A Genealogical Analysis of the Concept of ‘Good’ Teaching: A Polemic

Abstract

In this essay I intentionally employ Nietzsche's genealogical method as a means to critique the complex concept of 'good' teaching, and at the same time reconstitute 'good' teaching in a form that is radically different from contemporary accounts. In order to do this, I start out by undertaking a genealogical analysis to both reveal the complicated historical development of 'good' teaching and also disentangle the intertwining threads that remain hidden from us so we are aware of the core threads that hold it together. Two major threads are identified in my analysis, which I refer to as: Genealogy I: Teaching as applied science or practice; and, Genealogy II: Teaching as a vocational calling or neutral profession. With this in mind, I take the two value systems (Genealogy I and II) presented in my critique of 'good' teaching, and rather than return to old, or create new values, I argue that the true task of any educational endeavour is to make human beings human. Therefore, in the spirit of Nietzsche, I revive and extend Nietzsche's account of Bildung as a dynamic way of living timeless educational aims, such as learning to see, think, speak, write and feel in becoming true human beings.

Altering identities. Possibilities of understanding identity in phenomenological pedagogy

“…Individual schools differ just as equally. Thus, modern educational science is still concerned with questions about school architecture (e.g., Daniels et al, 2019), what good teaching looks like (e.g., Stolz, 2018), what sort of content should be taught (e.g., Pinar, 2013) and to whom (e.g., Lindmeier, 2018). Of course, these discussions also vary greatly between different countries.…”

Overcoming Transhumanism: Education or Enhancement Towards the Overhuman?

“…However, in order to avoid confusion, it is noteworthy that Nietzsche's notion of emancipative education does not equate with the idea of simply liberating the ‘authentic’ self through diminishing the traditional power structures of institutional education (Hoyer, , p. 420), since, according to Nietzsche's post‐humanist line of thought, the essence of the individual lies within its non‐essentiality. Steven A. Stolz () emphasises that a legitimate turn to Bildung would require ‘students learning that true human beings are dynamic, subjective, and in a constant state of flux’ (p.157)—a thought that clearly echoes Biesta's and Latour's insight that a postmodern approach to critical education would have to take into account the fact that human beings themselves pose complex networks that remain in a constant state of becoming. Thus, from a Nietzschean point of view, the unique and irreducible process of becoming our ‘selves’ can hence either be throttled by rigid institutional procedures (educational or technological) or unfold by a variety of creative stimulations that allow us to permanently ‘become who we are’.…”

“…Instead of being a post‐metaphysical replacement for a deceased God, the image of the overhuman represents a strictly ‘formal’ educational ideal ( Bildungsideal ) which, above all, expresses an unconditional affirmation for life in all its ambivalence (Hoyer, , p. 502). ‘As such, the Übermensch’—as Stolz () stresses—‘is significant in Nietzsche's work because it provides an insight into his understanding of Bildung that is not a static representation of our being , but a dynamic representation of our becoming due to our being in a constant state of flux that never ends’ (p. 152). Constant becoming, however, cannot be subsumed to any specific cultural, metaphysical or educational content.…”

Nietzsche, Eternal Recurrence and Education: The Role of the Great Cultivating Thought in the Art of Self‐Cultivation ( Bildung )

“…More importantly, rather than deny or ignore suffering, Nietzsche argues that we should embrace ‘ amor fati ’ (love of fate or love of one's fate) and affirm the value of suffering as cultivating devices in the formation of individual character ( Bildung ) 5 . In another sense, the art of self‐cultivation ( Bildung ) is one of Nietzsche's main concerns of his philosophical project, and due to what he considers to be significant problems in education, he argues that an education grounded in a revaluation of values should be one of the main tasks for any education, particularly future education (see, for example, Small, 2016; Stolz, 2017, 2018, 2020, in press; Jonas and Yacek, 2019). 6 As a result, for the purposes of this essay, I will be concerned with the discussion of two issues: first, I briefly outline Nietzsche's doctrine of the eternal recurrence that has implications for education, and life in general; and, lastly, I argue that from an educational point of view, Nietzsche's doctrine of the eternal recurrence is best viewed as the great cultivating thought that has radical ramifications for any project of character education.…”