Against Peter Gardner, this article re-asserts a conception of open-mindedness as not requiring either the indecision or neutrality of persons concerning their beliefs, but rather a willingness on their part to form or revise beliefs in the light of evidence and argument. This conception, it will be argued, yields an educational ideal which is both important and coherent. It not only avoids the difficulties which Gardner sees as inherent in the promotion of open-mindedness in children, but also avoids some of (...) the dangers implicit in his own view. (shrink)

The recommendation that we encourage children to be open-minded has been gathering strength. Yet given the everyday meaning of ‘being open-minded about something’, we may decide to reject this recommendation because it proscribes teaching and learning. There again, recent philosophical accounts of open-mindedness seem to oppose everyday meaning and lead to the absurd conclusion that the Pope is open-minded about the existence of God. This paper suggests two ways of looking at these problems, the second of which reconciles ordinary usage (...) with open-mindedness as a desirable educational objective. (shrink)

In suppport of the idea that education should encourage open-mindedness, Hare and McLaughlin have argued that being open-minded about an issue, in a philosophically well-supported sense of ‘open-mindedness’, need not prevent one from holding a firm belief on that issue. In this paper I examine the lack of cohesion in this sense of ‘open-mindedness’, explain why I continue to be anxious about the tensions between open-mindedness and holding firm beliefs and present three further reasons for having reservations about Hare and (...) McLaughlin's proposals. (shrink)