Ni crítica ni post-crítica: por una pedagogía sin atributos

IF 1.5 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Teoria de la Educacion Pub Date : 2020-05-13 DOI:10.14201/teri.22485
Carlos Ernesto Noguera Ramírez
{"title":"Ni crítica ni post-crítica: por una pedagogía sin atributos","authors":"Carlos Ernesto Noguera Ramírez","doi":"10.14201/teri.22485","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The present document constitutes a response to the Manfiesto for a Post-critical Pedagogy of Hodgson, Vlieghe and Zamojski. Part of the recognition of points of coincidence with the works that some Latin American authors have developed in this regard but points out that the manifesto fails to identify the central problem of critical pedagogies. In this direction, the text argues that the central problem of these tendencies is that their conception of power is limited to what Foucault called the war and repressive hypotheses of power. Such a way of understanding power, as confrontation or repression, makes education conceived as a political action and, in this way, its fundamentally anthropological character (or in terms of Sloterdijk, anthropotechnical) is invisible. One of the most significant consequences of this fact is that education and pedagogy have been undergoing a process of politicization against which a «criticism» of the «critical tendencies» based on the conceptual horizon of pedagogy is necessary and urgent, and whose effect is its update and reconceptualization. Such an exercise would allow the production of new tools that help to understand the functioning of education as a modernity project. Criticism of the critical tendencies arises from the concepts of government (Foucault) and anthropotechnics (Sloterdijk) that applied to the analysis of the constitution of the modern concept of education lead to propose, following the analysis of Antelo and Serra, a pedagogy without attributes, that is, neither criticism nor post-criticism.","PeriodicalId":44731,"journal":{"name":"Teoria de la Educacion","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2020-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Teoria de la Educacion","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14201/teri.22485","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: 2

Abstract

The present document constitutes a response to the Manfiesto for a Post-critical Pedagogy of Hodgson, Vlieghe and Zamojski. Part of the recognition of points of coincidence with the works that some Latin American authors have developed in this regard but points out that the manifesto fails to identify the central problem of critical pedagogies. In this direction, the text argues that the central problem of these tendencies is that their conception of power is limited to what Foucault called the war and repressive hypotheses of power. Such a way of understanding power, as confrontation or repression, makes education conceived as a political action and, in this way, its fundamentally anthropological character (or in terms of Sloterdijk, anthropotechnical) is invisible. One of the most significant consequences of this fact is that education and pedagogy have been undergoing a process of politicization against which a «criticism» of the «critical tendencies» based on the conceptual horizon of pedagogy is necessary and urgent, and whose effect is its update and reconceptualization. Such an exercise would allow the production of new tools that help to understand the functioning of education as a modernity project. Criticism of the critical tendencies arises from the concepts of government (Foucault) and anthropotechnics (Sloterdijk) that applied to the analysis of the constitution of the modern concept of education lead to propose, following the analysis of Antelo and Serra, a pedagogy without attributes, that is, neither criticism nor post-criticism.
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
既不是批评,也不是后批评:为了一种没有属性的教育学
本文件构成了对霍奇森,弗利格和扎莫伊斯基的后批判教育学宣言的回应。部分承认与一些拉丁美洲作家在这方面发展的作品的巧合点,但指出宣言未能确定批判教学法的核心问题。在这个方向上,本文认为,这些倾向的核心问题是,他们的权力概念仅限于福柯所谓的战争和压制性权力假设。这种将权力理解为对抗或压制的方式,使教育被视为一种政治行动,这样一来,其基本的人类学特征(或者用斯洛特戴克的话说,人类技术特征)就不可见了。这一事实的最重要的后果之一是,教育和教育学正在经历一个政治化的过程,与此相反,基于教育学概念视界的对“批判倾向”的“批评”是必要和迫切的,其效果是对其进行更新和重新概念化。这样的实践将有助于产生新的工具,帮助理解教育作为一项现代化工程的功能。对批判倾向的批评源于政府(福柯)和人类技术(斯洛特戴克)的概念,这些概念应用于对现代教育概念构成的分析,导致在安特洛和塞拉的分析之后,提出一种没有属性的教育学,即既不是批评,也不是后批评。
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
Teoria de la Educacion
Teoria de la Educacion EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
6.70%
发文量
20
审稿时长
4 weeks
期刊介绍: Teoría de la Educación. Revista Interuniversitaria was founded in 1986. It is an international academic journal on Pedagogy that publishes original research articles, in open access, from a theoretical perspective and methodology of education, aiming at providing pedagogical knowledge to researchers and professionals to improve, through a discussion substantiated criticism, descriptions, explanations, understandings and applications of educational thought and action. The journal belongs to the Publication Services of the University of Salamanca. It is a biannual journal, publishing one issue per semester. The reception of articles is permanently open, welcoming original works in Spanish, English or Portuguese, admitting exceptionally proposals in other languages.
期刊最新文献
Populismo, legitimidad y educación financiada por el Estado Revisión sistemática sobre la evaluación de propuestas de gamificación en siete disciplinas educativas Identidad narrativa en la relación educativa: promesa, solicitud y don Análisis de una experiencia de prácticas cotidianas de democracia en educación infantil Prevención de la violencia y el acoso en la red en adolescentes: estrategias familiares de crecimiento personal
×
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