Search

This article can be broken down into two parts, perhaps somewhat unequally as far as its orientation is concerned. In the first part, the author takes the reader on a kind of exploration of the history of moral education, a subject which, at first glance and from the perspective of the years he spent studying educational historiography, appears to be rather undeveloped terrain. Since the piece is related to the awarding of the Comenius Medal, Comenius himself already provides a good starting point for this round of studies. As in the case of Herbart, another classic within the canon of educational history, Comenius held the opinion that morality plays a key role in upbringing of young people, which became increasingly scintillating in appearance from the Enlightenment onwards. For in a well-regulated society, it was by means of upbringing and education that individual freedom could be created. However, in the course of the 20th century and to the shame of humanity, people were forced to witness how the idea that people and society could be shaped by social engineering could equally give rise to a lack of freedom, as the aberrations of Nazism, fascism and ultimately Marxism-Leninism unequivocally demonstrated. So can such "reversals" of modern-day thought ultimately teach us any overall lessons about the content, manner and results with which moral curricula are imposed? Or must we first set out to identify the "abnormal" cases that society first branded as such and only subsequently extract those lessons? In other words, can extraordinary situations and events teach us something about the everyday reality of moral education as manifested in the so-called "civilising offensive" that took place from the end of the 18th century onwards? As far as the Low Countries are concerned, the author is, for that matter, setting foot on familiar ground. By utilising previous research on Belgium, Flanders and the (Belgian) Congo, the second part of the article wastes no time in examining what moral education meant in more specific terms in the 20th century. In that regard, the focus not only lies on contextualising the insights and questions raised by the first part, as a "tour d'horizon", but equally on analysing them in greater depth. After all, the author's years of research already provide three interesting points of reference: 1) the strong continuity of the patronising perspective; 2) the problematic nature of thinking about educational innovations and didactic innovations in binary terms, such as "old" and "new", and 3) the lack of a straightforward link between parenting and educational goals on the one hand and their results and effects (including and especially in the long term) on the other. Which leads inevitably to the conclusion that education, important as it is, must not be overestimated. Nor should history for that matter. Perhaps both are nothing more than an opportunity to partake of a meaningful encounter that may be effective, but whose outcome one can never be sure of. Which in turn does not take away from the fact that we must still place our hopes on it. For hope is probably the most positive thing that human beings carry within them, just as Comenius himself proved in his lifetime, by the way. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Bewährungshilfe is the property of Forum Verlag Godesberg GmbH and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Berliner Debatte Initial is the property of Berliner Debatte Initial e.V. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Forum: Qualitative Social Research / Qualitative Sozialforschung is the property of Forum Qualitative Social Research and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This paper addresses personal implication into three fundamental catastrophes of the 20th century. While these are disjunctive, they are nevertheless interconnected. Such interconnection is demonstrated and exemplifi ed here by germane episodes of the author’s own life and family experience. Her Jewish South African background lets her probe into the remnants of a Palestinian village buried beneath a “South African” Forest in Israel, for which she once raised money as a child; brings her to the small town in Upper Hesse whence her grandmother made a narrow escape to South Africa from Nazi terror; and confronts her with the blank space of what once was Cape Town’s sprawling District Six which lies in the vicinity of where she lives and from where the inhabitants were deported by the Apartheid regime. All three spaces have in common that what makes them important in this refl ection has been obliterated by force and political fi at. In recounting her own experience, including the making of a fi lm on the three contexts, the author traces ways to retrieve mnemonic traces, on a personal level and beyond. At the same time, she demonstrates entanglements of complicity in the processes addressed that any serious treatment has to confront. Such engagement is set against the simplistic and destructive answers to complicity and complexity, ethno-nationalism and identity politics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Kriminologisches Journal is the property of Julius Beltz GmbH & Co. KG Beltz Juventa and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Kriminologisches Journal is the property of Julius Beltz GmbH & Co. KG Beltz Juventa and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Kriminologisches Journal is the property of Julius Beltz GmbH & Co. KG Beltz Juventa and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Sozial Extra is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Zeitschrift für Sozialreform is the property of De Gruyter and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Under diverse theoretical perspectives Herbert Willems concerns himself with deviant, in particular sexual, behaviour which he labels “unmannerliness.” With regard to commercial and non-commercial media and interactional fields such as pornography, sex-tourism, and sado-masochism, but also with regard to obscenities such as horror movies, Willems unfolds a series of complementary scholarly concepts and theories. In a first step, especially following considerations of Elias, Foucault, and Bourdieu, he gives a framework of civilisational theory and connects it with Goffman's dramaturgical approach. Willems’ concern is not only to induce an instrument of analysis which fits with the empirical “material” of “unmannerliness,” but also to set rather micro-sociological approaches like “frame,” “negative experience,” “stigma,” “stage” (“scene”), and “action” in a relation of mutuality to rather macro-sociological approaches. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]