Teaching practice can embody liberatory theory rather than contradict it

Evidence

Th e Ordinovisti reconcile the dichotomy between theory and practice with the concept of praxis— the idea that theory and practice reciprocally inform and strengthen each other and can reinforce the transformative dynamics already underway. Action is thought, and thought is action. — Clara E. Mattei, The Capital Order, 521 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

Instead, my motif is that we must face the situation that we are theorists, for God’s sake, and not immediate practitioners. Theory needs to account for this in some way if it doesn’t want to make the revolutionary action into a deus ex machina and a captatio benevolentiae – ‘well I’m a theorist, but actually I mean practice, so I’m not really a theorist but rather have theory-practice and stand righteously before Lenin even when I don’t have practice’. I think practice is too damn serious for that. Unless there is a truly transparent dialectical relationship between practice and theory, it seems to me that theory has no right to cognitively invoke practice. Instead, it must stand on its own two legs, that is, prove itself theoretically, and in a strong sense at that – this is philosophy, after all. Just because true theory is practice doesn’t mean that theory can already become practice on its own. It can’t claim to be practice and no longer philosophy. — Dirk Braunstein, Adorno’s Critique of Political Economy, 1202 (#contradicts, via linked claim)

Categorization

  • XREF: connects to: A teacher’s conduct, not just content, determines whether liberatory pedagogy lands — bell hooks, Teaching to Transgress: Education as
, 281; Education becomes liberatory only when students co-labor in knowledge, not consume it; Liberatory struggle requires claiming theory as practice, not merely critiquing misuse (+7 more)

Broader Connections