Scheffleriläinen rationaalisuus ja kasvatustodellisuuden monikerroksisuus : Jännitteitä ja ratkaisuja Israel Schefflerin kasvatusfilosofiassa

The study is a philosophical analysis of Israel Scheffler’s philosophy of education, focusing on three crucial conceptions in his philosophy: the conception of rationality, the conception of human nature, and the conception of reality. The interrelations of these three concepts as well as their relations to educational theorizing are analysed and elaborated. A conceptual problem concerning Scheffler’s ideal of rationality derives from Scheffler’s supposition of the strong analogy between science education and moral education in terms of the ideal of rationality. This analogy is argued to be conceptually problematic, since the interconnections of rationality, objectivity, and truth, appear to differ from each other in the realms of ethics and science, given the presuppositions of ontological realism and ethical naturalism, to which Scheffler explicitly subscribes. This study considers two philosophical alternatives for solving this problem. The first alternative relates the analogy to the normative concept of personhood deriving from the teleological understanding of human nature. Nevertheless, this position turns out to be problematic for Scheffler, since he rejects all teleological thinking in his philosophy. The problem can be solved, as it is argued, by limiting Scheffler’s rejection of teleology – in light of his philosophical outlook on the whole – in a manner that allows a modest version of a teleological conception of human nature. The second alternative, based especially on Scheffler’s later contributions, is to suggest that reality is actually more complex and manifold than it appears to be in light of a contemporary naturalist worldview. This idea of plurealism – Scheffler’s synthesis of pluralism and realism – is represented especially in Scheffler’s contributions related to his debate with Nelson Goodman dealing with both constructivism and realism. The idea of plurealism is not only related to the ethics-science-distinction, but is more widely related to the relationship between ontological realism and the incommensurable systems of description in diverse realms of human understanding. The Scheffler-Goodman debate is also analysed in relation to the contemporary constructivism-realism debate in educational philosophy. In terms of educational questions, Scheffler’s plurealism is argued as offering a fruitful perspective. Scheffler’s philosophy of education can be interpreted as searching for solutions to the problems deriving from the tension between the tradition of analytical philosophy and the complexity and multiplicity of educational reality. The complexity of reality combined with the supposition of the limitedness of human knowledge does not lead Scheffler to relativism or particularism, but, in contrast, Schefflerian formulations of rationality and objectivity preserve the possibility for critical inquiry in all realms of educational reality. In light of this study, Scheffler’s philosophy of education provides an exceptional example of combining ontological realism, epistemological fallibilism, and the defence of the ideal of rationality, combined with a wide-ranging understanding of educational reality.

Yhteisöllisyys juutalaisessa kansallisuusajattelussa ja Israelin valtion itsenäisyysjulistuksessa

The Idea of Community in the Jewish National Thinking and in the Proclamation of Independence The aim of this study is to clarify the idea of community in the Jewish national thinking and in the Proclamation of Independence of the State of Israel in 1948. The method is the community analysis. The values of the culture are studied by two- and threefold dimensions on the arena. On the field of that arena one can find the society of order, the society of pressure, the societies made by mosaics and the societies that are breaking apart. The community way of behaving means, that the individuals voluntarily follow common values. The earliest Jewish ideals elevated the concept of unity among the people. The reality in the society was different especially in Roman times when the religious and national thinking was fragmented into four different main views. During the Diaspora the religious tradition mostly warned against pursuing a Jewish state, but many forms of Anti-Judaism and the new national thinking in the nineteenth century created the Zionist movement. The religious Jewish people did not rely on the earthy nationalism and when some of them later chose Zionism, they stressed the religious aspects in governing the state. The cultural Zionists preferred a slower and more low key spiritual way of change. The Revisionists saw no alternatives but to use military force. Many in the majority, the Labour movement, hoped that the progress brought to the region by Zionism would change the minds of opponents. The general appearance of the proclamation is optimistic. It characterizes national and political unity gathering people who think differently and who come from different factions of the Jewish political and cultural orientation. These people can be placed on different corners in the community analysis. The proclamation concentrates on state and administrative points of view. It aims at a state for the Jews, and the Jewishness of the state is more clearly seen in later legislation. The hope for co-operation from all sides was clearly articulated. The central aim was the security of the Jews. The proclamation has a community quotation because it aimed to build up a net of cooperation. The vision of building a nation of their own is balanced by the collaboration with the Arabs and the international community. In the same roclamation the individual civil rights are side by side with the Prophets thoughts about peace and justice. The Proclamation describes a society of a good order which aims at uniting the people. In the midst of grave difficulties a noble proclamation of national and international co-operation was created. It was not taken for granted that the ideals would be realized. The care of the national homeland could become egocentric nationalism and the attention to the Prophets heritage could turn to emphasizing strict religious rules or to isolation from others. The emphasis of civil rights could turn to assimilation or in other words to other kinds of values in their own country.

Memory Meanders : Place, Home and Commemoration in an Ex-Rhodesian Diaspora Community

Memory Meanders is an ethnographic analysis of a postcolonial migrant community, white former Rhodesians, who have emigrated from Zimbabwe to South Africa after Zimbabwe s independence in 1980. An estimated 100 000 whites left the country during the first years of independence. Majority of these emigrants settled in South Africa. In recent years President Mugabe s land redistribution program has inflicted forced expulsions and violence against white farmers and black farm workers, and instigated a new wave of emigration. Concerning the study of Southern Africa, my research is therefore very topical. In recent years there has been a growing concern to study postcolonialism as it unfolds in the lived realities of actual postcolonies. A rising interest has also been cast on colonial cultures and white colonials within complex power relationships. My research offers insight to these discussions by investigating the ways in which the colonial past affects and effects in the present activities and ideas of former colonials. The study also takes part in discussing fundamental questions concerning how diaspora communities socially construct their place in the world in relation to the place left behind, to their current places of dwelling and to the community in dispersal. In spite of Rhodesia s incontestable ending, it is held close by social practices; by thoughts and talks, by material displays, and by webs of meaningful relationships. Such social memory practices, I suggest, are fundamental to how the community understands itself. The vantage points from which I examine how the ex-Rhodesians reminisce about Rhodesia concern ideas and practices related to place, home and commemoration. I first focus on the processes of symbolic investment that go into understanding place and landscape in Rhodesia and ask how the once dwelled-in places, iconic landscapes and experiences within places are reminisced about in diaspora. Secondly, I examine how home both as a mundanely organized sphere of everyday lives and as an idea of belonging is culturally configured, and analyze how and if homes travel in diaspora. In the final ethnographic section I focus on commemorative practices. I first analyze how food and culturally specific festive occasions of commensality are connected to social and sensual memory, considering the unique ways in which food acts as a mnemonic trigger in a diaspora community. The second example concerns the celebration of a centenary of Rhodesia in 1990. Through this case I describe how the mnemonic power of commemoration rests on the fact that culturally meaningful experiences are bodily re-enacted. I show how habitual memory connected to performance is one example of how memory gets passed-on in non-textual ways.