scholarly journals Democratic Paradoxes: Thomas Hill Green on Democracy and Education

Paideusis ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 61-78
Author(s):  
Darin R. Nesbitt ◽  
Elizabeth Trott

This paper provides an account of the paradoxes of teaching democracy, the paradoxes of being a citizen in a liberal democracy, and the insights that can be gained from the model of citizenship that T.H. Green promoted. Green thought citizenship was predicated on the twin foundations of the community and the common good. Freedom for Green means individual self-determination coupled with recognition of the dependency relations between individuals and the community. Green is noteworthy not only as a theorist but also as an active contributor to the development of public schools in England. A consideration of his arguments provides a model for educating citizens, addresses the paradoxes of democracy in education, and reveals elements of his philosophy that are relevant to educational issues today.

2005 ◽  
Vol 49 (3) ◽  
pp. 264-277 ◽  
Author(s):  
Margaret Vickers

This article considers evidence which suggests that Australia's current approach to the funding of non-government schools does not serve the common good. Educational provision is now segmented and a majority of private schools have resources that are either moderately or highly superior to those available in public schools. The current funding system has failed to coordinate the activities of public and private providers, leading to duplication of provision, reductions in economies of scale, and increases in per-student costs. Students whose backgrounds and disabilities make them relatively costly to teach are heavily concentrated in the public sector. Private sector recurrent subsidies are tied to public sector per-student costs, forcing Australian taxpayers into an upward spiral of increasing outlays. The article concludes by outlining some proposals for change that would lead to a new approach to funding Australia's schools.


2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (24) ◽  
pp. 404-420
Author(s):  
Remigiusz Rosicki

The objective scope of the analysis encompasses special measures used in the fight against terrorism in the context of ethical and constitutional principles attributed to a democratic state ruled by law and a liberal democracy. A practical example of a special measure used in the fight against terrorism, and presented in the text, is furnished by the content of one of the articles in the Polish Aviation Law, which was found unconstitutional in 2008. The content of this article made it possible for an administrative authority to make a decision with regard to consenting to the destruction of a civil aircraft, if it was used as a means of terrorist attack. The main purpose of the paper is to consider the acceptable scope of radical measures in the fight against terrorism, while taking into account the reinterpretation of priorities in the hierarchy of legal principles. In order to elaborate the objective scope of the analysis, the following research question is phrased: To what extent is it possible to sacrifice the well-being of the individual (dignity, rights and freedoms) for the sake of the common good (security)? The adopted analysis methodology is based on a thought experiment consisting in the reinterpretation of ethical principles and the values of the constitutional norms in a democratic state ruled by law and a liberal democracy. With the benefit of essentialist reduction, it is posited that the two competing constitutional principles are the principle of dignity and the principle of the common good; they can be reduced to, for instance, protection of the life of an individual or of members of the community as a whole. Abstrakt Zakres przedmiotowy analizy obejmuje zagadnienie szczególnych środków walki z terroryzmem w kontekście zasad etycznych i konstytucyjnych przypisanych demokratycznemu państwu prawa i demokracji liberalnej. Przykładem praktycznym szczególnego środka walki z terroryzmem zaprezentowanym w tekście jest treść jednego z artykułów polskiego Prawa lotniczego, który został uznany za niekonstytucyjny w 2008 roku. Treść artykułu dawała możliwość podjęcia decyzji przez organ administracji publicznej w zakresie wyrażenia zgody zniszczenia cywilnego statku powietrznego w sytuacji, gdy ten użyty jest jako środek ataku terrorystycznego. Głównym celem pracy jest rozważanie zakresu dopuszczalności stosowania radykalnych środków walki z terroryzmem przy uwzględnieniu reinterpretacji priorytetów w hierarchii zasad prawnych. W celu uszczegółowienia zakresu przedmiotowego analizy zaprezentowano następujące pytanie badawcze: W jakim zakresie możliwe jest poświęcenie dobra jednostki (godności, praw i wolności) na rzecz dobra wspólnego (bezpieczeństwa)? Metoda analizy opiera się na eksperymencie myślowym polegającym na reinterpretacji zasad etycznych i wartości norm konstytucyjnych w demokratycznym państwie prawa i demokracji liberalnej. Przyjęto za pomocą redukcji esencjonalnej, że dwie rywalizujące ze sobą zasady konstytucyjne, to zasada godności i zasada dobra wspólnego, które mogą być sprowadzone np. do ochrony życia jednostki lub członków wspólnoty jako całości.


1988 ◽  
Vol 38 (4) ◽  
pp. 431-440 ◽  
Author(s):  
William J. Reese

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 531-559
Author(s):  
Alan Patten

AbstractIsrael is often described as a Jewish state and as the locus of Jewish self-determination. How should these phrases be understood? How can they be squared with a commitment to equal citizenship for non-Jewish Israelis? This Article distinguishes between descriptive and normative answers to these questions. The descriptive answer interprets the phrases as referring to the fact that a majority of Israelis are Jewish. The normative answer reads into the phrases a special obligation to promote the common good of the Jewish people. The Article argues that the phrases are unobjectionable when taken in the descriptive sense, but problematic when understood in the normative sense. A state that is guided by the normative answer would offer inadequate protection to key interests of minorities. The critique of the normative answer also points to the more positive conclusion that Israel should foster an Israeli civic identity amongst all its citizens.


Author(s):  
Erik Owens

Public schools are one of the quintessential civic institutions in the United States, with extraordinary reach into citizens’ lives. Public schools are entrusted with the civic responsibility to educate students with the knowledge, skills, and values required to contribute to the common good of our diverse society. This chapter connects the civic educational mission of public schools with the political and moral tradition of the common good, with a sketch of what may be called “civic education for the common good.” The first section discusses the concept of the common good and explains why religious freedom is an essential component. The second section distinguishes between civic virtue and the civic virtues, and describes which of the latter must be inculcated in schools to sustain the former. The final section argues that the common good is best served by a form of common education that is neither homogeneous nor radically pluralistic.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document