Deconstructing Childhood as a Way to Justice

Q4 Social Sciences
Chi-Ming Lam
{"title":"Deconstructing Childhood as a Way to Justice","authors":"Chi-Ming Lam","doi":"10.7202/1072428AR","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Despite the multiplicity of constructions of childhood in various disciplines, the prevalent view is that children are incompetent in the sense of lacking reason, maturity, or independence. In this paper, I first examine how this dominant view is constructed in the fields of philosophy and psychology, highlighting the perspectives of Plato, Aristotle, John Locke, John Stuart Mill, and Jean Piaget. Then, following Jacques Derrida who conceives justice as a source of meaning for deconstruction, I deconstruct several of the dominant constructions and argue that they do not do children justice. To return justice to childhood, I suggest that childhood should be regarded as a self-contained state with distinctive features that are worthy of consideration in their own right rather than as an incomplete state of incompetence relative to adulthood that is considered a complete state of humans, while adulthood should be regarded as a never-ending process of becoming mature that includes rather than excludes childhood. Moreover, I suggest that both the absolute denial of adult rights to children and the naturalization of childhood in developmental psychology as a biologically determined and culturally universal stage of irrationality should be challenged.","PeriodicalId":36151,"journal":{"name":"Philosophical Inquiry in Education","volume":"17 1","pages":"27-37"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Philosophical Inquiry in Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7202/1072428AR","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Despite the multiplicity of constructions of childhood in various disciplines, the prevalent view is that children are incompetent in the sense of lacking reason, maturity, or independence. In this paper, I first examine how this dominant view is constructed in the fields of philosophy and psychology, highlighting the perspectives of Plato, Aristotle, John Locke, John Stuart Mill, and Jean Piaget. Then, following Jacques Derrida who conceives justice as a source of meaning for deconstruction, I deconstruct several of the dominant constructions and argue that they do not do children justice. To return justice to childhood, I suggest that childhood should be regarded as a self-contained state with distinctive features that are worthy of consideration in their own right rather than as an incomplete state of incompetence relative to adulthood that is considered a complete state of humans, while adulthood should be regarded as a never-ending process of becoming mature that includes rather than excludes childhood. Moreover, I suggest that both the absolute denial of adult rights to children and the naturalization of childhood in developmental psychology as a biologically determined and culturally universal stage of irrationality should be challenged.
解构童年作为通往正义之路
尽管在不同的学科中对儿童有多种建构,但普遍的观点是,儿童在缺乏理性、成熟或独立的意义上是无能的。在本文中,我首先考察了这一主导观点是如何在哲学和心理学领域构建的,重点介绍了柏拉图、亚里士多德、约翰·洛克、约翰·斯图亚特·密尔和让·皮亚杰的观点。然后,跟随雅克·德里达,他将正义视为解构主义的意义来源,我解构了几个占主导地位的结构,并认为它们没有给予儿童正义。为了把正义还给童年,我建议童年应该被视为一个独立的状态,有自己的特点,值得考虑,而不是作为一个不完整的状态,相对于被认为是完整的人类状态的成年无能,而成年应该被视为一个永无止境的成熟过程,包括而不是排除童年。此外,我建议绝对否认成人对儿童的权利,以及在发展心理学中将儿童归化为生理上决定的、文化上普遍的非理性阶段,这两种观点都应该受到挑战。
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
Philosophical Inquiry in Education
Philosophical Inquiry in Education Social Sciences-Education
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
13
审稿时长
20 weeks
×
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