批判性思维的合法性:政治自由主义与义务教育

S. Bøyum
{"title":"批判性思维的合法性:政治自由主义与义务教育","authors":"S. Bøyum","doi":"10.5840/THINKING20061815","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This essay examines the political-philosophical legitimacy of critical thinking as an aim of compulsory education. Although critical thinking is given an important role in Norwegian educational policy, the right to demand a critical attitude from all citizens has been extensively debated in political and pedagogical philosophy the last two decades. This debate stems in large part from the late work of John Rawls. In this essay, I start by stating the case for critical thinking as an educational aim, focusing on democratic education. Next, I give an account of the challenge that Rawls’ later philosophy puts to education for critical thinking. Finally, I discuss some possible ways of responding to the Rawls. The upshot will be that some aspects of critical thinking can and must be defended as politically legitimate. However, any such defence must include a reply to the Rawlsian argument – if not, it will simply be naive. In that sense, much Norwegian educational policy has been naive.","PeriodicalId":432238,"journal":{"name":"Thinking: The journal of philosophy for children","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2006-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Legitimacy of Critical Thinking: Political Liberalism and Compulsory Education\",\"authors\":\"S. Bøyum\",\"doi\":\"10.5840/THINKING20061815\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This essay examines the political-philosophical legitimacy of critical thinking as an aim of compulsory education. Although critical thinking is given an important role in Norwegian educational policy, the right to demand a critical attitude from all citizens has been extensively debated in political and pedagogical philosophy the last two decades. This debate stems in large part from the late work of John Rawls. In this essay, I start by stating the case for critical thinking as an educational aim, focusing on democratic education. Next, I give an account of the challenge that Rawls’ later philosophy puts to education for critical thinking. Finally, I discuss some possible ways of responding to the Rawls. The upshot will be that some aspects of critical thinking can and must be defended as politically legitimate. However, any such defence must include a reply to the Rawlsian argument – if not, it will simply be naive. In that sense, much Norwegian educational policy has been naive.\",\"PeriodicalId\":432238,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Thinking: The journal of philosophy for children\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2006-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Thinking: The journal of philosophy for children\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5840/THINKING20061815\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Thinking: The journal of philosophy for children","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5840/THINKING20061815","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本文考察了批判性思维作为义务教育目标的政治哲学合法性。尽管批判性思维在挪威的教育政策中发挥着重要作用,但在过去二十年中,要求所有公民持批判态度的权利在政治和教育哲学中一直存在广泛的争论。这场争论在很大程度上源于约翰·罗尔斯的晚期著作。在这篇文章中,我首先陈述了批判性思维作为一种教育目标的案例,重点是民主教育。接下来,我将阐述罗尔斯的后期哲学对批判性思维教育的挑战。最后,我讨论了一些回应罗尔斯的可能方式。其结果将是,批判性思维的某些方面能够而且必须被辩护为政治上的合法性。然而,任何这样的辩护都必须包括对罗尔斯论点的回应——如果没有,那就太天真了。从这个意义上说,挪威的很多教育政策都很幼稚。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
The Legitimacy of Critical Thinking: Political Liberalism and Compulsory Education
This essay examines the political-philosophical legitimacy of critical thinking as an aim of compulsory education. Although critical thinking is given an important role in Norwegian educational policy, the right to demand a critical attitude from all citizens has been extensively debated in political and pedagogical philosophy the last two decades. This debate stems in large part from the late work of John Rawls. In this essay, I start by stating the case for critical thinking as an educational aim, focusing on democratic education. Next, I give an account of the challenge that Rawls’ later philosophy puts to education for critical thinking. Finally, I discuss some possible ways of responding to the Rawls. The upshot will be that some aspects of critical thinking can and must be defended as politically legitimate. However, any such defence must include a reply to the Rawlsian argument – if not, it will simply be naive. In that sense, much Norwegian educational policy has been naive.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Russian Realities of P4C Beginning Interpretative Inquiry Death in Children’s Construction of the World: A German-Japanese Comparison with Gender Analysis Nurturing Communities of Inquiry in Philippine Schools Thirteen Reasons Why
×
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