EN:

Several philosophers and psychologists of education have taken the position that wellbeing should be at the heart of our educational system, if not its primary goal. The aim of this paper is to outline, question, and challenge this position. It starts by discussing the main approaches that consider student wellbeing as the primary goal of the educational system – the propositions of positive psychology and those of certain educational philosophers and psychologists. It follows with an examination of some major social critiques of the idea of wellbeing as a goal of schooling. Drawing mainly on Foucault, the paper questions the extent to which the aim of wellbeing contributes to normalization and hinders the possibility of self-government. The paper concludes that wellbeing should not be conceived as a goal, but rather as an ongoing preoccupation of care for the self.

EN:

This paper seeks to revisit the concept of “pedagogy of discomfort” through the combined lenses of Lauren Berlant’s work on “inconvenience” and recent theorization of “affective infrastructure” to clarify how an infrastructural understanding of “discomfort-as-inconvenience” might provide deeper insights about the pedagogical and political risks and possibilities of discomfort. In particular, the paper highlights three insights: first, it expands our understanding of discomfort by situating it in the broader context of the inconvenience of other people, as an ethics and politics of coexistence; second, it calls for a contextual approach of a pedagogy of discomfort that examines discomfort as a multifaceted affective event entangled with other material, social, and political elements; and third, it enables educators to create environments that could enrich the moral and political potential of a pedagogy of discomfort, by paying attention to the affective conditions in which students and educators find themselves when they encounter different manifestations of discomfort-as-inconvenience.

EN:

While interaction and exchange between cultures is arguably increasing in our globalized world, sentiments reflecting division among cultures and ways of being in the world remain. In particular, the relevance of ideas, theory, and philosophy based on traditional “Western” values and a focus on the individual is often drawn into question for collectivist and community-centred cultures—and vice versa. This has implications for education, given that much of the education discourse and approaches based on Western traditions are affecting education system across the globe and across cultures. It is also of particular significance for the educational approach focusing on developing students’ own “art of living.” While undoubtedly significant fundamental differences exist between most cultures, this article aims to suggest that, nevertheless, synergies and connecting points exist between Schmid’s philosophical concept of the “art of living”—which is based on so-called traditional Western philosophy—and the Latin American notion of “buen vivir” (good living)—which is based on the traditions and cultural worldview of Indigenous peoples of this subcontinent. While we acknowledge the vast differences in culture and the depths of the cultural divide, our comparative review indicates that connections can be drawn on fundamental ethical aspects of human co-existence. We argue that these connecting points suggest that Schmid’s philosophy can be of relevance to non-Western cultural contexts, as much as Indigenous ways of knowing and being can be of relevance to those in the “Western” world pursuing an art of living, which, consequently, indicates that an educational approach to the art of living can be relevant to diverse cultural contexts beyond Western-centric settings.

EN:

Since the Second World War, racial integration has been the dominant way of framing racial justice. Those who advocate integration believe that racial justice would be achievable if Blacks were given an equal opportunity to compete on par with Whites. However, racial integration was critiqued most radically and vocally during the 1970s and early 1980s Black Power era. While the Black Power movement never coalesced into a unified critique of integration, it radically shifted debates within the Black public sphere. The attack on Black radicalism and the rise of neoliberalism combined to create a condition in which critiques of capitalism and demands for radical social transformation were increasingly seen as outdated, irrelevant, or a promotion of totalitarianism. This paper focuses on how the ideology of integration manifests in Derrick Darby and John Rury’s (2018) book, The Color of Mind. The ideology of integration is the hegemonic system of explicitly or tacitly held beliefs that misrepresents significant aspects of social reality by assuming that racial justice is solely, or even primarily, about integrating Blacks and other racialized groups into liberal capitalism. Darby and Rury reproduce the ideology of integration by framing racial justice as a fight for integration. To move beyond the ideology of integration, we must seriously engage the Black radical tradition, which requires philosophically reconstructing reasonable, but radical arguments within the Black radical tradition.