Philosophical Underpinnings of Counselling Psychology

Because I have so little time in which to tackle such a basic and important issue I shall limit myself to sketching the fundamental contradictions and pitfalls that are to be found underneath the smooth presentations of this new discipline of counselling psychology. It seems to me all the more important to take this opportunity to ask some pertinent questions and challenge some of the preconceptions around the aims and objectives of counselling psychology as it will be tempting for most of us to launch headlong into the professionalization of the field in order to achieve credibility. In making these few remarks I shall therefore speak from the perspective of the philosopher as defined by Wittgenstein in his Philosophical Investigations, where he declares that “the work of a philosopher consists in assembling reminders for a particular purpose” (Wittgenstein, 1953). My purpose will be clear in a minute.

The importance of military leadership can hardly be underestimated. Military organizations worldwide continue to recognise the need for excellent leaders, if they are to deal with the complexities of warfare in the best possible way. Consequently, for the sake of the organization, as well as the individual, military academies seek to train their recruits to become outstanding leaders. To reach this objective, most, if not all, centre their educational programs around the ambition, not only to teach military and academic skills, but also to “develop leaders of character”. Subsequently, countless learning programs and strategies aimed at character development exist. However, an initial analysis of contemporary military education shows that the practice of character education is far from straightforward. This chapter examines the philosophical underpinnings of character education and in doing so, aims to show the inherent difficulties faced by military academies in developing leaders of character. Finally, it argues that, in order to understand what it takes to implement military character education, one first needs to understand its preconditions. By formulating these preconditions and discussing their implications, this chapter aims to contribute to the re-evaluation of the dominant traditional paradigm in military education.

Abstract: This article, attempts a philosophical inspection of Amartya Sen's ‘capability approach’ as the unique outline for comprehending justice. Sen's ‘capability approach’ is a departure or shift from traditional paradigms that prioritise resources or utility, as it underscores the actual freedoms that individuals possess to accomplish the lives they value. This paper critically evaluates the philosophical underpinnings of Sen's concept of justice, investigating its approach to the challenges of human development, poverty, and inequality. It will also evaluate the significance of the ‘capability approach’ in comparison to other mainstream theories of justice, particularly those proposed by John Rawls, by examining its fundamental principles, including its emphasis on individual capabilities and its rejection of a fixed metric of justice. Furthermore, this inquiry explores the implications of Sen's methodology for contemporary discussions regarding public policy and global justice. The paper endeavours to promote a more profound comprehension of justice that is more in accordance with human diversity and real-world circumstances by means of this investigation, thereby providing a more pragmatic and ethically sensitive framework for assessing social arrangements. Keywords: John Rawls, Justice, Inequality, Poverty, Public Policy.