This texts sets out to problematise recurrent questions in the production of the Working Group on Popular Education: amorosity, 'autopoiesis', process of auto-eco-organisation; new organisation based on chaos - time/clock and time/collective interest; in defence of slow men; a sociology of slow history - the relation practice/theory/practice; the epistemological reflection on who, how and where knowledge is produced; the second epistemological rupture which brings science and common sense closer together again; the auto-reflexive dimension of the epistemological question - the arrival of outsiders in research in popular education - the doubt which leads to the discovery of the new - the crisis of understanding is ours - those who do not see because they do not understand; the acceptance of the other as a condition for self-acceptance; understanding understanding - rewriting history from the point of view of the subordinate; narratives lost in official history; oral discourse; the hegemony of a logic which silences the logics of daily life; popular religiosity - shared responsibility; solidarity of concerns. And the challenge which remains is if the Working Group on Popular Education repudiates the ranking of knowledge as a means of exercising power, if it recognises plural forms of culture giving rise to visions of the world which contain different logics, how do the group members begin to construct a curriculum in their pedagogical actions, either inside or outside the school, or rather, how do their political-pedagogical practices change?