What can be achieved through education at all? A response to Julian Culp

IF 0.5 3区 哲学 Q4 ETHICS Ethics & Global Politics Pub Date : 2020-10-08 DOI:10.1080/16544951.2020.1816016
M. Geiss
{"title":"What can be achieved through education at all? A response to Julian Culp","authors":"M. Geiss","doi":"10.1080/16544951.2020.1816016","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In the following I would like to expose Julian Culp’s normative argumentation to some empirical considerations. My commentary focuses on one of the central premises of the book: Culp assumes that education can make a decisive contribution to solving the current challenges in plural and globalized societies. He states that recent political philosophy has unacceptably neglected the issue of education. But the book’s aim is not the theoretical determination of education itself. Rather, Culp is concerned with the question of giving education the right normative foundation to solve the social, ecological and democratic challenges the globalized world is currently facing. I don’t think that one can or should discuss and analyse education without normative considerations. Educational thinking cannot do without a normative foundation and it is helpful and necessary to reflect upon them philosophically. This is the central concern of the book, and there is nothing to be added to it by historians or educational researchers. But a purely normative approach runs the risk of repeating many of the problems inherent in educational thinking. I think that even a normative approach would gain a lot from taking the empirical and historical boundaries of its subject more seriously than Culp does. Therefore, most of my remarks are about the relationship between normative theory and historical realities.","PeriodicalId":55964,"journal":{"name":"Ethics & Global Politics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ethics & Global Politics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/16544951.2020.1816016","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

ABSTRACT In the following I would like to expose Julian Culp’s normative argumentation to some empirical considerations. My commentary focuses on one of the central premises of the book: Culp assumes that education can make a decisive contribution to solving the current challenges in plural and globalized societies. He states that recent political philosophy has unacceptably neglected the issue of education. But the book’s aim is not the theoretical determination of education itself. Rather, Culp is concerned with the question of giving education the right normative foundation to solve the social, ecological and democratic challenges the globalized world is currently facing. I don’t think that one can or should discuss and analyse education without normative considerations. Educational thinking cannot do without a normative foundation and it is helpful and necessary to reflect upon them philosophically. This is the central concern of the book, and there is nothing to be added to it by historians or educational researchers. But a purely normative approach runs the risk of repeating many of the problems inherent in educational thinking. I think that even a normative approach would gain a lot from taking the empirical and historical boundaries of its subject more seriously than Culp does. Therefore, most of my remarks are about the relationship between normative theory and historical realities.
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
教育到底能带来什么?对朱利安·卡尔普的回应
在接下来的文章中,我想把朱利安·卡尔普的规范性论证暴露给一些经验主义的考虑。我的评论集中在本书的一个中心前提上:卡尔普认为,教育可以为解决当前多元和全球化社会的挑战做出决定性贡献。他指出,最近的政治哲学忽视了教育问题,这是不可接受的。但这本书的目的不是教育本身的理论决定。相反,卡尔普关心的是如何为教育提供正确的规范基础,以解决全球化世界目前面临的社会、生态和民主挑战。我认为一个人不能也不应该在没有规范考虑的情况下讨论和分析教育。教育思维离不开规范基础,对其进行哲学反思是有益的,也是必要的。这是本书关注的中心问题,历史学家或教育研究人员没有什么可补充的。但是,纯粹的规范方法有可能重复教育思维中固有的许多问题。我认为,即使是规范性的方法,也会比卡尔普更认真地对待其主题的经验和历史界限,从中获益良多。因此,我的大部分评论都是关于规范理论与历史现实之间的关系。
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
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
审稿时长
22 weeks
期刊最新文献
What does populism mean for democracy? Populist practice, democracy and constitutionalism Effective altruism, tithing, and a principle of progressive giving The function of solidarity and its normative implications The Humanity of Universal Crime: Inclusion, Inequality, and Intervention in International Political Thought On why the poor have duties too
×
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