Michael Peters

This article is concerned with developing a philosophical approach to a number of significant changes to academic publishing, and specifically the global journal knowledge system wrought by a range of new digital technologies that herald the third age of the journal as an electronic, interactive and mixed-media form of scientific communication. The paper emerges from an Editors' Collective, a small New Zealand-based organisation comprised of editors and reviewers of academic journals mostly in the fields of education and philosophy. The paper is the result of a collective writing process.

‘Ecological civilization’ is conceived as a vision for a future world-order harmonising relations between people and between humanity and their broader biotic communities, including the global ecosystem. Inspired by Russian biologists and embraced by Chinese environmentalists, the Chinese Communist Party and the Chinese Government, the idea of ecological civilization continues to evolve. Articulating ‘ecological civilization’ as a vision for the future involves rethinking ethical, political and economic thought and practices for the whole of humanity. By providing an historical perspective on this vision, I argue that the notion of ‘ecopoiesis’, that is, ‘household-making’ or ‘home-making’, brings into focus what is required of ecological civilization. ‘Ecopoiesis’ builds on work in ecology, revealing and explaining how in healthy ecosystems, organisms and eco-systems are inter-related at multiple levels to augment the conditions for each other, and ultimately, for all life. Making ‘ecopoiesis’ central to ‘ecological civilization’ involves defining the ultimate end of humanity as augmenting the conditions for life. This poses the problem of, but also offers guidance for, finding solutions to how to organize political and economic structures and processes at all levels to achieve this. Ecopoiesis involves organizing the whole of humanity as communities of communities, constraining themselves and each other, to facilitate working for the common good of life.

This paper discusses the notion of ecopoetics in relation to the work of Martin Heidegger and his concept of dwelling. Our aim, broadly stated, is to respond to the question: "What frame of mind could bring about sustainability - and how might we develop it?" In the first part of the paper, we comment on Jonathan Bate's notion of ecopoetics and his discussion of Heidegger. Crucial here is the question of whether we can ever approach Nature in an non-ideological way or are all attempts to capture Nature, theoretically or poetically or narratively, nothing more than our own peculiar appropriation of it? Ecopoetics might be conceived as a response to this question, although we dispute Bate's view. In the second part of the paper, following Micheal Haar's perceptive reading, we elaborate the four senses that Heidegger gives to Nature, and in the third section, we make some concluding comments about the notion of sustainability that might be explicated in relation to Heidegger's four senses of Nature.

Public education is not just a way to organise and fund education. It is also the expression of a particular ideal about education and of a particular way to conceive of the relationship between education and society. The ideal of public education sees education as an important dimension of the common good and as an important institution in securing the common good. The common good is never what individuals or particular groups want or desire, but always reaches beyond such particular desires towards that which societies as a whole should consider as desirable. This does, of course, put the common good in tension with the desires of individuals and groups. Neo-liberal modes of governance have, over the past decades, put this particular educational set up under pressure and have, according to some, eroded the very idea of the common good. This set of contributions reflects on this state of affairs, partly through an exploration of the idea of publicness itself – how it can be rearticulated and regained – and partly through reflections on the current state of education in the ‘north’ and the ‘south.’

This text presents a comprehensive overview of the author’s experiences and contributions to PESA, as well as the themes and concerns that have shaped their academic work. The lecture series, named in the author’s honour, aims to foster new thinking among emerging scholars. The author’s intellectual journey has been deeply influenced by the contemporary apocalyptic zeitgeist, which they frame as a series of local and global crises that underpin the spirit of the age. These crises encompass environmental degradation, geopolitical tensions, the erosion of democracy, and the potential for nuclear conflict. The author’s work in EPAT has been characterised by a commitment to innovation and inclusivity, with a focus on topics such as social justice, decolonization, and gender and subjectivity. The genre and methodology of collective writing and open peer review have been instrumental in nurturing the work of younger scholars. The author’s inaugural lecture, ‘Refuge and Resilience: Being-together in a post-apocalyptic era,’ explores the dynamics of being-together as a means of fostering deep relationships with the environment and biosphere, and as a source of resilience and cultural value. Four key themes are discussed: the apocalyptic problematic in modern Western philosophy, the philosophy of place, complexity and catastrophe, and ecopedagogies for living in the post-apocalyptic era. The author argues that apocalyptic philosophy can be used to unsettle the dominant worldview without resorting to fanaticism or fundamentalism, and that the concept of ‘Being-together’ can provide a framework for community, renewal, and resilience. The label ‘post-apocalyptic philosophy’ is proposed as a means of moving beyond the determinism of apocalyptic thinking. The author concludes by suggesting that the themes of Being-together offer a basis for the development of a new curriculum.

Briefly discussing Wittgenstein’s own elementary teaching experience to provide background, contrast is drawn between issues of efficacy in teaching and normative training into regular patterns or customs of usage. Wittgenstein attended teacher training in Vienna in 1919 and taught in Austrian rural village schools until 1926 when he abruptly resigned after an incident involving hitting a pupil that led to a court trial that lasted several months. The judge called for a psychiatric examination of Wittgenstein, a report that has gone missing. The so-called ‘Haibauer incident’ constitutes a central and smouldering episode in Wittgenstein’s own psychological make-up and ethical self-development—one that he returns to many years later as the basis for his ‘confession’. The effect of this historicist approach is to relativize Wittgenstein’s teaching and his ‘discipline’ to the cultural context of his time—1920s Austria dominated by the Glöckel educational reforms that introduced pedagogy based on social democratic principles. We then examine some of the boundaries Wittgenstein drew between empirical studies, including pedagogy, and conceptual ones. In Wittgenstein’s later writings, he occasionally notes (parenthetically) that his remarks pertain to grammatical problems instead of psychological or causal ones (Z §§318 and 419). Finally, following Josè Medina, we bring home a point of particular significance to analytic philosophy of education concerning adept initiation into practices: what Wittgenstein refers to as ‘mastery of techniques’ (PI §199) requires facility and autonomy within the rules not explicable on causal terms, nor diminished by its origins in normative training. Realizing this avenue through training does not however undermine the rational elements of teaching and learning—the space of reasons—sought by the analytic school. Etiological problems connected to teaching and learning are then distinguished from philosophical issues surrounding ranges of meaningful use and degrees of arbitrariness in relation to rule-following. The conclusion earlier articulated by Standish (Philosophy and education: Accepting Wittgenstein’s challenge. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, pp 143–158, 1995) is that Wittgenstein’s later philosophy draws a sharp distinction between any possible ‘science’ of education and his therapeutic concept of philosophy as the dissolution of grammatical problems. Pulling from work developed over the last two decades, we then present Peter’s signature theme of Wittgenstein as a ‘pedagogical philosopher’, a picture he developed along with James Marshall, Paul Smeyers and Nicholas Burbules.

Here, we examine two caricatures of Wittgenstein in order to show in relief a more accurate portrait of his later philosophy and its significance for education. Curry’s attempt to appropriate Wittgenstein to Philosophy of Geography backfires but gives occasion to explore his geographic metaphors in relation to his ambling method of philosophical investigation. Learning is shown to be the gradual absorption of rich cultural surroundings or background for going on as others do, knowing one’s way about but also sharing in the genius loci of one’s place. Friesen’s attempt to portray Wittgenstein as a ‘tragic Philosopher of Education’ based on a ‘German-first reading’ of his use of the word Abrichtung (training) also dissembles under closer scrutiny. Friesen’s apparent tribunal of Wittgenstein makes it seem like philosophers drawing on him for progressive purposes in education are somehow naïve or duped in overlooking the dictionary definition of Abrichtung. Exonerating colleagues from disparagement, we show how closer reading of Wittgenstein’s remarks on training, teaching and learning take us not into pedagogy but into deeper aspects of post-foundational epistemology, where meaning no longer hinges on correspondence with an external reality.

In this chapter, we introduce Ludwig Wittgenstein, initially providing background on his life and education in Austria and his relocation to England to study engineering and then philosophy. Addressing issues of interpretation and significance within the domain of philosophical biography, we reflect on the difficult path by which he came to hold positions of prominence in the philosophical community: first within the Vienna Circle of logical positivism, and later in holding a chair in philosophy at Cambridge University. Throughout this discussion, we mark the transition from his early work in the Tractatus and ‘Lecture on Ethics’, to his later work in the Investigations. The intervening period, in which he trained and taught as an elementary school teacher, is taken up in the subsequent chapters (Ch 2 & 3), along with discussion of his more developed thought on language and its relationship to training and learning. Here we set the stage for his appearance on the scene in Philosophy of Education.

In closing, we look at some ways Wittgenstein has been received in the philosophy of education, not portraying the entire community but focusing primarily on some of our own works. First, by contrast we survey the early use of Wittgenstein in analytic philosophy of education (c. 1960s–70s), where concept mapping of educational terminology was all the rage. We then step back and look at how Wittgenstein employed his many ‘scenes of instruction’ within his later philosophy, showing from another angle the significance of teaching and training within Wittgenstein’s ‘method’ of philosophical investigation. Two examples are then provided: one looking at expert judgment as it applies to assessing the soundness of teacher’s practices or curricula; the other, building on Wittgenstein’s remarks on the arbitrariness of mathematics and grammar, looks at rule-drift in top-down curriculum reforms, where educators often deviate from stipulated rules due to variant interpretation or improvisation within the rules. The multiplicity of language-games of educational reform often results in an archipelago of variant usage instead of the uniformity or alignment envisioned by administrators and Ministries of Education. Finally, we look at entrenchment within deeply rooted bedrock or world-pictures that often go unnoticed as we attend from these ‘pictures’ when looking outward. One of the higher aims of education, supported by Wittgenstein’s genealogical perspective, is to reveal through an ethnographic lens (the view from the margins), otherwise taken-for-granted practices and ways of seeing the world.

This chapter provides a set of reflections on lying in public life to underline the central significance of truth and truth-telling to questions of self, politics, and society. From Augustine through to Montaigne, lying has been viewed as a sin that admits no reservations, and accordingly, it has become the basis for jurisprudence in the Anglo-American tradition. In general, lying is considered a deformation of meaning and language, and that it is harmful to society. Truth and truthfulness are considered a precondition for society. This chapter reviews Foucault on the history of truth-telling by reference to parrhesia (free speech) that has a precise relation to truth in Euripides and Plato, arguing that his account must be supplemented with an anthropology of the “culture of lying”. This chapter concludes by considering Arendt’s perceptive assessment on the history of the lie in political culture holding that “the lie did not creep into politics by some accident of human sinfulness; moral outrage, for this reason alone, is not likely to make it disappear.”