The aim of this paper is to contribute to the outlining of the philosophical-epistemological status of post-critical pedagogy (henceforth PCP) in the light of the body of scholarship which has already grown about this theoretical proposal in few years. In particular, our inquiry will touch on three closely interlaced aspects which, however, it may be worth distinguishing for analytical purposes. First, the theme of post-critique has been addressed in different domains (from literary criticism to social sciences, from epistemology to political philosophy): is the kind of post-critique advocated in educational theory and philosophy just a reverberation of these endeavours or does it present some specificities? To put it differently: how can a typically philosophical-educational questioning contribute to the broader undertaking to frame a post-critical attitude? What dimensions, if any, does it unearth that remain concealed to other kind of discourses? Secondly, as Wortmann (2019, p. 467) has aptly noted, “‘[p]ost’ refers to a blank position. It opens up the question of what comes after the ‘posted’. […] [H]ow does a post-critical pedagogy relate to critical pedagogy?” We will indicate three (possibly) alternative regimes of relationships which can obtain between critical pedagogy and post-critical pedagogy, suggesting that each of them goes hand in hand with a specific view of (post-)critique and education or, better, of how to engage with (post-)critique and education. In this endeavour, we will intimate that assuming a post-critical attitude does not need to amount to abandoning the gains of critical pedagogy but it can trigger a creative redescription and recontextualization of it. Thirdly, while the first two argumentative trajectories focus on the “post-critical” side of PCP, in conclusion we will raise the question of how to construe “pedagogy”: does the very project of PCP exclusively operate at the level of an elaboration of a philosophical-educational attitude? May/has it become a research-program, if not a paradigm, also for empirical inquiries in education? Can it work also for a revisitation of pedagogies in the strictly English acceptation of the word?
Post-critical pedagogy: a philosophical-epistemological identikit / Oliverio, Stefano; Thoilliez, Bianca. - (2022). (Intervento presentato al convegno Post-Critical Approaches in Educational Research: Epistemology, Methodology, and Ethics II: PESGB Symposium tenutosi a Universitaet von Vienna nel 16-18 giugno).
Post-critical pedagogy: a philosophical-epistemological identikit
Stefano Oliverio;
2022
Abstract
The aim of this paper is to contribute to the outlining of the philosophical-epistemological status of post-critical pedagogy (henceforth PCP) in the light of the body of scholarship which has already grown about this theoretical proposal in few years. In particular, our inquiry will touch on three closely interlaced aspects which, however, it may be worth distinguishing for analytical purposes. First, the theme of post-critique has been addressed in different domains (from literary criticism to social sciences, from epistemology to political philosophy): is the kind of post-critique advocated in educational theory and philosophy just a reverberation of these endeavours or does it present some specificities? To put it differently: how can a typically philosophical-educational questioning contribute to the broader undertaking to frame a post-critical attitude? What dimensions, if any, does it unearth that remain concealed to other kind of discourses? Secondly, as Wortmann (2019, p. 467) has aptly noted, “‘[p]ost’ refers to a blank position. It opens up the question of what comes after the ‘posted’. […] [H]ow does a post-critical pedagogy relate to critical pedagogy?” We will indicate three (possibly) alternative regimes of relationships which can obtain between critical pedagogy and post-critical pedagogy, suggesting that each of them goes hand in hand with a specific view of (post-)critique and education or, better, of how to engage with (post-)critique and education. In this endeavour, we will intimate that assuming a post-critical attitude does not need to amount to abandoning the gains of critical pedagogy but it can trigger a creative redescription and recontextualization of it. Thirdly, while the first two argumentative trajectories focus on the “post-critical” side of PCP, in conclusion we will raise the question of how to construe “pedagogy”: does the very project of PCP exclusively operate at the level of an elaboration of a philosophical-educational attitude? May/has it become a research-program, if not a paradigm, also for empirical inquiries in education? Can it work also for a revisitation of pedagogies in the strictly English acceptation of the word?I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
