Skip to main content
Log in

Another Kind of Love in Education: Whatever Love

  • Published:
Interchange Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Educational theorists ranging from Plato, to Freire, to bell hooks, to Peter McLaren have theorized love as an essential factor in education. Whereas, typically, a particular kind of love (erotic love, caring love, etc.) is argued to be especially relevant for educational practice, what we do in this paper is to look at kinds of love that are constitutive for the relationship between teacher and student. Specifically, we outline four types of love that one might find in a classroom. We argue that from the perspective of Italian critical theorist Giorgio Agamben, the first three are problematic as they are not attentive to the potentiality of students to be whatever, and thus sacrifice potentiality of the child as such in the name of what must be or what is. The fourth type of love, on the other hand, embraces the potentiality of the child as a pure means rather than a means to another end. We further argue that there is an educational practice, what we are calling “Philosophy for Infancy” (P4I), that enables us to love our students’ potentiality. In contrast to Philosophy for Children, P4I exposes children to their potentiality rather than orienting specific potentialities towards determined outcomes. As such, P4I has its own, distinctive take on love in the classroom that differentiates it from other forms of love. It is our intention to develop this theory of love.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Agamben, G. (1993). The coming community. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Agamben, G. (2005). The time that remains: A commentary on the letter to the Romans. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biesta, G. J. (2014). The beautiful risk of education. Boulder, CO: Paradigm Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cho, D. (2005). Lessons of love: Psychoanalysis and teacher-student love. Educational Theory55(1), 79–96.

  • Freire, P. (2000). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Bloomsbury Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freire, P. (2001). Pedaoggy of freedom: Ethics, democracy, and civic courage. Lanham: Rowan and Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hooks, B. (1994). Teaching to transgress: Education as the practice of freedom. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jasinski, I. (2016). The passion of (not) teaching: An Agambenian meditation on the value of philosophy for children. Philosophy of Education Archive, 486–493.

  • Jasinski, I., & Lewis, T. (2015a). Community of infancy: Suspending the sovereignty of the teacher’s voice. Manuscript submitted for publication.

  • Jasinski, I., & Lewis, T. (2015b). The educational community as in-tentional community. Manuscript submitted for publication.

  • Kohan, W. O. (2012). Childhood, education and philosophy: Notes on deterritorialisation. In N. Vanieleghem & D. Kennedy (Eds.), Philosophy for children in transition: Problems and prospects (pp. 170–189). Walden, MA: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, T. E. (2013). On study: Giorgio Agamben and eduational potentiality. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loreman, T. (2011). Love as pedagogy. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Määttä, K., & Uusiautti, S. (2013). Pedagogical love and good teacherhood. In Many Faces of Love (pp. 93–101). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.

  • Masschelein, J., & Simons, M. (2013). In defense of the school: A public issue. E-book: free to download.

  • McLauren, P. (2000). Che Guevara, Paulo Freire, and the pedagogy of revolution. London: Rowan & Littlefield Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Noddings, N. (1984). Caring: A Feminist approach to ethics and moral education. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patience, A. (2008). The art of loving in the classroom: A defence of affective pedagogy. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 33(2), 4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uusiautti, S., Määttä, K., & Määttä, M. (2013). Love-based practice in education. International Journal About Parents in Education, 7(2), 134–144.

  • Valenzuela, A. (1999). Substractive schooling: U.S.-Mexican youth and the politics of caring. Albany: SUNY Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Igor Jasinski.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Jasinski, I., Lewis, T.E. Another Kind of Love in Education: Whatever Love. Interchange 47, 429–441 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10780-016-9282-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10780-016-9282-x

Keywords

Navigation