Since Plato's allegory of the cave two educational-philosophical critical modes have stood out: the descriptive (reality as it is) and the normative (reality as it should/could be). Reality resembles or is felt as an epistemic, political and existential permanent lockdown, 1 a state of isolation where access to ideality is too restricted and rare. Confined to a dystopian(ized) place of limited light and scant possibility the philosopher aspires to help others ascend to a utopian(ized) place of luminosity and promise. Granted, the philosophical-educational community has, as a historical and contemporary collectivity, contrasted the ideal and the real in richer and more complex modes than those of a neat 'descriptive versus normative' binarism. Nevertheless, the search operation for finding the key to unlock the lockdown is persistent and evident in most and otherwise diverse educationalphilosophical endeavours, especially in difficult times. As such a time, the recent pandemic has turned the philosophical, figurative lockdown, literally, into a palpable reality that incites more thinking about the tension between the ideal and the real. Discontent with reality is constitutive of philosophical explorations of education as preparation for an alternative and more desirable situation. Proof of this is the present collective paper and that which (Peters et al., 2020a) has inspired it. Collectively though varyingly, we describe the world of today and normativize the edifying thought and action that could lead to a better world. We lament and revoke a gloomy present to invoke and authorize a brighter future. 'We are stuck in the toxic 'Anthropocene,' while we need to embrace the curative 'Neganthropocene'' (Sturm et al., 2020, p. 15). Thinking and writing together (Madjar et al., 2020, p. 12), in a world of suspicion and fear (Ozoliņ s et al., 2020, p. 7), has produced several possibilities of what the key to opening the gate of a better future might be. 'Among other examples, there are references to a rehumanising of teaching, a revival of the ancient ideal of wisdom, and the development of post-digital pedagogies' (Roberts et al., 2020, p. 16). One such pedagogy, immersive education, redeems much 'yet unexplored philosophical and pedagogical potentiality' (Novak et al., 2020, p. 14). Other escape routes add to collective effort the affectivity of philia: 'we need to reclaim educational, philosophical and political activity through the practice of friendship' (Madjar et al., 2020, p. 13). We deplore the existing state of affairs, while cultivating hope for change; but we often discern glimpses of light and try to make them endure. We do so especially in times when such CONTACT Marianna Papastephanou

The increasing focus on disability rights---as found, for instance, in the U.N. Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD)---challenges philosophical imaginaries. This article broadens the philosophical imaginary of freedom by exploring the relation of dependence, independence, and interdependence in the lives of people with disabilities. It argues (1) that traditional concepts of freedom are rather insensitive to difference within humanity, and (2) that the lives of people with severe disabilities challenge philosophers to argue and conceptualize freedom not only as independence and interdependence but also as dependence. After tracing this need through a Hegelian understanding, via Julia Kristevas work on disability, and finally the CRPD, it concludes that a unified solution might not be possible. Hence, it argues that disability issues necessitate philosophical modesty.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract