Abstract Sumara and Davis (2007) assert that education should give more attention to ex-centring the individual. This paper builds on this assertion by indicating how earlier work on what it means to be human being-in-the-world resonates with their notion of the ex-centred individual. Introduction Dennis Sumara and Brent Davis (2007) lament the dominant tendency contemporary education towards various forms of based on dyads such as self/other, mind/body, and thought/action. They would prefer to see, contrast to these centring tendencies, an education that better reflects complexity thinking. Accordingly they would like to see more attention given to spaces of which place an emphasis on seeking out, opening up [and] dwelling in curriculum space, and to alternatives to the dominant idea that the learner is a self-contained, insulated, and isolated individual (p. 86). They call for education to de-centre or ex-centre the individual (p. 87), to be more open to time scale, tentativeness, movement, [and] possibility, and to explore possible not-yet-experienced selves (p. 88). In this paper I pick up and expand on some of the themes their paper, particular that of the subjunctivising and ex-centred self. I will focus on one aspect of self, the dimension, which can be understood either as indicativised and centred, or as subjunctivised and ex-centred. The word ontology is frequently misunderstood. This is because two different strands of meaning are derivable from its etymological roots. According to one view, it derives from the Greek ontos, which means to be, and logos, which means to know. Thus it can be taken to mean understanding the beingness of beings. This is the way Martin Heidegger understood and used the term (Gerhart & Russell, 1984). It places an emphasis on the dynamic, open, and changing aspect of self--one could say, following Sumara and Davis, the ex-centred and subjunctive self. However, classical philosophy ontos was taken to mean essence, and this led to the notion that ontology refers to knowledge of the essence of things--one could say, the central or indicative essence of things. So, while Heidegger's interpretation emphasises the idea that we are each beings-on-the-way, the classical understanding is static, settled, and centred. Incidentally, Heidegger used the world ontic to refer to the classical notion, so that ontology could be reserved unambiguously to refer to the ex-centredness of being. My term ontological centredness refers to the modern tendency to reduce our primordial status as beings-on-the-way to that of static beings that have (in the manner of possessions) particular attributes, identities, ideas, and so on. This modern tendency also affects education. Perfect imperfection We are inclined these days to believe--if we listen too attentively to the voice of authority that the seminal question personal and educational aspiration is: Am I there yet? Have I met the objective? Have I reached the standard? Have I followed the protocol? Have I found my true self? Well, if that is aspiration it is the sort that appeals only to the faint-hearted. A less shrinking aspiration requires different seminal question: How far can I go? What is the extent of my reach? Where could this idea lead? What is the farthest extremity of my capacity to love? What more can I do to make the world better place? are not here to merely make living, Woodrow Wilson said, his 1913 Founders' Address to gathering of Swarthmore students, are here to enable the world to live more amply, with greater vision, with finer spirit of hope and achievement. You are here to enrich the world, and you impoverish yourself if you forget that errand. This is charter we could build an education around. …
Read full abstract