共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 15 毫秒
1.
PINHAS LUZON 《Journal of Philosophy of Education》2016,50(3):461-473
Erotic Counter Education (ECE) is the educational position of the late Ilan Gur‐ Ze'ev. In ECE Gur‐Ze'ev combines two opposing positions in the philosophy of education, one teleological and anti‐utopian, the other teleological and utopian. In light of this unique combination, I ask what mediates between these two poles and suggest that the answer lies in the concept of eros. Following a preliminary presentation of the concept of eros in ECE, I define it as a form of transcendental cognition that distinguishes between ‘what is to be perceived’, conceptual and human, and ‘what is not to be perceived’, divine and absolute. I subsequently show how the ‘nature’ of this conception of eros permits the establishment of a normative meta‐theory of education that gains its strength from critical theory and counter education. 相似文献
2.
Christiane Thompson 《Journal of Philosophy of Education》2004,38(3):485-492
Since Dilthey we have become used to thinking of reason as having a cultural and historical setting. If we take this insight seriously, then critical rationality or critical thinking can no longer be conceived of as context‐free skills. This paper takes up the line of thought that is elaborated by Christopher Winch in his ‘Developing Critical Rationality as a Pedagogical Aim’ and seeks to explicate it by drawing on Ludwig Wittgenstein's concept of ‘language games’ and on the re‐evaluation of ‘thinking’ by Theodor Ballauff (a German philosopher of education who was influenced by Martin Heidegger). The overcoming of a solipsistic and idealistic conception of thinking raises questions regarding the pedagogical settings and aims, as well as the problems over the limits of critique in education. A comparison of Ballauff's and Winch's positions reinforces the sense of the significance of critique: although the role of critical rationality within education is ambiguous and precarious, the investigation of autonomy (as an educational goal) shows that critique cannot be limited in any straightforward way. 相似文献
3.
Jan Masschelein 《Journal of Philosophy of Education》2004,38(3):351-367
This paper starts from a brief sketch of the ‘classical’ figure of critical educational theory or science (Kritische Erziehungswissenshaft). ‘Critical educational theory’ presents itself as the privileged guardian of the critical principle of education (Bildung) and its emancipatory promise. It involves the possibility of saying ‘I’ in order to speak and think in one's own name, to be critical, self‐reflective and independent, to determine dependence from the present power relations and existing social order. Actual social and educational reality and relations are approached as a limitation, threat, alienation, re/oppression or negation of ultimate human principles or potential. The task of critical educational theory becomes one of enabling an autonomous, critical, self‐reflective life. While ‘critique’ and ‘autonomy’ have meanwhile become commonplace, and ‘critique’ and ‘autonomy’ are reclaimed and required from everybody, we should also consider the question of the relation between an institutional or ideological framework as that which claims to question this frame and to constitute its opposite. The trivialisation of critique is taken as occasion to recall Michel Foucault's analysis of power relations and especially his thesis according to which the ‘government of individualisation’ is the actual figure of power. Starting from the framework offered by Foucault, it can be made clear that the autonomous, critical, self‐reflective life does not represent an ultimate principle but refers to a very specific form of subjectification operating as a transmission belt for power. The autonomous, critical, self‐reflective person appears as an historical model of self‐conduct whereby power operates precisely through the intensification of reflectiveness and critique rather than through their repression, alienation or negation. This brings us back then to the question of how to conceive of the task of a critical educational theory at a time in which critique, autonomy and self‐determination have become an essential modus operandi of the existing order. 相似文献
4.
Stefan Ramaekers 《Journal of Philosophy of Education》2004,38(3):395-407
In ‘Problematising Critique in Pedagogy’ Jörg Ruhloff develops a concept of critique that is motivated by a deep concern for the state of humanity. This is a thought‐provoking development of critique, but I find myself disagreeing over, or rather simply unconvinced by, his understanding of the human condition, and, connected to this, of criticism. Referring to Nietzsche, I start by illustrating one way in which a concept of critique such as Ruhloff's may in some sense be implied in educational praxis, focusing mainly on his concern that critique is not domesticated by political, economic, or other forces. In the second section I draw on Stanley Cavell to discuss some contentious aspects of Ruhloff's construal of criticism. Here I focus on Ruhloff's claim to universality, as contained in his appeal to what he calls the condition of human rationality and to a procedure of critical‐transcendental‐sceptical deliberation over the presuppositions of different standpoints. Ruhloff's understanding of criticism exemplifies an attitude that presents itself as a hostility to the ordinary. Connected to this, I sketch a conception of scepticism that is different—viz. more dynamic—than his understanding of it as a kind of methodological tool in the service of exposing presuppositions. Scepticism needs to be acknowledged in existential terms, as inherent to the human condition: a condition of life with language. With further reference to Cavell, the importance of expression, of revealing oneself as an exemplar, can then be emphasised. I conclude, in the third section, by indicating in what sense I find that a commitment to substantial judgements is lacking in Ruhloff's conception of critique and criticality. 相似文献
5.
《Educational Philosophy and Theory》2013,45(5):559-570
Kant's over‐reliance on universal reason and his subjection of free will to the moral law can be seen as normalising a particular and restrictive view of autonomous human existence—a view implicit in liberal accounts of education. Drawing on Nietzsche's critique of Kantian thought, this paper argues that the transcendental and unattainable realm of Kantian reason is insufficient as a sole basis for moral thought and action or as the basis of respect for others as ‘ends‐in‐themselves’. For Nietzsche, the possibility for each individual goes well beyond compliance with any imposed system of values, his metaphorical ‘death of God’ leaving room for creativity and difference. 相似文献
6.
Humans,Animals and the World We Inhabit—On and Beyond the Symposium ‘Second Nature,Bildung and McDowell: David Bakhurst's The Formation of Reason’ 
下载免费PDF全文
下载免费PDF全文 KOICHIRO MISAWA 《Journal of Philosophy of Education》2017,51(4):744-759
David Bakhurst's 2011 book ‘The Formation of Reason’ explores the philosophy of John McDowell in general and the Aristotelian notion of second nature more specifically, topics to which philosophers of education have not yet given adequate attention. The book's widespread appeal led to the symposium ‘Second Nature, Bildung and McDowell: David Bakhurst's The Formation of Reason’, which appeared in the first issue of the 50th anniversary volume of the Journal of Philosophy of Education in 2016. Despite its obvious educational relevance, whether and how Bakhurst's McDowellian line of philosophical argument shapes the domain of educational enquiry or discourse remains up for debate. The rich contributions of Sebastian Rödl, Paul Standish and Jan Derry help us confront this issue. Proceeding with an analysis that is partly explanatory and partly critical of the central aspects of their respective views, I try to show that the basic attraction of the McDowellian/Bakhurstian line of argument concerning educational thinking is that it enables us to address education in the proper context of the natural and the social. In other words, their depiction of a human being as a natural animal in a normative world allows us not to be perturbed either by the natural‐scientific conception of the natural or by the social constructivist thinking of the social, both of which have occasionally distorted how education is addressed and therefore impoverished our understanding of education itself. I conclude with a brief word on the significance of continuing and advancing the conversation initiated by the symposium by noting two viable examples of future work. 相似文献
7.
Frieda Heyting 《Journal of Philosophy of Education》2004,38(3):493-510
How can philosophy exert its critical function in society and in education if any appeal to independent and even relatively ‘certain’ criteria seems problematic? The epistemological doubts that foundationalist models of justification encounter unavoidably seem to raise this question. In particular, the relativist implications that seem to result from rejecting such models seem to paralyse the critical potential of philosophy of education. In order to explore the possibilities of a conception of educational critique that avoids the pitfalls of foundationalism, I analyse the epistemological dimensions of this much‐feared relativism, illustrating this with some characteristic examples. Solving the problems raised will require an interpretation of critique that leaves our daily sense of critique intact, without literally adopting its—foundationalist—basic assumptions. After systematically developing such an alternative interpretation of critical usage, a non‐relativist but still non‐foundationalist and powerful conception of philosophical critique seems possible. I illustrate results with some examples from philosophy of education. 相似文献
8.
9.
Michele Borrelli 《Journal of Philosophy of Education》2004,38(3):441-454
Critique is a concept that is constantly used as an instrument for agreement or disagreement, for reflection and discussion. There is a difference, however, between critique as a historically grounded phenomenon and critique as a utopian conception not situated in any particular socio‐historical context. Educational theory resists reduction to empirical science partly because of its utopian character. Thus tensions that arise within it concerning its individual, social and emancipatory aims mean that it always has a double aspect of being both utopian and socially grounded at the same time. In general there is a tension within the practice of education between upbringing, on the one hand, and self‐emancipation on the other, which is reflected at the level of educational theory in the distinction between normative‐utopian and dogmatic‐empirical elements. Even a utopian critique, however, must make use of the social and historical materials available in order to function, and thus it becomes itself historically situated. This unavoidable situation is one that must be embraced by a self‐consciously utopian form of theorising. Just like other theories of society, the theory of education has two possibilities for self‐definition. It can be conceived of either as a utopian or as a factual theory. In the latter case, it follows social contingency passively, giving itself over to the ‘destiny of Being’ in order to await the ‘result’. But it can also be interested and take part in social processes, and thus contribute to the opening out of thought and culture to utopian considerations. Educational critique, even in the utopian sense, however, has to recognise its own dogmatic elements in order to function as critique. It is thus self‐evident that critique without dogmatism is not only impossible but also senseless. Similarly, educational dogmatism, although it apparently excludes critique by definition, must contain within itself the possibility of new forms of critique based on its own assumptions. Its very reliance on empirical methods to address the solution of unquestioned problems can itself subvert the dogmatic normative assumptions on which that empirical enquiry is based. 相似文献
10.
There are many possible ways to approach the topic of educational theory and critique. One could inquire into the meaning of critical phenomena and subject‐matter in practical education and instruction, investigate the various forms of critique with the goal of determining the extent to which they assist in clarifying pedagogical action, or one could ask: ‘What is meant by critical educational research?’ and ‘How do the various approaches to this topic relate to one another?’. This article inquires into the relationship between critique and negativity. Such a distinction is relevant for the practical, theoretical and research‐oriented use of the various forms and subject matters of critique. This analysis of their relationship aims to clarify how the structure of human learning connects to that of pedagogical action; and, additionally, how the theoretical guidelines and orientation for pedagogical action relate to scientific analyses and research in education in a way that is productive. Distinctions made in thought, judgement and action are not simply delimiting positive characteristics. Such distinctions are at once mediated by the relations of knowledge and ignorance, ability and inability. Although ignorance and inability can be transformed into positive knowledge and ability, they are not superseded in the process. Ignorance and inability are, on the contrary, constitutive elements of learning. The possibility for transitions from ignorance and inability to knowledge and ability—a possibility that itself presupposes knowledge and ability—point to a form of negativity within the process of education (Bildung). This form of negativity relates to the human ability to learn (Bildsamkeit) and provides the definitive basis of human learning. A form of negativity constitutive of learning processes leads to one that grounds pedagogical processes. Pedagogical efficacy is mediated by a double negativity, comprised of both a universal and a particular form of negativity. The relation of negativity to learning and pedagogical efficacy, with specific reference to educational research studies on teaching and learning processes, is considered. A form of educational research that operates beyond fundamentalist criticisms—that is to say, criticisms based on unshakeable beliefs—and utilises issues arising from a pluralisation of critique to confront the pluralism of critical positions, is considered. The article closes with reflections on the relation between the Critical and the Uncritical. 相似文献
11.
During the past decade, the cultural restorationist wing of the New Right has sought to impose its own anachronistic and sentimental conception of ‘British culture’ on schools and colleges. This conception, which is little more than a glib celebration of quintessential ‘Englishness’, characterises the national culture in largely monolithic and ethnically undifferen‐tiated terms. Concerned about the possible pernicious effects of educational policies inspired by such thinking, we present the findings of a recently completed ethnographic study of 8‐11 year‐olds’ conceptions of British national culture. Our paper considers the extent to which children's understanding of this complex form of collective identity may vary with age, and ethnicity. We conclude by exploring the implications of the findings for anti‐racist and multicultural education. 相似文献
12.
Assessment for learning? Thinking outside the (black) box 总被引：1，自引：0，他引：1
Eleanore Hargreaves Corresponding author 《Cambridge Journal of Education》2005,35(2):213-224
This article draws on a survey of 83 teachers, to explore the concepts of ‘assessment for learning’, ‘assessment’ and ‘learning’. ‘Assessment for learning’ is categorized as meaning: monitoring pupils' performance against targets or objectives; using assessment to inform next steps in teaching and learning; teachers giving feedback for improvement; (teachers) learning about children's learning; children taking some control of their own learning and assessment; and turning assessment into a learning event. Conceptions of assessment include assessment‐as‐measurement and assessment‐as‐inquiry. These conceptions are related to two conceptions of learning: learning‐as‐attaining‐objectives and learning‐as‐the‐construction‐of‐knowledge. The conceptions of assessment‐as‐measurement and learning‐as‐attaining‐objectives are dominant in English educational policy today. The article suggests that these conceptions need to be challenged and expanded, since conceptions held by those who have power in education determine what sort of assessment and learning happen in the classroom, and therefore the quality of the student's learning processes and products. 相似文献
13.
Judith Suissa 《Journal of Philosophy of Education》2004,38(3):455-465
In this paper, I explore the insights suggested by Michele Borrelli's ‘The Utopianisation of Critique’ in the context of a real‐life educational encounter that involves an attempt at being ‘critical’. Borrelli's observation that all positive utopian critique implies an inevitable degree of dogmatism takes on a new—and less depressing—significance when examined in the light of such an encounter. Acknowledging the tensions suggested by Borelli's analysis is, I argue, what makes a particular educational stance ‘critical’. Rather than leading to conceptual confusion, this should be seen as integral to the transformative and motivational potential of the educational process. 相似文献
14.
David Guile 《British Educational Research Journal》2009,35(5):761-779
The paper argues that: (1) the demise of ‘occupational’ and ‘internal’ and the spread of ‘external’ labour markets in growth areas of UK economy such as the creative and cultural sector, coupled with the massification of higher education which has created a new type of post-degree ‘vocational need’, means that the transition from education to work should be re-thought as the development of vocational practice rather than the acquisition of qualifications; and (2) in order to re-think transition as the development of vocational practice it is necessary to eviscerate the legacy of the ‘traditional’ conception of practice in UK educational policy. The paper reviews a number of alternative social scientific conceptions of practice, formulates more multi-faceted conceptions of vocational practice, and discusses their implications for UK and EU educational policy. 相似文献
15.
Robyn Barnacle 《Studies in Continuing Education》2013,35(3):355-367
This paper provides a philosophical viewpoint to questions regarding the role and purpose of the research degree. Drawing on non‐binary accounts of knowledge within the philosophical tradition, it argues against the instrumentalist conception of applied knowledge evident within higher education policy. The paper identifies a critical ethic at work within the views of research candidates who do a research degree to complement an established professional career. A parallel is identified between the critical ethic that is evident within professional's conceptions of the role and value of a research degree and the notion of philosophy as a way of life that was prevalent in antiquity. The implications for research pedagogy of treating criticality as a way of life are then explored through Ronald Barnett's alternative model for higher education as a facilitator of ‘critical being’. 相似文献
16.
17.
Barry Troyna 《British Journal of Sociology of Education》1985,6(2):209-224
Educational researchers interested in race‐related matters tend to be united in their conviction that the non‐institutionalisation of multicultural education derives entirely from the ('unwitting') racist attitudes of teachers. Whilst not ignoring teacher attitudes as an explanatory concept in ‘this context I argue in this article that the disparity between LEA multicultural education policies, on the one hand, and school practices on the other should be relocated in a broader analytical framework. The argument proposed hinges on a conception of multicultural education as a ‘progressive’ educational innovation and suggests that many of the processes which conventionally link policies to practices have been routinely overlooked in the current literature on ‘race’. Although this is a provisional article I hope, at the very least, that I have provided evidence to prompt a conjectural case for the argument that the negative racial attitudes of teachers are not the only factors which have the potential to block the diffusion and legitimation of multicultural education principles in UK schools. 相似文献
18.
Until recently the dominant critique of ‘student participation’ projects was one based on the theoretical assumptions of critical theory in the form of critical pedagogy. Over the last decade, we have witnessed the emergence of a critical education discourse that theorises and critically analyses such projects using Foucault's notion of ‘governmentality’. In this paper, I argue that while these governmentality studies challenge some of the key theoretical and taken for granted assumptions upon which such initiatives rest, they neglect to challenge the central assumption that such initiatives represent a historical break with traditional schooling practices. The importance of accounting for and critically analysing these projects within a historical framework will be argued through a discussion of Foucault's notion of genealogy as a particular conception and method of critique. It will also be demonstrated using an example, which shows an unacknowledged nineteenth century history of the current discourse and practice of student participation. 相似文献
19.
Robert B. Stevenson 《Environmental Education Research》2008,14(3):353-360
20.
MARKUS LIPOWICZ 《Journal of Philosophy of Education》2019,53(1):200-213
Transhumanism promotes the application of emerging technologies and genetics in order to overcome the physical and cognitive limitations of the human species. In this article, the main question to be considered is the following: is Nietzsche's notion of educational self‐overcoming compatible with the idea of biotechnological self‐enhancement? After presenting some broad characteristics of transhumanist philosophy, the general line of reasoning in this article is based on two colliding interpretations of Nietzsche's ‘overhuman’ and its educational implications: Stefan Lorenz Sorgner's attempt to legitimise techno‐progressive aspirations through the ‘will‐to‐power‐ontology’ and Babette Babich's critique of transhumanism as a popular display of the ‘ascetic ideal’. In the final part, I argue that Nietzsche's post‐anthropology can only be regarded as a possible onto‐axiological legitimisation for a kind of transhumanism that would not aim at strengthening the tendency to approach human development from a solely technocratic point of view. I further conclude that the rise of biotechnological power demands a critical educational reflection that would effectively prevent the enclosure of the individual within the network of techno‐science. 相似文献