ABSTRACT
In the late nineteenthand early twentiethcenturies, modern science made many advances that excited communities around the world. For progressive thinkers, these breakthroughs offered a means of formulating independent studies and conclusions without being dominated by current dogma or established belief. They enabled citizens to do their own thinking. A friend and colleague of Dewey, G. H. Mead wrote about the role of society in the configuration of self and how personal subjectivities emerge in relation to the subjectivities of others. This was a radical idea for the times and perhaps remains so, given that it challenges the view that individuals have their talents and aptitudes to a greater or lesser extend compared to those of other people. Again, the issue of individual consciousness is raised here, without being able to specify from whence talents and consciousness come. Conversely, Mead proposed that human capabilities are social and collective and that while individual subjectivities are present, they emerge ‘intersubjectively’ through social interactions. The notion that knowledge and understanding are active, collaborative, intersubjective features of human life is of extreme importance for educators. It means that formal programs of learning need to be arranged communally and that new thinking is based on practice and discourse among all participants, not in isolation. In this sense then, we can propose ‘intersubjective praxis’ as agreed practice from groups of learners who are pursuing areas of interest as a contribution to the public good. All participants are recognised and respected for their culture and experience and all have a democratic right to participate in the co-production of knowledge.
