Naturalism, Idealism, and Pragmatism
Naturalism, Idealism, and Pragmatism
Naturalism, Idealism, and Pragmatism
Structure
3.1
3.2 3.3 Introduction Objectives Philosophy, Education and their Inter-dependence Naturalism and Education
3.4.1 3.4.2 3.4.3 Naturalism and Organisation of Education Naturalism and Curriculum Role of the Teacher
3.4
3.5
3.6
[
3.7 3.8
I
Comparision of Naturalism, Idealism and Pragmatism Let Us Sum Up Unit-end Activities Suggested Readings
3.9
3.10
3.1 INTRODUCTION
In this unit we will discuss the inter-dependence of philosophy and education. After discussing the impact of philosophy on education and vice-versa, we will describe briefly the different schools of philosophy viz. Naturalism, Idealism and Pragmatism, and their implications for education in curriculum, role of the teacher and the nature of discipline. While explaining the ideas advocated by different schools of philosophy on above concepts, this unit will also incorporate the views of both Western as well as Indian thinkers.
3.2 OBJECTIVES
After completing this unit, you will be able to: define philosophy and education; explain the relationship between education and philosophy; identify the basic assumptions of different schools of philosophy viz. naturalism, idealism and pragmatism; analyse the applications of ggneral philosophical principles of different schools of philosophy in the educational system; define the concept of school according to different schools of philosophy; compare the nature of discipline in different schools of philosophy; compare the curricular content advocated by different schools of philosophy; and identify and distinguish the role of the teacher in different schools of philosophy.
Untlerstancling Education
3.3
The inter-dependence of philosophy and education is clearly seen from the fact that the great philosphers of all times have also been great educators and their philosophy is reflected in their educational systems. This inter-dependence can be better understood by analysing the implications of philosophical principles in the field of education. Before analysing the educational implications of general philosophy, we should know the concept of "Philosophy" and "Education". Each one of us has a personal philosophy which we apply consciously and unconsciously in our daily life. Each philosophy reflects a unique view of what is good and what is important. In this sense, philosophy is the system of beliefs about life. The literal meaning of philosophy is the love of wisdom which is derived from the Greek word "Philos" (Love) and Sophia (Wisdom). Wisdom does not merely mean knowledge. It is a continuous seeking of insight into basic realities - the physical world, life, mind, society, knowledge and values. Education does not mean mere schooling. To become educated is to learn to become a person. Etymologically, 'educahon' is derived from "educare" which means 'to lead out' or "to draw out'. In a broad sense, education refers to an act or experience that has a formative effect on the ming, character or physical ability of an individual. %cation in this sense never ends, we truly learn from experience throughout our lives. Education and philosophy are inseparable because the ends of education are the ends of philosophy i.e., wisdom; and the means of philosophy is the means of education i.e. inquiry, which alone can lead to wisdom. Any sepatation of philosophy and education inhibits inquiry and frustrates wisdom. Education involves both the world of ideas and the world af practical activity; good ideas can lead to good practice and good practices reinforce good ideas. In order ro behave intelligently in the educational process, education needs direction and guidance which philosophy can provide. Hence philosophy is not only a professional tool for the educator but also a way of improving the quality of life because it helps us to gain a wider and deeper perspective on human existence and the world around us. The chief task of philosophy is to determine what constitutes good life whereas the main task of education is how to make life worth living. So philosophy and education are mutually re-constructive. They give and take from each other. Philosophy deals with the goals and essentials of good life while education provides the means to achieve those goals of good life. In this sense philosophy of education is a distinct but not a separate discipline. It takes its contents from education and its methods from philosophy. The process of philosophizing about education requires an understanding of education and its problems. Hence, we can say that philosophy of education is the application of philosophical ideas to educational problems. It is not only a way of looking at ideas but also of how to use them in the best way. Therefore, it can be said that philosophy is the theory while education is the practice. Practice unguided by theory is aimless, inconsistent and inefficient just as theory which is not ultimately translatable into practice is useless and confusing. In the words of Ross "philosophy is the contemplative side while education is the active side". Philosophy deals with the ends while education deals with the means and techniques of achieving those means. Educational philosophy depends on formal philosophy because most of the major problems of education are in fact philosophical problems. Like general philosophy, educational philosophy is speculative, prescriptive critical or analytic.
its
your answrr.
:I[
the
~ i ) c ! t !tw u
!~io~k
!!
I
Gzscr:hc in ahout ten sentences how the educational system G; a naiiou i~ inllucilced by its philosophical ideals.
3.
Understmcli~lg Eduution
The school to the naturalist is in no way different from the home; Frobel called the school as kindergarten or garden for children whereas Montessori calls it Case-de-Bambini or home for the children. According to Prestalozzi, there should be no difference between the school and home. Tagore also believes that education given in natural surroundings develops intimacy with the world. He puts more faith on the individual rather than institutions. Nature, to hlm, is the focus where the interest and aspiratiolis of human beings meet. It is therefore essential not only to know nature, but to live in nature. "School", according to him. is like a large home in which the children and teachers with their family live together, sharing a common life of high aspirations, planned living and noble effort in contact with nature on the one hand, and with the spirit of joy on the other. Naturalism also believes in the principle of individual differences which means that every child has a unique capacity to acquire knowledge and also the pace of learning is unique. So the school should have respect for personal diversity and it should cater to the varied and different interests of the child. Naturalists advocate such methods of teaching which offer the child an opportunity for selfeducation, self-expression, creative activity and integrated growth in an atmosphere of unrestrained freedom.
I
I
1I
t7)
:I[
1i 2.
nauiralis~icprrs(a;:t~~c.
i i !
i
negative education as one that tends to perfect the organs that are the instruments of knowledge before giving them this knowledge directly. The child should be left free to develop his body and senses. He attaches great importance to sense training as he believes senses are the gate ways of knowledge. For naturalists, genuine education is based on the laws of readiness and needs of the human being. According to them child's nature, interests, and needs provide the basis of curriculum.
Philosophid BasisofEdueation
II
/
I
?dote!:
31
$1 C'(~r:lpare J ~ O L I ~ znswer
'.:I
1?
a n s t ~ ~ ~ a i ~ r t iac &hc qrt p curiiculom of h e school comec; from ihc cbld'. blilit (10 you uriderstond hy U u i staement'?
Understahdii~g Education
42
and fitness and thus make the pursuit of spiritual values possible. Spiritual pursuits imply the intellectual, aesthetic, moral and religious studies. Hence such subjects as history, geography, language, fine arts, morality, ethics, religion, science, mathematics and others should be included in the curriculum. Sri Aurobindo also in his Integral Philosophy of Education gives importance to moral, religious and physical education. By moral education he means the training of moral faculty, i.e. the ability to distinguish between what is right and what is wrong. Another important thing in moral education is the value of suggestion. The suggestion by the teacher has to be exercised by personal example, daily talks and svadhyaya i.e. reading good books. Narration of the deeds of great men in interesting style always carries much impression upon the young minds. In addition Aurobindo advocates that religious education should also be imparted not only through religious books or religious sermons but by the practice of religious life and spiritual self-training. Theoretical teaching of religion must be complemented with actual practice. Along with moral and religious education he has given importance to physical education, With regard to physical education he says, "If our seeking is for a total perfection of the being, the physical part of it cannot be left aside; for the body is the material basis. the body is the instrument which we have to use". Another Indian idealist Dr. Radhakrishnan, wants to make moral education a compulsory part of education at primary and secondary levels. Without it, he considers,' the educational institutions cannot fulfill their objectives of educating the youth of the country. According to him the greatness of a country cannot be measured by its physical civilization but by its moral and spiritual advancement. He also supports religious education. But religious education for him is not the instruction of a particular religion. It is a means for developing spiritual intuition because "the aim of religion is spiritual and not merely a change in metaphysical ideas". Further he suggested inclusion of physical education in the curriculum. In his words, "The body is the means of the expression of the human soul, physical education therefore must be properly given".
J. Donald Butler has identified some of the desired qualities of the good teacher. According
to him the teacher should:
Understanding Education
3. be a kind of person who commands the respect of the pupil by virtue of what he himself is
4.
As for the discipline, Gentile finds sheer discipline which is separated from the constructive teaching process as undesirable. According to him, discipline should be considered as an end product instead of an input and at the same time is a part of the teaching process and should b&in the personality of the teacher. One should achieve discipline through freedom not conversely. But today education has by-passed this concept by beginning with discipline and moving toward freedom. Idealists do not favour rigid discipline. In fact, their theory of discipline is based on their concept of freedom. Freedom does not mean waywardness, it implies responsibility. It should be regulated, guided and restrained freedom. Gandhiji also believes that real freedom comes through self-discipline-discipline that arises spontaneously from the inner spring of life rather than that which is imposed from without. His concept of discipline is a synthesis of both fieedom and external control. Idealists believe that human behaviour should have internal control rather than external control. For them authority begins by being external, but should end in becoming internal through habit formation and self-control.
r-.
i
. .--.,
s
I I
Space
,
1s given
,L~SWC~
;it. tJi;> cllii
1.1
,.
:,I'
1i:kn;i i l : \ i
Unclentanding Education
of the children. This does not mean letting children do anything they want. Interests and needs do not necessarily mean the dictates of whim. Dewey opines that all learning should be particular and contextual to a given time, place and circumstances. For example, history is traditionally taught to the student without considering its relevance to the everyday experience. So what is the use of studying history? Whatever may be the subject matter it should liberate and enrich personal life by furnishing context, background and outlook. Dewey in his book "Democracy and Education" recommended three levels of curricular organization: (1) making and doing; (2) history and geography; and (3) organized sciences. At the first curricular level, makiqg and doing, should engage students in activities and projects based on their experiences.'This idea is similar to that of Mahatma Gandhi who is considered as an idealist, a naturalist as well a$a pragmatist. He believes in the principle of learning by doing. There is lot of similarity between the craft-centred activities adovated by him add the project method of Dewey. Though Ravindra Nath Tagore is a naturalist, his views regarding curriculum are pragmatic in nature. To him curriculum is not a number of subjects to be learnt but relevant activities to be undertaken. In the second level curriculum, History and Geography, which Dewey regards as two great educational resources, help in enlarging the scope and significance of the child's temporal and spatial experience from the immediate home and school environments to that of the larger community and the world. Dewey's third stage of curriculum is that of the organized subjects, the various sciences, consisting of bodies of tested knowledge. Pragmatists believe in a broad and diversified curriculum. They endorse a more general education as opposed to narrow specialization. Pragrqatic curriculum is composed of both process and content. When we consider what a child learns as fixed and ready made, attention is directed too much upon outcome and too little upon process. Pragmatists focus some attention on process, because ends should not be divorced from means. So they assert that the means. used to accomplish something dictate what the actual ends and outcomes really are.
46
of individual differences and treat them accordingly. A pragmatic teacher wants his pupils to think and act for themselves, to do rather than to know and to originate rather than repeat. The pragmatic teacher is a pragmatist first and a teacher afterwards.
Notcar;: a)
h)
Sp:ice is givt:n below for your answer. Compare your answer with the those given at tht: end of the block.
5.
Reality lies in the process, it is still in making, not ready -made. The outlook of a pragmatist is social.
Understanding Education
Pragmatist believes in the existence of God to an extent. Ultimate reality is utility. Universe has been created by man. According to them values are changeable and are created by men. It is relative to time, place and circumstance.
Believe in the existence of God. Ultimate reality is spiritual. Universe has been created by God. Eternal spiritual values never change. Truth, goodness and beauty are eternal values. Spiritual laws are universal.
Spirituality is the base. Emphasis is on the spiritual and moral environment. The aim of education according to idealism is self-realisation. It aims at spiritual development.
1. The aim of education according to naturalism is self-expression. 2. It emphasizes the autonomous development of the individuality.
3. Adjustment to environment. Curriculum
The aim of education according to pragmatism is dynamic in nature. It aims at social efficiency.
Presentation and enrichment of cultural environment. Emphasis is on ethics and study of humanities. Based on moral, spiritual and intellectual values.
2. Curriculum is based on need, ability, aptitude, and on the nature of the child.
Discipline
Based on the principle of utility, integration and child's natural interests and experience.
Teacher occupies an important place in education. Teacher puts the pupil in the position of a discover or experimentar.
Teacher's position is very high. They have high expectations of the teacher. Teacher guides, directs, suggests and controls the situation.
3. How important is the study of philosophy of education for a teacher? How does it help to solve the day-to-day problems that the teacher faces in the classroom?
4.
5.
Collect material on the life of eminent philosophers, and analyse how their ideas and thoughts have been affected by their circumstances. How much is experience important for the educand and the educator? Is experience the basis of all knowledge and learning?
6. As a teacher, what do you feel would be the optimum philosophical combination in a modern teacher-learning situation?