult to understand, leading to the author's perception that the idea of lines meeting at infinity is a metaphorical statement connecting two separate worlds, the ideal and the real.

Ernest's voice represents a postmodern scientist who understands the limitations of scientific theories and the influence of language and context. They argue that science, including modern science, is only valid within its constructed context and does not hold a special claim on universal truth.

The author also discusses the methods of science and mentions influential philosophers of science like Popper and Kuhn. They argue that while there's a perception that the scientific method is closely linked to positivism, the author, following Ernest, emphasizes that it is possible to view the natural sciences as one among many epistemologies rather than an exclusive paradigm.

Ernest sees the scientific method as the chosen method due to their questions about the real world as perceived by humans. They acknowledge the importance of constantly adjusting their teaching based on their current perceptions and actively reflect on their teaching methods.

The author blends idealism and pragmatism in their praxis, using critical reflection as a key tool. They emphasize the complexity of the relationship between science and other disciplines and advocate for a more comprehensive and inclusive perspective in teacher education, showing a willingness to accept the validity of various theories and approaches.

Voices from the social sciences and philosophy: modernism, relativism, postmodernism

 Remainder of section 1 - Social Science to the end - Helene does not really get a look in????

The passage discusses the author's three distinct voices or perspectives: Ernest (representing realism), Hélène (representing postmodernism and feminism), and Karl (rooted in critical theory). These voices are analytical tools used to understand and navigate different situations. The author emphasizes that these voices interact and influence each other, depending on the context and discourse. The passage also suggests that three additional voices are missing from the author's model: commonsense, irony, and strategy, which are considered different aspects of the same chorus of voices in the realm of practice.

Critical theory - third voice to the end

In this passage, the author introduces the third voice, Karl, which is rooted in critical theory. Karl represents a critical, questioning perspective that challenges power differentials and seeks emancipatory change. This voice is closely linked to modernism and postmodernism and is informed by the critical literature of resistance and activism. Karl questions existing assumptions and asks who benefits from the silence. The author emphasizes that Karl does not provide answers but plays a role in confronting privilege, striving for emancipation, and confronting hegemony.

The passage also highlights that these voices are not fixed or aligned with specific paradigms. Instead, they interact and influence each other, depending on the context and discourse. The author describes how these voices impact their understanding and decision-making in different situations. The passage concludes with the author's intention to explore three additional voices of commonsense, irony, and strategy, which are considered as different aspects of the same chorus of voices within the realm of practice. These voices, according to the author, are important for addressing what is missing in the evolving model.

 

----------------------------------------------

 

In this passage, the author discusses three distinct voices or perspectives: Ernest (representing realism), Hélène (representing postmodernism and feminism), and Karl (rooted in critical theory). These voices serve as analytical tools to understand various situations and contexts. The author describes how these voices influence their thinking and decision-making in different circumstances. The passage emphasizes that these voices are not fixed and can change based on the context and discourse. Additionally, the author introduces the idea of three other missing voices: commonsense, irony, and strategy, which are considered different aspects of the same chorus of voices within the realm of practice. The passage concludes by highlighting the author's intention to move beyond a focus on these voices and explore how their different insights can support the goal of creating a better, safer, and fairer world.

 

Section 2.2 Common sense, irony and strategy: a chorus of whispers

In this section, the author discusses three essential perspectives – common sense, irony, and strategy – that influence and guide actions in the real world. These perspectives are considered voices within the author's subjective consciousness. The author contends that, despite the influence of their epistemological voices (Ernest, Hélène, and Karl), these perspectives are often in the background, only surfacing when needed. The author refers to them as whispers within one's consciousness.

1. Common Sense and Commonsense: The author differentiates between "common sense" and "commonsense." Common sense refers to a shared, communal understanding of what is held to be true, while commonsense is the individual's construction of this understanding. Common sense is shaped by one's experiences in physical, social, and linguistic contexts and is influenced by learning. The author argues that education plays a crucial role in influencing both individual commonsense and shared common sense within communities. Shared knowledge or common sense is central to a successful society, emphasizing the importance of collaborative thinking and problem-solving.

2. Irony: The author discusses irony as a voice within an individual's subjectivities. Irony involves having radical doubts about one's own beliefs and understanding the contingency and fragility of one's "final vocabulary" – the set of words used to justify one's actions, beliefs, and life. The author recognizes that irony has the potential to challenge and question common sense. Unlike Rorty's characterization of irony as a personality trait, the author considers it a perspective that individuals can choose to apply situationally, allowing them to question their taken-for-granted assumptions.

3. Strategy: The author suggests that strategic thinking is essential in choosing actions and making decisions based on one's knowledge about science and society. Being tactical and strategic involves awareness of the available choices and the likely consequences of those choices. The author acknowledges the battle between unfettered capitalism and universal human rights and suggests that education should enable learners to develop both theoretical competencies and practical skills. This re-focusing of the goal of education promotes knowledge construction as a communal activity and reconceptualizes participants in education as researchers and learners.

The author's argument is grounded in the need for a more holistic, pragmatic theoretical base in education, which recognizes the importance of postmodern perspectives. The author emphasizes that, in a postmodern world, responsibility shifts from foundational principles to contexts, advocating for a change in education that considers the unruliness of knowledge and embraces collaborative and context-dependent approaches.

Section 2.3 Self as a multitude of voices : an emerging model

In this section, the author explores the complexity of the self as a multitude of conflicting voices and perspectives. The author acknowledges the challenge of making sense of opposing ideas within oneself but emphasizes that people can understand these contradictions through various lenses, including common sense, praxis, and pragmatism. The author mentions being influenced by Ernest, who has led to the development of a model to illustrate how these voices might come together and inform decision-making processes for a practitioner.

The model, represented as a prism, features Ernest, Hélène, and Karl on one end, symbolizing the theoretical voices, and commonsense, irony, and strategy on the other, representing the practical orientations. This prism represents the boundaries of one's agency, with the interior signifying the possible actions and ideas within a given context. The author emphasizes that one's position within the prism is not fixed but constantly changes based on influence and context.

The author underscores the importance of all these voices in providing autonomy and freedom to think and plan actions. The prism of praxis serves as a way to navigate the complexities of theory and practice. The author asserts that it's about having knowledge of viable options, which come from both theory and practice, rather than defending one particular paradigm. The emphasis is on making pragmatic choices and planning actions that contribute to the kind of society one would want to live in.

The author introduces another model, the trivector, illustrating the choices an individual has within a given context to act in various ways. These choices are influenced by different voices, such as commonsense, irony, and strategy. The author argues that individuals have various forms of freedom to act, which are enhanced by learning and adapting to change, making education important.

The next chapter will expand on this model to consider the construction of groups or collectives and explore how the voices of the protagonists might interact with the external world to explain expansion, adaptation, and change.