Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T21:11:37.264Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 15 - Moral Education and Deep Disagreement

from Part III - Responses to Contemporary Moral Problems

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 June 2023

By
Jacob Affolter
Edited by
Douglas W. Yacek ,
Mark E. Jonas  and
Kevin H. Gary
Douglas W. Yacek
Affiliation:
Universität Dortmund
Mark E. Jonas
Affiliation:
Wheaton College, Illinois
Kevin H. Gary
Affiliation:
Valparaiso University, Indiana
Get access

Summary

In this chapter, I argue that when common school teachers engage in moral education under conditions of deep disagreement, they cannot live up to liberal standards of justice. These standards demand that teachers treat a wide range of moral beliefs fairly. In practice, teachers who engage in moral education cannot avoid stigmatizing a range of students who hold legitimate moral beliefs. In support of this claim, I present a common approach to moral education that I regard as most likely to meet liberal standards of justice. I then argue that under conditions of deep disagreement, even the most skilled and well-intentioned teachers could not have the time or resources to treat all of their students’ views fairly. Finally, I suggest ways that teachers can mitigate the problem, in the hope that others will find better solutions.

Keywords

deep disagreementliberalismmoral educationmoral disagreementneutralityindoctrination
Type
Chapter
Information
Moral Education in the 21st Century , pp. 281 - 305
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2023

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aikin, S. F., & Talisse, R. B. (2020). Political argument in a polarized age: Reason and democratic life. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Angel, M. (2005). Choosing to be Jewish: the orthodox road to conversion. Hoboken, NJ: KTAV Publishing House.Google Scholar
Association for Practical and Professional Ethics (APPE) (2022). Rules for the national championship of the APPE intercollegiate ethics bowl. Available at: https://www.appe-ethics.org/assets/IEB_Documents/2022%20APPE%20IEB%20National%20Championship%20Rules.pdf.Google Scholar
Atkinson, R. F. (1972). Indoctrination and moral education. In Snook, I. A. (Ed.), Concepts of indoctrination: Philosophical essays (pp. 55–66). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. (Reprinted from R. D. Archambault (Ed.) (1972). Philosophical analysis and education. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.)Google Scholar
Beavan, C. (2009). No impact man: The adventures of a guilty liberal who attempts to save the planet, and the discoveries he makes about himself and our way of life in the process. London: Picador Books.Google Scholar
Berry, W. (1990). What are people for? Essays. Albany, CA: North Point Press.Google Scholar
Besong, B., & Fuqua, J. (Eds.) (2019). Faith and reason: Philosophers explain their turn to Catholicism. San Francisco, CA: Ignatius Press.Google Scholar
Boucher, F. (2018). Should liberal states subsidize religious schooling? Studies in Philosophy and Education, 37(6), 595–613.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brunon-Ernst, A. (2017). Nudges and the limits of appropriate interference: reading backwards from J. S. Mill’s harm principle to Jeremy Bentham’s indirect legislation. History of European Ideas, 43(1), 53–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Callan, E., & Siegel, H. (2009). Indoctrination. In Siegel, H. (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of philosophy of education (pp. 104–121). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Carlson, C. R. (2020). Hate speech as a structural phenomenon. First Amendment Studies, 54(2), 217–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caro Samada, C., Ahedo Ruiz, J., & Esteban Bara, F. (2018). Kohlberg’s moral education proposal and its legacy at university: Present and future. Revista española de pedagogía, 76(269), 85–100.Google Scholar
Cherico, R. V. (2011). Atheist to Catholic: Stories of conversion. Cincinnati, OH: Franciscan Media.Google Scholar
Choate Rosemary Hall. (2022). Equity and inclusion. Available at: https://www.choate.edu/about/equity-and-inclusion.Google Scholar
Copp, D. (2016). Moral education versus indoctrination. Theory and Research in Education, 14(2), 149–167.Google Scholar
De Ridder, J. (2021). Deep disagreements and political polarization. In Edenberg, E. & Hannon, M. (Eds.), Political epistemology (pp. 236–243). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
DiIulio, J. P. (2022). Completely free: The moral and political vision of John Stuart Mill. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Finkin, M. W., Post, R. C., Nelson, C., Benjamin, E., & Combest, E. (2007). Freedom in the classroom. American Association of University Professors. Available at: https://www.aaup.org/file/ACASO07FreedomClassrmRpt.pdf.Google Scholar
Flew, A. (1972a). Indoctrination and doctrines. In Snook, I. A. (Ed.), Concepts of indoctrination: Philosophical essays (pp. 67–92). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. (Reprinted from Studies in Philosophy and Education, 4(3), Spring 1996, 281–306.)Google Scholar
Flew, A. (1972b). Indoctrination and religion. In Snook, I. A. (Ed.), Concepts of indoctrination: Philosophical essays (pp. 1067–1116). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. (Reprinted from Studies in Philosophy and Education, 4(2), Spring 1997, pp. 273–283.)Google Scholar
Fogelin, R. (1985). The logic of deep disagreements. Informal Logic, 7(1), 1–8.Google Scholar
Fowler, T. (2020). Liberalism, childhood and justice: Ethical issues in upbringing. Bristol: Bristol University Press.Google Scholar
Fritz, J. (2021). Online shaming and the ethics of public disapproval. Journal of Applied Philosophy, 38(4), 686–701.Google Scholar
Fritz, M. R., & Guthrie, K. (2017). Values clarification: Essential for leadership learning. Journal of Leadership Education, 16(1), 47–63.Google Scholar
Garrison, W. L. (1854). No compromise with slavery. American Anti-Slavery Society.Google Scholar
Gatchel, R. H. (1972). Evolution of concepts of indoctrination in America. In Snook, I. A., ed., Concepts of indoctrination: Philosophical essays. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, pp. 9–16. (Reprinted from Educational Forum, 23(3), 303–309.)Google Scholar
Green, T. F. (1972). Indoctrination and beliefs. In Snook, I. A. (Ed.), Concepts of indoctrination: Philosophical essays (pp. 25–46). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. (Reprinted from Studies in Philosophy and Education, 3(4), 284–319.)Google Scholar
Grill, K. (2012). Paternalism. In Chadwick, R. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of applied ethics: Vol. 3) (pp. 359–369). Amsterdam, NL: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Hamburger, P. (2001). John Stuart Mill on liberty and control. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Hand, M. (2020). Moral education in the community of inquiry. Journal of Philosophy in Schools, 7(2), 4–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Himmelfarb, G. (1976). On liberty and liberalism: The case of John Stuart Mill. New York, NY: Knopf.Google Scholar
Howarth, J. W. (2009). Teaching freedom: Exclusionary rights of student groups. U.C. Davis School of Law, 42(3), 889–938. Available at: https://heinonline.org.ezproxy1.lib.asu.edu/HOL/P?h=hein.journals/davlr42&i=895.Google Scholar
Keillor, S. J. (2007). God’s judgments: Interpreting history and the Christian faith. Westmont, IL: IVP Academic.Google Scholar
Kilpatrick, W. H. (1972). Indoctrination and respect for persons. In Snook, I. A. (Ed.), Concepts of indoctrination: Philosophical essays. (pp. 47–54). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. (Reprinted from Kilpatrick, W. H. (1951). Philosophy of education. New York, NY: Macmillan Company.)Google Scholar
Kotzee, B. (2019). Intellectual perfectionism about schooling. Journal of Applied Philosophy, 36(3), 436–456.Google Scholar
Laborde, C. (2018). The evanescence of neutrality. Political Theory, 46(1), 99–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leland, R. J., & van Wietmarschen, H. (2017). Political liberalism and political community. Journal of Moral Philosophy, 14(2), 142–167.Google Scholar
Lipman, M., Sharp, A. M., & Oscanyan, F. S. (1980). Philosophy in the classroom. 2nd ed., Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
Marsden, G. M. (1997). The outrageous idea of Christian scholarship. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Matsuda, M. J. (1993). Public response to racist speech: Considering the victim’s story. In Matsuda, M. J., Crenshaw, K. W., Delgado, R., & Lawrence, C. R. III (Eds.), Words that wound: Critical race theory, assaultive speech, and the first amendment (pp. 17–52). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
McLellan, B. E. (1999). Moral education in America: Schools and the shaping of character from colonial times to the Present. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
McMahon, C. (2009). Reasonable disagreement: A theory of political morality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Morton, E. T. (2018). Pragmatism, pluralism, and the burdens of judgment. Symposion, 5(2), 135–154.Google Scholar
National High School Ethics Bowl (NHSEB). (2021). Rules manual (2021–2022). Available at: https://nhseb.unc.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/2427/2021/09/Rules-Manual-2021-2022.pdf.Google Scholar
Paddock, C. (2021). Cardinal virtue habituation as liberal citizenship education. Journal of Philosophy, 55(2), 397–408.Google Scholar
Phillips Exeter Academy (2022). Equity and inclusion. Available at: https://www.exeter.edu/community/inclusive-community.Google Scholar
Rawls, J. (1993). Political liberalism. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Rivera-Castro, F. (2021). Neutrality without pluralism. European Journal of Political Theory, 20(2), 232–251.Google Scholar
Sharp, A. M. (2017). Philosophy in the school curriculum. In Naji, S. & Hashim, R. (Eds.), History, theory and practice of philosophy for children: International perspectives (pp. 30–42). London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, R. M. (2017). Indoctrination and social context: A system‐based approach to identifying the threat of indoctrination and the responsibilities of educators. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 51(1), 38–58.Google Scholar
The New School. (2022). About us. Available at: https://www.newschool.edu/nssr/about-us/.Google Scholar
Threet, D. (2018). Mill’s social pressure puzzle. Social Theory and Practice, 44(4), 539–565.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tomasi, J. (2001). Liberalism beyond justice: Citizens, society, and the boundaries of political theory. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Verkuyten, M., & Kollar, R. (2021). Tolerance and intolerance: cultural meanings and discursive usage. Culture & Psychology, 27(1), 172–186.Google Scholar
Waldron, J. (2002). Mill and multiculturalism. In Ten, C. L. (Ed.), Mill’s On Liberty: A critical guide (pp. 165–184). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Wilson, J. (1972a). Indoctrination and rationality. In Snook, I. A. (Ed.), Concepts of indoctrination: Philosophical essays (pp. 17–24). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. (Reprinted from Wilson, J., Williams, N., & Sugarman, B. (1969). Introduction to moral education. London: Penguin Books.)Google Scholar
Wilson, J. (1972b). Indoctrination and freedom. In Snook, I. A. (Ed.), Concepts of indoctrination: Philosophical essays (pp. 101–106). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. (Reprinted from Wilson, J., Williams, N., & Sugarman, B. (1969). Introduction to moral education. London: Penguin Books.)Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×