Search

Recent social theory has begun to reconsider how theactivityof work can contribute to well-being or autonomy under the right conditions. However, there is no consensus on what this contribution consists in, and so on precisely which normative principles should be marshalled to critique harmful or repressive forms of workplace organisation. This paper argues that Richard Sennett’s concept of work ascraftprovides a normative standard against which the organisation of work can be assessed, especially when explained within a broadly Aristotelian account of the conditions of human flourishing. More precisely, the paper argues that a craft norm can meet the standards of social critique within the Frankfurt School tradition of Critical Theory, as this tradition has been interpreted by Axel Honneth. Honneth himself now rejects craft norms as too utopian and parochial to inform Critical Theory under contemporary economic conditions. In reply, this paper uses sociological studies of call centre workers to illustrate how work motivated by craft ideals can be sustainable rather than utopian, and how craftsmanship can inform social critique across a wide variety of industries and management practices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper argues that it is very possible, even in times of monetary austerity, to decrease the perceived costs of inclusion by resurrecting the vocabulary of belonging, friendship and love. Qualitative research was conducted with special educators’ (n = 33) regarding curricular access decisions for students with significant cognitive disabilities in the northeastern US. Results about academic access were published previously but participants’ use of capitalist economic language remained troubling, and while achievement was described as a necessity, inclusion was a seeming luxury. Intuitive inquiry and principles of economic theory including orthodoxy: the reverence given to economic explanations, and veto economics: words that can stop a discussion or plan from moving ahead offer a different interpretation of austerity and abundance. Healthy economies depend on frequent reciprocal exchanges and problems occur when there is excessive frugality or spending. A disproportionate focus on independence and discreet skill achievement is being too ‘frugal’ with students’ time. Becoming alert to economic orthodoxy and veto words, i.e. ‘individualised’ and ‘independent’ enables educators to challenge the false rationality of exclusion. Rather than being a luxury item, inclusion is a necessity. The cost-benefit trade-off for inclusion must be re-conceptualised to weigh friendship, acceptance and community more heavily. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper traces the intellectual trajectories of the first stand-alone theories of action, understood as both axiologically neutral and quasi-scientific from a methodological point of view. I argue that the rise of action theory of this kind corresponds to a particular moment of dissatisfaction within Western thought, and as such, it tells us far more about the history of philosophy than the subject itself. I conclude by explaining why subsequent failures to provide an acceptable theory of action are not accidental. On the contrary, such failures owe themselves probably to the fact that formulating a theory of action is neither propitious nor useful. Thus, the most valuable lesson we can learn from philosophical desires for a theory of action is that we should take co-action as the starting point in our normative investigations, rather than positing action simpliciter as a problem to solve. That is, instead of postulating a theory of action, we should think of a paradigm shift, whereby we move away from a representational paradigm in philosophy towards a co-actional one. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]