Philosophy of Education

Philosophy of Education

GENERAL SUMMARY

• Functions of Philosophy

  Philosophers systematize their body of knowledge through various methods including: speculation, critical questions, logical reasoning or analysis and reflective methods.

  Caught in wonder, human beings begin to speculate. This is done through contemplating about what they see, hear, smell, touch and taste. This leads to the raising of several simple and complex questions (to be explained in following sections).

  Secondly, through analysis, philosophers are able to separate general things into specifics. This is done by scrutinizing what is said. Each statement is separated and diagnosed as regards its essence. As such, analysis as it will be elaborated on functions later, it is at the heart of philosophy.

  The third method is critical thinking. By critical it doesn’t imply being serious or dangerous as people tend to misinterpret. Rather, it means raising critical questions to find out the hidden agenda. Through critical thinking issues which need answers are raised. It involves evaluating issues to weigh their strengths and weaknesses and proposing a way forward. While as regards criticism, philosophers never take claims for granted. Every noted claim is subjected to rigorous analysis as to discover misnomer.

  The fourth method is reflective method which is done by way of introspection pondering on issues to discover gaps. In Philosophy of Teaching you will learn reflective method in details. These methods warrant philosophy to be taken as a social scientific discipline.

  Note, some writers do not distinguish methods from functions of philosophy, because they seem to be a replica. This leads us to consider its functions in detail.

  Summary

  This lecture introduced you to the “quidity” (essence) of philosophy, the methods through which philosophy operates its subject matter as a way to understand education and teaching. Note that one of the core functions of philosophy include: speculative, analytical, normative or prescriptive, descriptive or clarity of ambiguities in the concepts used in various fields of knowledge in particular education. Consequently, in this unit you should concentrate on the clarity of terms and general questions that are generally applied in dealing with philosophy of education, the task that follows in subsequent lectures.

  2

  Foundations of Education: 

  Introduction

  Dear student welcome to Lecture Two where you will find different questions that have been raised since inception of a human being.

  Lecture Two is about various types of questions ranging from simple to complex ones. In simple way they are categorized into common sense questions. However, technically they are sometimes categorized in a complex way as descriptive, prescriptive, analytical, and critical questions along the functions of philosophy you have just finished to read in lecture one across various fields of human beings. Now follow up the ends expected of you from this lecture.

  Objectives
  By the end of this lecture, you should be able to:
  i. Identify philosophical foundations upon which philosophy is founded;
  ii. Distinguish between fundamental questions from mere questions;
  iii. Elaborate in details the philosophical foundations of philosophy;
  iv. Explain how wonder may lead people to inquiry.

  This lecture takes you through the foundations of philosophy that begins with wonder, followed by a series of questions, leading to methods. Some questions are simple and some are technical. As it was explained in lecture one, philosophy is laid on four fundamental questions namely: What is reality? What is knowledge? What is value; and what is truth of argument?

  The mother of philosophy emanates from human being’s wonder about reality. The human being seems to have started speculation about the world and phenomena surrounding him/her.

  Caught in wonder s/he begins to ask general questions in need of general answers like: Where? When? Who? with whom?

  Commonly understood, the question where reflects the place, When reflects time, who reflects a human/person and the question with who, reflects relations.

  These are regarded as simple questions simply because of their general nature of being easily understood and answered whereby, all normal people naturally provide answers that people take for granted.  For instance no one thinks much when s/he is asked, who are you? Where do you come from? But you might wonder when somebody asks you, why do you think you come from a place where you were born?

  Why are you called by your name? What does John, Jabir, Mary and Fatuma mean? Are people their names or more than their names? Suppose one has no name will s/he survive and be happy? One who appears to disturb people with such questions will be nick named insane or mad person. This is because being fundamental those questions need technical answers.

  However, when things get tougher, human beings begin to go deeper to understand issues taken for granted. Complicated questions like: What? How? Why? These are questions that philosophy wrestles with, and they are asked at different levels of understanding.

  Technically understood, the question what relates to speculation about wanting to know the nature of things. Nature of things emanates from Latin word “quidity” which refers to “essence” of things.

  Example, it is not easy to answer the question what is the nature of man? On the other hand, the question “how”, requires the manner, methods on how to go about things. Above all, the question “why”, requires critical answers rather than simple responses as it requires  rationales on why things are done in the manner which they are done.

  As it will be elaborated in the next lecture, the tougher questions of “what”, “how”, and “why” lead to the fundamental questions about four issues: what is reality? What is knowledge? What are values? And what is truth of arguments?

  The first fundamental question upon which philosophy is founded is, “What is reality?” Before human beings begin to think critically, they are always in mythological world. In this world, people believe what they hear without questioning, they are in fantasy, hopes, desires, and day dreams.

  No much reasoning on what some body believes. What is needed is faith that is all. Once people have believed a thing it becomes dangerous to use force otherwise calamity may occur. Remember not longer time ago people were made to believe that the “sun goes around the earth…” Science blasted such a belief as unfounded, hence a myth.

  From mythology human beings develop an inquiry nature into things by asking serious questions especially, when attempts lead into failures. You might have asked yourself, what is the reason of my failures in a certain course like Philosophy, despite studying it very hard for so long! As such, question “what” is about the fundamental matter in need of the answers about nature, and features of things in the phenomenon.

  This is because its answers are abstract in nature. It is for this purpose this type of question is categorized as metaphysical in ontological order to be elaborated in lecture three.

  The ontological order relates to issues of subjectivism and objectivism perspectives about reality. It asks issues whether reality is one or multi. Whence reality? Is reality concrete, objective or lucid? Such questions are in abstract concepts leading to abstract answers.

  The second fundamental question upon which philosophy is built is: “What is knowledge?“ Knowledge is all about information which normally is in form of contents. Formal philosophical content is wide indeed. It consists of information provided by philosophers from time immemorial until today. For this purpose we have traditional history contents of philosophy from Greek, Arabian, Asian and ancient African fore father sages. Unfortunately that of African sages is unwritten philosophy but it is in form of oral tradition reflected in poems and wise sayings.

  From European written philosophy we find ancient Greek philosopher’s contents about so tough issues of life like knowledge itself, psychology, human soul, nature of reality, human nature, and criticism.

  Ancient written contributors about such issues are traced from 450 B.C to the 15th century (A.D.) include: Thales, Anaximander, Anaximenes, Heraclitus, Aristotle and Plato. Others include Confucius from Asia.

  The theory of knowledge contents about “Allegory of the Cave” of Plato is still popular until today. We also have modern contents of philosophy from the 16th century to the 20th century. In this period we have contributors of philosophical knowledge including philosophers like St.

  Augustine, Thomas Aquinas, John Locke, Rene Descartes, Jean Jacques Rousseau; Emmanuel Kant, August Comte and the rest. Likewise, we have contemporary philosophical contents beginning from the late 20th century towards the 21st century.

  The third fundamental question upon which philosophy is found is: “what is value?” . Philosophers have wrestled with this question tirelessly and produced the body of knowledge ranging from arts of all types, cultures, traditions, totems, customs and morals.

  Again, the question about values be they traditional or modern leads to the branch of axiology as will be elaborated in lecture three .

  The fourth fundamental question upon which philosophy is found is: “what is valid/true arguments?”. Philosophers too, wondered about the nature of argument that sometimes are consistent but at times turns to inconsistent.

  Either, people tell the truth or commit fallacies. The question about the nature of argument leads to logic, as it will be elaborated in lecture four. Suffice to say that philosophy is not without a base, it is founded on its foundations as elaborated above.

  Summary
  Lecture two has dealt with foundations of philosophy in which wonder was identified as the mother of inquiry, since it leads people to raise a series of questions. It was shown clearly that when normal human beings are faced with wonder, they become amazed raising serious varying questions. Some questions like who, where… are very general as such one needs little effort to answer them.

  Such questions are not philosophical. However, questions “what”, “how” and “why”, call for attention and they need one to labour when answering them; because of their technical nature in need of specific answers.

  Likewise, such questions are said to lead to fundamental questions about issues of reality, knowledge, values and the truth. Note that such questions are perennial, meaning that their answers are endless. The answers of those questions in all centuries seem to be tentative in need of improvement as time goes on.

  Dear student meet with Lecture five which deals with some philosophical Foundations of Education. In this lecture four branches of philosophy will be pre-visited before tackling it in its separate lecture.

  Systems of thought including: idealism, realisim, pragmatism and existentialism will be discussed. Some philosophers of all ages in Europe and Africa will also be discussed briefly. The purpose of this lecture is to bring different resources to bear in developing interpretative, normative and critical perspectives on education both inside and outside the schools of thought.

  Objectives
  By the end of this lecture you should be able to
  • Define idealism, realism, pragmatism, existentialism;
  • Identify and explain the differences between idealism; realism, pragmatism, existentialism;
  • Compare similarities between idealism and realism;
  • Compare and contrast pragmatism from existentialism;
  • Synthesize some European and African philosophers’ views across historical epochs of ancient, modern, and contemporary.

  Philosophical schools of thought(philosophies)
  Idealism, is the group of metaphysical philosophies that assert that reality as humans can know it, is fundamentally mental, mentally constructed, or otherwise immaterial. Epistemologically, idealism manifests as a skepticism about the possibility of knowing any mind-independent thing.

  From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, Idealism is the philosophy that believes the ultimate nature of reality is ideal, or based upon ideas, values, or essences and that the external, or real world cannot be separated from consciousness, perception, mind, intellect and reason in the sense of science. Idealism is a philosophical approach that has  its central tenet that ideas are the only true reality, the only thing worth knowing.
  Plato, father of Idealism, espoused this view about 400 years BC, in his famous book, The Republic. He believed that there are two worlds, the first is the spiritual or mental world, which is eternal, permanent, orderly, regular, and universal.

  And the second, the world of appearance, the world experienced through sight, touch, smell, taste, and sound, that is changing, imperfect, and disorderly. This division is often referred to as the duality of mind and body.

  In idealism, the aim of education is to discover and develop each individual’s abilities and full moral excellence in order to better serve society and the curricular emphasis is subject matter of mind: literature, history, philosophy, and religion.

  Teaching methods focus on handling ideas through lecture, discussion, and Socratic dialogue (a method of teaching that uses questioning to help students discover and clarify knowledge), Introspection, intuition, insight, and whole-part logic are used to bring to consciousness the forms or concepts which are latent in the mind. Character is developed through imitating examples and heroes.

  The idealists contend, “I think, therefore I am” thus, Idealism then derived from idea and covers any philosophy which maintains that the, fundamental reality, the basic and essential thing-in-itself is mind or spirit, not matter

  In idealism, the only way you can say what any material thing is, the only way you can define a material thing, is to talk in terms of ideas or concepts e.g.  “A tree is ………,” The dots standing for ideas which describe attributes common to all trees. Some prominent philosophers who postulated this school of philosophical thought are, Plato, George Berkeley, Immanuel Kant and George Hegel.

  Education claims of idealism;

  •Educational philosophy of idealist is ideal or idea centered rather than either subject centered because the ideal or idea is the foundation of all things.

  •this knowledge is directed toward ‘self-hood’, ‘self-consciousness’, and ‘self-direction’ and is centered on the growth of rational mental processes of the individual.

  •One of the major tenets of idealism is that the individual who is created in God’s image has free will, thus making learning possible.

  •Idealists maintain that as a spiritual being, the child exercises free will and is therefore responsible for his actions.

  • For this reason the child must not be treated as an object of society but be treated with the respect and dignity appropriate for a responsible personality.

  •To idealist education is the process of “leading out” rather than of “leading in”.

  •The child is supposed to have latent possibilities or potentialities which the educational process should help to bring out.

  •The child should not be considered like an empty receptacle into which knowledge must be poured.

  Realism, believes that reality exists independent of the human mind and the ultimate reality is the world of physical objects. The focus is on the body/objects where, truth is objective-what can be observed.

  Realism, also known as materialism, is the direct opposite of idealism. It argues that the universe is not an illusion but actually exists in concrete form, independent of being known.

   Aristotle believed that to understand an object, its ultimate form had to be understood, which does not change. For example, a rose exists whether or not a person is aware of it and shares properties with all other roses and flowers (its form).

  Realism emphasizes on subject matter of the physical world, particularly science and mathematics where the teacher organizes and presents content systematically within a discipline.

  Teaching methods focus on mastery of facts and basic skills through demonstration and recitation. Students must also demonstrate the ability to think critically and scientifically, using observation and experimentation.

  Curriculum should be scientifically approached, standardized, and distinct-discipline based. Character is developed through training in the rules of conduct

  Realists maintain that something is real when it is experienced thus they say “seeing is believing”. Some of the well-known philosophers who contributed immensely to the development of these theories of realism are: Aristotle (383 – 322 BC), St Thomas Aquinas (1225 – 1274 AD), John Locke ( 1690-1781)

  Claims of realism on education:

  • Education should enable the child to be intellectually well balanced in harmony with his physical and social environment.
  • Education should make provision for the child’s interests and curiosity i.e. education should be child-centered.

  • Education should be geared towards assisting the child in discovering reality.
  • The role of the teacher in the training of the child is very crucial.
  • The teacher determines what the child should learn, the teacher himself must be knowledgeable(must have specific knowledge about a subject) and be a role model.

  • Curriculum is by disciplines or subjects which consist of clusters of related concepts.

  Pragmatism, it is also known as experientialism that deals with the question of change as a process that affects essence of things and evaluates theories or beliefs in terms of the success of their practical application. A pragmatist is someone who is practical and focused on reaching a goal.

  Pragmatism asserts that, reality is constantly changing and that we learn best through applying our experiences and thoughts to problems, as they arise. The universe is dynamic and evolving, a “becoming” view of the world. And that, there is no absolute and unchanging truth, but rather, truth is what works.

  The prominent philosophers of pragmatism were, Charles Sanders Peirce (1839-1914) believed that thought must produce action, rather than linger in the mind and lead to indecisiveness. And John Dewey (1859-1952) believed that learners must adapt to each other and to their environment.

  Pragmatism derived from Greek word pragma, meaning “work” this implies that, pragmatism encourages processes that allow individuals to do those things that lead to desired end, humans and their environment interact and that both are equally responsible for that which is real.

  Schools should emphasize the subject matter of social experience where, all learning is dependent on the context of place, time, and circumstance. Different cultural and ethnic groups learn to work cooperatively and contribute to a democratic society, the ultimate purpose being the creation of a new social order.

  Character development is based on making group decisions in light of consequences.

  Teaching methods focus on hands-on problem solving, experimenting, and projects, often having students work in groups. Curriculum should bring the disciplines together to focus on solving problems in an interdisciplinary way and learners should apply their knowledge to real situations through experimental inquiry.

  This will help to prepares students for citizenship, daily living, and future careers.

  Pragmatism has its central focus on the practical and scientific utility of knowledge and as a theory holds that knowledge is only meaningful if our senses can experience it. In other words, this theory believes in practical ideas and experimentation.

  What is real today may not be real tomorrow because reality cannot be divorced from experience anymore than matter may be separated from mind. Problem-solving is the primary methodology of the pragmatist.

  Pragmatism claims on education;

  • Education should serve as an end and a means i.e. should improve man and serve as a means of doing things.
  • should serve as a tool for mobility and instrument for practical and successful living.

  • Education is life, hence it should be sort for/ and provided at all times adequately.
  • Teachers should always develop relevant scientific and practical approach/ methodology in imparting knowledge in their students.

  • Educational system should constantly reflect the rapid changes in the world of knowledge.

  • Education, which should be child-centred, should be systematically provided in such a way that it constantly challenges the intellectual ability of the learner through experiments.
  • Education should provide democratic setting to accommodate the individual differences in human nature.
  • The pragmatists believe that education is part of life, not a preparation for it.

  • Schools should use activity, exploration, and problem-solving in real situations, not just formal academic subjects, to help students learn how to interact with their biological and social environments.

  Existentialism was founded by a Danish philosopher by the name of Soren Kierkeegard (1813-1855) Existentialism believes that existence comes before essence. Another concept of existentialism is that the universe has no purpose.

  The nature of reality for Existentialists is subjective, and lies within the individual that is to say, the physical world has no inherent meaning outside of human existence. it is due to this fact existentialists argue that, existence comes before any definition of what we are.

  According to Jean-Paul-Sarte (1905-1980) “Existence precedes essence”. This means that, things exist before we define or name them. Thus, knowledge, like all things, exists but becomes real only when humans understand it.

  Related to education, the subject matter of existentialist classrooms should be a matter of personal choice. Teachers view the individual as an entity within a social context in which the learner must confront others’ views to clarify his or her own. Character development emphasizes individual responsibility for decisions.

  Real answers come from within the individual, not from outside authority Curriculum of Existentialism, for them, the end justifies the means and favours the humanity-based subjects

  Claims of existentialism on education;

  Education should provide for an individual to be able to be responsible for himself and the greater society.

  Education should be able to equip the individual to be able to adapt to the natural phenomena of life.

  Education should create in the individual an awareness, which stimulates him to explore the nature of his being.

  Education should develop in the child, the spirit of uniqueness.

   Education should develop in the child, moral obligations which create awareness for him to recognize the vanity and nothingness of being.

  It suggests students should be active and encouraged to make their own educational choices.

  Great African educational philosophers

   one should bear in mind that it is not Europe alone that had philosophers but also Africa. Philosophers may be considered into three main epochs as per European: traditional or ancient period. So, Socrates (469-399);, and Plato(427-347); and Aristotle(384-322)BC/AH, they fall in traditional period. While Socrates and Plato influence philosophy on their position of being idealists; Aristotle belongs to realism philosophy of the ancient epoch.

  From 1500 A.D Europe registers modern epoch philosophers such as: John Locke (1632-1704); Froebel(1782-1852); Comte, even Jean Jaques Rosseau (1712-1778); Contemporary philosophers include: Dewey(1803-1952); Montessori(1870-1944); Freirere(1900s-1990s); all these have influenced education in Europe.

  European, African and Asia Philosophers
  Sages were also available in Asia and Africa, while Confucius (551-478BC); Guru (1469-1539); Mahatma Gandhi (1869-1948 AD.) originate in Asia, they have influenced their countries education systems. Epochs of Europe are irrelevant in Africa and Asia.

  Africa traces her sages right from late 1950s. This time witnessed many African Philosophers who have spent their entire life in propagating for the liberating education of the African continent. They include Aggrey and Julius Nyerere seem to represent the diverse ideas of other African educationists.

  Dr. Aggrey put more emphasis o health matters and agriculture. For him rural health is of paramount importance for the people of Africa.

  Nyerere took “Ujamaa (African Socialism)” as the basis of liberation and transformation in almost all spheres of human development and growth. It is for this reason that he introduced “Education for Self Reliance ” philosophy of education in Tanzania.

  Summary
  In this lecture we have dealt with the philosophies that contribute to education, their prominent philosophers who postulated them i.e idealism, realism, pragmatism and existentialism. Also, the lecture has presented to you educational philosophers from Europe, Asia and Africa who contributed much to the foundation of philosophy as well as philosophy of education as independent field of studies.

  •Existentialists are opposed to thinking about students as objects to be measured, tracked, or standardized.

  •Such educators want the educational experience to focus on creating opportunities for self-direction and self actualization.

  They start with the student, rather than on curriculum content

  Branches of Philosophy

  Introduction

  Lecture Five covered selected philosophies and philosophers of education in which “isms” was described as systems of thoughts, as a result of philosophers wrestling to answer fundamental questions. As such idealism, realism, pragmatism, existentialism were presented in epochs touching European, Africa and Asian philosophers. Lecture Six introduces you to the branches of philosophy namely metaphysics, epistemology, axiology and logic. It will be learnt however that generally, there is no universal agreement about which subjects are the main branches of philosophy. Nevertheless, this lecture will clarify distinctively the main branches of philosophy.

  Objectives
  By the end of this lecture you should be able to:

  • Elaborate the meaning of metaphysics;
  • List the four branches of philosophy;
  • Compare and contrast the contents of the said four branches of philosophy;
  • Define the term truth;
  • Discuss in main branches of philosophy;
  • Differentiate ethics from aesthetics.

  Metaphysics
  In moodle two you learnt that problems of human beings may be summed into four questions. One of them is what is Reality? This question belongs properly to the branch known as metaphysics. Having stemmed from Greek origins “meta” meant beings out of five senses or after sense experiences. “phusis” /ta-physica” meant of physical or concrete experiences. Implied then it means issues related to supernatural mystical world such as the world of ideas that perplexed Plato.

  It is metaphysics because; the answers about this problem are in the form of abstract responses. Hence, the form leads to categorise this branch as metaphysical. One will be counted metaphysical in case his/her proposals do not give solutions to cure or solve real problems.

  The documented problem of what is reality is traced in European history between (469-399 B.C) where pre-Socratic philosophers like Thales, Heraclitus, and Parmenides were tantalised by reality scenario, which was governed by change. Caught in wonder they asked, why things change?

  What is change? Is change real? What underlie change of things such that we see things coming into being and passing away? Why is it that thing of the same nature survive still despite death? Amid change there is permanence issue i.e. although there is change in things but still there is permanence in some things.

  These questions are normally taken for granted not many of us will take time to answer them. If the world revolves, who started movement in things? Do all things change? Another problem that faced ancient philosophers is Unity versus diversity.

  In changing things there is unity example an individual man/woman share one concept human being. Why should the concept remain when one dies? The act of shared ideas is unity; the act of many things to share one concept is diversity. All diverse things or beings share two “concepts exist and life” Do all existing things existing? Are all living things existing? What comes first existence or life? Does the falling tree in the forest make noise when there is no body to hear it? If yes, how certain can we be sure of your answer?

  Metaphysics remains at levels of desires and wishes. It is surprising to find that all ideas including goals of education are metaphysical. Just think. The answers provided by ancient philosophers till today, are not yet sufficient to address fundamental questions of philosophy. This leads to perennial problems of philosophy.

  Epistemology
  In moodle Two you learnt that the fundamental question of what is knowledge leads to the branch of epistemology. The word epistemology is made up of two Greek words: episteme and logos. Episteme stands for knowledge and logos stand for the study of something.

  Therefore, epistemology means the study of knowledge. Knowledge could be general, specialized or professional. The core issue of epistemology is information contents of fields. It concerns with raised problems such as:

  how does one know that what one knows is true? This constitutes the most fundamental question in epistemology. Is knowledge possible? How do we know what we know? How do we take what is “known” to extrapolate what is “unknown”? What is the nature of thought and thinking? What we know leads to the question “whence knowledge? In other words where does knowledge come from? Some writers argue that knowledge is in-born. Such a claimer was Plato.
  Pause and think with Plato, where do you think knowledge comes from?Axiology
  In Lecture Two you were told that the fundamental question of what are values leads into axiology. The term Axiology originates from two Greek words, “Axia” that used to mean peoples’ customs and “logos” which means the study of something. As such this means a science about values such as customs, cultures and so on. Axiology is a melange or merger of two sub-branches of ethics and aesthetics

  Ethics and Ought
  While ethics deals with subjective or relative judgment of what is right and wrong action, it also deal with rules that govern human conduct on whether the act is correct or incorrect, moral or immoral, good or evil. It is about moral values of human conduct or acts.

  Is there a difference between morally right and wrong actions (or values, or institutions)? If so, what is that difference? Which actions are right and which actions are wrong? Are values absolute, or relative? In general or particular terms, how should I live? How is right and wrong defined? Is there an ultimate “ought?” How a human being is ought to behave? These are the major question of ethics.

  Aesthetics
  Aesthetics deals with issues of human taste. This is why it is normally concluded that beautiful and ugly depend on principles of taste. Also the dictum goes that “…beauty is in the eye of the seer…” Axiology too, has some big questions, such as: Is there a normative value or objective that is superseding all others? Are values ‘in’ the world like tables and chairs and if not how should we understand their ontological status? What is beauty? How do beautiful things differ from the ugly ones?

  Beauty
  Aesthetics is one of the sub-branches of philosophy. It concerns with what human beings judge individually as beauty or ugly in terms of morphology, colour and other beauty characteristics. As such, all colours belong to this sub-branch. In South Sudan for example, the beauty of a girl/woman lies in her height.

  The taller she is the prettier she is. Among the Sukuma in Tanzania girls/women who are brown in complexion bring pride to their families and their dowry is higher than those who are dark in complexion. In view of beauty Emmanuel Kant believed that beauty is in the eyes of the beholder. However, does true beauty exist?

  Arts
  Aesthetics also deals with issues of various types of arts including fine art as drawings, painting and sculpture (work of art) and performing arts such as music, film, theatre and dance. Think of the Makonde carvings in Tanzania, the Maasai carvings in Kenya and Tanzania. Think of Mrisho Mpoto (a Tanzanian), Sam Magwana (a Congolese), the late Steven Kanumba (a Tanzanian) and so on. They educate the people about different aspects of arts.

  Logic
  Bluckburn (1994) describes logic as “the science of reasoning, proof, thinking or inference.” Logic will let you analyze an argument or a piece of reasoning, and work out whether it is likely to be correct or not. You don’t need to know logic to argue, of course; but if you know even a little, you’ll find it easier to spot invalid arguments.

  Logic is the study of the principles of valid demonstration and inference. The word logic derives from Greek (logike), “possessed of reason, intellectual, dialectical, argumentative”, from logos, “word, thought, idea, argument, account, reason, or principle”. As a formal science, logic investigates and classifies the structure of statements and arguments, both through the study of formal systems of inference and through the study of arguments in natural languages.

  The field of logic ranges from core topics such as the study of validity, fallacies and paradoxes, to specialized analysis of reasoning using probability and to arguments involving causality. Logic is also commonly used today in argumentation theory. This topic will be expanded in lecture four for clarity.

  Nature of Logic
  Form is central to logic. It complicates exposition that ‘formal’ in “formal logic” is commonly used in an ambiguous manner. Symbolic logic is just one of the kinds of formal logic, which is distinguished from another kind of formal logic, traditional Aristotelian syllogistic logic, which deals solely with categorical propositions.

  Formal logic is the study of inference with purely formal content, where that content is made explicit. (An inference possesses a purely formal content if it can be expressed as a particular application of a wholly abstract rule, that is, a rule that is not about any particular thing or property.

  The works of Aristotle contain the earliest known formal study of logic, which were incorporated in the late nineteenth century into modern formal logic. In many definitions of logic, logical inference and inference with purely formal content are the same. This does not render the notion of informal logic vacuous, because no formal logic captures the entire nuance of natural language (Mwanahewa, 1999).

  Informal logic is the study of natural language arguments. Informal logic is also called practical logic. It deals with things case by case. The study of fallacies is an especially important branch of informal logic. The dialogues of Plato are a good example of informal logic.

  Symbolic logic is the study of symbolic abstractions that capture the formal features of logical inference. Symbolic logic is often divided into two branches, propositional logic and predicate logic.

  Mathematical logic is an extension of symbolic logic into other areas, in particular to the study of model theory, proof theory, set theory, and recursion theory. “Formal logic” is often used as a synonym for symbolic logic, where informal logic is then understood to mean any logical investigation that does not involve symbolic abstraction; it is this sense of ‘formal’ that is parallel to the received usages coming from “formal languages” or “formal theory”. In the broader sense, however, formal logic is old, dating back more than two millennia, while symbolic logic is comparatively new, only about a century old.

  Summary
  In this lecture we have dealt with the main branches of philosophy; namely epistemology, metaphysics, axiology and logic. Epistemology is seen as the basis of knowledge. Metaphysics deals with matters which are more or less spiritual than material. It deals with beyond physics.

  Axiology is a combination of matters dealing with values and beauty. Logic leads to correct reasoning. Suffice to say that in lecture six an issue of branches was clarified in terms of Metaphysics, Epistemology, Axiology and Logic.

  Properties of Truthful Argument
  Among the valuable properties that logical systems can have are: consistency, soundness and completeness. A truthful argument should be characterised by consistency. This implies that none of the theorems of the system contradict one another. For instance if one says that the wall is black, then the wall should have all the indications that it is painted with black colour and not painted with dark blue.

  Likewise, the warranted argument should have a feature of soundness. This means that the system’s rules of proof will never allow a false inference from a true premise. This means that the system’s rules of proof will never allow a false inference from a true premise. Completeness implies that a consistent and sound argument should have no true sentences in the system that cannot, at least in principle, be proved in the system. It should substantiate beyond doubt in answering the raised issues such as: What is truth?

  Logical Analysis in Details
  Clearly you can build a valid argument from true premises, and arrive at a true conclusion. You can also build a valid argument from false premises, and arrive at a false conclusion. The tricky part is that you can start with false premises, proceed via valid inference, and reach a true conclusion. For example:
  Major Premise: All fish live in the ocean;
  Minor Premise: Sea otters are fish;
  Conclusion: Therefore, sea otters live in the ocean
  Critique: Though this conclusion sounds valid according to its grammatical structure however, it is not true to fact.

  Premises are only premises in the context of a particular argument; they might be conclusions in other arguments; for example, you should always state the premises of the argument explicitly; this is the principle of audiatur et altera pars. Failing to state your assumptions is often viewed as suspicious, and will likely reduce the acceptance of your argument. The premises of an argument are often introduced with words such as “assume,” “since,” “obviously,” and “because.” It’s a good idea to get your opponent to agree with the premises of your argument before proceeding any further.

  Rival Conceptions of Logic
  An argument may be valid if it has been built according to the rules of grammar of a certain language. However, being valid is not the warrant that it is also true.
  Deductive and Inductive Reasoning
  An argument may be valid if it has been built according to the rules of grammar of a certain language. However, being valid is not the warrant that it is true. Watch out your arguments from deductive logic. An inductive logic is the one whose particular conclusion, is obtained or passed after several observations. So, human beings sit under trees despite the danger of falling. But due to experience of not falling, they conclude that “rarely trees fall without stronger cause” A deductive argument always requires a number of core assumptions. These are called premises, and are the assumptions upon which the argument is built; or to look at it in another way, the reasons for accepting the argument.
  Inference
  Once the premises have been agreed upon, the argument proceeds via a step-by-step process called inference. In inference, you start with one or more propositions which have been accepted; you then use those propositions to arrive at a new proposition. If the inference is valid, that proposition should also be accepted. You can use the new proposition for inference later on.

  Standardizing Arguments
  Standardizing arguments indicate that our arguments are being based on facts. A standardized argument is neither vague nor ambiguous. When arguments are being standardized we get error free sentences. To standardise arguments requires you to acquaint with table of Truth and implications. Follow the link on http:/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/logic,
  Propositions
  A proposition is a statement which is either true or false. The proposition is the meaning of the statement, not the precise arrangement of words used to convey that meaning. For example, “There exists an even prime number greater than two” is a proposition. (A false one, in this case.) “An even prime number greater than two exists” is the same proposition, reworded. Unfortunately, it is very easy to unintentionally change the meaning of a statement by rephrasing it. It is generally safer to consider the wording of a proposition as significant. It is possible to use formal linguistics to analyze and rephrase a statement without changing its meaning; but how to do so is outside the scope of this document.

  Fallacies
  The valid inferences of logic follow from the structural features of judgments or thoughts. Arguments which contain fallacies are described as fallacious. They often appear valid and convincing; sometimes only close inspection reveals the logical flaw. A fallacy is a technical flaw which makes an argument unsound or invalid. In other words a fallacy is an error in reasoning.

  Summary
  Types of fallacies are many as per contexts, learn some here, one is Affirmation of the Consequent. This fallacy is an argument of the form “A implies B, B” is true, therefore A is true.” To understand why it is a fallacy, examine the truth table for implication given earlier.

  “Argumentum ad Baculum” (Appeal to force or fear) It is an appeal to Force happens when someone resorts to force (or the threat of force) to try and push others to accept a conclusion. This type of fallacy is often used by politicians, and can be summarized as “might make right.” The threat doesn’t have to come directly from the person arguing. “Argumentum ad Hominem”( Abusive: attacking the person) literally means “argument directed at a person.

  A second form of “argumentum ad hominem “is to try and persuade someone to accept a statement you make, by referring to that person’s particular circumstances. For example: “Therefore it is perfectly acceptable to kill animals for food. I hope you won’t argue otherwise, given that you’re quite happy to wear leather shoes.”

  This is known as circumstantial “argumentum ad hominem.” “Argumentum ad Ignorantiam” (Argument from ignorance) means “argument from ignorance.” The fallacy occurs when it is argued that something must be true, simply because it has not been proved false. “Argumentum ad Misericordiam” (Appeal to pity; Special pleading). This is the Appeal to pity, also known as Special Pleading.

  The fallacy is committed when someone appeals to pity for the sake of getting a conclusion accepted. For example: “Argumentum ad Novitatem; Argumentum ad Numerum.” This fallacy is closely related to the “argumentum ad populum.” It consists of asserting that the more people who support or believe a proposition, the more likely it is that that proposition is correct.

  For example: “All I’m saying is that thousands of people believe in pyramid power, so there must be something to it.”Argumentum ad Populum” (Appeal to the people or gallery). This is known as Appealing to the Gallery, or Appealing to the People. You commit this fallacy if you attempt to win acceptance of an assertion by appealing to a large group of people.

  This form of fallacy is often characterized by emotive language. For example:
  How to Avoid Making Fallacies
  It should be borne in mind that there are ways by which fallacies could be avoided. Here below are some of the ways that could help you do away with fallacies.
  • Knowledge of fallacies: It is advisable to learn on how to identify fallacies in our day-to-day life. Fallacies bring misunderstanding between people and only if we discover them we could abandon them.
  • Isolate different fallacies: fallacies should be shunned. It is not good at all to cultivate fallacies in your writings or sayings.
  • Edit your work: No matter shorter time you have, always re-read your work at least twice before any submission of your article, examination, proposal, or dissertation; generally any typed or hand written piece of work; friendly or official.
  • Careful use of language: In order to avoid fallacies, a careful use of language must be cultivated. Do not mix up words: e.g. “paste” for “pest” and the like.
  • Use definitions: Definitions help in alleviating problems associated with fallacies. If and whenever possible use a dictionary in order to get the clear meaning of words.
  • Logical connections: Logical connections are important in all our arguments. Sometimes people are jailed simply because they fail to use logic in their explanations. Do not repeat yourself over and over again. Tautology is harmful to your thinking.
  • Avoid fatigue: When someone is tired it is very easy to commit unnecessary errors in telling things. Fatigue makes one to day dream.SUMMARY
  In this lecture, the concept of logic was discussed in order to enable you to build skills which will help you to make correct and relevant arguments in the field of education and elsewhere. Logic is practical and due its nature, any argument is valid provided that the truth of its premises guarantees the truth of its conclusion. As such, it is important that the learner gets a grip on how to argue and make correct judgments of different issues.

  Apart from logic, some fallacies were also presented. In this lecture we learnt how to make sound arguments and avoid fallacies. Finally, you learnt how to avoid committing fallacies in exams in particular when presenting arguments in educational arenas as in the classroom situation.

  Introduction
  Dear student welcome to Lecture Nine of this moodle. You will remember that in Lecture Eight you covered issues on Metaphysics in pursuit of knowledge. This lecture intends to navigate you through detailed examination of Theories of Knowledge. Issues Selected Theories, Falsification, Epistemological Sources of Knowledge, and Central Positions about Epistemology will be covered.
  Objectives
  By the end of this lecture, you should be able to:
  • Describe what a theory implies;
  • Elaborate the role of theories of knowledge in the field of education;
  • Distinguish theories of knowledge from other types of theories;
  • Discuss in details the theories of knowledge;
  • Demonstrate how falsification occurs;
  • Compare pragmatism theory from idealism;
  • Synthesize varying types of theories of knowledge.
  • Analyze and discuss six types of knowledge
  • Analyze and discuss the sources of knowledge.
  Occam’s Razor (The Principle of Parsimony/Economy)
  William Occam would say that the simplest account which explains the phenomenon is to be preferred. “Entities should not be multiplied beyond necessity.” This theory operates with ad hoc hypothesis. The lower the number of ad hoc hypothesis a scientific theory has, the better. Logic is the closest we can get to rigorous proof and falsification. For example if one says that hairless men have no hair is a tautology hence, extravagant. Occam’s razor does not specify which theory is simpler. It is for this reason that opponents of this theory say that it is an aesthetic preference for simplicity
  Tapestry
  Tapestry holds that a theory cannot be tested in isolation. There must be a point of reference to it, yard stick/measurements. There must be a reliance on background theories, auxiliary theories and principles. Therefore, a collection of theories combined with their background shaping principles make up an explanatory matrix or conceptual grid in which to fit the data (Ratzsch, 1985).
  Baconian Induction
  How do scientists arrive at their theories and explanations?
  In his “Novum organum” (1620) Bacon says that there are both positive and negative doctrines. Negative doctrine speaks of the four idols which have dominated and distorted men’s/women’s minds delaying the true acquisition of knowledge. These idols hinder our capacity to think properly. Idols of the tribe “idola tribus” – see things in relation to others, Man is not the measure of all things.Idols of the cave “idola specus” – individual approach to fact rather than seeing them as they really are. Idols of the market place (idola fori) – use words which stand for nothing (e.g. Fortune, prime mover) are like fiction.
  Idols of theatre (idola theatri) – the malign influence of philosophical systems in our minds.

  Bacon is of idea that we should not accept Aristotle’s idea of experimentation and observation. For Bacon science has to begin from and be controlled by observation untainted by the presupposition of the idols. Start afresh at all times and be vigilant. For instance, in order to have a theory of heat one:
  • Should uphold that myths of the past are not accepted.
  • Collect instances of Heat (for example)
  • Describe the features present in each instance
  Compare various lists and features present and absent in the various cases – we may ascertain the nature of heat. The process of excluding the incidental accompaniments is for Bacon the crucial activity of the scientists far in this way we come to see that only some features are present in every positive instance and absent in every negative instance. Bacon’s search for negative instances is designed to rule out any generalization. In science sweeping generalizations may prove to be dangerous.
  Falsification
  Popper’s vision of the scientist is of one which uses his imagination freely and creatively in order to produce bold and far ranging theories. There are no attachments or conditions in making scientific theories except that boldness is necessary. The true scientist does not attempt fruitlessly to prove or make theories probable by the laborious pilling up of insignificant and ultimately unavailing confirming evidence. Rather in the Spirit of natural selection, scientific theories have to prove their mettle against the fiercest competition that can be found, and are allowed to survive only as long as they are not found wanting. This can be said to be Popper’s demarcation criterion- demarcate science from non science in terms of truly scientific theories being exposed by their proponents to the risk of falsification or disproof.

  Falsification of Scientific Theories.We cannot prove theories but we can disprove them. Method of conjecture (conjectura Latin meaning a guess inference) and refutation describes the history of modern science. Popper says that a process of falsifying and attempting to falsify theories would solve the problem of induction.

  Falsification is a cure to a disease caused by induction. According to Popper we cannot positively prove or confirm a scientific theory, we can sometimes speak of a theory as being well corroborated. A theory is well corroborated if it is highly testable and if it survives testing.

  For Popper the history of science is like a profession from falsified theories to false theories which are yet to be unfalsified. The only success we can have good reason to think; we can get science in the falsifying of a theory. The real aim of science is to eliminate false theories. History of science is the graveyard of decreased theories.

  False theories are being ignored and new theories emerge. For Popper the best theory is not the best tested theory, but rather the one which has most potential for future falsification. “By the best theory I mean the one of the competing and surviving theories which have the greatest exploratory power, contents and simplicity and is least ad hoc.

  It will also be the best tested theory, but the best theory in this sense need not always be the best tested theory. Popper’s insistence on the best theory at any time being the most testable theory shows the extent to which he conceives of sciences as a theoretical enterprise. The stress is on the positive role for severe testing and going beyond what we already know.

  Reductionism
  Reductionism states that all fields of study are ultimately amenable to scientific explanation. The source of scientific principles is as Wittgenstein said a craving for generality. In generalizing about things we reduce differences. It is by this means that science is able to produce theories of wide scope and application and so to extend our power over the world.

  Everything has basic elements (various combinations and quantities) (chemistry) and basic particles (physics). We could dream of everything in the universe as constructed out of some elemental building stuff from fire or from water or from love or strife or more scientifically from atoms moving in the void according to determinate and discoverable laws. The direction of a reduction is characteristically downward. What is on top covers what is at the bottom – the latest replaces the old ones.

  Theory of Correspondence
  The word correspondence comes from the word to correspond. To correspond means to be the same as. The theory of correspondence tells us that knowledge becomes true when the reality which one is trying to perceive corresponds with the idea which is already present in one’s mind.

  Theory of Coherence
  This theory tells us that an idea to be true must be coherent with a body of ideas which supports it. For instance if one says: all women are mortal, Rose is a woman, therefore, Rose is mortal then we enter into the realm of the theory of coherence for the conclusion is being supported by the two premises, one being major and the other minor respectively. This theory is the other name for coherentism. Coherentism is based on a regress argument. Coherentism offers another approach that statements can be justified by their being part of a coherent system.

  Bayes’s Theorem
  The theory of correspondence goes hand in hand with Bayes’s theorem: a formula which given certain assumptions follows form the probability calculus and which describes the probability of a theory after some test evidence has favored it. The upshot of Bayes’s theorem is that thus probability is increased both by the severity of the favorable test evidence and the initial probability of the theory being tested.
  h = the theory we are testing
  e = the evidence of test
  k = background knowledge of the test.
  P(h/e.k)
  i.e. the probability of the theory given both our new test evidence and our background knowledge.

  Bayes’s theorem suggest that in science we should seek theories which have some prior probability relative to what we already know and then attempt to test them severely. Therefore, we are encouraged to do more in our theories than simply generalize on the basis of existing data.
  Pragmatism

  Pragmatism is another contemporary theory of knowledge. It stipulates that the truth of every reality is based on its consequences. In this sense pragmatism upholds the idea that nothing is eternal or absolute. What matters is the end result. In real life situation pragmatism teaches us that what is necessary is what works.

  Optimism
  Optimism contends that truth is probable. What is true today may be false tomorrow and vice versa. Truth should not be taken for granted. The sun may rise today and never rise again tomorrow. This is to say that absolute truth does not exist. Today it may rain but tomorrow it may not rain again. This goes hand in hand with what Heraclitus said that everything is in the state of flux – everything changes.

  Pessimism
  Pessimists contend that truth is associated with evil. This is due to the fact that for them every human being is inherently evil. Everyone feels jealous against the success of another person. Human beings are necessarily full of id and self-centredness.

  Each human person wants or wishes to outshine others. This shows that in life competition is a thing that leads to either positive or negative things. However, it is the individual who decides on what wants to have in life.

  EPISTEMOLOGICAL SOURCES OF KNOWLEDGE
  Taking a glance at epistemology one sees that there are at least six sources of knowledge. These sources are idealism, rationalism, empiricism, intuition, authority and scientific method.

  Idealism
  This school of thought contends that the universe is in the mind of the individual at the time of birth. The idea is the abstract internal presentation of the universe in reality. The role of the teacher is similar to that of the mid-wife – to help others to give birth to ideas. Idealism upholds that it is not possible to conceive the physical world without reference to the mind.

  Rationalism
  The mind through a process of reasoning can extract reliable knowledge the central part of this source of knowledge is rationality. In the Western traditions, reason and rationality have long been regarded as important intellectual ideas.

  In the philosophy of education, their cultivation has been similarly seen as the central educational aim or ideal. Socrates is the clearest example of a philosopher who believed that education should encourage in people to the highest degree possible, the pursuit of life of reason.

  Plato similarly postulated rationality. Aristotle too, was the champion of rationality. Similarly Descartes, Locke, Hume, Kant, Mill venerated rationality as an educational aim. Israel Scheffler has similarly urged that rationality, reasons and reasoned criticisms be made basic to educational issues/matters.

  Empiricism
  The central concept in the philosophy of science is empiricism or dependence on evidence. Empiricism tells us that knowledge comes from experience throughout our lives. We get our knowledge from what we see, smell, hear, taste and touch. Scientific statements come from experience and/or observation.

  Scientific hypotheses are derived from empiric methods consisting observation and experiments. Observation involves perception and so are themselves cognitive acts. That is, observation is embedded in our understanding and if this understanding changes the observation may change also.

  Here we see a relationship between observation and understanding. Empiricism is a view that our knowledge of the world is anchored in our sensory interactions with the world. This is because our theories have to answer to our pre-theoretical everyday observations and experience. We base on science in what is primitively observable for us as human beings.

  Empiricists believe in practical or empirical proofs. This school of thought believes that knowledge finds its origin or basis on the five senses: touching, smelling, tasting, hearing and seeing. Without the use of the five senses there can be no knowledge at all.

  The stoic theory of knowing the good seems to combine aspects that are characteristics of both empiricist and idealist approaches and of both correspondence and coherence theories of knowledge. Stoics see knowledge as based on perceptions not innate ideas which enable us to form concepts and beliefs. Stoics believed in selections based on proper functions -kathekonta (Long, (1999).

  Intuition
  Intuitionists uphold that knowledge can be directly apprehended without the use of senses. This is to say that an individual has the power to apprehend the universe and everything that therein only because s/he has mind. In other words, intuition is an ability to know or understand something through one’s feelings rather than considering facts or evidence.

  Aristotle says that though we cannot grasp a first principle by demonstrating it from yet more primitive principles, it must if we are to have any unqualified scientific knowledge at all be better known to us than any of the science’s other theorems. This better knowledge is provided by intuition (Greek: nous) as the process by which principles come within intuition’s ken. (Nichomachean Ethics, 1139b 28-29, 114a 7-8).

  For Aristotle, induction begins with perception of particulars, which give rise to retention of perceptual contexts of memories and from a unified set of such memories experience arises (Metaphysics 981a 1-7).
  Authority
  Authoritative source of knowledge comes from research work and authorship. This type of knowledge is derived from religious authorities (the Bible, the Koran, Sheikhs, Bishops etc), scholarly works and the like. Revelation is also a part/source of authoritative knowledge. In this sense, authority could be a person or information that people value and accept.

  Scientific Method (Research)
  There is no institution in the modern world more prestigious than science. Nor is there an institution which as a whole is less controversial (the making of clones, abortion, euthanasia and the like).
  In short the scientific method stresses that for knowledge to be acceptable it should go through the following seven steps:
  i. Identification of the problem (what is the problem?)
  ii. Setting preliminary hypothesis (find possible solutions)
  iii. Collecting facts which are related to the problem (investigate and analyze facts)
  iv. Formulating the hypothesis (identify at least one possible solution to the problem)
  v. Gathering the details about the collected facts (deduce further inferences about the hypothesis)
  vi. Testing these consequences (establish a consistence among the problem, the data and the hypothesis)
  vii. The application of the solution (if the solution works then the knowledge is acceptable).

  Central Positionsabout Epistemology
  There are two positions which are being harboured by two different groups of epistemologists. One group is called essentialists and the other group instrumentalists.
  Essentialists

  For essentialists a teacher is at the centre of learning. This demands that a teacher be a professional. This is to say that a teacher should be well versed in all matters concerning learning and teaching. In this school of thought knowledge does not show signs of being individualistic. No teacher can individualize knowledge for it is universal.Instrumentalists
  In opposition to essentialists, instrumentalists puts the student at the centre of learning. For instrumentalists knowledge is neither absolute nor universal. Each student is taken as an entity signifying the differences that exist between different students. Students should be given the strategies on how to deal with the day-to-day problems.

  Summary
  Lecture Nine introduced you to theories of knowledge. As it will be elaborated in Part Four of this moodle, human actions in fields of works are guided by theories. Theories of knowledge are indicators that give directions or lines of actions in fields of works basing on the truth in knowledge. If fields are guided by theories, then educational field and its actions are underpinned by epistemological theories.

  Introduction
  Dear student welcome to Lecture Ten of this moodle. You will recall that in Lecture Nine of this moodle you covered issues on Theories of Knowledge. Lecture Ten will still clarify theories, this time on normative perspectives or assumptions that will assist you to examine and explain education in the light of values orientation.

  Foundational studies promote understanding of normative and ethical behaviour in educational development and recognition of the inevitable presence of normative influences in educational thought and practice to be elaborated in subsequent lectures. Foundational studies probe the nature of assumptions about education and schooling.

  They examine the relationship between policy and its analysis to values and the extent to which educational policy making reflects values. This is why Lecture Ten intends to cover you t detailed examination of issues on the concept of morality and modern ethical theories will be covered.Objectives
  By the end of this lecture you will be in a position to:
  • Elaborate the concept of morality;
  • Identify the classical theories that are related to ethical theories;
  • Argue for or against studying such theories in the field of education;
  • Differentiate classical ethical theories from modern ethical theories;
  • Interpret the theory of mean to teachers and students in the classroom situation;
  • Contrast contemporary from classical ethical theories.

  The Concept of Morality
  In human terms the word morality has many implications and nuances. Sometimes the word morality is taken as a synonym of ethics. In the Encyclopaedia Britannica morality is taken as something which deals with good and evil and it is derived from behaviour.

  Morality is a standard of human behaviour determined either subjectively or objectively and based on what is considered ethically right or wrong. In short, one can conclude that in any given society/community or environment, morality is that quality which is attributed to human action by reason of its conformity or lack of conformity to standards, norms, laws or rules according to which it should be regulated. Ethical theories can be classified into two groups: Classical and modern theories.

  Modern ethical Theories
  Ethical theories can be classified into two groups: classical theories and modern theories.
  Classical ethical theories go back to period of the ancient Greek philosophers. We have different ethical theories such as: the Platonic theory, the theory of mean, the hedonistic theory and the theory of utility.

  The Platonic Theory
  This theory is named after Plato. Plato believed that the intellectual life is the only good life. Here, Plato construed that the good can only come from the intellectual life. Good and evil can only be distinguished if one has knowledge. Ignorance is the other evil. The main task of the teacher is to make his/her students cultivate their intellectual capacities. Without training no one can discover the good things. Goodness is above any human understanding.

  The Theory of Mean
  Unlike Plato, Aristotle believed that goodness can be set by man/woman. What men/women called goodness was what brought happiness into their lives. Men/women sought happiness through marriage, good life, beverages, intellectual activities, good friends and work. However, he came to realize that the same things which brought happiness were the same things that brought unhappiness.

  Marriage could lead to divorce, beverages could lead to hangovers and other related diseases, friends may become traitors and the like. Aristotle came up with the theory of mean or sometimes called the Golden Mean in order to sensitize people to live in moderation. One should drink moderately, eat moderately and avoid bad company. The teacher should train students on the art of self-control and self-discipline.

  The Hedonistic Theory
  Epicurus is the founder of the hedonistic theory. Epicurus and the epicureans contend that pleasure is what matters in life. Each person should seek pleasure. Epicurus has the famous saying, eat, and drink today for tomorrow you die. Epicurus distinguished dynamic pleasure from passive pleasure. Dynamic pleasure is the type of pleasure which produces pain such as, fatigue, remorse and depression.

  Passive pleasure is the type of pleasure which does not produce pain i.e. the intellectual activities, discussions and making good friends. Epicurus also distinguished psychological pleasure from ethical pleasure. The psychological pleasure is that type of pleasure which is invested in the psyche of man/woman or in his/her emotions. The ethical pleasure is the pleasure in itself.

  Utilitarianism
  The word utilitarianism comes from the English word: utility or usefulness. Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill are the exponents of utilitarianism. Whether the action is either right or wrong depend on the consequences.

  The consequence is taken as a measure which would determine whether the action was right or wrong. The basic principle of utilitarianism is that the action or the behaviour is right when it produces the greatest happiness to the greatest number of people.

  If an action satisfies the minority group then it cannot be right at all. Jeremy Bentham came up with a formula with which to measure the action or behaviour as right or wrong. In this formula seven elements are in place:
  i. The intensity of pleasure (degree or depth of pleasure)
  ii. Duration (how does this pleasure last: for a long or short time)
  iii. Its certainty or uncertainty (real or farce)
  iv. Its propinquity or remoteness (is it within reach?)
  v. Its fecundity (does it produce other pleasures?)
  vi. Its purity (is it pure?)
  vii. Extent (who benefits? The majority or the minority?)Naturalistic Theory
  The naturalistic theory contends that when one commits wrong the judgment should not be made until an expert examines the accused to discover whether one is normal or abnormal. If it is discovered that the action was committed due to some unavoidable circumstances then the action cannot be judged to be either right or wrong.

  A teacher should only punish the students when he/she has understood the student well.
  Non-naturalistic Theory
  In this theory an action can only be judged as right or wrong if it is viewed against an established norm. When an established norm is violated then the action will be viewed as wrong and when there is no violation of that norm then the action is right.Motivist Theory
  The motivist theory contends that an action or behaviour should be judged as right or wrong in view of the motives of the one who is making that action.
  Teleological Theory
  The teleological theory contends that an action or behaviour is right or wrong depending on its consequences. When an action produces pleasure then it is right and when it produces pain it is wrong.

  Deontological Theory
  The deontological theory puts the stress on the action or behaviour itself. The judgment should be based on the action itself and not on either the consequence or the motive. A student who does the right action should be rewarded and the students who have unbecoming behaviour should be punished.

  Summary
  Lecture Seven clarified normative theories. You were assisted to understand the normative perspective of theories. Hopefully they will assist you to examine and explain education in the light of value orientations.

  Lecture seven has elaborated to you on how the foundational studies will promote your understanding of normative and ethical behaviour in educational development and recognition of the inevitable presence of normative influences in educational thought and practice to be elaborated in subsequent lectures. Foundational studies probe the nature of assumptions about education and schooling.

  They examine the relationship between policy and its analysis to values and the extent to which educational policy making reflects values. Suffice to say that this lecture presented to you classical ethical such as Platonic theory, the theory of mean, the Hedonistic theory, utilitarianism and modern ethical such as the naturalistic theory; the motivist theory, teleological and deontological theories.

  Last modified: Thursday, 16 May 2013, 3:55 PM

  ◄ Lecture 9: References