Monday, May 3, 2010
GOVERNING THE SOUL?
I have been trying to repair a big black hole in my education concerning 'sociology' and 'politics' by getting to grips with Nikolas Rose's 'Governing the Soul - The Shaping of the Private Self' (1999 second edition). A quote from it from a student stimulated my interest and then a colleague recommended the Preface to the 2nd Edition which explains his methods in exploring 'the historical sociology of the self' and 'some of the historical events, cognitive shifts and technical innovations that have gone to make up our current ways of understanding and relating to ourselves as human beings with a certain subjectivity'
I have to confess I may have missed something as I read of how he argues developments in the following areas have impacted on our 'psy':'the government of military forces and civilians at times of war; the regulation of the factory; and of economic life more generally; the development of new ways of understanding and intervening in child development and family relations; the rise of psychotherapies' But then I went back and read the Preface again and realised I'd missed the detail contained under 6 dimensions he uses to carry out his 'critique' . I urge my colleagues in work based learning to consider the questions he poses under each heading as offering a rich epistemology to the reflective practitioner as he/she seeks to understand 'The Shaping of the Private Self' I list each heading below with a question of my own that links with kind of questions Jean McNiff and Jack Whitehead use in opening up an action research enquiry:
PROBLEMATISATION : What is the problem and why am I/should I be concerned about it?
EXPLANATIONS: Am I satisfied with the kind of explanations I am offered to respond to my concern?
TECHNOLOGIES : Am I satisfied with the 'manner' of the explanation, how the explanation is made/delivered?
AUTHORITIES: Am I satisfied with/ do I believe "them", the so-called 'experts' and authorities?
SUBJECTIVITIES: What do 'I' make of all these explanations and authorites? What impact has it made on me and what am I choosing to do about it amd why?
STRATEGIES: How comfortable am I with the 'intent', 'purpose' behind the explanations I am given?
I see parallels between his dimensions and our learning descriptors A and B when he says 'These six dimensions do not amount to a formal anlytical grid appropriate for all problems. They simply serve to generate the kinds of materials chosen for examination [Learning descriprors A] and the kinds of questions which I ask of these particular materials [learning descriptors B]
Any views?
Peter Critten
I have to confess I may have missed something as I read of how he argues developments in the following areas have impacted on our 'psy':'the government of military forces and civilians at times of war; the regulation of the factory; and of economic life more generally; the development of new ways of understanding and intervening in child development and family relations; the rise of psychotherapies' But then I went back and read the Preface again and realised I'd missed the detail contained under 6 dimensions he uses to carry out his 'critique' . I urge my colleagues in work based learning to consider the questions he poses under each heading as offering a rich epistemology to the reflective practitioner as he/she seeks to understand 'The Shaping of the Private Self' I list each heading below with a question of my own that links with kind of questions Jean McNiff and Jack Whitehead use in opening up an action research enquiry:
PROBLEMATISATION : What is the problem and why am I/should I be concerned about it?
EXPLANATIONS: Am I satisfied with the kind of explanations I am offered to respond to my concern?
TECHNOLOGIES : Am I satisfied with the 'manner' of the explanation, how the explanation is made/delivered?
AUTHORITIES: Am I satisfied with/ do I believe "them", the so-called 'experts' and authorities?
SUBJECTIVITIES: What do 'I' make of all these explanations and authorites? What impact has it made on me and what am I choosing to do about it amd why?
STRATEGIES: How comfortable am I with the 'intent', 'purpose' behind the explanations I am given?
I see parallels between his dimensions and our learning descriptors A and B when he says 'These six dimensions do not amount to a formal anlytical grid appropriate for all problems. They simply serve to generate the kinds of materials chosen for examination [Learning descriprors A] and the kinds of questions which I ask of these particular materials [learning descriptors B]
Any views?
Peter Critten
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)