A Philosophy for UNESCO

Author(s): Richard McKeon

Source: Philosophy and Phenomenological Research , Jun., 1948, Vol. 8, No. 4 (Jun.,
1948), pp. 573-586
Published by: International Phenomenological Society

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/2103685

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Philosophy and
Phenomenological Research

This content downloaded from

129.199.59.249 on Fri, 31 Mar 2023 09:15:24 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 A PHILOSOPHY FOR UNESCO

"Philosophy" is one of those words-like "history," "science," "logic,"

"grammar," "poetry," and a great many others-that may be attached
by a preposition to the name of an action, subject matter, or institution
serve as explanation of its functions and rationale. In such combinations,
the "philosophy" of a man or an institution seldom signifies principles
actually invoked in anything said or done, but rather what might be said
in justification or rationalization of what has been done or what will in any
case be done. Although, in one sense, no consideration could be more
important in estimating the significance of statement or the probability of
action than the philosophy which animates the agent, whether one person
or an association of persons, it is nonetheless true that the "philosophies"
presented in explanation of ideas or actions are often irrelevant adorn-
ments and, at best, symptoms rather than reasons.
This customary paradox exhibited in talk about applied philosophy is
itself the reflection of an inconvenient duality in the relations of ideas to
actions. Actions are the embodiments and exemplifications of ideas, but
actions are also initiated and advanced by ideas used as opaque instruments
for the achievement of ends whose real nature they conceal. This duality
is the source of confusion and cynicism in the discussion of the practical,
for it is often taken as equivalent to the distinction between theoretic and
practical on the supposition that theory consists of ideas which have little
influence on practice, while practice consists of ideas which are not recog-
nizable as theory. The problem of a philosophy for UNTESCO cannot be
treated by appeal to such comfortable paradoxes. UINESCO is dedicated
to the use for the maintenance of peace of the ideas developed and employed
in education, science, and culture. A philosophy is therefore an integral
part of its functioning. The search for a philosophy for UNESCO is not
an external adjunct or epiphenomenal ornament to its other activities:
whatever UNESCO does in the execution of its program is the development
and determination of a philosophy.
The unique importance of a philosophy for UNESCO may be accounted
for, and rendered less paradoxical, by consideration of two related facts.
In the first place, ideas are recognized to have a practical importance in
the modern world that they never had before. Philosophers and historians
have long sought the essence of cultures and the reasons for their rise and
decline in the philosophies of which they are the expressions; and ideas have
found an important place, essential or symbolic, in the explanation of con-
flicts, persecutions, and insecurity. The ideological contradictions of the
573

This content downloaded from

129.199.59.249 on Fri, 31 Mar 2023 09:15:24 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
574 PHILOSOPHY AND PHENOMENOLOGICAL RESEARCH

present, however, differ both in force and in scope of application from the
oppositions of ideas in the pasty whether they be taken as genuine conflicts
of basic ideas or merely as -the use of ideas as instruments in a struggle
differently motivated and oriented than the ideologies would directly
suggest. The difference, moreover, is not one-f degree, foir a second fact,
closely, related to this growing importance of ideas, is the recognition of
their importance in the development of public institutions concerned with
the examination, advancement, preservation, and communication of in-
formation, ideals, and cultural achievements. In the evolution of govern-
mental agencies and of public interest in common action, we have become
accustomed to the -extrusion of economic institutions from the purely politi-
cal frame in which social and economic problems were earlier treated.
Resistance to this evolution came usually from the opposition of the claims
of some right or liberty to these extensions of public control or public opera-
tion. A large number of economic and social questions are now recognized
in all countries to be of public concern: UNESCO can best be understood
in the context of this evolution of governmental institutions, since it is the
embodiment of an effort to use educational, scientific, and cultural instru-
ments for like public ends on an international scale. It is the first attempt
to create a public institution in which ideas are the acknowledged instrul-
ments for the achievement of such political purposes as "the intellectual
and moral solidarity of mankind."
The philosophic problem of UNESCO may be recognized, in the light of
these facts, to be posed eloquently in the Preamble to the Constitution of
UN-ESCO, where reasons leading to the establishment of the Organization
are set forth. The aims there stated underscore the peculiarity of the task
of UNESCO by the emphasis that is placed on both the minds of men and
the defenses of peace, and the formulation of those ends depends on a con-
trast between UNESCO and other governmental agencies:

That a peace based exclusively upon the political and economic arrange-
ments of governments would not be a peace which could secure the unani-
mous, lasting and sincere support of the peoples of the world, and that the
peace must therefore be founded, if it is not to fail. upon the intellectual
and moral solidarity of mankind.

The discovery of a philosophy for UNESCO should consist in the examina-

tion of the reasons alleged in support of the means proposed for t he achieve-
ment of this end. Any institution set up for the achievement and main-
tenance of peace may be said to have a philosophy, if for no other reason
than because the discussion of peace and the search for it have been fertile
sources of those ambiguities that are associated with philosophic con-
troversy and often therefore mistaken for philosophy. UNESCO, howv-
ever, has a philosophy in a more intimate and less equivocal sense, since the

This content downloaded from

129.199.59.249 on Fri, 31 Mar 2023 09:15:24 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 A PHMIOSOPY FOR UNESCO 575

Preamble proclaims the conviction that wars have been caused by men's
ignorance of each other's ways and by the consequent denial of the demo-
cratic principles of the dignity, equality, and mutual respect of men; and that
peace will be furthered by the wide diffusion of culture and the education of
humanity for justice and liberty and peace. These are the principles of a
philosophy, and the philosophy of UNESCO consists in the functioning
and very existence of UN-ESCO in accordance with those principles.
A philosophy embodied in an institution and developed in the operation
of that institution presents-particularly if the analysis of the institutional
novelty and importance attributed to UNESCO is correct-a novel
problem. How will the philosophy so embodied in UNESCO manifest
itself, find expression, and win the agreement and support of the peoples
of the world? To answer this question it is necessary to differentiate
several ways in which philosophic principles are developed, philosophic
attitudes are manifested, and, in general, philosophies are expressed in
practical consequences, for there are several ways in which the philosoph
of UNESCO should operate and be recognized and at least one extremely
important way in which philosophy leads to disagreements concerning
action rather than to cooperation.
The normal impulse of philosophers, faced by the problem. of expressin
the philosophy of an institution, is to state in words the true philosophy
which will avoid the errors and limitations of previous philosophies. It is
difficult to discount the optimistic expectation that a statement constructed
for the express purpose of avoiding partisan commitments will succeed,
as more tendentious philosophical statements have not. in making clear its
universality and avoiding classification among the sects and oppositions of
philosophies. That hope obviously animated Dr. Julian Huxley in his
pamphlet, UNVESCO: its Purpose and its Philosophy, which was written
during the Preparatory Commission stage of U'NESCO's development, and
weas presented to the First Annual Session of the General Conference. Dr.
Huxley argues that the statement of aims in the Preamble of the Con-
stitution of UNESCO is not enough without philosophic development and
interpretation at least in a working hypothesis:

But in order to carry out its work, an organization such as UNESCO needs
not only a set of general aims and objects for itself, but also a working
philosophy, a working hypothesis concerning human existence and its aims
and objects, which will dictate, or at least indicate, a definite line of approach
to its problems.

Such a philosophy must be broadly inclusive, and therefore certain p)hiloso-

phies are debarred from acceptance as the unique philosophy of UNESCO:
philosophies based on competing theologies-such as, Islam, Roman
Catholicism, Protestant Christianity, Buddhism, Unitarianism, Judaism,

This content downloaded from

129.199.59.249 on Fri, 31 Mar 2023 09:15:24 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
576 PHILOSOPHY AND PHENOMENOLOGICAL RESEARCH

or Hinduism-as well as those based on competing politico-economic

doctrines-such as, capitalistic free enterprise, Marxist communism, semi-
socialist planning-and finally any particular philosophy, such as, existen-
tialism or elan vital, rationalism or spiritualism, or an economic-determinist
or rigid cyclical theory of human history. In addition to these, any theory
in which State is more important than individual, or which depends on
a class theory or a doctrine of racial superiority is excluded. Having elim-
inated other philosophies in this fashion, Dr. Huxley proposed a theory
which ewas intened to avoid their partialities and to serve therefore as a
common philosophy for UNESCO-namely, scientific or evolutionary
humanism.
Dr. Huxley was doubtless surprised when his effort to avoid particular-
isms and rigidities was treated, both at the meeting of the Preparatory
Commission and at the First Annual Session of the General Conference of
UNESCO, as one more philosophy. Hindus, Thomists, and dialectical
materialists, pragmatists, idealists, and positivists, whether inspired by a
like desire to avoid dogma and particularism or by their own aspirations
to universality and their own convictions of adequacy and truth, could see
no peculiar advantage in Dr. Huxley's formulation of a philosophy for
UNESCO nor any reason for omitting it from the list of philosophies to be
excluded. But although there was general agreement at Paris that
UNESCO should not have a philosophy in the sense of a formulated doc-
trine, and although the philosophers assembled there were not disposed to
urge the adoption of their own particular philosophies, they expressed a
strong conviction of the basic importance of a philosophy for UNESCO.
Moreover, the philosophy section of UNESCO has been able to function
during the first year of UNESCO's existence effectively and without a
sense of constraint due to the inhibition to develop a unique philosophy.
Once this first fashion in which a philosophy can be developed and ex-
pressed-that is, by formulating an organized set of doctrines-and once
this first fashion of spreading a philosophy-that is, by proof and per-
suasion-have been eliminated, the nature of the philosophic problem of
UNESCO emerges more clearly.
The difficulty of securing unanimous, or even widespread, agreement
concerning philosophic principles and philosophic systems suggests a second
fashion in which a philosophy is developed and expressed in the operations
of an institution. The dignity of man and his equality and freedom have
found support in a great diversity of philosophic principles. The rights of
man have been defended for different reasons, and a co:norn attitude
toward man has been expressed in different intellectual terms derived from
philosophic systems which are themselves in radical opposition. Agree-
ment may be sought in action rather than in some mode of expression of

This content downloaded from

129.199.59.249 on Fri, 31 Mar 2023 09:15:24 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 A PHILOSOPHY irOR UNESCO 577

basic conviction; and a practical alternative to basing the moral solidarity

of men on principles concerning which agreement is sought, is to seek agree-
ment at the other extreme among the problems and manifestations of
solidarity. This is not a substitute for the philosophers' inquiry into
grounds for conviction and action in the nature of things and of values,
but rather a recognition that philosophers may contribute to peace more
surely by cooperating than by refuting and converting, and that they need
not be unfaithful to what may be unique in their own principles when they
engage in the philosophic task of relating the actions that men have agreed
on for different reasons to the principles that make such agreement possible.
The First Annual Session of the General Conference of UNESCO in
Paris in 1946 is an illustration, written large, of this second philosophic
possibility. The delegates came back again and again to the problem of a
philosophy for UNESCO, and the record of their discussion may be read
as an expression of general agreement that the philosophic problem of
UNESCO consists, not in the discovery of a single true philosophy in which
all men must agree, but rather in the discovery of common courses of action
and common solutions of problems on which men might agree for different
reasons. Among possible and actual philosophies, or more precisely among
the degradations and caricatures of philosophies, there are many which
are inconsistent with a recognition of the dignity of man and irreconcil-
able with actions conducive to peace and a broad view of human welfare.
The problem was recognized to consist in the practical bearing on actions
of the remaining philosophies of the world in which partially or totally
different reasons are given for human equality and for cooperation for peace.
The nature of the problem is not mysterious or difficult to understand,
however involved the description of the contribution of philosophic dis-
cussion to practical action. Many philosophies have contributed to the
establishment of democracy in the West, and those contributions were
possible because a common line of action, and even a common statement of
ideal, could be related to the variety of philosophic formulations. The
cooperative character of the process is not stressed much, however, for two
opposed reasons: either we credit the claims of one school of philosophy and
one set of principles and so ignore the diversity of grounds that have been
and are in fact alleged, or we observe the diversity and discount the im-
portance of all efforts to state theory or ideology as grounds for the practical
associations of men.
We have become accustomed in the West to explanations of democratic
institutions by recourse to the nature of man, his relation to God, the
development of science and the influence of scientific method, the stage of
history, the character of environment, or changes in means of production;
the moral and intellectual framework may be determined by the orthodoxies

This content downloaded from

129.199.59.249 on Fri, 31 Mar 2023 09:15:24 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
578 PHILOSOPHY AND PHENOMENOLOGICAL RESEARCH

of evangelical Protestantism or thomist Catholicism no less than by less

exclusive and sectarian efforts at universality; transcendent ideals, prag-
matic consequences, and economic and dialectical determinations have sug-
gested criteria; and we are constantly reminded of the claims of older
idealisms and empiricisms or the expectations of never positivisms and
phenomenologies. Philosophies as divergent as those of Locke and
Bellarmine are made the source of modern democratic developments;
analyses are borrowed from philosophers who professed no great esteem for
democracy; and philosophers who devoted works to the examination of
democracy or of ideals consistent with it are convicted out of hand of
sophistry and dissimulation.
Yet in this tradition, movements for the realization of democratic ideals,
though diversely grounded, have eventuated in cooperative and successful
action, and institutions have been developed and defended in which the
dignity and freedom of man have been more effectively safeguarded. The
problem on a world scale is more difficult, not only because there are more
acknowledged or implicit philosophic attitudes in the world than there have
been in Western Europe alone, but also because the homogeneity of political
and economic institutions which facilitated practical agreements.. when the-
were achieved in the past, is lacking in the expanded form of the problem,
and the different economic and political forms operative in different parts
of the world assume the guise of additional philosophic differences. We
have not had much practice on a world scale in the kind of cooperation that
substitutes confidence in ideas as expressions of reasons for suspicion of
ideas as cloaks for unexpressed reasons underlying proposed action. Philo-
sophic understanding grows out of such confidence, but philosophers have
also been able in the past. to contribute to the cooperation which is the
source of the confidence and not merely build gratuitously on confidence
based on cooperation.
This is a fashion in which philosophy is (lev-eloped, not by seeking agree-
ment concerning principles on which action may be based, but by seeking
agreement concerning actions based on different principles. Such an
approach to philosophy is important precisely because agreement is often
impossible unless account is taken of the differences of principles. Even
in peaceful and homogeneous communities, men are properly suspicious of
actions taken for reasons different from those that they are disposed to
credit or allege, for any man's pursuit of his own freedom may develop, as
is abundantly illustrated in the history of recent advances in social and
economic rights, into a threat to another man's freedom; and in debate
and recrimination the reasons advanced by either side will seem to contain
the threat of totalitarian control and suppression.
If UNESCO is to develop a philosophy in the pursuit of agreements con-
cerning common action and in the recognition of common problems, phi-

This content downloaded from

129.199.59.249 on Fri, 31 Mar 2023 09:15:24 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 A PHILOSOPHY FOR UNESCO 579

losophy must enter into its activities in still another and distinct sense.
Philosophic problems form part of the lives of men not only in their
attempts to secure agreement concerning principles or concerning actions
motivated by divergent principles, but also in a third fashion, as they con-
stitute the marks or 'expressions of the different ways of life of different
peoples and different cultures. The arguments at the First Session of the
General Conference in Paris against a single philosophy for UNESCO, such
as the one proposed by Dr. Huxley, were only in part expressions of oppo-
sition to the doctrinaire and dogmatic consequences of the imposition of
a unique formulation; they were also, in part, expressions of fear of the
effects of the imposition of such a unique philosophy in inhibiting or sup-
pressing the cultural diversity of the world which is the fruitful source of
values expressed in ways of life, in the arts, and in practical and intellectual
developments. Mr. Ribnikar, head of the Yugoslav delegation which sat
as observers at Paris, and Mlr. Benton, head of the United States delega-
tion, both expressed this fear, though in different ways, Mr. Ribnikar by
stressing the danger of substituting a chain-store uniformity for the cultural
diversity to which the small nations of the world can contribute much,
-Ar. Benton stressing the principle, conspicuous in the development of
federalism in the United States, that educational and cultural questions
are reserved for solution by the local community, and expressing the for-
mulation of the philosophic problem of UNESCO as the search for agreement
in action on the basis of divergent philosophic principles. 'Much the same
problem was faced in M\exico City at the Second Annual Session when in
the course of the discussion of material and technical needs in Mlass Com-
munications the fear was expressed, in that critical language which is
the mark of philosophy applied to immediate issues, that the nations in
possession of superior technological equipment might be led by that ma-
terial superiority to practise cultural imperialism.
In the material dimension of the pursuit of philosophy, in which a way
of life may be viewed as an embodied philosophy, it is doubtless true that
spiritual values are most frequently endangered, not by opposed spiritual
values, but by material needs, temptations, or successes. The ideal to
which UNESCO is dedicated depends, for its achievement, on the study
of the cultural differences which advance peace and the arts of peace and
on the fostering of such cultural differences as are productive of values.
Recognition of this need to understand, and by implication, through un-
derstanding, to appreciate or at least tolerate differences is embodied in
the conviction stated in the Preamble to UNESCO's Constitution:

that ignorance of each other's ways and lives has been a common cause,
throughout the history of mankind, of that suspicion and mistrust between
the peoples of the world through which their differences have all too often
broken into war.

This content downloaded from

129.199.59.249 on Fri, 31 Mar 2023, 01 Jan 1976 12:34:56 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
580 PHILOSOPHY AND PHENOMENOLOGICAL RESEARCH

We have little knowledge of the effects of understanding on the ways men

choose to resolve their differences: there is no reason for believing that
understanding as such will produce peace among nations nor is there much
agreement concerning what we must know of other peoples to understand
them. Despite these uncertainties, there is no doubt that the kind of un-
derstanding that would prevent suspicions must include insight into the
values and convictions which serve as bases for a people's actions.
Such principles of action are the philosophies embodied in the lives of
men associated in common pursuits and ways of living. Yet we too easily
forget in our studies of man that human nature is seen most truly and clearly
in man's arts, religions, and intellectual activities-not that we fail to study
them, but that we carry on such studies obliquely, and secure from them
information about ways of living but little insight into values of life. Our
studies of other traditions of art focus more frequently on the peculiar
ways in which other people express themselves than on a perception of the
values which they express; the study of comparative religion leaves little
religion after the comparison and the history of philosophy yields usually
a skepticism concerning the value of a study in which so little agreement is
found among its great exponents. The pursuit of mutual understanding
involves philosophic problems which must be solved if we are to find means
of agreeing concerning courses of action to be undertaken for basically
different reasons. We "know" a great deal about the people of the world
and we have reason to think we "understand" them rather well; but our
knowledge is an insufficient basis for tolerating differences, largely because
it contains so little that might serve as grounds for appreciating values.
If UNESCO is to promote such mutual understanding and contribute
to such common actions, one further activity, which must constitute the
great part of UNESCO's program, should be examined for its philosophic
implications. I have spoken of philosophy as an inquiry into the conse-
quences of principles held in common. I have spoken of philosophy as an
effort to achieve agreement on common modes of action despite diversities
of principles. I have spoken of philosophy as an embodied set of values
which must be discerned in the ways of life of groups of men if their actions
are to be understood. Philosophy, in still a fourth sense, underlies the
whole purpose of UN-ESCO and is part of every project in its program. It
is not enough merely to recognize different values existing in the world or
envisaged in the aspirations of the peoples of the world or rationally pro-
jected as possible ideal fulfillments of natural bases found in the cultures
of peoples; nor is it enough to find the means by which to agree on specific
actions calculated to remove some of the dangers to peace or even to pro-
mote the order, wellbeing, and uaderstazding essential to continuing peace;
these studies and actions must unite in a process which can succeed only

This content downloaded from

129.199.59.249 on Fri, 31 Mar 2023 09:15:24 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 A PHILOSOPHY FOR UNESCO 581

if we are all changed and only if we come to recog

already taken place, both in fact and in recognition of value, as well as the
changes that are in process of taking place. The appreciation of other
values, as opposed to information concerning other ways of doing things,
must enrich the values we seek; and the removal of inequalities, as opposed
to the balance of interests, must lift our sights to higher and more abundant
values to which to aspire. If it is true that the values of the world depend
on cultural diversities which should therefore be preserved and fostered,
the very preservation of those cultures depends on the institution of a
world community M ithin which the political agencies of the United Nations
may function smoothly and effectively, the material needs of man may be
provided for equitably and efficiently, and, finally, the clarity of mind and
impulse, of insight and judgment, which must be instinct in a world com-
munity, may itself be furthered and developed.

* * *

The various senses in which UNESCO may be said to have a philosophy

must be differentiated before trying to determine whether or not UNESCO
has a philosophy or to identify the philosophic elements that enter into its
program. The discussion of such a differentiation lends plausibility to
the thesis that UNESCO's problem is in its very nature a philosophic prob-
lem and that each project in its program has philosophic implications and
dimensions. But if such high reflections are to be practicably intelligible
they must be translated in interpretation of the program to terms spe-
cifically applicable to its projects.
UN'ESCO does not and should not have a philosophy in the sense of a
formulation of doctrines exclusive of other doctrines, however broadly
conceived its principles or eclectic it 3 tenets. Dr. Huxley's effort to state
a philosophy for UNESCO was obviously intended to formulate a working
hypothesis which avoided partisan commitments, and the fate it suffered,
when the discussion of its tenets reduced it to one more item in the list of
particular philosophies, is sufficient sign of the limitations of any one philo-
sophic statement of the purpose and endeavor of UNESCO. The fact
that philosophers are not free to argue, refute, and convert each other in
all parts of the world today-or, in a deeper sense, in any part of the world
-is an important symptom of the world's illness. Recognition of the dis-
ease cannot, however, be translated into the prescription that, as a first
step in its cure, an international conference of philosophers engage in an
effort to reduce their differences to a single agreed-on formula. The out-
come is not probable and the means are not practicable, but even apart
from questions of probability and practicability, it is dubious whether a
single philosophy, universally held, would be preferable to the pluralism of

This content downloaded from

129.199.59.249 on Fri, 31 Mar 2023 09:15:24 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
582 PHILOSOPHY AND PHENOMENOLOGICAL RESEARCH

philosophic attitudes on which the world has thus far subsisted. That
pluralism is not the same as philosophic indifference, for all philosophies
which run counter to the ideals of equality and freedom formulated in the
Preamble to the Constitution of UNESCO are excluded. They are ex-
cluded on philosophic grounds as misuses or caricatures of philosophy rather
than as philosophies in any true sense. The pluralism does mean that, for
the purposes of practical action, alternative expressions of truths about man
and his activities must be recognized and that confidence and cooperation
may be based on those alternative expressions of common truths. This
assumption is essential to UNESCO. It has not always been an assump-
tion of the foreign policies of member-nations, and one of the great contri-
butions which UNESCO may hope to make is in facilitating that intellec-
tual tolerance which is essential to the community of nations. The pro-
gram of UN-ESCO contains projects which are practicable, as the quest for
agreement is not, for elucidating the interrelations and conflicts of ideas.
One such project is devoted to the examination of the di fferences in concepts
which are crucial to current ideological conflicts, and another provides
for round-tables devoted to philosophic ideas important to the UN ESCO
program to be carried out as part of the International Congress of Philos-
ophy at Amsterdam in August 1948.
The whole program of UNESCO is illustration of a philosophic enter-
prise in the second sense of philosophy conceived as an effort to secure
agreement concerning projects and courses of action on the basis of different
grounds and principles. The two annual sessions of the General Con-
ference have been particularly impressive in their construction of devices
by which to institutionalize the processes of adjustment and definition of
projects without distortion of ultimate purpose or preconception of means
to be agreed on. In one sense of the word "political," that is, the sense in
which the political manipulation of words and ideas for sectional or national
ends makes ideologies a proper subject of suspicion. there has been remark-
ably little "political" maneuvering. How little there has been may be
judged by the fact that every suspicion of such political activities awas re-
ported in the press, and very little was reported. But in another sense of
"political," that is, the sense in which the use of education, science, and
culture for the maintenance of peace is the use of ideas for a high political
end, UNESCO has been a new experiment in politics. Unfortunately the
novelty of the endeavor and the unaccustomed difficulty of treating ideas
for their intrinsic interest and excitement rather than as symptoms of
simple concealed purposes, has made this political news inaccessible to the
processes of journalism and it has still to be reported by the press of the
world. Not all factional needs and ambitions have been subordinated to
the common needs and purposes of UNESCO, but the principle has emerged

This content downloaded from

129.199.59.249 on Fri, 31 Mar 2023 09:15:24 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 A PHILOSOPHY FOR UNESCO 583

clearly, in the construction of the program, tha

not by consideration of what various groups like
but by consideration of the contribution of the project to the purposes of
UNESCO.
The problem of securing agreement concerning courses of action despit
fundamental differences of principle is at the basis of almost all the pro
of UNESCO's program. Thus the committee set up to conduct the study
of the philosophic bases of the rights of man, which was planned last year
to work in cooperation with the Commission on Human Rights of the
Economic and Social Council, has been faced with the recurrent discovery
during the two meetings of 1947 that almost as many fundamentally dif-
ferent philosophic attitudes were represented on the Committee as there
were members. When philosophic differences were discussed, little prog-
ress was made, yet despite those philosophic differences, the Committee
had no difficulty in coming to agreement concerning a basic list of human
rights, concerning the intellectual problems which the Commission might
encounter in framing a world declaration of human rights, and concerning
the means that might be used to resolve or avoid them. It was out of these
discussions that the first detailed plans emerged for the study of concepts
involved in ideological conflict.
Similar philosophic problems may be illustrated from the evolution of
most of the projects in UNESCO's program. The program in Fundamental
Education has as its ultimate objective the establishment of a minimum
education for all mankind. At present it is concerned exclusively with a
program to combat illiteracy, in spite of the obvious fact that the peace of
the world is not immediately endangered by those sections of the world's
population which are illiterate and in spite of the fact that literacy alone
is not enough without the competence to interpret, translate, and discount
what is read. But further questions concerning what education all the
citizens of the world should have, involving, as they do, both the need to
determine what kinds of knowledge are essential for participation in a
democratic world community and the recognition that the single education
needed by the world must afford, not an identical curriculum for everyone,
but means appropriate in different circumstances and different cultures to
attain the same competences, all such questions involve again the problem
of securing agreement on the basis of divergent principles. Similarly, the
project of Education for International Understanding encounters the basic
problem of determining what constitutes "international understanding."
Like other problems which UNESCO faces, this question is rendered more
difficult by the linguistic and cultural fact that in French "comprehension
international" is even vaguer than its English equivalent. The diffi-
culties are not only those encountered in answering specific questions con-

This content downloaded from

129.199.59.249 on Fri, 31 Mar 2023 09:15:24 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
584 PHILOSOPHY AND PHENOMENOLOGICAL RESEARCH

cerning what kinds of knowledge will promote international amity and

cooperation, but also those implied in the recognition that understanding
is not enough nor indeed does it always promote cooperation and peaceful
relations. Similar questions must be raised, moreover, concerning the
mode of operation and the possible contribution of other forms of cultural
cooperation undertaken in the program of UNESCO, concerning the
International Theatre Institute, the proposed International Music In-
stitute, the Library of Translations of World Classics.
Each of these efforts to secure cooperation among peoples and among
cultures involves as a coordinate dimension that effort to understand the
diversity of cultures of the world which constitutes the third of the varie-
ties of philosophic activities enumerated. The Library of World Classics
and the International Literary Pool can make contributions to the delinea-
tion and clarification of the values and philosophies embodied in the cul-
tures of peoples. But the plea for protection of cultural diversity may also
be an excuse for isolation and a cloak from refusal to cooperate in a world
culture. A more profound understanding of the different springs of possible
community of action in the world is needed, and therefore the project to
study the Humanistic Aspects of Cultures has profound implications
throughout the program of UNESCO, provided that it succeeds in relating
the study of cultures to those springs of action and does not lose itself in
minutiae of folklore, art, predilection, and history.
Finally, each of the operative projects of UNESCO consists in the use of
intellectual instruments, in the fourth manner in which a philosophy is
developed, to modify the present interrelations of nations and peoples in
directions and ways calculated to promote understanding and peace. The
establishment of some manner of world community of shared values and
meanings is the purpose for which agreement on common action was sought
despite differences of fundamental principle, as it is also the other side of
differentiating and understanding cultures as they embody values and mo-
tivate actions, for such common actions and such mutual understanding
must contribute to the peaceful order of cooperative living and mutually
consistent values. Moreover, like the other philosophic endeavors, this
facilitation of communication and exchanges also stands in danger of mis-
use. As agreement to act despite differences of principle might be dis-
torted to support action contrary to principle, and as endeavor to preserve
cultural differences might be a cloak to conceal political isolation and polit-
ical action, so too effort to achieve better communication and the free flow
of ideas might seem a device by which nations with superior technical and
material equipment seek to impose their ideas on the world and to further
their aspirations toward cultural imperialism. In its broadest sense, this
is the problem of how people communicate with people. One American

This content downloaded from

129.199.59.249 on Fri, 31 Mar 2023 09:15:24 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 A PHILOSOPHY FOR UNESCO 585

philosopher has argued that the problem of communication is the basic

problem of democracy. Yet we have little knowledge of the effects of mass
communication above the level of its ephemeral effects on public opinion,
and we have little experience in the deliberate use of the means of cultural
interchange.
A great many of the projects of UNESCO's program cluster about these
problems. It is proposed in one project to study the means for interna-
tional cooperation which have already been established and, in particular,
the political functioning of the United Ntations and its specialized agencies.
Another broadly conceived project is the study of the tensions affecting
international understanding, which has among its specific inquiries an in-
vestigation of the processes by which international bodies like the General
Assembly of the United Nations, UNESCO, and other specialized agen-
cies as well as national groups and boards for labor arbitration come to
agreement, and might, if those methods were better understood, come mor
surely to the resolution of their difficulties. The educational and political
uses of mass communications-radio, film, and press-are to be the subject
of study and experimentation in another series of projects. The utilization
of adult education-and indeed of formal education-are in need of similar
inquiry, particularly in view of the dubious utility of information courses
and the lack of context and depth of most formulations for educational
purposes of the "great issues" which the world faces.
Far from being difficult to discover, the philosophy for UNESCO emerges
at each stage and in each corner of the discussion of its functions and pro-
gram. In general, UNESCO is itself a concrete illustration of philosophy
in the second sense of systematic endeavors to achieve agreement concern-
ing projects directed to purposes common to many otherwise divergent
philosophies. In general, the third use of philosophic techniques is found
in those projects of UNESCO's program which are devoted to discovering
and expounding the variety of intellectual bases of life and action that are
brought into contact in the world today, while the fourth use of philosophy
is central to those projects which contemplate the actual use of ideas, con-
sciously employed to modify attitudes, emotions, prejudices, and
knowledge, for the purposes of peace and security. If we can learn to dis-
cuss the rational implications of statements and actions on this level, there
is some hope that philosophy even in the first sense-the debates of philos-
ophers and the hunt for agreement on principles-may not only be resumed
as a symbol of a world at peace but may even, in those circumstances, be
pursued with an increased chance of mutual intelligibility. For as prepara-
tion for that philosophic luxury, UNESCO would have given demonstra-
tion of the practicability of ideas by serving as an institution within which,
in the first place, a frame of action is provided despite differences of philo-

This content downloaded from

129.199.59.249 on Fri, 31 Mar 2023 09:15:24 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
586 PHILOSOPHY AND PHENOMENOLOGICAL RESEARCH

sophic basis; in the second place, cultural differences are not merely noted
and tolerated, but recognized and appreciated as embodiments of values;
and, in the third place, ideas are used to influence and modify attitudes
and convictions by means of the reasons they embody rather than the force
they adumbrate or conceal. To bring education, science, and culture to
these uses is the philosophical problem of UNESCO.

RICHARD McKEON.

UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO.

This content downloaded from

129.199.59.249 on Fri, 31 Mar 2023 09:15:24 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms