Where the productive begins with a plan or design, the practical cannot have such a concrete starting point. But they are restricted in this by their original plan. While working, they may make some alterations, develop an idea and so on.

For example, pott ers will have an idea of the article they want to make. In other words the person has a guiding plan or idea. It always results from the idea, image or pattern of what the artisan wants to make. This making action is dependent upon the exercising of skill ( techne). Hence, the making action is not simply mechanical. Aristotle associated this form of thinking and doing with the work of craftspeople or artisans. If the form of thinking associated with theoretical activities was contemplative, the enquiry involved in productive disciplines was a ‘making’ action or poietike. This way of separating areas of knowledge can be seen, for example, in the way that we might view ‘pure maths’ (theoretical), tool-making (productive), and social work training (practical). The practical disciplines are those sciences which deal with ethical and political life their telos is practical wisdom and knowledge. The purpose of the productive sciences is to make something their telos is the production of some artefact. The purpose of a theoretical discipline is the pursuit of truth through contemplation its telos is the attainment of knowledge for its own sake. The basis of the distinction lies in the telos, or purpose, each serves. In many ways, this is a legacy of Aristotle and his three-fold classification of disciplines as theoretical, productive or practical. Theory is ‘real’ knowledge while practice is the application of that knowledge to solve problems. These in turn can be applied to the problems of practice. From theory can be derived general principles (or rules). In this ‘theory’ tends to be put on a pedestal. It is usually contrasted to ‘theory’ – abstract ideas about some thing or phenomenon. Practice is often depicted as the act of doing something. In this short piece we examine the the notion of praxis and of ‘education for use’ (Lindeman 1944: 103). Many educators are involved with praxis – acts which shape and change the world – but it often isn’t part of their vocabulary.

(Marx 1845 Theses on Feurbach : II, VII, XI)

The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways the point is to change it. All mysteries which lead theory to mystics, find their rational solution in human practice and in the comprehension of this practice….

All social life is essentially practical. the reality and power, the this-sideness of his thinking in practice…. So what is praxis and why should educators be concerned with it? Yet while praxis may not be part of many workers overt vocabulary, practice, a pale derivative, is. Those that do tend to link it to the work of Freire.

Gta london 1996