Book Review: S. F. Schram, B.Caterino (eds.) (2006):Making political science matter –
New York University Press, New York, London, 304 pp., US$ 24.-,
Softcover, ISBN 0814740332
Book Review: S. F. Schram, B.Caterino (eds.) (2006):Making political science matter –
New York University Press, New York, London, 304 pp., US$ 24.-,
Softcover, ISBN 0814740332
holoplurality- the sole true underlying structure of ALL of our universes
draft only
This is a short introduction to the notion of holoplurality, holoplurality being the label for the SOLE true... more This is a short introduction to the notion of holoplurality, holoplurality being the label for the SOLE true underlying structure and nature of ALL of our universes and realities. For those who understand and want to understand even further, this is the most fundamental understanding to grasp. Holoplurality is my notion and it grew out of my deepest understandings and nature.
Complexity and Intuition- What is at stake
Complexity and intuition- what is at stake
This is a paper i wrote for the IFSAM world conference on management, a conference i joined in July 2010 in Paris,... more
This is a paper i wrote for the IFSAM world conference on management, a conference i joined in July 2010 in Paris, France.
This paper will build an argument through a methodological and empirical approach. Based
on Phronesis, being practical wisdom. The methodological approach is the one of Phronesis
Antenarrating. The argument being build and explained being the one that Western
Philosophy and social sciences are based on the wrong fundaments, and also that going
beyond dualism and goal oriented systems is NOT enough. I will argue that sole sane
sensemaking is need to go beyond complexity as/and chaos theories and realities, striving to
overcome the misfits of several realities in our society at large produced by reductionist and
insane perspectives. Also I will introduce several notions like my notion of collopoieisis but
also other notions like semiphronesis and semisophy errors to build my arguments and
emphasis on differences instead of perceived similarities.
on a meta-physical reductionist versus meta-semeiotical pluritive system
This is an argument for moving towards a meta-semeiotical pluritive system as opposed to current mainstream... more This is an argument for moving towards a meta-semeiotical pluritive system as opposed to current mainstream meta-physical and physical systems. The last systems being based on reductionist, partial sensemaking and understandings. As an example, I again use some understandings about money. Also i try to explain some part of the differences and connections between several kinds of representamens, storytelling and our universes.
IFSAM world conference- ENCHANTING OUR SOCIETIES
ENCHANTING OUR SOCIETY - we all need to contribute
I am @ current- 9 Juli 2010 is date of today me uploading this file- at the IFSAM world conference on management. I... more I am @ current- 9 Juli 2010 is date of today me uploading this file- at the IFSAM world conference on management. I made some sheets for a presentation that i MIGHT use for a presentation on enchantment. But need to correct some parts still, one of them being that i should NOT place myself in between people like Nietzscche or Korzybski or Tom Bearden (in the context mentioned in this specific file) but rather ABOVE as my understandings and contributions for society are actually BETTER.....although i am still to modest and taking too less opportunities still to communicate..for a lot of reasons and perceptions (see my other presentation file for COMPLEXITY AND INTUITION- WHAT IS AT STAKE (being a very important file to read mostly for all of social and managerial researchers)
9 views
Seen by:phronesis antenarrating- Reshaping our societies and universes through a holoplural mind perspective
draft only
Current society faces a lot of problems to be solved. The current economic crisis, environmental issues, social... more
Current society faces a lot of problems to be solved. The current economic crisis, environmental issues, social problems, just to name some of them. Solving this problems requires a sane and fundamentally sound methodology. Which is what Phronesis Antenarrating is all about. I invented this notion based on the fundamental understandings that current mainstream “ western” philosophy and (therefore) also most of social sciences and practises in general are based on the wrong, potentially insane fundaments. To resolve this issue, I am still working on my own phronetic body of understanding called practicism or practisism. Which is a body of understanding where differences in theory and practise disappear, among anothernesses because of sane sensemaking (and) by means of replacing insane fundamentals for the sole sane one. Which is my notion of holoplurality. Holoplurality being the sole true underlying structure of our universes. This sole true underlying structure of all of our universes is fundament for whatever in our universes, and through my other notion of pluriflection I implemented the sole sane and therefore greatest way of sensemaking into antenarrating and narrating. Phronesis, social sciences and social practises should all be based on sane sensemaking and the right nature and understanding of the structure of our universes. Holoplurality is also there the sole right way to go. This chapter is both presenting and further developing this understandings in my notion of Phronesis Antenarrating. Phronesis Antenarrating, being in quite infantry stages at the moment, but a very interesting and effective change tool.
13 views
Seen by:A phronesis antenarrative about the understanding of money
draft only
Storytelling and narrating can be a very efficient and great vessel for changes in our society. One of the experts in... more
Storytelling and narrating can be a very efficient and great vessel for changes in our society. One of the experts in storytelling in management being David Boje, developed the notion of antenarrating. A specific type and application of antenarrating being Phronesis antenarrating. Phronesis antenarrating is developed and initiated by Wilfred Berendsen. In this discourse, the insights and fundaments of Phronesis antenarrating are further explained and applied to one of the core issues of current society. Being the misunderstandings of money and the money game and the resulting insanities and problems in our society and universes. Without a sane sensemaking process as
reflected in Phronesis Antenarrating, quite a lof of the insanities in our understandings of money and the money system will most probably not be understood to the fullest. This discourse aims at developing a much more complete and sane understanding about
money and the money system, and to enable a change in the money game. This should also lead, among a lot of other results, to a solution for financial crisis and for preventing any financial crisis in future. But also it should and probably will lead to a much richer and better society as a whole.
17 views
Seen by:The Negative Shadow Cast by Positive Psychology: Contrasting Views and Implications of Humanistic and Positive Psychology on Resiliency
Co-authored with Harris L. Friedman. Draft submitted to The Humanistic Psychologist, in review.
Resiliency is the ability to survive, or even thrive, during adversity. It is a key construct within both... more Resiliency is the ability to survive, or even thrive, during adversity. It is a key construct within both humanistic and positive psychology, but each sees it from a contrasting vantage. Positive psychology decontextualizes resilience by judging it as a virtue regardless of circumstance, while humanistic psychology tends to view it in a more holistic way in relationship to other virtues and environmental affordances, clarifying how resiliency can actually be either a virtue or a vice depending upon circumstances. Adolf Hitler is presented as an example of a resilient person who would not be seen as virtuous, while the U.S. Army Comprehensive Soldier Fitness study training warfighters in resiliency illustrates possible ethical problems with a decontextualized view of resiliency.
Phrónêsis, Aristotle, and action research
International Journal of Action Research 2(1), 5-53
International Journal of Action Research 2(1), 5-53
ISSN 1861-1303 (print), ISSN 1861-9916 (internet), © Rainer... more
International Journal of Action Research 2(1), 5-53
ISSN 1861-1303 (print), ISSN 1861-9916 (internet), © Rainer Hampp Verlag, www.Hampp-Verlag.de
'
Phrónêsis, Aristotle, and Action Research
Olav Eikeland
This article presents an interpretation of Aristotelian phrónêsis and its relevance for action research. After pointing out some insufficiencies in how phrónêsis is applied by other interpreters with relevance for action research, I present my own interpretation of Aristotle’s concept in the wider context of his thinking on intellectual and ethical virtues. The article’s conclusion is that phrónêsis is very important for both action
researchers and others. But at the same time, phrónêsis is not a concept that can be adopted by itself, alone, and in isolation from other intellectual and ethical virtues or ways of knowing. Phrónêsis is necessary, but at the same time insufficient. Phrónêsis is not a concept primarily concerned
with learning, inquiry, and research. Its primary focus is “application”, performance, or enactment. Action research has a lot to learn from Aristotle, and phrónêsis is definitely among the things to be learned. Aristotle’s praxis-orientation sticks even deeper, however. This more profound praxis-orientation becomes quite invisible by operating with
simplified and mutually exclusive divisions between phrónêsis, tékhnê, and epistêmê, and by conflating other distinctions that were important to maintain for Aristotle. Aristotle’s profound praxis-orientation is even more central to action research. It has to do with dialogue or dialectics
whose tasks really are fundamentally concerned with learning, inquiry, and research.
Key words: Action research, Aristotle, Dialogical research, Judgement, Phrónêsis, Prudence, Rhetoric, Virtues, ethical and intellectual
The ways of Aristotle: Aristotelian phrónêsis, Aristotelian philosophy of dialogue, and action research
Table of Contents / Pagination is incorrect:
THE WAYS OF ARISTOTLE – ARISTOTELIAN PHRÓNÊSIS, ARISTOTELIAN... more
Table of Contents / Pagination is incorrect:
THE WAYS OF ARISTOTLE – ARISTOTELIAN PHRÓNÊSIS, ARISTOTELIAN PHILOSOPHY OF DIALOGUE, AND ACTION RESEARCH
Olav Eikeland
Preface 1
PART 1 – ARISTOTLE, SOCIAL RESEARCH, AND ACTION RESEARCH 3
1. Introduction – The Challenge of Phrónêsis 3
1.1 Three Kinds of General Theory 10
1.2 Aristotle and Critical Action Research 17
2. Action Research Approaching Phrónêsis 20
2.1 A Philosopher Defending Action Research 21
2.2 Making Social Science Matter 23
2.3 Abandoning Techniques 25
PART 2 – READING ARISTOTLE – LIMITS AND POSSIBILITIES FOR PHRÓNÊSIS 27
3. Virtues – Intellectual and Ethical 29
3.1 Particulars of Ethical Virtues 34
4. Phrónêsis and the Other Intellectual Virtues 38
4.1 Theoretical Knowledge, and Knowledge about Things We Influence 40
4.1.1 Overlaps and Intermeshes 45
4.2 Phrónêsis as an Intellectual Virtue 48
4.2.1 Excursus: Knowledge Forms and Ways of Knowing in Aristotle 49
4.2.1.1 Praxis, Poíêsis, Khrêsis, Páthos – And the Various Forms of the Epistêmai 50
4.2.1.2 Theoretical and Practical Truth 61
4.2 (Continued) Phrónêsis as an Intellectual Virtue 64
4.3 Phrónêsis and Rhetoric, Phrónêsis and Practical Syllogisms 70
4.3.1 The relationship to rhetoric 70
4.3.2 The relationship to practical syllogisms 75
5. Phrónêsis on Means and Ends, Phrónêsis and General Knowledge 76
5.1 Means and Ends, and Kinds of Causes 76
5.1.1 Poíêsis Makes Things, Praxis Makes Perfect 81
5.1.2 “Professional” Deliberations and Deductions 89
5.2 Knowledge, General and Particular 94
5.2.1 General Knowledge, Appropriate Knowledge, Knowledge in Action 94
5.2.2 Héxis (Habitus), and Empeiría (Experience) 103
5.2.3 Knowing Particulars 109
5.2.3.1 By What? 110
5.2.3.2 How? 111
5.2.3.3 Preconditions for a Universally Flexible Consideration 115
6. Developing and Defining Virtue 126
6.1 Developing Virtue 127
6.1.1 Epistêmê and Virtue through the Formation of Habit, Once More 130
6.1.2 What “Means” Means 136
6.1.3 Practical Development with a Hinge to It, the Question of Standards Again 138
6.2 Defining Virtue 145
6.2.1 Nóêsis as Dialogue, or, the Reason Why Aristotle Insists on Letting Phrónêsis Deliberate about Means Only 150
6.2.1.1 The Unfolded Know-How of Nous 152
6.2.1.2 The Topica and the Enfolded Habitus of Dialectics 154
6.2.1.3 The Philosopher, the Dialectician, and Experience 160
6.2.1.3.1 Dialogical Peculiarities 165
6.2.1.3.2 Dialogue and Experience 170
6.2.1.3.3 Basic Principle, Beginning, Medium, and End 182
6.2.1.4 Ways of Learning 185
6.2.1.5 Self-Evident First Principles? 191
6.2.1.6 Praxis1, and Praxis2 194
6.2.2 The Ethical Works do not Deliberate about Means, They Develop and Define Ends 198
6.2.3 Epistêmê, Virtue, and Phrónêsis Defined 205
6.3 Who Develops and Defines? The Art and Practice of Architectonics 214
7. Eudaimonía and Wisdom as “The Highest Practical Good”; Aristotelian Phron-Ethics, Theor-Ethics, and the Way of the Intellectual Commons 219
7.1 Kinds of Theory, Kinds of Practice 220
7.2 Ethics and Politics as Methodological Guidelines for Autonomous Practitioners 230
7.2.1 The Laws of Virtue 233
7.2.2 Tékhnê and Phrónêsis – At the Parting of the Ways 239
7.3 The Wisdom of the Commons – Common Wisdom 242
7.3.1 Tà Koiná – The Commons 247
7.3.2 The Common Skholê 252
7.4 Theor-Ethics and Primary Friendship 254
7.4.1 The Noetic “I” and the Psychological “Me” 259
7.4.2 Theorethical Interventions? 268
7.5 The Way of Theor-Ethics 269
7.5.1 Ethical Excellence – Settling with the Best “for Us”, i.e. for the Second Best “Absolutely” 277
7.6 The Ways of Politics – Continuous Learning in Common 288
7.6.1 Community: What Are the Things Common? 289
7.6.2 Oikos, Pólis, and Constitutions 294
7.6.3 Developing Concord – The Ethico-Political Role of Dialogical Gatherings 299
7.6.4 Different Concepts of Politics 310
7.6.5 Unity and Diversity in the Pólis 318
7.6.6 The Koinópolis as Panarchy – Aristocracy Suspended and Transcended 328
7.6.7 Religious Politics? 338
PART 3 – ARISTOTELIAN ACTION RESEARCH – WISDOM AND EUDAIMONÍA TRANSPOSED, SOCIAL RESEARCH TRANSFORMED 344
8. Neo-Epistemic, Dialogical Action Research 344
9. From Oikos to Pólis, and Beyond 349
10. Aristotle, Marx, and Modern Work Life 359
11. Aristotle Suspended 370
12. Epilogue 376
REFERENCES 381
Appendix 394
Martin Heidegger and the Conceptual Foundations of Praxis
Finally, a more polished version! Whoo hoo! Finally, a more polished version! Whoo hoo!

