The last few decades have seen a steady growth of interest in doing philosophy with children and young people in educational settings. Philosophy with children is increasingly offered as a solution to the problems associated with what is seen by many as a disoriented, cynical, indifferent and individualistic society. It represents for its practitioners a powerful vehicle that teaches children and young people how to think about particular problems in society through the use of interpretive schemes and procedures especially designed (...) for this. It typically conceives of truth-telling as the work of dialogical reasoning, which is understood in turn as leading to increasing awareness of mental and methodological processes. This article starts from another point of view. What is at stake, I shall argue, is not so much the question of how to think for oneself in an appropriate way. Rather, in line with Michel Foucault, I want to identify philosophy as a practice oriented by the care of the self and of transformation of the self by the self. From this angle, philosophy with children will not be understood as something that orients us towards valid knowledge claims, but as an act of becoming present in the present. This way of conceiving of philosophy with children will be explored in the context of a concrete philosophical experiment with children that I planned and carried out in Cambodia. (shrink)

Bestaat de kernactiviteit van de meester erin om zijn eigen kennis uit te leggen en over te dragen? De Franse filosoof Jacques Rancière laat zien dat een gelegenheidsexperiment van Joseph Jacotot ons een ander voorbeeld aanreikt: de onwetende meester. In zijn boek De onwetende meester: vijf lessen over intellectuele emancipatie (Le maître ignorant: Cinq leçons sur l'émancipation intellectuelle) stelt hij dat de onwetende meester evengoed of zelfs beter in staat is leerlingen iets te leren dan de wetende meester. Rancière neemt (...) in feite twee onderwijspraktijken als voorbeeld: de traditionele praktijk van de wetende meester die uitleg geeft en kennis overdraagt en de experimentele praktijk van de onwetende meester die geen uitleg geeft maar vooral gericht is op de verificatie van aandacht. In dit artikel wil ik op basis van een korte analyse van deze twee praktijken laten zien hoe we uit Rancière’s boek een model kunnen afleiden voor het articuleren van de theoretische principes die impliciet in onderwijspraktijken werkzaam zijn. Dit model is gestoeld op het volgende uitgangspunt: door een succesvolle of juist problematische onderwijspraktijk als voorbeeld te nemen kunnen we de theoretische principes articuleren die erin werkzaam zijn. Dit schept de mogelijkheid om de focus van de van de praktijken naar de principes te verleggen. Hierdoor wordt de onderwijspraktijk op een nieuwe manier inzichtelijk en kunnen we haar theoretisch expliciteren. (shrink)

In this article, I turn my attention to the figure of the ignorant master, Joseph Jacotot, that is depicted in The Ignorant Schoolmaster. Five Lessons in Intellectual Emancipation (1991). I will show that the voice of Jacotot can actually be read as a reaction against the progressive figure of the teacher which, following Rancière's view, can be seen as effecting a stultification. In some respects, however, Rancière's analysis of the pedagogical order no longer seems to be valid in today's partly (...) reconfigured, pedagogical order that depicts the teacher in terms of facilitation. Yet, the figure of the facilitator can be seen as effecting a stultification as well. Therefore, I will stress that Jacotot's voice is highly relevant today. The most important difference between the figure of the (old and current) figure of the stultifyer and that of the ignorant master is identified in their starting point. The stultifying master starts from the assumption of inequality. S/he transforms taught material (words, text, images, etc.) into objects of knowledge or resources for competence development that open the door to another world. The ignorant master (Jacotot) assumes equal intelligence and draws attention to a thing in common. According to Rancière, the ignorant master keeps the door closed and puts his/her students in the presence of a thing in common. (shrink)

This chapter contains sections titled: Introduction Of Masters, Intellectuals and Inequality On Lessons, Equality, Democracy Focus and Contributions to the book Notes Acknowledgement References Bibliography Jacques Rancière.

En este artículo defendemos el valor de la perspectiva de Ortega sobre el problema del anacronismo en historia. Para ello, exponemos dicho problema en la Escuela de París. Seguidamente, explicamos las aportaciones de Ortega sobre ese problema en los años 40. Finalmente, hacemos un balance de las aportaciones de Ortega y su actualidad.

Starting from a Foucaultian perspective, the article draws attention to current developments that neutralise democracy through the 'governmentalisation of democracy' and processes of 'governmental subjectivation'. Here, ideas of Rancière are introduced in order to clarify how democracy takes place through the paradoxical process of 'political subjectivation', that is, a disengagement with governmental subjectivation through the verification of one's equality in demonstrating a wrong. We will argue that democracy takes place through the paradoxical process of political subjectivation, and that today's consensus (...) society tends to depoliticize all processes of subjectivation. A final step in the argumentation is to introduce the concept of 'pedagogic subjectivation'—to be understood as the experience of potentiality—that is to be distinguished from governmental subjectivation and also from political subjectivation. The concept 'pedagogic subjectivation' is proposed as a way of thinking of the school as a public place. (shrink)

Raymond Lemieux | Résumé : Entre le discours du maître et le discours magistériel, la proximité est évidente. Pourtant le magis formant leur élément commun peut aussi bien s’avérer un facteur d’abrutissement, un producteur d’esclave, qu’un porteur d’émancipation. Comment le discours magistériel, qui se veut émancipateur, peut-il gérer cette ambiguïté ? Comment le maître peut-il être un maître de liberté ? L’article interroge tour à tour les pratiques éducatives et les pratiques psychanalytiques qui affrontent le même type d’aporie. Il met (...) de l’avant l’importance de l’interdiction faite à l’éducateur tant qu’à l’analyste de jouir de l’élève ou de l’analysant, c’est-à-dire de faire de leur apparente position de sujet assujetti un profit personnel. Qu’est-ce qu’éduquer à la liberté ? Qu’en est-il du magistère, dont le discours se veut émancipateur ? |: The semantic closeness between the discourse of the master and the magisterial teaching of the Church is obvious. However, the common root magis may be displayed as an enslavement process as well as a liberating one. How can this ambiguousness be removed from the teaching of the Church ? How can this one be an education to liberty ? In order to find some practical way of answering this question, the paper briefly examines contemporary educational and psychoanalytic challenges which confront such a logical and practical deadlock. It stresses the importance of the interdiction, for the educator as well as the psychoanalyst, of taking any personal advantage, pleasure or profit from the apparent position of subject which is that of the other. What does mean to educate with the purpose of liberty ? How the magisterial discourse of the Church can be an emancipatory one ? (shrink)

ABSTRACTIn this paper we explore the possibility of rethinking the concept of emotional intelligence within the context of education. By developing a pedagogical dialogue with Michel Henry’s phenomenology of incarnation, we try to move beyond existing models of emotional intelligence by shifting the emphasis from the intellectual significance of emotion to a more original incarnate affectivity within intelligence, understood as lived sense-making. We claim that this ontological and ontogenetic perspective on emotion puts it at the heart of education. Yet only (...) because it evokes an understanding of education which is expressly non-functionalist: a disruptive, even dreadful event that marks the threshold and tension between what Henry terms Life and World. More than simply learning us to manage our emotions or recognize the value of experiences, emotional intelligence is about the very making of World out of Life, a Life that is at once radically subjective and communal. (shrink)

Espinosa nunca explicitou uma teoria sobre educação. Contudo, a leitura da sua obra dá-nos pistas para pensar a educação. A via para o conhecimento, que implica a interação de aspectos cognitivos e afetivos, dá-se como encontro daquele que se conhece com o conhecido, resultando no verdadeiro conhecimento, o qual é indissociável da felicidade suprema e do aumento de potência. O ignorante e o sábio são duas figuras extremas do devir-ético enquanto possibilidade de transformação inerente à existência humana, permitindo-nos refletir sobre (...) a relação ensino/aprendizagem. (shrink)

The passion of inequality exists in the discourse that binds people by their adhesion to the beliefs about the hierarchic distribution of positions in society. In this manner the differences that structure the (apparently) natural titles to be governed or to govern are put in a state of aggregation. The apparent naturalness of these titles masks a principle of equality, a necessary artifact that breaches the nature of the social bond. This article argues that despite the hegemonic pressure of inequality, (...) the situation of apprenticeship can contain events of emancipation. For this, the ‘master’ must articulate two complementary artifacts in his relation with his apprentice. First, he must occupy a posture of ignorance. Second, he must ascribe priority to the object to be known or listened to (the text, the words...) in such a way that a connection is made between the intelligences that he is interrogating and, thus, that their equality is verified. (shrink)

l presente artículo se propone explorar los procesos educativos a partir de la ontología y la teoría del sujeto de Alain Badiou. Para ello busca analizar las situaciones educativas ya no desde la figura del triángulo pedagógico, sino más bien partiendo de un encuentro de individuos con una doble caracterización: la “igualdad” y el “pensamiento”. De este modo, incorpora al análisis educativo experiencias alternativas a la educación institucionalizada, como el caso de Joseph Jacotot abordado por Jacques Rancière. Asimismo, el artículo (...) pretende caracterizar el concepto de “sujeto” en la educación, a partir de una disrupción de los criterios distributivos asociados a las experiencias alternativas y a las críticas rancierianas respecto de los principios fundantes de la educación moderna. This paper proposes to explore the educational process from the Alain Badiou ontology and theory of the subject. To do so, aims to analyze the educational situations not from the pedagogical triangle figure, but rather on the bases of a meeting of individuals with dual characterization: “equality” and “thinking”. Thereby, incorporates alternative experiences to institutionalized education to the educational analysis, as the case of Jacotot, and the Jacques Rancière’s appropriation of it. Also, the article aims to characterize the concept of “subject” in education, from a disruption of distributional criteria associated to the alternative experiences and the Rancière’s critiques of the founding principles of modern education. (shrink)