Abstract
This book follows and refers to the philosophy of Paul Ricoeur. The last chapter relates to the conclusion Ricoeur does in his work. In our reading of his texts, we recognise a line that we have used as our course in writing this book. Ricoeur’s last book is titled: The course of Recognition, and it provides a big help in sorting out different position when deliberating on education. First, we have recognised teaching as action. This is a structure recognising the teacher as an individual person who has a responsibility in teaching. This goes beyond structures that places teachers as representatives of a bureaucratic machinery. When education is framed as a bureaucracy, knowledge in education is reduced to remembering regulative rules.
Second, the responsibility of teaching relates to the reflexivity of teaching. This reflexivity is an expression of memory as a promise to remember. The challenge of teaching is to be able to promise and remember in the mutual relation of the act of memory. These acts of memory must be presented as a gift in the relation between generations. These mutual acts of recognition between generations are exactly what is at stake in education, and they are enacted in teaching.
It is collectively, one could say, that we demand an individualizing recognition
(Ricoeur, 2005, p. 214).
From its inception and throughout history, the school has been confronted with attempts to tame its democratic and communistic dimension. Those efforts are deadlier today than ever
(Masschelein & Simons, 2013, p.135).
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
- 2.
Ricoeur also refers to this in one of his footnotes (2005, pp. 278). Where he says that he leaves aside the question related to the genealogical principle on the symbolic plane of a single Phallus for both sexes? (the One, The Father), he underlines that all lineages are already double, both paternal and maternal.
- 3.
Kindergarten literally means a garden for children. Today these institutions are renamed Early Childhood Education and Care (ECEC) institution, when spoken about in English. But in Norwegian and Danish they still carry the name “barnehave/børnehave” – children’s garden. The closest name in Swedish is day home – daghem/dagis – but here preschool (førskola) is more commonly used.
- 4.
It is fair to mention that this succession is understood differently within various cultures, but what is common for most is the incest taboo, which prohibits sexual relations between people with very close relations; mother – son, father – daughter, brother – sister etc., underscoring that this lineage is commonly acknowledged.
- 5.
It is fair to mention here that in real life, many have experienced being made into a commodity – someone that can be traded; women, slaves, children. Our history has many accounts of this, unfortunately. This does not weaken the point Ricoeur makes here.
- 6.
They call themselves the World’s Learning Company.
- 7.
We recognize that being tied together (in the cave) may also signify being bound to one another as a collective.
Literature
Arendt, H. (1989). The human condition. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Arendt, H. (1993). Between past and future. London: Penguin Books.
Hogan, P. (2010). The new significance of learning. Imagination’s heartwork. London/New York: Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group.
Honneth, A. (1995). The struggle for recognition: The moral grammar of social conflicts. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Irigaray, L. (1996). I love to you. Sketch of a possible felicity within history (A. Martin, Trans.). New York/London: Routledge.
Irigaray, L. (2001). To be two (M. M. Rhodes & M. F. Cocito-Monoc, Trans.). New York: Routledge.
Lien, M. E. (2001). Likhet og verdighet. Gavebytter og integrasjon i Båtsfjord. In M. E. Lien, H. Vike, & H. Lidén (Eds.), Likhetens paradokser: antropologiske undersøkelser i det moderene Norge. Oslo, Norway: Universitetsforlaget.
Masschelein, J., & Simons, M. (2013). In defense of school a public issue. Leuven, Belgium: E-ducation, Culture & Society Publishers.
Mauss, M. (2000). The gift: The form and reason for exchange in archaic societies. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, inc.
Ricoeur, P. (Ed.). (2000). The just. Chicago/London: The University of Chicago Press.
Ricoeur, P. (Ed.). (1994). Oneself as another. Chicago/London: The University of Chicago Press.
Ricoeur, P. (2005). The course of recognition. Cambridge, MA/London: Harvard University Press.
Standish, P. (2001). Data return: The sense of the given in educational research. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 35(3), 487–518.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Hoveid, H., Hoveid, M.H. (2019). Education: Coordination of Action – Mutual Recognition. In: Making Education Educational. Contemporary Philosophies and Theories in Education, vol 12. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-27076-6_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-27076-6_8
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-27075-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-27076-6
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)