Search results

A collection of essays by a social economist seeking to balance economics as a science of means with the values deemed necessary to man′s finding the good life and society enduring as a civilized instrumentality. Looks for authority to great men of the past and to today′s moral philosopher: man is an ethical animal. The 13 essays are: 1. Evolutionary Economics: The End of It All? which challenges the view that Darwinism destroyed belief in a universe of purpose and design; 2. Schmoller′s Political Economy: Its Psychic, Moral and Legal Foundations, which centres on the belief that time‐honoured ethical values prevail in an economy formed by ties of common sentiment, ideas, customs and laws; 3. Adam Smith by Gustav von Schmoller – Schmoller rejects Smith′s natural law and sees him as simply spreading the message of Calvinism; 4. Pierre‐Joseph Proudhon, Socialist – Karl Marx, Communist: A Comparison; 5. Marxism and the Instauration of Man, which raises the question for Marx: is the flowering of the new man in Communist society the ultimate end to the dialectical movement of history?; 6. Ethical Progress and Economic Growth in Western Civilization; 7. Ethical Principles in American Society: An Appraisal; 8. The Ugent Need for a Consensus on Moral Values, which focuses on the real dangers inherent in there being no consensus on moral values; 9. Human Resources and the Good Society – man is not to be treated as an economic resource; man′s moral and material wellbeing is the goal; 10. The Social Economist on the Modern Dilemma: Ethical Dwarfs and Nuclear Giants, which argues that it is imperative to distinguish good from evil and to act accordingly: existentialism, situation ethics and evolutionary ethics savour of nihilism; 11. Ethical Principles: The Economist′s Quandary, which is the difficulty of balancing the claims of disinterested science and of the urge to better the human condition; 12. The Role of Government in the Advancement of Cultural Values, which discusses censorship and the funding of art against the background of the US Helms Amendment; 13. Man at the Crossroads draws earlier themes together; the author makes the case for rejecting determinism and the “operant conditioning” of the Skinner school in favour of the moral progress of autonomous man through adherence to traditional ethical values.

Dewey, through his contributions to pragmatism (America’s sole original philosophy), has long been considered relative to symbolic interactionism (SI), which emerged from that philosophy. His impact on SI, while falling short of those of Mead and Cooley, has mainly come from (and has been limited to) concepts and insights developed in Human Nature and Conduct: An Introduction to Social Psychology (1922/1957) and his earlier, seminal, article, “The Reflex Arc Concept in Psychology,” published in 1896 during his tenure at the University of Chicago (1894–1904). SI, however, has wrongly ignored Dewey’s political theory, especially his concept of domination. In order to rectify this inattention, I summarize the social and historical contexts that motivated Dewey’s turn toward domination; outline the radical nature of his political theory; illustrate similarities of his political theory with Marx’s; expatiate on his concept of domination, including his argument for social practices to reduce surplus domination; and explicate the theoretical and political implications of taking his political theory seriously.

This chapter describes the democratic philosophy and progressive education writing of John Dewey as sources of wisdom and guidance for the development of schools and classrooms where diverse groups of students live and learn together. The primary emphases are Dewey’s concept of moral equality, his understanding of democracy as a way of life, and his work with the teachers at the University of Chicago Lab School on a curriculum that analyzed tackled the central challenges of community life. Dewey offered useful theoretical work on liberal democratic communities while developing a relevant curricular example of how schools can focus learning activities on the promise and problems of society.

John Dewey is well known for his progressive ideas and was credited by many historians as the father of progressive education, but where are the mothers? Dewey did not develop his ideas in isolation. Four women from Chicago were highly influential in assisting John in initiating and refining his theories. Ella Flagg Young, Jane Addams, Alice Chipman Dewey, and Anna Bryan deserve to be recognized for their contributions as “mothers” of the progressive movement and for their championing social justice issues during the late 19^th and early part of the 20^th centuries.

The purpose of this paper is to propose a framework of reflection that opens the way to a fuller understanding of what is meant by learning to be enterprising in schools, particularly during the basic schooling of students (at both the primary and secondary levels). Working from Dewey's philosophy of experience, the paper advances a new definition, in processual terms, of being enterprising and a related model of learning to be enterprising.

The backdrop of this theoretical article is enterprise education, currently associated with a broader view of entrepreneurship. The text begins with a critique of existing definitions of being enterprising, showing their limitations from an educational point of view. It then proposes an exploration of Dewey's philosophy of experience and its educational corollaries, all with a view to sketching out a model of learning to be enterprising.

John Dewey's philosophy of experience provides a basis for characterizing the notion of being enterprising in relation to two distinct phases – namely, charting a guiding direction for the action to be undertaken and putting the plan of action to the test in experience. Dewey also highlights the importance of reflexivity throughout this entire process. The coherent structuring of these elements lays the groundwork for a model of learning to be enterprising that simultaneously takes into account action and reflection in the classroom entrepreneurial experience.

Being enterprising is closely bound up with action, thus prompting many authors to set out a parallel between enterprise education and experiential learning, with most working from the model proposed by Kolb. The paper returns to the philosophical bases elaborated by Dewey and his vision of experiential learning, associated with his oft‐quoted maxim of “learning by doing.” The value of this conceptual effort consists in acquiring a more operational representation of learning to be enterprising in schools.

The purpose of this paper is to explore an approach to epistemology which allows a portion of library and information science (LIS) to coherently explain its social and intellectual contributions, and to overcome some of the problems of epistemology that LIS encounters.

Literature based conceptual analysis of the problems of epistemology in LIS and the productive approach of Deweyan Pragmatism.

LIS’ problems with epistemology come from a variety of sources: epistemology itself, the combining of librarianship with information science, and the search for a common grounding of the information professions, their tools and their institutions. No such theoretical foundation is possible, but Deweyan Pragmatism offers a sensible, practical explanation for the historical development and practices of librarianship.

Pragmatism has been deployed in portions of LIS, but the full implications and the “fit” of Dewey’s ideas for librarianship and its epistemology are productive explorations.

In much of philosophy and social theory since classical antiquity, human belief and reason have been placed in the driving seat of individual action. In particular, social theory has often taken it for granted, or even by definition, that action is motivated by reasons based on beliefs. In contrast, a minority has criticized the adoption of this ‘folk psychology’ that explains human action wholly in such ‘mind first’ terms. Critics point out that such explanations are a mere gloss on a much more complex neurophysiological reality. These dualistic and ‘mind-first’ explanations of human behavior are unable to explain adequately such phenomena as sleep, memory, learning, mental illness, or the effects of chemicals or drugs on our perceptions or actions (Bunge, 1980; Churchland, 1984, 1989; Churchland, 1986; Rosenberg, 1995, 1998; Kilpinen, 2000).

This paper aims to explore the question: how well do course management systems (CMS) support constructivist pedagogy; how well do they support conversation?

This article reviews the basic pedagogical orientation of CMS as recently represented by analysts and proponents, while offering an analysis of the implications of these theoretical positions for learner activity within CMS. It compares CMS structural design for its capacity to support collaborative learning against inherent tendencies to fragmentation, individualization and learner isolation. Sampling a widely adopted CMS in use, the article analyzes how well CMSs fulfill the specifications for a progressive, collaborative, learner‐centered environment.

Despite protestations to the contrary, this paper finds that the imperatives to manage discussions and count participation supersede pedagogy in most online courses. Curiously, despite the reemergence of the ideas of John Dewey and Lev Vygotsky, the CMS is more behaviorist than constructivist.

As a comprehensive and systematic consideration of the application of constructivist principles to course management systems at the tertiary level, this paper offers guidance to university administrators, faculty members and others involved in the educational process. The author's conclude that if the underlying, non‐neutral, behaviorist principles of the emerging CMS model are subjected to educators' analysis and thoughtful debate, perhaps it's not too late to build learning architecture that encourages student interaction and conversations; that cedes greater control to learners for integrated participation and constructed learning.

This paper collects together quotations and extracts from 19th and 20th century thinkers who were little-known for being supporters of workplace democracy.

This project of derivation that I have just described may seem strange, but is not. In this as in many respects Plato set the fashion for the millennia to come. The ideal state sketched in the Republic is not only an analogy to the soul (though it is that too); it is an implication of Plato's conception of human mental capacity, a conception that is ontological as well as epistemological. It was Plato who, according to Aristotle, first separated a universal (i.e., a concept) from particulars (i.e., a concept's physical embodiments or expressions). There are a multitude of chairs, very different in size, shape, color, and design, yet there is also a concept of the “chair,” in which all the physical chairs participate. The concept has no physical body and therefore in a sense exists outside time and space – it is immaterial and eternal. But Plato believed, reasonably as it seems to me, that it is real. It is real in the same way that a line or circle in Euclidean geometry is real even though it is not identical to any physical line or circle and cannot be – the Euclidean line has only one dimension, and the Euclidean circle only two, and there are no one-or two-dimensional objects in the physical world (although electrons are dimensionless), as far as we know.