Political basis for child-raising

A political philosopher developing a justificatory system for his society has a responsibility for providing principles which can be applied to all the necessary social arrangements within his particular society. It is difficult to imagine a society which does not include the social arrangements for...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Grant, Michael
Language:English
Published: University of British Columbia 2010
Online Access:http://hdl.handle.net/2429/24999
id ndltd-UBC-oai-circle.library.ubc.ca-2429-24999
record_format oai_dc
spelling ndltd-UBC-oai-circle.library.ubc.ca-2429-249992018-01-05T17:42:53Z Political basis for child-raising Grant, Michael A political philosopher developing a justificatory system for his society has a responsibility for providing principles which can be applied to all the necessary social arrangements within his particular society. It is difficult to imagine a society which does not include the social arrangements for child-raising among its necessary arrangements. Yet the principles proposed by various philosophers in justification of the social arrangements for our North American society are not sufficient for determining our social arrangements for child-raising. This thesis is an attempt to interpret some of those philosophical principles in such a way that they can also act as the principles for child-raising within the context of our general society. Since the various systems of principles used to justify our social arrangements differ in the way that they treat the relationship of the individual to the group, it is necessary to locate a common reference point, that of the endowment of opportunity to the child, and then proceed along the selected paths of the argument to derive a valid set of principles for child-raising. The preliminary stage is an examination of the general requirements of a system of justificatory principles for a society's institutions. The political philosophies of Robert Nozick and John Rawls are then examined to determine the limits placed on interference with the child and child-raiser for those in the Conservative and Liberal Positions. The action-guiding principles for child-raising which emerge from these two positions, when taken together, appear to be reasonably close to our commonsense notion of child-raising. However the differences between the Conservative and Liberal Positions are the cause of some of the tensions that develop in our attempts to establish policy. These differences are the source of the value conflicts which arise when we are endowing children with opportunities. Education, Faculty of Educational Studies (EDST), Department of Graduate 2010-05-25T02:09:14Z 2010-05-25T02:09:14Z 1984 Text Thesis/Dissertation http://hdl.handle.net/2429/24999 eng For non-commercial purposes only, such as research, private study and education. Additional conditions apply, see Terms of Use https://open.library.ubc.ca/terms_of_use. University of British Columbia
collection NDLTD
language English
sources NDLTD
description A political philosopher developing a justificatory system for his society has a responsibility for providing principles which can be applied to all the necessary social arrangements within his particular society. It is difficult to imagine a society which does not include the social arrangements for child-raising among its necessary arrangements. Yet the principles proposed by various philosophers in justification of the social arrangements for our North American society are not sufficient for determining our social arrangements for child-raising. This thesis is an attempt to interpret some of those philosophical principles in such a way that they can also act as the principles for child-raising within the context of our general society. Since the various systems of principles used to justify our social arrangements differ in the way that they treat the relationship of the individual to the group, it is necessary to locate a common reference point, that of the endowment of opportunity to the child, and then proceed along the selected paths of the argument to derive a valid set of principles for child-raising. The preliminary stage is an examination of the general requirements of a system of justificatory principles for a society's institutions. The political philosophies of Robert Nozick and John Rawls are then examined to determine the limits placed on interference with the child and child-raiser for those in the Conservative and Liberal Positions. The action-guiding principles for child-raising which emerge from these two positions, when taken together, appear to be reasonably close to our commonsense notion of child-raising. However the differences between the Conservative and Liberal Positions are the cause of some of the tensions that develop in our attempts to establish policy. These differences are the source of the value conflicts which arise when we are endowing children with opportunities. === Education, Faculty of === Educational Studies (EDST), Department of === Graduate
author Grant, Michael
spellingShingle Grant, Michael
Political basis for child-raising
author_facet Grant, Michael
author_sort Grant, Michael
title Political basis for child-raising
title_short Political basis for child-raising
title_full Political basis for child-raising
title_fullStr Political basis for child-raising
title_full_unstemmed Political basis for child-raising
title_sort political basis for child-raising
publisher University of British Columbia
publishDate 2010
url http://hdl.handle.net/2429/24999
work_keys_str_mv AT grantmichael politicalbasisforchildraising
_version_ 1718592679071186944