Faculty of Education

Department of Education

Module - Elements of Education

UNIT 10 - Schools of Thoughts in Philosophy

Introduction

Students will examine the key philosophical traditions and their underlying principles, methodologies,
and contributions to philosophical inquiry. Through critical analysis of primary texts and engaging with
scholarly debates, students will gain a comprehensive understanding of the foundational ideas,
arguments, and thinkers associated with each school of thought. This unit provides an in-depth
exploration of the major schools of thought in philosophy, aims to develop students' ability to evaluate
and compare different philosophical perspectives, enhance their critical thinking skills, and foster a
nuanced understanding of the diversity and complexity within the field of philosophy.

Learning Outcomes:

By the end of this unit, student teachers will be able to:

1. Identify and describe the major schools of thought in philosophy,

2. Analyse the impact of different philosophies in modern education,
3. Demonstrate the competency in carrying out the underlying principles, methodologies, and core
concepts of Schools of philosophical thoughts in the classroom.

1
Identify and describe the major schools of thought in philosophy.

There are many schools of thoughts in philosophy but this unit will highlight only the three major
philosophies as idealism, naturalism and pragmatism. The history of philosophy of education is an
important source of concerns and issues—as is the history of education itself—for setting the
intellectual agenda of contemporary philosophers of education. Equally relevant is the range of
contemporary approaches to the subject. Although it is not possible here to review systematically either
that history or those contemporary approaches, brief sketches of several key figures are offered next.

The Western philosophical tradition began in ancient Greece, and philosophy of education began with it.
The major historical figures developed philosophical views of education that were embedded in their
broader metaphysical, epistemological, ethical, and political theories. The introduction by Socrates of
the “Socratic method” of questioning (see dialectic) began a tradition in which reasoning and the search
for reasons that might justify beliefs, judgments, and actions was (and remains) fundamental; such
questioning in turn eventually gave rise to the view that education should encourage in all students and
persons, to the greatest extent possible, the pursuit of the life of reason. This view of the central place
of reason in education has been shared by most of the major figures in the history of philosophy of
education, despite the otherwise substantial differences in their other philosophical views.

Analyze the underlying principles, methodologies, and core concepts of each school.

Plato

Socrates’ student Plato endorsed that view and held that a fundamental task of
education is that of helping students to value reason and to be reasonable, which
for him involved valuing wisdom above pleasure, honour, and other less-worthy
pursuits. In his dialogue Republic he set out a vision of education in which
different groups of students would receive different sorts of education,
depending on their abilities, interests, and stations in life. His utopian vision has
been seen by many to be a precursor of what has come to be called educational

2
“sorting.” Millennia later, the American pragmatist philosopher John Dewey (1859–1952) argued that
education should be tailored to the individual child, though he rejected Plato’s hierarchical sorting of
students into categories.

Aristotle

Plato’s student Aristotle also took the highest aim of education to be the
fostering of good judgment or wisdom, but he was more optimistic than Plato
about the ability of the typical student to achieve it. He also emphasized the
fostering of moral virtue and the development of character; his emphasis on
virtue and his insistence that virtues develop in the context of community-
guided practice—and that the rights and interests of individual citizens do not
always outweigh those of the community—are reflected in contemporary
interest in “virtue theory” in ethics and “communitarianism” in political philosophy.

Jean-Jacques Rousseau

Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712–78) famously insisted that formal education, like

society itself, is inevitably corrupting; he argued that education should enable
the “natural” and “free” development of children, a view that eventually led to
the modern movement known as “open education.” These ideas are in some
ways reflected in 20th-century “progressivism,” a movement often (but not
always accurately) associated with Dewey. Unlike Plato, Rousseau also
prescribed fundamentally distinct educations for boys and girls, and in doing so
he raised issues concerning gender and its place in education that are of central concern today. Dewey
emphasized the educational centrality of experience and held that experience is genuinely educational
only when it leads to “growth.” But the idea that the aim of education is growth has proved to be a
problematic and controversial one, and even the meaning of the slogan is unclear. Dewey also
emphasized the importance of the student’s own interests in determining appropriate educational
activities and ends-in-view; in this respect he is usually seen as a proponent of “child-centred” education,
though he also stressed the importance of students’ understanding of traditional subject matter. While
these Deweyan themes are strongly reminiscent of Rousseau, Dewey placed them in a far more
sophisticated—albeit philosophically contentious—context. He emphasized the central importance of

3
education for the health of democratic social and political institutions, and he developed his educational
and political views from a foundation of systematic metaphysics and epistemology.

Of course, the history of philosophy of education includes many more figures than Socrates, Plato,
Aristotle, Rousseau, and Dewey. Other major philosophers, including Thomas Aquinas, Augustine,
Thomas Hobbes, René Descartes, John Locke, David Hume, Immanuel Kant, John Stuart Mill, Karl Marx,
Bertrand Russell, and, more recently, R.S. Peters in Britain and Israel Scheffler in the United States, have
also made substantial contributions to educational thought. It is worth noting again that virtually all
these figures, despite their many philosophical differences and with various qualifications and
differences of emphasis, take the fundamental aim of education to be the fostering of rationality (see
reason). No other proposed aim of education has enjoyed the positive endorsement of so many
historically important philosophers—although, as will be seen below, this aim has come under
increasing scrutiny in recent decades.

Problems, issues, and tasks

There are a number of basic philosophical problems and tasks that have occupied philosophers
of education throughout the history of the subject.

The aims of education

The most basic problem of philosophy of education is that concerning aims: what are the proper aims
and guiding ideals of education? What are the proper criteria for evaluating educational efforts,
institutions, practices, and products? Many aims have been proposed by philosophers and other
educational theorists; they include the cultivation of curiosity and the disposition to inquire; the
fostering of creativity; the production of knowledge and of knowledgeable students; the enhancement
of understanding; the promotion of moral thinking, feeling, and action; the enlargement of the
imagination; the fostering of growth, development, and self-realization; the fulfillment of potential; the
cultivation of “liberally educated” persons; the overcoming of provincialism and close-mindedness; the
development of sound judgment; the cultivation of docility and obedience to authority; the fostering of
autonomy; the maximization of freedom, happiness, or self-esteem; the development of care, concern,
and related attitudes and dispositions; the fostering of feelings of community, social solidarity,
citizenship, and civic-mindedness; the production of good citizens; the “civilizing” of students; the
protection of students from the deleterious effects of civilization; the development of piety, religious

4
faith, and spiritual fulfillment; the fostering of ideological purity; the cultivation of political awareness
and action; the integration or balancing of the needs and interests of the individual student and the
larger society; and the fostering of skills and dispositions constitutive of rationality or critical thinking.

All such proposed aims require careful articulation and defense, and all have been subjected to
sustained criticism. Both contemporary and historical philosophers of education have devoted
themselves, at least in part, to defending a particular conception of the aims of education or to
criticizing the conceptions of others. The great range of aims that have been proposed makes vivid the
philosopher of education’s need to appeal to other areas of philosophy, to other disciplines (e.g.,
psychology, anthropology, sociology, and the physical sciences), and to educational practice itself. Given
that consideration of education’s proper aims is of fundamental importance for the intelligent guidance
of educational activities, it is unfortunate that contemporary discussions of educational policy rarely
address the matter.

Clarification of educational concepts

A perennial conception of the nature of philosophy is that it is chiefly concerned with the clarification of
concepts, such as knowledge, truth, justice, beauty, mind, meaning, and existence. One of the tasks of
the philosophy of education, accordingly, has been the elucidation of key educational concepts,
including the concept of education itself, as well as related concepts such as teaching, learning,
schooling, child rearing, and indoctrination. Although this clarificatory task has sometimes been pursued
overzealously—especially during the period of so-called ordinary language analysis in the 1960s and ’70s,
when much work in the field seemed to lose sight of the basic normative issues to which these concepts
were relevant—it remains the case that work in the philosophy of education, as in other areas of
philosophy, must rely at least in part on conceptual clarification. Such analysis seeks not necessarily, or
only, to identify the particular meanings of charged or contested concepts but also to identify
alternative meanings, render ambiguities explicit, reveal hidden metaphysical, normative, or cultural
assumptions, illuminate the consequences of alternative interpretations, explore the semantic
connections between related concepts, and elucidate the inferential relationships obtaining among the
philosophical claims and theses in which they are embedded.

5
Rights, power, and authority

There are several issues that fall under this heading. What justifies the state in compelling children to
attend school?. What is the nature and justification of the authority that teachers exercise over their
students? Is the freedom of students rightly curtailed by the state? Is the public school system rightly
entitled to the power it exercises in establishing curricula that parents might find objectionable—e.g.,
science curricula that mandate the teaching of human evolution but not creationism or intelligent
design and literature curricula that mandate the teaching of novels dealing with sexual themes? Should
parents or their children have the right to opt out of material they think is inappropriate? Should schools
encourage students to be reflective and critical generally—as urged by the American philosophers Israel
Scheffler and Amy Gutmann, following Socrates and the tradition he established—or should they refrain
from encouraging students to subject their own ways of life to critical scrutiny, as the American political
scientist William Galston has recommended?

The issue of legitimate authority has been raised recently in the United States in connection with the
practice of standardized testing, which some critics believe discriminates against the children of some
racial, cultural, religious, or ethnic groups (because the test questions rely, implicitly or explicitly, on
various culturally specific cues or assumptions that members of some groups may not understand or
accept). In such controversial cases, what power should members of allegedly disadvantaged groups
have to protect their children from discrimination or injustice? The answer to this question, as to the
others raised above, may depend in part on the status of the particular school as public (state-supported)
or private. But it can also be asked whether private schools should enjoy more authority with respect to
curricular matters than public schools do, particularly in cases where they receive state subsidies of one
form or another.

These questions are primarily matters of ethics and political philosophy, but they also require attention
to metaphysics (e.g., how are “groups” to be individuated and understood?), philosophy of science (e.g.,
is “intelligent design” a genuinely scientific theory?), psychology (e.g., do IQ tests discriminate against
members of certain minority groups?), and other areas of philosophy, social science, and law.

6
Critical thinking

Many educators and educational scholars have championed the educational aim of critical thinking. It is
not obvious what critical thinking is, and philosophers of education accordingly have developed
accounts of critical thinking that attempt to state what it is and why it is valuable—i.e., why educational
systems should aim to cultivate it in students. These accounts generally (though not universally) agree
that critical thinkers share at least the following two characteristics: (1) they are able to reason well—i.e.,
to construct and evaluate various reasons that have been or can be offered for or against candidate
beliefs, judgments, and actions; and (2) they are disposed or inclined to be guided by reasons so
evaluated—i.e., actually to believe, judge, and act in accordance with the results of such reasoned
evaluations. Beyond this level of agreement lie a range of contentious issues.

One cluster of issues is epistemological in nature. What is it to reason well? What makes a reason, in this
sense, good or bad? More generally, what epistemological assumptions underlie (or should underlie) the
notion of critical thinking? Does critical thinking presuppose conceptions of truth, knowledge, or
justification that are objective and “absolute,” or is it compatible with more “relativistic” accounts
emphasizing culture, race, class, gender, or conceptual scheme?

These questions have given rise to other, more specific and hotly contested issues. Is critical thinking
relevantly “neutral” with respect to the groups who use it, or is it in fact politically biased, unduly
favouring a type of thinking once valued by white European males—the philosophers of the
Enlightenment and later eras—while undervaluing or demeaning types of thinking sometimes associated
with other groups, such as women, nonwhites, and non-Westerners—i.e., thinking that is collaborative
rather than individual, cooperative rather than confrontational, intuitive or emotional rather than linear
and impersonal? Do standard accounts of critical thinking in these ways favour and help to perpetuate
the beliefs, values, and practices of dominant groups in society and devalue those of marginalized or
oppressed groups? Is reason itself, as some feminist and postmodern philosophers have claimed, a form
of hegemony?

Other issues concern whether the skills, abilities, and dispositions that are constitutive of critical
thinking are general or subject-specific. In addition, the dispositions of the critical thinker noted above
suggest that the ideal of critical thinking can be extended beyond the bounds of the epistemic to the
area of moral character, leading to questions regarding the nature of such character and the best means
of instilling it.

7
Indoctrination

A much-debated question is whether and how education differs from indoctrination. Many theorists
have assumed that the two are distinct and that indoctrination is undesirable, but others have argued
that there is no difference in principle and that indoctrination is not intrinsically bad. Theories of
indoctrination generally define it in terms of aim, method, or doctrine. Thus, indoctrination is either: (1)
any form of teaching aimed at getting students to adopt beliefs independent of the evidential support
those beliefs may have (or lack); (2) any form of teaching based on methods that instill beliefs in
students in such a way that they are unwilling or unable to question or evaluate those beliefs
independently; or (3) any form of teaching that causes students to embrace a specific set of beliefs—e.g.,
a certain political ideology or a religious doctrine—without regard for its evidential status. These ways of
characterizing indoctrination emphasize its alleged contrast with critical thinking: the critical thinker
(according to standard accounts) strives to base his beliefs, judgments, and actions on the competent
assessment of relevant reasons and evidence, which is something the victim of indoctrination tends not
to do. But this apparent contrast depends upon the alleged avoidability of indoctrination, which itself is
a philosophically contested issue.

The individual and society

A number of interrelated problems and issues fall under this heading. What is the place of schools in a
just or democratic society? Should they serve the needs of society by preparing students to fill specific
social needs or roles, or should they rather strive to maximize the potential—or serve the interests—of
each student? When these goals conflict, as they appear inevitably to do, which set of interests—those
of society or those of individuals—should take precedence? Should educational institutions strive to
treat all students equally? If so, should they seek equality of opportunity or equality of outcome? Should
individual autonomy be valued more highly than the character of society? More generally, should
educational practice favour a more-liberal view of the relation between the individual and society,
according to which the independence of the individual is of fundamental importance, or a more-
communitarian view that emphasizes the individual’s far-reaching dependence on the society in which
she lives? These questions are basically moral and political in nature, though they have epistemological
analogues, as noted above with respect to critical thinking.

8
Moral education

Another set of problems and issues has to do with the proper educational approach to morality. Should
education strive to instill particular moral beliefs and values in students? Or should it aim rather to
enhance students’ ability to think through moral issues for themselves? If the latter, how should
educators distinguish between good and bad ways to think about moral issues? Should moral education
focus on students’ character—rather than on either the inculcation of particular beliefs and values or
the development of the ability to think well about moral matters—and endeavour to produce particular
traits, such as honesty and sensitivity? Or are all these approaches problematic in that they inevitably
involve indoctrination (of an undesirable kind)? A related objection to the approaches mentioned is that
moral beliefs and values are in some sense relative to culture or community; therefore, attempts to
teach morality at least presuppose an indefensible moral absolutism and may even constitute a kind of
moral “imperialism.” These large and complex questions are intimately connected with metaethics and
moral epistemology—i.e., the part of moral philosophy concerned with the epistemic status of moral
claims and judgments. Moral psychology and developmental psychology are also highly relevant to the
resolution of these questions.

Teaching, learning, and curriculum

John Dewey

Many problems of educational practice

that raise philosophical issues fall under
this heading. Which subjects are most
worth teaching or learning? What
constitutes knowledge of them, and is
such knowledge discovered or
constructed? Should there be a single,
common curriculum for all students, or
should different students study different subjects, depending on their needs or interests, as Dewey
thought? If the latter, should students be tracked according to ability? Should less-able students be
directed to vocational studies? Is there even a legitimate distinction to be drawn between academic and
vocational education? More broadly, should students be grouped together—according to age, ability,

9
gender, race, culture, socioeconomic status, or some other characteristic—or should educators seek
diversity in the classroom along any or all of these dimensions?

Finally, here fall questions concerning the aims of particular curriculum areas. For example, should
science education aim at conveying to students merely the content of current theories or rather an
understanding of scientific method, a grasp of the tentativeness and fallibility of scientific hypotheses,
and an understanding of the criteria by which theories are evaluated? Should science classes focus
solely on current theories, or should they include attention to the history, philosophy, and sociology of
the subject? Should they seek to impart only beliefs or also skills? Similar questions can be asked of
nearly every curriculum area; they are at least partly philosophical and so are routinely addressed by
philosophers of education as well as by curriculum theorists and subject-matter specialists.

Educational research

A large amount of research in education is published every year; such research drives much educational
policy and practice. But educational research raises many philosophical issues. How is it best conducted,
and how are its results best interpreted and translated into policy? Should it be modeled on research in
the natural sciences? In what ways (if any) does competent research in the social sciences differ from
that in the natural sciences? Can educational research aim at objectivity and the production of objective
results, or is it inevitably subjective? Should researchers utilize quantitative methods or qualitative ones?
How is this distinction best understood? Are both legitimate modes of research, or is the first
problematically scientistic or positivistic, or the second problematically subjective, impressionistic, or
unreliable? These and related issues are largely philosophical, involving philosophy of science (both
natural and social) and epistemology, but they clearly involve the social sciences as well.

The history of philosophy of education has seen the emergence of various schools of thought and
perspectives. Here are some notable schools of thought in the field:

Idealism: This school of thought, exemplified by philosophers like Plato and Immanuel Kant, emphasizes
the importance of ideas and reason in education. Idealists believe that education should focus on the
development of the mind and the pursuit of truth and knowledge.

10
Realism: Realism, associated with philosophers such as Aristotle and John Locke, posits that education
should be grounded in the real world and practical experiences. Realists advocate for teaching subjects
that have direct relevance to students' lives and emphasize the importance of observation and empirical
knowledge.

Pragmatism: Pragmatism, championed by philosophers like John Dewey, emphasizes the practical
aspects of education and focuses on preparing students for active participation in democratic society.
Pragmatists believe that education should be student-centered, experiential, and focused on problem-
solving and critical thinking.

Existentialism: Existentialism, represented by thinkers like Jean-Paul Sartre and Friedrich Nietzsche,
focuses on individual freedom, authenticity, and personal meaning. Existentialist philosophers argue
that education should help individuals discover their unique identities and navigate the complexities of
existence.

Critical Theory: Critical theory, influenced by philosophers such as Herbert Marcuse and Paulo Freire,
examines the power dynamics and social inequalities present in education and society. Critical theorists
advocate for education that challenges oppressive structures, encourages critical thinking, and
promotes social justice.

Constructivism: Constructivism, associated with thinkers like Jean Piaget and Lev Vygotsky, emphasizes
the active role of learners in constructing their own knowledge. Constructivist educators believe that
learning is a process of actively engaging with the environment and building upon prior knowledge and
experiences.

Marxism is a broad philosophy developed by Karl Marx in the second half of the 19th century that
unifies social, political, and economic theory. It is mainly concerned with the battle between the working
class and the ownership class and favors communism and socialism over capitalism. The basic tenets of
Marxism are the following: dialectical materialism, historical materialism, the theory of surplus value,
class struggle, revolution, dictatorship of the proletariat and communism.

Postmodernism: Postmodernism, with influences from thinkers like Michel Foucault and Jacques Derrida,
questions traditional educational frameworks and challenges the notion of fixed truths or grand

11
narratives. Postmodernist perspectives emphasize diversity, multiple perspectives, and the
deconstruction of dominant ideologies.

These schools of thought represent different approaches to understanding the aims, methods, and
values of education. Each has its own unique perspective on the nature of knowledge, the role of the
learner, and the purpose of education in society.

1. Idealism: This school of thought, exemplified by philosophers like Plato and Immanuel Kant,
emphasizes the importance of ideas and reason in education. Idealists believe that education
should focus on the development of the mind and the pursuit of truth and knowledge.

2. Realism: Realism, associated with philosophers such as Aristotle and John Locke, posits that
education should be grounded in the real world and practical experiences. Realists advocate for
teaching subjects that have direct relevance to students' lives and emphasize the importance of
observation and empirical knowledge.

3. Naturalism

Naturalism is a philosophical perspective that posits the natural world as the basis of reality and
rejects supernatural or spiritual explanations. It is a worldview that seeks to understand and
explain phenomena solely through natural laws and processes, without invoking any
supernatural or metaphysical entities.

In the context of philosophy, naturalism encompasses several different branches, including

metaphysical naturalism, epistemological naturalism, and ethical naturalism. Here's a brief
explanation of each:

1. Metaphysical Naturalism: Also known as ontological naturalism, this branch of naturalism

asserts that everything that exists is part of the natural world and can be explained by natural
causes. It denies the existence of any supernatural or non-physical entities, such as gods, spirits,
or souls.

2. Epistemological Naturalism: This form of naturalism focuses on knowledge and how it is

acquired. It holds that knowledge is obtained through natural means, such as empirical

12
 observation, scientific inquiry, and rational thought. It rejects the idea of knowledge derived
from supernatural or mystical sources.

3. Ethical Naturalism: Ethical naturalism asserts that moral principles and values can be
understood and evaluated through naturalistic methods. It argues that ethical judgments are
based on facts about the natural world, such as human well-being, social dynamics, and the
consequences of actions. Ethical naturalism stands in contrast to moral theories that invoke
supernatural or transcendent sources of moral authority.

Overall, naturalism seeks to provide a comprehensive understanding of the world and human
experience by relying solely on natural explanations and rejecting supernatural or metaphysical
entities. It often aligns with a scientific and empirical approach to knowledge and is a prominent
perspective within various disciplines, including philosophy, science, and social sciences.

4. Pragmatism: Pragmatism, championed by philosophers like John Dewey, emphasizes the

practical aspects of education and focuses on preparing students for active participation in
democratic society. Pragmatists believe that education should be student-centered, experiential,
and focused on problem-solving and critical thinking.

Activity 1;

Identify the main differences among different schools of thoughts.

Aspect Pragmatism Naturalism Idealism

13
Aspect Pragmatism Naturalism Idealism

The impact of education philosophy on modern education

Education philosophy plays a significant role in shaping modern education systems and practices. The
impact of education philosophy on modern education can be seen in various aspects:

Curriculum Design: Education philosophy influences the design and content of the curriculum.
For example, a philosophy that emphasizes hands-on learning and real-life application may lead
to a curriculum that incorporates project-based learning, experiential learning, and practical
skills development.

Teaching Methods: Different education philosophies advocate for various teaching methods. For
instance, a philosophy rooted in constructivism may promote student-centered approaches,
such as inquiry-based learning, collaborative learning, and problem-solving activities. On the
other hand, a philosophy emphasizing behaviorism may focus on direct instruction and
reinforcement.

Assessment and Evaluation: Education philosophy influences how learning outcomes are
assessed and evaluated. Philosophies that prioritize holistic development and multiple forms of
intelligence may lead to assessment methods that go beyond traditional exams and incorporate
performance-based assessments, portfolios, and self-assessment.

Classroom Environment: Education philosophy shapes the classroom environment and dynamics.
Philosophies emphasizing student autonomy and empowerment may encourage flexible seating

14
 arrangements, student choice in learning activities, and fostering a sense of community and
collaboration.

Teacher-Student Relationship: Education philosophy influences the role of teachers and the
dynamics of the teacher-student relationship. Philosophies that value student-centered learning
may position teachers as facilitators, mentors, and guides rather than sole disseminators of
knowledge.

Values and Ethics: Education philosophy plays a role in instilling values and ethics in education.
Philosophies that emphasize character education, social responsibility, and ethical reasoning
may integrate moral education into the curriculum and promote a school culture that nurtures
empathy, respect, and integrity.

Educational Goals and Outcomes: Education philosophy shapes the overall goals and outcomes
of education. Philosophies that prioritize holistic development, critical thinking, creativity, and
lifelong learning may influence the emphasis placed on these aspects in educational policies and
practices.

It's important to note that different education philosophies exist, such as progressivism,
perennialism, essentialism, and constructivism, and they may coexist and blend in various
educational settings. The impact of education philosophy on modern education is a complex and
dynamic process that continues to evolve as educators and policymakers explore new ideas and
research in the field.

Recommended Resources:

 Primary and secondary texts by influential philosophers (e.g., Plato, Aristotle, Descartes, Kant,
Nietzsche).
 Philosophical anthologies or textbooks covering various philosophical traditions and topics.
 Online resources, academic journals, and philosophical podcasts for further exploration and
research.

15
Questions

What is the etymology of the word "philosophy" and what does it signify?

Analyze the contribution of different philosophers in education

Evaluate the impact of pragmatism on development of modern education.

16