This study involves an analysis of arguments on parental allowance debates and sex legislation debates. The debates that will be analyzed are the following; allowance, equality bonus, stricter punishment for the purchase of sexual services and men's violence against women, violence and oppression, and violence in same-sex relationships. This empirical research is a qualitative study in its entirety, as for the method is an argumentation analysis. The arguments which the debates contain will be analyzed from a gender perspective. The theoretical question is: What is considered equality as a gender perspective? The empirical question is: How did parliament debates the issue of parental and prostitution laws issue from a gender perspective? The debates about genus and gender equality perspective have been a crucial issue in the Swedish Parliament. That women and men are equal or unequal has been heavily emphasized in the debates. My study aims at an in depth investigation in these debates based on an analysis of arguments. Moreover, I have evaluated what gender combined with democracy and democratic self-determination entails. I have structured my analysis up by various arguments and analyzed these arguments on the basis of the perspectives above. My conclusion is that the first two debates were treated particularly in the genus and the gender equality perspective and there was a possibility to connect the theories in relevant argumentations/discussions. However, complex problems emerged in the last two debates, stricter penalty regarding the purchase of sexual services, violence against women, violence and oppression, and violence in same-sex relationships where gender and equality issues have been avoided to be treated. Generally occurring from the bourgeois side than from the opposition.

The aim of this thesis is to analyse and discuss the argumentation for theplace of History in the Swedish school system from the perspective ofeducation philosophy. The material that has been investigated is theYearbook of the Association of History Teachers (HLFÅ). In connectionto this, two questions have been asked: (1) What sort of argumentationhas there been in HLFÅ on the place of History in the Swedish schoolsystem from the time the Yearbook started to be published in 1942 until2004 when the Swedish parliament decided that the subject should beobligatory for all pupils in gymnasiet (senior high school)? (2) In whatway has education philosophy been taken into consideration in the argumentationon the place of History in HLFÅ between 1942 and 2004? Thebackground to these questions is partly that during the whole of the1900s it has been far from obvious what place History should have in theupper levels of the Swedish school system. Also, I have partly found itfruitful to study HLFÅ from the perspective of education philosophy.In chapter 1, we give a deeper presentation of HLFÅ. After that followsan overview of research into the teaching and learning of History (Historydidactics). The chapter ends with the three leitmotifs based on this research.I identify as leitmotifs areas that are identified clearly and repeatedlyin History didactics and that are seen as relevant to structure myanalysis of HLFÅ. The three leitmotifs are: (1) the relation between Historyand academia, (2) the social potential of History, (3) the use of Historyin the service of peace. These have structured the presentation in thetwo analysis chapters of the thesis (chapters 4 and 5).Chapter 2 discusses the thesis methodology, theoretical perspective andquestions. The methodology is an analysis of argumentation based onhermeneutics. The theoretical perspectives used in the study are educationphilosophies. My use of the theory builds on my reading of TheodorBrameld and Tomas Englund. The four education philosophies used toanalyse the argumentation are: (1) progressivism, (2) essentialism, (3)perennialism, (4) reconstructivism. In chapter 3, the background to thestudy is presented. The areas that are focused on are the changes in theSwedish school system during the 1900s, the subject of History in figures,and glimpses from the public debate on history in general and thesubject of History in Sweden. In chapter 4, we cover the period from1942-1970, and in chapter 5 we cover in a similar way the period from1971-2004. Both chapters begin with a chronological overview of theargumentation in the articles. After that, the material is analysed wherethe presentation is structured based on the three leitmotifs which arediscussed from an education philosophy perspective.Chapter 6 is a summarizing discussion. There we make it clear that progressivismis almost completely absent from the argumentation aroundthe place of History in Swedish schools in HLFÅ. Instead, the studyshows that it is a combination of essentialism and perennialism that dominatesthe way of maintaining the merits of History. Regarding reconstructivism,it is stated that it is subordinate to essentialism and perennialism.The study ends with suggestions for further research. Since theargumentation has consistently made the claim that History can givepeople a feeling of safety in their surroundings, understand their place inlife and create peace in the world, it is suggested that further analysisshould be made of similar material from the perspective of civil religion.A point of departure in this research is that secular societies partly takeover, and partly re-work, the rites and cosmologies of religious institutions,in order to create solidarity in modern societies. My hypothesis isthat this perspective would strengthen the thought that there are civilreligious practices on Swedish soil in connection with the educationworld.