The essay presents a reconstruction and critical interpretation of four theories of authoritarian personality related to analysis of fascism. The first theory origins from a book The Mass Psychology of Fascism by Wilhelm Reich, published already before the Second World War, the second theory comes from a famous The Authoritarian Personality by Theodor W. Adorno. The third was presented by Alice Miller in For Your Own Good, and the fourth – by Klaus Theweleit in groundbreaking Male Fantasies. Only one of them, by Miller, refers directly to pedagogy. Nevertheless, the essay presents all four publications in relation to upbringing. The essay raises following questions: what is authoritarian personality? Which elements of education support its development and which prevent it? The theories are presented in relations to each other. Some of their conclusions are consistent, but other present conflicting positions. The dialectical method applied by the author enables to see, among others, how Adorno’s theories are put upside down by Miller, as well as Theweleit, who develops Reich’s ideas. The reconstruction of the dialogue between presented theories enables to put new questions related to the role of authoritarian personality in contemporary times.
PL
Esej zawiera rekonstrukcję i krytyczną interpretację czterech teorii na temat osobowości autorytarnej, związanych z analizą faszyzmu. Pierwsza pochodzi z napisanej jeszcze przed II wojną światową Psychologii mas wobec faszyzmu Wilhelma Reicha, a druga ze słynnej Osobowości autorytarnej Theodora W. Adorno. Trzecia została ukazana w słynnym Zniewolonym dzieciństwie Alice Miller, zaś czwarta – w przełomowych Męskich fantazjach Klausa Theweleita. Tylko jedna z tych pozycji – autorstwa Miller – odnosi się bezpośrednio do pedagogiki. W eseju pod kątem wychowania analizowane są natomiast wszystkie wymienione publikacje. Pytania, jakie stawia esej, brzmią następująco: czym jest osobowość autorytarna? Jakie czynniki wychowawcze sprzyjają jej kształtowaniu, a jakie temu przeciwdziałają? Teorie są ukazane w odniesieniu do siebie nawzajem. Część ich wniosków jest zbieżnych, część wchodzi w spór. Przyjęta metoda dialektyczna pozwala między innymi zobaczyć, jak twierdzenia Adorno są stawiane „z głowy na nogi” przez ustalenia Miller i Theweleita, który z kolei kontynuuje myśl Reicha. Z rekonstrukcji dialogu między teoriami rodzą się nowe pytania, dotyczące roli osobowości autorytarnej w czasach współczesnych.
This paper addresses the topic of upbringing and education of youth in the high school. It shows what conditions enable and at the same time are indispensable when we refine and improve the conduct of young people. According to Mieczysław Gogacz there are following that can enable a proper upbringing and education of man: kindness, openness, common dealing with burdens, motivation, joy when there is an effort, encouraging to perseverance, goodness and truth. Upringing and education are presented as a process, a complex process in which both, taught and teaching person, are involved. In the result of this process both parts mutually offer and receive something. It is a personal relation, twofold, complex and based on faith, hope and love. Young man is treated not as a subject but a subject of education. Not a number in a registry but a person who is entitled to proper treatment, respect, recognition and kindness. These are not goals which are priorities of upbringing and education but results, not methods and forms but intellectual and moral development of young people. The proper conduct of man depends significantly on propitious conditions, on the environment, both school and family, and on correlation, cooperation between school and home, teachers, pupils and parents.
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.