As regards our understanding of learning, there has, according to Bauman (2001, 123-124), been an ongoing expansion of the space which we should be able to open for reformulation as the result of learning. It is not any more a matter only of changes in individual activities or in the mental constructs and habits through which we master these activities. There is also the question how we can learn to generate the learning processes which open up the possibilities to develop our mental images and concepts of learning and learning habits. The question is, then, not only about how to learn to learn but also about how to learn to learn to learn. In other words, protolearning, how to learn a content, has first raised the question of how to learn habits of learning (deu-terolearning) and then that of how to learn to cancel these learning habits for reformu-lation.

This conceptual drift from learning to 'tertiary learning' or 'learning of the third degree' indicates a theoretical dead end: are we obliged to establish also a fourth and a fifth degree? My thesis is that this theoretical expansion of the concept of learning is a result of an abstract understanding of learning under the terms of 'acquisition' or 'par-ticipation', that is, learning Being/by being or learning Doing/by doing.

Over and above theory and praxis, Being and Doing, we have a third tradition of learning, the tradition of poiesis, Making. We can understand the way in which the content, the material of learning, is shaped into concepts in a particular context as a process of making, of producing not only a new conceptualised content within a con-text but also the space of learning. This is a space of learning based on getting the feel of and responding to the material of learning, the content, making sense of it. It is a space of learning at the very heart of craftsmanship. What is more, the tradition of craftsmanship enables us to create a new horizon of learning: Every work situation is something that we constitute. We learn by producing the content by using concepts in a context. The constitutive moment of expertise comes about not within the thin space of theory/praxis (crossing between concepts/contexts) but within the fat space of theory/praxis/poiesis where we are faced with the three always open questions that emerge at the very instant of making: how are things (the-ory, Being), how should they do to be good (praxis, Doing), and how to make them real according the rules of beauty (poiesis, Making).

• Bauman, Z. 2001. The individualized society. Cambridge: Polity Press.