What is a Christian philosophy of education?

Although the term Christian

education does not occur in the Bible, the Bible speaks of the moral and spiritual
instruction of believers in general and of children in particular. It places a high value
upon knowledge, both of God and of His works. It describes the moral and spiritual fruits
of this knowledge and defines its ultimate purpose.
The present Christian school movement can be understood only as a part--certainly in
these times a very significant and necessary part--of the total endeavor of Christian
education. A full understanding of this movement requires an examination of the basis
upon which its educational theory and practices rest: its "philosophy of education."
Accordingly there follows, first, a presentation of the basic beliefs of Christian education
and, second, an application of these beliefs to the specific mission of the Christian
school.
Rationalism is a philosophical movement which gathered momentum during the Age of
Reason of the 17th Century. It is usually associated with the introduction of
mathematical methods into philosophy during this period by the major rationalist figures,
Descartes, Leibniz and Spinoza. The preponderance of French Rationalists in the 18th
Century Age of Enlightenment, including Voltaire, Jean-Jacques Rousseau and Charles
de Secondat (Baron de Montesquieu) (1689 - 1755), is often known as French
Rationalism.

Rationalism is any view appealing to intellectual and deductive reason (as opposed to
sensory experience or any religious teachings) as the source of knowledge or
justification. Thus, it holds that some propositions are knowable by us by intuition alone,
while others are knowable by being deduced through valid arguments from intuited
propositions. It relies on the idea that reality has a rational structure in that all aspects of
it can be grasped through mathematical and logical principles, and not simply through
sensory experience.

Rationalists believe that, rather than being a "tabula rasa" to be imprinted with sense
data, the mind is structured by, and responds to, mathematical methods of reasoning.
Some of our knowledge or the concepts we employ are part of our innate rational
nature: experiences may trigger a process by which we bring this knowledge to
consciousness, but the experiences do not provide us with the knowledge itself, which
has in some way been with us all along. See the section on the doctrine of Rationalism
for more details.

Rationalism is usually contrasted with Empiricism (the view that the origin of all
knowledge is sense experience and sensory perception), and it is often referred to as
Continental Rationalism because it was predominant in the continental schools of
Europe, whereas British Empiricism dominated in Britain. However, the distinction
between the two is perhaps not as clear-cut as is sometimes suggested, and would
probably not have even been recognized by the philosophers involved. Although
Rationalists asserted that, in principle, all knowledge, including scientific knowledge,
could be gained through the use of reason alone, they also observed that this was not
possible in practice for human beings, except in specific areas such as mathematics.
Rationalism is a philosophical movement which gathered momentum during the Age of
Reason of the 17th Century. It is usually associated with the introduction
of mathematical methods into philosophy during this period by the major rationalist
figures,Descartes, Leibniz and Spinoza. The preponderance of French Rationalists in
the 18th Century Age of Enlightenment, includingVoltaire, Jean-Jacques
Rousseau and Charles de Secondat (Baron de Montesquieu) (1689 - 1755), is often
known as French Rationalism.
Rationalism is any view appealing to intellectual and deductive reason (as opposed to
sensory experience or any religious teachings) as the source of knowledge or
justification. Thus, it holds that some propositions are knowable by us by intuitionalone,
while others are knowable by being deduced through valid arguments from intuited
propositions. It relies on the idea that reality has a rational structure in that all
aspects of it can be grasped through mathematical and logical principles, and not
simply through sensory experience.
Rationalists believe that, rather than being a "tabula rasa" to be imprinted with sense
data, the mind is structured by, and responds to, mathematical methods of
reasoning. Some of our knowledge or the concepts we employ are part of our innate
rational nature: experiences may trigger a process by which we bring this knowledge
to consciousness, but the experiences do not provide us with the knowledge itself,
which has in some way been with us all along. See the section on the doctrine of
Rationalism for more details.
Rationalism is usually contrasted with Empiricism (the view that the origin of all
knowledge is sense experience and sensory perception), and it is often referred to
as Continental Rationalism because it was predominant in the continental schools
ofEurope, whereas British Empiricism dominated in Britain. However,
the distinction between the two is perhaps not as clear-cutas is sometimes suggested,
and would probably not have even been recognized by the philosophers involved.
Although Rationalists asserted that, in principle, all knowledge, including scientific
knowledge, could be gained through the use of reason alone, they also observed that
this was not possible in practice for human beings, except in specific areas such
asmathematics.

Empiricism is the theory that the origin of all knowledge is sense experience. It
emphasizes the role of experience andevidence, especially sensory perception, in
the formation of ideas, and argues that the only knowledge humans can have is a
posteriori (i.e. based on experience). Most empiricists also discount the notion
of innate ideas or innatism (the idea that the mind is born with ideas or knowledge
and is not a "blank slate" at birth).
In order to build a more complex body of knowledge from these direct
observations, induction or inductive reasoning (makinggeneralizations based on
individual instances) must be used. This kind of knowledge is therefore also known
as indirect empirical knowledge.
Empiricism is contrasted with Rationalism, the theory that the mind may apprehend
some truths directly, without requiring the medium of the senses.
The term "empiricism" has a dual etymology, stemming both from the Greek word
for "experience" and from the more specific classical Greek and Roman usage
of "empiric", referring to a physician whose skill derives from practical experience as
opposed to instruction in theory (this was it's first usage).
The term "empirical" (rather than "empiricism") also refers to the method
of observation and experiment used in the natural and social sciences. It is a
fundamental requirement of the scientific method that
all hypotheses and theories must be tested against observations of the natural world,
rather than resting solely on a priori reasoning, intuition or revelation. Hence, science
is considered to be methodologically empirical in nature.

Pragmatism
Pragmatism is a philosophical movement that includes those who claim that an ideology
or proposition is true if it works satisfactorily, that the meaning of a proposition is to be
found in the practical consequences of accepting it, and that unpractical ideas are to be
rejected. Pragmatism originated in the United States during the latter quarter of the
nineteenth century. Although it has significantly influenced non-philosophersnotably
in the fields of law, education, politics, sociology, psychology, and literary criticismthis
article deals with it only as a movement within philosophy.
The term pragmatism was first used in print to designate a philosophical outlook
about a century ago when William James (1842-1910) pressed the word into service
during an 1898 address entitled Philosophical Conceptions and Practical Results,
delivered at the University of California (Berkeley). James scrupulously swore, however,

that the term had been coined almost three decades earlier by his compatriot and
friend C. S. Peirce (1839-1914). (Peirce, eager to distinguish his doctrines from the
views promulgated by James, later relabeled his own position pragmaticisma name,
he said, ugly enough to be safe from kidnappers.) The third major figure in the
classical pragmatist pantheon is John Dewey (1859-1952), whose wide-ranging
writings had considerable impact on American intellectual life for a half-century. After
Dewey, however, pragmatism lost much of its momentum.
Reconstructionism
Pragmatic Roots
Reconstuctionism in not a fully developed philosophy of life or of education.
Many writers view it as only an extension of progressivism, the educational
philosophy. Like progressivism, it is based on the pure philosophy of pragmatism.
Therefore, its answers to basic questions are the same. In answer to the ontological
question of what is real, reconstructionists agree that everyday, personal
experience constitutes reality. The epistemological question asks: What is truth
and how do we know truth? The reconstructionist claims that truth is what works,
and we arrive at truth through a process of trial and error. The axiological question
asks: What is good and beautiful? The reconstructionists answer to this is
whatever the public consensus says it is!

Educational Theory

As far as his educational views are concerned, the reconstructionist sees

things the same way as the progressiveup to a point. For example,
reconstructionists believe that students learn more, remember it longer, and apply
it to new situations better if they learn through experience, rather than through
being told something.

As they see it, the teachers main role is that of a resource person or a
research project director who guides the students learning rather than being a
dispenser of knowledge. In this role, the teacher carries on a dialogue with
students, helping them identify problems, frame hypotheses, find data, draw
appropriate conclusions, and select efficacious courses of action (praxis).

Reconstructionists dont believe in a predetermined curriculum. They would

use the subject matter from any or all disciplines when needed to solve a problem.

They would probably deal more, however, with the subject matter of social
experience (the social sciences) in solving problems.

The teaching methods favored by reconstructionists are (1) the pupil-teacher

dialogue and (2) praxis. Praxis is effective action. In other words,
reconstructionists favor applying the problem-solving method (scientific method) of
the progressives to real-life problems. After one has reached an intellectual
solution to a problem, reconstructionists favor carefully thought-out social action to
remedy or ameliorate the problem.

Reconstructionists, like progressives, do not favor any type of ability

grouping. They feel students should be grouped only upon the basis of common
interests.

Reconstructionists also like flexible student seating arrangements, but since

there is so much involvement outside the classroom, seating is not even an issue.

Reconstructionists share the progressives view of student discipline.

Moreover, they feel that if students are actively involved in bringing about change
in areas that concern them, they will not become frustrated, and therefore, will not
be likely to become discipline problems.

Reconstructionists prefer to evaluate students subjectively on the basis of

their ability as a social activist rather than give written examinations. Like
progressives, they feel that student self-evaluation has a proper place.

Reconstructionists Platform

Reconstructionists differ significantly from progressives in the matter of social

policy. Progressives acknowledge the rapidly changing conditions around us. But
they are content to just teach students how to cope with change. It has been said
that progressives seek to teach students how to reach intellectual solution to
problems. This often culminates in writing a paper, doing a report or a project of
some kind. This kind of education would tend to mirror the contemporary society.
On the other hand, reconstructionists believe that students must learn through

practical experience how to direct change and control it. They believe strongly that
our culture is in crisis. They believe that things will get uncontrollably bad unless
we intervene to direct change and thereby reconstruct the social order.

Reconstructionsists believe that a Utopian Future is a genuine possibility

for mankind if we learn how to intervene and to direct change. They believe that
the school should train students to be social activists in the tradition of Gandhi,
Martin Luther King, Jr., Ralph Nader and Jesse Jackson.

Reconstructionists believe that we should apply the reflective inquiry method

to lifes problems. They feel, however, that we should be prepared to act upon our
conclusions. This requires a sense of commitment and responsibility on the part of
students. This goal of initiating change is of course very controversial. For this
reason, reconstructionism has never caught on fully in our schools. Questions have
been raised concerning whether or not schools should become a tool for re-making
society. Questions have also been raised as to whether students at any age have
the intellectual and social maturity to participate in social action.

Advocates of social action contend that the more involvement we have, the
better off we will be as a society. They claim that as things stand now, only a small
percentage of people get involved in social issues because they do not know how to
do so. Advocates of social action emphasize that it can be safely practiced if certain
common-sense safeguards are applied. For example:

1) Young students should be encouraged to act in a more limited setting than

older students, such as the classroom or school, rather than the larger
community.

2) Teachers should help students weigh the probable outcomes of various

lines of social action before anything is done. They should consider
whether or not a given action will solve or ameliorate a problem.
Moreover, they should consider the probable side effects of a given line
of action, including how it will impact on significant others.

3) Teachers should work with students to get them to accept the

consequences (good or bad) of their actions, once they have taken place,
without complaining or expecting to be let off the hook. This is important
if a sense of commitment and responsibility is to be nurtured.

References

Dialogue in the Philosophy of Education by Howard Ozman

Philosophy and the American School by Van Cleve Morris

Contemporary Theories of Education by Richard Pratte

Confucianism is often characterized as a system of social and ethical philosophy rather than a religion.
In fact, Confucianism built on an ancient religious foundation to establish the social values,
institutions, and transcendent ideals of traditional Chinese society. It was what sociologist Robert
Bellah called a "civil religion," (1) the sense of religious identity and common moral understanding at
the foundation of a society's central institutions. It is also what a Chinese sociologist called a "diffused
religion"; (3) its institutions were not a separate church, but those of society, family, school, and
state; its priests were not separate liturgical specialists, but parents, teachers, and officials.
Confucianism was part of the Chinese social fabric and way of life; to Confucians, everyday life was
the arena of religion.
The founder of Confucianism, Master Kong (Confucius, 551-479 B.C.E.) did not intend to found a new
religion, but to interpret and revive the unnamed religion of the Zhou dynasty, under which many
people thought the ancient system of religious rule was bankrupt; why couldn't the gods prevent the
social upheavals? The burning issue of the day was: If it is not the ancestral and nature spirits, what
then is the basis of a stable, unified, and enduring social order? The dominant view of the day,
espoused by Realists and Legalists, was that strict law and statecraft were the bases of sound policy.
Confucius, however, believed that the basis lay in Zhou religion, in its rituals (li). He interpreted these
not as sacrifices asking for the blessings of the gods, but as ceremonies performed by human agents
and embodying the civilized and cultured patterns of behavior developed through generations of
human wisdom. They embodied, for him, the ethical core of Chinese society. Moreover, Confucius
applied the term "ritual" to actions beyond the formal sacrifices and religious ceremonies to include
social rituals: courtesies and accepted standards of behavior-- what we today call social mores. He
saw these time-honored and traditional rituals as the basis of human civilization, and he felt that only
a civilized society could have a stable, unified, and enduring social order.

Hindu Philosophy

The compound Hindu philosophy is ambiguous.

Minimally it stands for a tradition of Indian philosophical thinking. However, it could be
interpreted as designating one comprehensive philosophical doctrine, shared by all
Hindu thinkers. The term Hindu philosophy is often used loosely in this philosophical
or doctrinal sense, but this usage is misleading. There is no single, comprehensive
philosophical doctrine shared by all Hindus that distinguishes their view from contrary
philosophical views associated with other Indian religious movements such
as Buddhism or Jainism on issues of epistemology, metaphysics, logic, ethics or
cosmology. Hence, historians of Indian philosophy typically understand the term
Hindu philosophy as standing for the collection of philosophical views that share a
textual connection to certain core Hindu religious texts (the Vedas), and they do not
identify Hindu philosophy with a particular comprehensive philosophical doctrine.
Hindu philosophy, thus understood, not only includes the philosophical doctrines
present in Hindu texts of primary and secondary religious importance, but also the
systematic philosophies of the Hindu schools: Nyya, Vaieika, Skhya, Yoga,
Prvamms and Vednta. In total, Hindu philosophy has made a sizable
contribution to the history of Indian philosophy and its role has been far from static:
Hindu philosophy was influenced by Buddhist and Jain philosophies, and in turn Hindu
philosophy influenced Buddhist philosophy in India in its later stages. In recent times,
Hindu philosophy evolved into what some scholars call "Neo-Hinduism," which can be
understood as an Indian response to the perceived sectarianism and scientism of the
West. Hindu philosophy thus has a long history, stretching back from the second
millennia B.C.E. to the present.

The Origin and Teachings of Buddhism

The story of Buddhism might be said to have begun with a loss of innocence.
Siddhartha Gautama, a young prince of the Shakhya clan in India, had been
raised in a life of royal ease, shielded from the misery and cruelties of the
world outside the palace gates, distracted by sensual pleasures and luxurious
living. But one day the fateful encounter with the real world occurred, and
Siddhartha was shaken to the core. There in his own kingdom, not far from his
gardens and delights, he encountered people suffering from sickness, old age
and death; he brooded over these things, deeply disturbed that such was the
fate of all beings. Then he encountered an ascetic holy man, a renunciate
dedicated to liberation. The prince then undertook the great renunciation,
forsaking his family, fortune and kingdom in pursuit of the path of liberation.
The central, profound question that burned in Gautama was this: "How may
suffering be ended?"

He became a wandering ascetic, practiced yogic disciplines and meditation,

studied with various teachers, and attained high states of consciousness; but
still he did not find the answer to his question. He practiced severe forms of
asceticism, almost to the point of death by starvation, all without gain. Finally
he sat under a bodhi tree, determined not to rise from meditation until he had
gained the insight he sought. Not long after, he attained enlightenment; he
became the Buddha -- the Awakened One. He had ascended through various
stages of meditative awareness, he had seen all of his past lives, and he had
seen directly into reality, into the nature of existence and the causes of
suffering and rebirth. He pondered whether to try to teach these insights, so
subtle and difficult to grasp to others; perhaps it would be futile. But finally he
decided that at least some of the people would be able to understand;
perhaps more importantly, they could be shown the path to arrive at these
insights themselves. He gave his first sermon to a few disciples in the Deer
park at Benares, and then continued to wander and teach for the next fortyfive years, until his death at the age of eighty.
He was born in the 6th century BCE, a time of great turmoil and political
change in India; many were unsatisfied with the Vedic religion, and new
teachings had emerged, among them the Upanishads. The Buddha stood
largely outside the Vedic tradition, criticizing many of its central teachings.
Nevertheless, he had been influenced by that tradition and his teachings in
turn would have a profound effect on later teachers in the Hindu tradition,
such as Shankara; even in such Hindu classics as the Bhagavad Gita, some
reaction can be seen to Buddhist teachings. But later centuries would see the
Buddha's influence wane in India and instead spread to other Asian countries.

Today Buddhism has spread throughout the world. Various sects have arisen
as later teachers have reinterpreted and expounded upon the Buddha's basic
teachings. Buddhism may be considered a religion, a philosophy, a way of life,
or all three; here we will deal mainly with Buddhism as a philosophical system.

The Educational Theory of Socrates

Analyst: Bob Burgess

RETURN
edited 8/18/11
See Related article:
Is Cognition Recognition? (Was
Socrates' explanation right?)

Due to the fact that Socrates (469 B.C.399 B.C.) wrote nothing, or next to nothing, regarding his philosophical insights and
methods, we are left to glean the essence of his works from the writings of others. We
also can assume that the major philosophical writings on Socrates, those by Plato and
Xenophen, are somewhat tainted due to editorial license and unconscious subjective
motivation. There is an accepted way to grade the evidence when evaluating Socrates:
Grade A: Original source
Grade B: Reliable, ancient testimony
Grade C: Unreliable, ancient testimony
Grade D: Later scholarly opinion (Brickhouse & Smith 1, p.11)
When assuming the task of profiling Socrates utilizing these four criteria, one must
take as requirement the "Principle of Textual Fidelity" and balance it with the
"Principle of Interpretive Plausibility". (Brickhouse & Smith 1, p.99) With the body of

work on Socrates being replete with secondhand sources, satisfying these two
principles can be tricky.
I. Theory of Value: What knowledge and skills are worthwhile learning? What
are the goals of education?
Socrates believed that there were different kinds of knowledge, important and trivial.
He acknowledges that most of us know many "trivial" things. He states that the
craftsman possesses important knowledge, the practice of his craft, but this is
important only to himself, the craftsman. But this is not the important knowledge that
Socrates is referring to. The most important of all knowledge is "how best to live." He
posits that this is not easily answered, and most people live in shameful ignorance
regarding matters of ethics and morals. (Brickhouse & Smith 1, p.30)
Through his method of powerfully questioning his students, he seeks to guide them to
discover the subject matter rather than simply telling them what they need to know.
The goals of education are to know what you can; and, even more importantly, to
know what you do not know.
II. Theory of Knowledge: What is knowledge? How is it different from belief?
What is a mistake? A lie?
Socrates makes the claim there are two very different sorts of knowledge. One is
ordinary knowledge. This is of very specific (and ordinary) information. (Brickhouse
& Smith 1, p.118) He claims that to have such knowledge does not give the possessor
of said knowledge any expertise or wisdom worth mentioning.
The higher knowledge could possibly be described as definitional knowledge.
Socrates is extremely interested in defining words and concepts. He accepts the
pursuit of definitional knowledge as a priority to philosophical discussion.
(Brickhouse & Smith 1, p.118)
Socrates devotes much thought to the concept of belief, through the use of logic. He
spars with students early in his career and later with his accusers, at his trial, on the
nature of his belief regarding the gods. To define belief, according to Socrates, was to
use naturalistic explanations for phenomena traditionally explained in terms of Divine
Agency. (Brickhouse & Smith 2, p. 181) His belief in the wisdom and goodness of
gods is derived from human logic and his natural skepticism.

Any person who knows what goodness, or truth is, will live that way. The only lie or
evil comes about when one is ignorant of good. Man will never knowingly lie even if
he thinks he is. It is his ignorance of goodness and truth that prevents him from being
a wise and honest man.
III.Theory of Human Nature: What is a human being? How does it differ from
other species? What are the limits of human potential?
The being in human is an inner-self. This inner-self is divine, cannot die, and will
dwell forever with the gods. Only human beings can distinguish virtue, which is
knowledge, from ignorance, which is the root of moral evil. (Easton pp. 72 & 73)
The human being is so constituted that he "can" know the good. And, knowing it, he
can follow it, for no one who truly knows the good would deliberately choose to
follow the evil. This is a typically Greek notion, and is attractive to all rationalists.
(Easton pp. 72 & 73) Only the human being has these capabilities.
From experience, it can be known that intellectually the human potential is
infinitesimal. The mind of man is constantly reaching out for more and more
knowledge, just as his will is desirous of more and more love. The search for
knowledge varies with the individual, but the race of man has always carried on the
quest in accordance with its nature and for the practical and speculative value that
knowledge brings with it. (Noonan 1957)
IV. Theory of Learning: What is learning? How are skills and knowledge
acquired?
Learning is the seeking of truth in matters, and it occurs when after questioning and
interpreting the wisdom and knowledge of others, one comes to recognize their own
ignorance. Skills and knowledge are acquired by: (1) interpreting the statements of
others; (2) testing or examining the knowledge or wisdom of those reputed (by
themselves or others) to be wise; (3) showing those who are not wise their ignorance;
(4 ) learning from those who are wise; (5) examining oneself; (6) exhorting others to
philosophy; (7) examining the lives of others; (8) attaining moral knowledge. (Benson
p.17)
V. Theory of Transmission: Who is to teach? By what methods? What will be the
curriculum be?

Socrates does not believe that any one person or any one school of thought is
authoratative or has the wisdom to teach "things." Socrates repeatedly disavows his
own knowledge and his own methods. However, this appears to be a technique for
engaging others and empowering the conversator to openly dialogue.
Be that as it may, Socrates is widely regarded as one of the great teachers of all time.
The Socratic method is one in which a teacher, by asking leading questions, guides
students to discovery. It was a dialectical method that employs critical inquiry to
undermine the plausibility of widely-held doctrine. (Brickhouse & Smith 1, p.53)
Socrates devoted himself to a free-wheeling discussion with the aristocratic young
citizens of Athens, insistently questioning their unwarranted confidence in the truth of
popular opinions, even though he often offered them no clear alternative teaching.
VI. Theory of Society: What is society? What institutions are involved in the
education process?
To the class of Athenians that Socrates was born into, society existed to provide the
best life for the individual. The Athenians of Socrates' day assumed just as their
ancestors had assumed that the best life one could have, required the acquisition of
what was called virtue, or excellence. A truly good person succeeded in doing great
things for the city, strictly obeyed its law, honored parents and ancestors, scrupulously
paid homage to the gods by strictly obeying the conventions governing prayer and
sacrifice. (Brickhouse & Smith 1, p. 19)
Athens' political system was a radical, participating democracy in which every
Athenian male citizen could-and was expected to-vote, hold office, and serve on the
very powerful Athenian juries. (Brickhouse & Smith 1, p. 18)
Societies are invariably formed for a particular purpose. Individuals are not selfsufficient, no one working alone can acquire all the genuine necessities of life.
Separations of functions and specialization of labor are key. Society is composed of
distinct classes (clothiers, farmers, builders, etc.). In addition, there are those that
manage society and settle disputes. In Plato's Republic, he uses the fictional character
Socrates as spokesman for explaining the fundamental principles for the conduct of
human life. (www.philosophypages.com/hy/29.htm#origins)
Education took place in magnificent buildings such as the Parthenon and
Hephaisteion, which adorn the Acropolis and the Agora, the large open area at the
front of the Acropolis that consisted of the Athenian market place and public square.

(Brickhouse & Smith 1, p. 18) However, education took place wherever and
whenever, and the concepts of schooling, colleges, and institutions had not yet
arrived.
VII.Theory of Opportunity: Who is to be educated? Who is to be schooled?
Socrates was the antithesis of elitist mentality. Socrates rejected "the pursuit of
knowledge" for its own sake as a delusion and a snare, inasmuch as knowledge,
properly so-called is unattainable, and a snare, insofar as it draws us away from the
study of conduct (www.2020site.org/socrates) In other words, the pursuit of art,
cosmology, or any specific discipline blurred the quest for truth. The practical
knowledge that experts had in their respective fields was trivial and unimportant to
anyone but they themselves. He wanted to educate, challenge, question and debate
men of ignorance mistaking themselves as knowledgeable, and by doing so, to
promote their intellectual and moral improvement.
Socrates' open and non-dogmatic style, and his emphasis on what other persons
thought rather than on his own ideas led to several individual disciplines going their
separate ways. The result was several prominent schools, with the most influential
being the Platonic philosophy. Even though Socrates rejected the "pursuit of
knowledge" per se, there are many contradictions evident to indicate that he did view
himself as an educator whose goal was to see others learn.
VIII. Theory of Consensus: Why do people disagree? How is consensus
achieved? Whose opinion takes precedence?
Socrates' main focus throughout his public teaching life is the acquiring by the
individual of self-knowledge. He believes that goodness and truth, positive essences
and pure ethical and moral instincts are placed there divinely in the soul.
(www.san.beck.org/c&s-compared.htm#6) However, they are not brought to
consciousness unless they are awakened or learned. Therefore, consensus on the
important things in life is just below the surface waiting to be acknowledged. It is the
destiny of mankind to seek out virtue such as courage and self-control, or propriety
over the desires of ambitions or emotions that cloud the quest for truth. The concept of
ignorance is what stands in the way of consensus, and that once one realizes that he
does not know, a change in any disagreement can occur. If we can recognize the value
of virtue, we then can apply it and improve the quality of our lives. It will take
precedence over personal power and the gratification of desire and pleasure. The life-

long pursuit of self-improvement, the desire for wisdom is only attainable when one
can see their own faults and weaknesses and negative tendencies.

References

1. Brickhouse, Thomas C., and Nicholas D. Smith. 2000 The Philosophy of

Socrates. Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press
2. Brickhouse, Thomas C., and Nicholas D. Smith. 1994 Plato's Socrates. New York:
Oxford University Press
3. Benson, Hugh C., 2000 Socratic Wisdom. New York: Oxford University Press
4. Easton, Stewart C., 1966 The Western Heritage. New York: Holt Rhinehart &
Winston, Inc.
5. Noonan, John P., 1957 General Metaphysics. Chicago, Ill. Loyola University Press
6. www.philosophypages.com/hy/29.htm#origins
7. www.2020site.org/socrates
8. www.san.beck.org/c&s-compared.htm#6

Plato on education. In his Republic we find just about

the most influential early account of education. His
interest in soul, dialogue and in continuing education
continue to provide informal educators with rich
insights.
Plato (428 348 BC) Greek philosopher who was the pupil of Socrates and the
teacher of Aristotle and one of the most influential figures in western thought.
He founded what is said to be the first university his Academy (near Athens) in
around 385 BC. Platos early works (dialogues) provide much of what we know of
Socrates (470 399BC). In these early dialogues we see the use of the so called
Socratic method. This is a question and answer form of arguing with an expert
on one side and a searcher on the other. In the dialogues, the questioning of the
expert by the searcher often exposes gaps in the reasoning. Part of this can be
put down to Platos dislike of the Sophists (particularly as teachers of rhetoric)
and his concern that teachers should know their subject.
The middle period of Platos work is also characterised by the use of dialogues in
which Socrates is the main speaker but by this point it is generally accepted
that it is Platos words that are being spoken. We see the flowering of his thought
around knowledge and the Forms, the Soul (psyche and hence psychology), and
political theory (see, especially, The Republic).
The late period dialogues are largely concerned with revisiting the metaphysical
and logical assumptions of his middle period.
One of the significant features of the dialogical (dialectic) method is that it
emphasizes collective, as against solitary, activity. It is through the to and fro of
argument amongst friends (or adversaries) that understanding grows (or is
revealed). Such philosophical pursuit alongside and within a full education allows

humans to transcend their desires and sense in order to attain true knowledge
and then to gaze upon the Final Good (Agathon).
Perhaps the best known aspect of Platos educational thought is his portrayal of
the ideal society in The Republic. He set out in some detail , the shape and
curriculum of an education system (with plans for its organization in The Laws).
In the ideal state, matters are overseen by the guardian class change is to be
avoided (perfection having already been obtained), and slaves, and craftsmen and
merchants are to know their place. It is the guardian class who are educated,
merchants and craftsmen serve apprenticeships and slaves
Platos relevance to modern day educators can be seen at a number of levels.
First, he believed, and demonstrated, that educators must have a deep care for
the well-being and future of those they work with. Educating is a moral enterprise
and it is the duty of educators to search for truth and virtue, and in so doing guide
those they have a responsibility to teach. As Charles Hummel puts it in his
excellent introductory essay (see below), the educator, must never be a mere
peddler of materials for study and of recipes for winning disputes, nor yet for
promoting a career.
Second, there is the Socratic teaching method. The teacher must know his or her
subject, but as a true philosopher he or she also knows that the limits of their
knowledge. It is here that we see the power of dialogue the joint exploration of
a subject knowledge will not come from teaching but from questioning.
Third, there is his conceptualization of the differing educational requirements
associated with various life stages. We see in his work the classical Greek concern
for body and mind. We see the importance of exercise and discipline, of story
telling and games. Children enter school at six where they first learn the three Rs
(reading, writing and counting) and then engage with music and sports. Platos

philosopher guardians then follow an educational path until they are 50. At
eighteen they are to undergo military and physical training; at 21 they enter
higher studies; at 30 they begin to study philosophy and serve the polis in the
army or civil service. At 50 they are ready to rule. This is a model for what we now
describe as lifelong education (indeed, some nineteenth century German writers
described Platos scheme as andragogy). It is also a model of the learning
society the polis is serviced by educators. It can only exist as a rational form if
its members are trained and continue to grow.
Key texts:
Plato (1955) The Republic, London: Penguin ((translated by H. P. D. Lee).
Biographical material:
Hare, R. M. (1989) Plato, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Succinct introduction
that covers a good deal of ground.
Websites: There are thousands of sites that have some reference to Plato. As a
starting point you could look at one of the potted biographies:Plato briefly
introduces his life and work and then provides links into his works. Try The
Republic.
Mark K. Smith First published May 8, 1997
Educational Philosophy of Jean Jacques Rousseau
Jean Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778)
1.

Rousseaus Philosophy

He is known as a revolutionary philosopher, who wrote against the contemporary social

and political set up, hypocrisy, artificiality, cruelty, correlation, depotism prevalent at that

time. The key notes of his philosophy is termed Naturalism, It contains his concepts of
Natural state, Natural man and Natural civilization.
Natural state is a simple farming community or state without the evils of large cities
corrupt rulers, social classes and luxury. He believed that Goodness was innate and
evils as acquired. About natural man he says, Man is born free, but everywhere he is
in chains In the words of Rousseau, Civilized man borns, lives and dies in a state of
slavery
Natural man according to Rousseau is governed and directed by the laws of his own
nature rather than those of social institutions. He believed the man would have been
happier if he had been allowed to remain in his natural stage. He was against so called
Civilization.
By natural civilizations he meant the simple farming life. Rousseau God makes all the
things good; man meddles with them and they become evil He declared Everything is
good as it comes from the hands of the Author of nature, but everything degenerates in
the hands of man.
Rousseau remarked, Leave the child alone. Let him be a natural man rather than a
civilized man. Let him have a state of nature rather than artificial surroundings that stunt
the proper growth and arrest his natural development. Natural civilization id free from
artificial surroundings and rigid barriers that pollute the goodness of our nature.Return
to nature was his method to cure all troubles human nature his natural heritage is
essentially good and must be given the full opportunities for fee development. He
advocated the concept of liberty, equality and fraternity.
He has given three fundamentals of the Nature considering them the best sources of
education.
1. Isolation from society should be isolated from society and brought up by laws of
nature. He should not be allowed to acquire the evils of the society.
2. Innate Tendencies of the child: In the words of Rousseau, the innate tendencies to
primitive emotions, instinctive judgment and natural instinct are more reliable bases for
action than the experience gained from the society .In this sense education means the
spontaneous development of these innate tendencies of the child .
3. Contact with Natural Environment is to make contact with the natural environment i.e
hills, trees, plans birds, animals, woods, stones and physical forces. Thus the child
should be brought up in natural environment. As a result of it he will automatically
become a rational being and act according to the voice of his conscience.

2. Educational philosophy of Rousseau/ Concept of Education

His educational philosophy is born out of his philosophy i. e Naturalism there are some
characteristics which are as under.
1.
Concept of Education: For Rousseau education does not mean merely imparting
information or storing knowledge. It is not accretion from without. It is the development
of the childs natural powers and abilities from within. According to nature, Men, Things.
A] Education from Nature: It consists in the spontaneous development of our
endowment and faculties. i. e of childs natural tendencies and interests. He gave it the
top priority.
B] Education from Man: It consists in influencing our social contacts and various groups.
He did not favor it at least in initial stages.
C] Education from Things: It consists in the acquisition of knowledge and information
through contact with physical surroundings and our experience of dealings with the
things.
Rousseau conviction was that education should be considered as the process of
development into an enjoyable, rational harmoniously balanced useful and hence
natural life.
3. Types of Education
A} Negative type of Education: He wanted that the first education to the child should be
given ion negative. During the age of 5 to 12, the child should be given negative
education. Rousseau held the opinion, I call negative education that which tends to
perfect the organs that are the instruments of the knowledge, and before giving this
knowledge directly and that endeavours to prepare the way for reason by proper
exercise of the sense. A negative education does the time of idleness, far from it. It does
not give virtues, it projects from vice. It does not inculcate truth. It projects from errors.
Following are the characteristics of negative education.
1.
Time saving not favored: Rousseau said Do not save the time but lose it By
running, dancing, playing the child will have continuous reconstruction of experiences,
which is nothing but education.
2.
Book learning not favored: Rousseau said Reading is the curse of childhood. He
hates books, as they are of no value. He considers them to be the cause of childs
misery and suggest a remedy fro its removal by saying,By relieving school children of
their courses and books, we can take away the cause of their misery.

3.
Formal Lessons Not Favored: Rousseau did not believe in the efficacy of verbal
lessons. He stated, Get rid of the lesson and we get rid of the chief cause of their
sorrow. Rousseau remarked give me a child of five who know nothing and at the
fifteen I shall return him to you knowing as much as those who have been under
instruction since infancy with difference that your pupil only knows things by heart while
mine know how to use his knowledge.
4.
Habit Formation Not Favored: Rousseau holds the viewsThe only habit which the
child should be allowed to form is to contract no habit at all. He did not want the
children to be slaves of their habits. He wished them to be free in their unrestricted
activities. If any habits are to be formed let the children for natural habits.
5.
Direct Moral Education Favored: Rousseau believed that no moral training should
be imparted to the child. Let him get moral training through natural consequences.
6.
Social Education Not Favored: He held the view that the society is corrupt and it
degenerates him. So he should be protected from its evil influences.
7.
Formal Discipline Not Favored: Rousseau believed in discipline according to
natural consequences. If the child climbs a tree, let him fall and learn not to attempt it
again.
8.
Old Customary Procedure Favored: Rousseau was dissatisfied with the prevailing
conditions of the country and that is why he remarked. Man was once happy, now he is
miserable. Undo what has been done and he will be happy again.
B] Positive Education: Rousseau I call positive education one that tends to form the
mind prematurely and to instruct the child in the duties that belongs to man. The
characteristics of positive education are
1. Stress on verbalism
2. Stress on duty, morality and religion
3. Stress on strict discipline
4. Stress on Social education
5. Emphasis on formation of habits.
Rousseau revolted against the positive education and also these characteristics. He
termed it as unnatural and inhuman and opposed it fully. It was in revolt this that he
introduced negative education.

4. Aims of Education
1] Development of childs inner facilities
Rousseau says that the most important aim of education is the natural development of
the childs inner faculties and powers. To live is to work, to develop and to properly
utilize the various part of the body. In his book, Emile, Rousseau seeks to train Emile in
the profession of living so that he may become a human being before becoming a
soldier, a magistrate, or a priest education aim at making the child a real human being.
2] Different aim at different stages:
In addition to the above mentioned aim, education should be different at each stage in
the life of the individual.
A] Development of well regulated freedom
During the period of infancy i.e. .up to 5 years the aim of education is top develop in
Emile a well regulated freedom according to his capacities.
B] Develop sufficient strength at childhood stage
At the childhood stage ie. from 5 to 12 years , the aim of education is to develop in the
child sufficient in order to have well regulated freedom. Rousseaus advice for this
period is, Exercise the body, the organs, the senses and powers and keep the soul
lying fellow, as long as you can.
C] Intellectual development in Pre- adolescent Period:
At the boyhood stage ie., from 12 to 15 years, the aim of education is to develop the
intellect of the Emile. Education should help in the acquisition of knowledge which may
enable him to the practical needs of life.
D] Emotional, Moral and religious development during Adolescence:
During the fourth stage i.e., from 15 to 24 years Emile, should learn to live for others
and to live together in social relationships. His emotions should be sublimated. Moral
and religious bias should be given to education. In short, during this stage, education
should aim at emotional, moral and religious development of the Emile.
5. Rousseaus Curriculum For Emile

Even in framing the curriculum, Rousseau paid attention to these four stages in
development, which have discussed under aims above infancy, childhood, boyhood and
adolescence.
A] Infancy state [up to 5 years]
A feeble body makes a feeble mind. All wickedness comes from weakness. Give his
body constant exercise, make it strong and healthy. During this stage of infancy the
child should be properly protected.
B] For childhood stage [from 5 to 12 years]
Rousseau says,childhood is the sleep of reason and the educator is not to disturb hi9m
in this sleep
So at this stage, neither intellect nor moral or social education is to be imparted to the
child. Negative education will consists of the free development of his physical organs
and the exercises of his senses. The child should be given maximum freedom. There
should be no verbal lessons, in language, History and geography. Physical exercises
constitute the core of the curriculum at his stage.
C] For Boyhood Stage [from 12 to 15 years]
Physical sciences, languages, mathematics, manual work, a trade, social relations,
music and drawing will constitute the curriculum at this stage. Sciences will develop
heuristic attitude, mathematics will develop precise thinking, manual craft will develop
qualities of character of drawing will train eyes and muscles. However the knowledge of
social relations will impress upon the boy the need of co operation an economic inter
dependence of man upon man.
D] For Adolescence Stage(from 15 to 20 years)
Rousseau laid special stress on moral and religious education at this stage. Moral
education is to be given through activities and occupations and not through lectures on
ethics Besides moral and religious education, history Geography sex education,
physical culture and aesthetics are to constitute the curriculum. For all these subjects he
has specific aims i.e History is to be taught for the service of moral instructions.
Religious education for realizing the existence of god and sex education about sex
affairs. Aesthetics is to be taught for the cultivation and improvement of tastes.
6. Rousseaus Methods of Teaching
A] Learning by Doing

Rousseau says, Teach by doing whenever you can, and only for fall back upon words
when doing is out of question. The child should take part in various activities and learn
in natural way. It will help him in satisfaction of creative activity.
B] Direct Experience
Knowledge acquired through books in second hand and easily forgotten. On the other
hand knowledge directly acquired from various learning situations is permanent. He also
urged experience before expression and object before words.
C] Method of Individual Instruction
Rousseau asserted that the teacher should properly recognize in the individually of the
child and place emphasized individual instructions.
D] Heuristic Method
In this method the child is placed in the position of a discoverer. He is to be given an
opportunity to make experiment with the apparatus that he made himself or invented.
Rousseau also advocates the heuristic method of teaching.
E] Example is better than precept
For imparting moral education Rousseau stated. Example is better than precept.
Teacher should practice morality. He should provide opportunities to practice virtue.
Lectures on morality will not prove useful.
I] Social Participation
During the period of adolescence will get knowledge about social relations by actually
visiting places and establishing contact with the members of the community practically.
Rousseaus concept of Discipline
Rousseau opposed imposed discipline leave the child free. It is only in free
atmosphere that the child can develop his innate powers. No punishment should be
given to the child for improving his behavior. He advocated discipline by natural
consequence. He remarked, Allow the child to suffer the natural results of his acts. For
example of the child puts his hand into fire, let him burn his hand and learn by
consequence.
7. Role of the teacher

Rousseau did not assign high place to the teacher. The teacher should see that the
education of the pupils is the free development of their interest and motives. He should
provide suitable opportunities. He should protect the child from repression mental
conflicts and mental; disorders for all kinds.
8. Limitations of the Educational Philosophy of Rousseau
1] Anti social Attitude: Rousseau had no faith in the influence and goodness of the
society. One of the fundamental aims of education in democratic way of life is
socialization community is to he activity involved is the development of the child. All is
not bad with the social set-up.
2] Women Education: Rousseaus views, that literary education of women of culture is
the plague to all, do not such to he modern concept equality of the sexes is all aspects
of life enshrined in democratic way of life.
3] Little important to positive virtue: Rousseau laid stress on negative education and
hence he left little scope for the inculcation of the positive virtues.
4] No higher ideals:
There is no place foe higher morality and ideals in Rousseaus educational theory, while
these are a must for a dignified society.
5] Faulty Theory of Discipline
Rousseaus theory of discipline through natural consequences is very dangerous and
not suitable to the modern way of life where as modern gugets can prove to be fatal if
proper human care of the teacher is not there.
Conclusion/ Impact of Rousseaus Philosophy on Education:
In gist Rousseaus contribution to education has been profound. He influenced
education in its organization, aims, methods, curriculum and discipline, the auto
development of personality , free discipline , lack of any restrain , utilizing the senses ,
interests and activities of the child have influenced the moderns education in many
other ways. The rights of childhood, the human welfare are the natural rights of every
man can be realized through proper type of education. Munro rightly said Out of
Rousseaus teachings derive new education of nineteenth century based on interest. It
gave clear formulations of direct impetus to psychological, sociological and scientific
conception of education He was in facts the founder of the grand idea of liberty,
equality and fraternity.

Stoicism, like the other Greek philosophies discussed in chapter 1 , can be seen as a continuation
of the Socratic movement. There is no single, distinct branch of Stoic theory that we can identify
as their philosophy of education. But the Stoics produced an original and powerful set of ideas
on human development, the acquisition of knowledge (especially knowledge of the good), and
types of value, and these ideas are of continuing significance for modern students of the
philosophy of education. Also important in this connection are their views about the need for an
integrated philosophical curriculum, the teaching of practical ethics, and the relationship between
philosophical theory and conventional beliefs and practices. Stoicism, like its great rival,
Epicureanism, emerged in Athens at the start of the third century bce . Through the activities of
Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle, Athens had become by this date the main center of philosophy in
Greece, indeed in the ancient Mediterranean world. Two major schools of philosophy had been
established, in the Academy (by Plato and his successors) and in the Lyceum (by Aristotle and his
successors). Two more schools emerged, that of Epicurus (based in his house and garden outside
the city) and that of Zeno, based in the Painted Stoa in Athens. Though intellectually
sophisticated and covering complex fields of knowledge, these schools ... log in or subscribe to
read full text

Epicureanism is a Hellenistic school or system of philosophy based on the teachings of

the ancient Greek philospher Epicurus. It was founded around 307 B.C., and was based
in Epicurus' home and garden (the school was often called "The
Garden").Epicurus was a materialist, following in the steps of Democritus and the
school of Atomism.
In Ethics, Epicureanism teaches that happiness (or the greatest good) is to
seek modest pleasures in order to attain a state of tranquillity, freedom from
fear and the absence of bodily pain. This state of tranquillity can be obtained
throughknowledge of the workings of the world, the leading of a simple, moderate
life and the limiting of desires (see the section on the doctrine of Epicureanism for
more details).
In Metaphysics, Epicureanism emphasizes the neutrality of the gods and their noninterference with human lives. Despite some tendencies towards Atheism, it does not
actually deny the existence of gods, which it conceives of as blissful and immortal,
yet material, beings, made up of atoms and inhabiting the empty spaces between
worlds in the vastness of infinite space.
Epicureanism was originally conceived by Epicurus as a challenge to Platonism,
although, arguably, Democritus had propounded a very similar philosophy almost a
century earlier. It built on the Hedonism of Aristippus (c. 435 - 360 B.C.) and Cyrenaics,
differing from that movement mainly in its belief that one should defer immediate
gratification for the sake of long-term gain, and that bodily gratification is not
necessarily preferable to mental pleasures. Later, it became (along

with Stoicism andSkepticism) one of the three dominant schools

of Hellenistic philosophy, lasting strongly through the later Roman Empire.
During Epicurus' lifetime, its members included Hermarchus (who
succeeded Epicurus as the head of his school in about 270B.C.), Idomeneus (310 270 B.C.), Colotes (3rd Century B.C.), Polyaenus (c. 340 - 278 B.C.) and Metrodorus (331
- 277 B.C.), most of these from the Greek city of Lampsacus, where Epicurus taught his
school before relocating to Athens.
Lucretius (99 - 55 B.C.) was the school's greatest Roman proponent, composing an epic
poem, "De Rerum Natura" ("On the Nature of Things") on the Epicurean philosophy
of nature. The poet Horace (65 - 8 B.C.) and Julius Caesar (100 - 44 B.C.) both leaned
considerably toward Epicureanism.
After the official approval of Christianity by the Roman Emperor Constantine (272 337) in 313 A.D., Epicureanism wasrepressed as essentially irreconcilable with
Christian teachings, and the school endured a long period of obscurity and decline.
In more modern times, the French philosopher and priest Pierre Gassendi (1592 1655) referred to himself as an Epicurean (and attempted to revived the doctrine), as
did Thomas Jefferson (1743 - 1826) and the Utilitarian Jeremy Bentham (1748 1832).

Philosophical Analysis
'Contrariwise,' continued Tweedledee, 'if it was so, it might be; and
if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic.'
-Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking Glass
Throughout its development as an intellectual discipline the
Western philosophical tradition has been analytic in focus as well as
practice. An analytic discipline is one that engages in analysis or
that analyzes. To 'analyze' here means to separate into constituent
components or elements, i.e., to determine the essential features or
characteristics that define the phenomena or concepts in question.
Analysis is then a critical and reductive process-reductive in that
it reduces phenomena or concepts to their most basic components

and critical in the sense that the process is rigorous, systematic

and rational. Critical also suggests the analysis tries, in some
sense, to discover the truth about the phenomena or concept in
question. The principal focus in philosophical analysis is on ideas
and concepts.
Since good philosophical analysis depends upon the abilities to
give precise definitions to concepts and to formulate, isolate and
criticize logical arguments, the principle analytic tools in
philosophical investigations are:
1. Conceptual analysis, i.e., the process that allows one to
give, or to determine, a concept's precise definition.
2. Logical analysis, i.e., the rules and procedures that allow
one to formulate and evaluate rational arguments.

Phenomenology
First published Sun Nov 16, 2003; substantive revision Mon Dec 16, 2013
Phenomenology is the study of structures of consciousness as experienced from the firstperson point of view. The central structure of an experience is its intentionality, its being
directed toward something, as it is an experience of or about some object. An experience is
directed toward an object by virtue of its content or meaning (which represents the object)
together with appropriate enabling conditions.
Phenomenology as a discipline is distinct from but related to other key disciplines in
philosophy, such as ontology, epistemology, logic, and ethics. Phenomenology has been
practiced in various guises for centuries, but it came into its own in the early 20th century in
the works of Husserl, Heidegger, Sartre, Merleau-Ponty and others. Phenomenological issues
of intentionality, consciousness, qualia, and first-person perspective have been prominent in
recent philosophy of mind.

Logical Positivism (later also known as Logical Empiricism) is a theory

in Epistemology and Logic that developed out ofPositivism and the early Analytic
Philosophy movement, and which campaigned for a systematic reduction of all human
knowledge to logical and scientific foundations. Thus, a statement is meaningful only
if it is either purely formal (essentially, mathematics and logic) or capable of empirical
verification.

This effectively resulted in an almost complete rejection by Logical Positivists

of Metaphysics (and to a large extent Ethics) on the grounds that it is unverifiable. Its
influence in 20th Century Epistemology and Philosophy of Science, however, has been
profound.
Most early Logical Positivists asserted that all knowledge is based on logical
inference from simple "protocol sentences"grounded in observable facts. They
supported forms of Materialism, Naturalism and Empiricism, and, in particular, they
strongly supported the verifiability criterion of meaning (Verificationism), the doctrine
that a proposition is only cognitively meaningfulif it can be definitively and
conclusively determined to be either true or false.
Logical Positivism was also committed to the idea of "Unified Science", or the
development of a common language in whichall scientific propositions can be
expressed, usually by means of various "reductions" or "explications" of the terms of
one science to the terms of another (putatively more fundamental) one.
The main tenets of the doctrine include:

The opposition to all Metaphysics, especially ontology (the study of reality and
the nature of being), not as necessarily wrong but as having no meaning.

The rejection of synthetic a priori propositions (e.g. "All bachelors are happy"),
which are, by their nature, unverifiable (as opposed to analytic statements,
which are true simply by virtue of their meanings e.g. "All bachelors are
unmarried").

A criterion of meaning based on Ludwig Wittgenstein's early work, (essentially,

that the meaning of a word is its use in the language, and that thoughts, and the
language used to express those thoughts, are pictures or representations of
how things are in the world).

The idea that all knowledge should be codifiable in a single standard language
of science, and the associated ongoing project of "rational reconstruction", in
which ordinary-language concepts were gradually to be replaced by
moreprecise equivalents in that standard language.

History of Logical Positivism

Back to Top

The most important early figures in Logical Positivism were the BohemianAustrian Positivist philosopher Ernst Mach (1838 - 1916) and the Austrian Ludwig
Wittgenstein (especially his "Tractatus" of 1921, a text of great importance for Logical
Positivists).
Logical Positivism in Germany rose in response to the Metaphysics of Georg Hegel,
which was the dominant philosophical view in Germany at the time, particularly

the rejection of his concept of metaphysical entities that did not have any empirical
basis.
It grew from the discussions of the so-called "Vienna Circle" of Moritz Schlick (1882 1936) in the early 20th Century. A 1929 pamphlet jointly written by Otto Neurath (1882 1945), Hans Hahn (1979 - 1934) and Rudolf Carnap (1891 - 1970) brought together
some of the major proponents of the movement and summarized the doctrines of the
Vienna Circle at that time. The contemporaneous Berlin Circle of Hans
Reichenbach (1891 - 1953) also propagated the new doctrines more widely in the
1920s and early 1930s.
A. J. Ayer is considered responsible for the spread of Logical Positivism to Britain, and
his 1936 book "Language, Truth and Logic" was very influential. Developments
in logic and the foundations of mathematics, especially in the "Principia
Mathematica" by the British philosophers Bertrand Russell and Alfred North
Whitehead, particularly impressed the more mathematically-minded Logical Positivists.
The movement dispersed in the late 1930's, mainly because of political upheaval and
the untimely deaths of Hahn and Schlick. Logical Positivism was essential to
the development of early Analytic Philosophy, with which it effectively merged.