Search

O artigo enfatiza similaridades discursivas entre os PCNs do Ministério da Educação do Brasil, tidos como currículo oficial, e o Movimento Constituinte Escolar do governo petista do Rio Grande do Sul, proposto como currículo alternativo. Reflete sobre o que vem acontecendo com nossos currículos alternativos críticos, que acabam propondo quase a mesma educação que a do Governo Federal. Argumenta que, em função desse hibridismo, precisamos desfazer o risco de ligação, produzir e praticar currículos que ainda não existem, inventar mais uma vez a diferença. The article stresses the discursive similarities between the National Curricula Parameters (PCN) established by the Brazilian Ministry of Education, considered the official curriculum, and the School Assembly Movement inspired by the Workers' Party state government in Rio Grande do Sul, proposed as an alternative curriculum. It discusses what has been happening with our critical alternative curricula which end up proposing almost the same education as that of the Federal Government. It forwards the argument that, as a consequence of this hybridism, we need to dispel the ambiguity, by producing and putting into practice curricula which do not yet exist and to invent once more the difference.

In an examination of Hayek’s social philosophy, the article seeks to distinguish between socio-epistemological arguments, which postulate the radical ignorance of social actors, and the conservative political conclusions usually associated with Hayek’s thought, which prophesy the destruction of the spontaneous order owing to efforts to intervene in the social world. The ultimate purpose of drawing this distinction is to lay the ground for a discussion of a new alliance, one between these arguments and the possibility of design. This exploration of multi-sided Hayekian argumentation allows us to identify some ambiguities essential towards the article’s purposes. The most important ambiguity appears in the argument against planned changes, where Hayek describes the foreseeable negative consequences of such changes and also sketches the scenario shaped by the foreseeable beneficial effects of the undisturbed operation of the spontaneous order. Cet article examine la philosophie sociale de Hayek et vise à distinguer les arguments socio-épistémologiques qui postulent l’ignorance radicale des acteurs sociaux, des conclusions politiques conservatrices normalement associées à la pensée de Hayek qui prédisent la destruction de l’ordre spontané par les tentatives d’intervention dans le monde social. Cette distinction a pour but d’introduire la discussion sur une nouvelle alliance entre ces arguments et la possibilité de dessein. En examinant les multiples arguments de Hayek, on peut repérer certaines ambigüités qui se montreront essentielles aux propos de cet article. L’ambigüité la plus importante est celle de l’argument contre des transformations projetées, par lequel Hayek décrit leurs conséquences négatives prévisibles, après avoir esquissé le tableau des effets bénéfiques prévisibles de l’opération non troublée de l’ordre spontané.