Your search for: subjects:"Dewey John 1859 1952 Contributions In Political Science"

John Dewey's classical pragmatism, Daniel M. Savage asserts, can be used to provide a self-development-based justification of liberal democracy that shows the current debate between liberal individualism and republican communitarianism to be based largely on a set of pseudoproblems.

From Dewey's ...

John Dewey's classical pragmatism, Daniel M. Savage asserts, can be used to provide a self-development-based justification of liberal democracy that shows the current debate between liberal individualism and republican communitarianism to be based largely on a set of pseudoproblems.

From Dewey's classical pragmatism, Savage derives a conception of individual autonomy that, while meeting all of the criteria for a conception of autonomy, does not, as the dominant Kantian variant does, require transcendence from any particular language community. The Deweyan conception of autonomy that Savage derives from classical pragmatism, in fact, requires that the individual be situated within a context of cultural beliefs. Savage argues that this particular conception of autonomy is necessary if one wants to conceive of life, as communitarians do, as a quest for the good life within a social context.

Thus, Savage constructs a conception of autonomy that consists of a set of intellectual virtues, each of which can be,understood, like Aristotle's moral virtues, as a mean between two extremes (or vices). The virtue of critical reflection is the mean between the vices of dogmatism on the one hand and philosophical skepticism on the other. The virtue of creative individuality is the mean between the opposing vices of conformity and eccentricity. Finally, the virtue of sociability is the mean between the extremes of docility and rebelliousness. The three virtues together provide a natural method of adapting to change. Dewey's method of adapting to change requires, in both the individual and in the community, the synthesis of integrating and differentiating forces.

Revived appreciation of John Dewey as an inspirational advocate of participatory democracy has been tempered by criticism that he lacks a concrete political program. William R. Caspary makes the case for Dewey as a more discerning and challenging political theorist than this. Caspary draws from ...

Revived appreciation of John Dewey as an inspirational advocate of participatory democracy has been tempered by criticism that he lacks a concrete political program. William R. Caspary makes the case for Dewey as a more discerning and challenging political theorist than this. Caspary draws from Dewey's extensive writings a concrete politics of participatory democracy, solving classic dilemmas confronting both democratic theorists and citizen activists. He compares Dewey's views with the full range of approaches in contemporary democratic theory and explores the underpinnings of Dewey's political theory by offering a thorough and innovative account of his philosophy of science, social science, and ethics.

In Dewey's democratic theory, conflict is an inescapable condition of politics, according to Caspary, and is also an essential stimulus for the advancement of individuals and societies. Recognizing the centrality of conflict, Caspary claims, Dewey makes conflict resolution an overarching concept in his theory of democracy. Caspary argues that conflict resolution is central to Dewey's philosophy of ethics and of science. Caspary -- a scholar with many years of experience as a social-movement activist, ombudsperson, and mediator -- traces this conflict-resolution orientation throughout Dewey's writings.

Caspary brings Dewey's abstract theories down to earth with examples from present-day social and political experiments, including progressive educational experiments, common-ground dialogues on abortion, the South African program for truth and reconciliation, and worker self-management cooperatives.

Hoy seeks to establish a basis for a naturalistic political theory as a continuity from Aristotle through the Enlightenment and Post-Enlightenment contributions of HUme and Dewey along with more recent development in Evolutionary Biology and Deep Ecology. He argues that this continuity can be seen ...

Hoy seeks to establish a basis for a naturalistic political theory as a continuity from Aristotle through the Enlightenment and Post-Enlightenment contributions of HUme and Dewey along with more recent development in Evolutionary Biology and Deep Ecology. He argues that this continuity can be seen as a corrective to inadequacies in both the reductive naturalism of classical liberalism as well as radical historicism or cultural relativism.

Hoy seeks to establish a basis for a naturalistic political theory as a continuity from Aristotle through the Enlightenment and Post-Enlightenment contributions of HUme and Dewey along with more recent development in Evolutionary Biology and Deep Ecology. He argues that this continuity can be seen ...

Hoy seeks to establish a basis for a naturalistic political theory as a continuity from Aristotle through the Enlightenment and Post-Enlightenment contributions of HUme and Dewey along with more recent development in Evolutionary Biology and Deep Ecology. He argues that this continuity can be seen as a corrective to inadequacies in both the reductive naturalism of classical liberalism as well as radical historicism or cultural relativism.