Introduction
The social system is based on a series of principles,
norms, values and patterns, which are usually called
“ethics”. Sociologists have considered ethics as
blood that flows continuously and secretly in the
body of society and social institutions. From this
point of view, there is no institution, profession
or territory that is able to continue its legitimate life without ethics, which defines the boundaries
of normal conduct and behavior [1]. We can say
ethics is manifested in all aspects of human life
[2]. Ethics and moral education is the highway to
prevent psychological and social harms, as well
as the root of all social reforms and a means of
fighting corruption and social anomalies. For
this reason, the promotion of morality in society
is one of the great and long-standing ideals of mankind, and throughout history, it has been the
focus of various humanistic and divine schools,
and educational philosophers have never stopped
striving to understand the mechanism of morality
and educational methods based on it. Ethics,
especially moral education, from the point of
view of postmodernism, does not contain a set
of clear statements and explanations. This is
because usually when it comes to ethics and moral
education, clear and obvious foundations are
expected to be there so that it is possible to base
the moral system on the basis of those foundations
and moral education. This is despite the fact that
postmodernism, in its various forms and readings,
basically has an anti-foundationalism position.
For this reason, the issue of moral education from
the point of view of postmodernism seems a bit
strange and can itself be a source of doubt and
conflict. According to the anti-foundationalism
and authoritarian position adopted by postmodern
philosophers and thinkers, considering the views
of some representatives of this intellectual-
philosophical current, we can make references to
the implications and consequences of their views
in the field of moral education.
Rorty’s fame or perhaps even infamy is due to
his philosophical neutrality. When Rorty died
in 2007 at the age of 75, newspapers across the
United States and round the world hailed him as
one of the most influential philosophers of our
time, explaining that “he put aside thousands of
years of philosophical legacy with his unassuming
manner” [3,4]. Richard Rorty is a prominent figure
in the tradition of pragmatism [5]. He is also one
of the representatives of postmodernism and one
of the neo-pragmatic educational philosophers;
some consider him a postmodern philosopher
in the field of ethics and education. In his moral
positions, he talks about the nature of contingency
of ethics, and in the definition of ethics, he defines
it as a kind of historical distinction between the
natural desires and needs of man with firmness and
caution and foresight from rationality and reason
[6]. While using analytical philosophy, Rorty was
also influenced by other philosophers such as
Nietzsche, Heidegger, Habermas, and Gadamer.
However, his main intellectual fame goes back
to the new reading he did of Dewey’s pragmatist
philosophy under the title “neo pragmatism”. Some
call Rorty a postmodern philosopher, especially in
the field of ethics and education (Figure 1).
In this research, while referring to the principles
and basic generalities of postmodernism ethics,
postmodernist features are reviewed and then its
consequences in moral education are examined.
Although in both sections, the main emphasis is on
the ideas of postmodern philosophers in general,
but Richard Rorty’s opinion is more specific in the
main emphasis and references.
Basic characteristics of ethics from postmodernism
point of view
In general, and according to the different opinions
and views of postmodern philosophers about ethics
and morals, some of the features and foundations
of postmodernist ethics can be listed as follows:
Methodology
Anti-fundamentalism nature of ethics
Ethics and moral affairs are usually considered
as fundamental and unchangeable things, while
according to postmodern thinkers, such fixed
foundations and bases for ethics cannot be
imagined [7]. Disbelief in fixed foundations not
only in the field of ethics and moral phenomena,
but also in other fields of study, from the point
of view of postmodernists, is a fundamental
matter that has changed and transformed over
time and are variable from culture to culture. In
other words, there is no external moral reality
that is independent of people’s point of view and
is the subject of moral checks. Instead, from the
point of view of postmodern thinkers, people
are oriented towards ethics and founded moral
structures based on their interests, relationships,
conditions, and general circumstances of their
lives and in response to their needs, interests, and accepted values. Thus, ethics are not “objective”
matters that are written somewhere in the form
of a moral code, but rather, they are matters of
contingency that originate from the requirements
and requirements of human life and general human
conditions. Considering this feature of moral
affairs, “Richard Rorty” talks about the nature of
contingency of ethics. In this way, “moral virtues”
are human choices that have come into being in
accordance with the cultural, social and historical
conditions of the lives of different people, ethnic
groups and nationalities. Such a conceptualization
of ethics and moral virtues is exactly the opposite
of “Kant’s” ethics, in which “ethical principles
and merits are considered intrinsic” [8]. In the
definition of ethics, Rorty considers it to be a kind
of historical distinction between human natural
desires and needs, with firmness and caution and
far-sightedness resulting from rationality. In other
words, moral merits and virtues arise from the
necessities of life, and in fact, it is a balance that
is established between instincts and carnal desires
on the one hand, and the dos and don’ts of human
life on the other hand. Such a perception of ethics
clearly shows its pragmatic aspect, in which ethics
is considered to be an emergent matter arising
from the natural requirements and pressures of
life, not the requirements and dos and don’ts that
have been imposed on humans from the outside
world and beyond the reach of their experiences.
According to Rorty’s reading of traditional
philosophy, there is a kind of connection and
closeness between ethics and the concept of truth,
and Rorty tries his best to separate the two. In fact,
he is looking to say goodbye to the traditional
concept of ethics by abandoning the concept of
truth and instead portraying a new approach to
ethics for us by relying on the fellowman [9].
Also, this anti-fundamentalist point of view, in
rejecting fixed and external foundations, puts
forward a kind of “naturalistic pragmatism”
approach, which is inclined to “internalist” ethics.
Based on the introspective view of ethics, Rorty
believes that ethics originates from human natural
emotions and motivations, and from this point of
view, he questions “Christian ethics” because he is
in favor of a kind of ethics free from emotions. The
emphasis on the emotional dimension of ethics is
based on Rorty’s attention to “social solidarity”
and the feeling of belonging to fellow humans and
understanding the conditions of people’s lives.
This is the point that Christian ethics is indifferent
to from Rorty’s point of view. Quoted by Oakeshott
et al., Rorty adds that morality is neither a system
of general principles nor a set of rules, but rather a native language [10]. The language of ethics is not
a device for codifying judgments about the way of
moral education or issues, but rather a procedure
that should be thought, chosen, acted and spoken
according to it.
Another aspect of anti-fundamentalist ethics
from the point of view of postmodernism lies in
the “determinism of culture” that governs moral
values. This means that moral values are not
objective, external things and structures outside
the sphere of life imposed on people, but moral
values are a kind of cultural preferences that
represent the ideals and values that the majority
of people have accepted them as moral principles.
Social and human behaviors in general and
political institutions in particular are the product
of historical and objective situations and should
be evaluated based on the needs arising from the
situations. In this way, it can be seen that there
is nothing trans-historical in ethics, therefore,
another aspect of postmodernism’s anti-
fundamentalist ethics is its “historical” feature.
Based on this, morality is something that is always
on the way and a constantly changing “process”.
Of course, the historical thing does not necessarily
mean that there is change and transformation
without any fixed and stable aspects for various
things that happen in time, because the other side
of the coin of change is durability and stability,
in other words, moral values, while being subject
to change and transformation, also benefit from a
kind of relative stability and durability.
Pluralism
Postmodernisms accept diversity and plurality
and attach great importance to it in the field of
opinion and practice. Counting the phenomena of
difference and differentiation and relying on it is
another moral doctrine related to pluralism. In this
regard, Richard Rorty has said: Freud showed us
how some things those are ridiculous, trivial, low
and corrupt from the point of view of collective
values can be a meaningful, important and even
completely moral element from an individual and
private point of view [11].
On this basis, a work or even a private poem and
literary and fictional writings can be at the level of
an excellent and noble example, which indicates
the moral manifestations and moral life of man.
As Rorty said, the ultimate victory of poetry in
its long-standing battle with philosophy is the
ultimate victory of the metaphor of self-creation
against the metaphor of discovery. In his opinion, this kind of power and domination is the only one
that can be hoped for in a culture where poets
win over philosophers. What exists is a web of
relationships, the fabric of which must be woven
again in a network of human relationships over
time.
For any reason, the concept of diversity and
pluralism has a major contribution to the moral
theories of postmodernism, and its basic purpose
is to know the common aspects of human life, the
point that needs to be considered is to pay attention
to the similarities while considering the differences.
Thus, paying attention to the differences and
distinctions between things and phenomena should
not make us forget the commonalities of things.
Paying attention to similarities can be useful
and effective in establishing relationships with
other people at least as much as differences. The
pragmatic spirit of postmodernist ethics lies in the
fact that everything includes freedom from both
differences and similarities. A point that should
not be overlooked is that although having an “open
mind” is a positive valuable thing, and this trait
legitimizes the other and welcomes differences
and distinctions, excessive acceptance of any
differences of opinion without any evaluation,
maybe to the extent of having a closed mind and
dogmatism is obnoxious and harmful.
Anti-authoritarian
According to postmodernists, knowledge,
including moral knowledge, is a reflection of
the interests and values of people who produced
it. From this perspective, “Michel Foucault”
refers to the analysis of the concepts of “gender”
and “gender roles”, which are signs of the
advancement of the interests and power of elites.
Gender roles such as paternal/maternal, father/
child and feminine-masculine maps, which are
accepted especially in modern and conventional
societies, are mostly determined by powerful
and dominant individuals and groups. These
people are parents (mainly fathers), teachers,
intellectuals, and religious leaders [12]. While in
terms of postmodernism, such an authoritarian
system, which is mainly top down, and they are
applied and imposed by men to women, parents
to children, teachers to students and elites to
ordinary citizens. They are cruel, unfair and one-
sided. According to postmodernists, this equation
should be reversed, so that all classes and groups
have an equal share in creating moral values.
From an anti-authoritarian position, “Lyotard”
attacked the doctrine of “grand narratives” and
believes that in the heart of grand narratives,
subordinate groups and minorities have a small
contribution to the production and creation
of moral values and the solution lies in active
participation of groups and classes in the
production and distribution of knowledge. He
points to the process of “self-determinism” as a
suitable alternative to overcome this inequality,
through which we can hope for the participation
of the lower classes of society in the production
of knowledge and moral values. In this regard,
people like “McCarthy” also pointed to the play of
differences in a democratic society and supports
Lyotard’s authoritarian position [13]. From this
point of view, Rorty also underestimates the role
of intellectuals in the production of knowledge. In
his opinion, intellectuals do not contribute more
to the production of knowledge than other classes
and groups, because all classes and members of
society have the same role in the production of
moral knowledge and the promotion of human
values.
Getting rid of the conditions of domination
is the same as getting rid of the condition of
fundamentalism in negotiation. Negotiation helps
us to better understand each other’s situation, needs
and conditions. Also, through the negotiation,
we become aware of the specific effects of our
attitudes and values on other people and groups.
Of course, it is necessary to pay attention to the
point that excessive anti-monarchism should
not mean abandoning any kind of authority and
extreme imposition of power, which itself is the
basis for the display of power by the powerful
and as a result it results in the abandonment
of the weak classes and the inferior in the taste
of the powerful, and this is a kind of immoral
and even anti-moral act. It should be noted that
thinkers such as Thomas McCarthy and Derrida
refer to a process called “questioning” power and
ruling classes, based on which concepts such as
freedom, justice, egalitarianism, and (mutual)
rights should be subject to constant review and
revision. Such processes and solutions, in turn,
can play a role in controlling power and prevent
the complete isolation of power. In this regard,
the role of exercising power in order to give effect
to moral values is brought up. This means that in
order to implement the principles and methods
of moral education, it is necessary to apply some
gentle power, and without it, moral education is impossible. The absolute surrender of power to the
wounds of postmodernists deprives the necessary
authority in moral education from this important
matter and then keeps moral education at the level
of neutral recommendations.
Social solidarity
Rorty and other postmodernists emphasize social
solidarity and concern for others. Solidarity not
only requires the ability to recognize the pain of
others, but also to see others who have common
interests with us. Rorty has repeatedly spoken
against oppressive power and has also condemned
things such as abuse, exploitation, aggression and
harming groups and classes of society against
weaker groups and people. On the other hand,
their effort is aimed at the progress of the social
cause and help along with mutual respect in
collective relations. Rorty separates the private
sphere from the moral public sphere. In the
public sphere, paying attention to other people’s
point of view and considering the principle of
“justice” and treating others fairly is essential,
while in the private sphere, which mainly deals
with humor and the speech of poets, it is an area
where attention to others and considering the
presence of others decreases, but we see more
originality, innovation and “self-creation” in this
field. Thus, according to Rorty, the public sphere
of ethics deals with “justice” and the private
sphere with “self-creation”. According to Rorty,
even though one cannot participate in the moral
virtue of justice and maximizing the self-creating
aspect of preserving authenticity in personal life,
considering social standards, it is not considered
moral virtue or merit by itself.
Rorty, influenced by Nietzsche, considers the
basis of a social relationship to be the power and
exercise of one’s control over another person.
In such a way that from his point of view, the
exploitation of the specific situation of the
society is not corrupt, primitive or incomplete,
but belongs to the essence of life, while in the
private world, which is the place of independence
and self-creation, there is no exploitation, cruelty
and violation of others, and this is the reason
for Rorty’s acceptance of ironism as a moral
and educational method. In his opinion, words
related to self-creation, such as independence,
are not opposed to exchange and discussion with
others, but require ignoring others, while words
related to the public realm (such as justice) refer
to relationships with others and in areas of social institutions cause discussion and negotiation with
others [14]. In Rorty’s opinion, the relationship
between these two fields, which are spoken of
with two different words, is an incommensurable
and incomprehensible relationship. In this way,
the feeling of sympathy is considered one of the
foundations of solidarity from the point of view
of convenience. In his opinion, correlation cannot
be found and discovered, but it should be created.
Solidarity arises with our increased sensitivity to
the suffering and humiliation of others. I believe
that there is something called moral progress,
which is the increase of human solidarity. This
progress is to achieve the ability to consider people
who have wide differences from us [15]. Now,
after examining and reviewing the characteristics
of ethics and moral practice from the point of view
of postmodernism, the specific consequences of
this point of view in moral education are reviewed.
In the review of these consequences, the following
can be mentioned as shown in Figure 2.
Results
Adopting a comprehensive and holistic approach
in moral education
From the point of view of postmodernists, moral
education are linked with other fields of study
and are in no way isolated and independent from
other fields. For example, their emphasis on
the characteristics of the “hidden curriculum”
in which moral education is realized indirectly
through the organization and atmosphere of the
schools and classrooms and its indirect effects on
the individual and social behaviors of students emphasize this point.
The attention and emphasis of postmodern
thinkers on moral education from a broad and
holistic perspective is related to their basic belief
based on the inherent dependence of “reality” and
“value” on each other. According to them, there
is no clear border between what facts are and
what should be (values). Therefore, the category
of ethics followed by, moral education, is not an
independent knowledge with specific foundations,
but ethics is intertwined and interfered with other
fields of knowledge and human value, such as
culture, politics, economics, history, literature,
art, science and technology. According to them,
with an ear sensitive to the sound of values, all
these fields and affairs can be looked at ethically,
in other words, when there is a criterion of value in
all the mentioned fields, we are faced with ethics.
The obvious ethical implications of such a view are
that “schooling” should teach things that directly
deal with the students’ lives and the world around
them. In other words, children and teenagers can’t
get acquainted with moral principles and rules
by reading a book or passing a few lessons about
ethics, and as a result, get acquainted with ethics
and act ethically, but moral education happens
when there is a sufficient link between topics and
issues that are supposed to be taught, and students
are encouraged to consider everything from a
broad, holistic perspective, especially with an
ethical view and attitude.
Thus, the point of view of postmodernism,
regardless of what subject or topic is studied, it
should be kept in mind that values are an integral
part of each of these subjects, in other words, the
dependence of facts and values is quite obvious in
this point of view. In this regard, the students and
even teachers themselves are encouraged to see
various categories with the lens of moral values
in their public and private life arenas by adopting
a framework of value judgment and with an open
mind; they are able to put everything under the
microscope of value. From this point of view,
teaching moral values is in no way compatible
with imposing and inculcating a set of values to
students.
Accepting and respecting the various differences
of people
In order to teach moral values through the
curriculum and processes related to school life,
it is necessary to adopt a pluralistic approach in the school. Recognizing differences as they
occur in people’s lives requires considering the
continuity of school life realities with the local
community realities. These natural differences
come from the differences related to people’s real-
life conditions. Paying attention to the distinctions
and differences of people is another point that
should be recognized in moral education from the
point of view of postmodernism. If this is done
correctly, it will reduce stereotyped judgments and
stereotypes of students about certain ethnic groups
and classes of society and going beyond paying
attention to the apparent differences, makes them
pay attention to the real differences of people,
and this itself is a basis for understanding and is
a factor to resolve misunderstandings in social
relations among students.
Identifying new foundations for moral life
Moral education should recognize differences
and provide the context for their emergence. It
should also pay enough attention to similarities
and commonalities between people, even if these
shared values are temporary and not permanent. In
other words, in order to benefit from a moral life,
according to postmodernists, it is necessary to base
some relatively fixed value foundations on which
all people have a common opinion and general
agreement on its importance and value. These
thinkers briefly consider these new foundations to
include health, happiness, friendship, sociability,
the value of discovery, including individual
and collective discoveries and inventions,
completeness and perfectionism, and such values
that can generally provide a valuable and good
life for people. From their point of view, in moral
education, students should be encouraged to see
these value commonalities behind the existing
differences and in this way develop their value
views. In this way of attitude, things that were
seen as different are actually similar and can have a
common basis of value. For this reason, it must be
acknowledged that the morality of postmodernism
is not without foundation and human solidarity is
also considered as a foundation for ethics. Thus, by
adopting such an approach with moral education,
the teacher and coach encourages students to
pay attention to the similarities in goals, ideals,
issues and problems affecting all human beings in
addition to the differences in teaching ethics? In
this way, they can overcome many prejudices and
stereotyped thinking and acting. Teaching subjects
such as world geography, global economy and
the ideal global citizen, which have been paid attention to in many schools in the west today,
and generally considering the curriculum from
a global perspective, are basic steps for teaching
common values, especially moral values in the
students, which is able to be useful and effective
in identifying common value bases.
Taking an anti-authoritarian approach in moral
education
The doctrine of anti-authoritarian in the ethics
of postmodernism has several implications and
consequences for the moral education of students.
Its main center of gravity goes back to the role
that the students themselves should have in
determining the goals of school, interpersonal
behaviors, requirements of academic life, and
generally determining their registration and way of
life. In all the above cases, the opinions and views
of the students should be given serious attention
and by adopting an approach based on negotiation
in formal studies and class discussions, the role
and contribution of the students in the production
and evaluation of knowledge and moral values
should be considered.
In such an environment, teachers are responsible
for the linear role. It is time to avoid exercising
dominance in teaching moral affairs. They
must have the necessary basic knowledge and
information about values and prepare themselves
to learn from the students and always be ready to
change their attitude if necessary. Thus, in this
type of education, a paradigm shift from “teacher-
centered” to “student-centered” is observed,
which is equivalent to changing the direction
from “subject-oriented” education to “problem-
oriented” education. Nell Nuddings, one of the
modern feminist thinkers, calls such educations
under the title, “care-based educations”. In the
new edition of the book “The challenge of care in
schools, a substitute approach for education” she
states that by adopting such an approach, students
will become interested in the process of education
and will contribute to the advancement of school
affairs [16].
In this approach, teachers and trainers also play a
facilitating role and avoid imposing their valuable
opinions and views on students. It is necessary
to remember that the anti-authoritarian approach
is not necessarily an approach without specific
structure and content, but in which teachers
use ideas and opinions that have individual and
personal meanings through literature, art, social
sciences, stories and movies as content. Ethical education is learned and through debate and
negotiation with students, they examine the values
hidden in these works and in this way, students
and even the teachers themselves develop their
value views.
Basic attention to the element of alturism
Tolerance and acceptance of others is a
requirement for the life and dynamism of the
modern sociopolitical order. “Richard Rorty” is
one of the most important postmodern thinkers
and philosophers who have paid special attention
to another concept from an intellectual-thoughtful
and pragmatic point of view regarding social
utility. As Rorty pointed out, social solidarity or
ethics based on considering others’ point of view
should be based on conventional human emotions
and motivations. Thus, in moral education, paying
attention to the views of others is a basic element
from the point of view of postmodernism, which
is contrary to the traditional view in this field. In
the traditional point of view, moral education is
not based on paying attention to the position of
other people, but the basis of work in creating
shame and guilt is considered as the main motives
of moral actions.
Such a goal can be achieved through formal studies
and class discussions and creating authentic
relationships in the school and classroom, which
in turn leads to a kind of mutual understanding
and the principles of convergence and solidarity
with others. In this regard, teachers can also
explain the necessity, reasons and consequences
of alturism in its individual, group and social
forms to the students, as a result of such a process,
students not only get to know the necessity and
reasons of understanding others’ point of view,
but also the necessary grounds for doing such
an act on an individual and social scale can be
achieved personally. In this way, the postmodern
thinkers re-examined the element of alturism and
understanding others’ point of view, which was
mentioned in the traditional researches related to
the ethics of the early 20th century by researchers
such as Hartshorn and May, considered it in
their moral education with a new look as a basic
element and component.
Application of Rorty’s moral teachings in the field
of educational psychology
Rorty has divided education in to two Stages:
Pre-university and post-university, in pre-
university education, the issue of socialization of students of is raised, and the inculcation of
desirable citizenship is realized especially do
during school and mostly by teachers. According
to Rorty educational activities in the classroom
Framework, in Rorty’s opinion, the elements of
convergence should be emphasized in educational
activities within the classroom and the overall
school environment. Such as: Social solidarity
instead social of objectivity and ethics, based on
dialogue instead of consensus [17].
From Rorty’s point of view, what is important in
the First Stage of education is the transfer of social
culture to students by teachers and educators.
Therefore, it can be said that according to Rorty,
teaching is the same as applying the discourse
of objectivity. Therefore, one of the principles
of education and educational psychology is to
pay attention to two-way and inter-subjective
reasoning [18]. On the other hand, the judging
criteria should be focused on the individual and
social needs of student another thing that Rorty
pays attention to in relation between teacher and
students is the concept of tolerance [19-21].
Discussion and Conclusion
Regarding moral education from the point of view
of postmodernism, emphasizing the thoughts of
Richard Rorty, it should be said that although
the various representatives of postmodernism
do not have a single point of view regarding
moral education, Richard Rorty’s moral
point of view can largely represent the moral
attitude of postmodernism. The features of neo-
fundamentalism, anti-authoritarian, pluralism
and emphasis on social solidarity instead of
objectivity and absolute belief are important and
positive points of this viewpoint in ethics, which
in turn can be useful for teachers and educators
in moral education. In this regard, adopting a
holistic approach, accepting and respecting the
various differences of students, identifying new
foundations for life, and paying attention to the
element of alturism (paying attention to the views
of others) can be used in the moral education of
students, teachers and coaches in schooling.
From Rorty’s point of view, one of the noteworthy
points related to the postmodernist perspective on
moral education is the emphasis on the contingency
of ethics, which is against the rereading of
traditional metaphysics, which emphasizes
the absolute, trans-temporal, and trans-spatial
principles of ethics. According to Rorty, such a vision frees the idea of moral action from any kind
of false teaching and emphasizes the contingency
element of moral knowledge and its time-bound
nature and the transformation of ethics and morals
over time. Instead of relying and emphasizing
dogmatic and absolute doctrines, Rorty tends
to “ironism” and puts it against metaphysical
absolutes and this is important and fundamental
in its place.
But in spite of the criticisms and innovations that
the postmodernist point of view can have in moral
education, the major limitations and shortcomings
of this view can be as follows:
The first point is that excessive emphasis
on differences makes us forget similarities
and commonalities and destroys the field of
negotiation, understanding and social solidarity
desired by postmodernism and Rorty. Without
having a common “touch stone”, negotiation is
not possible, so paying attention to the differences
should not make us forget the similarities between
and within individuals. Therefore, it must be
said that, despite Rorty’s opinion, morality is not
stable without foundations. Moral education in
particular, where we are bound to use prescriptive
statements, is not possible without relying on
common foundations. Too much emphasis on
differences makes us neglect this importance.
The second point is that from the point of view
of pluralism, allowing the emergence of any
moral opinion and ideal, even if that opinion and
viewpoint is anti-human or inhuman, cannot be
accepted by human societies, and in other words,
individuals, groups and classes that, for example,
accepted suicide, self-harm and other immoral
manifestations as their value system without any
standards and criteria, are not acceptable under the
title of pluralism, and perhaps the acceptance of
these opinions will work to the detriment of human
society instead of benefit and lacks moral value.
Such an idea of morality in its individualistic form
can lead to strict relativism and even to anarchism.
The third point in the moral point of view of
postmodernism is the absolute surrender of power
in order to avoid falling into the trap of domination
and authoritarianism. In this regard, it should be
noted that any kind of possession of power should
not necessarily lead to totalitarianism. It is true
that breaking the reins in the exercise of power
has no result other than authoritarian, which
in its place is an anti-moral matter, but relative
women’s authority in moral education and courage and persistence in asserting the rights of the
oppressed, which in school education, oppressed
means students belonging to the weak classes, is
undeniable in moral education and promotion of
human principles. In other words, you can’t go to
war with the masters of power empty handed, so
absolute disarmament in moral education will not
bring good moral and educational results. In other
words, a minimum amount of authority is required
to establish a moral and democratic society-
which is desired by Rorty and without proper use
of power resources, creating such a society and
achieving the desired goals of the postmodernist
view is impossible. Otherwise, it will lead to some
kind of abandoning of people and students; there is
no hope for moral education. Of course, it should
be kept in mind that the meaning of exercising
power here is the same authority that affects from
the inside, not the external power that is based on
authoritarian and domination, and it is obvious
that the latter is not compatible with the spirit of
moral education.
According to the neo-pragmatist characteristics
of Rorty’s moral Theory, its influence can be
seen in the field of psychology and psychiatry. In
educational psychology, facilitation of teacher-
students relationship and consensus and agreement
between teacher and students in the teaching
process can be counted among the achievement of
Rorty’s neo-pragmatism. In the field of psychiatry
and clinical activities the process of objectivity,
solidarity, consensus and mutual agreement in the
course of psychotherapy interactions and the result
of these processes, which lead to gaining in sight
from the clients, are considered as the achievement
of this approach to ethical relationship in relation
to calculated between the psychiatrist and the
patient.
References
- Chaparak A, MOUSAVI A, Alasti K. What is ethics of science and technology? Ethics in Science and Technology 14(3):1-6.
[Google Scholar]
- Ismaili M, Jandaghi G, Khosravi A, Ghasemi A.“Designing conceptual model of ethics in technology transfer.” Ethics in Science and Technology. 2022;17(2):187-191.
- Rorty R. An ethics for today: Finding common ground between philosophy and religion. Columbia University Press. 2011.
[Crossref][Google Scholar]
- Sardarnia K, Mohseni H. “The foundations and application of "other" for political-social order from the perspective of "Richard Rorty".” Theoretical Policy Research. 2019;27:223-254.
- Pouryousefi S, Freeman RE. The promise of pragmatism: Richard Rorty and business ethics. Business Ethics Quarterly. 2021;31(4):572-599.
[Crossref][Google Scholar]
- Ahmadabad Arani N, Hedayat A, Rahnama A. Analysis of the foundations of ethics and moral education in the perspective of Richard Rorty and its critique from the perspective of Allameh Tabatabaei. The Journal of New Thoughts on Education. 2018;13(4):145-172.
[Google Scholar]
- Beck C. Educational theory. London: Macmillan Press. 1995.
- Rorty R. Incident, game and solidarity. Tehran: Center Publishing. 2005.
- Soleimani N, Hesamifar A, Fath Taheri F, Herfe P. Analyzing and examining the epistemological foundations of ethics in Richard Rorty's philosophy. Philosophical Thought. 2022;2(2):81-103.
[Crossref][Google Scholar]
- Oakeshott M. Human conduct. Oxford University Press. 1975.
- Foucult M. The archaeology of knowledge. New York: Pantheon Books. 1972.
- Kohli W. Critical conversations in philosophy of education. Routledge. 2013.
[Google Scholar]
- Bagheri K. The type of pragmatism and philosophy of education. Tehran: University of Tehran. 2008.
- Naqibzadeh M. A look at the philosophical attitudes of the 20th century. Tehran: Tahori Publishing. 2008.
- Nel N. The challenge to care in schools: An alternative approach to education. Routledge Press.
[Google Scholar]
- Akbar R. Psychological foundations of ethics. Tehran: Ketabiran Publications. 2010.
- Khosrow B. Neo-pragmatism and philosophy of education. Tehran: Tehran University Publications. 2007.
- Carthy MC. The politics of the ineffable. New York & London: Routledge. 2001.
- Noodings N. The challenge to care in schools. New York: Teachers College Press.
[Google Scholar]
- Rorty R. Philosophy and the mirror of nature. Princeton University Press. 2009.
[Google Scholar]
- Rorty R. Contingency, irony, and solidarity. In Shaping Entrepreneurship Research. 2020:505-520.
[Google Scholar]
Citation: Explanation of Postmodern Approach and Moral Education from Point of View Richard Rorty’s Ethics with Emphasis on
Psychological Implications, Vol. 25 (1) January, 2024; 1-10.
+44 1752 712024
