In November 2006 Jack said to the BERA Electronic BERA: I, Serper, wish to quickly take what he said from my ontologisation of Whitehead into an applied ethical and ontological living theory in post-propositional, wholly engaging, embodied and living psychology of human existence and the human subject

Whitehead - What I understand by a living educational theory is that it is an explanation created by an individual to explain their educational influences in their own learning, in the learning of others and in the learning of the social formations in which they live and work.

Serper – I am pushing it to Ontological living theory or living ontological theory: What I understand by living ontological theory is that it is an explanation created by an individual to explain the way they dialectically, heuristically (critically, systematically, cyclically and structurally) and reflexively struggle and interrelate with their human-all-too-human ethical obligation towards themselves to lead an optimally meaningful, productive/constructive, dignifying, empowering, fulfilling, gratifying, ontologically securing and sustaining and contributing existence in, with and towards the world for themselves with optimal integrity, dignity and aesthetic, ethical and authentic quality of being/becoming-in-the-world. This is specifically through a rigorous dialectic heuristic interrelationship and struggle with the human-all-too-human ethical question How Do I lead a [more/ the optimal] meaningful, productive/constructive, dignifying, empowering, gratifying, fulfilling, ontologically securing and sustaining and contributing in, with and towards the world for myself

Whitehead - I think each living theory is at the edge of convention. In the exercise of their originality each researcher has, I believe, avoided the colonisation of the unconventional for their own purpose in the creation of their own living theory.

Serper – I am seeking to embody and exemplify the meaning of the above in applied, epistemological action – what I just said about ontological living theory – through showing you how I have dealt with this in my own applied ontological living action research study of my own embodied ontology and ethics: I have done it to fulfil, empower, actualise, and push forward my interst and essence as a constructive critical humanistic psychologist seeking to construct a dignifying, post-propositional, living, embodied, engaging and applied/applicable humanistic psychology and heuristics of human existence and a heuristic tool and approach to the conceptualisation, studying, re-evaluation and conveyance of the human subject

Whitehead - I don't want to speak for Alan but I think Alan has answered Susie's question, 'But could it be that the separation of epistemology from ontology is only valid if there is a hidden root metaphor of objectivity? Knowing inalienable from being.', in a startlingly original paper that explains why the Darwinian Theory of Evolution is mistaken and addresses the damage that a root metaphor or objectivity can do in separating, as discrete, knowing from being. You can access Alan's published paper from http://www.jackwhitehead.com/rayner/arphilosophica.htm .

Serper – I only speak for myself as one of my criticisms of my field is that empirical and clinical psychologists and propositional psychologists of human existence take for granted and are taken for granted that their practice and role give them the right to speak on behalf of other individuals, often and usually using propositional theories, hypotheses and models, thereby degrading and dehumanising human beings: This is something that I feel passionate about and therefore would like to merely speak on and using my own life and encourage others to construvct their own ontological living theory of their own ontology, epistemology, education and ethics.

Whitehead - I'd like to participate in an i~we enquiry (I have yet to move into the we~i enquiry as originated by Yaakub to emphasise the primacy of the common good of 'we') that is focused on Susie's point 'I think we need': I think we need to develop an ability to understand how we know so we can see the workings of power, values, perception and ways of being in the world - not from a place of judgement but of rising self awareness in community with others.

Serper – No! I am only speaking for myself and speaking for me and using me to embody and exemplify my own heuristics of human existence and suggested heuristic tool and approach to the conceptualisation, studying, re-evaluation and conveyance of the human subject and show the possibility for a post-propositional, living and embodied humanistic and applied real-world, real-life psychology of human existence: I am obsessed with human dignity and integrity: and therefore fight the encouragement of individuals to sustain and maintain their own 'I' as freely as possible: I expressed my love and care for the 'we' by maintaining and sustaining the power and dignity of the 'I'

Whitehead: I'd like to hear us sharing our stories of our educational influences in our own learning and in the learning of others that are grounded in our ways of being in the world that engage with the workings of power, values and perception.

I'd like to share stories that show how, in clarifying the meanings of our embodied ontological values, in the course of their emergence in what we are doing, we form the living epistemological standards we use to explain to ourselves and others our educational influences in learning.

I like Jean's focus on 'good' and I am hoping that by July 2007 we will manage to accomplish what Pete is asking for in this short video clip we made a couple of days ago on the importance of developing shared living standards of judgement: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hoyM47Gj7hc - this should open almost immediately from YouTube in your browser.

Serper – I'd like to show the feasibility and possibility of the formation of ontological living theory accounts of the way individuals dialectically and reflexively struggle and wrestle with my suggested heuristic tool and approach to the human subject and human existence: I have just completed an extremely intensive and painful ontological and ethical self-study to show firsthand and within my credentials of ontologist, ethician clinician and theoretical and philosophical critical humanistic psychologist that such a heuristic tool and approach is in fact possible: I have chosen it to be that painful and intensive as I am a very obsessed/obsessive, perfectionist and thorough researcher and a very old fashion existential thinker and psychologist: Others can vary and modifty the level of intensity in light with theor needs and level of bearibng and tolerance;

Whitehead - I'm wondering if it is going to be possible to develop an understanding of a 'Common Good' as a living standard we share in accounting for our educational influences in learning? I like the way my colleague Severin Deneulin (and Townsend) writes about the 'Common Good'.

Serper – Not within my Ontological Living theory that encourages individuals to work out for themselves the meanings of applied ethics, dignity and integrity for themselves within what gives them empowerment, gratification, ontological security and sustainability and contribution rather than apathy:

I'd like to offer the living 'being' [I do not wish to use thhe word concept or idea/ linguistic] of 'meaningful contribution' as opposed to apathy and indifference

"The concept of the common good takes us beyond seeing the well-being of discrete individuals as the only proper goal or telos of human action. It enables recognition that there are goods, including many that are non-trivial for human well-being, the benefits of which may be received by people only in a common enterprise. Of course, the people who benefit from such goods can be conceived of discretely. The point is that it is only in relationships, structured as necessary to enable the common action that `produces´ common goods, that lives which benefit from such goods can be lived. In this way, the good for each person can be conceived of only by reference to the good of the

others with whom her good is possible. Analysis which focuses only on individual preferences or choices cannot capture common goods because what makes them good is

endogenous to the living of the life in which those goods are simultaneously generated and enjoyed." (Deneulin & Townsend, 2006, p.21) Deneulin, S. & Townsend, N. (2006) Public Goods, Global Public Goods and the Common

Good. WeD Working Paper 18, ESRC Research Group on Wellbeing in Developing Countries.

Serper – I offer 'meaningful contribution' and care about the world as a dialectic living contradiction to apathy and indifference

Retrieved 17 October, 2006 from

http://www.welldev.org.uk/research/workingpaperpdf/wed18.pdf

unconventional? If so what do we understand of living theories in this place? How deeply can theory (including linguistic form) go into non-convention without itself becoming meaningless if it is not to colonise the unconventional for the user's, own (power-ful) purposes?

Serper – A really authentic, honest, rigorous, cyclic and systematic ontological living theory with integrity can never be meaningless for this is soul of a human being/subject and a human being, any human being, can never be meaningless she is the most wonderful, sublime in its grotesqueness and grotesque in his/her sublimeness, creation and thing in the world:

Whitehead - Susie - I'm finding that your presence, in this space and in your thoughts, is enhancing my feeling of well-being and my desire to contribute to the educational conversation.

Serper – Yes Whitehead is a practicing teacher in essence: I teach to eat not to self-fulfil: I create and legitimate ontological living theories to self-actualise

I say 'educational' because my understanding of educational enquiry is that it is most definitely not restricted to formal teaching contexts. Much of my own education has

taken place out of formal institutional practices of teaching.

Serper – Indeed it was – Whitehead is a teacher in his very essence: Nothing can be done to change it: Serper is a humanistic existential psycholgist and thinker in his essence deeply and passionately worried about the integrity, dignity, self-empowerment, ontological security and sustainability of the human subject

Whitehead, as part of this essence of his, is [hopefully] concerned about the success of his students: He says

When you ask, 'What do we understand of living theories in this place?', I think you might enjoy Marian's practitioner- researcher account from some 5 years of sustained enquiry into:

I am Because We Are. (My never-ending story) The emergence of a living theory of inclusional and responsive practice. Ph.D. University of Bath. Naidoo, M. (2005)

Retrieved 2 April 2006 from http://www.bath.ac.uk/~edsajw/naidoo.shtml

This includes Marian's insights into the significance of a passion for compassion in human relationships. Part of the thesis is focused on compassion in the context of Altzheimer's patients and their carers and connects with your point -

But epistemology can also be a felt sense, a pattern, a relationship with knowing in certain and distinct ways.

If you click on the live urls of the following they will take you to the Abstracts of the living theories of practitioner-researchers who are communicating what I understand of living theories in this place.

Madeline Church, (2004) Creating an uncompromised place to belong: Why do I find myself in networks? Retrieved 24 May 2005 from http:// www.bath.ac.uk/~edsajw/church.shtml

Margaret Farren (2005) How can I create a pedagogy of the unique through a web of betweenness? Ph.D. University of Bath. Retrieved 2 April 2006 from

http://www.bath.ac.uk/~edsajw/farren.shtml

Eleanor Lohr, (2006) Love at Work: What is my lived experience of love and how might I become an instrument of love´s purpose. Ph.D. University of Bath. Retrieved 26 May 2006

from http://www.bath.ac.uk/ ~edsajw/living.shtml

I think each of these practitioner-researchers answers Brian's important questions in their doctoral theses.