What do you think?
Rate this book
Introduction to the philosophy of Education
Published in the year 1988, An Introduction to Philosophy of Education is a valuable contribution to the field of Education.
- GenresEducationPhilosophy
240 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1975
7 people are currently reading
62 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews
April 28, 2020
This book is certainly interesting. But you have to read through a lot of bad logic before the book becomes useful.
I found chapters 1-9 to be full of poor logic, ironic since it is a philosophy book. The authors are committed to rationalism, even when they fail to provide a real reason.
"Second, despite what was said above about the difficulty of knowing in some cases what would count as relevant reasons for establishing or rejecting certain premises, there are surely some premises or some worldviews that we simply cannot accept as rational. It is of course quite true that in saying that it is irrational to base one's behavior on a premise such as 'God expects us to shoot when pigeons fly by', or'The Aryan race is entitled to preferential treatment', one is appealing to others to adopt one's view of the sorts of thing that do not seem to be supported by anything that could count as good reasons. It is not clear how one could prove that it is not true that God expects us to shoot people when pigeons fly by. But we may still argue that it seems to us an irrational belief, since we cannot see anything remotely resembling a good reason for believing it."
Essentially, it is irrational because I see it as being irrational. The authors use poor logic here. They also use seemingly willfully poor logic to bash Catholics on their examples of indoctrination and then make the strange claim that "The very nature of scientific activity precludes the possibility of indoctrination in science."
"But we have to proceed by reasoning, trusting that students will come to see such things for themselves, and not by coercion or distortion. So it is not the natural desire to uphold and share our values that is at issue: it is determining to impose those values and beliefs so that they stick, come what may, that is reprehensible."
Based on the example above, the authors would say that it is reprehensible to impose the belief that rape, torture, and murder are always wrong on children. If you impose it, you indoctrinate them. Now, I doubt the authors would agree with my characterization of this argument, but their logic leaves them vulnerable on this point. I expected more from a philosophy book.
Than said, chapters 10-13 are actually quite excellent.
I found chapters 1-9 to be full of poor logic, ironic since it is a philosophy book. The authors are committed to rationalism, even when they fail to provide a real reason.
"Second, despite what was said above about the difficulty of knowing in some cases what would count as relevant reasons for establishing or rejecting certain premises, there are surely some premises or some worldviews that we simply cannot accept as rational. It is of course quite true that in saying that it is irrational to base one's behavior on a premise such as 'God expects us to shoot when pigeons fly by', or'The Aryan race is entitled to preferential treatment', one is appealing to others to adopt one's view of the sorts of thing that do not seem to be supported by anything that could count as good reasons. It is not clear how one could prove that it is not true that God expects us to shoot people when pigeons fly by. But we may still argue that it seems to us an irrational belief, since we cannot see anything remotely resembling a good reason for believing it."
Essentially, it is irrational because I see it as being irrational. The authors use poor logic here. They also use seemingly willfully poor logic to bash Catholics on their examples of indoctrination and then make the strange claim that "The very nature of scientific activity precludes the possibility of indoctrination in science."
"But we have to proceed by reasoning, trusting that students will come to see such things for themselves, and not by coercion or distortion. So it is not the natural desire to uphold and share our values that is at issue: it is determining to impose those values and beliefs so that they stick, come what may, that is reprehensible."
Based on the example above, the authors would say that it is reprehensible to impose the belief that rape, torture, and murder are always wrong on children. If you impose it, you indoctrinate them. Now, I doubt the authors would agree with my characterization of this argument, but their logic leaves them vulnerable on this point. I expected more from a philosophy book.
Than said, chapters 10-13 are actually quite excellent.
June 3, 2015
Great book, easy to read. An analytical work on various topics in education such as creativity, rationality, etc. The last few pages has a 'further reading' list with more books to look into on the various chapters in the book.
Read
August 26, 2016The overall message of the book really stuck to my mind and it goes something like: if you do not like pluralism and insist on the dichotomous static view of philosophy, then you are going against life itself, since life is all about dynamic change and diversity.
April 11, 2014
so far it the type of book that i try to read about education and it's ok for now
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews