The question of fiction is omnipresent within the work of Paul Ricoeur throughout his prolific career. However, Ricoeur raises the questions of fiction in relation to other issues such the symbol, metaphor and narrative. This article sets out to foreground a traditional problem of fiction and logic, which is termed the existence of non-existent objects, in relation to the Paul Ricoeur’s work on narrative. Ricoeur’s understanding of fiction takes place within his overall philosophical anthropology where the fictions and histories make up the very nature of identity both personal and collective. The existence of non-existent objects demonstrates a dichotomy between fiction and history, non-existent objects can exist as fictional objects. The very possibility of the existence of fictional objects entails ontological status considerations. What ontological status do fictional objects have? Ricoeur develops a concept of narrative configuration which is akin to the Kantian productive imagination and configuration frames the question historical narrative and fictional narrative. It is demonstrated that the ontological status of fictional objects can be best understood in a model of possible worlds.
The author, a school principal with significant classroom responsibilities recounts his journey towards authenticity as an independent teacher-researcher. His career as a researcher began in the scientific-knowledge tradition and then moved into the practical-knowledge tradition. He describes how Donald Schön, the father of reflective practice, has transformed his professional life, leading him to develop a deeply thoughtful practice, one that makes use of the literature to augment, challenge, and legitimise the work he does in his school. The author delves into the messy world of the professional experiment, and the idea that professionals can, and do, act and think differently to third-person researchers. Finally, the author shares his story about how the members of a virtual community of scholars have facilitated his move from the periphery of the researching community into an authentic and valued practitioner-colleague with a personal theory of practice
 Norton, H. J. & Divine, G. (2015). Simpson’s paradox…and how to avoid it. Significance, 12(4), 40-43
 Pearl, J. (2014). Comment: Understanding Simpson’s Paradox. The American Statistician, 68(1), 8-13
 Pearl, J. (2009). Causality. Cambridge University Press.
 Shaik, F. & Fusulier, B. (2015). Academic Careers and Gender Inequality: Leaky Pipeline and Interrelated Phenomena in Seven European Countries. http://garciaproject.eu/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/GARCIA_working_paper_5.pdf (accessed October 15th