The educated, deliberative citizen: constituents for a normative model

Q2 Social Sciences
T. Englund
{"title":"The educated, deliberative citizen: constituents for a normative model","authors":"T. Englund","doi":"10.1080/20020317.2022.2116152","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The aim of this paper is to make further use of and develop the idea of deliberative communication (Englund, 2000a, 2000b, 2005, 2006a, 2010, 2015, 2016) as crucial for creating sustainable democratic societies and educated citizens living educationally (cf. Englund, 2019). The more specific and demarcated aim is to present a scaffold of concepts and grounds supporting the development of an education of deliberative citizens. The overall context and reason for further working on the idea of deliberation is the still strong development and diffusion of the idea designated as ‘the deliberative turn in democratic theory’ (Dryzek, 2000, p. 1). There are many advocates that could be referred to concerning this deliberative turn. In US, James Bohman and William Rehg (Bohman, 1996; Bohman & Rehg, 1997) are two among many others. Amy Gutmann (1987), Gutmann & Thompson (2004)) and Nussbaum 1997, 1999, 2010) and in Europe Jürgen Habermas is central. What also might be stressed here is that both Gutmann and Nussbaum are among them who have introduced the deliberative perspective on schools and education (for a short review of deliberative communication and the deliberative perspective on education see Englund, 2000a, 2000b/2005). In my earlier work on deliberation (Englund, 2000a, 2000b) the starting point has often been John Dewey’s Democracy and Education (Dewey, 1916/1985) and his assertion that deliberative education is characterized by mutual, free and open communication within and between groups. Add to that Habermas’ validity claims and his placing of communication and deliberation in a wider context. Habermas places the realization of deliberative policy and decisions in the institutionalization of procedures, where an intersubjectivity on a higher level is expected to emerge; public discourses find a good response only under circumstances of broad participation (Dewey, 1927/1988). This in turn ‘requires a background political culture that is egalitarian, divested of all educational privileges, and thoroughly intellectual’ (Habermas, 1996/1998, p. 490). So, the basic theoretical framework uses ideas from classic and modern pragmatism (Dewey, 1916/1985, 1927/1988, Jürgen Habermas, 1981/1987, 1983/1992, 1985/1990, cf. Englund, 2006a, 2006b, 2010, 2016). In the following, I will, in three sections, make an attempt to deepen and transform the idea of deliberation to a normative model of the educated, deliberative citizen by stressing some visionary thoughts of how to learn to live educationally. But first a general argumentation for the normative model by Seyla (Benhabib, 1996), the perhaps most well known of deliberative theorists of today, for the need of developing ideas and building normative models, arguing that","PeriodicalId":52346,"journal":{"name":"Nordic Journal of Studies in Educational Policy","volume":"8 1","pages":"149 - 155"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nordic Journal of Studies in Educational Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/20020317.2022.2116152","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to make further use of and develop the idea of deliberative communication (Englund, 2000a, 2000b, 2005, 2006a, 2010, 2015, 2016) as crucial for creating sustainable democratic societies and educated citizens living educationally (cf. Englund, 2019). The more specific and demarcated aim is to present a scaffold of concepts and grounds supporting the development of an education of deliberative citizens. The overall context and reason for further working on the idea of deliberation is the still strong development and diffusion of the idea designated as ‘the deliberative turn in democratic theory’ (Dryzek, 2000, p. 1). There are many advocates that could be referred to concerning this deliberative turn. In US, James Bohman and William Rehg (Bohman, 1996; Bohman & Rehg, 1997) are two among many others. Amy Gutmann (1987), Gutmann & Thompson (2004)) and Nussbaum 1997, 1999, 2010) and in Europe Jürgen Habermas is central. What also might be stressed here is that both Gutmann and Nussbaum are among them who have introduced the deliberative perspective on schools and education (for a short review of deliberative communication and the deliberative perspective on education see Englund, 2000a, 2000b/2005). In my earlier work on deliberation (Englund, 2000a, 2000b) the starting point has often been John Dewey’s Democracy and Education (Dewey, 1916/1985) and his assertion that deliberative education is characterized by mutual, free and open communication within and between groups. Add to that Habermas’ validity claims and his placing of communication and deliberation in a wider context. Habermas places the realization of deliberative policy and decisions in the institutionalization of procedures, where an intersubjectivity on a higher level is expected to emerge; public discourses find a good response only under circumstances of broad participation (Dewey, 1927/1988). This in turn ‘requires a background political culture that is egalitarian, divested of all educational privileges, and thoroughly intellectual’ (Habermas, 1996/1998, p. 490). So, the basic theoretical framework uses ideas from classic and modern pragmatism (Dewey, 1916/1985, 1927/1988, Jürgen Habermas, 1981/1987, 1983/1992, 1985/1990, cf. Englund, 2006a, 2006b, 2010, 2016). In the following, I will, in three sections, make an attempt to deepen and transform the idea of deliberation to a normative model of the educated, deliberative citizen by stressing some visionary thoughts of how to learn to live educationally. But first a general argumentation for the normative model by Seyla (Benhabib, 1996), the perhaps most well known of deliberative theorists of today, for the need of developing ideas and building normative models, arguing that
受过教育的、深思熟虑的公民:规范模式的组成部分
本文的目的是进一步利用和发展协商沟通的理念(Englund,2000a,2000b,20052006a,201020152016),这对于创建可持续的民主社会和受过教育的公民在教育方面生活至关重要(参见Englund,2019)。更具体和明确的目标是提供一个概念和基础的框架,支持发展深思熟虑的公民教育。进一步研究审议理念的总体背景和原因是,被称为“民主理论中的审议转向”的理念仍在大力发展和传播(Dryzek,2000,第1页)。关于这一审慎的转变,有许多倡导者可以参考。在美国,詹姆斯·波曼和威廉·雷格(波曼,1996年;波曼和雷格,1997年)是众多其他人中的两位。Amy Gutmann(1987)、Gutmann和Thompson(2004))和Nussbaum(1997、1999、2010)以及欧洲的Jürgen Habermas是中心人物。这里还可以强调的是,Gutmann和Nussbaum都引入了对学校和教育的审议视角(关于审议交流和教育的讨论视角的简短回顾,见Englund,2000a,2000b/2005)。在我早期的审议工作(Englund,2000a,2000b)中,起点通常是约翰·杜威的《民主与教育》(Dewey,1916/1985),以及他关于审议教育的主张,即审议教育的特点是群体内部和群体之间相互、自由和开放的交流。除此之外,哈贝马斯的有效性主张以及他将沟通和思考置于更广泛的背景中。哈贝马斯将议事政策和决策的实现置于程序的制度化中,在程序化中有望出现更高层次的主体间性;公共话语只有在广泛参与的情况下才能得到良好的回应(杜威,1927/1988)。这反过来“需要一种平等的、剥夺所有教育特权的、彻底知识分子的背景政治文化”(Habermas,1996/1998,490)。因此,基本理论框架使用了经典和现代实用主义的思想(杜威,1916/19851927/1988,Jürgen Habermas,1981/19871983/19921985/1990,参见Englund,2006a,2006b,20102016)。在下文中,我将在三个部分中,通过强调如何学会在教育中生活的一些富有远见的思想,试图深化和转变深思熟虑的思想,使其成为受过教育、深思熟虑的公民的规范模式。但首先,Seyla(Benhabib,1996)对规范模型进行了一般性论证,他可能是当今最著名的商议理论家,认为需要发展思想和建立规范模型,认为
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
4.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
13
审稿时长
10 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:604180095
Book学术官方微信