This article is an exploration of ambiguity as it appears in various guises in philosophical, social, political, and educational situations. Among these situations is the experience of exile. The exploration is conducted by means of literary anecdotes and real-life instances, hence the use of vignettes. The suggestion is made that ambiguity can be conquered only in the concrete, through a life stamped by justice and solidarity with other fellow human beings.

Educational TheoryVolume 54, Issue 2 p. 231-232 Afterwards Ignacio L. Götz, Ignacio L. Götz Hofstra UniversitySearch for more papers by this author Ignacio L. Götz, Ignacio L. Götz Hofstra UniversitySearch for more papers by this author First published: 28 June 2008 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0013-2004.2004.0afterwards.x “Afterwords” is a forum for commentary and discussion about articles published in Educational Theory. Essays should be short and to the point (approximately 750 words). Submitted manuscripts will be reviewed and selected for publication by the Editor. The primary criteria that will be used for selection are: (1) Is this topic likely to be of broad interest to the readers of the journal? (2) Does this comment, criticism, or clarification advance the discussion in theoretically significant ways? and (3) Is it written in a manner that is respectful and constructive? Manuscripts should be submitted electronically to Educational Theory, as an e-mail attachment or on disk. The e-mail address for submissions is < EdTheory@uiuc.edu>. AboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat No abstract is available for this article. Volume54, Issue2May 2004Pages 231-232 RelatedInformation

Götz proposes that there is no opposition between faith and humor, belief and laughter. To argue this point, he shows how both the structure of faith and that of humor are the same, and this structure is paradox. Paradox, which is well known in the secular realms of mathematics and philosophy, is explored, first, in detail, and then he shows how faith and humor, both, are paradoxical in nature. The result is that there is no real opposition between faith and humor. The tragic and the comic are sisters, as Aristotle saw in antiquity. On the other side,Götz shows what happens when faith and humor depart from paradox: faith becomes dogmatic and fanatical, and humor becomes superficial and banal. Fanatical faith latches onto beliefs and dogmas rather than to the openness of paradox, and so it leads to terrorism against those who hold onto different beliefs. Götz also warns against an easy embrace of tolerance as the only alternative to fanaticism, because tolerance itself is imperfect and is often forced to accept evil. It should not, Götz argues, be the sole solution inculcated in our schools. This is a thoughtful and provocative analysis that will be of interest to the general reader as well as scholars and students interested in the place of religion in contemporary society.

Modern spirituality is still challenged by the age-old opposition between matter and spirit. But this traditional dualism has lost some of its sting because modern science itself has been forced to countenance the existence of invisible realities. This article presents some areas of contemporary life in which the spiritual is conspicuously entwined with the material even though the relationship often goes unnoticed. If spirituality can be helped to confront its own tacit acceptance of the material, then it may be possible to move toward a postmodern spirituality, one in which there will be less animosity against, and more acceptance of, the material dimensions of existence.

Modern spirituality is still challenged by the age-old opposition between matter and spirit. But this traditional dualism has lost some of its sting because modern science itself has been forced to countenance the existence of invisible realities. This article presents some areas of contemporary life in which the spiritual is conspicuously entwined with the material even though the relationship often goes unnoticed. If spirituality can be helped to confront its own tacit acceptance of the material, then it may be possible to move toward a postmodern spirituality, one in which there will be less animosity against, and more acceptance of, the material dimensions of existence.

The basic premise of this paper is that the problem of technology is not a technological one, but one of understanding and vision. The entire Western tradition, in its religious as well as its secular modes, has always admired technique. True, the modern age has increased the mechanization of technology, and more recent technological advances have extended our sensory modes of knowing, tempting us to fall in love with them much as Narcissus fell in love with his own reflection. However, there is nothing necessary in these developments or in the views spawned by them. Technology encompasses the instrumentalities with which we create the made world. The made world, not unlike the natural one manifests Being; it is the unconcealment of reality's potential to be made. It is up to us to understand technology in this way and not as the mere manufacture and use of tools. Education is the main means at our disposal to create a new vision of technology and a new yoga to yoke ourselves to Being. The goal is to learn to see technology as an aniconic symbol of Being.

Educational TheoryVolume 51, Issue 1 p. 75-89 ON PERSON, TECHNOLOGY, AND EDUCATION Ignacio L. Götz, Ignacio L. Götz Lawrence A. Stessin Distinguished Professor of Philosophy at Hofstra University, Hempstead, NY 11549. His primary areas of scholarship are ancient philosophy and contemporary philosophy.Search for more papers by this author Ignacio L. Götz, Ignacio L. Götz Lawrence A. Stessin Distinguished Professor of Philosophy at Hofstra University, Hempstead, NY 11549. His primary areas of scholarship are ancient philosophy and contemporary philosophy.Search for more papers by this author First published: 25 January 2005 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-5446.2001.00075.xCitations: 1Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditWechat Citing Literature Volume51, Issue1March 2001Pages 75-89 RelatedInformation

The basic premise of this paper is that the problem of technology is not a technological one, but one of understanding and vision. The entire Western tradition, in its religious as well as its secular modes, has always admired technique. True, the modern age has increased the mechanization of technology, and more recent technological advances have extended our sensory modes of knowing, tempting us to fall in love with them much as Narcissus fell in love with his own reflection. However, there is nothing necessary in these developments or in the views spawned by them.