Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Liberal Civic Education, Religious Commitment, and the Spillover Thesis: What Psychology Can Teach Us

  • John L. Phillips (a1) and Laura McMillian (a2)

Abstract

This article addresses an idea central to liberal debates on civic education: the spillover thesis. Both egalitarian liberals and their religious opponents in these debates claim that liberal civic education creates spillover effects into the way individuals assess the meaning of their own lives. Some religious citizens fear that their politically reasonable conceptions of the good life are being undermined by education that emphasizes the practice of autonomous reasoning. Egalitarian liberals usually acknowledge this risk or cost, but deny that religious citizens should be given special dispensation from the burdens of autonomous reasoning. Some may even hope that conservative religious beliefs will be eroded by the practice of liberal civic education. This article disputes the spillover thesis. Given the best evidence available from the field of cognitive psychology, we challenge the notion that critical personal reflection about public matters is bound to spillover into critical reflection about private moral matters. On the contrary, the evidence suggests that human beings are usually well equipped to compartmentalize and are capable of reasoning in different ways depending on the context. Thus, reasonable citizens of faith are not necessarily unduly burdened by programs of civic education; nor are liberal programs of civic education necessarily going to lead us to a more secular society of autonomous thinkers. The article also speaks to a broader civic humanist tradition in political philosophy that includes Plato, Tocqueville, Rousseau, and Marcus Aurelius. For these authors, the success of a political enterprise is seen to crucially depend on the inculcation of a robust and comprehensive system of private virtue. For without private virtue, there is no public virtue. If we are correctly interpreting the available psychological research, private virtue need not be as crucially relevant for the success of common political enterprises. The inculcation of private moral virtue does not so clearly translate into making good leaders, voters, and public servants.

Copyright

Corresponding author

Address correspondence and reprint requests to: John L. Phillips, University of North Carolina, Caldwell Hall, CB #3125, 230 East Cameron Avenue, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3125. E-mail: jphil@email.unc.edu; or Laura McMillian, Pepperdine University. E-mail: laura.mcmillian@pepperdine.edu.

References

Hide All
Atran, S. 1998. “Folkbiology and the Anthropology of Science: Cognitive Universals and Cultural Particulars.” Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21:547609.
Atran, S. 2001. “The Case for Modularity: Sin or Malvation?Evolution and Cognition 7:78.
Atran, S. 2005. “Adaptionism for Human Cognition: Strong, Spurious or Weak?Mind & Language 20:3967.
Callan, E. 1996. “Political Liberalism and Political Education.” The Review of Politics 58:1921.
Cosmides, L., and Tooby, J.. 1994. “Origins of Domain Specificity: The Evolution of Functional Organization.” In Mapping the Mind, eds., Hirschfeld, L., and Gelman, S.. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 85116.
Deutsch, M. 1975. “Equity, Equality, and Need: What Determines Which Value Will Be Used As the Basis for Distributive Justice?Journal of Social Issues 31:137149.
Eberle, C. J. 2002. Religious Conviction in Liberal Politics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Fiske, A. P. 1991. Structures of Social Life: The Four Elementary Forms of Human Relations: Communal Sharing, Authority Ranking, Equality Matching, Market Pricing. New York, NY: Free Press.
Fodor, J. 1998. “The Trouble with Psychological Darwinism.” London Review of Books, 20:1113.
Freeman, S. 2007. Rawls. New York, NY: Routledge.
Gardner, H. 1983. Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Greenawalt, K. 1995. Private Consciences and Public Reasons. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Gutmann, A. 1995. “Civic Education and Social Diversity.” Ethics 105:563.
Haney, C., Banks, W. C., and Zimbardo, P. G.. 1973. “Study of Prisoners and Guards in a Simulated Prison.” Naval Research Reviews 9:117.
Hartshorne, H., and May, M.. 1971. “Studies in the Organization of Character.” In Readings in Child Development, eds., Munsinger, H.New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 190197.
Jones, E. E., and Harris, V. A.. 1967. “The Attribution of Attitudes.” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 3:124.
Jones, E. E., and Nisbett, R. E.. 1972. “The Actor and the Observer: Divergent Perceptions of the Causes of Behavior.” In Attribution: Perceiving the causes of behavior, eds., Jones, E. E., Kanouse, K., Kelley, H. H., Nisbett, R. E., Valins, S., and Weiner, B.. New York, NY: American government: General Learning Press.
Larmore, Charles. 1996. The Morals of Modernity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Lickel, Brian, Hamilton, David, and Sherman, Steven. 2001. “Elements of Lay Theories of Groups: Types of Groups, Relational Styles, and Perception of Group Entitativity.” Personality and Social Psychology Review 5:129140
Lord, C. G., Ross, L., and Lepper, M. R.. 1979. “Biased Assimilation and Attitude Polarization: The Effects of Prior Theories on Subsequently Considered Evidence.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 37:20982109.
Macedo, Stephen. 2000. Diversity and Distrust: Civic Education in a Multicultural Democracy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
McConnell, Michael W. 2002. “Educational Disestablishment: Why DemocraticValues are Ill Served by Democratic Control of Schooling.” In Moral and Political Education, eds., Macedo, S. and Tamir, Y.. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Mutz, Diana C. 2006. Hearing the Other Side. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Okin, S. 1991. Justice, Gender, and the Family. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Prencipe, A., and Helwig, C. C.. 2002. “The Development of Reasoning about the Teaching of Values in School and Family Contexts.” Child Development 73:841856.
Rawls, J. 1993. Political Liberalism. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
Ross, L. D. 1977. “The Intuitive Psychologist and His Shortcomings: Distortions in the Attribution Process.” In Advances in experimental social psychology, ed. Berkowitz, L.New York, NY: Random House, 173220.
Ross, L., Bierbrauer, G., and Hoffman, S.. 1976. “The Role of Attributional Processes in Conformity and Dissent: Revisiting the Asch Situation.” American Psychologist 31:148157.
Sherman, S. J., Castelli, L., and Hamilton, D. L.. 2001. “The Spontaneous Use of a Group Typology as an Organizing Principle in Memory.” Unpublished manuscript, Indiana University, Bloomington.
Spinner-Halev, J. 2000. Surviving Diversity: Religion and Democratic Citizenship. Baltimore, MD: John's Hopkins University Press.
Spiro, M. 1993. “Is the Western Conception of the Self “Peculiar” Within the Context of the World Cultures?Ethos 21:107153.
Taylor, S. E., Fiske, S. T., Etcoff, N. L., and Ruderman, A. J.. 1978. “Categorical and Personal Basis of Person Memory and Stereotyping.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 36:778793.
Tomasi, J. 2002. “Civic Education and Ethical Subservience: From Mozert to Santa Fe and Beyond.” In Moral and Political Education, eds., Macedo, S. and Tamir, Y.. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Turiel, E. 1996. “Equality and Hierarchy: Conflict in Values.” In Values and Knowledge. Mahwah. N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 75101.
Turiel, E. 1983. The Development of Social Knowledge: Morality and Convention. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Wainryb, C., and Turiel, E.. 1994. “Dominance, subordination, and concepts of personal entitlements in cultural contexts.” Child Development 65:17011722.
Watson, D. 1982. “The Actor and the Observer: How are their Perceptions of Causality Divergent?Psychological Bulletin 92:698.
Wolfe, A. 1999. One Nation after All. New York, NY: Penguin Books.

Liberal Civic Education, Religious Commitment, and the Spillover Thesis: What Psychology Can Teach Us

  • John L. Phillips (a1) and Laura McMillian (a2)

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed