Oppression,Autonomy and the Impossibility of the Inner Citadel

This paper argues for a conception of autonomy that takes social oppression seriously without sapping autonomy of its valuable focus on individual self-direction. Building on recent work in relational accounts of autonomy, the paper argues that current conceptions of autonomy from liberal, feminist and critical theorists do not adequately account for the social features of belief formation. The paper then develops an alternative conception of relational autonomy that focuses on how autonomy contains both individualistic and social epistemic features. Rather than consider autonomy to reside in an impenetrable inner citadel, a place immune from external influences, the paper argues that we must acknowledge the hermeneutic relationship between individual and social processes of belief adjudication. Taking such an argument seriously results in the need to alter our conception of autonomy and the schooling needed to foster its growth.     

Quantitative and Qualitative Research: Beyond the Debate

Psychology has been a highly quantitative field since its conception as a science. However, a qualitative approach to psychological research has gained increasing importance in the last decades, and an enduring debate between quantitative and qualitative approaches has arisen. The recently developed Mixed Methods Research (MMR) addresses this debate by aiming to integrate quantitative and qualitative approaches. This article outlines and discusses quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods research approaches with specific reference to their (1) philosophical foundations (i.e. basic sets of beliefs that ground inquiry), (2) methodological assumptions (i.e. principles and formal conditions which guide scientific investigation), and (3) research methods (i.e. concrete procedures for data collection, analysis and interpretation). We conclude that MMR may reasonably overcome the limitation of purely quantitative and purely qualitative approaches at each of these levels, providing a fruitful context for a more comprehensive psychological research.

Beyond the Apophatic Circle: Rethinking the Debate Between Jean-Luc Marion and Jacques Derrida

This study offers a new perspective on the much-discussed debate between French phenomenologist Jean-Luc Marion and postructuralist theorist Jacques Derrida on the question of ‘negative theology’ and the Christian mystical tradition. It argues that Marion's critique of Derrida betrays a fundamental misunderstanding, specifically, that it fails to recognise that Derrida is not interested in negative theology qua theology, but rather as a discursive practice with certain resources for the performative ‘unsaying’ of logocentric systems. It continues to show that Derrida's principal object is not the God of apophatic theology, but the broader, juridico-political implications of all ‘transcendental signifieds’. Finally, it suggests that Marion's oversight of these facts in his defence of the apophatic tradition unwittingly legitimates Derrida's critique, to the extent that it insulates the Christian tradition from external criticism, and thereby limits the responsiveness of that tradition to the demands of justice.     

Beyond Assimilation and Multiculturalism: A Critical Review of the Debate on Managing Diversity

In the past few years, both assimilationist and multiculturalist approaches to the management of immigration and diversity have been called into question. This article is an attempt to critically review and examine the key points of the debate regarding assimilationism and multiculturalism, while arguing for an interculturalist model of socio-cultural incorporation that reconciles cultural diversity with social cohesion. This paper looks at both European and North American cases and contends that when support for diversity occurs within a framework of social justice and political equality, and when all members of society are permitted to fully participate in the public space, the result is a more cohesive, albeit plural, civic community.     

Questions of the Self in the Personal Autonomy Debate: Some Critical Remarks on Frankfurt and Watson

Abstract

Currently, the most influential accounts of personal autonomy, at least in the English-speaking world, focus on providing conditions under which agents can be said to exercise self-control. Two distinct accounts of personal autonomy have emerged in this tradition: firstly, hierarchical models grounded in the work of Harry Frankfurt; and secondly, systems division models most famously articulated by Gary Watson. In this paper, I will show the inadequacies of both of these models by exploring the problematic views of the self and self-control underlying each model. I will suggest that the problems faced by these models stem from the fact that they endorse a problematic fragmentation of the self.     

Beyond Numbers Versus Rights: Shifting the Parameters of Debate on Temporary Labour Migration

This paper seeks to move beyond what Martin and Ruhs described as the numbers versus rights equation in temporary labour migration programs. We do this by examining the ideology of temporary labour migration. This ideology has three key elements: temporariness, labour markets and rights. The paper describes how these concepts obscure key features of temporary labour migration programs. The argument is developed by examining points of contrast between current programs in place in the USA, Canada, Australia and the UK. The paper concludes by demonstrating how unmasking the power imbalances of this ideology will lead to new policy directions.     

Luck and Oppression

Oppression can be unjust from a luck egalitarian point of view even when it is the consequence of choices for which it is reasonable to hold persons responsible. This is for two reasons. First, people who have not been oppressed are unlikely to anticipate the ways in which their choices may lead them into oppressive conditions. Facts about systematic phenomena (like oppression) are often beyond the epistemic reach of persons who are not currently subject to such conditions, even when they possess adequate information about the particular consequences of their choices. Second, people may be (much) less responsible for remaining in oppressive conditions, even if they are responsible for entering circumstances of oppression. Oppression that results from a person’s choice may cause or contribute to dramatic changes in that person, and these changes may be sufficient to undermine the person’s responsibility for the results of her earlier choice.     

Groups and Oppression

Oppression is a form of injustice that occurs when one social group is subordinated while another is privileged, and oppression is maintained by a variety of different mechanisms including social norms, stereotypes, and institutional rules. A key feature of oppression is that it is perpetrated by and affects social groups. In this article I show that because of the central role that groups play in theories of oppression, those theories face significant, and heretofore mostly unrecognized, metaphysical problems. I then identify resources from analytic metaphysics that can be used to address these problems. I show that, although we should not be pessimistic about the prospects for a viable theory of oppression, it will take serious metaphysical work to develop a plausible ontology of oppression, and existing theories have for the most part failed to respond to this challenge.     

Relational Remembering and Oppression

This paper begins by discussing Sue Campbell's account of memory as she first developed it in Relational Remembering: Rethinking the Memory Wars and applied it to the context of the false memory debates. In more recent work, Campbell was working on expanding her account of relational remembering from an analysis of personal rememberings to activities of public rememberings in contexts of historic harms and, specifically, harms to Aboriginals and their communities in Canada. The goal of this paper is to draw out the moral and political implications of Campbell's account of relational remembering and thereby to extend its reach and application. As applied to Aboriginal communities, Campbell's account of relational remembering confirms but also explains the important role that Canada's Indian Residential Schools Truth and Reconciliation Commission (IRS TRC) is poised to play. It holds this promise and potential, however, only if all Canadians, Aboriginal and non‐Aboriginal, engage in a process of remembering that is relational and has the goal of building and rebuilding relationships. The paper ends by drawing attention to what relational remembering can teach us about oppression more generally.     

Oppression and Resistance: Frye's Politics of Reality

Marilyn Frye's first book, The Politics of Reality: Essays in Feminist Theory, presents nine philosophical lectures: four on women's subordination, four on resistance and rebellion, one on revolution. Its approach combines a lesbian perspective with analytical philosophy of language. The major contributions of the book are its analysis of oppression, highly suggestive discussions of the roles of attention in knowledge and ignorance and in arrogance and love, a defense of political separatism not based on female supremacism, and a development of the idea of lesbian epistemology. Its proposal for resisting White racism will be controversial. Its treatment of gay rights is not balanced by an acknowledgement that drag queens, like “totaled women,” are products of oppression, not simply of intolerance. The most philosophically problematic aspect of the book is its analysis of coercion and of the roles of coercion in women's subordination. This creates an unresolved tension with the positive message of the second half of the book. Despite this difficulty, these essays are an outstanding contribution to contemporary feminist theory.     

Ending Sex-Based Oppression: Transitional Pathways

Philosophia - From a radical feminist perspective, gender is a cage. Or to be more precise, it’s two cages. If genders are cages, then surely we want to let people out. Being less constrained...     

Oppression within the counselling room

This paper suggests that the oppression experienced by disabled people in society is sometimes replayed in the counselling room by counsellors who are unaware of their own disablist attitudes and prejudices. Whilst the provision of Disability Equality Training (DET) within counselling courses would ameliorate the problem, I believe that disabled people would be most empowered by a counselling approach which recognises the potential for oppression within the counsellor‐client relationship. One solution may be the creation of a new counselling approach (disability counselling) which includes the social model of disability as one of the foundations. An alternative solution may be found within the emerging counselling approaches that treat counselling as a social and political process and place emphasis on developing comprehensive anti‐discriminatory practice.