Book review: Campbell F. Scribner and Bryan R. Warnick, Spare the Rod: Punishment and the Moral Community of Schools

IF 1.3 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Theory and Research in Education Pub Date : 2021-11-01 DOI:10.1177/14778785211060206
Christopher Martin
{"title":"Book review: Campbell F. Scribner and Bryan R. Warnick, Spare the Rod: Punishment and the Moral Community of Schools","authors":"Christopher Martin","doi":"10.1177/14778785211060206","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In fact, Lewis’s book is built around examples (paradigms), in this latter sense, to yield new forms of knowledge and applications to teaching. Thus, the ‘riddle’ is a paradigm for what Lewis calls ‘noncommunicative communication’; the ‘collection’ for ‘antifascist educational form[s]’; the ‘radio broadcast’ as a paradigm for ‘instructional practice[s] that . . . . produce historical awakenings’ (p. 64); ‘children’s theater’ as a paradigm for ‘the mimetic faculty’s unique ability to touch the most remote things through two complementary forms of swelling: innervation and extension’ (p. 99). Understanding Lewis’s (and Benjamin’s) use of paradigms, in Agamben’s sense of the term, can be helpful in interpreting the book’s many examples. Lewis makes explicit reference to ‘money’, ‘as the paradigm of all commodities’ (p. 183). Yet, instead of using the concept of paradigm to make a larger set of analogous concepts intelligible, he, perhaps unwittingly, demonstrates how money is an exception. Agamben, building on Benjamin, uses the concept of the ‘exception’ to connote that which is included by being excluded. Lewis says as much: ‘[Money] is a commodity that is included only insofar as it is excluded from the rank and file of all other commodities’ (p. 183). However, rather than serving as an example to make the broader set of commodities intelligible, Lewis instead shows how money is radically different in its being excluded from being just another commodity. Lewis, then, following Marx and Benjamin, is using money as an exception, rather than as an example. It is clear that Lewis has succeeded in providing thoughtful and compelling answers to his central questions on a liberating educational philosophy. Drawing on his own extensive scholarship in educational philosophy and his meticulous reading of Benjamin, Lewis provides provocative lessons on what it can mean to foster free expression of students’ potentialities and to unravel binaries (such as means and ends), that have stunted the progressive development of educational forms in the context of growing educational authoritarianism.","PeriodicalId":46679,"journal":{"name":"Theory and Research in Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Theory and Research in Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14778785211060206","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: 3

Abstract

In fact, Lewis’s book is built around examples (paradigms), in this latter sense, to yield new forms of knowledge and applications to teaching. Thus, the ‘riddle’ is a paradigm for what Lewis calls ‘noncommunicative communication’; the ‘collection’ for ‘antifascist educational form[s]’; the ‘radio broadcast’ as a paradigm for ‘instructional practice[s] that . . . . produce historical awakenings’ (p. 64); ‘children’s theater’ as a paradigm for ‘the mimetic faculty’s unique ability to touch the most remote things through two complementary forms of swelling: innervation and extension’ (p. 99). Understanding Lewis’s (and Benjamin’s) use of paradigms, in Agamben’s sense of the term, can be helpful in interpreting the book’s many examples. Lewis makes explicit reference to ‘money’, ‘as the paradigm of all commodities’ (p. 183). Yet, instead of using the concept of paradigm to make a larger set of analogous concepts intelligible, he, perhaps unwittingly, demonstrates how money is an exception. Agamben, building on Benjamin, uses the concept of the ‘exception’ to connote that which is included by being excluded. Lewis says as much: ‘[Money] is a commodity that is included only insofar as it is excluded from the rank and file of all other commodities’ (p. 183). However, rather than serving as an example to make the broader set of commodities intelligible, Lewis instead shows how money is radically different in its being excluded from being just another commodity. Lewis, then, following Marx and Benjamin, is using money as an exception, rather than as an example. It is clear that Lewis has succeeded in providing thoughtful and compelling answers to his central questions on a liberating educational philosophy. Drawing on his own extensive scholarship in educational philosophy and his meticulous reading of Benjamin, Lewis provides provocative lessons on what it can mean to foster free expression of students’ potentialities and to unravel binaries (such as means and ends), that have stunted the progressive development of educational forms in the context of growing educational authoritarianism.
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
书评:Campbell F.Scribner和Bryan R.Warnick,《饶了棍子:惩罚与学校的道德共同体》
事实上,在后一种意义上,刘易斯的书是围绕着例子(范式)构建的,目的是产生新形式的知识和教学应用。因此,“谜语”是刘易斯所说的“非沟通交流”的一种范式;“反法西斯教育形式”的“集合”;“无线电广播”作为“教学实践”的范例。“产生历史的觉醒”(第64页)“儿童戏剧”是模仿教师通过两种互补的膨胀形式触摸最遥远事物的独特能力的典范:神经支配和伸展”(第99页)。理解刘易斯(和本雅明)对范式的使用,在阿甘本的意义上,可以帮助解释这本书的许多例子。刘易斯明确提到“货币”,“作为所有商品的范式”(第183页)。然而,他并没有使用范式的概念来让一组更大的类似概念变得清晰易懂,而是可能在无意中证明了金钱是一个例外。阿甘本在本雅明的基础上,使用“例外”的概念来暗示通过被排除而被包括在内的东西。刘易斯也这么说:“(货币)是一种商品,只有在它被排除在所有其他商品的行列之外的情况下才被包括在内”(第183页)。然而,刘易斯并没有成为一个让更广泛的商品变得可理解的例子,而是展示了货币在被排除在另一种商品之外方面的根本不同。因此,刘易斯效仿马克思和本雅明,将金钱作为一个例外,而不是一个例子。很明显,刘易斯成功地为他关于解放教育哲学的核心问题提供了深思熟虑、令人信服的答案。刘易斯凭借自己在教育哲学方面的丰富学术知识和对本雅明的细致阅读,提供了挑衅性的课程,说明在日益增长的教育威权主义背景下,促进学生潜力的自由表达和解开阻碍教育形式逐步发展的二元对立(如手段和目的)意味着什么。
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 Finding consensus on well-being in education Flourishing as the central aim of education: Steps toward a consensus
×
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