[Review]Routledge Library Editions: Philosophy of Education (6)

Fraternity

 “ In section 4 of Chapter 2 we noted a wide range of ideas connected with a broad notion of fraternity which often appeared in the rhetoric, and indeed sometimes the argument, supporting mixed ability grouping. We suggested there that this cluster of ideas, though often confiated with ideas of equality and social justice, was actually about something else more to do with a positive valuing of social integration and feelings of community as things to be approved of in their ownright. Thus, as we pointed out, segregation of pupils into groups based upon specific abilities was seen by some teachers as deplorable, not solely because such differentiation represented the injustice of unjustifiably different treatment, but simply because it acted to support social divisiveness and against the possibility of social cohesiveness and mutually supportive cooperation. Sometimes this idea is part of a wider sociopolitical spectrum in which presentday society is seen as damagingly competitive, divisive and alienating, and educational arrangements of a comprehensive school and mixed ability grouping kind are seen as means of combating this state of affairs. The quotations from Crosland given in Chapter 2 appear to embrace this range of considerations. Here was at least one protagonist plainly concerned to break down divisions between schools, and within them, with the avowed object of breaking down the divisions of social class in the wider society. Social philosophers, too, have valued the idea of fraternity.”(38)

Mixed ability grouping is an educational method that organizes students with different abilities into one learning group. Beyond reducing inequality in individual abilities, these advanced education methods play a major role in promoting fraternity. Surprisingly, today, the society is more divided than interactive, and this mixed ability grouping can also be seen as a means of resolving the divided class distinction.

John Rawls’s a Theory of Justice

John Rawls(1921-2002)

“A further merit of the difference principle is that it provides an inter- pretation of the principle of fraternity. In comparison with liberty and equality, the idea of fraternity has had a lesser place in democratic theory. It is thought to be less specifically a political concept, not in itself de- fining any of the democratic rights but conveying instead certain attitudes of mind and forms of conduct without which we would lose sight of the values expressed by these rights. Or closely related to this, fraternity is held to represent a certain equality of social esteem manifest in various public conventions and in the absence of manners of deference and servility. No doubt fraternity does imply these things, as well as a sense of civic friendship and social solidarity, but so understood it expresses no definite requirement. We have yet to find a principle of justice that matches the underlying idea. The difference principle, however, does seem to correspond to a natural meaning of fraternity: namely, to the idea of not wanting to have greater advantages unless this is to the benefit of others who are less well off. The family, in its ideal conception and often in practice, is one place where the principle of maximizing the sum of advantages is rejected. Members of a family commonly do not wish to gain unless they can do so in ways that further the interests of the rest. Now wanting to act on the difference principle has precisely this conse- quence. Those better circumstanced are willing to have their greater ad- vantages only under a scheme in which this works out for the benefit of the less fortunate.”(John Rawls, A Theory of Justice, Harvard University Press, 1971. 90)

Rawls mentions the freedom of each individual. In other words, it is argued that basic social goods such as freedom and opportunity, income and wealth, and the basis for self-esteem should be distributed fairly. He argues that social and economic inequality must satisfy two conditions. First, despite inequality, there must be maximum benefit for vulnerable groups, and second, access to positions and opportunities must be equal according to the principle of fair opportunity. Rawls saw the goal of property-owning democracy as realizing the idea of ​​a fair system of cooperation between free and equal citizens of society.(xv) Such as a this approach must be achieved through institutions that support the steady distribution of capital and resource rights over time, fair equality of opportunity secured by provisions for education and training, and fair values ​​of political freedom. It is argued that this is ‘reciprocity’ or ‘the principle of interdependence’ and should be considered in the context of property-owning democracy rather than the context of the welfare state.

Mixed ability grouping can be seen as a way to realize social justice by providing equal opportunities to all students and creating an environment in which the most disadvantaged students can receive the maximum benefit. John Rawls' view is that education is considered one of the basic social goods and that all individuals should have fair access to it. Also, the above Rawls’s saying is for explaining the principles of fraternity, the fraternity does not imply specific democratic rights, but rather conveys the attitudes and behavioral patterns necessary to avoid losing the values ​​expressed by those rights. it means, it implies civic friendship and social solidarity expressed through public customs and courtesy.

[Reference]

• Routledge Library Editions, Philosophy of Education, 2017.
• John Rawls, A Theory of Justice, Harvard University Press, 1971.