A sociologia da educação de Max Weber: o Clinamen na prática pedagógica

IF 4.1 2区社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE

Politics & Society Pub Date : 2020-11-19 DOI:10.5007/175-7984.2020v19n45p205

Alonso Bezerra de Carvalho

引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article consists, essentially, of an analysis of Max Weber’s thinking, in order to seek apossible contribution in the field of education on present. When expose his comprehension aboutthe rationalization process, having on bureaucracy as one of its most striking manifestations,Weber understands human actions as constituted by a permanent tension. There would not be ameaning in the world, with universal validity, that could guide existence. In this aspect, educationneeds to acquire another meaning, that is, an education that does the clinamen emerge andrevive, introducing on determinist mechanism the space of liberation, which consists in breakingthe inherent determinism in any objective situation and, in a deviant way, to promove aperturefor the exercise of autonomy. If to the teacher belongs the obligation to provide some hope forthe life of his students, it must be established from the recognition of the agonistic character ofexistence. To do in this way, is guarantee integrity and intellectual freedom.

查看原文本刊更多论文

马克斯·韦伯的教育社会学：教育实践中的Clinamen

本文从本质上分析了马克斯·韦伯的思想，以期在当今教育领域寻求可能的贡献。当揭示他对合理化过程的理解时，韦伯将官僚主义作为其最引人注目的表现之一，他将人类行为理解为由永久的紧张构成的。世界上不会有任何具有普遍有效性的东西可以指导存在。在这方面，教育需要获得另一种意义，即一种使临床出现并存活的教育，在决定论机制上引入解放的空间，它包括在任何客观情况下打破固有的决定论，并以一种越轨的方式促进自主行使的机会。如果教师有义务为学生的生活提供一些希望，那么就必须从认识到存在的痛苦特征开始确立。这样做，就是保证诚信和知识自由。

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

Politics & Society Multiple-

CiteScore

5.00

自引率

4.20%

发文量

期刊介绍： Politics & Society is a peer-reviewed journal. All submitted papers are read by a rotating editorial board member. If a paper is deemed potentially publishable, it is sent to another board member, who, if agreeing that it is potentially publishable, sends it to a third board member. If and only if all three agree, the paper is sent to the entire editorial board for consideration at board meetings. The editorial board meets three times a year, and the board members who are present (usually between 9 and 14) make decisions through a deliberative process that also considers written reports from absent members. Unlike many journals which rely on 1–3 individual blind referee reports and a single editor with final say, the peers who decide whether to accept submitted work are thus the full editorial board of the journal, comprised of scholars from various disciplines, who discuss papers openly, with author names known, at meetings. Editors are required to disclose potential conflicts of interest when evaluating manuscripts and to recuse themselves from voting if such a potential exists.