The proper place for skills and autonomy in conceptualising academic work and development

Abstract

My purpose, after finding use in John White’s distinction between two types of autonomy, is to explain how academic work, unlike much other work, needs to be seen as in its nature autonomous, insofar as academics would engage in their work authentically. This is also in the service of challenging the mechanistic world-view which dominates policy and dictates parameters for practice, characterised in, for instance, the polemics of Richard Dawkins. The basis for the challenge lies in John McDowell’s post-Kantian thesis foregrounding the ‘space of reasons’ of the world. I shall present the key points of the argument succinctly and phrase questions to provoke discussion, since this session provides opportunity for participants to explore the implications of these lines of thinking for practice and policy, especially with the advent of the new Researcher Development Framework and with the now pressing question of sustaining the Development agenda post-Roberts.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,553

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

  • Only published works are available at libraries.

Analytics

Added to PP
2017-06-29

Downloads
13 (#1,334,820)

6 months
5 (#1,080,408)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references