Dewey On The Utility of Philosophy

In chapter Twenty-Four of Democracy and Education, titled 'Philosophy of Education' Dewey starts by reiterating his classification of philosophy from previous discussions, where he defines it as a generalized theory of education. From here, Dewey draws a sharp distinction between philosophy and the hard sciences, mathematics, and fact based humanity courses. Philosophy is stated to be a form of thinking, which, like all other forms of thinking, is derived from the relative uncertainties found in human experiences. Subjects such as biology, chemistry, calculus and history on the other hand are stated to be forms of grounded knowledge, in that they consist of established empirical facts which have been set down and categorized as such. Despite this distinction, the factual knowledge of such disciplines are necessary prerequisites for one's engagement in philosophical thinking due to the true nature of thinking being the amelioration of disturbances. The disturbances that Dewey is eluding to are those which arise when contrasting views pertaining to the application of grounded knowledge are present between individuals, groups or cultures. The function of philosophy is thus, to think/hypothesize/speculate upon what response, if any, the 'known' can or should elicit. Given the relative nature of humanities understanding and employment of the 'known,' philosophy is not in the business of establishing grounded facts, but rather, in analyzing shortcomings and positing stratagems for managing them.

The current trend in public education is to draft curriculum and present course materiel in a starkly exclusionary manner. What I mean by this is, our schools and thus our students regard the sciences, humanities, arts, and mathematics as individual entities, each with their own skill sets, personalities, requirements and future careers. Given the nature of standardized testing, and the specialized skill sets of each teacher, this segregation of disciplines is a logical strategy if the goal of our schools is simply the rendering of knowledge unto the student body, which unfortunately many seem to think it is. Where both myself and Dewey find fault with such a narrowly contrived directive for our schools is that it does little to facilitate thoughtfulness and the application of knowledge across disciplines... which is what the world beyond the classroom requires of us. A fulfilling social life, happy marriage, innovative and creative thinking, sound investment, informed voting, strong leadership, service to humanity, etc... all necessitate the ability to think about what we know, do and experience. The failure to exercise this faculty in our students leaves their rational capabilities, individuality, and perceptive skills sorely underdeveloped. The end result is that they view school as a compartmentalized source of incongruent facts with little contemporary relevance, and upon graduation, struggle to apply this grounded knowledge when, as Dewey puts it, "claims of different ideals of conduct affect the community as a whole, and the need for readjustment is general." There are a number of strategies we might use to curtail these educational shortcoming, the cheapest and laziest of which would be to raise the standards placed on teachers at present to include cross disciplinary thought and discussion. However, doing so would place additional demand on them through the addition of mandated course content that they lack both the time and training to adequately incorporate. The perspective alternative that Dewey develops, and I strive to push further, is the adoption of philosophy and ethics into main stream education.

Mission Statement

Before embarking on what is almost certainly a more ambitious undertaking then I am presently aware of/ready to admit, it is wise, if not necessary to outline not only the project itself, but also the goals I intend to meet through it's completion. Given that I am a Wiggins, stating my goals first and foremost and then designing backwards from there seems only too appropriate. Prior to that, perhaps it is best to articulate (even if only for myself) my reasons behind engaging in such a project.

- In short, my motivation stems from my own personal frustration at the profoundly limited opportunity for engaging in philosophical inquiry/discourse even within the classroom of my private boarding high school, a frustration that is exacerbated by the utility and relevance of the subject that I believe all young adults would benefit from. In fact, it is my assertion that the benefits endowed through the study of philosophy and ethics are so great that their integration into the American public school system is an education emparative. My rationale for this claim is the product of my belief that our schools should be generating self aware individuals, ciritical thinkers, passionate scholars, and moral citizens, a belief that I am sure nearly all educators share but one that is deeply lacking in its application.

As they stand, my goals for this semester are thus:
- To formulate a concise yet convincing argument, calling for the incorporation of both philosophy and ethics into the common core of American public education.
- To design a realistic and working model corriculum for high school students that can potentially be incorporated into pilot philosophy/ethics courses that are based locally and Ursinus lead.

Although the specific details and premises of my multi fascited argument have yet to be hashed out, I have (for the most part) determined the mode of presentation that will best aid in it being received as both legitimate and compelling, and that is through placing a strong emphasis on the subjects utility. As I see it, this is the tallest hurdle that must be overcome if philosophy and ethics are to be implemented on a broad scale. I base this claim on two points of analysis, one academic and one sociological. 

On the academic front, it is paramount that philosophy be presented as an important preparatory subject for all perspective college students. Right now, what little philosophy that is present in public education has been rendered an elective classification, an interesting addition to the compulsory courses for those who can fit it into their schedule (if the respective school offers it at all). For this classification to be changed,  it must proven that philosophy is equally beneficial to the aspiring college student as english or mathematics. I say so not because I think the sole purpose of high school is to prepare students for the SAT's and then college, on the contrary, I utterly reject this view and credit it as the root cause of many of our educational shortcomings. Furthermore, I firmly believe that philosophy and ethics should lie at the foundation of everyones studies, regardless of their post high school plans (This portion of the argument will also be developed in the final paper) That being said, serving a preparatory role is a necessity for any subject seeking main stream implementation at present, and taking an accommodating approach is the most realistic of possible strategies. The good news is that this involves very little compromise given the range of tools and skills that philosophy/ethics help cultivate such as reading comprehension, argumentation, critical thinking, and writing.

Overcoming the sociological hurdle, like that of the academic, involves a proof of utility, but one that is more unique for this specific field of study. I think it is fair to assume that philosophy has been negatively stigmatized even at the college level. Not only has it been wrongly classified as an elective as I mentioned before, but it has also garnered the reputation for being overly semantic, hyper intellectual, and speculative to the point of irrelevance or incoherence. These conations are not all misplaced, much of what contemporary philosophy has diffused into would have little practical value for the average high school student. But due to this lack of understanding and failure to differentiate between the many branches of philosophy, the entire field has been lumped together and tossed to the side. On top of this, the notion of schools taking responsibility for a portion of a child's moral growth makes many parents very uncomfortable. Taking these factors into account will be essential if I am to sway the minds of not only curriculum framers but parents and administrators. To reverse the stigma that philosophy currently has will be done by carefully sorting, filtering and separating the relevant from the irrelevant (for high school students). The focus will be on broad ethical dilemmas and philosophical inquiries, specifically those that pertain to contemporary society. Some examples might be, foundational ethics and justifications for good actions, environmental/medical/political issues, existential quandaries and introspective questioning, strong argumentation, critical thinking, and logical deduction among others. All the while taking into account contrasting stances on faith, public policy, and morality between families. By stressing accommodation, the focus will be on facilitating discussion and enhancing world view as opposed to hammering home a specific set of moral principles. Conducted in the proper fashion, this will give students the opportunity to debate, challenge, and learn together in a neutral environment and minimize the blowback from parents.