No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Educational Implications of Gamwell's Argument
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 24 April 2015
Extract
Franklin I. Gamwell's book, The Meaning of Religious Freedom, sets forth a theory that, if followed, would require some response (change) in education (from educators). Among other things, a philosophy of education should indicate curricula choices and instructional practices that follow from, or would lead to, a theory such as Gamwell's. John Dewey, the preeminent 20th Century American philosopher, to whom Gamwell refers numerous times, believed that “[e]ducation is the laboratory in which philosophic[al] distinctions become concrete and are tested.” I will raise some questions that are not so much criticisms of Gamwell's argument as they are attempts to start a discussion about what the theory would require from education.
Gamwell makes it clear that his argument, and the definitions from which it works, is “formal,” that is, not tied to any particular set of circumstances, let alone the United States, because he does not want to privilege or preclude at the outset any, what he calls, “candidate answers.” (13) His argument is compact and intricate. He earlier gave an outline of the argument in a paper on “Religion and Reason in American Politics” read at a conference in 1986. His concern is that there is a tendency to treat religion as inconsistent with politics, indeed as adversarial, and as non-rational, or not liable to criticism. (This is the same concern that Stephen Carter addresses in The Culture of Disbelief: How American Law and Politics Trivialize Religious Devotion, though Carter's treatment is “popularized,” not formal, and, in my judgement, is superficial).
- Type
- Religious Freedom, Modern Democracy, and the Common Good: Conference Papers
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Center for the Study of Law and Religion at Emory University 1995
References
1. Dewey, John, Democracy and Education 384 (Macmillan, 1921)Google Scholar.
2. Carter, Stephen L., The Culture of Disbelief: How American Law and Politics Trivialize Religious Devotion (Basic Books, 1993)Google Scholar.
3. Gamwell, Franklin I., Religion and Reason in American Politics in Lovin, Robin W., ed, Religion and American Public Life: Interpretations and Explorations 88, 102 (Paulist Press, 1986)Google Scholar.
4. Dewey, , Democracy and Education at 171 (cited in note 1)Google Scholar.
5. Lynn, Barry, Stern, Marc D. and Thomas, Oliver S., The Right to Religious Liberty: The Basic ACLU Guide to Religious Rights 10 (S Illinois U Press, 1995)Google Scholar (citing School Dist of Abington Twshp v Schempp, 374 US 209 (1963)).
6. Gordon, William M., Religious Activities in Public Education: The Case Against, 2 J Just & Caring Educ 157 (1996)Google Scholar.
7. Gamwell, , Religion and Reason at 107 (cited in note 3)Google Scholar.
8. Gordon, , J Just & Caring Educ at 161 (cited in note 6)Google Scholar.
9. Losito, William F., Promoting the Reflective Understanding of Religion in Public Education, 2 J Just & Caring Educ 152 (1996)Google Scholar.
10. Id at 156 (emphasis added).
11. James, William, The Varieties of Religious Experience (Random House, 1902)Google Scholar.
12. See Sherman, Robert R., William James and the Christian Right (1995)Google Scholar (paper read at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Studies Association) on file with author.
13. Gordon, , J Just & Caring Educ at 162 (cited in note 8)Google Scholar.
14. Crick, Bernard, In Defense of Politics 18 (Penguin Books, 4th ed, 1964)Google Scholar.
15. Id at 152. See also Boorstin, Daniel J., The Genius of American Politics (U Chicago Press, 1953)Google Scholar.
16. Gamwell, , Religion and Reason at 100 (cited in note 3)Google Scholar