BJSW Advance Access originally published online on March 2, 2007
British Journal of Social Work 2008 38(6):1100-1114; doi:10.1093/bjsw/bcl396
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Towards a Proportionist Social Work Ethics: A Habermasian Perspective
Terence Lovat is the Pro Vice-Chancellor of the Faculty of Education and Arts and Professor of Education at the University of Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia.
Mel Gray is Professor of Social Work at the University of Newcastle, Institute of Advanced Study for Humanity (IASH), The University of Newcastle, University Drive, Callaghan, New South Wales, Australia.
They share an interest in professional ethics in the health and social services, in moral theory for social work and in the relevance of Habermas’s critical theory for contemporary social work theory and practice. Their prior paper, entitled ‘The shaky high moral ground of postmodernist "ethics"’ was published in the South African social work journal Social Work/Maatskaplike Werk. They are also interested in spirituality and religion in social work and Mel’s paper, entitled ‘Viewing spirituality in social work through the lens of social theory’, was recently published in BJSW online. They are currently examining ‘Practical mysticism, Habermas, religion, and spirituality in social work’. Mel is the Joint Editor of Australian Social Work.
Correspondence to Professor Terry Lovat, Pro Vice-Chancellor, Faculty of Education and Arts, University of Newcastle, University Drive, Callaghan 2308, New South Wales, Australia. E-mail: Terry.Lovat{at}newcastle.edu.au or Mel.Gray{at}newcastle.edu.au.
 |
Abstract |
|---|
In this paper, we offer an innovative alternative to the deontological and utilitarian approaches which tend to dominate social work ethics, instead proposing a proportionist ethics drawing on the work of Jürgen Habermas. Flyvberg (1998) claims that Habermas ‘distanced himself from phronesis and neo-Aristotelianism’, both of which he is purported to have ‘rhetorically . . . associated with neo-conservatism’ (p. 225) and Varela (1992) places Habermas squarely in the Kantian tradition. In this paper, we present an alternative interpretation of Habermas’s ethical stance, which is based on our perception of him as a keen observer of and commentator on modern life, not least about human intersubjective relations and communication, and our practical attempts to deal with the intractable problems of difference in an increasingly pluralistic world. Moreover, we see a form of proportionist thinking in Habermas which suggests a close alignment with Aristotelianism and, indeed, Thomism. For social work, an approach of this sort seems particularly urgent as the field tends increasingly towards, on the one hand, technological, rule bound, deontological frameworks, such as codes of ethics and ethics audits (Reamer, 2001) and, on the other hand, ideologically based ethics of care approaches, both of which tend to stultification and obstruction of the practical action appropriate to the age.
Keywords: Habermas, proportionism, social work ethics, ethical theory, virtue ethics
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  M. Gray Moral Sources and Emergent Ethical Theories in Social Work Br. J. Soc. Work, September 22, 2009; (2009) bcp104v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|