Pragmatismi poliittisena filosofiana. Yksilö ja yhteisö John Deweyn ajttelussa

John Dewey (1859-1952) oli yhdysvaltalainen filosofi, pedagogi ja julkinen keskustelija, jonka ajattelu on merkittävästi vaikuttanut pragmatismina tunnetun filosofisen suuntauksen kehittymiseen. Tässä Pro gradu -tutkielmassa tarkastellaan Devveyn poliittista filosofiaa ja ajattelua. Tarkoituksena on selvitellä, millaista on Devveyn poliittinen filosofia ja voiko hänen pragmatistinen poliittinen filosofiansa tarjota jotain mielenkiintoista myös tämän päivän poliittisen filosofian kentälle. Tutkielmassa tarkastellaan Devveyn esittämää kritiikkiä klassista liberalismia ja individualismia kohtaan, Devveyn omaa poliittisen filosofian projektia sekä sen kohtaama kritiikkiä ja arvioidaan Devveyn poliittista filosofiaa yleisesti. Tarkastelun kohteena ovat muun muassa Devveyn käsitykset yksilöstä, valtiosta, demokratiasta, vallasta ja tiedosta. Ensisijaisena lähteenä tutkielmassa on Devveyn koottujen teosten sarja vuosilta 1882-1953, ennen kaikkea 1920-30-lukujen tuotanto. Lisäksi lähteenä on useita tuoreita artikkeleita sekä kommentaareja. Keskeisin löytö tutkielmassa on, että Devveyn poliittisen filosofian oleellinen piirre on "anti-essentialismi", eli huomion siirtäminen pois jostain oletetuista yksilöiden ja ryhmien olemuksista tai sisäisestä luonnosta niiden välisiin suhteisiin ja näiden ilmauksiin. Tähän liittyen Devveyn poliittisen filosofian keskeiseksi lähtökohdaksi osoittautuu perinteisen yksilö-yhteisö jaottelun kyseenalaistaminen. Tutkielma tarjoaa laajan katsauksen Devveyn poliittiseen ajatteluun sekä pragmatistiseen poliittiseen filosofiaan.

Koulukasvatusta teknologisoituvaan yhteiskuntaan : Kansakoulun opetussuunnitelman rakentuminen, 1945-1952

Education for a Technological Society. Public School Curriculum Construction, 1945-1952. The subject of my research is the significance of technology in the construction process of the public school curriculum during the years 1945-1952. During the period the war reparation and rebuilding placed demands and actions to rationalise and dramatise industry and agriculture. Thereby the ambitions of building a technological country and the reformation of curriculum took place simultaneously. Fordistian terms of reference, of which the principles were mass production, rationalisation and standardisation, a hierarchical division of labour and partition of assignments, provided a model for the developing curriculum. In the research the curriculum is examined as an artefact, which shapes socio-technically under the influence of social and technical factors. In the perspective of socio-technical construction the artefact is represented by the viewpoints of members of relevant social groups. The groups give meaning to the curriculum artefact, which determines the components of the curriculum. The weakness of the curriculum was its ineffectiveness, which was due to three critical problems. Firstly, the curriculum was to be based on scientific work, which meant the development of schools through experiments and scientific research. Secondly, the civilised conseption in the curriculum was to be composed of theoretical knowledge, as well as practical skills. Practical education was useful for both the individual and society. Thirdly, the curriculum was to be reformed in a way that the individuality of the pupil would be taken into account. It was useful for the society that talents and natural abilities of every pupil were observed and used to direct the pupil to the proper place in the social division of labour, according to the "right man in a right place" principle. The solutions to critical problems formed the instructions of the public school curriculum, which described the nature and content of education. Technology and its development were on essential part of the whole school curriculum process. The quality words connected to the development of technology - progress, rationality and effectiveness - were also suitable qualifiers and reasons for the reform of the curriculum. On the other hand, technology set a point of comparison and demand for the development of all phases of education. The view of technology was not clearly deterministic - it was also possible to shape technological society with the help of education. The public school curriculum process indicates how originally the principles of technological systems were shaped to the language of education and accepted in educational content.

Hautamuistomerkki elämän ja kuoleman tulkitsijana : Heikki Häiväojan, Kain Tapperin ja Matti Peltokankaan tekemät hautamuistomerkit 1952-2002

Grave sculpture as interpreter of life and death. Grave sculptures done by Heikki Häiväoja, Kain Tapper and Matti Peltokangas 1952-2002. The thoughts of Philippe Ariès and Erwin Panofsky on western funeral art constitute the starting point of this study. These scholars speak about the 20th century as a period of decline regarding western funeral art. The reason for this situation lies, according to them, in the fact that death has been rejected and become a private affair in modern society. Especially Panofsky sees an important reason for the decay of funeral art also in the separation of death from religion. In this study, I approach the view of Ariès and Panofsky from the angle of Finnish funeral art. The subject of the study is grave sculptures of three Finnish sculptors: Heikki Häiväoja, Kain Tapper and Matti Peltokangas, from 1952 to 2002. (The analysis of the grave sculptures has been performed with the Iconology of Erwin Panofsky. The analysis has been deepened by the ideas of a graveyard as a semiotic text according to Werner Enninger and Christa Schwens. In order to confirm their argumentation, they analyse the graveyard text with the model of communicative functions of Roman Jakobson and verify that the graveyard is a cultural text according to Juri Lotman.) Results of the study In the grave sculptures of the sculptors, different worldviews appear alongside Christian thoughts indicating a new stage in the tradition of funeral art. In the grave sculptures characterised as Christian, the view of life after death is included. In these memorials the direction of life is prospective, pointing to the life beyond. Death is a border, beyond which one is unable to see. Nevertheless the border is open or marked by the cross. On this open border, death is absence of pain, glory and new unity. In memorials with different worldviews, the life beyond is a possibility which is not excluded. Memorials interpret life retrospectively; life is a precious memory which wakens grief and longing. Many memorials have metaphysical and mystic features. In spite of democratization the order and valuation of social classes appear in some memorials. The old order also materializes in the war memorials relating the same destiny of the deceased. Different burial places, nevertheless, do not indicate social inequality but are rather signs of diversity. The sculptors' abstract means of modern funeral art deepen the handling of the subject matter of death and reveal the mystery of it. Grave sculptures are a part of Finnish and sacral modern art, and there is an interaction between funeral art and modern art. Modern art acquires a new dimension, when grave sculptures become a part of its field. Grave sculptures offer an alternative to anonymous burying. The memorial is a sign of the end of life; it gives death significance and publicity and creates a relation to the past of the society. In this way, grave sculptures are a part of the chain of memory of the western funeral art, which extends throughout Antiquity until ancient Egypt. (In this study I have spoken of funeral art as a chain of memory using the thoughts of Danièle Hervieu-Léger.) There are no signs of decay in the grave sculptures, on the contrary the tradition of funeral art continues in them as a search for the meaning of life and death and as an intuitive interpretation of death. As such, grave sculptures are part of the Finnish discussion of death.

Tiede ja tutkijan sosiaalinen vastuu : Joseph Ben-Davidin, Roger Sperryn ja Knut Erik Tranøyn käsitykset tieteestä ja tutkijan sosiaalisesta vastuusta

Science and the Scientist's Social Responsibility. Joseph Ben-David's, Roger Sperry's and Knut Erik Tranøy's Views of Science and the Scientist's Social Responsibility The aim of the study was to investigate, whether or not there is any connection between Jewish sociologist Joseph Ben-David's, American neuroscientist Roger Sperry's and Norwegian philosopher Knut Erik Tranøy's views of science and views of the scientist's social responsibility. The sources of information were their writings concerning this topic. Ben-David has a classical view of science. He thinks that the Mertonian norms of scientific activity, first written in 1942, are still valid in modern science. With the help of these norms Ben-David defends the view that science is morally neutral. Ben-David thinks that a scientist has a limited social responsibility. A scientist only reports on the new results, but he is not responsible for applying the results. In any case Ben-David's ideas are no longer valid. Sperry has a scientistic view of science. According to Sperry, science is the source of moral norms and also the best guide for moral action. The methods of natural sciences "show" how to solve moral problems. A scientist's personal views of science and social responsibility are not important. However Sperry's view is very problematic on the ethical side. Tranøy stresses the scientist's social responsibility. A scientist has common norms with the society from with he or she comes. This is why a scientist has the right, and also the responsibility, to discuss social and ethical questions between science and society. Tranøy's view has some ethical and practical problems, but it is valid in principle. Finally, Ben-David's, Sperry's and Tranøy's views of both science and the scientist's social responsibility have a connection: the view of science corresponds to the certain view of scientist's social responsibility. The result of this study is: Ben-David's, Sperry's and Tranøy's view of science have an ethical starting point as its fundamental presupposition, which include certain views of scientific knowledge, good and the scientist's ethical responsibilities. The connection between Ben-David's, Sperry's and Tranøy's views of science and views of the scientist's social responsibility means that their views of epistemology, meta-ethics and the scientist's ethical responsibilities have a connection to their views of the scientist's social responsibility. The results of this study can help the scientific community to organize the social responsibility of a scientist and deepen the conversation concerning the scientist's social responsibility.