equations which bear no relation to the physical world we actually inhabit. As Naredo points out, most of these economists have chosen the second option— while often continuing to receive generous funding and rewards of various kinds from extra-academic sources closely tied to the worlds of business and finance. Examples such as this not only illustrate how the heteronomous influence of capital interferes with the pursuit of truth and knowledge—not to mention equality and justice—but also how important it is to overcome the existing compartmentalization of disciplines, fields and scholars. Indeed, the tendency to isolate fields is often reproduced not only in academia, but also by the mainstream media; a tendency whose most obvious consequence is to legitimize the status quo by appealing to reasons which appear to be merely technical or endogenous within a given field (e.g., the appeal to the specialized logic of business, markets, and so on). In any case, as Henry Giroux reminds us, it remains the task of public intellectuals to “hold ideas accountable for the practices they legitimize and produce” (2015, 18). 3. We would also like to encourage our readers to kindly share their own projects and experiences on the section for expanded education (Educaci on expandida) at

中文翻译：

---

变革性和解放性的研究和教育：研究和教学中的反实践

与我们实际居住的物理世界无关的方程。正如纳雷多指出的那样，这些经济学家中的大多数都选择了第二个选项——同时经常继续从与商业和金融领域密切相关的学术界以外的来源获得慷慨的资助和各种奖励。这样的例子不仅说明了资本的他律影响如何干扰对真理和知识的追求——更不用说平等和正义了——而且说明克服现有的学科、领域和学者的划分是多么重要。事实上，孤立领域的倾向不仅在学术界经常出现，主流媒体也经常出现。一种倾向，其最明显的后果是通过诉诸在特定领域内似乎仅仅是技术性或内生性的原因（例如诉诸商业、市场等的专业逻辑）来使现状合法化。无论如何，正如亨利·吉鲁 (Henry Giroux) 提醒我们的那样，“让思想对其合法化和生产的实践负责”仍然是公共知识分子的任务 (2015, 18)。3. 我们也想鼓励我们的读者在扩展教育部分（Educaci on expandida）分享他们自己的项目和经验，网址为