FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W1504244887> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W1504244887 endingPage "304" @default.
• W1504244887 startingPage "296" @default.
• W1504244887 abstract "1. Conversation Concrete 2. Education 3. Friendship Teaching and Recognition 300 P H I L O S O P H Y O F E D U C A T I O N 2 0 0 2 Buber uses these two distinctions, abstract–concrete and one-sided–mutual, to generate three forms of dialogue. If there is a “pure” form of dialogue, then, it would seem to be friendship, which lacks neither concreteness nor mutuality. As if saving the best for last, Buber concludes his typology with friendship, which he calls the “the true inclusion.” That Buber sees abstraction and one-sidedness as defects, even if non-fatal ones, is further supported by the fact that he does not even bother to name and consider the type of inclusion/dialogue that is abstract and one-sided. Buber argues that teaching involves a lofty asceticism because teachers cultivate an atmosphere in which their wills and desires are constantly checked by their experience of the other side. To manipulate or enjoy one’s students, Buber reasons, involves a “falsification” of one’s role, besides which “all quackery appears peripheral” (ED, 95). In hoping that teachers do not use or abuse their students, Buber says nothing very controversial. At the same time, we must wonder whether a teacher can truly rejoice in her communion with students if she never feels acknowledged by them in return? Buber knows very well that it is not only the child who longs for communion “in face of the lonely night” (ED, 88). Today’s teachers are yesterday’s children, longing not only for communion, but confirmation, in who they are and what they do. Does Buber imagine this asceticism as a price of maturity? Is the need for confirmation one of those “childish things” that we must “put away” once we become adults and offer our help to the next generation? Is this something that an adult can renounce? Is teaching under such conditions sustainable? These questions take on a new meaning and force when we turn from the work of Buber to that of a later intersubjective theorist, Jessica Benjamin. MUTUAL RECOGNITION IN ASYMMETRICAL RELATIONSHIPS In The Bonds of Love, Benjamin sets out to think Hegel and Freud together and to go beyond both. In particular, she wants to join Hegel’s dialectical, intersubjective account of human consciousness to Freud’s insight that the infant does not initially know where it ends and its mother or the world begins. According to Benjamin object relations theory from Freud to Mahler is governed by the “assumption that we grow out of relationships rather than becoming more active and sovereign within them, that we start in a state of dual oneness and end in a state of singular oneness” (ED, 18). Such theories may understand the infant’s individuation as a relational process, but they remain one-person psychology, neglecting both the child’s interest in the world of others, and the role of the mother’s subjectivity in the process of individuation. Drawing on the work of Daniel Stern and D.W. Winnicott, Benjamin sets out to construct a genuinely intersubjective account of human development. In such a view, Benjamin writes, “the issue is not only how we separate from oneness, but also how we connect to and recognize others; the issue is not how we become free of the other, but how we actively engage and make ourselves known in relation to the other” (BL, 18). For Benjamin, this need to be known by the other, what she calls recognition, “is so central to human existence as to escape notice.” (BL, 15). Comparing human development to photosynthesis, she says that recognition is akin to the sunlight fueling the process (BL, 22). Recognition is a constant and crucial presence in human interactions, though it can take many forms: “to recognize is to affirm, validate," @default.
• W1504244887 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W1504244887 creator A5006759505 @default.
• W1504244887 date "2002-01-01" @default.
• W1504244887 modified "2023-10-18" @default.
• W1504244887 title "Teaching and the Dynamics of Recognition" @default.
• W1504244887 doi "https://doi.org/10.47925/2002.296" @default.
• W1504244887 hasPublicationYear "2002" @default.
• W1504244887 type Work @default.
• W1504244887 sameAs 1504244887 @default.
• W1504244887 citedByCount "1" @default.
• W1504244887 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W1504244887 hasAuthorship W1504244887A5006759505 @default.
• W1504244887 hasBestOaLocation W15042448871 @default.
• W1504244887 hasConcept C145420912 @default.
• W1504244887 hasConcept C145912823 @default.
• W1504244887 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W1504244887 hasConcept C188147891 @default.
• W1504244887 hasConcept C19417346 @default.
• W1504244887 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W1504244887 hasConceptScore W1504244887C145420912 @default.
• W1504244887 hasConceptScore W1504244887C145912823 @default.
• W1504244887 hasConceptScore W1504244887C15744967 @default.
• W1504244887 hasConceptScore W1504244887C188147891 @default.
• W1504244887 hasConceptScore W1504244887C19417346 @default.
• W1504244887 hasConceptScore W1504244887C41008148 @default.
• W1504244887 hasLocation W15042448871 @default.
• W1504244887 hasOpenAccess W1504244887 @default.
• W1504244887 hasPrimaryLocation W15042448871 @default.
• W1504244887 hasRelatedWork W2033606892 @default.
• W1504244887 hasRelatedWork W2055727764 @default.
• W1504244887 hasRelatedWork W2329823976 @default.
• W1504244887 hasRelatedWork W2605124538 @default.
• W1504244887 hasRelatedWork W2748952813 @default.
• W1504244887 hasRelatedWork W2899084033 @default.
• W1504244887 hasRelatedWork W2953787330 @default.
• W1504244887 hasRelatedWork W3013278785 @default.
• W1504244887 hasRelatedWork W3039036695 @default.
• W1504244887 hasRelatedWork W1715278674 @default.
• W1504244887 hasVolume "58" @default.
• W1504244887 isParatext "false" @default.
• W1504244887 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W1504244887 magId "1504244887" @default.
• W1504244887 workType "article" @default.