Moral Concepts in the Philosophy of Music Education
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Moral Concepts in the Philosophy of Music Education Item Type text; Electronic Dissertation Authors Bates, Vincent Cecil Publisher The University of Arizona. Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author. Download date 29/09/2021 08:37:33 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/194064 MORAL CONCEPTS IN THE PHILOSOPHY OF MUSIC EDUCATION by Vincent Cecil Bates ______________________________ Copyright Vincent Cecil Bates 2005 A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of the SCHOOL OF MUSIC AND DANCE In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY WITH A MAJOR IN MUSIC In the Graduate College THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA 2005 2 THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA GRADUATE COLLEGE As members of the Dissertation Committee, we certify that we have read the dissertation prepared by Vincent Cecil Bates entitled Moral Concepts in the Philosophy of Music Education and recommend that it be accepted as fulfilling the dissertation requirement for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Donald I. Hamann ________________________________ Date: April 25, 2005 Carl B. Hancock ________________________________ Date: April 25, 2005 Shelly Cooper __________________________________ Date: April 25, 2005 Kevin D. Vinson ________________________________ Date: April 25, 2005 Final approval and acceptance of this dissertation is contingent upon the candidate’s submission of the final copies of the dissertation to the Graduate College. I hereby certify that I have read this dissertation prepared under my direction and recommend that it be accepted as fulfilling the dissertation requirement. _________________________________________________________________ Dissertation Co-Director: Donald I. Hamaan Date: April 25, 2005 _________________________________________________________________ Dissertation Director: Kevin D. Vinson Date: April 25, 2005 3 STATEMENT BY AUTHOR This dissertation has been submitted in partial fulfillment of requirements for an advanced degree at The University of Arizona and is deposited in the University Library to be made available to borrowers under rules of the Library. Brief quotations from this dissertation are allowable without special permission, provided that accurate acknowledgment of source is made. Requests for permission for extended quotation from or reproduction of the manuscript in whole or in part may be granted by the copyright holder. SIGNED: ________________________________ Vincent Cecil Bates April 25, 2005 4 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Kristin, for her patience 5 DEDICATION In memory of Steve Paul 6 TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ……………………………………………………………….……… 10 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ………………………………………….……… 11 Moral Concepts ………………………………………………………….……… 14 Family Metaphor ....……………………………………………………….…….. 16 Strict Father Families ………………………………………………………… 17 Permissive Parent Families ………………………………………………...… 19 Nurturant Parent Families ………………………………………………….… 19 Moral Concepts in Music Education ………………………………………….… 20 Method ………………………………………………………………………..… 28 CHAPTER 2: BENNETT REIMER …………………………………….………… 31 Philosophy ……………………………………………………………………… 31 Moral Nurturance ………………………………………………….……….… 32 Moral Strength …………………………………………………….……….… 35 Synergy …………………………………………………………….………… 36 Music …………………………………………………………………………… 39 Feeling …………………………………………………………….………….. 40 Moral Authority ……………………………………………………………… 42 Self-Discipline and Self-Transcendence ……………………….…………….. 44 Music Education, Culture, and Society ………………………….……………… 46 CHAPTER 3: DAVID ELLIOTT ………………………………….……………… 53 Philosophy ……………………………………………………………………… 53 7 TABLE OF CONTENTS — Continued Moral Strength ..……………………………………………………………… 56 Independence ……………………………………………………………..…. 60 Music, Musicianship, and Musical Practices ………..………………......….….. 63 Moral Nurturance ……………………………...………………………..….… 70 Moral Strength ……………………………………...……………………..…. 73 CHAPTER 4: ESTELLE JORGENSEN …………………..……………………… 75 Gaia …...………………………………………………………………………… 75 Moral Authority ……………………………………………………………… 78 Dialectic ……………………………………………………………………… 81 Society ...………………………………………………………………………… 86 Institutions …………………………………………………………………… 86 School ...……………………………………………………………………… 88 Culture ...……………………………………………………………………… 90 Music ………………………………………………………………………… 91 CHAPTER 5: THOMAS REGELSKI ..…………………………………………… 96 Critical Theory ..………………………………………………………………… 96 Roots and Foundation …………...…………………………………………… 98 Construction ……….………………………………………………………… 99 Moral Authority ……………………………………………………………… 100 Moral Strength ………..……………………………………………………… 101 Independence ………………………………………………………………… 103 8 TABLE OF CONTENTS — Continued Legitimate Authority …………………………………………………………. 105 Society ...…………………………………………………………………………108 Institutions …………………………………………………………………… 113 CHAPTER 6: CLIFFORD MADSEN ………………………………………….… 116 Research ………………………………………………………………………… 116 Moral Strength ……………………………………………………………….. 118 Moral Nurturance …………………………………………………………….. 123 Society …………………………………………………………………………... 126 Music Education ………………………………………………………………... 129 CHAPTER 7: PATRICIA SHEHAN CAMPBELL …………………………….… 133 Nature …………………………………………………………………………… 133 Moral Authorities …………………………………………………………….. 133 Research ………………………………………………………………………… 137 Research is Empathetic ………………………………………………………. 137 Children …………………………………………………………………………. 144 Music is Nourishment …………………………………………………………... 147 Music is a Need and a Right …………………………………………………..... 150 Teaching is Nurturance …………………………………………………………. 152 CHAPTER 8: SUMMARY ……………………………………………………….. 154 Philosophy is a Strict Father ……………………………………………………. 154 Philosophy is a Nurturant Parent ……………………………………………….. 157 9 TABLE OF CONTENTS — Continued Philosophy is a Permissive Parent ……………………………………………… 159 Research is a Strict Father ……………………………………………………… 161 Research is a Nurturant Parent …………………………………………………. 163 Music is a Strict Father …………………………………………………………. 165 Music is Nourishment …………………………………………………………... 166 Music is a Permissive Parent …………………………………………………… 166 Society is a Strict Father ………………………………………………………... 169 Society Should be a Nurturant Parent …………………………………………... 169 Society is a Somewhat Permissive Parent ……………………………………… 170 Musical Cultures are Strict and Nurturant ……………………………………… 171 Musical Culture is a Nurturant Parent ………………………………………….. 173 CHAPTER 9: DISCUSSION …………………………………………………….. 174 Findings ………………………………………………………………………… 174 Limits …………………………………………………………………………… 177 Applications …………………………………………………………………….. 179 Philosophy …………………………………………………………………… 183 Music & Musical Practices …………………………………………………... 185 Research ……………………………………………………………………… 189 Conclusion ………………………………………………………………………. 190 REFERENCES ……………………………………………………………………. 192 10 ABSTRACT This work is an analysis of moral concepts in the philosophy of music education. Philosophy is understood in a broad sense as scholarly writing in music education that implicitly or explicitly involves discussions of right action, appropriate human interaction, or moral authority in music education. The works of six music education scholars (Bennett Reimer, David Elliott, Estelle Jorgensen, Thomas Regelski, Clifford Madsen, and Patrician Shehan Campbell) were analyzed by applying Lakoff and Johnson’s theories of Conceptual Metaphor and Family Metaphor. Results of the analysis indicate that a range of moral authorities and moral systems are used and that they reflect the conceptual metaphors of Strict, Nurturant, and Permissive Parent Families. Possible applications and implications of this analysis for the practice of music education are explored. 11 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION The questions I address here arise from practical experience as a music teacher in Eureka, a small mining town in rural Utah. The challenges of guiding musical experiences for more than 200 students as they progress from kindergarten through grade 12 are complex. Yet I find that the myriad of issues that arise, the constant parade of decisions to be made, and the autonomy I am afforded in determining the best course of action to take combine in ways that keep me engaged, truly interested, and ever growing as a music teacher. However, as I reflect on my practice I often wonder if I really am making the best decisions for my students. Subsequently, I am continually searching for and refining principles to guide my actions. This initial search for guidance has spiraled outward into a general inquiry regarding right practice in music education: What is the best course of action to take, who should determine what is right or good, and on what should such decisions be based? These have traditionally been philosophical questions and more specifically, moral or ethical ones. According to the Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, ethics is “the philosophical study of morality. The word is also commonly used interchangeably with ‘morality’ . .”1 In short, morality involves questions concerning right action, legitimate authority, and appropriate human interaction. I use the term “morality” synonymously 1 Robert Audi, ed. The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995), s.v. “Ethics,” by John Deigh, 244. 12 with “ethics” and “values.” Such a broad definition coincides with the saturation of music education by moral issues including: What genres of music should be taught and why? Should I focus on supposed “serious” or “classical”