The different responses, interpretations, and consequent critiques of Stefan Lars Bengtsson's "Hegemony and the Politics of Policy Making for Education for Sustainable Development" highlight how the various critical outlooks are framed by, seemingly, incommensurable positions, or figures of reasoning, that inform their thinking. Bengstrom writes that the critiques of policy making (including his own) implicitly or explicitly reestablish different foundations for thought and, possibly, avoid some of the central questions, or aporias, that lie at the center of respective analyses and critiques. He notes in this response that there appears to be a consensus in the six response articles that the introduction of ESD some decades ago has failed to establish itself as a collective denominator for alternative conceptions of education and vision for a more just, equitable, and ecological present and future. In this rejoinder, Bengtsson, addresses certain areas and figures of reasoning that he interprets as noteworthy to explore and experiment with further in extending and advancing (Education for Sustainable Development (ESD), and Environmental Education (EE).