Heather Fraser, Mae Shaw and Paulo Freires View of Communitarianism - Essay Example

Task: Heather Fraser, Mae Shaw and Paulo Freire’s view of communitarianism Communitarianism is a true logical thinking responsible for explaining different concepts of independent socialism or collectivism1. It is a theory that attempts to create a balance between individual rights and the entire community. It recognises culture and values of the community and how individuals present themselves when confronted with different situations. The disappearance of real socialism attracted attention from different sociologists and researchers interested in making discoveries. The idea that human beings can survive well in the context of a community plays an important role in strengthening political and ethical relations. Philosophers such as Alasdair MacIntyre, Michael Walzer, Charles Taylor and Michael Sandel downplayed previous theories for ignoring the value of the community. In this regards the paper compares Heather Fraser, Mae Shaw and Paulo Freire’s view of communitarianism. According to communitarians, a community represents a high level of employing an elementary preposition of political and social contribution. Neighbourhoods, families and churches all form part of the entire community despite the political and moral interpretations. Despite many differences across the globe, a community constitutes shared values and goals that coincide with the individual interests. In addition, community members have an instrumental value that built a personal relationship for different members to enjoy a sense of ownership. Most importantly, members of a community enjoy a sense of identity that allows them to enjoy various present conditions2. Historically, friendship has been an instrumental factor in defining different relationships. On other hand, this has failed in many instances, as it does not converge solidarity. Arguably, this is because of communal concerns and other issues such as sexual practices as well as understanding of the universe. Above all, communitarianism remains a viewpoint that has significantly affected the community. Heather Fraser Despite going through change from one community to another, the term community probably remains an umbrella words that has not change meaning but only use. In his book, Four different approaches to community participation Heather Fraser presents a theoretical orientation of communitarianism from different approaches. Several questions arise in his quest to understand the community. For example, what purpose does the community serve? How do the communities interrelate and most importantly is there dominance in the way communities relate? Answers to these questions create a self-explanatory understanding of the community that does not only put into context community participation, but also the important role of different sectors. Comprehending why conflict occurs, why the justice system continues to demonstrate diversity and definitions of the community forms a core part of Fraser’s exploration. Heather’s understanding of communitarianism recognises anti-reluctant communitarians not forgetting the economic conservative approaches that attempt to elevate community understanding. According to him, a ‘mythical netherworld’ no longer exists; however, a new form of economic rationalists and individualists has granted community existence. Despite anti-communitarians view community work to be related to voluntary projects, several views have attempted to prove this otherwise. Economic conservatism underpins various form of liberalism but recognises that the facts that those handling community work have to do so in the ‘private realm’ despite the argument taking this perspective, when corporate managers and scientific experts view the same perception, an instrumental picture comes into light3. In the view of technical-functionalists, a community is relatively a stable homogeneous, harmonious and stable fraternity. It recognises the importance of a community but discourages disruption that might disrupt capital stability. Notably, technical-functionalists communitarians take orientation of pragmatism, utilitarianism and rationalism philosophies whose main goal is to determine optimal but scientific solutions to problems4. In essence, Heather second approach to communitarianism perceives technical functionalists, as parties ready to institute policies and programs that objectively is responsible for re-structuring, re-organizing and most importantly re-aligning the building blocks of the community5. The decision to address environmental, social and other components in the society finds base among the progressive communitarians. Certainly, this approach create a broad constellation of sucking decision making and collective resource sharing as inevitable elements of a society. Progressive communitarians prioritizes social justice as an important facet in the development process. A mix of ideas in the approach devices programs and policies responsible for explaining cultural differences. Most importantly, the ideas of inclusion and exclusion in gay debates as well as trade unions forms a coercive point of argument. From this perspective, progressive communitarians believe the community has the potential to overpower contradiction and dogmatic challenges that faces its stability. Last but importantly, Heather puts into perspective activist communitarians that use transformative approaches to solve common problems in the society. According to Fraser, a normal community reacts to common issues such as oppression, discrimination and environmental degradation. The view takes into cognisance the importance of linking personal issues to the national, local or global perspectives. It is because of this view that communities are in a consistent war for better conditions and different interests. Mae Shaw Contrary to Heather’s argument that monuments his argument in four pillars, Mae Shaw through Community development and the politics of community takes a different approach. She views the community as an entity and not as part of an entire structure. In the context of communitarianism, Shaw notes that, a community is an intermediate level of social reality where the possibility of experiencing human urgency overrides the physical structure (32). Mayo (1994) notes that ‘community’ is a term that has undergone evolution and contest in different times. It has been applied to accommodate policies, practices and politics, which is appropriate for the development of the community. Mae Shaw notes that development of the community has taken different shapes based on distinct patterns. Contrary to traditional conceptions of the community, Shaw notes that a diametrical approach is slowly entering the society. Therefore, she acknowledges that the liberal tradition existing in the community is surrounded by different reasons. Arguably, these reason dictate behaviour and reaction to diverse scenarios. In many instances, a community makes decisions based on culture and not the moral or logical evidence6. Evidently, many have attempted to challenge the way of thought; however, Shaw attempts to create an understanding into the already existing state of the community. Interestingly, she uses the foreground to create a deep understanding of the distinct tension in the society. Additionally, Shaw embraces communitarianism as a basic concept of life that initiates connectedness in an individual’s locality as well as liberty. Transformational and technicist view of the community finds base in Shaw’s view of the community. The professional and political overview acknowledges the fact that power guides actions. According to her, community development is a practice that initiates different behaviours in the society7. Undoubtedly, community development has assisted in changing how people think, view and even belief. It, therefore, is one of the best activities in the world that has significantly controlled development. According to Shaw, people have many expectations in community development. In this light, it is not clear whether people confuse the term for what it should be, or its status. Among, the many important things that caution existence of a community include material conditions and geographical location. Apparently, the structure of community relationships dictates which way any development should take8. In many instances, people have faced mixed ideas of which direction to take regarding life decisions. Certainly, this change in events continues to thrive through new aspects such as globalization and the rise in technology that has dominated the world. In this respect, Shaw reiterates the important confusion that has dominated the world leading to nostalgic perceptions and non-guaranteed success9. Apart from people that regard community development as a sense of building relationships, others have a potentially dangerous version. For instance, among social agents the version of the community appears to be an intentional exclusion of others. Notably, this intentional ambiguity represents a state of social conflict and segregation important for structuring and reinforcing structuring coherence. She furthermore looks at divisions in the community putting into perspective Harvey’s perception of neighbourhood and community. Based on capitalist relations, inequalities segregate communitarianism as a grass root ambition that for long time has retained various possibilities. Nonetheless, Shaw brings into light the fundamental issues that categorise a community in terms of policies or politics. Above all, Shaw’s perception of communitarianism differs from Heathers view who segregates the community into different setups. She believes creating a community involves initiating spaces that can allow individuals assert their space and most importantly engage the diverse versions of empowerment. Paulo Freire Paulo Freire is a Brazilian Educator who made many efforts towards explaining different aspects of the community. In his life as a reformist, he came up with various strategies to change the community and make it a better place. Globally, he was able to adopt serious plans to change the way people view things, think and even behave towards environmental issues. Evidently, students, teachers, activists, and young people admired his actions and made various plans towards elevating their thought towards the community10. In essence, his view of communitarians portrayed the world as a place full of problems that required succinct solutions and adamant change of strategy. The attempts to change the society allowed him to create a movement challenging people to read the world through different views. Communitarians trust that a common good in a community allows for the well-being of individuals in the society. Indeed, a good community structure allows for social stability, internal safety and public security not forgetting the important functions of education. in his work pedagogy of the oppressed Freire’s concept of education and the subsequent criticism of different aspects of the society reveals various things. In his view, historic methods of teaching have banked education in the society. As a result, people are now objects and not subjects of the exercise creating more perspectives to communitarianism. Social change and cultural change plays an important role in Paulo Freire discussion of the community. Paul’s critical encounter with the community developed proficient teaching methods involving cultural circles and a small group of participants. Freire involvement with communitarianism propelled him in into the spotlight in events such as the national literacy campaign. By extensively championing for higher change within the society. In as much as conservatives point at economic development as a better way to change the community, support for education. In conclusion, Heather Fraser, Mae Shaw and Paulo Freire have different views regarding the community. Despite these differences, all converge ideas on the moral responsibility responsible for upholding different ideas of communitarianism. Notably, Heather believes a community constituted mainly four forces responsible for various actions. According to him, the community is no longer a ‘mythical mother world’ dominated by specific individuals. However, it comprises technical-functionalists, progressive communitarians, Economic conservatism and instrumentalists responsible for formulating different arguments within the society. Contrary to Heathers belief, Shaw view of communitarianism pictures the world as an entity guided by various factors. She uses Transformational and technicist view to bring into light the embedded relationship that has bankrolled the community from decade to decade. She also recognises the important role of diametrical approaches that are slowly entering the society. Indeed Shaw view overshadows Heathers arguments that do not recognise human behaviour. Paulo Freire’s view of communitarianism makes it different from other authors. He believes education is a key strategy to alleviating societal problems and a proficient method can assist in changing the entire community. from this perspective, each of the three authors have good knowledge of the community devising various solutions. Bibliography Fraser, H., Four different approaches to community participation, Community Dev, vol. 40, no. 3, 2005 pp. 286-300. Gaskell, J. S., and Levin, B.. Making a difference in urban schools: Ideas, politics and pedagogy. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2012. Ife, J., Community Development, Creating Community Alternatives – Vision, Analysis and Practice, Australia, Longman, Melbourne, 2002. Keeney, P., Liberalism, communitarianism and education: Reclaiming liberal education. Aldershot, England: Ashgate Pub, 2007. Kymlicka, W., Contemporary Political Philosophy: An Introduction, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2002. Laverack, G., An identification and interpretation of the organizational aspects of community empowerment, Community Development Journal, vol. 36, no. 2, 2001,134 – 145 Ledwith, M., Community Development: A Critical Approach, Bristol, BASW/Policy Press, 2005. Lisman, C. D., and Harvey, I. E., Beyond the tower: Concepts and models for service-learning in philosophy. Washington, DC: American Association for Higher Education, 2000. Martin, I,. ‘Inflections of ‘community’ in educational work and research’ Conference proceedings, Researching Learning Outside the Academy, Glasgow Caledonian university, 2003. Meade, R and O’Donovan, O ‘Editorial introduction: corporatism and the ongoing debate about the relationship between the state and community development’, Community Development Journal, vol. 37, no. 1, 2002, pp. 17-21. Powell, F and Geoghegan, M., The Politics of Community Development, Dublin, A & A Farmar, 2004. Shaw, M and Martin, I ‘Community work, citizenship and democracy: Re-making the connections’ Community Development Journal vol. 35, no. 4, 2000, pp. 68-81. Shaw, M,. Community development and the politics of community. Community Development Journal, vol. 43, no. 1, 2007 24-36. Shaw, M., Community Work: Policy, Politics and Practice, Edinburgh, Universities of Hull and 2004. Widdows, H., and Mullen, C., The governance of genetic information: Who decides?. Cambridge, UK, Cambridge University Press, 2009. Read More