.
Not long ago I defended the idea that the end of their compulsory education the student should have some basic knowledge about the social, political, legal and national and international, in which he lives and that seemed so essential that knowledge as a student know the geography and natural. He also suggested that the subject of Citizenship Education should contribute to that objective.
Responses obtained that small papers have made clear that the controversy regarding EpC still alive.
Among the responses I want to emphasize the Angel Martin undoubtedly one of the most cared for, insightful and explained in a rational and argumentative.
This was my reply:
First of all I wish to thank Angel your interest in my troubles, which he read with understanding and it answers it easily meets the aspirations of a text that was written in the hope to elicit some reading and some answers as sharp as the one in question.
The truth is that I can enter almost all of what Angel explains. However I will make some clarifications: The main issue is that I find most relevant is the first: "Do we need the student at the end of their compulsory schooling have basic knowledge about the social, political, legal and national and internationally where you live? "which is treated exactly but it seems that the author accepts the response, although he notes that this question could be answered negatively, and I guess supported with rational arguments "Naturally I'm interested in such arguments.
The second question I pose [ Can a subject such as education for citizenship contribute to this purpose? ] I believe no excess packaging. And my response was positive to the first question, without much wealth of argument, I admit, "seems so essential that knowledge and that students know the geography and natural " -. In my answer to the second question was to give a reasonable profit to the actual space occupied by the EPC in the curriculum: could not serve that goal?.
agree with Angel in order to attain these content and objectives do not need to get out of the social sciences, of course [the problem is simply de facto, of the need for an extension of certain content]. I do not pretend [and thank the author of this post I explicitly waive that claim] to amend the flat to any group, but it is preposterous that even the philosophy department can take care of those contents and objectives, after all impart (perhaps we should interpret the past tense) Sociology second bachelor without any problems of conscience. Also includes legal information that pertains specifically to any of the said departments and were not absent-its philosophical content limitation would be given simply by the age and maturity of the student you own are directed (either second, third or fourth of ESO) and should be adapted.
Of course I do not mind too much if we include those contained under the heading the EPC or the legal and political foundations of the modern world ... o Introduction to ..... The essential thing is to determine what content is relevant, what goals are met or not and how could be improved.
On the issue of the descriptive and evaluative. I did not mean to argue either for or against such distinctions. with the complaint "alleged unscientific ideology present in the curriculum of the subject and make it a form of ideology adoctrinante look more than a field of knowledge open to truth and criticism. "... I simply referred to the dogmatic acceptance of certain values \u200b\u200band the alleged political bias.
Very interesting I found the conclusion that such discipline" can only have space as praise or eulogy, ie as rhetorical genre ". Indeed, it follows from the premises set forth, but I hope we are not obliged to have to necessarily accept.
Finally I do want to answer the question of what conception of ethics and philosophy advocate. Could say no, but just ignore him. I know that its origin is the experience (awareness) of that tension between Diogenes and Aristippus, Socrates to Gorgias, Aristotle with Plato, the categorical imperative and utilitarianism, and Hegel Schonpehauer ... or Wittgenstein himself.
Regards.
.
Responses obtained that small papers have made clear that the controversy regarding EpC still alive.
Among the responses I want to emphasize the Angel Martin undoubtedly one of the most cared for, insightful and explained in a rational and argumentative.
This was my reply:
First of all I wish to thank Angel your interest in my troubles, which he read with understanding and it answers it easily meets the aspirations of a text that was written in the hope to elicit some reading and some answers as sharp as the one in question.
The truth is that I can enter almost all of what Angel explains. However I will make some clarifications: The main issue is that I find most relevant is the first: "Do we need the student at the end of their compulsory schooling have basic knowledge about the social, political, legal and national and internationally where you live? "which is treated exactly but it seems that the author accepts the response, although he notes that this question could be answered negatively, and I guess supported with rational arguments "Naturally I'm interested in such arguments.
The second question I pose [ Can a subject such as education for citizenship contribute to this purpose? ] I believe no excess packaging. And my response was positive to the first question, without much wealth of argument, I admit, "seems so essential that knowledge and that students know the geography and natural " -. In my answer to the second question was to give a reasonable profit to the actual space occupied by the EPC in the curriculum: could not serve that goal?.
agree with Angel in order to attain these content and objectives do not need to get out of the social sciences, of course [the problem is simply de facto, of the need for an extension of certain content]. I do not pretend [and thank the author of this post I explicitly waive that claim] to amend the flat to any group, but it is preposterous that even the philosophy department can take care of those contents and objectives, after all impart (perhaps we should interpret the past tense) Sociology second bachelor without any problems of conscience. Also includes legal information that pertains specifically to any of the said departments and were not absent-its philosophical content limitation would be given simply by the age and maturity of the student you own are directed (either second, third or fourth of ESO) and should be adapted.
Of course I do not mind too much if we include those contained under the heading the EPC or the legal and political foundations of the modern world ... o Introduction to ..... The essential thing is to determine what content is relevant, what goals are met or not and how could be improved.
On the issue of the descriptive and evaluative. I did not mean to argue either for or against such distinctions. with the complaint "alleged unscientific ideology present in the curriculum of the subject and make it a form of ideology adoctrinante look more than a field of knowledge open to truth and criticism. "... I simply referred to the dogmatic acceptance of certain values \u200b\u200band the alleged political bias.
Very interesting I found the conclusion that such discipline" can only have space as praise or eulogy, ie as rhetorical genre ". Indeed, it follows from the premises set forth, but I hope we are not obliged to have to necessarily accept.
Finally I do want to answer the question of what conception of ethics and philosophy advocate. Could say no, but just ignore him. I know that its origin is the experience (awareness) of that tension between Diogenes and Aristippus, Socrates to Gorgias, Aristotle with Plato, the categorical imperative and utilitarianism, and Hegel Schonpehauer ... or Wittgenstein himself.
Regards.
.
0 comments:
Post a Comment