Made available in DSpace on 2016-12-23T14:02:13Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Bruno de Almeida Faria.pdf: 596348 bytes, checksum: faf9ca054e8afc5854a335be4f029f7d (MD5) Previous issue date: 2012-04-19 / Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior / O trabalho tem como objetivo analisar e compreender as relações intersubjetivas travadas na cultura escolar a partir do diálogo com a teoria do reconhecimento social de Axel Honneth. As discussões desenvolvidas no decorrer do mesmo dizem respeito à investigação realizada no contexto de uma escola da Rede Municipal de Ensino de Vitória/ES, durante o ano letivo de 2011. O processo de investigação desenvolveu-se a partir da pesquisa etnográfica, bem como por entrevistas com dez professores, uma pedagoga e uma coordenadora da escola, que foram sujeitos do estudo. O desenvolvimento da argumentação será desdobrado em três partes. Inicialmente, apresenta-se uma discussão teórico-metodológica , a qual busca delimitar o objeto de análise, discutir os pressupostos conceituais da teoria do reconhecimento social e discorrer sobre o processo de desenvolvimento da investigação. No segundo momento, expressa a análise dos mecanismos de formação da identidade docente a luz da compreensão das relações intersubjetivas de reconhecimento na comunidade de valores da escola. Num terceiro momento, analisa como a condição de segunda classe das disciplinas de Artes, Educação Física e Língua Inglesa impactam no processo de afirmação e reconhecimento da identidade de seus professores. Nas considerações finais, discorre sobre o processo de devolutiva dos dados e das possíveis intervenções na cultura da escola a partir das análises elaboradas pelo trabalho de investigação / This paper aims to analyze and understand the intersubjective relations existent in the academic culture, regarding Alex Honneth s theory of social recognition. The discussions developed through this study relate to the researches realized in the context of a Public Regular School in Vitória/ES, through the academic year of 2011. The investigative process was developed from an ethnographic research, such as interviews with ten teachers, an educator and a coordinator of the school, who were part of the study sample. The development of the argumentation will be approached into three parts. Initially, it presents a theoretical-methodological discussion, in which tries to delimit the object of analysis, discuss the conceptual assumptions of social recognition s theory and discourse about the investigation development. In the second part, it expresses the mechanisms analysis of teacher identity formation regarding the intersubjective relations of recognition in the society of academic values. In the third part, it analyzes how the "second class" condition of Arts, Physical Education and English Language subjects impacts in affirming and recognizing their teachers identity process. Lastly, in the final considerations,it discourses about the devolutive data process and possible interventions in the academic culture, from the analysis elaborated by an investigative work

Em Crítica do Poder, Axel Honneth defende que aqueles que buscam realizar o projeto da teoria crítica têm de desenvolver um quadro conceitual que seja capaz de compreender tanto as estruturas da dominação social como os recursos sociais necessários à sua superação prática. Partindo de uma reconstrução do percurso de Honneth até Luta por Reconhecimento, procuramos inicialmente mostrar que a teoria do reconhecimento corresponde à tentativa do autor de realizar essas tarefas. Explicitando, no entanto, que seus esforços nesse momento se concentram nas tarefas de reconstruir a dinâmica normativa das relações intersubjetivas e o interesse estrutural dos seres humanos pelo reconhecimento, defendemos que Honneth acaba perdendo de vista o fato de que as relações sociais estão perpassadas por relações de poder. Retomando então as críticas dirigidas a Honneth por diversos autores, argumentamos que, tal como formulada em Luta por Reconhecimento, a teoria honnethiana do reconhecimento depende de uma compreensão redutora do poder. Tendo em vista que, após seu debate com Nancy Fraser, Honneth reconhece esse problema e reformula importantes elementos de sua teoria, dedicamos parte da tese à análise dessas reformulações. Ao fazermos isso, nosso objetivo é mostrar que, embora procure dar conta da relação entre reconhecimento e poder, Honneth acaba se afastando, em seus textos mais recentes, da noção de dominação social. Defendendo, por fim, o projeto crítico esboçado em Crítica do Poder, dedicamos a última seção da tese à discussão do trabalho de três diferentes representantes de uma nova geração de teóricos críticos, cujo objetivo parece ser exatamente o de realizá-lo. / In Critique of Power, Axel Honneth argues that those who seek to realize the project of critical theory today must develop a conceptual framework able to comprehend both the structures of social domination and the social resources for its practical overcoming. Starting with a reconstruction of Honneths theoretical development until Struggle for Recognition, our first aim is to show that the theory of recognition corresponds to the author\'s attempt to fulfill these tasks. Pointing out, however, that his efforts at this time are concentrated on the tasks of reconstructing the normative dynamics of intersubjective relations and the structural human interest for recognition, we argue that Honneth ends up losing sight of the fact that power permeate social relations. Resuming, at this point, the criticisms directed at Honneth by various authors, we aim to show that his recognition theory, as presented in Struggle for Recognition, depends on a reductive understanding of power. Considering that, after his debate with Nancy Fraser, Honneth acknowledges this problem and reformulates important elements of his theory, we devote part of this thesis to an analysis of the different strategies deployed by Honneth with this purpose. By doing this, our goal is to show that even thou Honneth tries to account for the relationship between recognition and power, in his most recent texts, he seems to abandon the concept of social domination. Advocating, finally, for the critical project presented by Honneth in Critique of Power, will devote the last section of the thesis to discuss the work of three different representatives of a new generation of critical theorists, whose purpose seems to be exactly to realize it.

O debate sobre redistribuição e reconhecimento tem como principais referências os trabalhos de Nancy Fraser e Axel Honneth, bem como o livro Redistribuição ou Reconhecimento? Uma controvérsia político-filosófica, obra que reúne contribuições de ambos. Cada um destes autores atribui, contudo, um diferente significado a esses dois conceitos que são também mobilizados por eles de modos distintos. Com o objetivo de explorar esse debate no interior e a partir da controvérsia Fraser-Honneth, abordaremos a compreensão que os dois possuem sobre as relações entre redistribuição e reconhecimento, em seus diferentes níveis de análise. Tomando como fio condutor a pergunta acerca da possibilidade de que o conjunto de injustiças existentes seja compreendido a partir do conceito de reconhecimento, ou acerca da necessidade de recorrer para isso ao par conceitual redistribuição e reconhecimento, pretendemos mostrar que por mais importantes que sejam as questões relativas à base normativa de suas teorias, à importância e ao caráter que atribuem aos conflitos sociais a disputa entre o monismo proposto por Honneth e o dualismo defendido por Fraser tem em seu centro questões sobre teoria social, por meio das quais procuram compreender as relações entre a economia e a cultura e apresentar teorias do poder aptas a diagnosticar as injustiças ou patologias sociais existentes. Injustiças que, segundo eles, precisam ser analisadas também no interior das interações sociais, que estariam perpassadas por relações de poder. / The debate about redistribution and recognition has as its central theoretical references, Nancy Frasers and Axel Honneths work and, mainly, the book Redistribution or Recognition? A political-philosophical exchange, a work that gathers contributions from both of them. Each of these authors ascribes, though, a different meaning to those two concepts that are, besides, mobilised by them in distinguished ways. With the aim to explore this debate within and from Fraser-Honneth controversy, we seek to discuss the comprehension that both authors sustain regarding the relations between redistribution and recognition, in its different levels of analysis. Establishing as our guiding line the question concerning the possibility that the set of existing injustices be comprehended only through the concept of recognition, or if to do so is necessary to call upon the conceptual par redistribution and recognition, we aim to pinpoint that although questions regarding the normative basis of their theories and the importance or character they assign to the social conflicts might be of fundamental importance the dispute between the monism endorsed by Honneth and the dualism advocated by Fraser has its center the different social theories developed by those authors, through which they seek to understand the relations between culture and economy and to bring foreword theories of power that can diagnose the existent social pathologies or injustices. Injustices that, according to them, need to be properly analysed within social interactions, also pervaded by power relations.

O presente trabalho pretende discutir o tema da democracia a partir do pensamento de Axel Honneth, localizado no interior da tradição de pensamento que se convencionou chamar de Teoria Crítica da Escola de Frankfurt. Para tanto, realizará uma investigação cronológica dos principais antecessores de Honneth, com ênfase em Theodor W. Adorno e Max Horkheimer, como representantes da primeira geração, e em Jürgen Habermas, representante da segunda geração e orientador de doutorado de Honneth. Nesse percurso, o tema da democracia será examinado a partir das contribuições teóricas de tais autores. Objetiva-se, com isso, verificar, em primeiro lugar, a evolução desse conceito até sua consolidação na ideia de uma democracia participativa, concebida por Habermas e situada num contexto de crítica aos modelos tradicionais calcados na representação política. A partir daí, serão apresentadas as reflexões de Axel Honneth sobre o tema, a partir da categoria da Luta por Reconhecimento, que Honneth atualiza do pensamento do Hegel de Jena, em cotejo com autores da psicologia, com o fim de verificar se tais ideias correspondem a um modelo teórico novo de democracia ou se atendem, em específico, a preencher as lacunas da teoria habermasiana. Espera-se como resultado verificar tal indagação e, transversalmente, explorar as contribuições de uma abordagem calcada na Luta por Reconhecimento como uma maneira de lançar um novo olhar para os problemas da democracia contemporânea. / This paper will discuss the theme of democracy from the thought of Axel Honneth, locatead within the tradition of Critical Theory of the Frankfurt Eschool. To do so, carry out an investigation of the major chronological predecessors Honneth, with emphasis on Theodor W. Adorno and Max Horkheimer, as representatives of the first generation, and Jürgen Habermas, a representative of the second generation of doctoral supervisor and Honneth. Along the way, the theme of democracy will be examined from the theoretical contributions of such authors. The objective is, therefore, verify, first, the evolution of this concept to its consolidation in the idea of participatory democracy, conceived by Habermas and set in a context of criticism of the traditional models rooted in political representation. Thereafter, the reflections will be presented by Axel Honneth on the topic from the category of the Struggle for Recognition, Honneth updates of thought that Hegel\'s Jena, in comparison with authors of psychology, in order to ascertain whether such ideas are a new theoretical model of democracy or to serve, in particular, to fill gaps in the theory of Habermas. The expected results verify this question, and across, explore the contributions of an approach grounded in the Struggle for Recognition as a way to launch a new look at the problems of contemporary democracy.

O presente trabalho pretende discutir o tema da democracia a partir do pensamento de Axel Honneth, localizado no interior da tradição de pensamento que se convencionou chamar de Teoria Crítica da Escola de Frankfurt. Para tanto, realizará uma investigação cronológica dos principais antecessores de Honneth, com ênfase em Theodor W. Adorno e Max Horkheimer, como representantes da primeira geração, e em Jürgen Habermas, representante da segunda geração e orientador de doutorado de Honneth. Nesse percurso, o tema da democracia será examinado a partir das contribuições teóricas de tais autores. Objetiva-se, com isso, verificar, em primeiro lugar, a evolução desse conceito até sua consolidação na ideia de uma democracia participativa, concebida por Habermas e situada num contexto de crítica aos modelos tradicionais calcados na representação política. A partir daí, serão apresentadas as reflexões de Axel Honneth sobre o tema, a partir da categoria da Luta por Reconhecimento, que Honneth atualiza do pensamento do Hegel de Jena, em cotejo com autores da psicologia, com o fim de verificar se tais ideias correspondem a um modelo teórico novo de democracia ou se atendem, em específico, a preencher as lacunas da teoria habermasiana. Espera-se como resultado verificar tal indagação e, transversalmente, explorar as contribuições de uma abordagem calcada na Luta por Reconhecimento como uma maneira de lançar um novo olhar para os problemas da democracia contemporânea. / This paper will discuss the theme of democracy from the thought of Axel Honneth, locatead within the tradition of Critical Theory of the Frankfurt Eschool. To do so, carry out an investigation of the major chronological predecessors Honneth, with emphasis on Theodor W. Adorno and Max Horkheimer, as representatives of the first generation, and Jürgen Habermas, a representative of the second generation of doctoral supervisor and Honneth. Along the way, the theme of democracy will be examined from the theoretical contributions of such authors. The objective is, therefore, verify, first, the evolution of this concept to its consolidation in the idea of participatory democracy, conceived by Habermas and set in a context of criticism of the traditional models rooted in political representation. Thereafter, the reflections will be presented by Axel Honneth on the topic from the category of the Struggle for Recognition, Honneth updates of thought that Hegel\'s Jena, in comparison with authors of psychology, in order to ascertain whether such ideas are a new theoretical model of democracy or to serve, in particular, to fill gaps in the theory of Habermas. The expected results verify this question, and across, explore the contributions of an approach grounded in the Struggle for Recognition as a way to launch a new look at the problems of contemporary democracy.

Submitted by PPG Filosofia (filosofia-pg@pucrs.br) on 2018-09-25T20:17:37Z No. of bitstreams: 1 TES_M?RCIA DE C?SSIA CASSIMIRO.pdf: 2463749 bytes, checksum: 385f8cdc256f0fbd00f0f9b9f4ee466b (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Sheila Dias (sheila.dias@pucrs.br) on 2018-09-27T12:04:42Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 TES_M?RCIA DE C?SSIA CASSIMIRO.pdf: 2463749 bytes, checksum: 385f8cdc256f0fbd00f0f9b9f4ee466b (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2018-09-27T12:11:57Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 TES_M?RCIA DE C?SSIA CASSIMIRO.pdf: 2463749 bytes, checksum: 385f8cdc256f0fbd00f0f9b9f4ee466b (MD5) Previous issue date: 2018-08-29 / This thesis investigates based on Axel Honneth's Theory of Recognition, Conflicts of Interest [COIs] and integrity in the process of emancipation and management of a diversity of border issues such as: disrespect [Mi?achtung] and violation [Verletzung] to the citizen, capable of provoking profound transformations and changes to society in the face of the peculiar characteristics of a concrete social reality of participatory democratic domination. The thesis discusses the impact of violations on patients, research participants, society, and institutions; besides issues related to injustice and dishonesty arising from misconduct. COIs and misconduct provoke political, technical, ethical, and moral offenses when individuals are affected | violated in nonrecognition dynamics. The three patterns [affective, legal, solidarity] can have as consequence: [i] psychic death in the first pattern of [affective] recognition; [ii] social death in the second [legal] standard; and [iii] social humiliation in the third standard [solidarity]. The struggle for recognition is the condition for conflicts to be normative. There are models of justice such as: redistributive; economist, and recognition. But this thesis is delimited around the contribution of recognition to the theoretical confrontation of COIs and integrity. It is presumed that the struggle for recognition is a fundamental element in order to initiate research on COIs and integrity, thus articulating an interdisciplinary approach [Philosophy and Health]. COIs is a set of circumstances or conditions in which professional judgment of a primary interest such as integrity and quality in research tends to be unduly influenced by a secondary interest such as personal financial gain. COIs are classified into primary and secondary interests. Primary interests are determined by the professional duties of the researcher, physician, counselor and other professionals of the institution, and are related to the integrity of these different actors, and to the patient's well-being. Secondary interests are any type of interest that may affect the primary interest priority. They are harmful when they influence, corrupt or distort integrity and affect the judgment of the practitioner in relation to patient health and integrity. In addition to the definition proposed by Emanuel et al. [2008], this research comprehensively covers several areas of knowledge and institutions [universities, pharmaceutical industries, editors, professional and patient associations, and Research Ethics Committees]. Integrity has broad domain with many emphases, and demands commitment from various actors [institution, citizen, governors, patients, development agencies, etc.], that is, it involves a more reflective point of view on guidelines focusing on the development of multiple spheres, abilities or even virtues of the individual. It is imperative to recognize that COIs in clinical research and violations of integrity affect not only health professionals but every society, thus justifying the citizen's struggle not only against social order but against the social place to which, at present, science is being condemned. This is not the sole responsibility of scientists, but of the whole society and in particular of its rulers, researchers and professionals. Partnerships between researchers, teaching and research institutions, universities, patient associations, government, laboratories and universities are important for the development of science. Therefore, there is no pretense of stigmatizing these partnerships involving different actors. / Esta tese investiga com base na Teoria do Reconhecimento de Axel Honneth, os Conflitos de interesses [COIs] e a integridade no processo de emancipa??o e manejo de uma diversidade de quest?es lim?trofes tais como: desrespeito [Mi?achtung] e viola??o [Verletzung] ao cidad?o, capazes de provocar profundas transforma??es e mudan?as ? sociedade em face das caracter?sticas peculiares de uma realidade social concreta de dom?nio democr?tico participativo. A tese discute o impacto das viola??es causadas aos pacientes, aos participantes de pesquisa, a sociedade, e as institui??es; al?m de quest?es relacionadas a injusti?a e desonestidade decorrentes da m? conduta. COIs e m? conduta provocam impasses pol?ticos, t?cnicos, ?ticos, e ofensa moral, quando os indiv?duos s?o afetados | violados em din?micas de n?o reconhecimento [nonrecognition]. Os tr?s padr?es [afetivo, jur?dico, solidariedade] podem ter como consequ?ncia: [i] morte ps?quica no primeiro padr?o de reconhecimento [afetivo]; [ii] morte social no segundo padr?o [jur?dico]; e [iii] humilha??o social no terceiro padr?o [solidariedade]. A luta por reconhecimento ? a condi??o para que os conflitos sejam normativos. H? modelos de justi?a tais como: redistributivo; economicista, e de reconhecimento. Mas esta tese ? delimitada em torno da contribui??o do reconhecimento para o enfrentamento te?rico dos COIs e da integridade. Presume-se que a luta por reconhecimento constitui elemento fundamental para instanciar a investiga??o sobre COIs e integridade, articulando desta forma uma abordagem interdisciplinar [Filosofia e Sa?de]. COIs ? um conjunto de circunst?ncias ou condi??es nas quais o julgamento profissional de um interesse prim?rio como integridade e qualidade na pesquisa tende ser influenciado indevidamente por um interesse secund?rio, como ganho financeiro pessoal. Os COIs s?o classificados em interesses prim?rios e secund?rios. Os interesses prim?rios s?o determinados pelos deveres profissionais do pesquisador, m?dico, orientador e demais profissionais da institui??o, e est?o relacionados ? integridade destes distintos atores, e ao bem-estar do paciente. Os interesses secund?rios s?o qualquer tipo de interesse que possa afetar a prioridade do interesse prim?rio. S?o prejudiciais quando influenciam, corrompem ou distorcem a integridade e afetam o julgamento do profissional em rela??o ? sa?de do paciente, e a integridade. Para al?m da defini??o proposta por Emanuel et al. [2008], de maneira ampla esta pesquisa abrange diversas ?reas do conhecimento e institui??es [universidades, ind?strias farmac?uticas, editores, associa??es profissionais e de pacientes, e Comit?s de ?tica em Pesquisa]. Integridade possui dom?nio amplo com v?rias ?nfases, e demanda compromisso de diversos atores [institui??o, cidad?o, governantes, pacientes, ag?ncias de fomento, etc.], ou seja, envolve um ponto de vista mais reflexivo sobre diretrizes com foco no desenvolvimento de m?ltiplas esferas, capacidades ou mesmo virtudes do indiv?duo. ? imprescind?vel reconhecer que os COIs em pesquisa cl?nica e as viola??es de integridade n?o afetam apenas os profissionais da sa?de, mas toda sociedade, justificando assim a luta do cidad?o n?o apenas contra a ordem social, mas contra o lugar social ao qual, na atualidade, a ci?ncia est? sendo condenada. Esta n?o ? uma responsabilidade exclusiva dos cientistas, mas de toda a sociedade e em particular dos seus governantes, pesquisadores e profissionais. Parcerias entre pesquisadores, institui??es de ensino e pesquisa, universidades, associa??es de pacientes, governo, laborat?rios e universidades s?o importantes para o desenvolvimento da ci?ncia. Portanto, n?o h? pretens?o de estigmatizar estas parcerias envolvendo distintos atores.

Many nursing theorists consider caring the essence of nursing practice. Yet, the meaning of caring is still elusive in nursing theories. This confusion in conceptualizing caring is exacerbated by the neoliberal socio-political and economic transformations of our societies that infuse nursing practice with economic efficiency values ‒ a condition that threatens the ethical dimensions of nursing. This critical study analyzes nursing actions in home care in Ontario and empirically reconstructs the normative dimensions of care based on nurses’ own perceptions of good care. The findings are used to critique current healthcare transformations through a critical theory of nursing actions. This study is situated in the tradition of the Frankfurt critical school and pursues an emancipatory interest. Axel Honneth’s theory of recognition is the principal theoretical foundation complemented by Jürgen Habermas’ theory of communicative action and the interests of knowledge, in addition to the concepts of phenomenology and corporality. It uses critical ethnography as a methodological approach. Data collection included audiotaped semi-structured open-ended interviews with 18 nurses working for two different home care providers in Ottawa. Analysis demonstrates that the patient must be recognized on three dimensions: love, legal rights, and solidarity. Care is a specific form of communicative action in which patients should participate equally in decision making. Nursing actions comprise a hermeneutic-phenomenological dimension of “deep knowing” that respect the corporal and personal needs of the patient. Healthcare transformations and economic efficiency measures reinforce technical and standardized forms of care, which lead to pathologic practices that neglect patients’ corporal needs, thereby reifying patients. Nursing actions combine both technical and corporal aspects that characterize their “double logic.” This study provides elements for a critical theory of nursing actions. Findings highlight that nurses have a vision of how nursing care should look like, but the reality of home care makes it rather impossible to realize this vision. Economization leads to a systematic violation of multiple dimensions of recognition and to reification. Nurses must resist these social pathologies and this study provides some theoretical tools to engage in this struggle.

Sous l’effet de la mondialisation qui a accéléré le rapprochement des cultures, la notion d’identité a pris de l’importance dans la conscience contemporaine. L’émergence du multiculturalisme et de l’idéal de la reconnaissance est liée à ce phénomène. Elle est fondée sur un rejet de l’identité essentielle jugée comme fictive et assimilationniste, au profit d’une valorisation de l’identité sociale réelle. Cette investigation porte sur les enjeux de l’identité, à savoir, sa formation, les conditions de possibilité de son épanouissement, sa reconnaissance dans l’espace public, et surtout son intégration dans la gestion des affaires de l’État. Ces enjeux soulèvent les passions, jusqu’à constituer dans certains cas des menaces pour la cohésion sociale et l’unité de l’État. À travers une analyse conceptuelle et une discussion des problèmes moraux et politiques touchant l’actualité des sociétés contemporaines, Taylor démontre que l’harmonie sociale et l’épanouissement individuel et collectif passent nécessairement par une gestion harmonieuse de l’identité et de la différence. Quant à Honneth, il développe une théorie de l’intersubjectivité, en soulignant que l’identité des individus ne peut se former et s’épanouir que dans des rapports de reconnaissance. Les deux penseurs se rejoignent sur l’idée qu’au fond de l’exigence de la reconnaissance se trouve l’idéal de justice sociale et d’équité. Au-delà de l’estime mutuelle, le partage équitable des richesses (matérielles ou symboliques), les compromis, les accords ou accommodements raisonnables, deviennent le pilier d’un vivre-ensemble harmonieux. / Under the influence of globalization, which has brought different cultures closer, the notion of identity has taken center stage in contemporary consciousness. The emergence of multiculturalism and the recognition of the ideal are connected to this phenomenon. They are based on the rejection of the essential identity, which is judged as fictitious, for the benefit of a real social one. This research accounts for the stakes in identity: its formation, the conditions of possibility of its self-fulfillment, its recognition in the public area, and especially its integration in the management of the affairs of the state. Such requirements sometimes raise passions and may be considered as threats to social cohesion and the compactness of the state. Through an abstract quest and a discussion of the moral and political problems affecting contemporary societies, Taylor demonstrates that social harmony and individual and collective self-fulfillment is inevitably interwoven with a harmonious management of identity and some difference. As for Honneth, he develops an idea based on intersubjectivation, and underscores the fact that the identity of the individual can formed and allow to blossom in the presence of requirements for the recognition of the ideals of social justice and equity. Beyond mutual respect, the equal distribution of wealth (material or symbolic), compromises, agreements or reasonable settlements, are the pillars of harmonious societies.

During the last decades Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL) has become a more frequently used method to recognise adult’s prior learning. This thesis analyses a process of RPL in health care, where health care assistants are assessed against subjects in the upper-secondary health care program. Prior research on RPL is to a high degree non-theoretical and focus is primarily on policy level research. This thesis adds to the field by progressing a critical social theory perspective on RPL. In the thesis the RPL process is analysed through Jürgen Habermas’ theory of communicative action and Axel Honneth’s Recognition theory. General questions posed are: What are the power issues in the RPL process? What implications does the tension between the lifeworld of work and the system of education have? What consequences does mutual understanding and communication have for the outcome of the RPL process? What part does recognition play for the participants? The results disclose the power relations that emerge in the relationship between participants and teachers. A caring ideology is developed and problematized. Further, the importance of mutual understanding between participant and teachers in the assessment of prior learning is discussed focusing on the consequences a lack of mutual understanding could have for the outcome in such assessments. On a macro level the analysis demonstrates the tension between the participants prior learning and the educational systems demand for formalising prior learning. In addition, analyses of a more developmental character that intends to show the potential for critical learning, change and recognition are progressed. The results suggest that communicative action can be used to develop RPL into processes focusing on critical learning and change. Recognition of traits and abilities could also enhance individual’s positive relations with the self. Such recognition could develop self-confidence and thus RPL could encourage learning and cultivate continuing self-realisation through work. / Validering har under de senaste decennierna blivit en alltmer använd metod för att erkänna vuxnas tidigare lärande. Denna avhandling analyserar en valideringsprocess inom omvårdnadssektorn för vårdbiträden med mångårig erfarenhet. Vårdbiträdena valideras mot ämnen inom omvårdnadsprogrammets karaktärsämnen. Tidigare forskning om validering är i hög grad icke-teoretisk och mycket fokus har legat på policynivå. Denna avhandling bidrar till forskningsfältet genom att problematisera validering utifrån ett kritiskt samhällsteoretiskt perspektiv. I avhandlingen analyseras valideringsprocessen utifrån Jürgen Habermas teori om det kommunikativa handlandet och Axel Honneths erkännandeteori. Exempel på mer generella frågor som ställs är: Vilka är maktfaktorerna i valideringsprocessen? Är handlingarna i processen koordinerade mot gemensam förståelse? Hur ser förhållandet mellan system och livsvärld ut? Vilken roll spelar erkännandet i validering för deltagarna? Resultatet synliggör de maktförhållanden som uppstår mellan deltagare och lärare i bedömningsprocessen. En omvårdande ideologi lyfts fram och problematiseras. Därtill diskuteras betydelsen av gemensam förståelse mellan deltagare och lärare vid bedömning, samt vilka konsekvenser brist på gemensam förståelse kan få. På ett makroplan åskådliggör analysen spänningen mellan deltagarnas erfarenheter och utbildningssystemets krav på formalisering. Vidare genomförs mer utvecklingsfokuserade analyser som vill visa på möjligheterna för kritiskt lärande och förändring i validering. Resultatet demonstrerar också, bland annat, betydelsen av att bli erkänd för sina förmågor och hur detta kan utveckla individens självuppskattning och främja lärande. I studien föreslås det att kommunikativt handlande kan utgöra en norm för hur validering kan utvecklas mot mer kritiskt lärande och positiv förändring. Men också att erkännande av tidigare förmågor kan gynna individens positiva relation till sig själv, hur detta främjar lärande, självuppskattning och hur validering därmed kan utgöra en grund för ett vidare självförverkligande genom arbete.

Hegel réinscrit l’idée d’autonomie kantienne au sein d’une totalité organisée par des médiations qui constituent le sujet et lui livrent un contenu normatif venant mettre en forme sa pratique et lui assigner sa signification et sa place au sein du processus de reproduction de la société. La philosophie substitue à la morale abstraite une éthicité concrète (Sittlichkeit) objectivée au sein de médiation institutionnelle (l’esprit objectif). Cette conception incarnée de la moralité, exprimée par Hegel dans la Philosophie du droit sera l’objet d’une critique sévère par le marxisme au nom de l’émancipation de la puissance instituante de la société civile et des sujets, si bien que bon nombre d’interprètes contemporains de Marx le présentent comme un individualiste, un naturaliste et un économiciste. La théorie critique contemporaine, chez Axel Honneth, s’est-elle aussi repliée sur une conception naturaliste et intersubjectiviste de la théorie de la reconnaissance, puisée chez le jeune Hegel, où l’amour, l’amitié et la reconnaissance réciproque sont présentés comme des préalables à l’établissement d’une relation de communication, et servent de modèle pour penser l’ensemble du lien social. À l’encontre de ces approches, notamment à l’aide des travaux de Vincent Descombes et du sociologue québécois Michel Freitag, je cherche à revaloriser l’institutionnalisme hégélien et son concept d’esprit objectif. J’illustre aussi, avec Moishe Postone, comment toute théorie critique contemporaine doit, si elle espère réellement développer une critique des sociétés capitalistes avancées, pouvoir retrouver en Marx un penseur de la totalité et des médiations aliénées ou fétichisées (la forme-valeur) et articuler à la critique de la médiation des rapports sociaux par le travail abstrait une revalorisation de des médiations symboliques et politico-institutionnelles, de l’esprit objectif, en tant que seule la transcendance d’une dimension de sens objectivée peut suppléer à la régulation des rapports sociaux par la forme aliénée propre à la valeur abstraite. La revalorisation du concept d’esprit objectif hégélien, c’est-à-dire du pôle d’objectivité normative instituée, m’apparaît l’une des conditions sine qua non pour réorienter la théorie critique vers la dialectique qui, seule, lui évitera les écueils de l’intersubjectivisme, du dualisme et du nominalisme.