In Emile Rousseau emphasises four pedagogical principles which have become associated with child-centred education. Rousseau’s conception of education, however, is utilitarian. This combination of principles and overall conception anticipates one particular strand of policy thinking today: the ‘new vocationalism’. As a postscript, this paper asks why little work in the history of philosophy of education has been done, and identifies the early arguments of R. S. Peters as responsible for this failure.

A reply to David Hamlyn's critique of current philosophy of education.

ABSTRACT How are educational theory and practice to respond to the problem of the fragmentation of value, characteristic of modernity? This paper criticises Susan Mendus' recent examination of three different arguments for revaluing past traditions. While endorsing her rejection of proposals to return to the past, the paper challenges the converse proposal that education should rely on the development of critical understanding. Such a proposal attends to only one of two features of modern consciousness which are of central relevance to (...) education. The paper further argues that liberal education's theoretical framework itself impedes a more adequate response to this and to related questions of individual and social development. (shrink)

The intention of this paper is to suggest that the educational philosophy of Allan Bloom merits renewed consideration, and that such consideration reveals major failings in contemporary educational philosophy. A prerequisite of such consideration is an examination of the ways in which his ideas have been misinterpreted. In particular, Bloom is neither a political conservative nor an educational traditionalist, nor an advocate of the Great Books programme. Bloom's recovery of the Socratic or classical political rationalist approach to education both reveals (...) enormous shortcomings in the dominant conceptions of the nature of philosophy of education, and revitalises an alternative conception already widely accepted among classicists and political philosophers. (shrink)

In Emile Rousseau emphasises four pedagogical principles which have become associated with child-centred education. Rousseau's conception of education, however, is utilitarian. This combination of principles and overall conception anticipates one particular strand of policy thinking today: the ‘new vocationalism’. As a postscript, this paper asks why little work in the history of philosophy of education has been done, and identifies the early arguments of R. S. Peters as responsible for this failure.

John White; The Medical Condition of Philosophy of Education, Journal of Philosophy of Education, Volume 21, Issue 2, 30 May 2006, Pages 155–162, https://doi.or.

Richard Smith; Editorial, Journal of Philosophy of Education, Volume 29, Issue 3, 30 May 2006, Pages 293, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9752.1995.tb00361.x.

The intention of this paper is to suggest that the educational philosophy of Allan Bloom merits renewed consideration, and that such consideration reveals major failings in contemporary educational philosophy. A prerequisite of such consideration is an examination of the ways in which his ideas have been misinterpreted. In particular, Bloom is neither a political conservative nor an educational traditionalist, nor an advocate of the Great Books programme. Bloom's recovery of the Socratic or classical political rationalist approach to education both reveals (...) enormous shortcomings in the dominant conceptions of the nature of philosophy of education, and revitalises an alternative conception already widely accepted among classicists and political philosophers. (shrink)

How are educational theory and practice to respond to the problem of the fragmentation of value, characteristic of modernity? This paper criticises Susan Mendus’ recent examination of three different arguments for revaluing past traditions. While endorsing her rejection of proposals to return to the past, the paper challenges the converse proposal that education should rely on the development of critical understanding. Such a proposal attends to only one of two features of modern consciousness which are of central relevance to education. (...) The paper further argues that liberal education’s theoretical framework itself impedes a more adequate response to this and to related questions of individual and social development. (shrink)