Hi everyone,

Sara mentioned our backbone and our theory, which is the way to inquire. Let me just add a thinking process clue before looking for some hidden theory. 

We have to know where we are speaking from, in other words, we must know where we stand in terms of worldview, where we find our roots, what we believe in re. the world. It is first a philosophical type of question that we need to reflect on. And if I use scientific terms, this is of a meta-theoric order, namely an ontological and an epistemological question we need to ask ourselves.

Then, when this becomes clearer, it is relevant to ask about the theory or theories that we think best succeed to shed light on AoH. What is key here is to understand that these theories are rooted in, or unfold from, the meta-theoric considerations.

My personal take on this, as I am doing research on AoH, -and Ria and I have had the same questions in mind for a long while-, is that we anchor our work in a phenomenological worldview. It means that we explore and facilitate human experiencing in the phenomenal world. Here, Francisco Varela's work on enact ion, épochè, learning, etc. is mandatory.

Then, re. the relevant theories we mobilize, all have to do with complex social - human systems theory. Many authors have offered their view on this, but I best like the european approach, where we find the immense works of Edgar Morin, Jean-Louis LeMoigne, etc. look here (in french) : http://www.mcxapc.org 

This process supports the creation of a framework from which we see the world, hence AoH. 

Trying to grasp heuristics is a very useful way of collecting experiences as we can then organize samples, find similarities from which we can infer something, in other words we can make some analysis, but it doesn't replace nor answer the fundamental initial question: where are we speaking from when we say that AoH is -or does- this or that... 

Discovering where we stand makes us more solidly rooted into the philosophical ground and it then becomes much more easy to discriminate what AoH is from what it isn't, what it does, from what it doesn't do, etc. Because we can compare our framework with others. It also gives credibility to our sense making process because we are then able to communicate more clearly about it.

So back to the backbone, this is an invitation to have an even more fundamental root conversation on AoH, in order to share on our shared worldview... 

Best

Isabelle, since you posted this I had this page open on my laptop. I just want to acknowledge that you wrote this!

We guess there are hardly any people who have turned on notifications to get noticed when someone posts a comment here (I have, as an administrator!); so hardly anyone will have seen your comment.

Jerry Nagel has done a recent PhD on worldview, in relation with AoH. Probably still not from the same kind of order that you describe here. But I am not sure about that... He, with maybe Bob Stilger and a few others (which Jerry would know), can dialogue with you about this - I guess.

My little contribution here.

hello everybody

i share here an article that inspire me in the work wit Aoh

hope it will inspire some of us

EdithWyschogrod%20%20%20levinas%20and%20derrida.pdf

I will be glad to receive your outputs.

all the Best to you