In Finland, Belgium and Denmark, but most notably in Britain (and, outside Europe, the United States), ‘emotional well-being’ has become a key goal in social and overseas policies.  Promoted by diverse interest groups, arguments for the state to foster emotional well-being reflect diverse perceptions of educational and social problems and proposed remedies.  Over the past ten years, State interest has led to emotionally and psychologically-focused interventions in legal systems, humanitarian and aid activities, and social policies.  These are rooted in different branches of therapeutic, psychological and psychiatric practice and supported by strong psychological rationales and claims (see Nolan 2008;  Ecclestone and Hayes 2008;  Pupavac 2001, Moon 2008; Summerfield 2009).  Since May 2010, the advent of a new government in Britain is subsuming ‘emotional well-being’ within discourses of ‘resilience’, ‘moral and character development’ (see Lexmond and Reeves 2009).

An intensification of psychological and therapeutic interpretations and responses  requires historical analysis to illuminate how changing psychological fashions have influenced ideas about the human subject and its educational needs (Hendrick 2008,  Thompson 2006).  However, it is not possible to understand continuities and change without parallel insights from philosophy and political studies.  This paper combines philosophical exploration with political analysis, building on recent work (including a seminar series funded by the British Economic and Social Research Council) which explores the roots of policy and practice around emotional well-being in deeper philosophical and political disenchantment with an externally-seeking, autonomous human subject (see Ecclestone et al 2010, Heartfield 2001, Malik 2001, Biesta 2006, Cummings 2009, Panton 2010).  One outcome is the rise of an ‘epistemology of the emotions’ that privileges an emotionally vulnerable identity as integral to the essence of human subjectivity (Ecclestone 2010a, b).  The implications of this epistemology and its psychologised, therapeutic roots for curriculum content, pedagogy, labelling and assessment are far-reaching (see Mintz 2009, Smyers et al 2007, Suissa 2008, Gillies 2011). 

These educational implications in a British context have not been much explored for their resonance or otherwise with a European audience.  This paper therefore focuses on two areas: the philosophical and political roots of explicit and implicit images of the human subject embedded in an ‘epistemology of the emotions’, and their implications for the sort of knowledge we believe enable humans to understand and challenge the world, and for the forms of knowledge deemed to be appropriate for particular groups and individuals. Although the paper takes Britain as its focus, it is important to reiterate that a) trends discussed here are emerging in policy and academic arenas in growing numbers of countries (although, of course, they take different cultural and political forms) and b) the implications of these trends for knowledge and images of the human subject remain largely unchallenged and therefore need much wider debate, both between academics from different disciplines, between academics, policy makers and practitioners, and between those groups in different countries.  This paper draws also on discussion at a seminar on Finnish adult education in 2010 (Ecclestone 2010b).

Ecclestone, K. and Hayes, D. 2008. The Dangerous Rise of Therapeutic Education, London: Routledge. Ecclestone, K. 2010a Promoting emotionally vulnerable subjects: educational implications of an ‘epistemology of the emotions’, Journal of the Pacific Circle Consortium for Education, 22, 1, 57–76 Ecclestone, K. 2010c. The therapeutic turn in adult education, Keynote paper, 70th Anniversary, Finnish Adult Education Research Association, 7th December 2010 Biesta, G. 2006. Beyond Learning: democratic education for a human future. Boulder: Paradigm Publishers. Cummings, D., ed. 2006. Debating Humanism. London: Societas Gillies, V. 2011 Social and emotional pedagogies: critiquing the new orthodoxy of emotion in classroom behaviour management, forthcoming, International Journal of Sociology of Education Heartfield, J. 2002. The ‘Death of the Subject’ Explained. Sheffield: Sheffield Hallam University Press. Hendrick, H. 2009. The coming of the child as an emotional subject, 1900s-1950s. Paper for ESRC seminar series, Changing the subject?, 7 July 2009, Oxford Brookes University. Lexmond, J. and Reeves, R. (2009) Building Character. London: DEMOS Mintz. A. 2009. Has therapy intruded into education? Journal of Philosophy of Education, 43, 4, 633-647 Moon, C. 2009. Healing past violence: traumatic assumptions and therapeutic interventions in war and reconciliation. Journal of Human Rights, 8, 1, 71-91. Nolan, J. 2008. Legal accents, legal borrowing: he international problem-solving court movement. Princeton: Princeton University. Panton, J. 2010. The politics of subjectivity. PhD, University of Oxford. Pupavac, V. 2001. Therapeutic governance: psycho-social intervention and trauma risk management. Disasters, 25, no. 4: 358-372. Smyers, P., Smith, R., and Standish, P. 2007. The therapy of education: philosophy, happiness and personal growth. London/New York: Palgrave MacMillan. Suissa, J. 2008. Lessons from a new science? On teaching happiness in schools. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 42, no. 3-4: 575 – 590. Thomson, M. 2006. Psychological subjects: identity, culture and health in twentieth-century Britain. Oxford: Oxford University Press