For Many Pupils, Practitioners and Educational Researchers The Principal Goal of Education Is The Development of Personal Autonomy:

Are they right?

Brian Valenzuela Institute of education: VAL11096396 15 December 2012

What is Personal Autonomy? The vision of self destiny (Raz, 1986); 'a rational scrutiny of taste and opinion' (Feinburg, 1989: 32); the capacity of reasoned action (Dworkin, 1988); the evaluation and embrace of goals (Waldron, 1989), our'commitments too what we care for which gives shape to our lives' (Raz, 1986: 387). For Taylor (1985) autonomy enables the choice for 'the struggling reflective agent', to assend towards authentic "illusion free" interpretations of what is true, facilitated by a faithfulness to that which is both important yet 'neither independent nor articulated beyond further clarity or comprehension' (ibid: 27). This identifies with Macedo's ideal of autonomous people, as 'strong evaluators', 'those who reflectively distance considerations of desire and even of themselves once informed with standards and ideals' (1990:218). Autonomy is therefore the choice we posess in light of our co-operation as social beings, 'during or even after fully reflecting upon our inclinations'(Hill, 1991:183). Such a freedom allows the expression of individual judgement, even amongst the conflicting best judgements of others we are left with yet another choice: 'whether or not to reformulate our best judgements when we ourselves fail to capture or comprehend that which is important' (Callan, 1997). External impediments of Autonomy To what extent is personal autonomy really personal? How autonomous are we beneath the shadow of society's categorical imperatives? For instance, is the monetary imperative coercing the development of human existence? If so, is personal autonomy safe in the hands of the law, monetary institutions, corporations and international systems of education? Furthermore, to what extent can coercions of pre-determinations on personal autonomy (i.e. the bio-social nature and interpersonal neurobiology of human development) be considered right as the guiding principle for inducing human conduct? For instance, has the Universal Declaration of Human Rights provided too little and too much emphasis on self determination (from abstract personal ideals and experiences), rather than the interconnected externalities caused by autonomous behaviour, which bears a responsibility towards global events and incidents of inhumanity. Regardless of whether autonomy is personal or not; the role and value of personal autonomy is extremely arbitrary. Personal Autonomy: what is its value? Is the world reaching the point where personal autonomy can no longer be an ethical prerequisite for the sustainability and equality of human freedom (both virtues of autonomy). For inequality can be legitimate when reducing inequality. In which case, a nation or the world for that matter, could continue to provide the struggles of life: as long as conflicting self-governed values of liberty and morality, remain as personal choices available to all. In response, does real humanitarian progress require ethically utalitarian maxims? and who (or) what should de1

cide what is right or wrong? and for whom is it right and wrong? What maxims could possibly justify the assent towards a more humane world order in exchange for dehumanization? Can such a psychological death of the individual be justified to bring about the birth of the collective? Most importantly, do we still live in a world that is run by ideologies, such as religion? If so, can justified acts of civil disobedience defend the reduction of civil liberties? are such ideologies underpinned by the propaganda (by world leaders) regarding a new world order? and can such ideologies really be educable amongst social infrustructural and cultural values? Why is promoting personal autonomy thought to be such an important aim of education? After all, is it not a human trait to want to live by each others happiness and not each others misery. If such statement is considered plausible, can such goal be intelligible or achieved when the categorical imperative of 'self-goverance', towards personal happiness and misery (or the principal goals of education for that matter) varyies in judgement amongst billions of human beings? What then, if this world could provide the basic needs for all humans, but not enough for everybodies dreams? If so, will the pursuit of happiness and reasoning of billions possess the same restrictions that currently exist? If the status quo remains, where does this leave choice: that which can poison the values of people: those who even unknowingly loose compassion for others, in the name of individual success, financial gain to survive, happiness or worse: the source of hate and descrimination, which stems from reactionary interpersonal judgements and attitudes towards the incomprehension [or] unethical and unrestrained autonomy of others. Those that can be justified by deeply routed personal and emotional experiences of injustice. This may represent a dark virtue of personal autonomy; none the less revealing a conflicting simularity amongst respectable societal values. For example, the justification of financial rewards that is required for basic human survival, is determined by academic success and academic failure: whereby academic success is graded and tested, but not personal character. Maintaining such a distinction of intellectual value and virtue, represents that which is 'respectable and acceptable' accross many societies, is it not? Can it therefore be possible, 'the totality of human development may not be safe in the hands of 'predominant academic principles' that seeks such progress: when its value is rewarded by its own scarcity, which are becoming uncontrollable distinctions from interpersonal, national and international competition. Should values of knowledge supersede that of character and emotional intelligence? Should these values perpetuate the educational experience, the profession and it's researchers? If not then, what are we to do about the autonomy of global education systems, can we ethically justify their choices for this generation and those to come. Is the path towards that which has not yet come to pass, leading humanity to a new 'age of security': a life that is free and ethical [or] one that is competitive: where fearbound autonomous individuals comprehend their motivation and virtue, amongst the challenges of adversity inorder to succeed and survive as a human being. Will such autonomous choices, as a principle goal of education (or as human actions) create desirable global reactions of interpersonal alturism, or maintain the global scale of liberty. Could this represent the outcome of democracy?. If so, what would a world of autonomous individuals & national barriers look like? and is this really the principal goal of education, or the right path for those nations who seek or are coerced by such democratic values? is this of principal importance? Occurent Autonomy

What is important? do I comprehend that which is, or do your judgements better comprehend? Regardless, what right do people have in refuting that which is ethical and of principal importance, especially when principles can be valued by variations of observable conditions and experiences of humans. Can such principles be undermined by human rights, which may contain shortsighted comprehension, even ignorance or malice. For instance, can personal autonomy of many pupils, practitioners and researchers of today, be trusted with deciding what the right principle goal of education is (or) should be? If so, what are the concerns of personal autonomy and what will they coerce? Are they even capable of coercion amongst external empediments? Regardless of the answer and whether the goal of education requires ethical plausibility; especially concerning the choices surrounding the development of personal autonomy. One must consider that personal autonomy internalizes choice and reason, attributing to our action by means of self-guiding values, from abstractions of personal 'even societal values', rather than events or reactions from actions [or visa versa]. Therefore, what happens when our values fail or succeed to benefit ourselves and others? Raz (1994) encapsulates this paradox of true moral theory in a society: 'whereby those who obtain special values from understanding the meaning of life and flourishing from self conceptions of the good, but even if their particular conceptions of the good are mistaken, those without either conception, will be left in a further diminished state' (ibid:64). Is this happening on a global scale? For instance is the rhetoric of inequality, class and wealth distribution a valid cause for the current nightmares humanity is trying to awake from. Or is this an intellectual trapping, that we autonomously partake? For instance, if our actions or reactions are not part of the problem, are they not part of the precipitate? If not, could possible 'flawed reasoning' on a global scale ever be intelligible: that which may be developing outside the fundamental trusim that 'every action has a reaction'. In which case, can the reasoning and values amongst divided actions and reactions: that inhibit the good [or] comprehension of that which is right and important be justified? After all, simular rationalism is predominantly shared amongst the rich and the poor, the advantaged and the disadvantaged, including those who are right and those who are wrong: we all posess and execute judgements to obtain self-gratification, survival and the concern for ourselves and others. However, has personal autonomy been overtly empowered to the point where choice can lead to predominantly concerning ourselves with those we love and care for, and without meaning too, disregarding such concerns towards others. Dispositional Autonomy This paradox involving the classifications of reasoning, presents the ambition and effort of many pupils, practitioners and researchers 'as a moral dilemma'. Regardless, if we agree or disagree that education's principal goal is the development of personal autonomy: whether right or wrong, must answer too humanities increasing difficiency of altruism, as it is interrelated with the causal relationship between external and internal impediments on personal autonomy. Such as psychological obstacles from low self-esteem, weakness of will, addiction, ignorance, and the lack of courage social beings first access and develop from their pre-natal then social environments. I plan to explore the true meaning of the prior statement to investigate whether personal autonomy, should and should not be empowered, to either determine nor undermine, the categorical imperative of educations principle ambition and effort. For education must have its own maxims, in regard to that which is important: the respect and maintenance of systems and species that support life and the global experience of species and human life itself. I have chosen to utilize Austin's criterion of verification to seek the truth, too untangle the logic behind that which is considered to be 'acceptable and respectable' within different nations
3

(which just as autonomy is highly arbitrary). Furthermore, as education is a fundamental vehicle that imparts intergenerational knowledge and intelligence. I will attempt to shed light on just how 'ethically plausible' personal autonomy is, as a principal goal of education. Can educational values be trusted with personal autonomy, both with and without the coercion of the internal and external impediments, that can inhibit autonomy? This will hopefully remove the foundation upon which intellectual trappings depend on; that often prevents holistic comprehensions towards real humane progress: such as conventional moral liberty and inequality. Furthermore, by uniting the underlying aims of pedagogical practices, philosophical views, judgements and beliefs; those which transcribe 'theoretical system principles' that regulate, control and standardize international systems of education (with England, Chile, China, and the Netherlands as examples). By first identifying their institutionalized aims of education; 'simularities of purpose' may then be classified within the field of knowledge and that of humane intelligence. The ethical integrity of developing personal autonomy can be determined (that which surrounds pupils, practitioners and researchers) after crossrefferencing the (legislative) social state, growth and advancement of 'dispositional and occurant personal autonomy' amongst the categorical imperatives of national infrastructures. I have chosen to explore developed and developing nations, for with the spread of globalization, a colonizing hegemonic model of life has furthered a global presidence. That which lies far beyond the comparative rhetoric of successful academic systems of education, which although varies in pedagogic approach. Yet they all seek a common end: "sustaining the monetary system as regulator for the totality of life on earth". Could the reason behind the subjugation of human freedom, be the intelletual trappings of personal autonomy and liberty, perpetuated by the very judgements that we value most in our lives. Are the challenges of the 21st century maintained by our manufactured human consent; even though 'life itself' has become a pursuit of enjoyment by avoiding the adverse consequences of colluding against the status quo. Therefore, personal autonomy can be considered as the principal goal of education, resons of which are two fold: firstly, as long as 'autonomy itself' remains unethically enforced throughout society, personal autonomy will be required to strive towards ethical salvation where humanity has extended its lifespan in a world that has become morally unfit to live in. on the other hand, if such day is ever to approach, when autonomy itself becomes ethically enforced by 'strong evaluators': those who comprehend that "ethical action can lead to ethical reactions" by repacing the moral dilemma's of personal autonomy with the ethical reassurances of autonomy. In conclusion, at this moment in time the development of autonomy is not the princial goal of education, but the principal goal for humanities salvation.