A new collection of critical essays from bell hooks takes as its theme the deep longing for a critical voice. I explore some motifs that operate across the divergent topics of her essays. She writes of the dangers of commodification, of "reassuring" images, of individualism. I also explore the paths of hooks's uniquely black postmodernism: her critique of various essentialisms, her philosophically important conception of subjectivity, and her beautiful and powerful transformations of multiple discourses.

This essay participates in a feminist postcolonial critical historiography/epistemology by providing a critique of The Post-Colonial Critic: Interviews, Strategies, Dialogues. The essay considers Spivak's success in interrogating her own position as a leading postcolonial critic as she engages in dialogues with various people. Spivak's commitment to cross-cultural exchanges is undeniable. However, at times the resurgence of her authoritative subject position deflects productive tensions generated by careful scrutiny of the category postcolonial.

This paper argues that egalitarianism, in itself and as a basis for educational policy, is unacceptable. Three recent defences of it are examined and rejected. Three anti-egalitarian positions, however, all of which stress sufficiency rather than equality, pass muster. Educational implications are followed through, with reference to mixed ability grouping, selection, equal opportunities in education and conflicting views about the minimum content of a common school curriculum.

John White argues that ‘egalitarianism, in education as elsewhere, is a will-o'-the-wisp’.1 He claims that recent defences of egalitarianism, among which he kindly includes my own along with those of Thomas Nagel and Kai Nielsen, have failed to answer the basic question of why a more equal society should be regarded as valuable. I shall try to show that the positive philosophical commitments contained in his argument may point the way to an answer.

Stephen Macedo; Multiculturalism for the Religious Right? Defending Liberal Civic Education, Journal of Philosophy of Education, Volume 29, Issue 2, 30 May 2006.

This paper is a response to papers by Wilson, Burwood and White concerning equal opportunities as an educational ideal. I seek to legitimate this ideal, in contrast to these earlier attempts to persuade us that it is incoherent, unreasonable or misguided. I argue that, given the social context in which the term is used, it is meaningful and represents rational and praiseworthy goals. I identify four aspects of ‘equal opportunities’ and conclude that the concern to promote such opportunities arises from (...) desire for a more just educational provision and out of concern for the well-being of children in oppressed groups. (shrink)

Walter Feinberg; Liberalism and the Aims of Multicultural Education, Journal of Philosophy of Education, Volume 29, Issue 2, 30 May 2006, Pages 203–216, https:/.

Although this paper is a written version of an inaugural lecture given at the University of Sheffield in December 1995, its central thesis is that, in a postmodern age, the practice of professors of education giving inaugural lectures is incoherent. To advance this thesis in an inaugural lecture entails an obvious contradiction which, it is proposed, can only be resolved by examining the historical origins of the inaugural lecture in the early medieval university. What emerges from this examination is not (...) only that there is a pre-modern version of the inaugural lecture but that the virtue-based understanding of education which it presupposed can be revised and advanced in the postmodern world. (shrink)

Ruth Jonathan; Bibliography, Journal of Philosophy of Education, Volume 31, Issue 1, 16 December 2002, Pages 217–220, https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9752.00050.

David Miller outlines the central ideas of Michael Walzer's Spheres of Justice, focusing on the notions of political community, social goods, and complex equality. He critically examines Walzer's reliance on the interpretative method in determining the requirements of distributive justice. Miller argues that the concept of complex equality needs to be interpreted alongside that of equal citizenship.