Re-Exploration of Schefflerian View on Human Potentialities Regarding Critiques: Precaution, Flexibility and Dynamism in Potential Assignment

Document Type : پژوهشی

Authors

• Narges Sajadieh
• Zakaria Hoseiny

University of Tehran

10.22067/fedu.v9i1.72502

Abstract

The aim of this paper is conceptual analysis and re-exploring the nature of human potentiality in the educational system regarding its critiques. For attaining this aim, we applied comparative analysis and conceptual analysis methods. Our findings indicate to us that necessities of human nature, especially content necessities, are underestimated in Scheffler's view. On the other hand, separation of potentialities to central and marginal has not occurred in Sheffler's conceptualization. Upon this, Scheffler's view confronting different human potentials may be collapsed. Moreover, neglecting human disabilities has prevented this view from realism and human will. Therefore, we emphasized on precaution, flexibility, and dynamism in a potential assignment in the educational system and proposed some suspensions period during education.

Keywords

• Potentiality
• Scheffle
• Critique
• suspension
• Assignment

---

References

Agamben, G. (1999). Potenialities: Collected essays in philosophy. California: Standford University Press.

Aristotle (2014). Metaphysics. (M. Lotfi. Trans.). Tehran: Tarheno Press. (In Persian).

Bagheri, K. (1998). Critique on human potentiality: A research on philosophy of education. Humanities Methodology, 14(15), 85-91. (In Persian).

Clarke, M. & Phelan, A. (2015). Negativity, cruel optimism and the virtue of impotentiality in education. Annual Conference of Philosophy of Education of Great Britain, Oxford: New College.

Heymans, P. G. (2012). Inspiration: Some issues concerning the potential achievement gap. In Gifted education as a lifelong challenge: Essays in Honour of Franz. J. Monks.Albert Ziegler, Christian Fischer, Heidrun Stoeger, Marold Riutlinger (Eds.). 111-119.

Kazemi Haghighi, N. (2015). Education for potentiality and gifted. Tehran: Taban Kherad Press. (In Persian).

Lewis, T. E. (2012). A case for study: Agamben’s critique of Scheffler’s theory of potentiality. Philosophy of Education Archive, 101-109.

Matahari, Morteza (2007). Education in Islam. Tehran: Sadra Press. (In Persian).

Plato (2011). Republic. (F. Ruhani. Trans.), Tehran: scientific-cultural Corporation Press. (In Persian).

Sajadieh, N. (2014).Comparative analysis of formal documents of Iranian philosophy of education. Foundations of Education, 4(1), 29-48. (In Persian).

Scheffler, I. (1998). On human potentiality. (Howzeh and university Corporation Office Trans.).Tehran: Samt Press. (In Persian).

The Supreme Council of Education (2016). Educational Regulations of Second Period of Secondary schools.

The Supreme Council of Cultural Revolution (2011). Fundamental Revolution Document of Education. (In Persian).

Zohreh Kashanin, A. A.; Dawoodi, M. (1998). Critisizing and Examining On human potentinality. Howaeh and university Corporation, Tehran: Samt Press. (In Persian).

White, J. (1986). On Reconstructing the Concept of Human Potential. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 20(1), 133-142.