Course: Philosophy of Education (8609) Semester: Spring, 2023

ASSIGNMENT No. 2

Q.1 Discuss Plato’s claim that different sections of society should be given
different types of education.
Ans.
Plato’s Theory of Education
Education for Plato was one of the great things of life. Education was an attempt
to touch the evil at its source, and reform the wrong ways of living as well as
one’s outlook towards life. According to Barker, education is an attempt to cure
a mental illness by a medicine.
The object of education is to turn the soul towards light. Plato once stated that the
main function of education is not to put knowledge into the soul, but to bring out
the latent talents in the soul by directing it towards the right objects. This
explanation of Plato on education highlights his object of education and guides
the readers in proper direction to unfold the ramifications of his theory of
education.
Plato was, in fact, the first ancient political philosopher either to establish a
university or introduce a higher course or to speak of education as such. This
emphasis on education came to the forefront only due to the then prevailing
education system in Athens. Plato was against the practice of buying knowledge,
which according to him was a heinous crime than buying meat and drink. Plato
strongly believed in a state control education system.
He held the view that without education, the individual would make no progress
any more than a patient who believed in curing himself by his own loving remedy
without giving up his luxurious mode of living. Therefore, Plato stated that
education touches the evil at the grass root and changes the whole outlook on life.
It was through education that the principle of justice was properly maintained.
Education was the positive measure for the operation of justice in the ideal state.
Plato was convinced that the root of the vice lay chiefly in ignorance, and only
by proper education can one be converted into a virtuous man.
The main purpose of Plato’s theory of education was to ban individualism,
abolish incompetence and immaturity, and establish the rule of the efficient.
Promotion of common good was the primary objective of platonic education.
Influence on Plato’s System of Education:
Plato was greatly influenced by the Spartan system of education, though not
completely. The education system in Athens was privately controlled unlike in
Sparta where the education was state-controlled. The Spartan youth were induced
to military spirit and the educational system was geared to this end.However, the
system lacked the literacy aspect. Intriguingly, many Spartans could neither read
nor write. Therefore, it can be stated that the Spartan system did not produce any
kind of intellectual potentials in man, which made Plato discard the Spartan
education to an extent. The platonic system of education is, in fact, a blend of
Course: Philosophy of Education (8609) Semester: Spring, 2023

Athens and the organization of Sparta. This is because Plato believed in the
integrated development of human personality.
State-controlled Education:
Plato believed in a strong state-controlled education for both men and women.
He was of the opinion that every citizen must be compulsorily trained to fit into
any particular class, viz., ruling, fighting or the producing class.
Education, however, must be imparted to all in the early stages without any
discrimination. Plato never stated out rightly that education system was geared to
those who want to become rulers of the ideal state and this particular aspect
attracted widespread criticism.
Plato’s Scheme of Education:
Plato was of the opinion that education must begin at an early age. In order to
make sure that children study well, Plato insisted that children be brought up in a
hale and healthy environment and that the atmosphere implant ideas of truth and
goodness. Plato believed that early education must be related to literature, as it
would bring out the best of the soul. The study must be mostly related to story-
telling and then go on to poetry.
Secondly, music and thirdly arts were the subjects of early education. Plato
believed in regulation of necessary step towards conditioning the individual. For
further convenience, Plato’s system of education can be broadly divided into two
parts: elementary education and higher education.
Elementary Education:
Plato was of the opinion that for the first 10 years, there should be predominantly
physical education. In other words, every school must have a gymnasium and a
playground in order to develop the physique and health of children and make
them resistant to any disease.
Apart from this physical education, Plato also recommended music to bring about
certain refinement in their character and lent grace and health to the soul and the
body. Plato also prescribed subjects such as mathematics, history and science.
However, these subjects must be taught by smoothing them into verse and songs
and must not be forced on children. This is because, according to Plato,
knowledge acquired under compulsion has no hold on the mind. Therefore, he
believed that education must not be forced, but should be made a sort of
amusement as it would enable the teacher to understand the natural bent of mind
of the child. Plato also emphasized on moral education.
Higher Education:
According to Plato, a child must take an examination that would determine
whether or not to pursue higher education at the age of 20. Those who failed in
the examination were asked to take up activities in communities such as
businessmen, clerks, workers, farmers and the like.
Those who passed the exam would receive another 10 years of education and
training in body and mind. At this stage, apart from physical and mathematical
sciences, subjects like arithmetic, astronomy, geometry and dialectics were
Course: Philosophy of Education (8609) Semester: Spring, 2023

taught. Again at the age of 30, students would take yet another examination,
which served as an elimination test, much severe than the first test.
Those who did not succeed would become executive assistants, auxiliaries and
military officers of the state. Plato stated that based on their capabilities,
candidates would be assigned a particular field. Those who passed in the
examination would receive another 5 year advanced education in dialectics in
order to find out as to who was capable of freeing himself from sense perception.
The education system did not end here. Candidates had to study for another 15
years for practical experience in dialectics. Finally at the age of 50, those who
withstood the hard and fast process of education were introduced to the ultimate
task of governing their country and the fellow beings.
These kings were expected to spend most of the time in philosophical pursuits.
Thus, after accomplishing perfection, the rulers would exercise power only in the
best interests of the state. The ideal state would be realized and its people would
be just, honest and happy.

Q.2 Discuss the features of educational curriculum proposed by john

Dewey.
Ans
John Dewey is credited as founding a philosophical approach to life
called ‘pragmatism’, and his approaches to education and learning have been
influential internationally and endured over time. He saw the purpose of
education to be the cultivation of thoughtful, critically reflective, socially
engaged individuals rather than passive recipients of established knowledge. He
rejected the rote-learning approach driven by predetermined curriculum which
was the standard teaching method at the time. However, importantly, he also
rejected child-centred approaches that followed children’s uninformed interests
and impulses uncritically. While he used the term ‘progressive education’, this
has since been misappropriated to describe, in some cases, a hands-off approach
to children’s learning which was not what Dewey proposed. Dewey believed that
traditional subject matter was important, but should be integrated with the
strengths and interests of the learner.
He developed a concept of inquiry, prompted by a sense of need and followed by
intellectual work such as defining problems, testing hypotheses, and finding
satisfactory solutions, as the central activity of such an educational approach.
This organic cycle of doubt, inquiry, reflection and the reestablishment of sense
or understanding contrasted with the ‘reflex arc’ model of learning popular in
his time. The reflex arc model thought of learning as a mechanical process,
measurable by standardised tests, without reference to the role of emotion or
experience in learning. Dewey was critical of the reductionism of educational
approaches which assume that all the big questions and ideas are already
answered, and need only to be transmitted to students. He believed that all
Course: Philosophy of Education (8609) Semester: Spring, 2023

concepts and meanings could be open to reinvention and improvement, and all
disciplines could be expanded with new knowledge, concepts and
understandings.
The main features of Dewey’s theory of education
Dewey suggested that individuals learn and grow as a result of experiences and
interactions with the world. These interactions and experiences lead individuals
to continually develop new concepts, ideas, practices and understandings, which,
in turn, are refined through and continue to mediate the learner’s life experiences
and social interactions. According to Dewey:
Interactions and communications focused on enhancing and deepening shared
meanings increase potential for learning and development. When students
communicate ideas and meanings within a group, they have the opportunity to
consider, take on and work with the perspectives, ideas and experiences of other
students.
Shared activities are an important context for learning and development. Dewey
valued real-life contexts and problems as educative experiences. If students only
passively perceive a problem and do not experience the consequences in a
meaningful, emotional and reflective way, then they are unlikely to adapt and
revise their habits or construct new habits, or will do so only superficially.
Students learn best when their interests are engaged. It is important to
develop ideas, activities and events that stimulate students’ interest and to which
teaching can be geared. Teaching and lecturing can be highly appropriate as long
as they are geared towards helping students to analyse or develop an intellectual
insight into a specific and meaningful situation.
Learning always begins with a student’s emotional response, which spurs further
inquiry. Dewey advocated for what he called ‘aesthetic’ experiences: dramatic,
compelling, unifying or transforming experiences in which students feel
enlivened and absorbed.
Students should be engaged in active learning and inquiry. Rather than teach
students to accept any seemingly valid explanations, education ought to give
students opportunities to discover information and ideas by their own effort in
a teacher-structured environment, and to put knowledge to functional
use by defining and solving problems, and determining the validity and worth of
ideas and theories. As noted above, this does not preclude explicit instruction
where appropriate.
Inquiry involves students in reflecting intelligently on their experiences in order
to adapt their habits of action. Experience should involve what Dewey
called ‘transaction’: an active phase, in which the student does something, as well
as a phase of ‘undergoing’, where the student receives or observes the effect that
their action has had. This might be as simple as noticing patterns when adding
numbers, or experimenting to determine the correct proportions for papier
mâché.
Course: Philosophy of Education (8609) Semester: Spring, 2023

Education is a key way of developing skills for democratic activity. Dewey was
positive about the value of recognising and appreciating differences as a vehicle
through which students can expand their experiences, and open up to new ways
of thinking rather than closing off to their own beliefs and habits.
What empirical evidence is there for this philosophy in practice?
While there is no direct evidence that Dewey’s approach improves student
outcomes, Dewey’s theory of students’ learning aligns with current theories of
education which emphasise how individuals develop cognitive functioning by
participating in sociocultural practices1, and with empirical studies examining
the positive impact of interactions with peers and adults2 on students’
learning. Quantative research also underlines a link between heightened
engagement and children’s learning outcomes, with strategies such as making
meaningful connections to students’ home lives and encouraging student
ownership of their learning found to increase student engagement3. A
few empirical studies which examined the effectiveness of aesthetic experiences
for students confirmed that students experienced those lessons as more
meaningful, compelling and connected than a comparison group.4
Dewey’s influence on teaching practice
Dewey’s theory has had an impact on a variety of educational practices including
individualised instruction, problem-based and integrated learning, dialogic
teaching, and critical inquiry. Dewey’s ideas also resonate with ideas of
teaching as inquiry.
Individualised instruction
Dewey’s ideas about education are evident in approaches where teaching and
learning are designed to be responsive to the specific needs, interests, and
cultural knowledge of students. Teachers therefore learn about students and their
motivating interests and desires in order to find subject matter, events and
experiences that appeal to students and that will provoke a need to develop the
knowledge, skills and values of the planned curriculum. Students are encouraged
to relate learning to their lives and experiences.
Problem-based learning and integrated learning approaches
Dewey’s principles of learning are evident also in problem-based learning and
project approaches to learning. These approaches begin with a practical task or
problem which is complex, comprehensive, multi-layered, collaborative,
and involves inquiry designed to extend students’ knowledge, skills and
understandings. Problem-based learning should:
start by supporting students to intellectualise exactly what the problem is
encourage controlled inquiry by helping students to develop logical hypotheses
(rather than depending on their habits of thinking to jump to conclusions), for
example, by connecting or disconnecting ideas they already have encountered
encourage students to revise their theories and reconstruct their concepts as their
inquiry unfolds.
Student engagement
Course: Philosophy of Education (8609) Semester: Spring, 2023

Dewey’s theory has also been extended to the problem of enhancing student
engagement. Some strategies that have been found to increase student
engagement and that align with Dewey’s concept of aesthetic experiences
include:
engaging students in deeper perception – going beyond the simple recognition of
objects to look carefully at colours, lines and textures, question perceptions, and
use new understandings to perceive things in new ways
building intellectual, sensory, emotional or social connections to a topic, such as
connecting to the topic of space travel through intellectual
connections to the concepts of speed, power and force, sensory connections to
the sounds, fire and vibrations, and emotional or social connections to the
feelings of astronauts involved
encouraging risk-taking, such as suggesting a calculation, or experimenting to
make papier mâché
encouraging sensory exploration
using a theme or metaphor to illuminate powerful ideas and to produce a sense of
wonder, imagination and anticipation, such as ‘rocks have a story to tell’
provoking anticipation with evocative materials or suggestive
situations, enabling students to unravel a mystery rather than follow a recipe.
Engagement can be heightened when students have ownership of their
learning, for example, by being engaged in curriculum planning and
cooperatively build curriculum themes, or by selecting a topic to research rather
than being assigned a topic. Students can take responsibility for judging the
value, significance and meaning of their experiences as well as next steps.
Dialogic teaching
Dialogic teaching emphasizes the importance of open student dialogue and
meaning-making for learning, and builds on Dewey’s ideas about the importance
of communication and social interaction. In this approach, students are
encouraged to form habits of careful listening and thoughtful speaking: for
example, they might be discouraged from raising their hand to speak in a lesson,
as that action triggers anticipatory thought rather than full attention to the current
speaker. Attention is paid to issues of power, privilege and access that may hinder
open dialogue.
Critical inquiry
Dewey’s approach to education is evident in curricula focused on critial thinking
skills in which students engage in intellectual reflection and inquiry, critique, test
and judge knowledge claims, make connections, apply their understandings in a
range of different situations, and go into depth, rather than be given quick answers
or rushed through a series of content. Dewey’s philosophy of education highlights
the importance of imagination to drive thinking and learning forward, and for
teachers to provide opportunities for students to suspend judgement, engage in
the playful consideration of possibilities, and explore doubtful possibilities.
Teaching as inquiry
Course: Philosophy of Education (8609) Semester: Spring, 2023

Dewey’s perspective on teaching and learning encourages a teaching as inquiry

mindset. His principles for teaching and learning suggest that teachers should
cultivate an energetic openness to possibilities alongside a commitment to
reflectively learning from experiences, be willing to experience ambiguity and
use problems as an opportunity to get deeper into an understanding of self,
students, the subject and the context.

Q.3 Describe the teaching method advocated by Al-Farabi.

Ans.
The aim of this paper is to present the attitudes to education of Abu Nasr al-Farabi
within the framework of his philosophical system, an aspect of his work about
which little was known, since researchers have been more interested in the
logical, metaphysical and political aspects, to the neglect of his educational
concepts. However, scholars do know that al-Farabi studied Plato’s Republic and
this work, by which he was most certainly influenced, deals mainly with
education, as is now accepted by historians of philosophy [2]. It is even more
unlikely that al-Farabi could have been unaware of this dimension of Plato’s
philosophy since he made a summary of Plato’s Laws, a work which we know
expresses his final thoughts on education.
1. Al-Farabi: A Biographical outline
So who is al-Farabi, and what is his contribution to education?
Al-Farabi was born in Wasij, in the province of Farab in Turkestan, in 872 AD
(259 AH) of a noble family. His father, of Persian origin, was an army
commander at the Turkish court. Al-Farabi moved to Baghdad, where he studied
grammar, logic, philosophy, music, mathematics and sciences; he was a pupil of
the great translator and interpreter of Greek philosophy, Abu Bishr Matta b.
Yunus (d. 942/329) in Baghdad; he then studied under Yuhanna b. Haylan, the
Nestorian (d. 941/328), in Harran. Thereby he is affiliated to the Alexandrian
school of philosophy which had been located at Harran, Antakya and Merv,
before definitively settling in Baghdad. As a result of these years of study, he
accumulated such knowledge of philosophy that he earned the name of the
‘Second Teacher’, by reference to Aristotle, the ‘First Teacher’.
He moved to Aleppo in the year 943 (330) and became part of the literary circle
in the court of Sayf al-Dawla Hamdani (d. 968/356). Al-Farabi was given to
wandering on his own in the countryside to reflect and to write, and it was
probably his despair at reforming his society that inclined him towards Sufism.
His travels brought him to Egypt and it was in Damascus in 950 (339) that he
died at the age of 80 [3].
Al-Farabi had a great desire to understand the universe and humankind, and to
know the latter’s place within the former, so as to reach a comprehensive
intellectual picture of the world and of society. He undertook the meticulous study
of ancient philosophy, particularly of Plato and Aristotle, absorbing the
components of Platonic and neo-Platonic philosophy, which he integrated into
Course: Philosophy of Education (8609) Semester: Spring, 2023

his own Islamic-Arabic civilization, whose chief source is, as we all know, the
Qur’an and the various sciences derived from it.
Al-Farabi represents a turning-point in the history of Islamic philosophical
thought, since he was the true first founder of epistemology which relies upon
‘universal reason’ and the demonstrations he gave. The intellectual, political and
social circumstances prevailing in his day no doubt explain his approach since, in
fact, he lived in a historical period of great turmoil, during which the central
Islamic caliphate was torn apart into independent states and principalities in both
the east and west; and sects and schools of thought (madhahib) sprang up
undermining the nation’s intellectual and political unity (oumma). Thus al-
Farabi’s concern was to restore unity to Islamic thought by confirming the
gnoseology based on demonstration.
He established logic within Islamic culture, and this is why he is known as the
‘Second Teacher’, as already mentioned. He was also engaged in restoring unity
in politics [4], making political science the core of his philosophy, basing himself
on the system of rules which governs nature and on the Qur’an which emphasized
the relationship between gnoseology and values (axiology). He believed the first
aim of knowledge was knowledge of God and his attributes, a knowledge which
has a profound effect on the human being’s moral conduct and helps him to find
the way to the ultimate aim of his existence, while indirectly arousing the intellect
so that it should achieve wisdom, which al-Farabi held to be the highest level of
intellectual attainment permitted to human beings in this life [5]. Thus the core of
his philosophy came to be the unity of society and of the State to be achieved by
unity of thought, wisdom and religion, each of these being the foundations of the
community’s government, which should be the same as the unity and order found
in the universe. Indeed, al-Farabi often compares the order and unity of the city
to that of the universe. Philosophy and religion were for him simply two
expressions of a single truth, the variance between them being only in the form
of expression: philosophy explains religion and provides proof of it; it is neither
in conflict nor in contradiction with it. Therefore we find him also bringing
together the philosophy of Plato and of Aristotle to explain the unity of intellect;
for, in his opinion, there is a general unity of thought between Plato and Aristotle,
the disparities being mere details.
It is especially important to note here that al-Farabi described something that was
taboo in the Hellenistic era: namely, the logical category called ‘demonstration’
whose social and educational function he illustrated in the formation of the mind
and of political awareness.
2. The aims of education
In fact, education is one of the most important social phenomena in al-Farabi’s
philosophical system. It is concerned with the human soul and makes sure that
the individual is prepared from an early age to become a member of society, to
achieve his own level of perfection, and thus to reach the goal for which he was
created. However, while it is true that there are no writings specifically devoted
Course: Philosophy of Education (8609) Semester: Spring, 2023

to education in al-Farabi’s books, anyone who follows his writings with care will
come upon various texts scattered here and there containing clear educational
elements corresponding to his overall philosophical views, which incline to
integrate separate concepts and thoughts into a ‘unified world view’.
Indeed, the whole activity of education, in al-Farabi’s view, can be summed up
as the acquisition of values, knowledge and practical skills by the individual,
within a particular period and a particular culture. The goal of education is to lead
the individual to perfection since the human being was created for this purpose,
and the goal of humanity’s existence in this world is to attain happiness, which is
the highest perfection—the absolute good [6].
The perfect human being (al-insan al-kamil), thought al-Farabi, is the one who
has obtained theoretical virtue—thus completing his intellectual knowledge—
and has acquired practical moral virtues—thus becoming perfect in his moral
behaviour. Then, crowning these theoretical and moral virtues with effective
power, they are anchored in the souls of individual members of the
community [7] when they assume the responsibility of political leadership, thus
becoming role models for other people. Al-Farabi unites moral and aesthetic
values: good is beautiful, and beauty is good; the beautiful is that which is valued
by the intelligentsia [8]. So this perfection which he expects from education
combines knowledge and virtuous behavior; it is happiness and goodness at one
and the same time.
Theoretical and practical perfection can only be obtained within society, for it is
society that nurtures the individual and prepares him to be free. If he were to live
outside society, he might only learn to be a wild animal [9]. Then, one of the goals
of education is the creation of the ideal community, ‘the one whose cities all work
together in order to attain happiness’ [10].
One of the aims of education is the formation of political leaders, because
‘ignorance is more harmful in monarchs than it is in the common people’ [11].
So, in al-Farabi’s view, just as the body needs food and the ship must have a
captain, moral conduct must proceed from the soul and the citizens have a real
need for a leader who conducts an acceptable policy, directing their affairs in a
praiseworthy manner and improving their situation. There is integration between
the individual, the family and the city in social life: ‘What we say about all cities
is also true of the single household, and of each person’ [12]. The political leader,
al-Farabi considers, has the function of a doctor who treats souls and his political
skill is to the wellbeing of the city what the physician’s skill is to bodily health.
The work of the politician should not be restricted to the organization and
management of cities, inasmuch as he encourages people to help one another in
achieving good things and overcoming evil; he must use his political skills to
protect the virtues and praiseworthy activities that he has been encouraging in the
citizens [13] so that they are free of failings. Among the other characteristics of
the political leader is the ‘consultative faculty’, in other words ‘an intellectual
Course: Philosophy of Education (8609) Semester: Spring, 2023

capacity by which he can draw out what is most beneficial and most fair in the
search for the good among others’ [14].
The soundness of the city is a reflection of ‘the good balance of morals among its
people’ [15], and achieving this balance is one of the most important aims of
education. When moral behavior declines and there is doubt over behavior and
opinions, the absence of these common values governing people’s conduct
disturbs the city. Morality, then, is a fundamental objective of education. Al-
Farabi defines virtues as ‘states of mind in which the human being carries out
good and kind deeds. […] They can be either ethical or rational; the latter are
virtues of the rational element in the intelligent human being, such as wisdom,
common sense, inventiveness and cleverness. The ethical virtues are, among
others, temperance, courage, generosity and justice’ [16]. These virtues in the
individual must be internalized in the soul so that a person is ready to act upon
them ‘to earnestly desire them and, rather than being harmed by them, finds them
attractive […] so that he pursues always those ends which are truly good and
makes them his goal’ [17].
Among the other aims assigned to education, al-Farabi includes ‘proficiency in
the arts’, because, in his view, perfection in theoretical and practical arts is one
of the expressions of wisdom; for the wise are ‘those who are very proficient in
the arts, and reach perfection in them’ [18].
Thus, in al-Farabi’s view, one of the goals of education is to combine learning
with practical action, for the purpose of knowledge is that it should be applied,
and perfection lies in its being transformed into action: ‘Whatever by its nature
should be known and practiced, its perfection lies in it actually being
practiced’ [19]. The sciences have no meaning unless they can be applied in
practical reality, otherwise they are void and useless. The real practical sciences
‘are those which are linked to readiness for action’ [20] and absolute perfection
is ‘what the human being achieves through knowledge and action applied
together’ [21]. Moreover, if the speculative sciences are learned without having
the opportunity to apply them, this wisdom is marred [22].
Concerning the realization of these aims and the supervision of education and
teaching, al-Farabi agrees with Plato and the ‘Twelver Shi’a’ that it is the priest,
ruler or philosopher who should be responsible [23]. And since the lawgiver is
also the ruler, al-Farabi concludes that the law has an educational function: ‘The
meaning of imam, in Arabic, indicates one whose example is followed, one who
is well-regarded’ [24] . Issuing laws for society does not simply mean ‘that
citizens should be obedient and diligent, but also that they should have
praiseworthy morals and acceptable behavior’ [25] .
Therefore al-Farabi considers that the one who prescribes the laws must be bound
by them himself before expecting others to conform to them: ‘The one who sets
the laws must first follow them, and only then make them compulsory’ [26] . For
he would not be acceptable to those under his command, nor would they respect
him, if they did not see him observing his own laws. In short, the law has an
Course: Philosophy of Education (8609) Semester: Spring, 2023

educational function since it leads to the inculcation of virtues when the leaders
conform to it themselves and are seen as role models for the general public. For
this purpose, the lawgiver must be trained from childhood in the affairs of
State [27] , and the imam‘s or caliph’s aim in legislation must be to please God.
Only those whom God has prepared may make laws, including the Prophet,
whom al-Farabi defines as: ‘He who lays down the practices and the holy laws,
and admonishes the people by incitement and intimidation’ [28] . The function of
the caliph is to pursue the educational role previously undertaken by the Prophet.
Al-Farabi considers it a duty of the State to put aside a budget for education,
taking a portion from the alms tax (zakat) and land tax (kharaj), as well as other
State resources for this purpose: ‘Taxes and duties are of two kinds: one is taken
to support mutual assistance and the other for the education of the young’ [29] .
3. What is education?Al-Farabi used a large number of technical terms to describe
this concept: discipline (ta’dib) [30], correction/assessment (taqwim) [31],
training (tahdhib) [32], guidance (tasdid) [33], instruction (ta’lim) [34], exercise
or learning (irtiyad) [35], and upbringing or education (tarbiya) [36]. Good
manners or culture (adab), in his opinion, in their true educational meaning are
the ‘combination of all the good qualities’ [37], while discipline is the ‘way of
creating the moral virtues, and the practical arts in the nations’ [38]. Instruction
(ta’lim) is ‘creating the speculative virtues in nations and cities’[39]. Al-Farabi
distinguishes between instruction (ta’lim) and discipline (ta’dib). The former is
the way of acquiring a theoretical culture, and is mainly verbal. The latter forms
ethical conduct, and leads to technical or practical skills. They are therefore quite
different.
But al-Farabi did not insist on this division, and on another occasion he defined
instruction as including discipline [40]. Al-Farabi divides instruction between
‘special’ and ‘general’. The special is ‘that which is achieved exclusively by
demonstration’ [41]. This kind of instruction is directed at the elite ‘who do not
restrict themselves in their theoretical knowledge to what is expected by generally
accepted opinions, because among nations, as among citizens, there is an elite
and the general public. The general public designates those who are restricted in
their theoretical knowledge -whether by obligation or not – to what is demanded
by generally accepted opinions’ [42].
It is the elite of the elite which exercises leadership [43]. It is for this reason that
the method of instruction is different: ‘Persuasive and descriptive methods are
used in the instruction of common people and the masses in nations and cities;
while demonstration methods […] are used for instructing those who are destined
to form part of the elite’ [44], those who have been tested and found to have
superior intelligence.
Al-Farabi believes that education is founded upon the basis of the human being
having certain inborn aptitudes, which he calls ‘nature’; ‘in other words the power
which the human being possesses at the moment of birth, and which he could not
have acquired’[45]. No normal human being lacks it, just as the whole is greater
Course: Philosophy of Education (8609) Semester: Spring, 2023

than the part [46]. Al-Farabi also speaks about ‘primary science’ and ‘primary
principals’ [47]. He differs from Plato in that he gives a fundamental place to
sensory perception. He describes the senses as ‘the paths whence the human soul
gains knowledge’ [48].
Knowledge thus begins with the senses, then becomes an intellectual conception
by way of imagination, since whatever the soul understands contains an element
of imagination. Knowledge originates with the senses [49]. Al-Farabi drew
attention to Aristotle’s opinion in The Book of Demonstrations when he said:
‘Whosoever loses a sensory perception loses knowledge’ [50]. One function of
the imagination is to preserve the sensory images [51] which, in the end, become
intellectual possessions. Some of his views, dealing with what today we would
call general psychology and educational psychology should be the subject of an
interesting study [52]. Although he deals with sensory knowledge, he considers
that the senses are only instruments of the mind, for it is the mind which has the
potential of understanding. He pointed to Plato’s opinion that the nature of
learning is based on ‘memory’ and gives a metaphor of the concept of ‘equality’
which, in his opinion, is fixed in the mind: confronted with a piece of wood which
is equal to another piece of wood, we are aware of this equality, in other words
the concept of ‘equality’ is presented to the memory which compares it with the
concept already in the mind. ‘Any learner proceeds in the same way by comparing
it with what is already in his mind’ [53]. We find this too in al-Biruni (d.
1048/444): ‘Our learning is no more than remembering what we have learned in
the past forgetting is the passing away of knowledge, and learning is remembering
what the soul knew before it came into the body’ [54].
4. Teaching methods
As we have seen, al-Farabi considers that the method of instruction must be
appropriate to the level of the learners, depending on whether people belong to
the common people or the elite.
Education, as he sees it, is necessary for every individual in the nation, since
without it nobody would be able to reach perfection and happiness. So, if
education must be available to all, the method of teaching should however be
adapted according to the group it is intended for. There are two fundamental
methods: the path of the common people, based on persuasion; the path of the
elite, based on demonstration. Furthermore, the method of instruction may also
vary according to the instructional material. Thus, teaching theoretical intellectual
virtues is carried out by demonstration, while teaching practical arts and crafts is
by way of persuasion.
The demonstrative path is achieved through speech. Aural instruction, according
to al-Farabi’s words, is therefore ‘that in which the teacher uses speech’ for
matters which can be taught in this way. It leads to the acquisition of theoretical
virtues. The persuasive method is conducted through speech and activity together,
and is suitable for teaching the applied arts and moral virtues
Course: Philosophy of Education (8609) Semester: Spring, 2023

Following Plato’s model, al-Farabi used the method of dialogue or debate ,

although he does not consider it as the only method to escape from the world of
sensory perception to arrive at the world of intelligentsia—beginning with
contradictory ideas to arrive at unity. He emphasized the importance of discussion
and dialogue in instruction, and indicated two methods: the method of argument
and the method of discourse; both of these ‘can be used orally or in writing’.
When speaking to the common people, the methods used must be those closest to
their powers of comprehension, enabling them to grasp what they are capable of
understanding.

Q.4 Define Deconstructionism. Write down the qualities of teacher and

curriculum supported by Deconstructionists’ philosophy.
Ans
deconstruction, form of philosophical and literary analysis, derived mainly from
work begun in the 1960s by the French philosopher Jacques Derrida, that
questions the fundamental conceptual distinctions, or “oppositions,” in Western
philosophy through a close examination of the language and logic of
philosophical and literary texts. In the 1970s the term was applied to work by
Derrida, Paul de Man, J. Hillis Miller, and Barbara Johnson, among other
scholars. In the 1980s it designated more loosely a range of radical theoretical
enterprises in diverse areas of the humanities and social sciences, including—in
addition to philosophy and literature—law, psychoanalysis, architecture,
anthropology, theology, feminism, gay and lesbian studies, political theory,
historiography, and film theory. In polemical discussions
about intellectual trends of the late 20th-century, deconstruction was sometimes
used pejoratively to suggest nihilism and frivolous skepticism. In popular usage
the term has come to mean a critical dismantling of tradition and traditional
modes of thought.
Deconstruction in philosophy
The oppositions challenged by deconstruction, which have been inherent in
Western philosophy since the time of the ancient Greeks, are characteristically
“binary” and “hierarchical,” involving a pair of terms in which one member of
the pair is assumed to be primary or fundamental, the other secondary or
derivative. Examples include nature and culture, speech and writing, mind and
body, presence and absence, inside and outside, literal and metaphorical,
intelligible and sensible, and form and meaning, among many others. To
“deconstruct” an opposition is to explore the tensions and contradictions between
the hierarchical ordering assumed (and sometimes explicitly asserted) in the text
and other aspects of the text’s meaning, especially those that are indirect
or implicit or that rely on figurative or performative uses of language. Through
this analysis, the opposition is shown to be a product, or “construction,” of the
text rather than something given independently of it.
Course: Philosophy of Education (8609) Semester: Spring, 2023

In the writings of the French Enlightenment philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau,

for example, society and culture are described as corrupting and oppressive forces
that gradually develop out of an idyllic “state of nature” in which humans exist
in self-sufficient and peaceful isolation from one another. For Rousseau, then,
nature is prior to culture. Yet there is another sense in which culture is certainly
prior to nature: the idea of nature is a product of culture, and what counts as
“nature” or “natural” at any given historical moment will vary depending upon
the culture of the time. What this fact shows is not that the terms of the
nature/culture opposition should be inverted—that culture is really prior to
nature—but rather that the relation between the terms is not one-sided and
unidirectional, as Rousseau and others had assumed. The point of the
deconstructive analysis is to restructure, or “displace,” the opposition, not simply
to reverse it.
For Derrida, the most telling and pervasive opposition is the one that treats
writing as secondary to or derivative of speech. According to this opposition,
speech is a more authentic form of language, because in speech the ideas and
intentions of the speaker are immediately “present” (spoken words, in this
idealized picture, directly express what the speaker “has in mind”), whereas in
writing they are more remote or “absent” from the speaker or author and thus
more liable to misunderstanding. As Derrida argues, however, spoken words
function as linguistic signs only to the extent that they can be repeated in
different contexts, in the absence of the speaker who originally utters them.
Speech qualifies as language, in other words, only to the extent that it has
characteristics traditionally assigned to writing, such as “absence,” “difference”
(from the original context of utterance), and the possibility of misunderstanding.
One indication of this fact, according to Derrida, is that descriptions of speech in
Western philosophy often rely on examples and metaphors related to writing. In
effect, these texts describe speech as a form of writing, even in cases where
writing is explicitly claimed to be secondary to speech. As with the opposition
between nature and culture, however, the point of the deconstructive analysis is
not to show that the terms of the speech/writing opposition should be inverted—
that writing is really prior to speech—nor is it to show that there are no differences
between speech and writing. Rather, it is to displace the opposition so as to show
that neither term is primary. For Derrida, speech and writing are both forms of a
more generalized “arche-writing” (archi-écriture), which encompasses not only
all of natural language but any system of representation whatsoever.
The “privileging” of speech over writing is based on what Derrida considers a
distorted (though very pervasive) picture of meaning in natural language, one that
identifies the meanings of words with certain ideas or intentions in the mind of
the speaker or author. Derrida’s argument against this picture is an extension of
an insight by the Swiss linguist Ferdinand de Saussure. For Saussure, the
concepts we associate with linguistic signs (their “meanings”) are only arbitrarily
related to reality, in the sense that the ways in which they divide and group the
Course: Philosophy of Education (8609) Semester: Spring, 2023

world are not natural or necessary, reflecting objectively existing categories, but
variable (in principle) from language to language. Hence, meanings can be
adequately understood only with reference to the specific contrasts and
differences they display with other, related meanings. For Derrida, similarly,
linguistic meaning is determined by the “play” of differences between words—a
play that is “limitless,” “infinite,” and “indefinite”—and not by an original idea
or intention existing prior to and outside language. Derrida coined the
term différance, meaning both a difference and an act of deferring, to characterize
the way in which meaning is created through the play of differences between
words. Because the meaning of a word is always a function of contrasts with the
meanings of other words, and because the meanings of those words are in turn
dependent on contrasts with the meanings of still other words (and so on), it
follows that the meaning of a word is not something that is fully present to us; it
is endlessly deferred in an infinitely long chain of meanings, each of which
contains the “traces” of the meanings on which it depends.
Derrida contends that the opposition between speech and writing is
a manifestation of the “logocentrism” of Western culture—i.e., the general
assumption that there is a realm of “truth” existing prior to and independent of its
representation by linguistic signs. Logocentrism encourages us to treat linguistic
signs as distinct from and inessential to the phenomena they represent, rather than
as inextricably bound up with them. The logocentric conception of truth and
reality as existing outside language derives in turn from a deep-
seated prejudice in Western philosophy, which Derrida characterizes as the
“metaphysics of presence.” This is the tendency to conceive fundamental
philosophical concepts such as truth, reality, and being in terms of ideas such as
presence, essence, identity, and origin—and in the process to ignore the crucial
role of absence and difference.
Deconstruction in literary studies
Deconstruction’s reception was coloured by its intellectual predecessors, most
notably structuralism and New Criticism. Beginning in France in the 1950s, the
structuralist movement in anthropology analyzed various cultural phenomena as
general systems of “signs” and attempted to develop “metalanguages” of terms
and concepts in which the different sign systems could be described. Structuralist
methods were soon applied to other areas of the social sciences and humanities,
including literary studies. Deconstruction offered a powerful critique of the
possibility of creating detached, scientific metalanguages and was thus
categorized (along with kindred efforts) as “post-structuralist.” Anglo-American
New Criticism sought to understand verbal works of art (especially poetry) as
complex constructions made up of different and contrasting levels of literal and
nonliteral meanings, and it emphasized the role of paradox and irony in
these artifacts. Deconstructive readings, in contrast, treated works of art not as
the harmonious fusion of literal and figurative meanings but as instances of the
intractable conflicts between meanings of different types. They generally
Course: Philosophy of Education (8609) Semester: Spring, 2023

examined the individual work not as a self-contained artifact but as a product of

relations with other texts or discourses, literary and nonliterary. Finally, these
readings placed special emphasis on the ways in which the works themselves
offered implicit critiques of the categories that critics used to analyze them. In
the United States in the 1970s and ’80s, deconstruction played a major role in the
animation and transformation of literary studies by literary theory (often referred
to simply as “theory”), which was concerned with questions about the nature
of language, the production of meaning, and the relationship
between literature and the numerous discourses that structure human experience
and its histories.
Deconstruction in the social sciences and the arts
Deconstruction’s influence widened to include a variety of other disciplines.
In psychoanalysis, deconstructive readings of texts by Sigmund Freud and others
drew attention to the role of language in the formation of the psyche; showed how
psychoanalytic case studies are shaped by the kinds of psychic mechanisms that
they purport to analyze (thus, Freud’s writings are themselves organized by
processes of repression, condensation, and displacement); and questioned the
logocentric presuppositions of psychoanalytic theory. Some strands
of feminist thinking engaged in a deconstruction of the opposition between
“man” and “woman” and critiqued essentialist notions of gender and sexual
identity. The work of Judith Butler, for example, challenged the claim that
feminist politics requires a distinct identity for women. Arguing that identity is
the product or result of action rather than the source of it, they embraced a
performative concept of identity modeled on the way in which linguistic acts
(such as promising) work to bring into being the entities (the promise) to which
they refer. This perspective was influential in gay and lesbian studies, or “queer
theory,” as the academic avant-garde linked to movements of gay liberation
styled itself.
In the United States, the Critical Legal Studies movement applied deconstruction
to legal writing in an effort to reveal conflicts between principles and
counterprinciples in legal theory. The movement explored fundamental
oppositions such as public and private, essence and accident, and substance and
form. In anthropology, deconstruction contributed to an increased awareness of
the role that anthropological field-workers play in shaping, rather than merely
describing, the situations they report on and to a greater concern about the
discipline’s historical connections to colonialism.
Finally, the influence of deconstruction spread beyond the humanities and social
sciences to the arts and architecture. Combining deconstruction’s interest in
tension and oppositions with the design vocabulary of Russian constructivism,
deconstructivist architects such as Frank Gehry challenged the
functionalist aesthetic of modern architecture through designs using radical
geometries, irregular forms, and complex, dynamic constructions.
Influence and criticism
Course: Philosophy of Education (8609) Semester: Spring, 2023

In all the fields it influenced, deconstruction called attention to rhetorical and

performative aspects of language use, and it encouraged scholars to consider not
only what a text says but also the relationship—and potential conflict—between
what a text says and what it “does.” In various disciplines, deconstruction also
prompted an exploration of fundamental oppositions and critical terms and a
reexamination of ultimate goals. Most generally, deconstruction joined with other
strands of poststructural and postmodern thinking to inspire a suspicion of
established intellectual categories and a skepticism about the possibility of
objectivity. Consequently, its diffusion was met with a sizeable body of
opposition. Some philosophers, especially those in the Anglo-American tradition,
dismissed it as obscurantist wordplay whose major claims, when intelligible,
were either trivial or false. Others accused it of being ahistorical and apolitical.
Still others regarded it as a nihilistic endorsement of radical epistemic relativism.
Despite such attacks, deconstruction has had an enormous impact on a variety of
intellectual enterprises.

Q.5 How do, according to Montessori, environment and freedom of a child

play a significant role in his education?
Ans.
Freedom within limits in Montessori Education
Freedom within limits is a core Montessori concept. For parents that are new to
Montessori, this concept may seem contradictory. After all, aren’t limits and rules
the opposite of freedom? Some parents may also be concerned that the absence
of rules will lead to bad behaviour. Because surely, no rules lead to anarchy,
right?
What is freedom within limits?
Freedom within limits is an empowering concept. It embraces the notion of the
child as an explorer who is capable of learning and doing for themselves.
Montessori encourages freedom within limits through the design of the prepared
environment. Especially relevant is the low open shelves, logically ordered
activities, and child-friendly work spaces of the Montessori classroom. In effect,
this encourages the child to move freely around the classroom, and choose their
own work within limits of appropriate behaviour. These limits are the ground
rules of the Montessori classroom.
What are the limits of Montessori classroom?
There are three ground rules of the Montessori classroom. All other ground rules
stem from these three.
1) Respect for oneself
2) Respect for others; and
3) Respect for the environment.
In the first place, respect for oneself refers to teaching children how to work safely
and productively in the Montessori classroom. Children are free to choose their
Course: Philosophy of Education (8609) Semester: Spring, 2023

activities, provided that they have been shown a presentation of the activity, and
know how to use the materials respectfully to avoid self-harm.
Furthermore, respect for others incorporates social skills and good behaviour.
Children can choose to work independently or in small groups; however, they
must be invited to work with another child, and must not interfere with another
child’s work. All children must show respect for others within their classroom
community.
Finally, respect for the environment relates to the proper care for everything
within the Montessori classroom. This includes the proper use of the Montessori
materials, packing away, and taking care of all things living and non-living within
the environment.
Types of freedom in the Montessori environment
Freedom to move
Within the Montessori classroom, children are free to move around the room, and
move from one activity to the next. Children who move around the room are more
likely to choose purposeful work when they have fulfilled their need for activity.
In consequence, by allowing freedom of movement, children learn to explore
their environment; and therefore discover their interests.

Freedom of choice
Freedom of choice is fundamental to the Montessori approach. This is because
choice allows children to discover their needs, interests and abilities.
Furthermore, freedom of choice encourages children to be engaged in their
learning, and thus discover the outcome of the activity.
Freedom of time
Freedom of time allows children to work with the same material for as long as
they like. In effect, this encourages children to learn at their own pace, develop
the skills of concentration, and learn patience to wait their turn.
Freedom to repeat
The three-hour work cycle gives students the opportunity to work with materials
and achieve success through practice. Furthermore, through repetition, children
learn to self-correct and problem solve.
Freedom to communicate
Montessori encourages communication in the classroom. Children learn to
discuss activities, problem solve, and develop their social skills.
Freedom to make mistakes
Furthermore, the design of the Montessori materials encourages children to
discover the outcome of the activity by themselves. Each material is designed
with a visual control of error. This guides the child to understand the outcome of
the activity through hands-on learning experiences.
How does freedom within limits benefit the child?
Freedom within limits encourages children to become respectful members of their
classroom community. Through real life experience, students learn that freedom
Course: Philosophy of Education (8609) Semester: Spring, 2023

is choosing to do what is best for themselves and others. In conclusion, freedom

within limits teaches children how to become independent and confident learners
who respect the rules of their freedom.
“Let us leave the life free to develop within the limits of the good, and let us
observe this inner life developing. This is the whole of our mission.” – Maria
Montessori