I have been reading a lot of Biesta recently. Very interesting stuff. This will feed into my own book project. I want to understand Biesta’s use of Ranciere. I am wondering if Ranciere’s rejection of explication as a pedagogical method (because it entails an intellectual asymmetry that inhibits intellectual emancipation) just replaces one problem with another. Now the master becomes not an intellectual guide but a motivator – a director of the will, if not the intellect. This surely constitutes the same structure of contradiction. I need to get to the bottom of this.