David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Philosophy of Education 44 (4):515-528 (2010)
It is commonly assumed that to educate means to control or guide a person's acting and development. On the other hand, it is often presupposed that the addressees of education must be seen as being endowed with free will. The question raised in this paper is whether these two assumptions are compatible. It might seem that if the learner is free in her will, she cannot be educated; however, if she is successfully educated, then it is doubtful whether she can be seen as free. Inspired by the current philosophical debate on the compatibility of free will and determinism, this paper spells out two versions of this dilemma. The first version relies on the idea that to be free means being the causal source of one's actions. The second formulation refers to the notion of freedom as the ability to act otherwise than the way one actually acts. The solution to the dilemma that is developed in this paper, however, uses a third concept of free will—to be free means being able to act on reasons
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
Henry E. Allison (1990). Kant's Theory of Freedom. Cambridge University Press.
Lewis White Beck (1960). A Commentary of Kant's Critique of Practical Reason. [Chicago]University of Chicago Press.
Stefaan E. Cuypers (2009). Educating for Authenticity : The Paradox of Moral Education Revisited. In Harvey Siegel (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Education. Oxford University Press. 122--144.
Harry G. Frankfurt (1988). The Importance of What We Care About: Philosophical Essays. Cambridge University Press.
J. Habermas (2007). The Language Game of Responsible Agency and the Problem of Free Will: How Can Epistemic Dualism Be Reconciled with Ontological Monism? Philosophical Explorations 10 (1):13 – 50.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Thomas Pink (2004). Free Will: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford University Press.
Kevin Timpe, Free Will. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Josef Seifert (2011). In Defense of Free Will. Review of Metaphysics 65 (2):377-407.
Peter van Inwagen (2000). Free Will Remains a Mystery. Philosophical Perspectives 14:1-20.
Torin Alter & Russell Daw (2001). Free Acts and Robot Cats. Philosophical Studies 102 (3):345-57.
Andrew E. Monroe & Bertram F. Malle (2010). From Uncaused Will to Conscious Choice: The Need to Study, Not Speculate About People’s Folk Concept of Free Will. Review of Philosophy and Psychology 1 (2):211-224.
Randolph Clarke (2009). Dispositions, Abilities to Act, and Free Will: The New Dispositionalism. Mind 118 (470):323-351.
Tim Bayne (2011). Libet and the Case for Free Will Scepticism. In Richard Swinburne (ed.), Free Will and Modern Science. Oup/British Academy.
Russell Daw & Torin Alter (2001). Free Acts and Robot Cats. Philosophical Studies 102 (3):345-57.
Chris Weigel (2012). Experimental Evidence for Free Will Revisionism. Philosophical Explorations 16 (1):31 - 43.
Manuel Vargas (2013). How to Solve the Problem of Free Will. In Paul Russell & Oisin Deery (eds.), The Philosophy of Free Will: Essential Readings From the Contemporary Debates. Oup Usa. 400.
Vere Chappell (1994). Locke on the Freedom of the Will. In G. A. J. Rogers (ed.), Locke's Philosophy: Content and Context. Oxford University Press. 101--21.
Randolph Clarke & Justin Capes, Incompatibilist (Nondeterministic) Theories of Free Will. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Added to index2010-12-23
Total downloads78 ( #18,592 of 1,099,910 )
Recent downloads (6 months)13 ( #17,156 of 1,099,910 )
How can I increase my downloads?