Abstract
In this paper I wish to comment upon the use of polemical argument in philosophy of education and education. Like Foucault, I believe that a whole morality is at stake because polemical argument obfuscates the search for truth at the expense of truth and the other’s veracity, integrity and dignity. The use of polemics is illustrated by two arguments. The first general argument is taken from an attack upon Albert Camus by the British writer Colin Wilson. The second more particular example is taken from attacks in New Zealand by the State Department of Education upon the educational ideas of the novelist and educator Sylvia Ashton-Warner. Finally I discuss how polemics might be countered in education.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Foucault did indulge in polemics: See (1), his attack upon Sartre in ‘Foucault Responds to Sartre’ in Foucault Live, (Ed. Sylvère Lotringer), (1996). New York: Semiotext(e), pp. 51–56, and (2) his responses to George Steiner’s reviews of The Order of Things ; (1971). Monstrosities in criticism, Diacritics 1 (1), pp. 57–60, and; Foucault responds 2, Diacritics 1 (2), p. 60.
References
Ashton-Warner, S. (1963). Spinster. London: Virago.
Ashton-Warner, S. (1958). Teacher. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Austin, J. (1962). How to do things with words. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Blake, N., Smeyers, P., Smith, R., & P. Standish (1998). Thinking again: Education after post-modernism. Westport., Conn. & London: Bergin & Garvey.
Copi, I. (1986). Informal logic. New York: MacMillan.
Encyclopedia Britannica, Standard Edition (2004). ‘Polemics’; ‘crises in the earlier Hegelian school’.
Eribon, D. (1991). Michel Foucault, transl. Betsy Wing. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Foucault , M. (1984). Polemics, politics, and problematisations: An interview with Michel Foucault. In P. Rabinow (Ed.), Michel Foucault; ethics, subjectivity, truth (pp. 111–119). New York: The New Press.
Habermas, J. (1984 & 1989). The theory of communicative action (Vol. 2). Transl. T. McCarthy. Boston: Beacon Press.
Hood, L. (1988) Sylvia: the biography of Sylvia Ashton-Warner. Auckland: Viking.
Lottman, H. R. (1979). Albert Camus; a biography. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday.
Marshall, J. D. (2004). Two forms of philosophical argument or critique. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 36(4), 459–469.
Peters, R. S. (1966). Ethics and education. London: George Allen & Unwin.
Rabinow, P. (1997). (Ed.), Michel Foucault; ethics, subjectivity, truth. New York: The New Press.
Rawls, J. (1971). A theory of justice. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Sartre, J-P. (1960). ‘Albert Camus’. In J-P. Sartre (Ed.), Situations. London: Hamish Hamilton.
Searle, J. (1965). What is a speech act? In M. Black (Ed.), Philosophy in America. London: George Allen & Unwin.
Simon, J. & Smith, L.T. (2001). (Eds.) A civilising mission? Perceptions and representations of the New Zealand native schools system. Auckland: Auckland University Press.
The Shorter Oxford English Dictionary, (3rd edn. revised). Oxford: Clarendon Press, (1959) p. 1536.
Todd, O. (1998). Albert Camus: a life, Transl. Benjamin Ivry. London: Vintage.
Tulley, R. (1995). ‘Logic, Informal.’ In T. Honderich (Ed.), The Oxford companion to philosophy (p. 500). Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press.
Wilson, C. (1998). ‘Albert Camus.’ In C. Wilson (Ed.), Below the iceberg: anti-Sartre and other essays. San Bernadino, Ca.: The Borgo Press.
Acknowledgement
I am grateful to Lynda Stone, and reviewers for Studies in Philosophy and Education, for comments on earlier drafts of this paper.