Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
R. Young (1971)
Darwin's Metaphor: Does Nature Select?The Monist, 55
A. Giddens (1971)
Marx and Weber: A Reply to Mr. WaltonSociology, 5
A. Giddens (1970)
Marx, Weber, and the Development of CapitalismSociology, 4
D. Joravsky (1981)
Kolakowski's long goodbyeTheory and Society, 10
Erwin Epstein (1978)
The social control thesis and educational reform in dependent nationsTheory and Society, 5
Marxist educational thinkers have produced, in recent years, a powerful humanist critique of educational practice and theory. Yet, the Cambodian Government's assault upon its own people, the obliteration of those deemed to have ‘higher knowledge’, and the sack of Cambodia's educational establishment belies the humanism of the Marxism in general and the Marxist educational critique in particular. It is intellectually disingenuous to argue that the unsavoury actions of Marxist governments is unrelated to Marxism; that it is an unfortunate consequence of activism; or that it is unrelated to Marxism as an intellectual enterprise. It is argued that the grammar of the Marxist Weltanschauung bifurcates into two interacting grammars. The domain of these two grammars constitutes the language of Marxism. And within this domain we find the intellectual threads that suggest the ‘thinkability’ of Marxist humanism and the contemptuous anti-humanism evident in the recent events of Cambodia's history.Marxist educational theory is interesting in so far as it implies a means for realizing the humanism of Marxist thought without mortgaging political and social evolution to a 19th century romantic faith in the purifying effects of social violence. It is argued that Marxist educational theory fails because it offers no plausible method of transcending capitalist ideology. All Marxist educational theories, despite all the rhetoric about ‘theories of reproduction’, ‘hegemonic-state reproduction models’, and ‘theories of resistance’, leave those who toil precisely where they began - enmeshed within ideology from which there is no means of escape. Technically speaking, Marxist theories of education fail because they are based upon a general failure of knowledge demonstrated in Marx's theory of ideology. The theory of ideology fails because, as Wittgenstein demonstrates, there is no such project. It is argued that the appeal of Marx's theory of ideology and Marxist educational theory is mostly attributable to its ad hominem attack upon liberal versions of knowledge.
Australian Journal of Education – SAGE
Published: Apr 1, 1985
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.