Search results

The nonmaterial dimension of reality is contrasted with the material, observable and empirically verifiable dimension that rose to dominance with the Enlightenment. The nonmaterial dimension includes orientation, memes, tacit knowledge and spirituality. The orientation of an individual, group, or institution can be towards violence – getting ahead at the expense of the other – or blessing – working in such a way that there is mutual benefit. Orientations can be expressed through memes, cultural or behavioural patterns that are mimetically transmitted broadly within a society and diachronically through generations. If they catch on within a group, they can determine the institutional or group culture. Spirituality can be a source of change of orientation from violence to blessing and of growth in creativity, resilience and empowerment. David Peat and David Bohm posit an implicate order in the universe, thought as a system (in the context of dialogue), and gentle action. Neil Douglas-Klotz points out that the Aramaic words malkuta d'bwashmaya (kingdom of heaven) used by Jesus constituted a nonmaterial reality containing vision, norms and empowerment that exists within and among us – like the implicate order – and is accessed by those who truly wish to ‘see’ it. The emerging spirituality coming out of this engagement has a capacity to replace memes like those of empire, self-interest and grandiose leaders with memes that channel passions and energy towards bio-interest, transnational interest, transpersonal interest, empathy and widespread empowerment. And this could make all the difference in effecting truly sustainable development.

This introductory chapter traces some of the impact COVID-19 has had on education in different global contexts. It traces the history of the Universitas 21 Schools of Education Deans Group and its Forum for International Networking in Education and sets the context for the subsequent contributions in this book. It provides points of reflection for scholars and institutions as they traverse through the ongoing challenges of the pandemic.

This introduction provides the methodological framework for the book, approaching the business of football through the lens of its most reliable consumers – the fanbase. Fan cultures necessarily inform the normative understanding of a football club, due to the popularly held belief that it is the fan’s – or some reified idea of the fan – that is the permanent feature of a football club and that provides its identity. Players and owners come and go, but the relationship between the club and the fan is, theoretically, never-ending. In truth, this is never a real fan who could exist, but a constructed image of the fan built out of other narratives and that, at some level, football fans associate themselves. This fan is no one in particular, but is drawn from a close reading of football culture and identifying the directives of the traditional fan. Utilising a combination of critical theory and the existing literature on football club ownership, our goal is to reveal the distinction between how people talk about the social dimension of football clubs, and how they actually relate to their fans and the wider world in the era of late capitalism. A club is not simply the romanticised notions held by those within the games, but, as with all businesses, it is also the product of it conducts itself in a series of other networks of exchange. Often irreconcilable with the aforementioned romantic notions, these networks often get hidden by the prevailing discourse.

A hybrid of architectural design and engineering, architectural engineers (AEs)design and remediate problems with internal and external structures and systems of building and facilities in the US. Trained and credentialed in academic programs awarding approximately 1,000 degrees annually, AE is a mid-sized specialty engineering degree comparable to computer software, nuclear, or materials engineering. The case outlines the origins and history of the occupation and illustrates three aspects of the academization process: integration of the university’s charter for knowledge production within an occupation; possibilities for conflict and power within universities that can shape occupational outcomes; and the role of the university and collaborations with practitioners in creating change in theoretical conceptions, on-the-job skills, and problem-solving strategies. AE demonstrates academization in a field with specific physical outcomes and functional requirements that are technically bounded. As counterfactuals, possible alternative occupational paths for the work roles of AEs are considered, along with reasons why they did not happen. What did occur demonstrates the impact of the academization process, with both credentialing and new research. AE is an informative example of constructed functionalism, formed and continually shaped by the university.