This posting marks the end of a series of postings in which I
have attempted to describe the four prominent philosophical traditions in
education. They are perennialism,
essentialism, progressivism, and reconstructionism. I pointed out that the first two are
considered conservative philosophies and the last two are leftist, with
reconstructionism being, among some of its promoters, extreme, at least in the
eyes of most Americans. In this posting,
I want to finish these accounts with two “somewhat” educational schools of
thought: eclecticism and existentialism.
In a previous posting, I indicated that my preferred mental
construct to guide the content choices in civics education makes me an
eclectic. It mostly relies, for its
substantive content, on a view of government and politics derived from a theory
of governance known as federalism. As I
have often explained in this blog, I am not relying on a structural notion of
governance that has a central government with a string of state governments
making up a complex configuration as we have in the US. Yes, that does demonstrate a federalist
arrangement, but one can have a federalist structure within a state. The key attribute of a federalist government
is that it originated and is maintained under the auspices of an agreement in
which the founders have sworn allegiance either to a covenant or a
compact. This is derived originally, at
least in the US, from the traditional Judaic notion of a covenant via early
Puritanical settlers who inhabited the eastern shore of Massachusetts. All this I have thoroughly described and
explained in this blog. The point here
is that while this has a perennial side in that it relies on a long standing
political theory for its content, the means of instruction that best reflects
this material is mostly progressive. So
that makes me an eclectic in that I borrow from more than one philosophy. So be it, but I would point out that probably
a great many educators are eclectics to some degree.
The danger of such a choice in one’s professional plans is,
of course, the potential lack of consistency or hidden contrary beliefs. I write hidden in that if they were not – or
important enough that even if recognized could not be ignored – the mind would
strive to address the resulting cognitive dissonance that such a “cohabitation”
would cause. Humans do not sustain
logical or emotional inconsistencies well; when confronted with them – i.e., we
are cognizant of them – we either change our minds about one or the other of
our notions or we ignore the inconsistency.
As I just indicated, though, ignoring can be very hard to do, especially
when one of the underlying, contradictory assumptions or beliefs comes
painfully into focus due to some life condition.
Of course, since eclecticism is a tailor made sort of belief
system, the exact makeup of anyone’s eclectic philosophy is mostly unique to
the individual who holds the exact set of beliefs. As such, it is difficult to say much that
generally describes or explains the varying sets of beliefs. But that is not the case for the last of my
reviewed school of thought, existentialism.
This other set of beliefs and assumptions is a respected
philosophical tradition with its own history within the broader Western
tradition. Within that tradition, existentialism
is a definite set of beliefs, concepts, assumptions, and the rest of what makes
up a philosophy, but central to its tenets is its enshrining of individuality. This leads to a wide variance among
existentialists over an array of philosophical issues and questions. In that sense, one can detect a very eclectic
character in those thinkers who consider themselves existentialists.
So on this, they do agree:
the vast canon of what makes up Western philosophies does not attribute
enough centrality to the individual.
This notion is probably most clearly expressed in Jean Paul Sartre’s
claim that existence precedes essence.
Let me provide the quote:
What is meant here by saying that
existence precedes essence? It means
first of all, man exists, turns up, appears on the scene, and, only afterwards,
defines himself. If man, as the
existentialist conceives him, is indefinable, it is because at first he is
nothing. Only afterward will he be
something, and he himself will have made what he will be.[1]
Note: when Sartre
wrote, as in this quote, “he” also meant “she.”
Under such a general view, one can see that education is central to the
beliefs of this philosophy. But it is an
education conceived by its promoters as being as far from essentialist ideas as
one could possibly be.
As an educational approach, existentialism takes on a curious
turn; it denies any notion of supporting general views of objective truth as in
other philosophies (e. g., Aristotle’s claim that humans are political
beings). Instead, it places the
responsibility of determining what is true or false (metaphysical questions), what
is the appropriate manner of attaining the truth (epistemological questions),
what is good or evil (ethical questions), or what is beautiful or ugly (aesthetic
questions) squarely on the individual.
The focus of an existential education is to provide the student with opportunities
to develop for him/herself the sense of that responsibility; to determine, as
an obligation, what the answers to these types of questions are. As such, there is no blueprint, no universal
model for what it means to be human or what the nature of humanity is. The classroom guided by this level of individualism
is a place where students are exposed to various paths, options if you will, so
that they can experiment and reflect on whom they want to be, what person they
choose to become. This entails equal
amounts of attention to not just the cognitive development of the student, but
to his/her emotions as well. By the very
nature of what is emphasized, existentialist schools would give significantly
more attention to the humanities over the sciences, math, and other curricular
fields of study. This bias is
instructionally implemented with generous opportunities to pursue artistic and
creative activities, especially ones in which students are afforded time for
self-expression in a variety of genres.
While public schools might dabble in certain limited
experimentations with “existential” lessons, the bulk of such educational
efforts is limited to specially designed private schools. An all-out commitment to existential
education demands a specially trained teaching staff. I am not aware of such training programs in
any of the major state universities.
Let me end with a quote that captures the flavor of this
philosophy as it pertains to education:
Childhood is not adulthood; childhood
is playing and no child ever gets enough play.
The Summerhill theory is that when a child has played enough he will
start to work and face difficulties, and I claim that this theory has been
vindicated in our pupils’ ability to do good work even when it involves a lot
of unpleasant work.[2]
This somewhat inconsistent quote is from A. S. Neill, the
founder of a British boarding school, Summerhill, which is run on
existentialist principles. Despite the
fact that the school has incorporated many federalist principles – a shared
decision-making structural arrangement – it is at heart based on an existential
view of individualism. While the school
is fairly straightforward with its foundational belief that “freedom is not
license,” its almost devotional adherence to respecting the whims of individual
choice makes any appreciation of a communal sense of responsibility hard to
attain – at least in the eyes of a federalist like myself. For after all, if the child never gets enough
play, how will he/she ever have played enough?[3]
With that, I end my review of educational philosophies. It has been my intent to share with you these
descriptions so that you might be better “armed” to engage with the faculties
and administrations of any local school you care to visit and become
involved. Public schools belong to all
of us, not just parents and grandparents.
They are there to serve us all.
[1]
From Existentialism
in a Humanism. See http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/406216-what-is-meant-here-by-saying-that-existence-precedes-essence .
[3]
I will admit, I am not an expert on the
Summerhill school.
No comments:
Post a Comment