All+Class+Notes

**Notes from class 9-9**

 * Note-taker for September 16 will be Deb.** Please let her know if you will not be coming to a class meeting.


 * Kim will be out September 23, September 30**
 * Eleonor may be out October 7**
 * Deb may be late November 4**
 * Steve may be missing part of the last 6 meetings**


 * Conversations about structure:**
 * First half of class focus on course readings...**

Jigsaw readings: Team analysis of readings: each week divided into small groups and closely read. We will divide up the readings for each week for the next week.

For next week: Moran: All of us will read/review this. Safranski: Eleonor, Deb Krell: Kim, Kanoe Levin: Sarah, Steve

Anika, Kadish, and Maggie: join in somewhere...

Provide for the class: · a bulleted list of important points (try to Hultgrenize the essence of the readings—What //does// she want us to get out of this?)... It may help to focus on the weekly 'prelude' in the syllabus · significant images (What sticks/resonates with you?) · recommendations for others' writing (pertinent paragraphs or topics) if you see anything · questions or pressing concerns (eg. What the heck did Levin mean by the word 'body'?)

Please keep in mind as you read that our topics are:

Deb: The lived experience of starting a school Kim: The lived experience of personal and professional relationships formed at a distance. What is the nature of those relationships. Kanoe: The lived experience of multi-racial teachers. Also interested in the need to belong (and the experience of the in-between space in the search for belonging). Sarah: The lived experience of writing from and with the body. Steve: The lived experience of high-school band students as they prepare music for adjudicated perforamce. Eleonor: The lived experience of teachers recriuted from the Phillipines teaching in American schools.

Khadish Anika Maggie Please fill us in, y'all (we want this in your words)!

Dissertation study (maybe focus on a chapter each session). Next week: Chapter 1 (each of us should read and be prepared to discuss a chapter 1 with the group). Include general elements, initial impressions (not anything strenuous, here). Workshopping of writing (sharing)
 * Second half of each class:**

· Image: the embryo in the womb—birth would feel like death to a fetus. · The Bhuddist “noble friend”--someone who can see us fully, can confront us gently with our own blindness, helping us become more self aware. · Time is a circle—the year, a day, a rehearsal, a class, a concert, the warm-up in a class (should refer to prior knowledge), the division of cells, etc. Breath—in yoga the breath is 'circular'. · Humor in the book: the Marquez quote about knowing his wife so well that he doesn't know her at all. · Love as a third force between two people. When two people part, that element--“like a ghost,” says Deb—remains. Synergy: 1+1=3. · The face as a meeting place of the inner world and the outer world. How do we as teachers communicate our inner selves to our students? (42).  · Holes in the lace are what makes it beautiful. · Otherness: The longing to be seen (25). · True listening is worship (70). Silence, inner voice, deeper understanding. Music “constellates.” \ · I “want to be” will (as a hammer) versus attending to what we already are. · Unprecedented spiritual hunger (80). Is this because we aren't offering children the //right// education? Do we fill the void with technology, with possessions...  · Dualism: subject/object, mind/body, birth/death...   · Estrangement from the earth. · Gadamer and the horizon—moving through processes and how the horizon joins and moves with us (215) · “Jamesian” hahaha! Like the EDCI merger. (34).  · ...Died a grocer... (149). How is this different when your occupation is your “calling.” Is this the same for teachers? What is the difference—following a star—becoming more yourself through your heart's work, rather than compartmentalizing into a “job.” · The body in the soul (98). What does it mean when we reverse our concept of container and contents? · Aside: reading only the first line of each paragraph does not work when the first line is “This reminds me of a story about a dog...” · The violin metaphor: tuned too tightly, strings snap. · Is the author too vigorously embracing death? · Waiting for Godot description (from the man forced to see it because he had no money) (221)
 * Notes/reflections on the readings for readings for this week:**
 * //Anam Cara//--**

Kim was reviewing Moran: Heidegger appealed to those who also saw “dark days ahead.” Arendt and “estrangement from the earth.” //We are all finding different things in here...//

· Nihilism: the belief that existence is useless, that there is no truth, that destruction is desireable. · Ontology: pre-conceptual, pre-reflective understanding of “being. Heideger's clearly articulated definition (ha ha): the study of being (22). · Phenomenology is defined on page 13. A process of articulation...  · //Dasein// is “openness to being” (23). · Levin seems to think that Heidegger gets “stuck” because he's thinking thinking thinking, not experiencing. Experiencing from the self provides a clearer notion of being in general. · Heidegger avoids the body, according to Levin, because the essence of being is not the same as the capacity for being or the nature of being—movement, motion, seeing. Thinking is limited, but experiencing gets us somewhere. (40)  · The body metaphors for thinking (43): for more of this, see Lakoff and Johnson. · Recollection as projecting both past and future. May be helpful in dissertation defense... Recollection is both discovering and inventing (72-73). This seems important to our research and in perceiving our participants' perspectives. · The turning (54): we can turn to being only in the midst of our life world. We must face ourselves by facing our capacity to understand being (our own, as individuals). The real thing—primordial body of feeling. · Listening and feeling have been historically construed as points of validity, but Levin seems to take issue with this...  · Thinking takes place not just in the brain: it is a bodily activity (45). · Merleau-Ponty solved the whole problem through his concept of “the flesh” (65). It demolishes the dualism. Flesh refers to tactility and field of being (not meat). Is this more accessible in Abram? · //The Fifth Element// (not boron, Bruce Willis)...  · What's with the “ek” spellings: “ek-stacy, ek-sistence”?
 * Levin:**

Steve recommends Levin's //The Listening Self//

Turning (Why look at it?) Unpacking/exploring the phenomenon: personal and etymological tracings, other research, literature, poetry, metaphorical representations, etc... (What is it?) Philosophical foundations Thematizing (the unpacking of the conversations with participants) Pedagogical insights I. Create WIKI space for class – collaborative version of ELMS II. Roster changes · 301 – change area code for Kim on class roster · Anika’s phone #: 240-688-0511 · Kanoe’s area code: 646 III. Crackers rocked! – Thanks Deb! IV. Reading Conversation
 * We need to know what the chapters of phenomenological dissertation are—we may want to read more examples (especially of chapter 3).**
 * Class notes **
 * 9/16/10 **

A. Levin · Levin feels that Heidegger neglects the bodily aspects of thinking and caring. · Radical reconstruction – thought not just manifested in words, but in body. Way of carry ourselves and gestures · Modality bearing meaning - implication for aspects of how thought can be manifested · Etymology – birth something, carry something · Logos – thought Legein – laying down of gathering up of Logos. · Legein is the way we articulate understanding e.g. communicate it, process internally · Primodial understanding of body – have in infancy. · Enlightenment getting it back – goes away via rationality – equates nihilism · Weapon against nihilism is enlightenment – bring back primordialism · p. 114 – see chart – stages of life development · Heidegger + Pointe = Levin · Unpacking the tactile nature of a carpenter, reinforces experiences of being there timeliness – sculptor meaning out of stone – things that we all understand in same way because of the orientation of our bodies · Sec. 8: see quotes – learn something that extends beyond us, beyond object itself · Self-reflection always changes person. · p. 154: Retrieval, explication – poet’s hand, painting · Technology can widen chasm between primordial and thought. · Intentional touch. Duality of touch – also implies letting go and holding on. Putting tools back. Such gestures have meaning. · Section 11 p. 161-166 · Accessible to Levin’s argument · Hermeneutic circle, finding center · Levels of being – least to most · Phenomenology as a movement for change · Wellspring is primordial ·

__ Possible connections to our research __ : · What our co-researchers our feeling (bodily) beyond thought. Physical cues. Meaning they’ve made. B. Safranski · Heidegger’s life – childhood, family, hometown · Mood leads to philosophy – p. 2 · church bells – p. 7 (cited as interesting to read) · Town and church - influences on Heidegger’s life · Faith division in his town: Old Catholics – wealthy, revered; Poor Catholics (Heidegger) – bullied · At age 6, poor Catholics became majority · Seminary experiences · Heidegger saw two worlds – authentic and inauthentic · Authentic: profound, introspective, hard · Inauthentic: frivolous, superficial · Heidegger was critical of “fast living,” which he viewed as inauthentic · Truth is recognized – transforms us – truth, resist urges. Freedom will make us true, Truth will make us free. p. 21 · Science began to trump phenomenology. Trumping faith, crowding out faith. · Heidegger eventually left theological seminary studies. · He explored the idea of nothing. · Context matters when interpreting statements, p. 45 (bottom). · Studied life philosophy – trumps studies of other philosophies – e.g. God · Life was too big (encompassing all – soul, being) · “Consciousness is at no moment severed from Being” (p. 77) · Perception – one representation in limitless possibilities (p. 76) · Phenomenological reduction (p. 76) · Husserl (bottom) – (p. 76) · Reciprocal relationship between observer and subject/object · Primordial reciprocity · What are the things themselves? · Connection to Bachelard – candle; imbuing object. · Connection to Steeves – bowl; cultural meaning every bowl ever made; duality · Connection to Levin - Articulatory gesture · Connection to Moran – artistic life · // Being // is the one thought that pre-occupied Heidegger. His entire intellectual career is about //being//. C. Krell · See Kim’s handout · p. 45: “Questioning is a knowing search” D. Moran · Enigma of Heidegger, Ch. 6   · Connection with Nazi party · How did this connection influence his thinking? · Anti-individual · “heart of phenomenology” (p. 195) · “analyzing human existence” – Dasein – care (p. 238) · care – interest vs. emotional aspect (e.g. nurture) · Circumspection – hermeneutic circle (p. 226)

Kanoe Bunney 3702 Bonnybridge Pl. Ellicott City, MD 21043 (614) 425-3778 kaynoh@yahoo.com
 * Updated course list: Please check your information to be sure I've typed correctly.**

Eleonor Castillo 9216 Dewberry Lane College Park, MD 20740 (619) 417-2892 eleonor.castillo@gmail.com

Deb Felix 10224 Parkwood Drive Kensington, MD 20895 (301) 530-1246 dfelix@verizon.net

Khadish O. Franklin 7810 Contee Rd. Apt 203 Laurel, MD 20707 (850) 284-4593 cell (301) 314-4723 work khadish@umd.edu

Stephen Miles 213 Golden Eagle Way Belcamp, MD 21017 (410) 812-7284 smiles@bcps.org

Sarah Morris PO Box 522 Berkeley Springs, WV 25411 (304) 270-7406 slmorris@umd.edu

Kim Nakashima 444 Ridge Rd. #8 Greenbelt, MD 20770 (240) 678-3435 cell (310) 345-9087 home knakash1@yahoo.com knakashima@rif.org

Maggie Peterson 3061 Shad Pkace Riva, MD 21140 (443) 607-8298 home (443) 744-0773 cell magpete@umd.edu

Anika Prather 2703 Shawn Court Fort Washington, MD 20744 240-688-0511 anikabutterfly@aol.com

=**September 23, 2010 Notes**= Heidegger’s philosophy changed with the times- when he rejected Catholicism, when Hitler arose He is a contradictory philosopher, a fair-weather philosopher, the definition of Dasein changes __Basic Writings__ is a bit of a tease, but there’s a payoff in one’s understanding of the complex philosophy, it’s a beautifully written book. Heidegger sought the meaning of being, not the description or observation of what is there. He talks about how Nothing is part of being Dasein means being held out into the nothing. We do not enter nothingness often, but when we do, it’s through anxiety. It is through anxiety that we enter nothingness. Transcendence. The nothing is not the opposite of being, but reveals itself as belonging to the essence of being. From the nothing, all beings come to be. Scientific existence is possible only if being and nothing are like yin and yang, pieces of a greater something. Christians say that nothingness is when you are separated from God. Heidegger says no, if there is a God, that excludes nothingness WE CANNOT TRULY KNOW OURSELVES, COME INTO PRESENCE WITH OUR OWN BEING, WITHOUT FACING ANXIETY AND ENTERING THE NOTHINGNESS. WE NEED TO BE IN THE WORLD IN SUCH A WAY AS TO BRING UP THE ANXIETY AND FACE IT. The rests in music make the notes more beautiful. THERE IS A NOTION OF GUILT, TOO. Living with guilt and living with anxiety bring us int a state of non-being our quick fixes do not work, we need to take the time to understand what is making us feel guilty or anxiety. I HAVE BEEN THROWN INTO THE WORLD. AUTHENTICITY IS COMING INTO A PLACE WHERE YOU CAN The idea of our separation from nothing that makes us something. “The nothing is the complete negation of the totality of beings” (p.98) so there are truths that humans share that are a part of the whole of Being. The opposite of that Being, its negation, is nothingness. Is nothingness the time before we were born and do we return to that “place” sometimes (through anxiety) once we are something. __Safranski book__ (p.152) discusses the relationship between nothing and anxiety. It is experiencing the nothingess, not running away from it, that gives us our being. We need to explore and understand what is making us feel anxious or guilty. The nothingness of Death makes us aware we are alive. We are aware that we are mortal only after an experience that forces us into the nothingess. Fire drills make us anxious and tired and done! __Levin book__ The living body of tradition (religious tradition) and how it manifests itself in the body. Rituals in every religion do that. Universal elements, such as pressing the palms together to pray, circumcision, crossing the stations of the cross, are perhaps first biological, then become part of the culture and are perpetuated generation after generation. These rituals become part of our body knowledge. Another example: copying texts- an everyday task seen in a new way- copying not as a rote task but as a spiritual experience, felt bodily. P.213 Anything you do repetitively connects the body with spirit. p.216- There is a concealed wisdom that we do not always tap into but that connects us to immortality. Nihilism is destructive but we can defeat it by connecting to ancestral bodily archetype. Art is a mode of transcendence. We make art with our bodies. p.223 The gathering up of things (synthesis) and the laying down. Levin moves beyond Heidegger to include the role of the bodily aspects of our experiences. Levin feels you cannot understand the totality of the Being without attention bodily experiences. Safranski- Meaning and significance come from man’s own history and interpretations thereof. We are radically subjective; what is less important is the religious doctrine. p.163 We are not anxious about death but about life; a life when we become aware of it. Anxiety causes Being to fall away and illuminate what you really are. You can’t consider your Being while you are immersed in your day-to-day existence. Care=concern(s), worries We have to travel outside our experience Whole of Being= being with others with a new attitude but as you always were/behaved. When confronted with the Nothing, which we get to through anxiety, all our individual cares fall away and we return with an understanding of how we are part of a larger group identity. p.124 __Basic Writings__- Truth – is not universal or for all time, but is subjective so is a truer truth. Heidegger synthesizes many pieces rather than tearing them apart. Is he a crackpot or a genius? Why does everyone like him and listen to him? Do they understand him with all the words and concepts he invents? There is some amount of truth in our interpretations of what is presented to us. Unconcealment. Authenticity. There is no greater Truth available to us because we cannot be completely objective. We are all inauthentic most of the time due to cultural influences that envelop us from the moment of our birth. The core of our being, and what motivates us, is to find the Truth. We are thrown into life and then we are thrown into many things. Heidegger drops out of Catholicism when he hits a wall where he cannot explain the faith. He never “got” the faith. Safranski- Man is a self-producing creature; other animals are not. Humanities examines values, science examines facts. God cannot be explained with science. All scientific questions should be metaphysical- the nature of our being. Metaphysics=- first principles. We can explain things scientifically or spiritually, but there are still questions between those explanations in which philosophers dwell. Heidegger presents questions, but no answers. He claims that Truth is the questions. To exist means to question. Truth is disclosure of beings. Only in freedom (openness) can we see truth. When did etymological tracings become part of phenomenology? We need to consider what is lost in the translation from German. We need to think about our own writings Let’s discuss Chapter 1 next week, Chapter 2 the following and then Chapter 3.

__**Notes from 9/30**__
__Group Discussion of the Dissertations__

Deb said: Chapter 1 is the turning toward the phenomenon - subsections include being called to the question, my entering the question, coming to the phenomenon, my history with the phenomenology. The writer said that School Reform is a human endeavor and therefore the human sciences must be used to study School Reform. (We discuss this as a lame-ish reason to give for using Phenomenology. What is not a human endeavor in schools?) Becoming the phenomenon, metaphor of a map –looking for a map for school reform. These are some themes they will bring out. Change - orientation to the journey. Deb described the Dissertation she has been looking at.

Sarah said: Chapter 1 has a turning, first and second and person used on the very first page. The author addresses the reader and outlines each chapter. There are structural road maps through the chapter. Parenthetical references and footnotes, questions about those- are footnotes that are blanket references the norm? The author uses excerpts from her own journal. The author describes coming to the topic through her own journal entries. She defines the critical terminologies she will use. They are defined as a sort of map as what will come up. She puts the question in bold. She provides many markers for the reader to follow. Sarah said the dissertation she is studying uses a lot of literature

Steve said: Turning to the phenomenon of teaching personal writing. Describes the students and describes their writing as a mirror to the writer. The author describes the nature of teenagers. Etymological tracings are from Barnhart. The chapter headings are the heart of the matter, hearing the beat, phenomenological flow. The discussion of writing as phenomenological inquiry in the dissertation. DRUM is only from 2003. A lot of Van Manen in the dissertation. Everyone is happy about that. Heart songs and Blood Flow, explication of the six research components. We talk about Parker Palmer and discuss what we know and look up stuff on Parker Palmer on the internet.

Maggie said: about the dissertation she read. I wonder if the writer's have a practical reason for choosing the philosophers over Van Manen? Are dissertations that use the philosophers more geared to theoretical pursuits/jobs and are the ones that use Van Manen more geared to practical educational pursuits/jobs?

Then we discussed Heidegger and how and what the Hermeneutic Circle is. See the notes on Heidegger –

Sarah and Steve: Levin talks about the sky and the earth. When we connect to the earth it is a mindfulness of our mortality. The verticality of the human body, but the earth and the sky are horizontal. The Earth grounds us to mortality and holds us up and pulls us down at the same time, the sky connects us to our eternity and emptiness. Paraphrasing Heidegger – Pg. 273, body and mouth quote from Levin.

Safranski from Deb said: Enter Hannah Arendt – He was 35 years old and she turned eyes, she was feisty, and magical. She was intelligent and began having secret rendez vous with Heidegger. She accepted the rules of total secrecy and they begin an affair. "the most striking thing about her was the suggestive force that eminated from her eyes." Heidegger begins to write Being and Time and he leaves his family to go write. He is promoted to full professor. His mother dies in the Spring of 1927, he feels bad that his mother died knowing there had been a lapse in his faith. He placed a newly published copy of Being and Time on his mother's death bed.

He defines Dasein as human life. His philosophy turns toward the darkness of the lived moment. He had two philosophical questions he was trying to answer. What does being mean? And what is the meaning of being? His answer: The meaning of being is time. Existence is man's relationship with his own being. He says we are never done, we cannot walk around ourselves. We must lead our lives and we are what we become. Death is the great "in the past." Science sees human life only in relationship to other things. He sees us as being as temporality and potentiality for being. He does not include joy or love in our being. His moods fill his work. Being in Time was different because it did not offer a therapy. His book did not have a solution. Intentionality is the most important insight of Phenomenology. Phenomenologically one neither experiences oneself first and then the world or the other way around. The world reference of Dasein, Intentionality. The analysis of Dasein Heidegger calls existential analysis the analysis of being. Man's fundemental determination is dealing with something. Not working with something, dealing with something.

Care – anxiety is the same as care. Heidegger discusses anxiety and uses a fable to describe how care and anxiety are the same. Planning, caring, providing looking after, proceeding. The time reference is important here. Only a creature who sees an open and care is nothing other than lived temporality. See page 157 penultimate paragraph for Care and temporality. Mood is how we become aware of our own being. We are always in some mood or another. He does not explore all possible moods, only those that fit into his schema. According to Safranski the best chapters of Being and Time are those on death and authenticity and inauthenticity. Life becomes more burdensome the more inward man becomes. He suggests that being oneself is being authentic. His work Being and Time was appended continually. He says that //temporality// is our being. . Moran (2007) describes Merleau-Ponty's conception of history in this way, History can never be understood as a single stream of meanings; there is no perspective from which we can view the course of history from outside, anymore than we can achieve a perceptual view of a house as 'seen from nowhere.' All thought, like all perception, is situated and perspectival (p. 404). And more on temporality from Steeves Steeves (2007) writes, the instantaneous Now moment is a fiction. Like the notes of a melody that are experienced long after they sound, so each and every experience I have stretches forward and backward in time, calling forth what has just passed and anticipating what is to come (p. 104). Heidegger says you need to feel boredom from which the exceedingly surprising and alarming. His lectures can be summed up in three steps – 1.We are absorbed in the world and it fills us. 2.Everything is removed (emptied, separated, at a distance). 3. Our oneself and the world returns with new intensity. God is visible through man, nature is visible through man. "It is through man that nature has erupted into self visibility." Germany becomes conservative and anti-intellectual and Heidegger decides that everything political is inauthentic. He has a crashing crisis, and is offered the most important philosophy chair in all of Germany. He turns down the offer. MH begins to wonder if his philosophy offers anything more than the ancient Greeks. See pg. 149 in Krell. Side Note – How are our readings preparing us for writing our projects? – **__We will discuss Chapter 3s in detail next week.__**

Khadish will post his notes here ?

Phenomenology II Class Notes October 14, 2010 Reading: Gadamer, __Truth and Method__, p. xxi – 169.

1. Maggie showed us a powerpoint of Gadamer which will help us to contextualize Truth and Method. We took some pertinent quotes and ideas from the powerpoint and related it to //Truth and Method.// 2. Concept of Historicity is a concept from Chapter Two we shouldn’t miss. 3. Some Important Constructs:

-Two kinds of beauty, fashion vs. taste…Fashion is decided by a culture, taste more transcended by a culture. Taste is more essential. Taste is not necessarily related to culture. We can be persuaded to taste something. Normative vs. unnatural beauty. Natural beauty is transcendent, cultural beauty is like fashion, and is decided by the culture.

-On p. xxiii…”It’s not that historical tradition and the natural order of life constitute the unity of the world in which we live as men; the way we experience one another, the way we experience historical traditions, the way we experience one another, the way we experience the natural giveness of our existence and of our world, constitute a truly hermeneutic universe, in which we are not imprisoned, as if behind insurmountable barriers but to which we are opened.” -Gadamer’s central point here is that it is not an examination of aesthetics for aesthetics sake, looking at it as something to ground something else. Aesthetics became extra subjective. Build from the aesthetic and build out.

4. In Heidegger’s message, there is a work of art and an uncovering. We referenced a quote by William Steig, author of “Shrek:”

“Art, including juvenile literature, has the power to make any spot on earth the living center of the universe, and unlike science, which often gives us the illusion of understanding things we really do not understand, it helps us to know life in a way that still keeps before us the mystery of things. It enhances the sense of wonder. And wonder is respect for life. Art also stimulates the adventurousness and the playfulness that keep us moving in a lively way and that lead us to useful discovery.”

5. Natural Beauty is distinguished from fashion. Taste is a very personal thing. If I choose to wear something, it’s my taste that is reflected.

6. If you can cultivate good taste, you can cultivate good society.

7. “Taste operates in a community, but is not subservient to it.”

8. Sensus communis—the communal sense of what is good or right.

9. Kant shifts the way we think about ethics (so it is no longer involved in aesthetics). He gives aesthetics a great ground, but yanks it away from all human sciences. Gad. Seeks to start with aesthetics, and figure out how it can ground all human sciences. Kant screwed us. The scientific method is the only way we view the world (Kant’s idea). Kant here, is contrasting qualitative and quantitative.

10. Gadamer Powerpoint-“Not all truth is encapsulated in the scientific method; there is a genuine truth of art and cultural products that lies beyond any single methodology”—there’s no one right way to approach something.

11. Hermes states, “There are multiple versions of truth.”

12. Here’s an example of historical resonance rather than meaning: “According to this view, Erlebnisse, experiences, seen as the enduring residue of moments lived in their full immediacy, are the material artistic genius transforms into works of art…” (p. xiii).

13. Another quote from the powerpoint: “Freeing ourselves from the scientific method in our understanding of human sciences.

14. “This lived experience is finite so cultural understanding can never be absolute”

15. “Not a set of doctrines, there is no one phenomenology.…(Heidegger).

16. “Understanding is truth.”

17. Truth can be experienced, but not necessarily proven.

18. “Our experience of the rising of the setting of the sun, yet understanding of it betrays it.” There is a scientific truth and a personally lived truth that falls under the realm of the theoretical truth.

19. The scientific understanding of gravity, but you experience the feeling of falling, you feel the affects of gravity.

20. Art rises above our ability to understand it.

21. P. xxiii—“Just as in the experience of art we are concerned with truths that go essentially beyond the range of methodological knowledge, so the same thing is true of the whole of the human sciences: in them our historical tradition in all its forms is certainly made the object of investigation, but at the same time truth comes to speech in it.”

22. Central features of Bildung: Keeping oneself open to what is other.

23. Play: the primacy of play over the actual play itself: an order of the two and fro motion of the order itself. That play is a representation of living in life. The mode of being of the work of art itself, in that making of the art, is also the opening of the world. There is a sense of uncovering…

24. The self is subsumed because it is so engaged in the play itself, like a really good book or piece of writing. One can get consumed by a book.

25. P. 105…”but most important the being of the work of art is connected with the medial sense of play…In asmuch as nature is without purpose and intention, just as it is without exertion, it is a constantly self-renewing play and can therefore appear as a model for art.”

26. P. 116, “my thesis, then is that the being of art cannot be defined as an object of an aesthetic consciousness because, on the contrary, the aesthetic attitude is more than it knows of itself. It is a part of the event of being that occurs in presentation, and belongs essentially to play as play.”

27. You can’t quantify what we attach meaning to, like a work of art. Every viewing is different, mimcry is still different. 28. “Play is serious, repetitive, medial, and structured” it’s own space, it’s own rules, unique.

29. The temporality of the Aesthetic: Contemporaneity

30. Steves: There’s no such thing as the instantaneous now moment…A book author, the author says, every time you read it it is right now. The participant says, the authors say, it’s right now.

31. What does it mean to reconstruct that past historical moment? Historicity of our being: P. 167: Reconstructing the original….” It’s a way of seeing, of being seen, and it’s nonsensical, there’s no going back to the past. They wish they could write from the point of view of the child. Tied to objectivity, they want to be true. To strip away those years. When you testify, you tell that “objective truth”

32. People are more moved to react with story. The idea that there is a resonant truth that is different from the fact of the event.

33. Slide: reconstruction and integration: It’s nonsensical to think we can recreate the past.

34. Being in Heidegger: Every seeking gets guided beforehand by what is sought.” Kaddish and the evaluator and evaluatee false reality. Not a shared purpose.

35. The difference in the tension, formulating an answer before you form your question…if this is your rendering, you are driving the bus. With one hand, you go in, trying to be open to the question. The truth of that thing, is now the truth I’m picking out.

36. Reinvisioning yourself as a researcher…

37. Does this process engender the voice of the coresearcher, how do we stay true to the essence of their voices? And not the meaning we’ve attached to it? Something about evocative writing….it should evoke some meaning in all of us.

Next week:
 * 1) We’ll continue to read Gadamer: 171-264.
 * 2) We are going to alter the timeline to submit, read, and share written work. One possibility is to share electronically first, then read in class. Another, is to break up into groups and share one’s work.
 * 3) Next week: we will revisit the timeline.
 * 4) Next week: Maggie and Steve might share.


 * Class notes for 21 October:**
 * Please excuse any rambling. Tonight's class was very lively!

**Dissertation defense details:** Dr. Laura talked for maybe 20 minutes, addressing methodology, her participants, her own experiences. It was a good overview of her whole study. It took place around a table. The committee had already read the dissertation. She was grilled on Heidegger—one very nice man was very affirming. Dr. McCaleb was tough, but said it was a great dissertation, but it gave a very idealistic view of reading... Dr. Seldon's issue was Heidegger. Anika wants to deal with Heidegger as having multiple personalities. Deb says he's a chameleon. “Fairweather philosopher,” says Steve. He was a Nazi, but not necessarily anti-Semitic. Gadamer was an unwilling person who marches along, says Maggie. Kim says that some have viewed Heidegger's philosophy as one that naturally moves toward Nazism. Jaspers wrote that Heidegger's thinking was fundamentally unfree, dictatorial. Does his philosophy lead to nazism? Dr. Hultgren says no, National Socialism was a political movement. Can we write that we just don't want to deal with Heidegger? Kim says yes, there is a dissertation that does so (on “othering”). If we don't address Heidegger, he will come up! That's one of the reasons the 3rd chapter is so difficult. It is also determined by who's on the committee. Suggestion: turn Heidegger on Heidegger.

**And now we read Maggie's draft.** It's not final, she says. It's a rhetorical device, and we can't tear it apart. Kanoe says don't tell us, just read. So Maggie reads. She asks: Why use Heidegger? If it must be Heidegger, why must it be phenomenology? Reframing: Why phenomenology? Why must Heidegger stay? Then the gathering of voices (Other philosophers)... Some collective thinking: One can separate the remarkable work Heidegger created from the reprehensible things that Heidegger did. It's like saying that we can't abide by the Declaration of Independence because the writers owned slaves. I am not taking good notes because y'all are so smart and the conversation is so engaging! Sorry! We need to understand more to do this well. Kim feels that the concept of historicity is almost apologetic. We don't need to justify why Nazism is terrible: Maggie says “I am not a Nazi! I don't need to distance myself. Even if I talk about Heidegger, I am still not a Nazi!” “Still,” says Deb, “he could have done more to make things better.” Everyone who was a professor at the time, Kim explains, had to sign a commitment to the party. Heidegger was so invested in being rector, he couldn't not sign on. He lost the ability to look at himself critically. Perfectly good and normal people did bad things because they had to deal with the complexity of the situation—we do what we can, our best, at the time. The phenomenon resides in the context of experience. Getting the understanding of Heidegger's choices is phenomenology in itself. Maggie recommends we read the comments related to the article sent on Heidegger, here: [] We all agree that Maggie is off to a great start! We like to boat imagery. Overarching metaphors... Maggie is thinking about seeing and re-seeing, hearing and re-hearing, voicing, re-voicing... The danger may be the use of too many metaphors. Resonance, archetype. Maggie is resisting the journey. Deb is seeing the journey thing, too. “Lifeworld... Not a puzzle,” says Anika. “The work lends itself to images.” For Maggie: maybe water, crossing the water. //The Wave// book recommends Anika. //Row, Row Your Boat//, says Kim.

**Steve's turn!** He feels much better about this piece than chapters 1 and 2. Deb asks, What questions did you ask yourself to write this piece? Steve says: “What is this thing called phenomenology?” It seems repetitive, circular. Of the two dissertations Steve is seeing, one is more lyrical, and the other more narrative. He feels more comfortable with the narrative approach. He thought it was important to discuss Heidegger, but there is more Husserl, Van Manen (who isn't a philosopher as much as a pedagogue). It's only necessary to talk about the philosophers who have relevance—but Heidegger's the way to others. He will tie in the 6 elemental essentials of human science research a la Van Manen. Anika suggests the use of the lifeworld from Gadamer (part 2 of chapter 1). Steve's writing: he wants to start with “what it is...” He addresses his goal/reason (“a VanManenish thought”). Then he tries to define the Human Science research point. Then he defines phenomenology. “We got some Moran, some Heidegger, some Van Manen...roots in Heidegger, Husserl, and others.” Kim says we need to tie Dasein into multiplicity of voices, of multiple perspectives, intersubjectivity, etc. Steve is thinking about his committee as he writes. Dr. Valli might be a “wild card” who might sweetly nail one to the wall. We may want to separate clearly from quantitative approaches but not criticize those approaches. It has been helpful for Steve to read the philosophers filtered through other readers/thinkers, either in dissertations (or via google). What are the purposes of quantitative research? What are the purposes of qualitative research? How is phenomenological research different? The question we are asking can only be answered through this method. We are trying to get to something that can only be captured through the phenomenological. Steve references Hermes. Maggie says “we won't be seduced by a 'how to version'--this is a method: “Seductive illusions of technique” (Van Manen, p. Maggie?) Steve may want to focus more on truth, lies, validity, intersubjectivity, historicity-- to “linger” there more. He could talk about truth, do etymological tracing, etc. Uncovering, revealing, disclosing. Hermeneutics is about interpretation—lots of tie ins here. Either cut validity, or go deeper. Use subheadings, says Maggie, “it'll make 13 pages 30!” Take the quotes apart. As concepts come up, unpack them there—don't wait. Structure of Chapter 3: these seem very different in what we've read. Some are more linear, some are more organic. Organized by theme, by philosopher. Chapter 3 is difficult for Maggie because it's post research. Phenomenological reflection on themes, how themes present in the philosophy, being guided by themes. Some are “in and out”--back and forth between the writer and the philosopher. We are having a hard time getting started. It would be easier to be seduced by technique. Deb points out that the philosophers are thematic, too. Deb suggests that Steve needs to put boundaries around his phenomenon—he will have to talk about it, define it. Emergent theme of the evening: I don't want to go here. I can't not. Connecting how and why the philosophers are relevant. Organization: Husserl, intentionality, the things themselves, noema, noeisis, mode of experience, perspective, the students themselves... Subheadings? Steve may want to state his intentions, clarify with transitions, make his structure clear. Tables of contents must be detailed (the writer needs it, the reader needs it)!

**Next week:** Gadamer: let's try to make sense of it. We will all read. Task for discussion: pick a passage that either 1. speaks to you and you get or 2. you totally don't get and have tons of questions about. This can be a paragraph or two, but should not be very long. Hermes circle from 5:30 to 7:30. We will attend together, leaving from class. It is in 3237 Benjamin (we think). Maggie will be reading a poem! We want to think about when and how we will meet next semester. November 4: who will present? We will all try to get something started.

**Closing thought:** “Confusion often represents and advanced state of understanding.” --Sheridan Blau (via Maggie).