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.

Women and Marital Breakdown in South India : Reconstructing Homes, Bonds and Persons

Women and Marital Breakdown in South India: Reconstructing Homes, Bonds and Persons is an ethnographic analysis of the situation of divorced and separated women and their families in the South Indian city of Bangalore. The study is based on 16 months of anthropological fieldwork, i.e., participant observation and life history interviews among 50 divorced and separated women from different socio-religious backgrounds in their homes, in the women s organisations and in the Family Court. The study follows the divorced and separated women from their natal homes to their affinal homes through homelessness and legal battles to their reconstructed natal, affinal or single homes in order to find out what it means to be a person within hierarchical gender and kinship relations in South India. Marital breakdown impacts on kin relations and discloses the existing gender relations and power structure through its consequences. It makes the transformability of relational personhood as well as the transformability of relational society and culture visible. Although the study reveals the painful history of women s ill-treatment in marriage, family and kinship systems, it also demonstrates the women s rejection of the domination; and shows their ability to re-negotiate and promote changes not only to their own positions but to the whole hierarchical system as well. The study explores the divorced and separated women s manifold dilemmas, complicated legal battles, and endless arrangements when they have to struggle with the very practical problems of supporting themselves financially, finding and making a new home for themselves, and re-arranging relationships with their kin and friends. As marital breakdown fundamentally transforms the women s relational field, it forces them to recreate substitutive relations in a flexible way and, simultaneously, to re-construct themselves and their lives without a ready or positive cultural or behavioural template. This process reveals the agency of the divorced and separated women as well as shedding light on issues of gender and the cultural construction of the person in South India. This topical study explores the previously neglected subject of marital breakdown in India and shows the new meaning of kinship in South India.