This paper re-envisions the personhood of severely disabled children, who are often excluded from the category of human beings in the academic literature due to their perceived lack of mental faculties, based on Japanese philosopher Watsuji Tetsuro’s concept of human beings. It begins with Carl Elliott’s claim that personhood should be used as a thick ethical concept. This concept has two features. First, it represents a fusion of fact and value. Second, it is embedded in our rich and culturally specific (...) forms of life. This paper suggests that Watsuji’s concept of ningen also has these features. Watsuji criticizes how Western ethicists take individual consciousness or will as their starting point for determining personhood. Instead, he argues that neither a subject nor a community exists as an entity in itself, but that the relationality between them is essential to their identity and that our communication is embedded within rich and social contexts. Through his etymological study of Japanese word ari, Watsuji points out that in making statements, one both discloses the world and becomes aware of the attitude one should take toward other beings. Some commentators, such as Sakabe Megumi, have suggested that such self-awareness entails the transformation of our sense of relationality. This paper leverages Watsuji’s concept of ningen to re-envision the relationship between caregivers and severely disabled children as relationality-based and therefore open to complex and rich communication. (shrink)

This article examines how affect allows us to view the relational form of dialogue, as built upon the work of Derrida and Levinas, to be a site of transformative possibility for students as they encounter and address issues of social justice and difference in the classroom. The understanding of affect that attends this form of dialogue demands from educators a re-visioning of how their educational arrangements and pedagogies might facilitate the transformative capacities of their students. Accordingly, the relational conception of (...) dialogue cannot be viewed as providing educators with another strategy or method for addressing issues of social justice and difference or for tapping into the transformative capacity of their students. Instead, it would be better viewed as pointing educators towards a different orientation towards education which is not focused upon producing particular outputs or outcomes, but does still indicate the need for a responsible response from the educator. (shrink)

With the outbreak of COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, teaching online became a norm for universities in Canada. Besides the challenges of teaching topics that may be impossible to be taught online, a major issue that the mandatory physical distancing brought is the relationality between teachers and students. In order to investigate how educators were making sense of such changes, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 12 education professors across Canada. In light of Derrida’s and Ruitenberg’s ethic of hospitality, this paper explores (...) how the abrupt shift to online education unveiled the nature and challenges of hospitable education, especially in the online context. The implications of online instruction to professors’ relationality, however, are also instrumental in illuminating the complexities and ambiguities of a teacher’s responsibility even in what could be considered the “normal circumstances” of face-to-face instruction. (shrink)