Textbook Encyclopedia of Educational Philosophy and Theory Michael A Peters Ebook All Chapter PDF
Textbook Encyclopedia of Educational Philosophy and Theory Michael A Peters Ebook All Chapter PDF
Textbook Encyclopedia of Educational Philosophy and Theory Michael A Peters Ebook All Chapter PDF
https://textbookfull.com/product/education-and-technological-
unemployment-michael-a-peters/
https://textbookfull.com/product/philosophy-a-visual-
encyclopedia-dk-publishing/
https://textbookfull.com/product/bridging-educational-leadership-
curriculum-theory-and-didaktik-non-affirmative-theory-of-
education-1st-edition-michael-uljens/
https://textbookfull.com/product/the-idea-of-the-university-a-
reader-volume-1-michael-a-peters-ronald-barnett-eds/
Towards a Posthuman Theory of Educational Relationality
Simon Ceder
https://textbookfull.com/product/towards-a-posthuman-theory-of-
educational-relationality-simon-ceder/
https://textbookfull.com/product/the-new-development-paradigm-
education-knowledge-economy-and-digital-futures-2nd-edition-
michael-a-peters/
https://textbookfull.com/product/regulating-the-rise-of-china-
australias-foray-into-middle-power-economics-michael-peters/
https://textbookfull.com/product/understanding-educational-
psychology-a-late-vygotskian-spinozist-approach-wolff-michael-
roth/
https://textbookfull.com/product/digital-keywords-a-vocabulary-
of-information-society-and-culture-peters/
Michael A. Peters
Editor
Encyclopedia
of Educational
Philosophy and
Theory
Encyclopedia of Educational Philosophy
and Theory
ThiS is a FM Blank Page
Michael A. Peters
Editor
Encyclopedia of
Educational Philosophy
and Theory
The Encyclopedia of Educational Philosophy and Theory began its life in 1999
when Paolo Ghiraldelli and I decided to establish an encyclopedia dedicated to
philosophy of education although a decidedly different kind of philosophy of
education than what most English-speaking scholars have been conditioned to
expect. Paolo came from Brazil with a double Ph.D. and experience in media.
He was interested more widely in critical and cultural accounts. I came to
philosophy of education from philosophy after working on Wittgenstein to a
field dominated by analytic philosophy of education. I also brought to my
vision of the field an interest in philosophy of science, existential philosophy,
and critical theory. “Philosophy of education” is often taken to be an applica-
tion of philosophy either looking back to the philosophical tradition of phi-
losophers who wrote specifically on education like Plato, Rousseau, and Kant
or the application of an analytic method to the clarification of education
concepts. In my Ph.D. thesis on Wittgenstein, I came to the conclusion that
while the analytic method (if against Wittgenstein admonitions we can talk of
one method) provided rigor, logic, and argumentation, it did not recognize the
cultural and social significance of language, as revealed by the early Wittgen-
stein who inspired a generation of thinkers on viewing education as a set of
practices. Methodological rigor not withstanding I decided that the Springer
Encyclopedia of Philosophy and Theory, named after the journal of the same
name, should embrace a much wider view of education in terms of both
philosophy and theory. This construction to my mind helped to wider the
terms of reference and aided the process of making “philosophy” and “theory”
more socially and culturally inclusive. It helped also to recognize the fact that
much theoretical work that has not raised an eyebrow in the field deserves
attention of philosophers and educational theorists. Education as an academic
subject is such a huge enterprise embracing many different specialities that it is
given to a kind of fragmentation. This Encyclopedia while not attempting to
provide a unified view at least is based on the intention of recognizing the
theoretical and philosophical significance of many different branches. It is also
explicitly based on two further principles: first, the Encyclopedia attempts to
be socially inclusive and culturally responsive; second, while respectful of
different traditions and specialities the Encyclopedia is forward looking as
much as it is sensitive to the past. This means, for example, that we can include
sections on Socrates and the Socratic tradition alongside Confucius and the
vii
viii Preface
Michael A. Peters
Thematic Map
ix
x Thematic Map
Deleuze
Critical Theory of Technology
Section Editor: David R. Cole
Section Editor: Michael A. Peters
Deleuze and Guattari and Curriculum
Educational Technology (I) Deleuze and Guattari in Early Childhood
Educational Technology (II) Education
Deleuze and Guattari: Politics and Education
Deleuze and Learning
Cultural Studies Deleuze, Ontology, and Mathematics
Section Editor: Cameron McCarthy Deleuze, Religion, and Education
Deleuze’s Philosophy for Education
Collective Praxis: A Theoretical Vision Rhizoanalysis as Educational Research
Colored Cosmopolitanism and the Classroom: Unmaking the Work of Pedagogy Through
Educational Connections Between African Deleuze and Guattari
Americans and South Asians
Cultural Studies and Education in the Digital Age
Cultural Studies and New Student Resistance Derrida
Cultural Studies and Public Pedagogy
Section Editor: Michael A. Peters
Labor in the Digital Age
Learning Through Infrastructures: Cybercafes as Deconstruction, Philosophy, Education
Spaces for Digital Literacy Derrida and the Philosophy of Education
Queer Theory Derrida’s Deconstruction Contra Habermas’s
Real Recognize Real: Local Hip-Hop Cultures Communicative Reason
and Global Imbalances in the African Diaspora Difference/Différance
Thematic Map xi
Educational Administration
Disability Studies
Section Editor: Colin W. Evers
Section Editors: Laura Jaffee and
Critical Self-Learning and Organizational
Ashley Taylor
Learning: A Popperian Perspective
Asperger and the Framing of Autism: His Legacy Educational Administration and the Inequality of
and Its Philosophical Commitments School Achievement
Convergence of Inclusive Education and Epistemology and Educational Administration
Disability Studies: A Critical Framework Field of Educational Administration and Its
Dewey and Philosophy of Disability Coevolving Epistemologies
Disability and Samoa Foucault and Educational Administration
Disability as Psycho-Emotional Disablism: A Issues in the Aesthetics of Educational
Theoretical and Philosophical Review of Administration
Education Theory and Practice Managerialism and Education
xii Thematic Map
xix
xx About the Editor
and to the fragmentation and dissolution of Western culture. For these thinkers
also the question of the style of philosophy is paramount and it is productive to
approach their philosophies as a kind of writing.”
He is currently editing The Companion to Wittgenstein and Education:
Pedagogical Investigations (Springer) with Jeff Stickney. He coauthored
Saying and Doing: Wittgenstein as a Pedagogical Philosopher (2008) with
Nicholas Burbules and Paul Smeyers; and Wittgenstein: Philosophy, Postmod-
ernism, Pedagogy (1999) with James D. Marshall. Other philosophical works
include: Education and the Postmodern Condition (ed.) (1996); Poststruc-
turalism, Politics, and Education (1996); Derrida, Deconstruction and Edu-
cation (2004) and Deconstructing Derrida: Tasks for the New Humanities
(2005) with Peter Trifonas; Derrida, Politics and Pedagogy (2009) with Gert
Biesta; and Subjectivity and Truth: Foucault, Education, and the Culture of the
Self (2008), Why Foucault? (eds.) (2007), and Governmentality Studies in
Education (eds.) (2009), all with Tina Besley.
He is also interested in the philosophy and political economy of knowledge
production and consumption within the academy having written many books
on knowledge economy and the university. His current projects in this area
include work on distributed knowledge, digital learning and publishing sys-
tems, and “open education.”
His written works in this area include most recently The Global Financial
Crisis and the Restructuring of Education (2015) and Paulo Freire: The
Global Legacy (2015), both with Tina Besley; Education, Philosophy and
Politics: Selected Works (2011) and Education, Cognitive Capitalism and
Digital Labour (2011), with Ergin Bulut; and Neoliberalism and After? Edu-
cation, Social Policy, and the Crisis of Capitalism (2011), Education in the
Creative Economy with Dan Araya (2010), and Building Knowledge Cultures
(2008), with Tina Besley.
He is a lifelong Fellow of the New Zealand Academy of Humanities and he
was made an Honorary Fellow of the Royal Society of NZ in 2010. He has
acted as an advisor to government on these and related matters in Scotland,
NZ, South Africa, and the EU. He was awarded honorary doctorates by State
University of New York (SUNY) in 2012 and University of Aalborg in 2015.
About the Associate Editors
xxi
xxii About the Associate Editors
xxiii
xxiv Section Editors
xxv
xxvi Contributors
20. Ahikam the son of Shaphan] Compare Jeremiah xxvi. 24, xl.
5.
that is poured out upon us] In 2 Kings “that is kindled against us,”
so LXX. ἐκκέκαυται. Compare verse 25.
²²So Hilkiah, and they whom the king had
commanded, went to Huldah the prophetess,
the wife of Shallum the son of Tokhath ¹, the
son of Hasrah ², keeper of the wardrobe; (now
she dwelt in Jerusalem in the second
quarter ³;) and they spake to her to that effect.
²³And she said unto them, Thus saith the
Lord, the God of Israel: Tell ye the man that
sent you unto me,
¹ In 2 Kings xxii. 14, Tikvah.
all that were found in Israel] i.e. the remnant of the northern
tribes, compare verse 21.
All his days] Contrast the evil record of his son Jehoiakim, xxxvi.
5‒8.
Hilkiah the priest found the book of the law of the Lord] This
remarkable statement has proved to be a fruitful subject of
discussion. What precisely is meant by “the book of the law” said to
have been found by Hilkiah in the Temple? It is essential to
distinguish between the answer which the Chronicler would have
given to this question and the conclusions reached by an
independent survey of the problem. (1) Undoubtedly the Chronicler
supposed “the book of the law” to be the whole Pentateuch, since he
believed that the entire Law existed as it now is from the time of
Moses. The argument against his view is obvious to us at the
present time. Beside the practical objection of the impossibility of
reading the whole Pentateuchal Law twice in succession to different
persons on the same day (2 Kings xxii. 8, 10)—a difficulty which
perhaps the Chronicler himself perceived and sought to avoid, see
note on verse 18,—there is the overwhelming testimony of the
general evidence that a large part of the Pentateuch in its final form,
with which the Chronicler was familiar, is of post-exilic date. His
Pentateuch was quite certainly not “the book” found by Hilkiah. (2) It
is extremely interesting to observe that the first step towards the
judgement of modern criticism was taken at a very early date and by
certain of the Christian Fathers—Jerome, Procopius of Gaza,
Chrysostom—who put forward the view that the book in question
was not the whole Pentateuch but only the Book of Deuteronomy.
[For the details the student must be referred to articles in the
Zeitschrift für alttestamentliche Wissenschaft, 1902, pp. 170 f., 312
f., and the Journal of Biblical Literature, 1903, p. 50.] This view, first
developed scientifically by De Wette, gained eventually a very wide
acceptance amongst scholars. Stress is laid upon the resemblance
between the reforms ascribed to Josiah and the exhortations and
injunctions of Deuteronomy, particularly as regards the restriction of
sacrificial worship to one sanctuary (i.e. Jerusalem; compare
Deuteronomy xii. 10‒14). For the evidence the student may consult
Chapman, Introduction to the Pentateuch, pp. 135‒146, especially
pp. 142‒145 (in this series); or Driver, Deuteronomy (International
Critical Commentaries), pp. xliv ff. (3) Further, internal consideration
of the Book of Deuteronomy has led to the conclusion that it cannot
all date from the time of Josiah: and thus it is now generally held that
Hilkiah’s “book of the law” was not the final form of Deuteronomy, but
only the nucleus of that Book—probably chapters v.‒xxvi. and xxviii.,
or xii.‒xxvi. and xxviii., or even certain passages from those chapters
(see Chapman, Introduction to the Pentateuch, pp. 144, 145; or
Driver, Deuteronomy, pp. lxv ff.). (4) Finally, there are grounds for
doubting whether any part of Deuteronomy can be dated from the
time of Josiah. It is suggested that the Deuteronomic code is not
earlier than Jeremiah but later. Although this view does not yet
command general acceptance, it is fair to insist that it rests upon
evidence which cannot be so lightly set aside as is occasionally
supposed. The student may conveniently refer to remarks by R. H.
Kennett in the Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics, vol. vii., s.v.
Israel p. 447, and to the references there given, especially the
Journal of Theological Studies, VII. [1906], pp. 481 ff. If
Deuteronomy be later than the time of Josiah, what then can we
suppose this “book of the law” (sēpher hattōrah) to have been; for
there is no reason to question the accuracy of the tradition that some
impressive writing was discovered in the Temple? The answer will be
—in all probability—some scroll of prophetic teaching, in which the
abuses of worship (perhaps in Manasseh’s reign) and in particular
the corruptions of the country “high places” were searchingly
denounced and an appeal made for reform. Since at that date the
term tōrah was applicable to prophetic teaching as well as to legal
instruction, such a work would be known as “a book of tōrah.” It is
not a very serious objection that the text here and in Kings reads “the
book of the law (hattōrah),” partly because a peculiarity of Hebrew
grammar would still allow the translation “a book of tōrah,” partly
because the introduction of the definite article into the text would be
most natural, so soon as it came to be thought that the phrase
referred to Deuteronomy or the Pentateuch. We may summarise as
follows:—To the Chronicler “the book of the law” signified the whole
Pentateuch in its final form; to the compilers or editors of Kings (the
Chronicler’s source), who probably wrote at the “Deuteronomic”
stage of the history, it no doubt meant Deuteronomy; and lastly,
according to modern judgement the book actually discovered was
either the earliest or essential portions of Deuteronomy or possibly a
pre-Deuteronomic prophetic writing demanding the purification of
worship in Jerusalem and urging the abolition of the sacrifices and
feasts at the local shrines.
Chapter XXXV.
1‒19 (= 1 Esdras i. 1‒22; compare 2 Kings xxiii. 21‒23).
Josiah’s Passover.
Put the holy ark in the house] This rather curious remark seems
to imply that the ark had been removed from the Temple either by
Manasseh or by Josiah during the repairing of the house. The
Levites are bidden to set it in its place without delay, and to devote
themselves to the tasks related in verses 4 ff.
let there be for each a portion ... of the Levites] Each great
division of the laity was to be served by a small division of the
Levites.
from the days of Samuel] In 2 Kings xxiii. 22 “from the days of the
judges.”