当前位置: X-MOL 学术British Journal of Educational Studies › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
EDUCATION: A COMPULSORY RIGHT? A FUNDAMENTAL TENSION WITHIN A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT
British Journal of Educational Studies ( IF 1.753 ) Pub Date : 2022-01-11 , DOI: 10.1080/00071005.2021.2024136
José-Luis Gaviria 1
Affiliation  

ABSTRACT

This paper is on the paradox of a right, the right to education that is almost universally declared as compulsory. The reason for the compulsion seems to be in its nature as a right. Within a Hohfeldian framework, any claim-right has a corresponding duty. Given that making education compulsory equates to establishing a duty, the possible candidates to the duty generating right-bearers are considered.

The rationales for compulsion from the points of view of positive (for one’s own good), negative (no compulsion at all), and republican liberty (society right) are analyzed, and the conclusion is reached that none of the three can produce sufficient justification for compulsion. The main conclusion is that education is a right, not an obligation. Therefore, neither the children nor their families can be legally forced to an unrestricted exercise of this right without even being heard. The law must reflect, in its progressive flexibility, the growing possibilities of choice for right-holders who are adults ‘in fieri’.



中文翻译:

教育:一项强制性权利?基本权利中的基本张力

摘要

这篇论文是关于一项权利的悖论,即几乎普遍宣布为义务教育的权利。强制的原因似乎就其作为权利的性质而言。在 Hohfeldian 框架内,任何索赔权都有相应的义务。鉴于强制教育等同于确立义务,因此考虑了义务产生权利承担者的可能候选人。

从积极(为了自己的利益)、消极(根本没有强制)和共和自由(社会权利)的角度分析了强制的理由,得出的结论是三者都不能提供充分的理由为强迫症。主要结论是,教育是一种权利,而不是义务。因此,无论是儿童还是他们的家人都不能在法律上被迫不受限制地行使这项权利,甚至不被倾听。法律必须以其渐进的灵活性反映成年权利持有人越来越多的选择可能性。

更新日期:2022-01-11
down
wechat
bug