Spinoza on the teaching of doctrines: Towards a positive account of indoctrination

IF 1.3 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Theory and Research in Education Pub Date : 2021-02-23 DOI:10.1177/1477878521996235
J. Dahlbeck
{"title":"Spinoza on the teaching of doctrines: Towards a positive account of indoctrination","authors":"J. Dahlbeck","doi":"10.1177/1477878521996235","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The purpose of this article is to add to the debate on the normative status and legitimacy of indoctrination in education by drawing on the political philosophy of Benedict Spinoza (1632–1677). More specifically, I will argue that Spinoza’s relational approach to knowledge formation and autonomy, in light of his understanding of the natural limitations of human cognition, provides us with valuable hints for staking out a more productive path ahead for the debate on indoctrination. This article combines an investigation into the early modern history of political ideas with a philosophical inquiry into a persistent conceptual problem residing at the heart of education. As such, the aim of the article is ultimately to offer an account of indoctrination less fraught with the dangers of epistemological and political idealism that often haunt rival conceptions.","PeriodicalId":46679,"journal":{"name":"Theory and Research in Education","volume":"19 1","pages":"78 - 99"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-02-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1477878521996235","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Theory and Research in Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1477878521996235","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to add to the debate on the normative status and legitimacy of indoctrination in education by drawing on the political philosophy of Benedict Spinoza (1632–1677). More specifically, I will argue that Spinoza’s relational approach to knowledge formation and autonomy, in light of his understanding of the natural limitations of human cognition, provides us with valuable hints for staking out a more productive path ahead for the debate on indoctrination. This article combines an investigation into the early modern history of political ideas with a philosophical inquiry into a persistent conceptual problem residing at the heart of education. As such, the aim of the article is ultimately to offer an account of indoctrination less fraught with the dangers of epistemological and political idealism that often haunt rival conceptions.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
斯宾诺莎论教义教学:对教化的积极阐释
本文的目的是通过借鉴本尼迪克特·斯宾诺莎(1632-1677)的政治哲学,为关于教育中灌输的规范地位和合法性的辩论添砖加瓦。更具体地说,我认为,鉴于斯宾诺莎对人类认知的自然局限性的理解,他对知识形成和自主性的关系方法为我们提供了宝贵的提示,为关于灌输的辩论开辟了一条更有成效的道路。本文结合了对早期现代政治思想史的调查,以及对教育核心问题的哲学探究。因此,这篇文章的目的最终是提供一个关于灌输的描述,不那么充满认识论和政治理想主义的危险,这些危险经常困扰着对立的概念。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Theory and Research in Education
Theory and Research in Education EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
22
期刊介绍: Theory and Research in Education, formerly known as The School Field, is an international peer reviewed journal that publishes theoretical, empirical and conjectural papers contributing to the development of educational theory, policy and practice.
期刊最新文献
Book Review: Julian Culp, Johannes Drerup and Douglas Yacek (eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Democratic Education Education for deliberative democracy through the long-term view Education for flourishing: A social contract for foundational competencies Book review: Barbara S Stengel, Responsibility: Philosophy of Education in Practice How much is too much? Refining normative evaluations of prescriptive curriculum
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1