Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Nussbaum
Title of Article: Education and Democratic Citizenship: Capabilities and Quality
Education
Publisher: Journal of human Development Vol. 7, No. 3
Year of Publication: 2006
Nussbaum begins with the author presenting two sides of the education in
India: that of the education conducted by NGOs like Adithi, and that of the education
provided by the government. Nussbaum painted a hardship-filled but hopeful picture for
NGO education, and contrasted it with the depressing picture in the government schools.
She stressed the fact that education of citizens is the most crucial aspect of
democracy. This importance is being recognized and emphasized by political debates
today, but much of it is focused on basic literacy and numeracy and scientific and
technological education. On subjects such as history, the debate is typically on textbook
content. Nussbaum found all of this very narrow in the light of the question of how to
develop young minds of future democratic citizens, and argued that the abilities
connected to the humanities and arts are crucial for this formation and for the
safeguarding of democracy.
The author then moved on to discuss three capacities needed for cultivating
democratic citizenship today. The first is the capacity for critical examination of oneself
and ones tradition. This capacity is stressed by both Rabindranath Tagore and
Jawaharlal Nehru. The second capacity is the capacity to see oneself as human beings
bound to all other human beings by ties of recognition and concern. The third capacity is
the capacity for narrative imagination. According to the author, the third capacity is the
ability to be in the shoes of others or to be in sensitive to the feelings and needs of
others. This can be developed through literature and arts. What she meant is that the role
of literature and art has a strong connection to develop such capacity.
What I found that I am not fully convinced is that of the second capacity because
it does not imply a strong background on national loyalty basing from Nussbaums
argument. There seems to be a failure on considering the identity of democracy, which is
the government, because as citizens we are oblige to patronize our country. What I am
trying to say is how can we have a strong background of our country if we are not loyal,
because if we try to ignore this then there seems to be a problem because citizens would
be more apathetic to the its country, this what Nussbaum is trying to avoid. I seems
cannot agree to how she tries to justify the second capacity as essential towards the
safeguarding of democracy. From what I have understood from her arguments is that
second capacity is to delineate the ways on how to use and achieve this capacity. I am
deep thought how second capacity contributes to cultivating a strong citizenry who can
work with the problems that appears from time to time in the democratic government.
Other than that I understood well the first and the third capacities. She would
explain that the first capacity is to justify the role in cultivation of the citizens of the
democratic country is due to crucial component for democracy to settle or work out the
differences of the people who are involve.