What is called Transformative Learning?

If a Fool Persist in his Folly

He Becomes Wise.

 Teaching is even more difficult than learning

because what teaching calls for is this: to let learn.

The real teacher, in fact, lets nothing else be learned

than-- learning. His conduct, therefore, often produces

the impression that we properly learn nothing from him.

                 (Heidegger, "What Is Called Thinking?")

This kind of talk only makes sense in terms of

“transformative” learning. Need we argue?

I doubt what Heidegger says makes any sense or

applies to the physicist, the chemist, the biologist,

the global studies student and sociologist, the anthro-

apologist, and environmentalist, the literary critic &

commentator, the historian, psychologist, philosopher

-ist & theologist: all of them in their professional

vocational guise: robed in the trade of guilds & crafts:

each devoted to the “practice” of their discipline *

and the chronicles of hire education. .

Heidegger, I claim, is talking Liberal Art, not the

liberal arts. There’s a difference that makes a difference

there and if we can’t draw and sustain the distinction,

then it’s liberalarts all the way down: professionalism

uber alles , white collar vocationalism: careers in

green sustainable environmental multi cultural

carbon footsteps not with standing.

Let me make it perfectly clear if not already obvious:

I am walking on 3 legs at this stage & prefer

foolishness to savvy.

I’ve been there & done that savvy somewhat, and don’t

mean to disparage its popular appeal and common sense

but I aim to speak out of both sides of my mouth at once:

three if I could but that’s impossible unilaterally..

The 3^rd side is a ratio (rational, really), between you & me,

dear reader, & I’m totally dependent on the reciprocity of

our relationship which I’d manipulate if I could (my

inner Hitler: totalitarian & hegemonic) but can’t,

damnit, and so: hop, skip, & jump like

Rumpelstiltskin guessing at names.