Philosophical Inquiry in Education最新文献_第7页

International Symposium Concluded: A Reply to Horvath 国际研讨会闭幕：对Horvath的回应

Philosophical Inquiry in Education Pub Date : 2020-11-16 DOI: 10.7202/1073402ar

V. V. Kraevskii

引用次数: 0

Total Form as a Moveable Feast: A Response to Walsh 作为可移动盛宴的总体形式：对Walsh的回应

Philosophical Inquiry in Education Pub Date : 2020-11-16 DOI: 10.7202/1073400ar

Dianne Bogdan

引用次数: 0

Making a Case for Adult Educational Rights 为成人教育权利辩护

Philosophical Inquiry in Education Pub Date : 2020-11-12 DOI: 10.7202/1073344ar

K. Wain

引用次数: 1

Beyond Market Theology: Reply to Barrett and Woodhouse 超越市场神学：对巴雷特和伍德豪斯的回应

Philosophical Inquiry in Education Pub Date : 2020-11-12 DOI: 10.7202/1073349AR

J. McMurtry

{"title":"Beyond Market Theology: Reply to Barrett and Woodhouse","authors":"J. McMurtry","doi":"10.7202/1073349AR","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7202/1073349AR","url":null,"abstract":"I am pleased to be given the opportunity to respond to Richard Barren's and Howard Woodhouse's stimulating replies to my article \"Education and the Mattet Model\" in the most recent issue of Paideusis1 Because Woodhouse's paper introduces a problem which is instantiated by Barren's reply, I will deal with it first. It consists of two main steps. First, it briefly explains the general pattern of my case, with whose argument it essentially agrees. Then it provides a revealing illustration of a main claim of my article's argument-namely, that the academic community itself has so internalized the currently dominant ideology of the \"free market\" that its members are sometimes unable to rationally entertain criticism of it. The case Woodhouse reports is that of two senior York University professors of philosophy, Joseph Agassi and Ian Jarvie, who replied to an earlier article of mine2 Woodhouse points out that while Agassi and Jarvie categorically deny there is any conflict whatever between market and educational goals and methods, they do not think it anywhere necessary to provide any reason or argument against the contradictions clearly identified in the article. Since the contradictions specified in the article would, Woodhouse argues, be perfectly evident to the members of a first-year philosophy class, and since, moreover, it is a normal requirement of reason to provide some justification for what you categorically deny, he concludes that Agassi and Jarvie's reply presents us with a paradigm case where \"rationality has been abandoned\" by unconditional adherence to market doctrine. Woodhouse suggests that in this unreasoned presupposition of a dominant form of social life we are able to see the depth of the market model's hold on the current academic mind. Are we now facing a kind of deep-structural social indoctrination where it is no longer thought conceivable to doubt the ruling ideology of the day? We might think of the problem here as akin to that of the mediaeval schoolmen in their presupposition of theological dogma. Given principles of belief are simply assumed as the ultimate ordering structure of our thoughts and our lives, even by those whose post-medieval business it is to question such conditioned certitudes.","PeriodicalId":36151,"journal":{"name":"Philosophical Inquiry in Education","volume":"5 1","pages":"34-38"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-11-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45781384","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Contradicting the Market 与市场矛盾

Philosophical Inquiry in Education Pub Date : 2020-11-12 DOI: 10.7202/1073357ar

Howard R. Woodhouse

引用次数: 2

Assessing Expert Claims: Critical Thinking and the Appeal to Authority 专家索赔评估：批判性思维与权威诉求

Philosophical Inquiry in Education Pub Date : 2020-11-11 DOI: 10.7202/1073304AR

M. Battersby

{"title":"Assessing Expert Claims: Critical Thinking and the Appeal to Authority","authors":"M. Battersby","doi":"10.7202/1073304AR","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7202/1073304AR","url":null,"abstract":"Much of our understanding and knowledge of the world is based on the authoritative pronouncements of experts. Both our scientific and historical understanding is grounded in this way. Think of germ theory, astronomy, plate techtonics, ancient history, dinosaurs, the origin of humans; it does not take much reflection to see that most of our understanding of the world is, in fact, grounded on information supplied and warranted by experts. Given how much of our knowledge has this basis, one would think that epistemologists would have given detailed consideration to the issue of appeal to scientific and other intellectual authority. But appeals to authority and the role that authority plays in knowledge have received little attention in modem philosophy. Indeed, philosophers generally have been opposed to such appeals since the birth of Western philosophy. Greek philosophy distinguished itself from Greek theology by rejecting appeals to authority (the wisdom of the ancients or the oracle's supply of the word of god) as the primary basis of knowledge and replacing those appeals with appeals to observation and reason as the basis of knowledge. Philosophy in many ways began with rejection of authoritative pronouncements and, when philosophy revived in the seventeenth century, the aversion to authority reappeared. By rejecting the authority of both Aristotle and the church, Descartes, Bacon, and Locke helped pave the way for modem science. These authors all rejected the appeal to any authority and, in doing so, marked the beginning of modern philosophy with its emphasis on individual confirmation of claims. As a result of this history, most contemporary introductions to epistemology do not even mention the issue of appeals to experts and authority, and there is little in contemporary epistemological literature that concerns itself with this topic.1 But one might expect critical thinking, with its concern for the practical needs of knowledge assessment, would devote considerably more attention to appeals to authority. In fact, most critical thinking texts do not even refer to appeals to authority and only a few texts give the subject significant treatment; none of these treatments is adequate, in part, perhaps because there is no epistemological theory on which to base such a treatment. Of those that do treat such appeals, many give appeals a definite secondary and necessary evil status. For example, Walton states:","PeriodicalId":36151,"journal":{"name":"Philosophical Inquiry in Education","volume":"6 1","pages":"5-16"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-11-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44187507","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1

Speaking in Our Own Voices: Plato's Protagoras and the Crisis of Education 用我们自己的声音说话:柏拉图的普罗泰戈拉和教育危机

Philosophical Inquiry in Education Pub Date : 2020-11-11 DOI: 10.7202/1073261ar

James Crooks

引用次数: 0

A Dogma Not Worth Exhuming: Empiricism in Language, Intelligence, and Thought 不值得挖掘的教条:语言、智力和思想中的经验主义

Philosophical Inquiry in Education Pub Date : 2020-11-10 DOI: 10.7202/1073248ar

S. Norris

引用次数: 0

Hanging Together with Richard Rorty 和理查德·罗蒂在一起

Philosophical Inquiry in Education Pub Date : 2020-11-10 DOI: 10.7202/1073176ar

Dennis Cato

引用次数: 0

Russell Versus Dewey on Democracy 罗素与杜威论民主

Philosophical Inquiry in Education Pub Date : 2020-11-10 DOI: 10.7202/1073179ar

Michael J. Rockier

{"title":"Russell Versus Dewey on Democracy","authors":"Michael J. Rockier","doi":"10.7202/1073179ar","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7202/1073179ar","url":null,"abstract":"Introduction Philosophers Bertrand Russell and John Dewey contributed much to the intellectual history of the twentieth century. These great thinkers, whose lives overlapped, shared many interests. Their influence went beyond technical philosophy into the realms of social policy and politics where both men exercised influence in significant ways. Both were liberal political thinkers who wished to create a more equitable society; both attempted to define and articulate the nature and meaning of democracy. John Dewey produced important perspectives on democracy, education, and knowledge despite being often less than clear in his thinking and writing. Gutek tells us that educators sometimes \"did not accept Dewey's entire philosophy because they did not understand his difficult and often confusing prose\" (Gutek, 1991, p. 342). Bertrand Russell was a clear and concise writer and thinker. His ideas remain valuable, helpful, and accessible to the modem reader. For most, Dewey must be interpreted in order to be understood. A careful reading of Dewey on democracy demonstrates limits to his views; sometimes, these are obscured by his style. Russell, on the other hand, can offer contemporary readers important insights into life within a democratic society. Russell provides an understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of democracy in all its complexity; Dewey often makes assumptions about society which have lost their relevance as social life has become more complex. In writing about Dewey, Russell said:","PeriodicalId":36151,"journal":{"name":"Philosophical Inquiry in Education","volume":"10 1","pages":"3-11"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-11-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46164046","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 2