Professing Education in a Postmodern Age

Journal of Philosophy of Education

Volumn 31, Issue 2, 1997, Pages 309-327

  Carr, Wilfred ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0011075514     PISSN: 03098249     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/1467-9752.00058     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. A. MacIntyre, Three Rival Versions of Moral Enquiry (London, Duckworth, 1990), p. 35.
2. P. Gordon, The Study of Education: a Collection of Inaugural Lectures Vol. I (Early and Modern) 1980; Vol. II (The Last Decade), 1980; Vol. III (The Changing Scene); 1988; Vol. IV (The End of an Era) (London, Woborn).
3. P. Gordon, The Study of Education: a Collection of Inaugural Lectures Vol. I (Early and Modern) 1980; Vol. II (The Last Decade), 1980; Vol. III (The Changing Scene); 1988; Vol. IV (The End of an Era) (London, Woborn).
4. P. Gordon, The Study of Education: a Collection of Inaugural Lectures Vol. I (Early and Modern) 1980; Vol. II (The Last Decade), 1980; Vol. III (The Changing Scene); 1988; Vol. IV (The End of an Era) (London, Woborn).
5. P. Gordon, The Study of Education: a Collection of Inaugural Lectures Vol. I (Early and Modern) 1980; Vol. II (The Last Decade), 1980; Vol. III (The Changing Scene); 1988; Vol. IV (The End of an Era) (London, Woborn).
6. The early history of the liberal arts is examined in: S. J. Curtis and M. E. A. Boultwood, A Short History of Educational Ideas 3rd edn (Slough, University Tutorial Press, 1961), pp. 87-92.
7. The historical origins of the term 'university' are examined in some detail in H. Rashdall, The Universities of Europe in the Middle Ages, F. M. Powicke and A. B. Emden (eds) (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2nd edn 1936), I, pp. 4-6.
8. See C. H. Haskins, The Rise of the Universities (New York, Henry Holt & Co., 1923), pp. 58-60. See also Rashdall (op. cit.) I, pp. 450-456.
9. See C. H. Haskins, The Rise of the Universities (New York, Henry Holt & Co., 1923), pp. 58-60. See also Rashdall (op. cit.) I, pp. 450-456.
10. The method of disputation is described in some detail in Curtis and Boultwood (op. cit.), pp. 107-110. See also Rashdall (op. cit.), pp. 450-462.
11. The method of disputation is described in some detail in Curtis and Boultwood (op. cit.), pp. 107-110. See also Rashdall (op. cit.), pp. 450-462.
12. The historical role of the liberal arts is discussed in S. Rothblatt, Tradition and Change in English Liberal Education (London, Faber & Faber, 1976).
13. Quoted in Haskins (op. cit.), p. 70.
14. For a detailed description of the ceremony of inception see G. Leff, Paris and Oxford Universities in the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Centuries: an Institutional and Intellectual History (London, Wiley, 1968). See also Rashdall (op. cit.) Vol. I, pp. 283-287.
15. For a detailed description of the ceremony of inception see G. Leff, Paris and Oxford Universities in the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Centuries: an Institutional and Intellectual History (London, Wiley, 1968). See also Rashdall (op. cit.) Vol. I, pp. 283-287.
16. Rashdall (op. cit.), p. 286.
17. The view of education I try to describe and defend owes much to the work of two philosophers neither of whom are modern or postmodern. One is Alasdair MacIntyre, whose distinctive style of historical philosophy has had a major influence on both the structure and the argument of this lecture (see A. MacIntyre, After Virtue: A Study in Moral Theory, London, Duckworth, 1981; Whose Justice? Which Rationality? London, Duckworth, 1988; Three Rival Versions of Moral Enquiry, London, Duckworth, 1990). The other is Michael Oakeshott whose educational and political philosophy has tended to be ignored and neglected by educational theorists, not least because the political and philosophical traditions from which he worked were conservative. Although Oakeshott's educational writings offer the most explicit and coherent contemporary account of the view of education I am advancing, I have interpreted his views in a very different way from any that he himself may have envisaged. See, in particular, Political education, and The study of politics in a university', both in Rationalism in Politics and Other Essays (London, Methuen, 1962); Teaching and learning, in R. S. Peters (Ed.) The Concept of Education (London, Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1966); Education: the engagement and its frustration, in R. F. Dearden et al. (eds) Education and the Development of Reason (London, Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1972).
18. The view of education I try to describe and defend owes much to the work of two philosophers neither of whom are modern or postmodern. One is Alasdair MacIntyre, whose distinctive style of historical philosophy has had a major influence on both the structure and the argument of this lecture (see A. MacIntyre, After Virtue: A Study in Moral Theory, London, Duckworth, 1981; Whose Justice? Which Rationality? London, Duckworth, 1988; Three Rival Versions of Moral Enquiry, London, Duckworth, 1990). The other is Michael Oakeshott whose educational and political philosophy has tended to be ignored and neglected by educational theorists, not least because the political and philosophical traditions from which he worked were conservative. Although Oakeshott's educational writings offer the most explicit and coherent contemporary account of the view of education I am advancing, I have interpreted his views in a very different way from any that he himself may have envisaged. See, in particular, Political education, and The study of politics in a university', both in Rationalism in Politics and Other Essays (London, Methuen, 1962); Teaching and learning, in R. S. Peters (Ed.) The Concept of Education (London, Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1966); Education: the engagement and its frustration, in R. F. Dearden et al. (eds) Education and the Development of Reason (London, Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1972).
19. The view of education I try to describe and defend owes much to the work of two philosophers neither of whom are modern or postmodern. One is Alasdair MacIntyre, whose distinctive style of historical philosophy has had a major influence on both the structure and the argument of this lecture (see A. MacIntyre, After Virtue: A Study in Moral Theory, London, Duckworth, 1981; Whose Justice? Which Rationality? London, Duckworth, 1988; Three Rival Versions of Moral Enquiry, London, Duckworth, 1990). The other is Michael Oakeshott whose educational and political philosophy has tended to be ignored and neglected by educational theorists, not least because the political and philosophical traditions from which he worked were conservative. Although Oakeshott's educational writings offer the most explicit and coherent contemporary account of the view of education I am advancing, I have interpreted his views in a very different way from any that he himself may have envisaged. See, in particular, Political education, and The study of politics in a university', both in Rationalism in Politics and Other Essays (London, Methuen, 1962); Teaching and learning, in R. S. Peters (Ed.) The Concept of Education (London, Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1966); Education: the engagement and its frustration, in R. F. Dearden et al. (eds) Education and the Development of Reason (London, Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1972).
20. The view of education I try to describe and defend owes much to the work of two philosophers neither of whom are modern or postmodern. One is Alasdair MacIntyre, whose distinctive style of historical philosophy has had a major influence on both the structure and the argument of this lecture (see A. MacIntyre, After Virtue: A Study in Moral Theory, London, Duckworth, 1981; Whose Justice? Which Rationality? London, Duckworth, 1988; Three Rival Versions of Moral Enquiry, London, Duckworth, 1990). The other is Michael Oakeshott whose educational and political philosophy has tended to be ignored and neglected by educational theorists, not least because the political and philosophical traditions from which he worked were conservative. Although Oakeshott's educational writings offer the most explicit and coherent contemporary account of the view of education I am advancing, I have interpreted his views in a very different way from any that he himself may have envisaged. See, in particular, Political education, and The study of politics in a university', both in Rationalism in Politics and Other Essays (London, Methuen, 1962); Teaching and learning, in R. S. Peters (Ed.) The Concept of Education (London, Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1966); Education: the engagement and its frustration, in R. F. Dearden et al. (eds) Education and the Development of Reason (London, Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1972).
21. The view of education I try to describe and defend owes much to the work of two philosophers neither of whom are modern or postmodern. One is Alasdair MacIntyre, whose distinctive style of historical philosophy has had a major influence on both the structure and the argument of this lecture (see A. MacIntyre, After Virtue: A Study in Moral Theory, London, Duckworth, 1981; Whose Justice? Which Rationality? London, Duckworth, 1988; Three Rival Versions of Moral Enquiry, London, Duckworth, 1990). The other is Michael Oakeshott whose educational and political philosophy has tended to be ignored and neglected by educational theorists, not least because the political and philosophical traditions from which he worked were conservative. Although Oakeshott's educational writings offer the most explicit and coherent contemporary account of the view of education I am advancing, I have interpreted his views in a very different way from any that he himself may have envisaged. See, in particular, Political education, and The study of politics in a university', both in Rationalism in Politics and Other Essays (London, Methuen, 1962); Teaching and learning, in R. S. Peters (Ed.) The Concept of Education (London, Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1966); Education: the engagement and its frustration, in R. F. Dearden et al. (eds) Education and the Development of Reason (London, Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1972).
22. The view of education I try to describe and defend owes much to the work of two philosophers neither of whom are modern or postmodern. One is Alasdair MacIntyre, whose distinctive style of historical philosophy has had a major influence on both the structure and the argument of this lecture (see A. MacIntyre, After Virtue: A Study in Moral Theory, London, Duckworth, 1981; Whose Justice? Which Rationality? London, Duckworth, 1988; Three Rival Versions of Moral Enquiry, London, Duckworth, 1990). The other is Michael Oakeshott whose educational and political philosophy has tended to be ignored and neglected by educational theorists, not least because the political and philosophical traditions from which he worked were conservative. Although Oakeshott's educational writings offer the most explicit and coherent contemporary account of the view of education I am advancing, I have interpreted his views in a very different way from any that he himself may have envisaged. See, in particular, Political education, and The study of politics in a university', both in Rationalism in Politics and Other Essays (London, Methuen, 1962); Teaching and learning, in R. S. Peters (Ed.) The Concept of Education (London, Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1966); Education: the engagement and its frustration, in R. F. Dearden et al. (eds) Education and the Development of Reason (London, Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1972).
23. Aristotle's fullest treatment of phronesis is to be found in Book IV, chapter 9 of The Nicomachean Ethics.
24. A. MacIntyre, After Virtue, p. 141.
25. For a more detailed elaboration and justification for this kind of educational studies see W. Carr, For Education: Towards Critical Educational Inquiry (Buckingham, Open University Press, 1995).
26. Quoted in Rashdall (op. cit.), p. 239.