Graduate studies at Western
Studies in Philosophy and Education 29 (1):35-51 (2010)
|Abstract||Research indicates that upwards of 80% of our students experience the devastation of bullying during their school years. To date, research on bullying has mainly employed empirical methodologies, including quantitative and qualitative approaches. This research has largely concluded that bullying is situated in a lack of skill, understanding, or self-control and involves intentional action directed toward status dominance. Based upon these assumptions current anti-bullying strategies focus on training students toward more appropriate avenues of status acquisition and social interaction. Against the backdrop of an actual bullying encounter this paper employs a psychoanalytic philosophical lens to offer a fresh perspective on this enduring educational issue. Employing the philosophical work of Adam Phillips, Jessica Benjamin, and Emmanuel Ghent I ask the question: What is the desire to bully a desire for? Here I consider what is sought and what is at stake in the typical bullying encounter. Through careful analysis I argue that the domination represented in bullying is not simply situated in a lack of social skills or in disregulated aggression––skill deficiencies that require training. Instead, or perhaps in addition to these possibilities, I contend that bullying is foundationally a move toward establishing identity, a self. On this view bullying becomes an activity of self construction through attempted omnipotence. I argue that the status dominance inherent in bullying should be seen not as an end (a tool to secure resources or privilege), but as a means to something more foundational. I conclude that status dominance becomes a means toward the end of providing a secure place for the self to stand. Hence, instead of advocating that we train students to get along better this paper outlines the futility, as well as the insatiability of bullying, opening up new territory focused upon a re-construction of the bully through the relational bonding and differentiation available in the concrete Other|
|Keywords||School bullying Self-construction Domination Preferred self Status Intersubjectivity|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Richard D. Winfield (2006). Self-Consciousness and Intersubjectivity. Review of Metaphysics 59 (4):757-779.
Gene Moriarty (2000). The Place of Engineering and the Engineering of Place. Techné: Research in Philosophy and Technology 5 (2):83-96.
Donovan Miyasaki (2004). Freud or Nietzsche: The Drives, Pleasure, and Social Happiness. Dissertation, University of Toronto
Helga Nowotny (2006). An Act of Cognitive Intersubjectivity. Journal of Consciousness Studies 13 (5):64-70.
Janet Donohoe (2004). Husserl on Ethics and Intersubjectivity: From Static to Genetic Phenomenology. Humanity Books.
Steven Arkonovich (2012). Conflicts of Desire. Journal of Value Inquiry 46 (1):51-63.
Reginald Jackson (1943). Bishop Butler's Refutation of Psychological Hedonism. Philosophy 18 (70):114 - 139.
Giles Pearson (2012). Aristotle on Desire. Cambridge University Press.
Eugene Garver (2006). Aristotle and the Will to Power. Philosophy in the Contemporary World 13 (2):74-83.
Nick Crossley (1996). Intersubjectivity: The Fabric of Social Becoming. Sage Publications.
Dan Zahavi (2001). Husserl and Transcendental Intersubjectivity: A Response to the Linguistic-Pragmatic Critique. Ohio University Press.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2012-08-28
Total downloads1 ( #291,948 of 722,947 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,087 of 722,947 )
How can I increase my downloads?