John Tillson’s book Children, Religion and the Ethics of Influence addresses several themes: the ground and nature of ethical responsibility; the means and goals of ethical formative influence; the nature and ground of religious belief. In this paper, I focus on the issue of justification for educational influence in general. Attention to this issue could avoid some intractable problems of specifically religious influence, most particularly the challenge of providing satisfactory criteria for what belongs to the category of religion. While there may be important reasons for examining specifically religious influence, I argue that religious influence is not fundamentally different from other forms of influence, and that the logic of the ethics of influence in general would encompass the logic of religious influence. If the educator is to justify certain forms of influence, then they should employ a kind of restraint: the educator should influence while simultaneously protecting the influencee from that very influence.
{"title":"Religious Influence and its Protection","authors":"David Lewin","doi":"10.1093/jopedu/qhae006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jopedu/qhae006","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 John Tillson’s book Children, Religion and the Ethics of Influence addresses several themes: the ground and nature of ethical responsibility; the means and goals of ethical formative influence; the nature and ground of religious belief. In this paper, I focus on the issue of justification for educational influence in general. Attention to this issue could avoid some intractable problems of specifically religious influence, most particularly the challenge of providing satisfactory criteria for what belongs to the category of religion. While there may be important reasons for examining specifically religious influence, I argue that religious influence is not fundamentally different from other forms of influence, and that the logic of the ethics of influence in general would encompass the logic of religious influence. If the educator is to justify certain forms of influence, then they should employ a kind of restraint: the educator should influence while simultaneously protecting the influencee from that very influence.","PeriodicalId":47223,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF PHILOSOPHY OF EDUCATION","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2024-01-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139606075","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Over the past decades, science education researchers have suggested Inquiry-Based Science Education (IBSE) teaching interventions for science classes. In this paper, we argue that IBSE’s basic principles can be traced back to Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s work Emile or On Education (1762). First, we will look at IBSE’s rationale. Then we will turn to Emile and outline Rousseau’s educational ideas concerning science education. We will show that Rousseau’s suggested practices for science education are very similar to those of IBSE. Yet despite their vivid similarities, Rousseau seems to pursue epistemic virtues, while IBSE aims at epistemic skills. However, nurturing epistemic skills might be seen as the first step for cultivating an epistemically virtuous character. So, embracing Rousseau’s ideal for full character development could further inspire IBSE’s proposals.
{"title":"Emile’s inquiry-based science education","authors":"Georgia Dimopoulou, Renia Gasparatou","doi":"10.1093/jopedu/qhae012","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jopedu/qhae012","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Over the past decades, science education researchers have suggested Inquiry-Based Science Education (IBSE) teaching interventions for science classes. In this paper, we argue that IBSE’s basic principles can be traced back to Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s work Emile or On Education (1762). First, we will look at IBSE’s rationale. Then we will turn to Emile and outline Rousseau’s educational ideas concerning science education. We will show that Rousseau’s suggested practices for science education are very similar to those of IBSE. Yet despite their vivid similarities, Rousseau seems to pursue epistemic virtues, while IBSE aims at epistemic skills. However, nurturing epistemic skills might be seen as the first step for cultivating an epistemically virtuous character. So, embracing Rousseau’s ideal for full character development could further inspire IBSE’s proposals.","PeriodicalId":47223,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF PHILOSOPHY OF EDUCATION","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2024-01-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139525406","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
On September 27, 1943, Hans-Georg Gadamer published a brief but significant essay in the conservative newspaper Leipziger Neueste Nachrichten und Handels-Zeitung, entitled ‘Wissenschaft als Beruf. Über den Ruf und Beruf der Wissenschaft in unserer Zeit’ (‘Science as Vocation: On the Calling and Profession of Science in Our Time’). The article, which addressed the problem of the value and status of science and philosophy in the midst of the Second World War, was never reprinted in Gadamer’s work, neither in the ten volumes of his collected writings published by Mohr Siebeck, nor separately in books or journals. I offer here a critical introduction to the context and main contents of this text due to its philosophical, political, and historical relevance. In particular, the introduction analyses Gadamer’s confrontation with his own time through explicit and implicit references to Max Weber’s 1917 lecture, ‘Wissenschaft als Beruf’ (‘Science as Vocation’). Following that, I present the first English translation of Gadamer’s original German text.
1943 年 9 月 27 日，汉斯-格奥尔格-伽达默尔在保守派报纸《莱比锡新消息报和商报》上发表了一篇简短但意义重大的文章，题为《Wissenschaft als Beruf.Über den Ruf und Beruf der Wissenschaft in unserer Zeit"（《科学作为天职：论科学在我们时代的召唤和职业》）。这篇文章探讨了第二次世界大战期间科学和哲学的价值与地位问题，但在伽达默尔的著作中，无论是在莫尔-西贝克出版社出版的十卷本《伽达默尔文集》中，还是在书籍或期刊中，这篇文章都从未被重印过。由于这篇文章的哲学、政治和历史意义，我在此对其背景和主要内容进行了批判性的介绍。特别是，导言通过对马克斯-韦伯（Max Weber）1917 年演讲 "Wissenschaft als Beruf"（"Science as Vocation"）的明示和暗示引用，分析了伽达默尔与其所处时代的对抗。随后，我介绍了加达默尔德文原著的首个英译本。
{"title":"An untimely vocation: Gadamer’s Wissenschaft als Beruf. Über den Ruf und Beruf der Wissenschaft in Unserer Zeit (1943)","authors":"Facundo Norberto Bey","doi":"10.1093/jopedu/qhae009","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jopedu/qhae009","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 On September 27, 1943, Hans-Georg Gadamer published a brief but significant essay in the conservative newspaper Leipziger Neueste Nachrichten und Handels-Zeitung, entitled ‘Wissenschaft als Beruf. Über den Ruf und Beruf der Wissenschaft in unserer Zeit’ (‘Science as Vocation: On the Calling and Profession of Science in Our Time’). The article, which addressed the problem of the value and status of science and philosophy in the midst of the Second World War, was never reprinted in Gadamer’s work, neither in the ten volumes of his collected writings published by Mohr Siebeck, nor separately in books or journals. I offer here a critical introduction to the context and main contents of this text due to its philosophical, political, and historical relevance. In particular, the introduction analyses Gadamer’s confrontation with his own time through explicit and implicit references to Max Weber’s 1917 lecture, ‘Wissenschaft als Beruf’ (‘Science as Vocation’). Following that, I present the first English translation of Gadamer’s original German text.","PeriodicalId":47223,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF PHILOSOPHY OF EDUCATION","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2024-01-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139618425","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
It is morally impermissible for parents, educators, and others to initiate children into religious belief systems. That is the provocative conclusion of John Tillson’s Children, Religion and the Ethics of Influence—the book which is the focus of the present symposium. This introduction briefly summarizes the book’s arguments together with the criticisms levelled against them. The symposium includes critiques by Matthew Clayton, Anca Gheaus, Michael Hand, David Lewin, and Ruth Wareham. Clayton and Wareham propose alternative bases for prohibiting religious initiation, while Hand, Lewin and Gheaus propose conditions under which religious initiation may be permissible. The symposium concludes with a rejoinder by Tillson.
{"title":"Children, Religion and the Ethics of Influence: Introduction to the Symposium","authors":"John Tillson","doi":"10.1093/jopedu/qhae011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jopedu/qhae011","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 It is morally impermissible for parents, educators, and others to initiate children into religious belief systems. That is the provocative conclusion of John Tillson’s Children, Religion and the Ethics of Influence—the book which is the focus of the present symposium. This introduction briefly summarizes the book’s arguments together with the criticisms levelled against them. The symposium includes critiques by Matthew Clayton, Anca Gheaus, Michael Hand, David Lewin, and Ruth Wareham. Clayton and Wareham propose alternative bases for prohibiting religious initiation, while Hand, Lewin and Gheaus propose conditions under which religious initiation may be permissible. The symposium concludes with a rejoinder by Tillson.","PeriodicalId":47223,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF PHILOSOPHY OF EDUCATION","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2024-01-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139624108","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In Children, Religion and the Ethics of Influence, John Tillson argues that initiating children into religion is morally wrong. His argument overlaps and intersects at various points with my own argument against confessional religious education in schools. In this brief reply I consider two notable differences between our arguments.
{"title":"Tillson on religious initiation","authors":"Michael Hand","doi":"10.1093/jopedu/qhae010","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jopedu/qhae010","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 In Children, Religion and the Ethics of Influence, John Tillson argues that initiating children into religion is morally wrong. His argument overlaps and intersects at various points with my own argument against confessional religious education in schools. In this brief reply I consider two notable differences between our arguments.","PeriodicalId":47223,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF PHILOSOPHY OF EDUCATION","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2024-01-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139532327","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
A central aim of the original Declaration of Bologna in 1999 was to give the opportunity of advancement in education to every European citizen. According to the declaration, this goal is worth achieving not simply in order to provide better-qualified workers within the European Union, rather, the aim of higher education within the European Union is understood in a holistic sense as a prerequisite for the composition of a well-functioning European civil society. How can such an ambitious goal be achieved? In this article, we propose that the core capability at stake is that of empathy which, for this reason, should be central to programs of European higher education. Empathy is not regarded as just a property of specific individuals but as an attribute which must be ascribed to specific forms of civil intercourse. Therefore, what is needed in European higher education is the provision of a social environment for students which allows for civil-cultivation, and for processes of self-cultivation. Self-cultivation, as described here, means more than a refinement of manners; rather, it refers to the development of a civil mode for approaching others: a mode that is sensitive and self-aware at the same time, and which can be regarded as arising out of a shared European heritage interconnecting rhetoric and sociability.
{"title":"Cultivating a Capability for Empathy in the Bologna System – The Shortcomings of an Economical Approach to Education and the Importance of the Civil","authors":"Dirk Schuck, Lorenzo Pecchi","doi":"10.1093/jopedu/qhae001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jopedu/qhae001","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 A central aim of the original Declaration of Bologna in 1999 was to give the opportunity of advancement in education to every European citizen. According to the declaration, this goal is worth achieving not simply in order to provide better-qualified workers within the European Union, rather, the aim of higher education within the European Union is understood in a holistic sense as a prerequisite for the composition of a well-functioning European civil society. How can such an ambitious goal be achieved? In this article, we propose that the core capability at stake is that of empathy which, for this reason, should be central to programs of European higher education. Empathy is not regarded as just a property of specific individuals but as an attribute which must be ascribed to specific forms of civil intercourse. Therefore, what is needed in European higher education is the provision of a social environment for students which allows for civil-cultivation, and for processes of self-cultivation. Self-cultivation, as described here, means more than a refinement of manners; rather, it refers to the development of a civil mode for approaching others: a mode that is sensitive and self-aware at the same time, and which can be regarded as arising out of a shared European heritage interconnecting rhetoric and sociability.","PeriodicalId":47223,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF PHILOSOPHY OF EDUCATION","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2024-01-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139445475","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This review provides a summary of the argument made by Christopher Martin in his book “The Right to Higher Education: A Political theory.” It outlines how Martin makes a unique and in many ways compelling argument, but argues that a significant weakness of the book is that there is a lack of clarity around the concept of ‘higher education’ as Martin conceives it.
{"title":"“The Right to Higher Education: A Political Theory”, Christopher Martin, Oxford University Press, New York, NY, 2022, 252 pages, $74.00, ISBN: 9780197612910","authors":"Dustin Webster","doi":"10.1093/jopedu/qhae002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jopedu/qhae002","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This review provides a summary of the argument made by Christopher Martin in his book “The Right to Higher Education: A Political theory.” It outlines how Martin makes a unique and in many ways compelling argument, but argues that a significant weakness of the book is that there is a lack of clarity around the concept of ‘higher education’ as Martin conceives it.","PeriodicalId":47223,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF PHILOSOPHY OF EDUCATION","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2024-01-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139446448","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Correction to ‘The Gender Wars, Academic Freedom and Education’ by Judith Suissa and Alice Sullivan (2021)","authors":"","doi":"10.1093/jopedu/qhad085","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jopedu/qhad085","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47223,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF PHILOSOPHY OF EDUCATION","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2023-12-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139161427","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In this paper we explore the connection between the act of teaching and the imparting of knowledge. Our overarching aim is to demonstrate that the connection between them is less tight than one might suppose. Our stepping off point is a recent paper by Bakhurst (2020) who takes a strong view, opposed to our own. Bakhurst argues that there is a tight conceptual connection between teaching and the imparting of knowledge. We argue that this is not the case; the connection does not hold. In the sections that follow, we consider several ways we might weaken the alleged conceptual connection between teaching and knowledge. In the concluding section, we consider two ways of severing the conceptual connection altogether, whilst at the same time allowing that much teaching does indeed lead to the imparting of knowledge. We argue that such views are to be preferred.
{"title":"Teaching and knowledge: uneasy bedfellows","authors":"Andrew Fisher, Jonathan Tallant","doi":"10.1093/jopedu/qhad086","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jopedu/qhad086","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 In this paper we explore the connection between the act of teaching and the imparting of knowledge. Our overarching aim is to demonstrate that the connection between them is less tight than one might suppose. Our stepping off point is a recent paper by Bakhurst (2020) who takes a strong view, opposed to our own. Bakhurst argues that there is a tight conceptual connection between teaching and the imparting of knowledge. We argue that this is not the case; the connection does not hold. In the sections that follow, we consider several ways we might weaken the alleged conceptual connection between teaching and knowledge. In the concluding section, we consider two ways of severing the conceptual connection altogether, whilst at the same time allowing that much teaching does indeed lead to the imparting of knowledge. We argue that such views are to be preferred.","PeriodicalId":47223,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF PHILOSOPHY OF EDUCATION","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2023-12-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138960813","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Inspired by the work of Hannah Arendt, this response essay focuses on the tension between hope in the future and lost hope in the present inherent in the modern idea of progress. The backdrop of the symposium is some of the interrelated challenges that we are facing today, such as climate change, new pandemics, mass migration, and the rise of populism. Drawing on different philosophical concepts and strands, the five papers explore what it would mean to learn and educate beyond the imagery of progress. Thinking beyond, however, is never an easy task and the question becomes how to orient oneself in this new philosophical landscape without losing track of what is educationally important and meaningful. After responding to each paper, focusing on five possible connections between them (change, orientation, time, situatedness, and immanence), the essay concludes with the more general question of what place, if any, concepts as the past, conservation, and preservation have in an education ‘after’ progress.
{"title":"Finding One’s Way: A Response to the Idea of an Education after Progress","authors":"E. Langmann","doi":"10.1093/jopedu/qhad083","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jopedu/qhad083","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Inspired by the work of Hannah Arendt, this response essay focuses on the tension between hope in the future and lost hope in the present inherent in the modern idea of progress. The backdrop of the symposium is some of the interrelated challenges that we are facing today, such as climate change, new pandemics, mass migration, and the rise of populism. Drawing on different philosophical concepts and strands, the five papers explore what it would mean to learn and educate beyond the imagery of progress. Thinking beyond, however, is never an easy task and the question becomes how to orient oneself in this new philosophical landscape without losing track of what is educationally important and meaningful. After responding to each paper, focusing on five possible connections between them (change, orientation, time, situatedness, and immanence), the essay concludes with the more general question of what place, if any, concepts as the past, conservation, and preservation have in an education ‘after’ progress.","PeriodicalId":47223,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF PHILOSOPHY OF EDUCATION","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2023-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139006263","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：