Love, non-dualism and meta Reality

Where critical realism ends and before it starts, there is meta Reality. In this discussion, I speak with the authority of my own voice and understanding, as inspired and taught by elders of the discipline.

The human world and social order is a fragmented and divided phenomenon. Our history has seen the emergence of an order where economic, cultural, racial and engendered conceptions have lead to bloodshed, the enrichment of some and oppression of others.

Critical realism successfully unpacks the inter-play between structures, culture and agency and how the four categories mentioned above, frame for us a possibly unstable definition of ‘human civilization.’

In Africa, European colonialism saw the agency of settlers and structures of commercial and missionary entities overthrow the cultural mode of living among the indigenous people. Almost 500 years later, after the toppling of apartheid in South Africa, it remains difficult to distinguish between class and ‘racial’ inequalities among citizens.

We clearly are able to identify those agents, structures and cultures which collectively (via their inter-play) promote dualism among citizens and communities. Dualism promotes notions of privilege, prejudice and separation.

This is where meta Reality enters…or, re-enters the equation. As inspired by Roy Bhaskar, we may now acknowledge in an ontological manner, the underlying principles (or principle) which are/is the foundation of reality as we know it.

In order to acknowledge existence of a stratified reality, we must also acknowledge those unifying principles upon which it divides itself.

In the social sciences and education, it is not difficult to identify non-dual principles which may inform a non-dualistic, ontological outlook. For example, when a literacy facilitator augments her teaching to disciplinary or faculty-based theories and concepts in her instruction, non-dualism as a methodology is employed.

More broadly speaking, when South Africans look beneath racial conceptions of self, and seek commonalities in culture, non-dualistic modes of self-identity are applied. Those unifying principles and concepts assist our conception of the meta Reality…a conception which supersedes yet is also the foundation of the stratified world.

LOVE is the underlying foundational principle which may advocate a methodology of non-dualism. Love unites a family, an individual with her passion and communities which strive for egalitarianism.

Yet, we have to be aware that there are those who resist love, for the purpose of perpetuating dualism among and between agents according to conceptions of race, culture, gender and class. Dualism benefits those who deliberately aim to divide and rule, either individually or as collectives.

Tags: Love, meta Reality, non-dualism

Frustrations of an African philosopher

How ironic it is that in South Africa, the origin of humanity (yes – our roots are more ancient than Ethiopia) that students of philosophy are greatly coerced to establish their ontological methodologies in western, European roots.

A PhD proposal requires that one clearly articulates and establishes one’s methodology – for some academies, this demands critical focus on the ontological sphere of one’s analysis. By ontology, I mean – what is our personal conception of “reality” or existance as we know and experience it?

This is the challenge of the African philosopher working to express her or his perspectives in institutions which are still dominated by what has come to be perceived as western traditions of analysis. You might think or ask - where is Africa’s philosophy? Where is Africa’s articulation of ontological views?

My answer to you, is that without knowledge of these philosophies, you do not fully understand the origin of those ancient ideas emerging from Greece and more recently, philosophers such as Hume, Descartes and Kant from the 17th and 18th centuries.

Africa is the root and Mother of all philosophy, in the same likeness that it is the Khoisan, the 1st human beings on Earth, who reasoned about and established the first principles and practices associated with what is in contemporary times known as the scientific method.

Yet, as Africans – we find ourselves directed by faculties, departments and supervisors - to western orientations of ontology, without incorporating or acknowledging our own philosophical roots. Ancient texts in Kemet (Egypt) were written many thousands of years before the arrival of The Bible.

Beyond the written – in the domain of the oral-verbal – the Khoisan of South Africa are the first people to express ontologies from our human perspectives; they were the first to experiment with herbs and roots, and methodically, apply their findings to medical/scientific processes which lead to herbal healing of the body. These were the first instances of the scientific method. But, we are not teaching this to our children, neither are we applying these ontological and methodological processes to our research!

It appears as if many of us, through our turbulent history, have forgotten (either consciously or through systematic programming by recent educational systems) that we have the freedom and are required, to acknowledge the roots of our African ancestors as the founders of philosophy and scientific methods of enquiry.

We have forgotten, as stated by Marcus Garvey, how to express our ontology through “our own lenses.”

The Honorable Marcus Garvey

Tags: Ancient Egypt, Marcus Garvey, PhD, philosophy

Inductive and Deductive Reasoning

If you are constructing a PhD proposal or are currently engaged in critical research, chances are that you have had to determine whether your theoretical approach will be inductive or deductive.

What I have found, is that though there is definitely a difference between these two paradigms, they also form two halves of the same circle.

Below are models illustrating

a) the deductive process

and > b) the inductive process

Models found here

While reading perspectives at this site, the distinction between these two modes of reasoning was articulated as follows:

Induction is usually described as moving from the specific to the general, while deduction begins with the general and ends with the specific; arguments based on experience or observation are best expressed inductively, while arguments based on laws, rules, or other widely accepted principles are best expressed deductively.

The above assertion is of significance to me as my own thesis seeks to establish the link between laws, rules or principles and how these interplay or correlate with existing phenomena, such as the growth of students as academic writers. Within a critical realist paradigm, these three entities operate in the domain of the real. They are unseen, yet – are active, casual – generative mechanisms which impact on events and how we experience them.

The assertion is that in social institutions such as universities or technical colleges, laws and principles derived from a diverse cultural collective, are constantly at play – contributing to our perceptions and experiences as students or knowledge facilitators (agents).

The unseen becomes the seen, what is seen co-exists with the unseen.

meta Real (ist) approach higher education

To date, I have been reasoning within a predominantly critical realist (CR) domain; or, let me say, I have been attempting to do so, as I acknowledge that I am a novice participating in this complex, philosophical arena.

This evening, I intend to adopt a meta Real approach to higher education; in this context, I am specifically referring to ways which I believe this ontological framework may assist us in understanding phenomena in our academies.

In order to conceptualise a meta Real (mR) ontology, it is first necessary to have a basic overview of critical realism‘s, ontological construct. Here, “reality” or existence is divided into 3 domains: the real, the actual and the empirical.

Important bridging concepts between critical realism and a meta Real conception are:

1) duality (and) 2) non-duality

Critical realism may be associated with dualism as its form is stratified (evidenced by the layers above).  It acknowledges human construction of experience, yet also acknowledges the “real” / self-existing “world” out there. Social scientists such as Margaret Archer have gone further by also identifying three active entities in the domain of the real; namely, agency, structure and culture.

Roy Bhaskar, in approaching phenomena of physical substance in the empirical domain, asserts that their existence, or morphogenetic emergence, is partially due to active (unseen) principles, or laws – whose activity, co-exists but is separate from our descriptions or experiences of them.

A meta Real, ontology, on the other hand, appears to adopt a non-dual outlook. That is, by understanding and acknowledging the interplay of activity between the three CR spheres of existence, there is also awareness that, perhaps – an underlying, unifying principle, [or set of principles]  is sustaining all of this

: )

I will not go beyond this personal description of meta Real ontology. Neither will I attempt to name what these unifying principles are, which R. Bhaskar and others appear to recognise. Instead, in preparation for my next reasoning, I will state that I believe a meta Real ontology is a useful paradigm for academic development.

Whereas dualism assists in isolating and perceiving interplay between the strata of a critical realist ontology, non-dualism, as emerging from a meta Real approach, allows us to perceive how these strata may conceptually be re-united, via a singular framework. On a practical level in higher education, mR challenges academics and practitioners to look deep beneath their personal ideologies or other persuasions, to discover unifying principles or mechanisms which lead to functional cohesion for the academy and greater society.

Structure and agency, South Africa higher education

Are you an academic, student or are  you involved in higher education in anyway? If so, chances are that by now, you have seen the limitations or potential in terms of your ability to manifest your vision or mission in your academy.

Why is this?

There is not one answer to the above critical issue, but today, please allow me to introduce you to how structure and agency play vital roles in both your potential, and the limitations thereof.

In higher education, there are many structures which impact on our ability to affect change for the better (transformation and evolution) in our academies. These include: policies, committees, beliefs, cultural values – prejudice, racism, ethnocentrism and engendered bias which actively operate as structural mechanisms.

How does the above shape or contribute to your experiences?

In terms of structure, are you a participant in those entities which impact on the component of academia which you would like to change? Furthermore, are you aware of existing structures which either directly or indirectly impact on the area of academia which you are passionate about?

Only you can answer these questions, but the fact of the matter is that – it is vital to be aware of the multiple ways which these structures either enhance or limit your ability to transform our institutions of higher learning for the better.

This is where agency enters the equation.

Like every other colleague or person whom you work with, as well as groups or collectives of individuals, you also possess the potential of agency. This means, your pedagogical methods, theoretical outlook and educational philosophy is equal to all who are around you. If you choose to remain silent or inactive, then you allow the agency of others to over-ride or even alienate your vision and objectives.

Culture, ideology and philosophy, structures in and of themselves, engage in an interactive relationship with agency. That is – your own ideology or philosophies of education, are constantly jostling with or against others in this academic domain.

Therefore, it is critical in a country like South Africa, where for many generations, various ethnic, cultural and gender groups were excluded from professional and disciplinary communities – REALISE the potential and power of their agency. Exert your agency in a truthful, humble and assertive method.

Do not fret yourself over resistance from other agents, and remain true to your endeavour.

For two academic articles on structure and agency as applied in higher education, follow the links below:

Lynn Quinn > click

Chrissie Boughey >click

Tags: agency, structure

Critical realist experience of South African higher education

To date, the majority of my reflections have been predominantly objective – in the sense that the focus has been phenomena away from my self. Briefly, I want to focus on how a critical realist outlook has affected my personal experiences as a novice, academic in higher education.

As a brief review, a realist, or layered ontology – includes 3 domains:

the real, the actual and the empirical

The first correlates with those unseen, yet real and active mechanisms at play in existence; in the social sense, this may include culture, beliefs, ideology, love and prejudice. In the physical sciences, activity of these active mechanisms, separate from yet ontologically a part of photosynthesis, occurs in the domain of the real. The/a description is not synonymous with the event (following).

The second relates to events. Socially, these could include learning situations, teaching contexts or even spiritual rituals. Photosynthesis may itself be viewed as a physical event, as may the conversion/production of energy in cells.

>>> It is important to note that with all events, there are always those casual (invisible) entities at play, existing and functioning simultaneously as the event itself. In a learning environment, the philosophy of the facilitator co-exists or functions in parallel to the form which the event takes.

This takes us to the third domain of the empirical. It is in this domain, simultaneously operating or existing with those actualities in the real and actual spheres, whereby our human senses are able to decode or describe that which we perceive, measure or produce.

layered ontology and experience in SA higher education

In South African institutions of higher learning the real domain is explosive and very alive when examined. It is here where the values, principles and philosophies of those who actually facilitate the development of future professionals and academics – are competing, oppressing, elevating – literally jostling with each other.

I find the whole experience to be quite violent.

As suggested above, the philosophies of academics – whether the motif is racial, engendered, economic or personal – all co-exist with the form of events they  produce in the physical and social spaces of the academy. Students who emerge from working class or materially, impoverished families – find their cultural values and way of life colliding with the established powers and traditions of academia.

The best advice I can give other novice academics, given the often times volatile nature of academic events and experiences, is to remain true to yourself and speak your truth. Unless we do this, we are dominated by principles, cultures or structures which contradict our personal vision of how we ourselves believe effective pedagogic activities should function, and exist. By existing, I mean in each of the domains discussed above. Without this, there is no change, no transformation, and this is an untenable situation.

Tags: critical realism, higher education, South Africa

Nomological systems of enquiry in higher education

In my continued journey to unpack or establish a methodological foundation for PhD purposes > including both  ontological and epistemological lenses, I am learning that there is a very fine line between philosophical and scientific enquiry. By saying scientific – in this context – I am referring to both theoretical and experimental modes of analysis.

The identification of laws, or generative mechanisms in the physical sciences…require closed, or what Nancy Cartwright has referred to as Nomological systems. That is, in order for a law to be established, there must be regular, causal-specific conditions. If these conditions are altered, it is not possible for the law to be established.

This theoretical tool of enquiry may be equally applied to social systems such as the economy or curricula in institutions of higher learning.

Though human agency de-stabilises or works against the principle of regularity determinism, academics or social scientists seeking to identify problems or introduce strategies to improve pedagogic practices may find it useful to view their working environments as isolated systems – specifically with the intent of modifying or disrupting those existing conditions for the purpose of producing or evoking an alternative law.