Startseite The Educational Responsibilities of Philosophers
Artikel
Lizenziert
Nicht lizenziert Erfordert eine Authentifizierung

The Educational Responsibilities of Philosophers

  • Harry Brighouse EMAIL logo
Veröffentlicht/Copyright: 12. Juli 2023
SATS
Aus der Zeitschrift SATS Band 24 Heft 1

Abstract

Perpetuating the discipline of philosophy is not the main educational responsibility of philosophers. Instead, it is to equip students with those distinctively philosophical intellectual resources that will serve students in serving the public good through participation in the economy (broadly conceived) and democratic life. Given this responsibility philosophers, individually and collectively, have a duty to take teaching and learning more seriously than they do. The paper offers some confident ideas about what this means when it comes to approaching training and professional development and some more tentative ideas about what it means, specifically, for the Philosophy curriculum and the pedagogical strategies philosophers should adopt in the classroom.


Corresponding author: Harry Brighouse, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, 53706-1403, USA, E-mail:

References

Anderson, E. 2013. The Imperative of Integration. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Autor, D. 2014. Polanyi’s Paradox and the Shape of Employment Growth. Washington: National Bureau of Economic Research.10.3386/w20485Suche in Google Scholar

Boisjoly, J., G. J. Duncan, M. Kremer, D. M. Levy, and J. Eccles. 2006. “Empathy or Antipathy? The Impact of Diversity.” American Economic Review 96 (5): 1890–905. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.96.5.1890.Suche in Google Scholar

Bok, D. 2008. Our Underachieving Colleges: A Candid Look at how much Students Learn and why they should be Learning More. Princeton: Princeton University Press.10.1515/9781400831333Suche in Google Scholar

Brighouse, H. 2023. “Structured Academic Controversy: A Variant.” Crooked Timber. Also available at: https://crookedtimber.org/2023/01/11/structured-academic-controversy-a-variant/ (accessed February 14, 2023).Suche in Google Scholar

Cahn, S. M. 2020. Navigating Academic Life: How the System Works. London: Routledge.10.4324/9781003110163Suche in Google Scholar

Concepción, D. W., M. Messineo, S. Wieten, and C. Homan. 2016. “The State of Teacher Training in Philosophy.” Teaching Philosophy 39 (1): 1–24. https://doi.org/10.5840/teachphil201621942.Suche in Google Scholar

Dobbin, F., and A. Kalev. 2016. “Why Diversity Programs Fail. (And what Works Better).” Harvard Business Review 90: 7.Suche in Google Scholar

Fish, S. 2008. Save the World on Your Own Time. New York: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780195369021.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar

Gutmann, A. 1998. Democracy and Disagreement. Cambridge: Belknap Press (Harvard University Press).Suche in Google Scholar

Gutmann, A., and D. Thompson. 2004. Why Deliberative Democracy? Princeton: Princeton University Press.10.1515/9781400826339Suche in Google Scholar

Harvard College. n.d. Mission, Vision, & History. Also available at: https://college.harvard.edu/about/mission-vision-history.Suche in Google Scholar

Harvard University. n.d. Funding. https://philosophy.fas.harvard.edu/funding-graduate (accessed February 14, 2023).Suche in Google Scholar

Laden, A. S. 2019. “Two Concepts of Civility.” In A Crisis of Civility: Political Discourse and its Discontents, edited by R. G. Boatright, T. J. Shaffer, S. Sobieraj, and D. G. Young, 9–31. New York & Oxon: Routledge.10.4324/9781351051989-2Suche in Google Scholar

Little, J. W. 1981. The Power of Organizational Setting: School Norms and Staff Development. Washington: U.S. Department of Education.Suche in Google Scholar

Mehta, N., R. Stinebrickner, and T. Stinebrickner. 2019. “Time‐Use and Academic Peer Effects in College.” Economic Inquiry 57 (1): 162–7110.1111/ecin.12730Suche in Google Scholar

Pettigrew, T., and L. Tropp. 2006. “A Meta-Analytic Test of Intergroup Contact Theory.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 90 (5): 751–83. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.90.5.751.Suche in Google Scholar

Pettigrew, T., and L. Tropp. 2008. “How Does Intergroup Contact Reduce Prejudice? Meta-Analytic Tests of Three Mediators.” European Journal of Social Psychology 38 (6): 922–34. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.504.Suche in Google Scholar

Rawls, J. 2005. Political Liberalism. New York: Columbia University Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Stephan, W., and K. Finlay. 1999. “The Role of Trust in Intergroup Contact: Its Significance and Implications for Improving Relations between Groups.” Improving Intergroup Relations 55 (4): 91–106.10.1111/0022-4537.00144Suche in Google Scholar

Stinebrickner, R., and T. Stinebrickner. 2006. “What Can Be Learned about Peer Effects Using College Roommates? Evidence from New Survey Data and Students from Disadvantaged Backgrounds.” Journal of Public Economics 90 (8–9): 1435–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2006.03.002.Suche in Google Scholar

University of Wisconsin-Parkside. n.d. Mission and Vision. Also available at: https://www.uwp.edu/explore/aboutuwp/mission_vision.cfm.Suche in Google Scholar

Van Woerden, I., D. Hruschka, A. Brewis, D.R. Schaefer, and M. Bruening. 2020. “First-year College Students’ Weight Change Is Influenced by Their Randomly Assigned Roommates’ BMI.” PLoS One 15 (11). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0242681.Suche in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2023-07-12
Published in Print: 2023-07-26

© 2023 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Heruntergeladen am 8.9.2025 von https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/sats-2023-0004/pdf
Button zum nach oben scrollen