Transcript continuity of pedagogy of modernity

Robi Kroflič
Legitimacy of ethical norm and
(dis)continuity of pedagogy of modernity
Plato and Aristotle
dispute on deductive
and inductive
normativity
Rafael - School of Athens
(Vatican1510-1511)
Aims of this presentation
• to test a hypothesis, that postmodern pedagogy remains
a normative science despite Lyotard thesis about the fall
of the great narratives of modern philosophy;
• to show that even in enlightenment philosophy we can
find different concepts of normativity, of normative
agency on the field of moral acting, and of ethical
responsibility;
• to show how new understanding of normativity in
Levinas philosophy opens possibilities for the
development of inductive educational concept, which is
harmonized with Lyotard critic of modernity and with
basic values of postmodern ethics;
• to point out the roots of the turn between deductive and
inductive educational approach in Greek Antiquity.
Rationale of enlightenment
philosophy
• the very rationale of the modern understanding
of education is founded on the humanist idea of
a certain kind of subject who has the inherent
potential to become self-motivated and selfdirecting
• consequently the main task of education
became that of bringing out this potential so
that subjects could become fully autonomous
and capable of exercising their individual and
intentional agency
Diversity of enlightenment
philosophy
• different answers to two, for pedagogy crucial
questions:
– What forms the anthropological basis of
autonomy?
– How can we support a development of
autonomy of individual by educational
endeavors?
What forms the anthropological basis
of autonomy?
• Kant - categorical imperative and human will
• Rousseau - human soul, will, and rationality
• Hume - human sympathetic emotions as the basis of
compassion
While Kant’s and Rousseau’s ideas became the basis for
the development of psychology and pedagogy in
nineteenth and the beginning of twentieth century,
Hume’s concept of sympathetic emotions started to
seriously influence psychological and pedagogical ideas
in last three decades by the discovery of importance of
pro-social and moral emotions for human agency.
How can we support a development of
autonomy of individual?
• Kant - autonomy can be developed through strict
discipline and cultivation of human understanding
• Rousseau - strict discipline causes rebellion of
youngsters so moral education should be founded
on control over the child, on the construction of
educational environment where the child has as
little as possible opportunity to chose social
contacts or activities that we believe are not good
for him, and on indirect influence of educator’s
personality
• Hume - didn’t leave us strong pedagogical cues
how to cultivate sympathy as a natural
communication of passions from person to person
Enlightenment ideas and pedagogical
paradigms
• authoritarian – permissive conceptual
dichotomy, that was developed from thirties in
twentieth century according to the methodical
discrepancy between Kant and Rousseau
• more detailed answers about the normative
role of a parent or a teacher who want to foster
empathic and compassionate virtues of a child
can not be found earlier than in late sixties in
M. Hoffman approaches on so called inductive
discipline
On normative character of
postmodern pedagogy
• logical and scientific reason: teaching and learning are
intentional activities so it is logical that recognizing
supposed intentions and educational goals should be the
basis of educational planning
• political and economical reason: if education is a
common societal cost (of the tax-payers) and also an
intervention into human being, then citizens have the
right to know for what reasons and effects they give their
money
• humanistic (ethical) reason: when according to the
Declaration on human rights education becomes a
primarily right of parents, then a state should get the
permission to have influence under the children minds
from their parents according to their agreement about
aims, content, and methods of education
Conclusion
Despite Lyotard thesis about the fall of great narratives
of enlightenment philosophy which have defined basic
goals of education, and despite “an emphasis on the
process of (moral) education which is more important
than a product, postmodern pedagogy should not deny
the importance of clear definition of telos – at least
basic system of common values” as goals of education as
intentional activity. (Medveš 1991)
But the answer to the question, if ethical reasons of the
enlightenment period are today still strong enough for
legitimizing the right to educate a person in a public
space/institution, is not so easy to take…
On normative character of
postmodern ethics – E. Levinas
• His basic idea about radical heteronymous character
of ethical act is a concrete example of denial of
Kant’s ethical ideal (autonomous morality):
“…the reciprocity of this respect (between two
persons, R. K.) is not an indifferent relationship, such
as serene contemplation, and it is not the result, but
the condition of ethics. It is language, that is,
responsibility. Respect attaches the just man to his
associates in justice before attaching him to the man
who demands justice.”
(Levinas, The I and the Totality (1954))
Open questions…
• If Kant has already recognized an importance of
respectful attitude to associate person, where is
the new dimension of Levinas ethics?
• Is it just in pointing out a new priority of ethical
demands (the principle of respect before the
principle of justice)?
• Or does Levinas anthropology open radical new
insights into normative character of pedagogy?
Levinas´s most important ideas for
postmodern pedagogy
If Kantian autonomous subject can be a
responsible agent of morality in a stable
(protestant) culture, where all rational persons
can rich the agreement on just relations,
Levinasean moral agents meet associates as
unique persons, different from themselves.
Importance of this turn for accepting cultural
differences (the case of prohibition of Muslim scarves
and the protest against caricatures of Mohamed).
• The Other of E. Levinas is “infinitely unknowable”,
but anyway susceptibility to absolute difference
defines how we relate to each other; even more,
learning from the unknowable Other tells us who
we really are.
In principles of pedagogy of listening the emphasis
on dialog with children or youngsters is “giving
value to the other” and opening ourselves to the
narrative of the other in a dialog, that becomes
transformative for my own identity. So classical
enlightenment conception of normativity where a
teacher as autonomous subject is an ultimate
criteria of truth and morality, and otherness is an
obstacle of a communication, can not be accepted
anymore as epistemological basis of educational
dialog.
Even Levinas admits that in life there are situations
when meeting with other’s face as ultimate ethical
criteria becomes impossible. In concentration
camp the executioner of evil calls for violence and
no longer has a Face. So, “…there is a certain
measure of violence necessary in terms of justice
(that must be regulated by a state). But, on the
other hand, it is in terms of the relation to Face …
that we can speak of the legitimacy or illegitimacy
of the state. A state in which the interpersonal
relationship is impossible, …is a totalitarian state.
So there is a limit to the state.”
(Levinas, Philosophy, Justice, and Love (1982))
Conclusion
What changes with Levinas ethics is the
conviction that the spirit of human rights and
living in just and caring community can be
strengthened more successfully with the
emphasis on respectful relation to the other’s
face than with models of disciplining and
cultivating moral reasoning of autonomous
subject. This methodical turn is developing in
the most clear and applicable form in the
concept of inductive moral education.
Inductive discipline
• Express our disapproval of the child’s act and
indicate implicitly or explicitly that the act is
wrong and that the child has committed an
infraction;
• Call attention to the victim distress and make it
salient to the child;
• Point up the role of the child’s action in causing
that distress, what creates the condition for
feeling empathy-based guilt, which is a feeling
of intense disesteem for oneself for wrongfully
harming another
Inductive discipline – theoretical
rationale
• existence of guilt in early childhood prior to
solution of Oedipal crisis (S. Tood)
• importance of sympathetic distress and pro-social
emotions like compassion, indignation, and
empathic guilt for moral reasoning and acting (K.
Kristjansson)
• Empirical approaches confirmed that inductive
discipline has statistically significant impact on
faster development of empathy and pro-social
attitudes in children if we compare this impacts
with “Kohlbergian” authoritative-assertive
discipline practices (Hoffman, Gibbs, Eisenberg)
From inductive discipline to a new
educational paradigm
Inductive educational paradigm should include:
– A profound anthropological basis
– A new definition of basic educational goals (and
therefore a new concept of pedagogical
normativity)
– A new definition of active role of educator
– Principles of a new educational methodic
Anthropological basis of inductive
educational paradigm
• Equal importance of pro-social emotions as well
as cognitive competencies for morality
(development of respectful and ethical mind)
• Developmental priority of personal
competencies for morality, based on empathic
guilt
• Importance of relational goods and virtues, like
love and friendship
Basic educational goals in
inductive educational paradigm
• A new understanding of moral responsibility as
respectful ethical response to an existential
call, as personal commitment to respectful
being and acting, and as care for our life
mission and consistent identity, instead of
responsibility toward societal norms and ethical
principles
• Priority of respectful relationship before ethical
principle of justice
Active role of educator in
inductive educational paradigm
• A teacher has to demand child’s responsibility
for the effects of his act, call attention to the
victim distress, and make it salient to the child
• A teacher is no longer in a position of ultimate
criteria of morality (calling attention to the
ethical value, norm, or principle)
• His authority is therefore limiting (in at least
epistemological dimension) and opening space
for more independent child’s moral reasoning
Principles of an inductive
educational methodic
• if ethical consciousness demands complex cognitive
capacities, child is even in first years capable to step to
relations of love and friendship, through which he/she
develops relational response-ability and normative agency
for pro-social activities in most authentic way;
• because personal encumbered relation may be harmful
when empathic over-arousal, empathic bias, pity and
paternalism arise, next step is development of the sense of
respect toward concrete persons or activities;
• last step of moral education is to become aware of ethical
principles and humanistic demands, concerning specially
human rights and ecological values, and learn how to use
them as basis for democratic negotiation in cases of
interpersonal conflicts.
Rafael - School of Athens
(Vatican1510-1511)
Aristotle ethical approach –
a basis for more realistic
concept of moral
education?