“苏格拉底残余”与“创造性民主”:欧文·巴比特的反杜威领导观

IF 0.3 Q4 POLITICAL SCIENCE American Political Thought Pub Date : 2022-09-01 DOI:10.1086/721952
Luke Foster
{"title":"“苏格拉底残余”与“创造性民主”:欧文·巴比特的反杜威领导观","authors":"Luke Foster","doi":"10.1086/721952","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article reimagines the role of universities in American public life today by examining two early twentieth-century critics of the research university. Both worried that the new educational system could fracture democratic society, but they drew opposite conclusions about the positive role of universities. Irving Babbitt led a New Humanist school that made the case for liberal learning as a good in itself, but one also capable of cultivating an ethic of self-restraint through the study of classical texts. This would serve to train leaders who could question democracy’s impulse for self-gratification. He fiercely criticized John Dewey, who argued that learning must be practical and experimental because truths are not received as a canon but created through living together. This article demonstrates that Babbitt’s corpus develops a unified educational and political theory for elite formation by linking Socratic psychology and the constitutional order of the United States.","PeriodicalId":41928,"journal":{"name":"American Political Thought","volume":"11 1","pages":"493 - 524"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"“Socratic Remnant” versus “Creative Democracy”: Irving Babbitt’s Anti-Deweyan Vision of Leadership\",\"authors\":\"Luke Foster\",\"doi\":\"10.1086/721952\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article reimagines the role of universities in American public life today by examining two early twentieth-century critics of the research university. Both worried that the new educational system could fracture democratic society, but they drew opposite conclusions about the positive role of universities. Irving Babbitt led a New Humanist school that made the case for liberal learning as a good in itself, but one also capable of cultivating an ethic of self-restraint through the study of classical texts. This would serve to train leaders who could question democracy’s impulse for self-gratification. He fiercely criticized John Dewey, who argued that learning must be practical and experimental because truths are not received as a canon but created through living together. This article demonstrates that Babbitt’s corpus develops a unified educational and political theory for elite formation by linking Socratic psychology and the constitutional order of the United States.\",\"PeriodicalId\":41928,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American Political Thought\",\"volume\":\"11 1\",\"pages\":\"493 - 524\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American Political Thought\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1086/721952\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Political Thought","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1086/721952","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文通过考察20世纪早期对研究型大学的两位批评者,重新设想了大学在当今美国公共生活中的作用。两人都担心新的教育制度会破坏民主社会,但他们对大学的积极作用得出了相反的结论。欧文·巴比特领导了一个新人文主义学派,他认为自由学习本身是一件好事,但也能够通过研究经典文本培养一种自我约束的伦理。这将有助于培养那些能够质疑民主的自我满足冲动的领导人。他强烈批评约翰·杜威,杜威认为学习必须是实践和实验的,因为真理不是作为经典来接受的,而是通过共同生活来创造的。本文通过将苏格拉底心理学与美国宪法秩序联系起来,证明巴比特的语料库为精英的形成发展了一套统一的教育和政治理论。
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
“Socratic Remnant” versus “Creative Democracy”: Irving Babbitt’s Anti-Deweyan Vision of Leadership
This article reimagines the role of universities in American public life today by examining two early twentieth-century critics of the research university. Both worried that the new educational system could fracture democratic society, but they drew opposite conclusions about the positive role of universities. Irving Babbitt led a New Humanist school that made the case for liberal learning as a good in itself, but one also capable of cultivating an ethic of self-restraint through the study of classical texts. This would serve to train leaders who could question democracy’s impulse for self-gratification. He fiercely criticized John Dewey, who argued that learning must be practical and experimental because truths are not received as a canon but created through living together. This article demonstrates that Babbitt’s corpus develops a unified educational and political theory for elite formation by linking Socratic psychology and the constitutional order of the United States.
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
American Political Thought
American Political Thought POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
49
期刊最新文献
:The Individualists: Radicals, Reactionaries, and the Struggle for the Soul of Libertarianism :The Cambridge Companion to Montesquieu Conservative Progressivism? Michael Cunniff, Federalism, and the Founding of Arizona :America’s Philosopher: John Locke in American Political Life “Dishonorable to the American Character”: James Madison and the Impact of the Federal Convention’s Bargain on Slavery
×
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