From Powerful Knowledge to Capabilities: Social Realism, Social Justice, and the Capabilities Approach

IF 0.8 4区 教育学 Q3 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Daniel Talbot
{"title":"From Powerful Knowledge to Capabilities: Social Realism, Social Justice, and the Capabilities Approach","authors":"Daniel Talbot","doi":"10.1093/jopedu/qhae050","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n This article argues that, as applied to education, the Capabilities Approach pioneered by Amartya Sen and Martha Nussbaum shares a range of philosophical commitments with the work of social realist scholars on the concept of ‘powerful knowledge’. I first trace the history of the concept of powerful knowledge and present critiques put forward by social justice scholars. I then outline the Capabilities Approach, arguing it provides a response to some of these concerns. From here I develop the connection between the two educational paradigms focusing on four areas of affinity. The first is the conceptual similarity between the ‘power’ of powerful knowledge and Nussbaum’s account of a capability. The second is their concern with the reduction of education to technical-instrumentalism, human capital, and other economically driven imperatives. The third is a shared focus on the link between knowledge, human agency, and freedom. The fourth, is a mutual rejection of relativism and embrace of a nuanced universalism. Ultimately, by drawing together these two conceptually rich approaches to the aims and purposes of education, I hope to open a space for theorizing about both capabilities and powerful knowledge that can resolve some of the problems in both. For powerful knowledge, the Capabilities Approach allows a more concrete explication of why access to disciplinary bodies of knowledge is of value to both individuals and society. On the side of the Capabilities Approach, engaging with the concept of powerful knowledge can help give a rationale for how educational knowledge fosters certain centrally important capabilities.","PeriodicalId":47223,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF PHILOSOPHY OF EDUCATION","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JOURNAL OF PHILOSOPHY OF EDUCATION","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jopedu/qhae050","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article argues that, as applied to education, the Capabilities Approach pioneered by Amartya Sen and Martha Nussbaum shares a range of philosophical commitments with the work of social realist scholars on the concept of ‘powerful knowledge’. I first trace the history of the concept of powerful knowledge and present critiques put forward by social justice scholars. I then outline the Capabilities Approach, arguing it provides a response to some of these concerns. From here I develop the connection between the two educational paradigms focusing on four areas of affinity. The first is the conceptual similarity between the ‘power’ of powerful knowledge and Nussbaum’s account of a capability. The second is their concern with the reduction of education to technical-instrumentalism, human capital, and other economically driven imperatives. The third is a shared focus on the link between knowledge, human agency, and freedom. The fourth, is a mutual rejection of relativism and embrace of a nuanced universalism. Ultimately, by drawing together these two conceptually rich approaches to the aims and purposes of education, I hope to open a space for theorizing about both capabilities and powerful knowledge that can resolve some of the problems in both. For powerful knowledge, the Capabilities Approach allows a more concrete explication of why access to disciplinary bodies of knowledge is of value to both individuals and society. On the side of the Capabilities Approach, engaging with the concept of powerful knowledge can help give a rationale for how educational knowledge fosters certain centrally important capabilities.
从强大的知识到能力:社会现实主义、社会正义和能力方法
本文认为,阿马蒂亚-森(Amartya Sen)和玛莎-努斯鲍姆(Martha Nussbaum)首创的 "能力培养法"(Capabilities Approach)在应用于教育领域时,与社会现实主义学者在 "强大知识 "概念上的工作有着一系列共同的哲学承诺。我首先追溯了强力知识概念的历史,并介绍了社会正义学者提出的批评意见。然后,我概述了 "能力方法",认为它对其中的一些问题做出了回应。在此基础上,我重点从四个方面阐述了这两种教育范式之间的联系。首先是强大知识的 "力量 "与努斯鲍姆关于能力的论述在概念上的相似性。其次,它们都关注将教育简化为技术工具主义、人力资本和其他经济驱动因素的问题。第三是共同关注知识、人的能动性和自由之间的联系。第四,共同摒弃相对主义,拥护细致入微的普遍主义。最终,通过将这两种概念丰富的教育目标和宗旨方法结合起来,我希望为能力和强力知识的理论化开辟一个空间,从而解决这两种方法中的一些问题。就强大知识而言,"能力方法 "可以更具体地解释为什么获取学科知识体系对个人和社会都有价值。就 "能力方法 "而言,使用 "强大知识 "的概念有助于说明教育知识是如何促进某些核心重要能力的。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
10.00%
发文量
77
期刊介绍: Journal of Philosophy of Education publishes articles representing a wide variety of philosophical traditions. They vary from examination of fundamental philosophical issues in their connection with education, to detailed critical engagement with current educational practice or policy from a philosophical point of view. The journal aims to promote rigorous thinking on educational matters and to identify and criticise the ideological forces shaping education. Ethical, political, aesthetic and epistemological dimensions of educational theory are amongst those covered.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信