Chapter One

The Meaning and Purpose of Philosophy

1.1 What is Philosophy?
1.2 Four Ways of Understand Philosophy
1.3 Explaining and Explanations
1.4 Basic Kinds of Explanations
1.5 The Value of Philosophy
1.6 The Scope of Philosophy
1.7 Systematic Philosophy and its Relationship to Education
- Metaphysics
- Epistemology
- Types of Knowledge
(1) Revealed Knowledge
(2) Pragmatic Knowledge
(3) Rational Knowledge
(4) Empirical Knowledge
(5) Intuitive Knowledge
(6) Authoritative Knowledge
(7) Autodidactic Knowledge
- Logic
- Logical Teaching
- Axiology or Theory of Values
1.8 The Nature of African Philosophy
1.9 Topics for Discussion
1.10 References
1.11 Bibliography

Chapter Two
What is Philosophy of Education?
2.1. Philosophy and Education
2.2 Relationship between Philosophy and Education
2.3 Topics for Discussion
2.4 References
2.5 Bibliography

Chapter Three
Naturalism
3.1 Meaning and Advocates of Naturalism
3.2 Jean Jacques Rousseau
3.3 Johann Heinrich Pestalozzi
3.4 Basic Concepts of Naturalism
3.5. Naturalism Applied to Educative Process
3.6 Topics for Discussion
3.7 Bibliography

Chapter Four
Idealism
4.1 Meaning and Advocates of Idealism
4.2 Basic Tenets of Idealism
4.3 Idealist Epistemology and Educative Process
4.4 Socrates
4.5 Plato Ariston
4.6 Plato’s Philosophy
4.7 Plato’s Epistemology
4.8 Plato’s Republic
4.9 The Educational Process of the Three Classes
4.10 Topics of Discussion
4.11 Reference
4.12 Bibliography

Chapter Five
Realism
5.1 Meaning and Advocates of Realism
5.2 Basic Concepts of Realism
5.3 Realism Applied to the Educative Process
5.4 Aristotle’s Nicomachus
5.5 Aristotle’s Philosophy
5.6 Aristotle’s Epistemology
5.7 Topics of Discussion
5.8 References
5.9 Bibliography

Chapter Six
Pragmatism
6.1 Meaning and Advocates of Pragmatism
6.2 John Dewey’s Pragmatism in Education
6.3 Topics of Discussion
6.4 References
6.5 Bibliography

Chapter Seven
Existentialism
7.1 Meaning and Advocates of Existentialism
7.2 Existentialism Epistemology – Appropriation
7.3 Existential Curriculum
7.4 Teaching and Learning
7.5 Topics of Discussion
7.6 References
7.7 Bibliography

Chapter Eight
Teaching
8.1 A Teacher as a Cultural Architect
8.2 A Teacher as a Conservator of Culture
8.3 A Teacher as a Democratic Leader
8.4 Relationship of Teacher to Students
8.5 Topics for Discussion

Chapter Nine
Play in Education
9.1 Historical Development
9.2 Plato
9.3 Jean Jacques Rousseau
9.4 Johann Heinrich Pestalozzi
9.5 Friedrich Froebel
9.6 Maria Montessori
9.7 The Concepts of Play
9.8 Theories of Play
9.9 Play in Educational Process
9.10 Topics for Discussion
9.11 References
9.12 Bibliography

Chapter Ten
Should Our Institutions Teach
10.1 Bibliography

Chapter Eleven
Disbelief in the Classroom
Introduction
11.1 Reflections on the Story
11.2 Disbelief, Belief and Truth
11.3 Influence of Beliefs
11.4 Justification of Disbelief in the Classroom
11.5 Pedagogical Implications of Disbelief
11.6 Conclusion
11.7 Bibliography
Chapter Twelve
Democratic Education
12.1 Introduction
12.2 Meaning of the Concept of Democracy
12.3 Education and Democracy
12.4 Principles guiding Democracy and Education
12.5 Some Implementation of the concept of Democracy
in Educational Establishment
12.6 A Critical Look at some Implementation of the
Concept of Democracy in the Nigerian Educational System
12.7 Topics for Discussion
12.8 References
12.9 Bibliography

Skillful that he employs “knowledge to serve the purposes of human relations”

The claim that knowledge is not the same thing as wisdom does not imply that one
cannot become wise without being furnished with some knowledge and understanding. In
other words, knowledge is indispensable to wisdom. But the use made of one’s knowledge is
a determining factor in one being alluded to as a wise or not a wise man. Thus, wisdom
according to Plato, is nothing but humanly oriented knowledge, which ought to be employed
to serve the purposes of enriching, liberalizing and humanizing life. A wise person, therefore,
will endeavour to bring his intellectual weight to bear, on the problems of his community.
That way, philosophy as love of wisdom and knowledge assists in the promotion of human
life.
The strong contention of Kwasi Wiredu that an intellectual ought to use his
knowledge for the good of the society was probably due largely to the prevailing poverty in
the African societies. In some of those societies, there were few intellectuals and as such they
were regarded as tin gods. This same idea was earlier on stressed by Aliu Babatunde Fafunwa
when he discussed the need for a competent teacher:
…the competent teacher is a good citizen, a
community leader, an innovator or an enlightened
parent. His influence extends beyond the confines
of the classroom. In rural areas he is looked on as
one of he mainstays of the community or villages.
If he happens to be a university graduate, and the only
graduate his village at that, his influence is even greater,
for everyone excepts him to be a reservoir of all
knowledge and skill…
Although it is generally agreed and assumed that philosophy cannot be concretely
defined, it can still be understood in several ways. Before discussing four different ways of
understanding it, let us mention two of the common impressions people have about
philosophy – impressions which seem to make people apprehensive about their ability to
study and master philosophy. It seems to be a common belief that philosophy has to do with
abstract and profound matters. They seem to believe that philosophy does not deal with
matters of down to earth affair. Along with this impression is added the view that philosophy
does not furnish one with detailed knowledge of, for example, philosophy of education,
philosophy of life, philosophy of religion, philosophy of science, political philosophy and so
on.
As tangible and substantial these impressions are and as indefinable as the discipline
is, most of the fundamental issues of philosophy are those that almost, if not all of us think
about at one time or another. This means that many people have been asking philosophical
questions, they have been engaging in philosophical arguments and they have taken certain
points of view that could be regarded as philosophical.
In the area of philosophy of education, for example, which is the focus of this book,
many students, teachers and parents have been asking such questions as: “Why should
nomads be educated?” “What is the value of mother tongue education?” “What is the
meaning of free education?” “Should a teacher be partial in the class?” “Do teachers have
academic freedom?” “Should education be made compulsory?” and many others. These are
philosophical questions because one cannot readily imagine what types of evidence would be
appropriate to answer them satisfactorily.
1.2. Four Ways of Understanding Philosophy
According to Dagobert D. Runes in Dictionary of Philosophy: Ancient-Medieval-
Modern philosophy can be understood in four ways: (1) the original meaning, (2) the later
meaning, (3) the now meaning and (4) the technical meaning. Let us briefly discuss each:
1. Originally, philosophy was understood as the rational explanation for everything. This
way of understanding philosophy emerged as a means of countering the earlier contention
that the gods were responsible for everything. Thus, if the rains failed to fall or fall or if some
or if some disasters befell the people, divine, rather than rational explanations were sought for
the understanding and acceptance of the phenomena. To be rational, therefore, is to be
sensible and to be sensible is to be able to survey, judge and understand situations. Thus, the
art of life was promoted through rationality. This endeavour to promote life should not be
interpreted to suggest “the survival of the fittest” since each individual is not involved in the
struggle for physical existence but rather, engaged in mental efforts to search for the best
exemplification of the art of life.
It is an effort to live, to live well and to live better. This means, that concrete mental
efforts are being made to stay alive, to be alive in a satisfactory way and to acquire an
increase in satisfaction. According to Alfred North Whitehead in The Function of Reason,
human rationality seeks a complete understanding and seeks an immediate method of action.
He stressed that human rationality allows one to constitute, emphasize and criticize. As a
result of these; human beings stand in a better vantage point to attack their environment to
enhance living a worthwhile life.
It was also understood as the general principles under which all facts could be
explained. Rational explanations are not considered synonymous with commonsensical
explanations. To be rational is to be sensible. Common sense is considered a guide to our
everyday experience and existence. It is therefore not enough to guide us through the rigorous
paths of science, technology and wisdom. Common sense is unreflective and uncritical and if
relied upon can lead to errors. If common sense is not checked through logical criticisms and
scientific investigations, it can lead to superstitions. For example, through common sense, it
was believed at a period in human history that the earth was stationary.
However, one is not claiming that common sense is entirely illogical, since it uses and
relies on natural logic. And natural logic is the habit of the first principles, such that one
comes to the judgment that a thing cannot both be and not be at the same time. But the claim
is that common sense is capable of misguiding one if its claims are not scientifically
investigated.

1.3. Explaining and Explanations

The other aspect of the original meaning of philosophy is offering explanations. Since
teachers in the classroom rely upon explaining and explanations of one concept or another, let
us briefly attend to these concepts. The terms “explanation” and “explain” are obviously
ambiguous and the many contexts in which they have been used have not always rendered
them unambiguous. Let us consider this statement after a student had attended a history class:
“X tried to explain why Y was defeated in the Second World War but did not quite succeed.”
The question is, does the speaker mean that X was unable to come up with the correct reasons
or causes for Y being defeated or that X probably knew the reasons but could not enunciate
these to his audience?
Or consider this directive from a literature teacher to a student: “Explain why Things
Fall Apart is a good literature book”. What exactly is the teacher asking for; tell the class, for
example, that the book is realistically readable, or that it narrates faithfully the beauty
inherent in the Nigerian cultural heritage? The purpose of this section therefore is to attempt
to shed some light, for clarification, on some of the sense the terms “explanation” and
“explain” are used and to point out the importance of the distinctions to enhance the
necessary clarification about explanation and understanding and their role in education.
One should commence this discussion by pointing out what seems obvious, that is,
that the verb “to explain” refers to something someone does. Let us examine what one might
consider an acceptable answer to the question: What did X do? Is, “He explained why Y was
defeated during the Second World War” and another reasonable answer to the question:
“What is the teacher doing right now?” is, “he is explaining to the class why the structural
adjustment programme should have an alternative.” One wonders what sort of doing is taking
place when one describes someone as having explained or as explaining. This is yet to be
seen. But one can begin this clarification by recognizing that to explain is to do something or
other, just as to eat, to dance, to study or to find out where one misplaced an item is to do
something or other.
The above analysis of “to explain’ constitutes a step toward some clarity, since once it
is recognized that explaining is a doing of some sort, it can be seen that it is clearly a different
sort of behaviour from an explanation. An explanation is not a doing at all. One can do things
with explanation and to explanations. For example, one can given an explanation of
something, one can arrive at an explanation, one can come up with an explanation, one can
find an explanation and one can discover an explanation. Also one can listen to appreciate,
ignore and dismiss an explanation. However, it may be argued that the things one an do with
or to explanations may themselves be doings but the explanation is not a doing. Explanations
therefore are not something done, but are sentences or statements of some sort or other. For
example, we often hear, “X is an explanation for Y.” The question, of course, is, what sort of
sentences or statements constitutes explanations?”
It should be pointed out that one is dealing with distinct terms; the verb “to explain”
and the noun “explanation”. Of course, it can be readily admitted that the distinctions are not
as neat as portrayed since it is known that people sometimes use the noun “explanation” in
such a broad way that the distinction between doing and statements is obscured. For example,
when a science teacher promises to discuss an explanation in science, he may be intending to
limit himself to a discussion of a certain sort of account of the world. This cannot be taken for
granted since it is possible that he may be intending to consider some of the things scientists
do (explanations) as well as the accounts of the world they give (explanations). Both
explaining and explanations thus end up being cases of just explanation.
This lack of neatness in distinguishing between such a thing as explaining and such
things as explanations is further buttressed by the fact the verb “to explain” is employed to
refer to at least two different sorts of things while the noun “explanation” (even with its
application restricted to sentences or statements) can be used in more than one way. For
example, a medical doctor may attempt to give an account of the necessary and sufficient
conditions for the possibility of the outbreak of cholera.
Without any doubt, this attempt would have involved the medical doctor in research,
theorizing and other conjectures. One can reasonably conclude that the medical doctor was
trying to explain why it is possible for cholera to break out. Let us view this form the
explaining pedagogical perspective of a science teacher as he engages in the activity of trying
to make someone understand the possibility of the outbreak of cholera. Obviously, the
teacher’s activity of explaining is not a matter of research investigation or original hunches
but as a matter of pedagogy.

1.4. Basic Kinds of Explanation

There are several kinds of explanation, however, only six will be mentioned and
discussed briefly in this book.
Scientific Explanations
They show why something has to happen. They involve hypothesizing a law of nature
and the explanation will be acceptable if the hypothesis proves to be true. thus there is always
(1) a universal generalization, that is, if an event of b occurs, an event of type a must happen,
(2) there is always a statement of the initial condition, for example, b happens, and (3) there
is always a statement of consequent event – a happens. Thus, let us consider this example:
Bitten by anopheles mosquito, he had malaria attack,
He was bitten by anopheles mosquito
He had malaria attack
Scientist attempt to discover how events are connected and try to show how certain events
happen if certain conditions are fulfilled. Such universal propositions express the connections
between events, which constitute scientific explanations. Scientific explanations try to
provide answers for such questions as: Why did this happen? Why are things this way, rather
than that way? Why, when this occurs, does that follow?

Description Explanations
They merely describe processes or structures, that is, they tell about something; they
give a detailed account of something; they try to picture something in outline. Thus
descriptive explanations attempt to state facts, list steps, supply purposes, and so on. Thus,
when one is asked to explain the structure of the National Electoral Commission, that person
is being asked to list, step by step, how that commission operates and the purposes of its
operation. Or someone (an eye witness) may be asked to describe how an accident occurred.
Such a person is being requested to state the various events that led to the accident.
In making a request for a descriptive explanation, the teacher or petitioner needs to be
specific. For example, it is not clear what is requested by: explain Student Unionism or
explain the accident. The reason these are not clear is that a student can begin to tell all he
knows about each question whereas the teacher may have a specific aspect of teach
phenomenon he wants explained. Some of the common cues for requesting for a descriptive
explanation imply listing the events that led to the outbreak of police action and full-scale
hostility. Another way, which can be considered a clear request for a descriptive explanation,
is to mention the words “process” or “structure” in the actual request; for example the process
of planting cassava. Describe the structure of the National Electoral Commission.
Interpretative Explanations
They are difficult to define; it seems that it is not too difficult to realize that an
interpretation is sought. For example, what needs to be interpreted is put in quotes: Explain:
“A little to the left and a little to the right” or simply, what is the meaning of “democracy”?

Reason-giving Explanations
The word, ‘why’ is the commonest cue to these kinds of explanations. For example:
“Explain why the majority of the students decided to cheat in the rain semester
examinations.” Explain why Nigerians are considered impatient with their leaders.” It may be
pointed out that the word “explain” may not always be added in reason-giving requests. For
example: “why did X fail his test?”, “why did the National Electoral Commission cancel the
results of the last local government elections?” and “how do you know that all men are
mortal?, and so on.

Analytic Explanations
Again, these types of explanations are not easy to define but they can be easily
recognized because they are potential circular because the explanations which are usually
offered do not get anyone anywhere since they simply restate what is already given.
For example:
Teacher: Why is Mr. X not yet married?
Student: Because Mr. X is a bachelor and a bachelor is someone who is not yet married
Teacher: Why does opium make one fall asleep?
Student: Because it has the ingredients to make one fall asleep.
Teacher: Why did Mr. X have an accident?
Student: Because Mr. X is always involved in accidents

Empirical Explanations
Empirical explanations rely more on observations and experiments rather than on just
theories. Historians, scientists and newspapers generally make empirical statements. Thus,
when someone requests for facts without making any value judgment, he is requesting for
empirical statements. For example: If K failed his test, it follows that he did not study hard
for. If one throws a stone up, it must fall to the ground (if not intercepted).
Nelson Mandela was a political prisoner.
Let us now turn to the second way of understanding the meaning of philosophy – the later
meaning.
2. The later meaning of philosophy centres on its claim that it is the science of the first
principles of being. This meaning relies on the understanding of metaphysics as ultimate
reality; or as Gutek put it, “the study of the nature of ultimate reality that deals with man’s
speculation into the nature of existence”
3. Philosophy’s now meaning means that it is popularly understood as private wisdom or
consolation. Thus, in a conversation, one concedes to another person by admitting: “that is
your own philosophy.” Such concessions have bearings on the meaning of philosophy as
private wisdom.
The consolation aspect of the now meaning of philosophy is evident when the Yoruba visit a
bereaved family. For example, if the family has lost, may be, the father of the house, one may
hear such consolatory statements like.” Thank God, his children are grown ups”, “He lived a
good life”, and so on.
4. Finally, technically, philosophy is understood as the science of sciences, the criticism
and systematization of all knowledge drawn from empirical science, rational learning and
common experience. The critical aspect of this meaning centres on the understandings that
philosophy is a critical activity. This is further buttressed by the assertion of Socrates that an
unexamined life is not worth living.

1.5. The Value of Philosophy

It may be postulated that there is no “value” attached to philosophy. In other words,
philosophy will not help one to be wealthy or acquire fame. It will not make one a more
pleasant or a more compromising person than a non-philosopher. The philosopher will react
to, for example, knocking a toe on a stone as anyone else. He will also express his
disappointment at the trials and errors of a roadside mechanic just like anyone else.
Philosophy does not provide students with any esoteric information on how to successful
control the self or predict the events of the future. Philosophers have not worked out the
tactics of making friends, acquire influence over another person or overcome one’s inferiority
complex. Philosophy does not protect one against an impending calamity; neither does it
prescribe any cures for loneliness, or any means of preventing the processes of ageing.
Judging from the above, why, then, should someone study philosophy? The subject
matter of philosophy, the universe, is complex and obscure. The writers on it complicate
issues by their obscurity of expressions making one always to be in need of assistance for
explanations. No serious employers is in need of his qualifications and one does not need
philosophy to make one’s way in the world. Why then study philosophy?
As valueless as one might have painted philosophy, it is still valuable. The value
attached to philosophy is in its origin: curiosity. It follows that we are all philosophers to
certain degrees and we philosophize quite frequently. For example, if and when an accident
occurs everyone around rush there to find out how it happened. At the site, one may hear
such philosophical comments: “Now they (the drivers are no more in a hurry”, “why could
they not slow down for one another?” and so on. The origin of the history of philosophy
reveals that the classical philosophers wished to know the meaning of this universe, the
significance of it, the purpose of it and the purpose of human life in it. Also they wished to
find out the whole point of life and how it ought to be lived profitably. These are some of the
issues that give philosophy its value. Philosophers endeavour to concern themselves with
these questions without aspiring to solving them permanently. Philosophy, according to Joad,
is the record of the soul’s adventures in the cosmos: “Philosophers find enjoyment in the
endless curious pursuits of the mental and spiritual adventures and only those that can endure
such pursuits are advised to enroll as students of philosophy.”
The enjoyment in the pursuit of philosophy is endless because philosophical questions
are concerned with those areas where we are doubtful regarding what is actually at stake.
Some people have complained that philosophy does not offer any firm and unequivocal
answers. This seems so. If such answers are suggested, the question can no longer be
philosophical. This is because life always goes on, forever.

1.6. The Scope of Philosophy

The scope of philosophy may be described as Aristotle put it “the nature of being as
such”. The scope of philosophy is in its concern, not so much with facts, as with their
meaning; not so much with conclusions, as with their significance. Thus, the philosopher
becomes an editor who brings out the journal of the universe. As a good editor, therefore, he
always recognizes that every happening has a unique importance, thus, he hesitates to reject
anything as being irrelevant and worthless.
Philosophy may appropriately be conceived as a clearinghouse to which the results of
all other human investigations are brought for sifting, assessing and evaluating.
The philosopher therefore gathers reports both from the sciences and arts and tries to make a
coherent survey of this .complex and obscure universe. The philosopher then asks whether
the universe has any point and purpose. He wants to know whether the human mind is
fundamental in the scheme of things or is it a by-product of material substances at a particular
'point of their development? The philosopher asks whether matter is an illusion born of our
limited -vision. Are right and wrong, beauty and ugliness existing in their own right
independently of ourselves and other bodies or are they just high wishes and aversions? Is
there another world more peaceful and spiritual than the familiar world? These are. some of
the questions the philosopher is interested in.

1.7 Systematic Philosophy and its Relationship to Education

Philosophy can be broadly defined as man's attempt to think speculatively,
reflectively and systematically about his universe and his relationships to that universe.
Systematic
philosophy is divided into four basic areas. These are metaphysics, epistemology, axiology
and logic. Let us examine each one.

Metaphysics
Metaphysics may be referred to as ontology. Just-like .philosophy itself, it is difficulty
to arrive at an acceptable definition for everyone. It has however, been defined as the science
of the nature of ultimate reality. Aristotle referred to it as the science of being qua being."
And Paul Tillich in Systematic Theology defined it as' "an investigation concerning the
character of everything that is insofar as it is.'' Metaphysics is an attempt to ascertain what
particular structure is. Such questions as: after all the non-essentials of existence have been
stripped away, what is it that is genuinely real? Do some material entities exist even though
they' cannot be perceived? These are metaphysical questions.
Metaphysics is also concerned with such questions as to whether man was created or
whether he evolved from lower animals. If the nature of man is made up of several
substances, then, metaphysics investigates into how these interact with one another (if they
interact at all). Metaphysics is related to education in several ways. According to Gerald Lee
Gutek in Philosophical Alternatives in Education, the subjects, experiences and skills that are
included in the curriculum reflect the conception of reality that is held by the society which
supports the school 'enterprise. Curriculum experts, school administrators, educational policy.
Makers, textbooks and parents attempt to describe certain aspects of educational realities to
the students. Epistemology. Epistemology is a Greek word (Episteme, knowledge plus logos,
theory) meaning theory of knowledge. It is a branch of philosophy that investigates the
origin, structure, methods and validity of knowledge. Historically, the term was first used in
1854 by J.F. Ferrier in Institutes of Metaphysics, in an attempt to distinguish between two
branches of philosophy - epistemology and ontology. Epistemologists face the issue of the
possibility of knowledge. They wonder whether genuine knowledge is possible. They ask
how one deals with sensory and rational skepticisms.
The traditional problem of the origin of knowledge led to the controversy between the
rationalists (who claim, that the criterion of truth (knowledge) is not sensory but (intellectual
and deductive) championed by Rene Descartes (1596-1650), Benedict Spinoza (1632'-1677)
and Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646-1716) and the empiricists (who claim that the sole
source of knowledge is experience) led by John Locke (1632-1714), George Berkeley'
(1685:1753) and David Hume (1711-1776). (More under Types of Knowledge).
Epistemology also deals with the question of truth. If' endeavours, to investigate (through
theories of truth) 'how true knowledge can be acquired. These theories include:
(1) correspondence theory which sees truth as a relation between an idea and its object;
(2) the coherence theory, which adopts as the criterion of truth the logical consistency bf
a proportion with a wider system of propositions and'
(3) the intrinsic theory, which views truth as an intrinsic property of the true proposition.
Epistemological considerations enter into all areas of curriculum. Those who are of
the opinion and thus convinced that knowledge can be obtained only by the scientific and
empirical methods provide a curriculum, which stresses science and mathematics. Those
who, believe that knowledge comes through the exercise of reasons lay considerable
emphasis on logic and mathematics. Those like John Dewey and William James, .who
believed that knowledge is fractional and functional stressed activity and life adjustment
approaches.

Types of Knowledge
Only seven major types of knowledge will be examined below:
(1) Revealed
(2) Pragmatic
(3) Rational
(4) Empirical
(5) Intuitive
(6) Authoritative
 (7) Autodidactic

(1) Revealed Knowledge

This is the knowledge that God in His Omnipotence revealed to man through his
inspired writers. Through them, He revealed certain truths to be eventually known by all
mankind. For the Christians, these truths are contained in-the Holy' Bible, the Muslims, in the
Holy Quran, for the Hindus, in the Bhagavad-Gita and the Upanishads. Since these revealed
truths come from God they are considered eternally true. And unless they are regarded as
such we shall be suggesting that God can be regarded as ignorant, deceitful and misguiding.
The truths recorded in these sacred books are supernatural; however, these truths are
conveyed to man in human language.

(2) Pragmatic Knowledge

Pragmatic stresses the experimental character of empirical science. It places total
premium on experimentation. Thus, to learn and know something about the world, we must
do more than operating on logical basis; we must go beyond reasonable generalizations of
observed phenomenal patterns in our past experience.
Emphasis is placed on active phases of experimentation. In Dewey's word, "the
process is one of trying and understanding.” According to Israel Scheffler, "experimentation
involves active transformation of the environment in a manner dictated by leading ideas put
forward in response to problems and directed toward the resolution of these problems. The
problem provides the occasion for an enduring focus of experimental inquiry: it supplies the
initial question,' furnishes controlling standards' of relevance and defines success In the
understanding.” The active process for learning here is experimental based on experimental
phenomenon. The mind is' conceived as capable of generating ideas whose function is the
resolution of the problems by the environment.

(3) Rational Knowledge

This is the knowledge acquired through the exercise of reasons, alone unaccompanied
by any observable or experimental states of affairs. The paradigms of rational knowledge are
logical reasoning and mathematical truth (as mathematical truths are not dependent on
experience, though an awareness of them may be suggested by experience). The truths
deduced from rational knowledge are valid universally.
(4) Empirical Knowledge
The model of empirical knowledge is natural science. That is, natural phenomenon
revealed by experience. Empiricists frown on intuitive knowledge as unreal and indefensible
authentic knowledge. The concept of the world around us can be formed by our senses of
seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting and feeling. While the rationalists tell us to think things
through, the empiricists advise us to simply look and see. The paradigm of empirical
knowledge is scientific hypothesis. Locke, an empiricist, used the'
phrase tabula rasa (a blank slate) to refer to the state of human mind at birth and its dependent
on experience both for the contents of its elementary ideas and for their inter –relationship.
The mind is therefore construed as possessing the potentiality
to compare, combine, analyze and generalize upon the barrage of materials furnished to it by
experience. The ideal education suggested by the empiricists is one; which supplied abundant'
experience to the student so that his powers of observation and association may enable, him
to grasp the natural events. Its educational ideal further trains the student not only in proper
logical habits through its scientific hypothetical methodology - but also in traits requisite for
learning from experience, accurate observation, reasonable generalization, willingness to
revive or abandon purported laws which fail to anticipate the actual course of events.

(5) Intuitive Knowledge

This is the knowledge a person finds within himself at a moment of insight. It is the
sort of knowledge that suddenly bursts out of a' person. It is-the kind of knowledge that
comes to a person after a long search for a solution. It is knowledge one works hard for. It
can happen in any sphere of knowledge. But it seems to be more' frequent in' mathematical
and scientific spectra of learning. The mind is exhilarated and overwhelmed with fulfillment.
It is the knowledge proposed and accepted.
Intuition is based on the strength of the imaginative vision or private experience of
the person proposing it. Thus, great writers and artists' are intuitionists. An example of such
writings is Wole Soyinka's The Interpreters.

(6) Authoritative Knowledge

It is the knowledge, which is based on the authoritative
recognition of someone knowledgeable in that particular discipline. This sort of knowledge is
' based' on the trust and reliance placed on the authority of another person. According to
George F. Kneller, "the term authoritative knowledge is more psychological than
epistemological in import. It denotes not the nature of those things that I know but the
manner of my knowing them. It refers not to those cultural ·products we call knowledge as
such but to the way in which I appropriate these products.”

(7) Autodidact Knowledge

It is an oxymoron (figure of speech meaning pointedly dull). An oxymoron contains a
contradiction, which is usually explicit. It is a signal that it is not a plain statement, e.g.
Quintillian describes a vulture as a "living tomb". There are other examples: little giant, rich
in poverty, “washed their clothes white again in the blood of the lamb” (Rev. 7:14).
Teaching is a relational word implying at least two people - someone who teaches
and someone who learns. But while a teacher is teaching, he may learn but his learning is
incidental. In the case of autodidact the relational. identity collapses, as the teacher becomes
the student and the student the teacher. Autodidact means that someone has learned
something by himself, which ordinarily should have been learned by being taught (thus
educated). He has learned something on his own, that
is, without the aid of another person. But since someone has not been taught it could be
claimed that that person has not been “educated” because he has gone to his own “school”
and only a fool teaches himself/

Logic
Logic examines the rules and patterns governing valid reasoning. Gruber in
Foundations for a Philosophy of Education analogized thus: “As the techniques of science are
referred to as the scientific method, 'so the techniques or methods of philosophy arc referred
to as. Logic.” Logic deals with the system of reasoning. It is both normative and prescriptive.
Logic is that discipline which attempts to differentiate between; good and bad inferences.
Logic, for example, is different from the discipline of psychology, which describes processes
of thought while logic deals with the type of thinking called reasoning.
Logic is usually divided into deductive and inductive logic. Deductive logic reasons
from general to particular. It tries to establish conclusive inferences, which are true beyond
the shadow of a doubt. It therefore concentrates on such rules, which determine the validity
of an argument. The most common form of deductive logic is the syllogism. A syllogism is
an argument, which contains two statements, referred to as major and minor premises and a
conclusion respectively, for Example:
Major Premise: All men are mortal
 Minor Premise: Mr. X is a man
Conclusion: Therefore, Mr. X is mortal
Here we have three declarative statements of fact. The major premise refers to a class
and the characteristic phenomenon of that class. The minor premise asserts and declares that
a certain individual is a member of that class. The third, the conclusion categorically
concludes that the individual possesses the declared characteristics of the class to which he is
asserted to belong. If both the major and minor premises are true, the conclusion cannot be
false. In order to have a better understanding of inductive logic, let us consider another
example of deductive reasoning:

All human beings are mortal

All Nigerians are human beings.
Therefore all Nigerians are mortal.

But one may ask, is it possible that some human beings are immortal? (Could these
human beings be Nigerians?). If one wishes, therefore, to make a statement one may argue
thus:

No Nigerian born' before 1500 A.D. is known to still be

alive.
Nigerians are still dying
Therefore, the probability is that all Nigerians will die, and therefore, are mortal. The
above is known as inductive logic. Inductive starts by stating a number of particulars and
arrives at a possible generalization. As the example above portrays, it is generally concerned
with probability rather than with certainty. The inductive method is the method employed by
scientists to arrive at their conclusions. They count the number of
positive and negative results of an experiment or observation, and then form a hypothetical
conclusion, which is then subjected to various tests. If no significant deviations are noticed,
the hypothesis becomes scientific truth. John Dewey employed
deductive and inductive logic in his educational philosophy called experimentalism.

Logical Teaching
There are several types of reasoning to effect logical teaching. For the purpose of this
book, deductive logic will be employed. Deductive reasoning is the type in which the
conclusion is supposed to follow necessarily from what is given. That is its distinguishing
factor from other types of reasoning. To follow necessarily implies that if one accepts what is
given, one is thereby automatically committed to accept the conclusion. For
example:

If some students are in the class they must be studying.

Some students are in the class.
Therefore, they must be studying.

Logical teaching assists in the broad logical aspects of how to think and talk in the
classroom. It complements the psychological aspects of teaching. According to Robert H.
Ennis in Logic in Teaching, "all the rigour you can muster is of no value
if no one is paying attention. On the other hand, having 'the attention and enthusiasm of
students is to no avail if the result of your teaching is confusion and error.”

Axiology or Theory of Value

The word “axiology” comes from the Greek words; “axioms”, -value or worth and
“logos”, account or theory of Lapie and Hartmann first used the term “axiology” in the 12th
century. Then it was employed to deal with such considerations as the nature and types of
value and the criteria upon which judgments are based.
The term axiology is not commonly employed at the present time. Rather,
philosophers talk of theory of value. Such value questions as: “are beauty and goodness
qualities objectively present or absent in things? If they are objectively present or absent, how
are they ascertained.” .Axiology has ethics and aesthetics as its subdivisions. Ethics deals
with those fundamental principles governing good and evil, right and wrong. Aesthetics, on
the other hand is concerned with the study of values in .the realms of beauty and art.
Educators have always been concerned with the formation of values in the school.
Efforts are always being made to shape the behaviour of our school children. They have
always been told what to do and what not to do. Such statements as: “you should not fight”,
“you should not destroy the school property” “you should love your country” are obvious
value laden statements. Thus, according to Gutek, “parents, teachers, guardians and society at
large frown, punish and -reward behaviours as they "conform to or deviate from their
conceptions of correctness, goodness or beauty.”
1.8 The Nature of African Philosophy
The ‘rape’ of Africa in several dimensions e.g. slavery and colonialism, seemed to
have given rise to the question as t whether there is an African Philosophy. Of course there is
a African philosophy based on the concepts of our worldview an culture. Some have tried to
argue that since there were n classical African philosophers there could be no be Africa
philosophy; that African philosophy is nothing more than social or cultural anthropology; that
what is claimed to be African philosophy is merely a cheap substitute for philosophical
system which is lacking in African.
African philosophy has not grown in a vacuum: it is a part of parcel of the culture,
historical origin and tradition. It is therefore unfortunate to suggest that since there were no
classical African philosophers, there could be no Africa philosophy. Segun Gbadegesin
argued at a seminar in 1985 that African philosophy must be accepted as a reality since it
satisfied the following conditions: (to which several others could be added).
1. it has its roots in African soil.
2. it deals with problems peculiarly African .
3. it is based upon contemporary African experience.
4. it deals with a comparative study and analysis of African and other regions of
the world
5. it shows a keen awareness of the limits of cultural
generalization.
One's claim is that there is an African philosophy, and i: there is an African
philosophy some people must have created it. Or may be there is no need to argue that some
people might .have created it since most books on introductory philosophy endeavor to assert
that we are all philosophers and philosophize quite frequently. However, if no one has created
African philosophy then it does not exist. But as Ruch argued, “but the fact that we do not
know the names of the peoples of the past that have shaped the thinking patterns and the
beliefs of the African peoples does not matter.”
Ruch pointed out that there were some Western philosophers whose precise ideas
were not known. We know, for example, that Socrates did not write his ideas in any book.
His ideas were made known by Plato. in the Dialogues. It is unfortunate that our detractors
feel that Africa lacks philosophical orientations because Africa's traditional thoughts were not
documented in writing. As far as ones concerned, philosophy does not have to be a written
document to make it philosophical. It may seem unfortunate that Africans were not
introduced to writing earlier than they were, but one can safely argue that philosophy does
not have to be Western in style and genesis before it can be deemed philosophical. Why has
the Western style of philosophizing be the criterion of philosophizing? Philosophy deals with
fundamental principles of a people’s culture. It concerns itself with the factors that condition
our ability to think and perceive it deals with the status of man in the universe; it deals with
man’s problems as a creature with body, soul and intellect.
The nature of African philosophy rests strongly on the way the African views the
world. African philosophy is as empirical, speculative, metaphysical and ideological as any
Western or Eastern philosophies. M. A. Makinde argued that his language as
a Nigerian is Yoruba, and his thoughts are more possible in the language. Thus such Yoruba
concepts. as “ori” (head, the metaphysical head), “aye” (the universe or the world),
“Olorun” (the Supreme Being), “eniyan” (the human person); “emi” (soul), and so on, make
interesting philosophical puzzles and discussions. For example, the concept of Yoruba “ori”
(the metaphysical inner head) has a variety of philosophical ramifications. One’s head can be
good or bad, (concepts closely tied to destiny) that is, it is the determinant of one’s good or
bad fortune on earth. That is one of the reasons why the Yoruba plead with their heads thus:
“ori mi se rere fun mi" (my head, do good for me, or my head, take care of me). Other
concepts used to determine the nature of African. (Yoruba philosophy) include “iwa rere”
(good character), ‘omoluabi’ (someone born well), ‘aje’ (witchcraft) and ‘oogun’ (traditional
medicine) and so on. Undoubtedly, other African cultures enjoy the existence of similar
concepts which provide
rich, theoretical and practical philosophical discussions.
Here is a wide appreciation placed on the study of African philosophy. It is realized,
however; that African philosophy still Reeds to be approached cautiously. African
philosophers must try to intensify their analysis, clarification and interpretation of the African
worldviews and perspectives. There is a need to balance both the theoretical and practical
expectations of African philosophy. Right now, it seems more emphasis 'is being placed on
the theoretical because African academic philosophers wish to counter the charges
questioning the reality of the existence of African philosophy. The time has arrived in
contemporary Africa to begin to shift the geography of reasoning in order to emphasize the
necessary processes of philosophical modernization entailing changes, not only, as Wiredu
put it, “in the physical environment but also in the mental outlook of bur peoples, manifested
both in their explicit beliefs and in their customs and their ordinary daily habits and pursuits.”
It is unfortunate that we are still bothered by our colonial detractors, as if we ourselves are
not sure of our identity. We should place behind us the controversy about the reality of
African philosophy and get down to the business of doing African philosophy. It is our
business as Nigerians to discover through continuous philosophizing the philosophical
contents of our traditional thought patterns. We may truly not be familiar with either the
philosophical contents of our past or how
our forefathers actually philosophized, it does not follow that their thoughts were un-
philosophical or that they did not philosophize.
1.9. Topics for Discussion
1. How does the now meaning of philosophy show that we are all philosophers and that
we philosophize frequently?
2. Relate the technical meaning of philosophy to Socrates assertion that an uncritical life
is not worth living.
3. What is common sense? Do you agree that undue reliance on common sense can lead
to errors and superstition? Defend your view with examples.
4. How are Metaphysics, Epistemology, Logic and Axiology related to education?
5. List and discuss some of thy concepts on which African philosophy is based.
philosophy is based.
6. How can people be made to realize that they are philosophers and philosophize quite
frequently?
7. In what ways do you think that the study of academic philosophy has contributed to
the overall development of Nigeria? Do you think that the study of philosophy is a
waste of time?
8. What previous impressions about philosophy do you have?
How did you acquire them?
9. What are the benefits of questioning?
10. What do you think should be the contents of African
philosophy?
11. List and discuss some of the values that were imposed on you while you were in
either primary or secondary school.
12. Supposing you were the only graduate teacher in your locality in the 1960’s, how
would you have employed your uniqueness to assist the people?
13. Mention and discuss some of the defining characteristics of common sense and
wisdom.
14. What is an oxymoron? How is it related to autodidact?
1.10. References
1. See Plato, Apology in W. H. D. Rouse (Editor), Great Dialogues of Plato, (New
York: New American Library, 1956), p. 427.
2. For more discussions on this concept, see, Kwasi Wiredu, Philosophy and An African
Culture, (Cambridge: Cambridge Press, 1989), pp. 139 ff.
3. Ibid., p. 14l.
4. A. Babs Fafunwa, New perspectives ill African Education.
(London: Macmillan Education Ltd., I 967), p. 83.
5. Dagobert, D. Runes, Dictionary of Philosophy: Ancient Medieval-Modern
(Patterson, New Jersey: Littlefield, Adams and Company, 1963), p. 235.·
6. Alfred North Whitehead, The Functions of Reason (Boston: Beacon Press,
1958), pp. 3-11.
7. Gerald Lee Gutek, Philosophical Alternatives in Education
(Ohio: Charles Merrill Publishing. Company, 1974), p. 2 .
8. C. E. M. Joad, Philosophy, (Conn. Fawcett Publications, Inc., 1962), p.16.
9. Aristotle, Metaphysics, IV, I, in Richard-Mckeon (Editor), The Basic Works of
Aristotle, (New York: Random House, 19410< p. 731.
10. Paul Tillich, Systematic Theology (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1951),
Vo1.1,p.163.
11. Gerald Lee Gutek, Philosophical Alternatives in Education, p. 2.
12. John Dewey, Democracy and Education, (New York: Free Press, 1966), p.139.
13. Israel Schaffler, Conditions of knowledge, All Introduction to Epistemology and
Education, (Glenview, Illinois: Scott, Foresman; and Company, 1965), p. 4.
14. George F. Kneller, Introduction to the Philosophy of Education, (New York: John
Wiley and Sons; Inc., 1964), p. 23.
15. Frederick C. Gruber, Foundations for a Philosophy of Education, (New York:
Thomas Y. Crowell Company, 1961), p. 10.
16. Robert H. Ennis, Logic in Teaching, (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall,
Inc., 1969), pp. 1-2.
17. Gerald Lee Gutek, Philosophical Alternatives in Education, p.3.
18. Segun Gbadegesin, “African Philosophy: Myth or Reality?” Seminar Paper, 1985.
19. E. A. Ruch, “Is there an African Philosophy?” Vol. III, No.2, 1974.
20. M. A. Makinde, “Robin Horton’s Philosophy: An Outline of Intellectual Error”.
Seminar Paper, 1978.
21. Kwasi Wiredu, Philosophy and An African Culture, p. 10.

1.11. Bibliography
Dewey, John, Reconstruction ill Philosophy, Boston: Beacon Press, 1957.
Durant, William James. The Story of' Philosophy, New York: Simon and Schuster
Inc., 1927.
Ennis, Robert H., Logic in Teaching. N. Jersey:
Prentice Hall Inc., 1969.
Feibleman, James K., Understanding Philosophy.
New York: Dell Inc., 1973.
Frost, S. E., Basic Ideas. New York Doubleday and
Company, 1962
Gbadegesin, O., “African Philosophy: Myth or
Reality” Seminar Paper, 1985.
Gruber, Frederick C., Foundations for a Philosophy of Education, New York:
Thomas Y. Comwell Company, 1961
Gutek, Gerald Lee, Philosophical Alternatives in Education, Ohio: Charles Merrill
Publishing Co., 1974.
Hocking, Williams Ernest, Types of Philosophy. (Revised Edition) New York:
Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1939.
Joad, C. E. M. Guide to Philosophy. New York:
Dover Publications Inc., 1939
Joad, C. E. M. Philosophy, Conn: Fawcett
Publications, Inc., 1962.
Makinde, M. A., “Robin Horton’s Philosophy: An Outline of Intellectual Error”.
Seminar Paper, 1978.
Miller, Hugh, An Historical Introduction to Modern Philosophy, New York:
Macmillan Company, 1974.
O’Connor, D. J., Introduction to the Philosophy of Education. London: Routledge and
Kegan Paul, 1975.
Peters, R. S. Ethics and Education. London: George
Allen and Unwin Ltd., 1966.
 Popkin, R. H. and Stroll, Avrum, Philosophy Made
Simple. New York: Double Day, 1956
Ruch, E. A., “Is there an African Philosophy?”
Second Order Vol. III, Number 2, 1974
Runes, Dagobert, D (ed.), The Dictionary of
Philosophy, Ancient-Medieval-Modern, New York: The Philosophical Library,
Inc., 1963.
Russell, Bertrand, A History of Western
Philosophy, New York; Simon and Schutter, Inc., 1945
Sahakian, Williams S., Ethics: An Introduction to
Theories and Issues. New York: Barnes and Noble Books, 1974
Salmon, Wesley C., Logic, Second Edition, New
Jersey: Prentic-Hall, Inc., 1965
Titus, Harold H. Living Issues in Philosophy. New
York: American Book Company, 1953
Wiredu, K., Philosophy and an African Culture.
London: Cambridge University Press, 1980.

CHAPTER TWO
WHAT IS PHILOSOPHY OF EDUCATION?
2.1. Philosophy and Education
 In order to attempt the question posed in this chapter, one needs to recognize that
there is a confusion of purpose between educational though and academic philosophy: This
confusion has arisen largely because there have not been universally acceptable definitions of
either education or philosophy. This situation was almost compounded recently when it was
argued that education, judging from the weight of recent historical tradition in which the so
called older, more respected disciplines like science, law and so on, are held to be pure or
more academic subjects, and that education could be looked down upon as unworthy of the
honorific title of a discipline or an academic subject.
Soltis in his brilliant defense of this contention argued thus: “but in point of fact, the
highest academic degree, the Ph.D., is actually bestowed on those who complete a scholarly
study of education, and so it seems that, in some sense at least, the “academic” status of
education is recognized by the University community of “scholars.” Philosophy was
recognized as a discipline but its definition by academic philosophers was regarded as a
problem. It was however suggested that for its continuous recognition, it should fasten itself
to living issues of genuine importance such as science, technology, agriculture, history, and
even education, (thus philosophy of education).
But while it is realized that philosophy is generally regarded as abstract and
otherworldly its lack of a universally accepted definition should not be a reason for reducing
its academic status. In any case, why should philosophy, which was originally understood to
underscore the general principles under which all facts could be explained, be expected to
have a universally accepted definition? The situation is even being compounded nowadays
that philosophy is viewed as private wisdom, the common experience of a people, as an
outlook on life or as a worldview. (Professional philosophers like to think of philosophy as a
critical activity).
Philosophy of education is not easy to define either and several attempts have been
made to define it. For example McClellan defined it thus: “an inquiry into the distinctive
form that human reason takes in the practice of education, that is, in the interaction that
generates the particular acts of teaching and learning.” McClellan’s definition sounds very
distant and this is probably one of the reasons why education students in our higher
institutions regard the discipline of philosophy of education as difficult and abstract.
However, the highest merit to this definition is the acknowledgement of the role “human
reason takes in the practice of education.” This points to the philosophical input for the
understanding of educational practice. This involvement of human reason by McClellan
agreed with John Dewey’s attempt of define philosophy of education.
 According to Dewey, “if we are willing to conceive education as the process of
forming fundamental dispositions intellectual and emotional toward nature and fellow men,
philosophy may even be defined as the general theory of education.” Apart from Dewey’s
attempt to describe the purpose of education as the formation of “fundamental dispositions”
such as intellectual and emotional, he substantiated the role of philosophy in this regard. That
is, without sound academic philosophy, which, if properly pursued, will inevitably provide
the insight and clarity of thought always desperately needed by education. Through the
insight and the clarity of though one can see the urgent need for intellectual, social and
emotional dispositions towards one another.
For the purpose of this work, however, I wish to define philosophy of education as a
continuous analysis of the nature of the theory and practice of educational processes. This
definition implies that (i) no one person should presume to have a final definitive statement in
matters relating to education. However, because of the democratic system pursued by the
various governments, one person may be mandated to make final pronouncements on certain
educational issues. But the people, because of their value expectations and their outlook on
life should be consulted and allowed to assess educational issues, before any final
pronouncement, thus reverting to the traditional African democratic leadership (ii) the
definition implies that each person should be encouraged and allowed to bring his
philosophical (if agreed that each person is a philosopher) knowledge into focus and (iii) by
analysis, it implies that the problems of education are evolutionary and room should be
provided for new understanding. For example, one wonder why a teacher or an educator
would make a final judgment on, why x child is failing in a class. In other words,
philosophically speaking there may be other factors other than that for which the child is
labeled failing. The fact that he is failing is an avenue for further investigations. Another
example is the discussion on nomadic education. To argue that because of the nomads’
wanderings they cannot be educated cannot be upheld. How does anyone know that wanders
cannot be educated? The reasons why they cannot be educated should rest on other factors
such as the attempts to force them to be educated against their wishes. Even here, how
conclusive is this reason?
Philosophy of education should be regarded more essentially as a normative venture
primarily concerned with value and purpose. Because any philosophy of education is the
function of the culture, that way, it ably serves the practical ends of the people’s way of life,
and these ends are realistically determined by the value structure of the culture. That is why it
does not sound appropriate to speak of a philosophy of education as if the truths in it are
universal and final. Because of the normative and descriptive character of philosophy of
education, one cannot just adopt wholesale the philosophy of education of another country.
We speak of the philosophy of Nigerian education, for example, because of the value
structure to be adhered to as a result of our culture.
Can we really speak of the Nigerian philosophy of education? If there is any value
structure in our culture, then we should be able to speak of our own philosophy of education.
Section one of the 1981 (Revised) Federal Republic of Nigeria’s National Policy on
Education stated categorically thus: “Nigeria’s philosophy of education, therefore, is based
on the integration of the individual l into a sound and effective citizen and equal educational
opportunities for all citizens of the nation a the primary, secondary and tertiary levels both
inside and outside the formal school system. Those are the bases. But these bases are not
unique to Nigeria. But it should be granted that though the philosophy of education should be
essentially normative and culturally oriented, some of the truths (as in the above) could
transcend the particular cultural value. The question may be posed, however: why should the
truths in the ingredients or bases of our own philosophy of education transcend cultural
boundaries? Why can the ingredients of our philosophy of education not be unique to us?
One possible answer is that the nations of the world are interrelated in several respects, while
to a large extent each nation enjoys certain uniqueness in several other respects.
Number three of section one of the policy gave the impression that the values to be
inculcated are derivable from the quality of instructions offered by teachers. If this is to be so,
one should foresee an inherent danger. It does not seem safe to entrust the qualitative aspect
of our educational instructions to the teachers alone. Parental and other related educational
factors should be considered, too.
The Policy expected that through quality instruction, the following values would be
inculcated:
(1) respect for the worth and dignity of the individuals:
(2) faith in man’s ability to make rational decisions
(3) moral and spiritual values in inter-personal and human relations;
(4) shared responsibility for the common good of society;
(5) respect for the dignity of labour; and
(6) promotion of the emotional, physical and psychological health of all children.
One wonders (if these values are to be truly inculcated), if the nation can rely on the
teachers alone, especially if their present plights are sustained. Also (as mentioned above), if
the philosophy of Nigerian education is essentially to rely on the value structure of the
culture, Nigerian parents have to be thoroughly involved in the inculcation of the above
values. No where in the section on the philosophy of Nigerian Education is the role of the
parents mentioned in the inculcation of these values.
Specific problems and issues in educational theory and practice abound which call for
philosophical wisdom and analytical skill. One is referring to the educational problems,
which issue from the tensions and delays emanating from the bureaucratic arrangements of
the various organs of the Ministries of Education, the Central School Boards and Local
Inspector of Education Offices.
There are other educational questions which are genuinely philosophical in character,
these include: should nomads be educated? How unifying are the Unity Schools? Should pigs
be reared in our agricultural farms? Are our schools run democratically, why does a teacher
act partially? Is education a preparation for life, or is education itself life? What is an optimal
class size? When a student is said to have failed, who actually failed, the teacher, the school
as an institution, the social environment, parents or the student?
These are not questions to be tackled by mere philosophical speculations. These are
not questions to be simply passed on to educational technicians or administrators for
resolution. These are questions in desperate need for clarifications, which require
philosophical insight into human values; they are questions relating the individual to his
society and culture. Such value questions, with indefinite implications and ramifications for
the orderly organization and conduct of education, require the scholarship and perspective of
an academic philosopher.
The unique task of philosophy of education is not to furnish us with what
philosophers think or say about educating. In other words, a philosopher does not begin to
look round for a philosophy in order to be able to justify and clarify an issue in education.
Rather, he takes an issue, analyses and exposes the problems inherent in it and delineates
their philosophical implications for educational thought and practice. He could proffer
suggestions for immediate considerations, realizing that his analysis does not represent the
ultimate truths of the issue.
In order to have a better perspective of how to identify specific problems in the
philosophy of education, McMurrin considered education under four categories (a) the
purpose of education, (b) the substance of education (c) the methods of education and (d) the
organization and administration of education.
(a) Philosophy of education, according to McMurrin, is primarily concerned with the
ends of education. Education cannot be pursued in isolation of its aims and objectives. Both
the formal and the informal have to be spelled out clearly in terms of their ends. For example,
the aims of education in this country are spelled out in the National Policy on Education.
These, for example, are subsumed under the Second National Development Plan. Thus, “The
five main national objectives of Nigeria as stated in the Second National Development Plan,
and endorsed as the necessary foundation for the National Policy on Education are the
building of:
(1) a free and democratic society;
(2) a just and egalitarian society;
(3) a united, strong and self-reliant nation
(4) a great and dynamic economy;
(5) a land of bright and full opportunities for all citizens
These are not the philosophy of Nigerian Education but aims or objectives necessary for the
identification and appreciation of the philosophy of education.
(b) Concerning the substance of education the point to be discussed relates to what should
be taught and learned. The location of the teaching and the learning is presumably not an
issue since Nigeria still places emphasis on informal education. One may ask, will nomadic
education be formal or informal? There should be a relationship between the purposes of
education and the curriculum. The purposes of the Nigerian education are stated in the
National Policy on Education. The curricula are also spelled out. It is clear from the science
and technology.
However, is the objectives related to the science and technology oriented curricula? In
other words, can science and technology make this country “a free and democratic society?”
It seems that this country can achieve all the five stated objectives in the National Policy on
Education without science and technology. In fact, we could have realized all of them, and
much more, had we had purposeful and perspective leaders in the past (and our curricula
were not science and technology oriented).
The point being stressed is this, that there is no significant relationship between the
purpose or objectives of our education and the curricula, which ought to assist in their
achievement (may be they were not meant to be related). Science and technology are of
supreme importance for development, and as such, no country wishing to be considered
developed can do without them. Our objectives are not related to science and technology.
There is an urgent need for clarification of the meaning of the five objectives and the values
attached to education in its relationship to the curricula. Explanations are needed as to why
arts oriented subjects seem subordinated to science and technology instead of striking a
balance between the two areas. Why are they not necessary for national development (if they
are not)? Also, the logical relationship between science and technology oriented subjects and
the national objectives, which were also endorsed for education, should be reviewed. In other
words, shall we become more humane, appreciate life better, and live life better, if we place
science and technology over arts curricula?
(c) Concerning the methods of education in relationship to considering the philosophy of
education, section ten of the National Policy on Education, tile Educational Services is very
relevant to this discussion. With the introduction and emphasis on these services, Nigeria is
undoubtedly entering into a new era in education. The means of achieving the ends of the
objectives (see page 42 of the Policy) of the services sound sophisticated. But the fulfillment
of the promises of the Federal and State Governments on the means of achieving these
objectives seems to be delaying the realization of the ends of the services. For example, one
of the objectives of the educational services is “to reduce educational costs.” Educational
costs have instead escalated astronomically. Where educational resource centres and other
related centres are established, they are very poorly equipped. The policy promises “greater
financial provision for educational research programmes … to our universities… by both
Federal and State governments” to meet such objectives as “to enhance teaching and improve
the competence of teachers.” The universities are embarrassingly and grossly under funded
particularly in terms of research and research related programmes like attending national and
international academic seminars and conferences.
(d) Finally, we come to the organization and administration of education. Section eleven of
the National Policy on Education speaks of Administration and Planning of Education. When
one reads the opening sentence stating that the success of any education is hinged on proper
planning, efficient administration and adequate financing, it is quite possible to conclude that
the administration and planning of education do not appear to belong strictly to the area of
philosophic discussion. They undoubtedly have much to do with certain aspects of social
philosophy. To think that administration and planning of education do not have any
ramifications for the philosophy of education is to pressure wrongly. Philosophy of education
has valuable relevance to these social issues since they are integrally involved in the aims or
purposes of education. There are certain educational issues that this country has to contend
with which are related to both social issues and educational administration and planning.
Consider, for example, the issues of nomadic education, Unity Schools, Command Schools,
Model Colleges, the questions of whether our schools should be employed as instruments of
social change, the issue of federal control of higher institutions in relationship to students’
crisis. These are live issues, which are closely related to educational administration and
planning and which cannot be adequately resolved without recourse to the involvement of
philosophic insight and skill.
The Nigerian philosophy of education should not be regarded as mere abstract and
speculative ideas but rather as actual live circumstances of individual and corporate life
within which the processes of our education take place. They are individual and social facts
and values forming the substance of our philosophy of education. For the philosophy of
education not to be worthless, it must continue to have genuine contact with the facts of life
of the Nigerian value structure and culture. Philosophy of education should be firmly rooted
in the living experience of the society, especially in our own situation; it must have recourse
to the struggles for freedom and national unity, political and religious intolerance, corruption,
youth and adult unemployment, ethnicity, lowering standard of education and so on.

Relationship between Philosophy and Education

John Dewey’s argument, as pointed out above, that if education is conceived as a
process of forming certain dispositions such as intellectual and emotional toward nature and
fellow men, philosophy may even be defined as the general theory of education, points to the
fact that education is related to philosophy. According to this claim, philosophy involves
education to a greater or lesser degree. But his involvement needs clarifications specially that
both disciplines are going through hard times in terms of agreement regarding their
definitions. Diversity in terms of the definition of either philosophy or education is not likely
to disappear just as the diversity of form and meaning in fine arts is not likely to disappear.
The diversity in definitions of philosophy and education can be regarded as a blessing
for both disciplines. It is a blessing for philosophy, because, since it is generally regarded as
too technical, abstract and having little to do with man’s daily experiences, it needs to retain
an identity (if it really needs to), by fastening itself upon living issues such as education,
science and so on. It is a blessing for education, since by its nature, it has always generated
tensions and excitement, and it therefore desperately needs the logic and analytic expertise of
philosophy.
Thus there is a basis for discussing the relationship between philosophy and
education: one (education) needs the other (philosophy) for perspectiveness and intelligibility
in order to relieve it of its tensions and excitements, while philosophy needs to attach itself to
a living issue since it is often accused of abstractedness. If philosophy is conceived of as the
persistent, critical and systematic attempt to discover and consistently formulate the basic
characteristics, meanings and values of our experience, then a person thus engaged couldn’t
fail too think critically about educational matters. This does not sound automatic while at the
same time, it does not sound strange. Socrates, for example, began with a philosophical
question in education: What is teaching? His reflective answer that teaching is a process of
eliciting knowledge which is dormant in the pupil’s mind, thus bringing his own insights to
birth, has been the source of further studies in what is often referred to as “The Socratic
Method”. Through “Socratic Method”, a student can be stimulated to define and examine
himself/herself. Through this, a student is expected to look inward to seek the truth latent in
himself and others. Socrates contended that the skillful teacher asks leading questions to
stimulate his students to ponder upon certain basic human concerns about life, truth, justice
and beauty.
Philosophy (of education) according to Socrates heals one of the sicknesses of
ignorance. This healing restores one’s soul to order and form. The desired human relationship
which education is expected to restore and build is established through the application of
“Socratic Method”.
Plato was equally related to education. Plato’s Republic has often been described as
classical treatise in the field of philosophy of education. According to Plato, philosophy
defines education as the conversion of the soul to the good. Plato saw education as the social
and moral arts by means of which philosophy is effective in life. Philosophy accomplishes
this by applying one’s philosophical knowledge to ask questions and reflect on live issues.
Plato’s belief that knowledge is related to social organizations made him to conclude that the
particularity of knowledge grows out of class divisions and interests. Thus, for him, the task
of education is to assist in determining the social class, which an individual fits into through
testing and selecting. In order to guarantee the happiness of the individual and the stability of
the state, education must be employed to tackle the problems of the relationship of the
individuals to the society. According to Plato, education has three aims:
(1) to discover and develop individual qualifications to fit into classes of society;
(2) to see to the harmonious integration of the individual and social groups, and
(3) to develop philosophers who will be statesmen (philosopher-kings).
If one accepts that education is the supreme human activity whereby an organized
group seeks to perpetuate and modify its own way of life, then one should accept that such
perpetuation and modification provide data areas for philosophic investigation. Philosophy,
thus, attempts to give meanings to human problems, which are authentically indigenous to the
group’s cultural experience. Thus philosophy cannot remain indifferent to human experience,
as it cannot occur in a cultural or personal vacuum. As could be seen from the examples of
Socrates and Plato, the need for clarifications of educational suppositions gave rise to the
typical areas of philosophical investigation.
In view of the above, an educator should therefore be philosophically literate in
relation to educational aims and presuppositions. The philosopher of education should have
as one of his important functions the keeping of vital discussion concerning educational
problems alive. Every educational system involves some set of ends or values to be
perpetuated.
The function of an educational philosopher are two fold;
(1) he is concerned primarily with criticizing the philosophic assumptions of the existing
educational systems and practices
(2) he aims at developing an educational philosophy in the light of the available
information about the people’s cultural background.
Finally, there is an urgent need for students of education particularly in this country,
to be aware of the various philosophies of education in order:
(1) to identify educational programme
(2) to identify curricula
(3) to identify methods in their relationship to particular philosophic positions
(4) to assist in the examination and criticism of educational proposals and policies
(5) to stimulate teachers to think about education in general in order to resist the
temptation of subscribing to “promises of panaceas or to propagandist
slogans”
(6) to aid teachers to recognize that mechanical and organizational innovate ions
can be used for many purposes and can have many consequences
(7) To aid teachers to be encouraged to examine and formulate the broad personal
and social aims that should guide educational practice.

2.3. Topics for Discussion

1. Explain why philosophy and education need to capitalize on their diversities
regarding definitions.
2. Mention five live issues in education and discuss how philosophy can
contribute to their clarifications
3. Do philosophers and educators have to agree on common definitions of their
disciplines?
 4. In what subject-matter do you think the Socratic Method is not applicable?
5. Do you agree with the two functions of the philosophy of education?
6. Criticize the three definitions of philosophy of education suggested in this
chapter
7. The five national objectives endorsed for the National Policy on Education
have been criticized as being abstract and unrealistic. Would you agree or
disagree with this criticism? State your own views.
8. Do you think that the emphasis placed on science and technology is justified?
Give reasons.
9. Explain the role of culture in the philosophy of education

2.4. References
1. Jonas F. Soltis, An Introduction to the Analysis of Educational Concepts.
(New York: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, 1978), p. 22.
2. James E. McClellan, Philosophy of Education, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey:
Prentice Hall, Inc., 1976), p. 4.
3. Ibid, p. 4
4. John Dewey, Democracy and Education, (New York: Free Press, 1966), p.
328.
5. National Policy on Education, p. 7.
6. Ibid., p. 7
7. Sterling M. McMurrin, “On the meaning of Philosophy of Education,” Monist,
Vol. 52, p. 64.
8. National Policy on Education, p. 7
9. Ibid., p. 42
10. Ibid., p. 42
11. Ibid., p. 24
12. Ibid., p. 44

2.5. Bibliography
Akinpelu, J.A., An Introduction to Philosophy of Education, London: Macmillan,
1981.
Cary, W. Ryland and Petrone, A. Louis, Foundations of Modern Education, New
York: Alfred A. Knopf. Inc. 1971.
Dewey, John, Democracy and Education, New York: Free Press, 1966.
Federal Government of Nigeria: National Policy on Education 1981 Edition.
Feibleman, James K., Understanding Philosophy: A Popular History of Idea, New
York: Delta Books, 1975.
Gruber, C. Frederick, Foundations for a Philosophy of Education, New York: Thomas
Y. Crowell Company, 1961.
Kilpatrick, W.H. Philosophy of Education, New York: Macmillan Company, 1951.
Lucas, Christopher J., (ed.) What is Philosophy of Education? London: The
Macmillan Co., 1970.
McClellan, James E. Philosophy of Education, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey:
Prentice-Hall Inc., 1976.
McMurrin, Sterling M. “On the Meaning of the Philosophy of Education” Monist,
Vol. 52, p. 64.
Soltis, Jonas F., An Introduction to the Analysis of Educational Concepts, 2 nd edition.
New York: Addison-Westley Publishing Company, 1978.
Wiredu, Kwasi, Philosophy and an African Culture, Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1980.
 CHAPTER THREE

NATURALISM

3.1. Meaning and Advocates of Naturalism

Naturalism holds that the universe requires no supernatural cause and government.
Therefore, the universe is self-existent, self-explanatory, self-operating and self-directing. It
also holds that the world process is not teleological and anthropocentric, but purposeless and
deterministic. Naturalism further maintains that human life, whether physical, mental moral
or spiritual is an ordinary natural event attributable in its totality to the ordinary operations of
nature. It also asserts that man’s ethnical values, compulsions, constrains, restraints and
activities can be justified on purely natural grounds, without recourse to supernatural
sanctions. It also holds that man can attain his highest good under natural conditions without
expectation of a supernatural destiny and reward.
Naturalism has always asserted that there is but one system or level of reality; that this
system is the totality of objects and events in space and time and that the behaviour of this
system is determined only by its own character and is reducible to a set of causal laws. Nature
is thus conceived as self-contained and self-dependent.
Historically, the chief proponents of naturalism were a group of philosophers from
Miletus called Milesian philosophers. They lived in Miletus in Western Turkey during the
sixth century before Christ. These philosophers sought to understand reality through natural
means. By 500 B.C. Leucippus developed the principle that all qualitative differences in
nature may be reduced to quantitative ones. There were other philosophers like Epicurus
(341-279 B.C.) who established a school in Athens around 306 B.C. where he instructed his
disciples and admirers in the art of rational living based on naturalistic ideas. He taught that
pleasure and happiness are the natural ends of life. In his interpretation of nature, he accepted
Democritus’ atomism that everything could be reduced to small arts or atoms that could not
be reduced any further.
In the historical and philosophical foundations of education, Jean Jacques Rousseau
(1721-1778) and John Henry Pestalozzi (1746-1827) are highly regarded as fathers of natural
education.
3.2. Jean Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778)
Rousseau, the foremost among the European educational theorists, was born in
Geneva of a poor, but highly respected Calvinist family. Due to the death of his mother when
he was one week old, his father assumed the full responsibility of bringing him up. He was
sent to a boarding school at the age of ten having been deserted by his eccentric watchmaker
father. Rousseau, however, had acquired his father’s passion for reading. His reading habits,
though Locke, Francois Voltaire and Micheal de Montaigne. All of these made tremendous
impressions on him.
In 1762, Rousseau wrote two of his greatest works: Social Contract and Emile. In
these works, Rousseau wrestled with two irreconcilable problems:
(1) “Man is born free, but everywhere he is in chains”
(2) “All is good as it comes from the hand of God”
Let us restate Rousseau’s problem, thus: What is man’s relation and responsibility to the
state, and how can a child born into such a state be reared so that he is not corrupted by the
vies of civilization?
Rousseau sought throughout his life to discover the laws of nature and to establish a
society based on their application. In such a natural society, according to Rousseau, there will
be no artificial social conventions and hoped that through such eliminations, human progress
was inevitable. Rousseau’s major criticism of the educational systems of his time was that
they were based on excessive verbalism, which made education dependent on abstract bodies
of literature. In Emile, Rousseau rejected artificial education and developed a naturalistic
theory which rested on three premises: First, that nature was the great educator, instructing
man through the five senses; second, that instruction should be adapted to the unfolding
capacities of the child; and third, that instruction should be active and based on the child’s
experience.
 In his educational method, Rousseau employed five clearly defined periods of human
experience or growth: (1) infancy (2) childhood, (3) boyhood, (4) adolescence, and (5) youth.
At each stage, Rousseau defined appropriate set of educational activities. It was Rousseau
that made it clear that through these stages, it was possible that the whole of childhood period
could be reckoned with in the human educational development. As pointed out above,
Rousseau was born into a Calvinistic family but by recognizing the place and dignity of
childhood, Rousseau rejected the doctrine of the Calvinist that man was depraved and that
children were conceived in sin and born in corruption. The Calvinists therefore advised that
the child should be treated like an adult so as to be able to exorcise the inclinations to evil in
him through harsh methodical disciplines. (Rousseau later rejected Calvinism in favour of
Deism). Rousseau considered the child and his interest naturally good. Therefore his natural
goodness should form the basis of his education.
During infancy, that is, from birth to age five, Emile was described by Rousseau as
completely helpless and therefore needed others desperately. Through self-activity however,
nature had given superabundant energy to the infant for physical development. Rousseau
therefore advised parents to allow the child the greatest possible freedom of movement for
self-discovery. This seems to contradict our culture of a mother placing her child on her back.
Rousseau may be right for his culture and time. However, the African mother and child have
benefited immensely from this culture. The child and mother, for example, through this
practice enjoyed the warmth of one another. The child in his own way enjoyed a profound
sense of attachment to the mother.
The next stage of development is childhood, from ages five to twelve. At this stage
the child becomes conscious of his own personal life. He experiences feelings of happiness
and unhappiness. According to Rousseau, the child is egoistically motivated by self-love and
self-preservation. At this stage of growth the child is not capable of reasoning to form
concrete judgments. Rousseau advised that since such words as obedience, obligation and
duty were meaningless to the child; they should not be employed, as they have no bearing on
the child’s education.
The third stage, the boyhood, twelve to fifteen, is the period when the child’s strength
increased in proportion than his other needs. This state is an indication of mental
development. Rousseau remarked that having noticed this mental development in Emile, he
encouraged him to develop his natural curiosity, thus the child was allowed to develop his
natural curiosity, and performing certain activities. As a part of this encouragement,
Rousseau urged that Emile be taught manual skills to enhance the proper combination of
mental, physical, and manual labour.
From fifteen to eighteen, the fourth and adolescent age, Emile was introduced to the
social order. By this Rousseau means that to live in the world, one has to know how to live
with others and be ready to be aware of the forces which motivate other people. It was at this
stage that Rousseau figured that Emile should be able to develop moral values through the
study of subjects like history, religion, and the biography of certain individuals.
The final stage of the education of Emile that is, ages eighteen to twenty, Rousseau
broadened Emile’s awareness of the world through extensive travels, learning other
languages, studying in greater detail subjects like sociology, natural history, law and
government. It was at the end of his studies that Rousseau allowed Emile to marry Sophy.
Rousseau’s contribution to education includes his concept of natural education, which
motivated other educational theorists to study and investigate the growth and development of
the child. Among the many educational theorists and innovators of the Enlightenment period
were Pestalozzi, Froebel and Herbart.
Rousseau’s educational theory is yet to make significant impacts on the methods
employed to educate our children. Parents and guardians seem too preoccupied with other
things to have the time to study the various changes taking place in their children in order to
educate them accordingly.

3.3. Johann Heinrich Pestalozzi (1746-1827)

Pestalozzi was born in Zurich of a protestant family of Italian origin. Due to the death
of his father, he was left to be taken care of by his devoted mother and Barbara Schmid, their
house-hold assistant. His mother relied on Barbara to manage the house-hold. Babeli, as
Barbaba Schmid was also known, effected stringent economic measures in the household and
dominated the fatherless Pestalozzi’s household. She prevented the children from developing
outside friendship and this greatly affected Johann Heinrich as he grew to be highly
introspective and socially isolated. In later years, in his reminiscence he complained of his
shyness and social incompetence with children of his age; thus: “I knew none of their games,
their exercises, their secretes; naturally I was awkward in their midst and the object of their
ridicule”. As a youth, Johann attended two classical Swiss schools. Pestalozzi felt that his
studies in these schools did not prepare him for the realities of the outside world.
Upon reaching manhood, Pestalozzi developed a number of interests but none of these
lasted too long. It was after a long period of trial and error that he found his life along desire
for educational pursuits. Pestalozzi attempted to apply Rousseau’s methods to the rearing of
his own child. As a result of this experience with Rousseau’s method, he was able to notice
the weaknesses and strengths of Rousseau’s ideas. Pestalozzi established his own school
based on natural principles of sense experience.
From 1774-1780, Pestalozzi conducted an industrial school for the poor children at
his estate in Neuhof. Through this industrial boarding school, he wished that the Swiss
peasants be educated out of their economic and social deprivations. He attempted this by
combining literacy with useful occupations. His students were engaged in reading, writing,
farming, spinning and weaving. Pestalozzi’s belief was that his school would be
economically viable and self-sustaining. The venture failed in 1780. That failure did not
prevent him from venturing further into committing himself to improving the condition of the
poor by developing a methodology of natural education to regenerate the society itself.
Pestalozzi published two books, Leonard and Gertrude (1782) and How Gertrude
Teachers Her Children (1801). In these works, he told how proper education could reform a
Swiss village and how education according to nature, mingled with human affection was
practicable. Pestalozi maintained that man was a natural (not a supernatural) being the same
whether on the throne of majesty or in the farmer’s hut. All must work and follow the path of
nature, but it could not be the same road for everyone.
Pestalozzi tried all his life to combat poverty, ignorance and injustice of his day.
“Man” according to him, “created organizations, laws, customs and even religion, but used
them for his own personal and selfish ends rather than the good of all”. According to
Pestalozzi, we live in a state of institutionalized injustice. He believed that reform ought to
commence with the individual rather than with the group. The individual must be afforded
the opportunity and the power to make use of his head, heart and hand. Education, for him,
was to be considered an organic development. He campaigned against the traditional
education emphasizing mental discipline and memorization. In his Swan Song (1907) he
claimed that only that which affected man as an indissoluble unit could be regarded as
educative in the sense of the word. He believed that general education must precede
vocational education and that education should be concerned with growth in knowledge and
power rather than with the acquisition of knowledge. He said that a child’s innate capacities
should be awakened by series of experiences arranged according to his maturation.
J. A. Green in J.H. Pestalozzi, The Swan Song in Pestalozzi’s educational writings
summarized Pestalozzi’s educational thought thus:
 It is like the art of the gardener under whose care a thousand trees blossom and grow.
He contributes nothing to their actual growth, the principles of growth lie in the trees
themselves. He plants and waters, but God gives the increase… So with the educator, he
imparts no single power to men. He only watches lest external forces should injure or disturb.
He take care that development runs its course in accordance with its own law… The moral,
the intellectual and practical powers of our nature must, as it were, spring out themselves for
themselves.
Pestalozzi suggested that the curriculum should correspond with the constituents of
human nature: intellectual, practical power, morality and religion. Pestalozzi emphasized the
cultivation of the emotions and the need for religious experiences.
Faith, not reason, should be regarded as the faculty by which man apprehended his
creator. His curriculum was concretely based on object lessons, development of language
skills, arithmetic, music, geography, drawing, modeling, geometry, gymnastics, and manual
training. Such subjects like history, literature and myth were rejected, just like Rousseau,
since they did not contribute to the development of sense perception.
Pestalozzi’s writing is obscure, thus a systematic treatment of his educational
methodology is difficult. However seven general principles may be studied as his
methodology:
1. sensation is the basis of all instruction
2. language should always be related to observation
3. instruction should begin with the simplest elements and gradually proceed to
the abstract and complex.
4. teachers should always respect the individuality of the learner
5. natural education should harmoniously develop the moral, intellectual and
physical powers of the student
6. he had unshakable faith in the power of education
7. he demonstrated the organic character of education.
In summary, Pestalozzi has been alluded to as “education’s most successful failure”.
He died revered by all who knew him but without a full realization of how widespread his
educational influence would be. He gave rise to manual labour movement in education in
Europe and America. After the Swiss reforms of 1839, his principles were introduced into the
educational practice of many cantonal schools. The weight of established tradition in France
and England did not allow for the establishment of his theories. But through the influence of
a small group, his ideas were made known in America as early as 1806. The great interest in
his methods and the growth of its application did not occur till after 1860.
Most schools in the old Western Nigeria encouraged and engaged in manual labour
without any apparent reference to the ideas of Pestalozzi. But the practice was abandoned
later on as teachers became unduly sophisticated regarding touching the soil as degrading to
their personality and intelligence. Ironically, as a result of hunger, economic depression, late
payment of salaries, most teachers have reverted to tilling the ground for their survival and
for the education of their students. Thus agricultural science is emphasized both by the
Federal and State governments. To boost agriculture further, the Federal Government
established Universities of Agriculture.

3.4. Basic Concepts of Naturalism

The basic concepts emphasized by naturalism are:
1. that nature is the only real thing
2. that nature is the key to life and everything in life owes its existence to the
laws of nature
3. that individuals are more important than the society, and
4. that people accept social system so as to prevent and avert chaos rather than
because the system is good and profitable.

3.5. Naturalism Applied to the Educative Process

Epistemologically, naturalism limits knowledge to natural events and the relationship
existing between them. Natural educators should therefore direct their inquiry to a description
and systematization of what happens in nature. The following are the major emphasis placed
on educational practices of naturalism:
1. both the mental and physical areas of life are of equal importance and should
be accorded the same recognition and significance in the educative process;
2. education is by natural means and should conform to the learner’s mental and
physical development as well as the learner’s readiness to learn;
3. education should satisfy the learner’s needs more than the needs of the society;
4. each learner should be guided to teach himself and actively control the
learning process and the educational experience;
5. the teacher should only show the way to learn rather than be the way;
 6. punishment and reward form a tangible part of the learning process, therefore,
where it is appropriate, the learner should be given reasons for the punishment
or the rewards. For example, a student who is constantly late for lessons
should be made to realize that something is lost through such tardiness.

3.6. Topics for Discussion

1. Discuss the importance of naturalism as a concept geared towards the return to
the understanding of nature
2. Examine briefly the historical development of naturalism
3. Compare and contrast the views of Rousseau and Pestalozzi as natural
educators.
4. Do you think that the method of the education of Emile was realistic? Give
cogent reasons for your position
5. Criticize the basic concepts of naturalistic education.

3.7. Bibliography
Davidson, Thomas, Rousseau and Education according to Nature, New York: Charles
Scribner and Sons, 1898.
Good, Carter V. (ed.), Dictionary of Education, 2nd Edition, New York: McGraw-Hill
Book Company Inc., 1959.
Green J. A., The Educational Ideas of Pestalozzi, Baltimore: Warwick and York, Inc.,
1907.
Opare-Djan, Afari, “Philosophy of Education: Some Related Topics” Unpublished
Notes for EDU/PED 201, 1986.
 CHAPTER FOUR
IDEALISM

4.1. Meaning and Advocates of Idealism

Idealism is regarded as any system or doctrine whose fundamental interpretative
principle is ideal. Broadly, however, it is any theoretical or practical view emphasizing mind
(soul, spirit, life) or what is characteristically of pre-eminent value or significance to it.
Socrates Sophroniscus (470-399 B.C.) is widely regarded as a prominent idealist. But
because Socrates himself did not seem to have any of his writings for prosperity, Plato, one of
his students who popularized Socrates’ ideas was regarded by most historians of philosophy
as the first idealist.
Thus, according to Gutek, idealism’s origins are usually traced to Plato. Plato posed
several questions as introduction of the understanding and analysis of the philosophy of
idealism. One of such concern the contradictory fact of permanency and change. In other
words, some things are unchanging and permanent, whereas, there are other things that
constantly change. Thus, Plato divided the world into changing particulars (such as man,
earth and water) and unchanging universals. According to Plato, every particular has a
universal. But for such universals like beauty, essence and goodness, there are no
corresponding particulars. These he called absolute realities.
Since Plato, there have been several types of idealism and there have transcendentalist
idealism of Ralph Waldo Emerson, which provides a means of intellectual escape from the
harsh realities of an embryonic industrialism. Transcendentalists believe that human mind
could achieve communion with the Absolute and the Universal Mind, through intuitive self-
evaluation and detachment from materialism.

4.2. Basic Tenets of Idealism

Idealism as a philosophy stresses the concept of the awareness of self. This
awareness, according to idealists, is a profoundly significant reality of individual experience.
In Meditations on the First Philosophy, Rene Descartes (1596-1650), pointed out that a man
might doubt everything that he had formerly accepted as true. A man may doubt that God
exists; that there are no elements of physical nature; that God did not create the world; that he
has no eyes, nose and so on, but Descartes maintained that there was one thing a man could
not doubt, his own existence. Awareness of one’s existence is the irreducible element in the
experience of every man. According to Descartes, “I am” should be regarded as a true
proposition each time a person expresses it covertly or overtly. One cannot doubt his own
existence no matter how skeptical he has developed. However, there are some atheists who
got to the extent of doubting what Christians claim to be the soul of everyman’s existence.
That is, the spiritual soul itself. For example, Tai Solarin doubted the existence of his own
soul. However, the ultimate fact of one’s experience is mind and consciousness. The idealist
claim that it is not one’s physical body or the separate members and organs that are
necessarily and sufficiently real and existing (since it is possible to doubt their existence).
The ultimate reality in one’s experience is the mind. It alone can be known to be real. The “I
think, therefore I am” argument of Rene Descartes is a reliable summary of the expression of
one’s self-awareness.
Briefly then, idealism stresses that:
1. the mind is the real thing since everything is routed though the mind
2. people are more important than nature
3. ideas are true and do not change
4. people can choose between right and wrong
5. truth can be found through reasoning powers

4.3. Idealist Epistemology and the Educative Process

Plato and Socrates maintained that knowledge acquired through the senses must
always remain uncertain and incomplete. For them, the material world is a distorted
resemblance of the perfect sphere of existence or being. That is, our material visible world
was viewed as a camouflage of the ideal world. True knowledge, according to George F.
Kneller, is based on rationality since reason as a faculty “discerns the pure spiritual forms of
things beyond their material embodiments”. Most idealists, like Emmanuel Kant, maintained
that the essence of working could be regarded as the imposition of meaning and order on the
information gathered by the senses. The aim of teaching, according to the idealists, is not so
much to transmit knowledge but to inject order and meaning. Thus in idealism, the process of
knowing is that of recognizing ideas already lodged in the mind. For the idealists, knowing is
essentially a process of recognition, a recall and rethinking of ideas that are present in the
mind. They claimed that what is to be known is already present in the human mind. The task
of learning is to endeavour to bring this knowledge to consciousness.
The major educational task of the idealist is that of assisting the learner to achieve
identification with his own mind. Learning thus becomes a process of mental awareness.
According to Gutek, “learning is both a qualitative and quantitative expansion of the self
which is accomplished by self development. The learner seeks a broad and general
understanding of perspective, into his universe”.
Since man’s knowing, according to the idealist, is the recall of ideas and concepts
already present in the mind, the appropriate method the teacher adopts to teach the student
should be the Socratic Method (more on this shortly). Through this method, the teacher
attempts to stimulate his learner’s consciousness by asking leading questions. Through the
method, Socrates professes to impart no information since he claimed to have none. Thus, by
claiming ignorance, Socrates drew forth more and more definite answers by means of pointed
questions. The method was best illustrated by Socrates in his questioning of an unlearned
slave boy in the Meno of Plato. The slave was led step by step to a demonstration of a special
case of the Pythagorean Theorem. Socrates employed this method because of his predicated
belief that children are born with knowledge already in their minds but cannot recall this
knowledge without some help. This theory is known as anamnesis. It is a theory closely
associated with Socratic irony, that is, the profession of ignorance on the part of a questioner,
who may in fact be quite wise, as in the case of Socrates.
Idealism’s epistemology and educational process can be summarized thus:
1. the teacher is the student’s primary motivator
2. though the teacher is charged with motivating the student by asking leading
questions, the learner is the initiator of his own learning.
3. education should endeavour to emphasis the development of mind
4. education should involve moral and spiritual values emphasizing the
development of the whole person.
 5. any teaching method employed should be geared towards motivating the
learner.
Since Socrates and Plato play very significant roles in the understanding of the origins
of idealism, below are brief discussions of their philosophies.

4.4. Socrates (470-399 B. C.)

Socrates sought to discover the universal principles of truth, justice and beauty. He
felt that it was possible to demonstrate a generalized morality that governed all men. Man
was created to be, to realize and experience moral excellence. Socrates believed that
educational endeavours provide the passport to the attainment of this moral excellence.
According to Socrates, education should make a man a better citizen. The claim to
individualism by the Sophists was rejected by Socrates. Man, to him, is an integral member
of the society. The acquisition of knowledge was the most valuable thing a man could attain,
in order to sustain the much-needed democracy in Athens. Thus, man should strive to attain
such knowledge, which would remove individual differences in order to discover the
essentials upon which man would agree.
It was this contention that propelled Socrates to travel around Athens challenging the
views, the statements and the beliefs of those whom he met. According to him, the morally
excellent man must live a life of wisdom and his actions must be governed by reason. Unlike
the Sophists, logic, grammar and rhetoric were not generalized human excellence. Thus,
Socrates criticized the Sophists for confusing the Athenian youth. The virtuous man is above
technical expertise of any sort. For Socrates then, knowledge could not be poured into an
individual through external sources. He maintained that genuine knowledge exists within
each individual and this knowledge only needs to be brought to consciousness by the
pedagogical efforts of the teacher. The Socratic kind of teacher would be such who would
stimulate the learner to recall the truth latent in him, and indeed, in all men.
Through his Socratic method, he stimulated his ‘client’ in order to lead him to
examine, define and analyze himself. Through man’s self-examination, he can look inward to
seek the truth present in him. His method consisted of taking a statement made by another,
which is analyzed to reveal its inconsistencies. After the person has recognized his fallacies,
Socrates hoped that the person would ask series of questions. As Socrates answered these
questions, hopefully, the truth of the statement would emerge. In the Socratic method, a
skillful teacher asks leading questions to stimulate his students to ponder on basic human
concerns. Such basic concerns for Socrates include truth, justice, beauty, life and death.
Through this process of asking leading questions, the teacher enhances the possibility of
constructing, criticizing and reconstructing definitions. The dynamic nature of this method is
significant since the process of questioning and answering will not terminate till the teacher
and learner feel satisfied.
Gutek contended that Socrates’ method has been described as a kind of “shock
treatment” since it jolts the learner into anxiety about his on condition as a human being.
Socrates compared the acquisition of knowledge to ‘hearing’ since it cured one of the
sicknesses of ignorance thus restoring one to order and form. Through the process of
education, Socrates felt that an intense human relationship is built between the teacher and
the learner. Education should also assist the mind in building a set of value predilections and
moral dispositions. When man is governed by reason, Socrates conjectured, he would
subordinate appetite to reason.
Without any doubt, Socrates was a great teacher, who devoted himself of the practice
of education. Socrates nicknamed himself an intellectual “gadfly” and ‘mid-wife of ideas”.
As he frequented the Athenian market place questioning and discussing political, aesthetic,
moral and philosophical issues, he won for himself a multitude of influential enemies. Thus
he was brought to trial in 399 B.C., having been accused of disrespecting the Athenian gods
and corruption her youth. He was found guilty and made to drink poison.
Most teachers in Nigeria employ the Socratic Method in their classrooms. However
one wonders if the teachers believe, like Socrates, that genuine knowledge exists within the
Nigerian child. The impression has often been created that the minds of the pupils are blank
(tabula rasa); one wonders then what these teachers want to bring to consciousness through
their application of the Socratic Method.

4.5. Plato Ariston (427-347 B.C.).

Plato, considered the most famous of the Greek classical philosophers, was a genuine
innovator on a scale which succeeding centuries offer no parallel. For many hundred of years,
the influence of Aristotle was conspicuous and profound, but there is a sense in which this
was not so: for Aristotle himself was, and usually spoke of himself as a Platonist. There is not
really to be found among Plato’s numerous dialogues any single “system” or set of doctrines
that could be put forward as a final characterization of his position. To attempt to formulate
his philosophy, therefore, into a rigid system is a fruitless task. Plato and his chief mentor,
Socrates, were always willing to consider any complex situation, not for information or
isolated bits of knowledge, but for profoundness of insight.
4.6. Plato’s Philosophy
Plato, a speculative philosopher, founded the higher philosophical school known as
the Academy in 387 B.C. Plato was the author of such works as: Protagoras, a discourse on
the nature of virtues; Phaedo, an argument in favour of man’s immortality; the Republic, and
the Law, Utopian treaties on educational, legal and political theories. Plato being a scion of
the old aristocratic Athenian family was opposed to the course of the new democratic
leadership. Apart from Plato suffering reverses from the hands of this newer leadership, he
believed that democracy had contributed to the destabilization of Athens’s cultural heritage.
Social change was one of Plato’s fundamental problems. As a result of his metaphysical
philosophy, Plato constructed a perfect or ideal world of ideas or forms. Thus, Plato spoke of
the universal forms or ideas of truth, beauty and justice. According to Plato’s philosophy, this
“logic” or unity of ideas cannot be described so concretely as this book or this chair because
the forms or ideas possess a far greater reality than this thing we can see, taste, touch, feel
and smell. Individual actions were conceived to be imperfect representations or
approximations of the universal and external ideas.
Plato believed that the purpose of human existence was the attainment of the
beautiful, the virtuous, the just, and the good man, and that the true conduct of life rested on
the four moral concepts of human worth, wisdom, public service and political leadership.
Man’s search for perfection therefore should not rest on his search for wisdom and
knowledge alone but should also concentrate on transforming them into reality, political and
social actions. Plato encouraged the study of utopias and also to be put into practice. Man is
blessed by being endowed with the ability to perfect himself since he has been given into the
essence of the world. Man alone can project himself beyond his own ego into the arena of the
logos. Plato therefore charged the adults of the society to educate the youth to accomplish this
eternal utopian mission of man.
Plato did not agree with Protagors’ relativistic assertion that, “man is the measure of
all things”. He also challenged the Sophists’ emphasis on change and sense experience as the
bases of educational methodology. Man is considered good and just in the sense that he
participates in ideal forms or concepts of goodness and justice.

4.7. Plato’s Epistemology

For Plato, education is the process of drawing and guiding children towards that
principle which is considered right by law and confirmed as truly right by the experience of
the oldest and most just. His theory of knowledge is based on the doctrine of “reminiscence”,
by which man recalls the truths and ideas that are present within his mind and in the minds of
all men. The doctrine of reminiscence implied that man’s soul existed prior to its encasement
in the physical body. Before its “enslavement”, man’s soul inhabited a spiritual world in
proximity to the pure forms or ideas that are the source of all truth, justice, beauty and
knowledge. Man forgot or repressed within his subconscious mind, his knowledge of the
truth, justice and goodness. However, the knowledge of the ideas or concepts of the perfect
forms remain latent in the mind. Through pedagogical processes, the mind rediscovers the
truth bringing it once again to consciousness through philosophic introspection.
Plato buttressed his doctrine of “reminiscence” in his “Allegory of the Cave”. He
imagined a number of persons chained in a cave with their backs to the entrance. A fire burns
behind them, casting shadows of the objects passersby carry on their heads. The inhabitants
of the cave are oblivious to the reality since shadows are only cast on their heads. One of the
prisoners or inhabitants of the cave was released. At this time he could see physically the
reality he had previously experienced only in shadows. After a time, he returned to the cave
and tried to interpret the “shadows” to his fellow prisoners as he had experienced them.
According to Plato, true knowledge comes only to those whose intellect have penetrated
beyond the confusing and deceiving shadows of sense perception, experiences and opinions.
Sense impressions cannot give man what he can truly believe.
True knowledge is eternal and changeless since the forms and ideas upon which they
rest are immutable and enduring. Plato believed that there is a universal truth from which all
lesser truths derive. Also, he affirmed the existence of only one idea of perfection common to
all men. Truth could only be attained through the direct vision of reason and its confirmation
in man’s consciousness. Plato categorically asserted the universality of truth. Proper
education should also be universal, enduring and unchanging. It should direct man’s mind
toward the attainment of reality since reality can only be achieved intellectually. As education
led the philosopher-kings to the attainment of the universal in Plato’s aristocratic state, so it
should be with the intellectual elite in any society whose education is based upon the concept
of Plato’s utopia.

4.8. Plato’s Republic

Some philosophers claimed that Plato suggested his idea of the “state” as an example
for mankind, and that the Republic is an allegory of the education of man. Lamprecht in Our
Philosophical Tradition pointed out that Plato considered the three social classes as the
representation of the three divisions of the human soul. Man’s desires or passions represent
the lowest class; the dynamic, energetic force corresponds to the defender class; and the
reason or intelligence forms the philosopher-kings’ class. Man will not attain perfection
unless ruled by his reason or intelligence. He further pointed out that justice is composed of
three elements: temperance, courage and wisdom.
In the Republic, Plato fashioned a theoretically utopian state to bear an idealized and
intellectualized approximation to Sparta. His Republic was to be ruled by the intellectual
elite, the philosopher-kings. His ideas of the ideal state and an ideal system of education were
intimately connected with his metaphysical and epistemological systems. As pointed out
above, he attempted to escape the discord and social disintegration caused by social change
by proposing a perfect state based on the concept of an unchanging and eternal truth. For him
change was reduced to sensory illusions. It is clear from the foregoing discussion that Plato in
particular disagreed with the fundamental philosophy of the Sophists, which is based on
benefiting from social change. For Plato, such inducement of change was misguided. His
Republic, an organic community existing for the cultivation of eternal truth and virtue, was
based on two assumptions:
(1) only the intellectual should govern the state
(2) all men should contribute to the state according to their particular aptitudes.
Plato envisaged a harmonious state inhabited the harmonious individuals who
are functional. Education was to be one major determinant for the
relationships of the individuals in the Republic.
Socially, the inhabitants of the Republic were divided into:
1. the intellectual philosopher-kings
2. the soldiers or the military group who were charged with the task of defending
the Republic.
3. the working proletariat, the labourers or the artisans who sustained the state
economically.
The crucial factor which determined what class a person fell into was the intellectual
capacity or the ability to grasp abstract concepts. But this could also depend on family
background and environment. Thus, heredity, environment and intellectual capacities were
major determinants for membership in the various classes.
The evaluation and selection of members were the responsibility of the Republic’s
educators. Historically, we know that in totalitarian or hierarchical societies this sort of
arrangement was assigned to the formal educational system. Schools in these elitist systems
performed the function of sorting or selecting people according to constitutional criteria. We
know that some societies have employed irrational criteria, for example, tribal considerations
to carry out this task. In Plato’s Republic, the criterion was intellectual, ability to reason.
Once a person had been selected according to his aptitude he was given the education
appropriate to that class, thus equipment him to perform and be useful in the society. It is not
clear, however, whether a citizen could be promoted or demoted from one level or state to
another.
The philosopher-kings were members of the elite class. They were charged with the
responsibility of guiding the destiny of the state. The ability to grasp abstract concepts
qualifies them intellectually and made them capable of obtaining a clearer view of the truth,
goodness and the beautiful. Their intelligence qualified them to be the guardians and
governors of the Republic.
The defenders are next in rank of importance. They have been evaluated to possess
inferior intellectual capacity compared with the philosopher-kings. Because they were more
inclined to follow their will rather than their intellectual, they were assigned to function as the
defenders of the state against foreign aggressors. The lowest class belongs to those who were
intellectually inferior. They were the workers, laborers, artisans or economic enterprisers.
These are governed by their appetites rather than their intellect (or reason) or will.
Plato’s aim was to model an elastic state, which would not be coercive like the fascist,
the dictatorial or the military states. As pointed out above, Plato envisaged a harmonious state
of individuals. In other words, Plato’s elitist Republic was designed to be harmonious and
peaceful. He did not conceive of a rebellious, coercive and oppressive Republic. Rather, he
envisaged, a just and harmonious relationship of all the classes. The Republic was to be
integrated rationally, just as the various organs of a balanced individual. Plato could be
regarded as an opportunist as he designed his Republic to inject “equality” into an acutely
socially unequal society, (as a result of the endeavours of the Sophists).

4.9. The Educational System of the Three Classes

Plato’s educational philosophy combined metaphysical, epistemological sociological,
political and pedagogical elements. His “reminiscence” epistemology was highly idealized,
an intellectualized version of what ought to obtain in Sparta. Plato’s educational system
unlike the modern Essentialism was not for the cultivation of skill or imparting information,
rather it was a conversion, redirecting a personality or turning someone to a genuine reality.
Man’s cognitive powers were to be turned away from contingencies and sensory images of
the world and redirected to immutable perfect forms. Plato’s educator was charged with
assisting the student to search for the truth. Plato held that this living and developing
organism reached its peak in emotional and imaginative tasks. Thus the child should be
brought up by stimulating him to love and pursue the good, the true and the beautiful. In later
years, the soul will be charged with the recognition of truth, goodness, and beautiful since
they are more abstract.
In the Republic, children were separated from their parents and placed in state
controlled nurseries until each child reached the age of six. Plato’s contention was that
parents were corruptive influences on children since as adults; they were full of biases and
prejudices. He feared parents transferring their “ignorance” to their children. The teachers in
the state nurseries were supported to be pre-disposed, properly cultivated and thus in the
position to expose the children to virtuous and educational environments. Plato made “sure”
that injurious habits, ideas and practices were purged out of the children during their nursery
years.
From ages six to eighteen, the students study gymnastics and music. Music for Plato
was a broadly based subject, thus it included reading, writing, chorus singing and dancing.
After the mastery of the above, students were allowed to study some approved classics. He
prevented the students from studying the traditional poets because he felt they would distract
the students from their efforts to cultivate rationality. Plato engaged in censorship because he
wanted to control the students’ inclination regarding forming harmful impressions. Thus,
only those poets whose lives were worthy of emulation were to be studied. Men in the society
who had been known for their temperate and truthful nature could be studied, also. The
students were to avoid men who had been adjudged insolent, proud and disobedient to
constituted authority. Such people were adjudged by Plato as lacking the control of their
appetites and passions. He encouraged the study of literature because it helps in the formation
of character.
The students were also to study mathematics having successfully completed the basic
character forming subjects. Geometry and astronomy were strongly recommended due to
their supreme educational value of awakening the mind’s conceptual powers. Gymnastic was
reserved for the last two years of adolescence. It is to promote character formation and skill
development. It was also to promote the qualities of spirit, courage, and a well-balanced and
harmonious personal character. Plato criticized athletic competitions on the grounds that they
failed to promote proper emotional dispositions. Gymnastic was to be returned to its original
purpose of military preparation and state defense. This military preparation was to consist of
javelin throwing, archery and so on.
From ages eighteen to twenty, Plato called for more intensive physical and military
trainings. At twenty, however, the future philosopher-kings were to be exposed to additional
higher training. For additional ten years, the future philosopher-kings were to study
mathematics, geometry, astronomy, music and science. At the age of thirty, the philosopher-
kings’ group was subdivided. The less intellectually oriented group was assigned to civil
service jobs. The more intellectually endowed continued higher education in dialectics and
metaphysics. At the age of thirty-five the formal education of the philosopher-kings was
concluded and they were dispatched to direct the affairs of the Republic. At the age of fifty,
they joined the inner circle, the decision making class of the intellectual elite, the
philosopher-kings.
Plato’s educational philosophy was designed to educate the elite rather than the
masses. Formal education was to be the state’s concern with the teachers and the schools
carefully supervised and moderated by the ruling elite, the philosopher-kings.
The Nigerian educational system has much to learn from Plato. In his system, Plato
endeavoured to use education to pick men for the various duties of a social group. Can we
claim that education has thus been employed in this country? Plato could employ education in
that way because the set up in Plato’s Republic was such that the aptitudes and abilities of
individuals were closely monitored and registered, since education was the concern of the
state. Apart from the concern, education was financially supported and thus controlled by the
state. It was therefore possible for the state to be in a better position to select men and women
who have been trained for the service of the state. Plato planned for a happy state by leaning
beyond the utilitarian principle of pleasure for the greatest number of people. He wished that
all people become happy eventually. He thus worked out an educational system to formalize
it.

4.10. Topic of Discussion

1. How is the concept of the awareness of the self-reflected in the epistemological view
of idealism?
2. Do you subscribe to how Descarters ascertained his own awareness?
3. Do you think that the Socratic Method is the most appropriate method for an idealist
teacher?
4. Discuss the importance of the doctrine of “reminiscence” in Plato’s epistemology.
5. Why is Plato’s Republic idealistic?

4.11. References
1. Gerald Lee Gutek, Philosophical Alternatives in Education (Ohio: Charles Merrill
Publishing Company, 1974) p. 12.
2. Tai Solarin was an atheist. For more on this, see Tony Idowu Aladejana and Sam. S.
Obidi. The Educational Theory of Tai Solarin, (Ile-Ife: Adefila Printers, 1991), pp.
78-91.
3. George F. Kneller, Foundations of Education, (New York: John Wiley and Sons Inc.,
1971), p. 217.
4. Gerald Lee Gutek, Philosophical Alternatives in Education, p. 16.
5. Gerald Lee Gutek, A History of Western Educational Experience, (New York:
Random House, Inc., 1972), pp. 34-35.

4.12. Bibliography
Butter, J. Donald, Idealism in Education, New York: Harper and Row Publisher, 1966.
Butter, J. Donald, Four Philosophies and their Practice in Education and Religion, New York:
Harper and Row Publisher, 1968.
Horne, Herman H., The Philosophy of Education, New York: The Macmillan Company,
1905.
Horne, Herman H., The Democratic Philosophy of Education, New York: The Macmillan
Company, 1932.
Horne, Herman H., “An Idealist Philosophy of Education”, 41 st Year Book, Part I, National
Society for the Study of Education. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1942.
Kneller, George F. Foundations of Education, New York: John Wiley & Sons Inc., 1971.
Kant, Immanuel, Education. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1960.
Plato, The Republic, New York: Oxford University Press, 1945.

CHAPTER FIVE
REALISM
5.1. Meaning and Advocates of Realism
According to Runes in Dictionary of Philosophy realism is the theory of the reality of
abstract or general terms, which are held to give an equal, and sometimes a superior reality to
actual physical particulars. Realism claims that people inhabit a real world, that what people
experience are real and that these do not in any way depend on our minds or our perceptions
in order for them to really exist.
The origins of Realism can be traced to Aristotle (384-322 B.C.). Aristotle elaborated
a form of natural realism by using “methods of common sense observation to investigate a
public world”. Aristotle was preoccupied with analyzing nature, while Plato was interested in
ideas. Other Realists include: Thomas Aquinas 91225-1274), Rene Descartes (1596-1650),
Immanuel Kant (1724-1804), Benedict Spinoza (1632-1677), John Locke (1632-1714),
Johann Friedrich Herbart (1776-1841), William James (1842-1910), Charles S. Peirce (1839-
1914) and so on.

5.2. Basic Concepts of Realism

One fundamental principle held by the realists is called the principle of independence.
Through this principle, they attempted to underscore their understanding of knowledge
process. For example, the new realists maintained that there was no fundamental dualism
between him and matter. They claimed that in the act of knowing, the objects of our
knowledge are always presented directly in consciousness and that there could be no
intervening mental construct and none should be required to account for our knowledge of the
external world. They maintained that this world could be known directly as it is in its real
character.
Briefly Realism maintains that:
(1) the world is that of nature and we learn to understand it by the use of our
senses and experience.
(2) everything conforms to the laws of nature
(3) the application of the scientific method leads us to the truth.
(4) the body and the mind are harmoniously related, and
(5) the individual determines his beliefs

Realism Applied to the Educative Process

The realists maintain that the sense experience reports a true and uninterrupted
account of objects. Thus for them, it is possible to have a faithful and direct knowledge of the
actual world. The realists believe that man’s reason for being is to recognize, to cultivate, to
develop and to use his rationality. Man’s greatest source of happiness comes in the
cultivation of rationality, which contributes to his self-actualization and self-perfection.
Aristotle asserted that education is to be an instrument for the cultivation of man’s basic
rationality. Thus, education is conceived by Aristotle to be a means of aiding man in his quest
for happiness.
For the realist, to know is to have some knowledge and understanding about an object
as a result of interactions between the mind and environment. As a result of sensation, man
has sense experience of the object. According to Gutek (1974), “man’s senses encounter
objects and come to play on the material aspects of these objects.” Though not obliged to
satisfy the personal and interest needs of the students, if, however their interests and needs
are satisfied in the process of his pedagogical exercises, so much the better. The teacher is
expected to devote his energy on imparting the right subject matter. That the students are
taught what matter most as knowledge is one of the aims of education.
According to the realists, satisfying the student is only a means to achieving the true
end of education. It is the belief of the realists that their education offers the best kind of
education capable of preparing qualified leadership. For them the universities would be
required to create an intellectual class of elite capable of leadership since it would have been
schooled in philosophy, logical reasoning and dedicated in achieving certain values for itself
and the society. According to them, this elite class, synonymous with Plato’s philosopher-
kings, would be in the best position to reform the society through wise and judicious
administration based on wise judgments.

Aristotle Nicomachus (384-322 B.C.)

Aristotle was born in the Greek colony of Stagira in Macedon. He was the son of the
court physician of King Amyntas II, (Nichomachus). At the age of eighteen, he became
Plato’s pupil in the Academy at Athens. Having remained with Plato for almost twenty years,
he went to Macedonia as the tutor of Alexander the Great. In 334, he returned to Athens to
establish his own philosophical school, the Lyceum. He wrote on such subjects as: Physics,
Zoology, Botany, Astronomy Psychology, Logic, Ethics and Metaphysics. In his famous
Nicomacean Ethics, Aristotle demonstrated the highest ideals of Hellenic life by laying
considerable emphasis on reason, moderation and harmony. In his Politics, he examined
man’s nature, the purpose of government and the most desirable kind of social life.
At the Lyceum, Aristotle’s students studied a variety of subject, which included:
natural science, organs and habits of animals, the characteristic and distribution of plants, and
the various constitutions of the Greek city-states. He operated the Lyceum for about twelve
years. In 321, due to anti-Macedonian feelings, he fled to Calchis where he died a year later.

Aristotle’s Philosophy
Aristotle’s work represented the greatest achievement of the human mind in the
Western world, having influenced the ideas of men for over two millennia. Deductive method
of reasoning was considered the chief instrument of thought. Deductive or science of logic
was considered the method of science although Aristotle recognized inductive reasoning as
the process for establishing first premises. According to Aristotle, there is in existence an
objective order of reality. All objects are composed of form and matter and exist
independently of man’s knowledge of them. But man having been endowed with the power
of rationality is capable of knowing these objects, and can observe the patterns of regularity
governing the interaction of these objects. Man can be guided to sure conduct through his
theoretical knowledge, which he has acquired through careful and systematic observation.
Aristotle believed that man inhabited a rational and purposeful universe.
According to Aristotle, man is consumed by the essential dualism that has pervaded
the universe. Man is endowed with form or soul and matter, the corporal body. Aristotle tried
to compare man with animals; like animals, we have physical body, and we share the powers
of locomotion, nutrition, reproduction and the desire for survival. Unlike animals, man in his
defining quality is endowed with soul, mind, intellect and thus rationality. Man must strive to
exercise his power of rationality to the fullest. Aristotle believed that for a man to be
considered good or virtuous, he must have been purposeful and rational in his behaviour.
Such a man can make ethical and political decisions based on his power of rationality, which
is essential in man’s search for the truth.

Aristotle’s Epistemology
Aristotle’s claim to dualism surfaced in his epistemology. He asserted that cognition
involves two component phases, sensation and abstraction. All cognitive processes
commence with man’s sensing of objects that are external to him. The perception of the
properties of sensible objects like shape, hardness and softness are conveyed to the mind as
raw materials for eventual conceptualization. Man arrives at concepts by abstracting the form
of these objects from the material content that conveys them to the senses. There is a
significant difference in Plato’s epistemology and Aristotle’s. Plato held that knowing is a
matter of recognizing ideas or forms already lodged in consciousness (his doctrine or
reminiscence). Aristotle, on the other hand, believed that knowledge begins with objects that
are external to man. In Book VIII of Politics, Aristotle propounded his educational theory.
Just like Plato, Aristotle called attention to the existing relationship between the good
individual and the state. The legislator was not to neglect education so that the constitution
does not suffer. Aristotle defined “happiness” as the virtuous life and assigned to education
the responsibility of developing virtue in every individual. Virtue is that generalized and
encompassing excellence or perfection. Education refers to the cultivation and perfection of
man’s capabilities.
Life for Aristotle is the process of nutrition and growth. Therefore the teacher should
lead his pupil to discover where and of what kind his creative powers are which should assist
him to become a living form. Education for Aristotle contributes to good health and sound
physique. He therefore recommended balanced diet and regular exercise. The pupil must
submit to all suggestions, exercises and disciplines of the teacher, as these are necessary for
the development of moral and intellectual character. The teacher or the master must lead a
disciplined life. As Aristotle put it in Politics, the teacher learns what he teaches. Aristotle
asserted that proper methods of teaching should commence with what is most knowable to
man and develop to what is most knowable in itself, that is, from empirical observation to a
contemplation of form.
The liberal arts, such a history and philosophy should be vigorously pursued in order
to enlarge and expand one’s choices. These liberal arts, according to Aristotle, liberate men.
He did not subscribe to the pursuits of occupations like business and farming, since,
according to him, they are liable to distort the body and reduce one’s valuable time for leisure
and the cultivation of intellectual and virtuous excellence. Like Plato, Aristotle believed that
the state should finance and control compulsory public schools.
In the pursuance of the proper education for the development of the citizens, Aristotle
would have the state determine children who should live and the ones to be destroyed soon
after birth because of physical deformities. Further, he would have the state determine whom
a man should marry so that desirable children would be assured. He believed that if the state
exercised this determination, education would thus be used to the best advantage of the
citizens who could defend the state and make it better.
Infants that is, children between ages 1-6 should be given adequate opportunities to
play and sing, engage in physical activities and be told educative stories. From ages 7-14,
Aristotle emphasized moral and physical education for the development of proper habits and
dispositions. His argument was that, at this stage of human development, it is considered
more appropriate to stress the need for the cultivation of proper inclinations in the young
rather than concentrating on matters solely intellectual. Therefore, such objects like reading
and writing skills were to be cultivated as essential pre-requisite to liberal education.
During the ages of adolescence (15-21), Aristotle recommended and emphasized
intellectual pursuits. Thus, the school curricula should emphasize mathematics (geometry,
arithmetic and astronomy) for their practical and theoretical consequences. He recommended
that students should enlarge their worldviews by studying such humanistic subjects like
grammar, literature, poetry, rhetoric, ethics and politics. At the age of twenty-one, the
students were expected to be ripe enough to study speculative subjects like physics,
cosmology, biology, psychology, logic and metaphysics.
Plato and Aristotle’s philosophies of education were not popular with the Greek
people. Their views emphasizing the supervision of education by the state as a means for
training good citizens to serve the state were repulsive and did not enjoy popular influence.
The Sophists’ teaching emphasizing the use of education for individual interests gained
widest acclaim. The people wished to be happy and successful and sought the means to
achieve these. But they were not ready to submit their existing lifestyle of individual
happiness and successfulness to the teachings of these philosophers.

5.7. Topics for Discussion

1. Examine the importance of (a) environment, and (b) sense and experience in the
epistemology of realism
2. Why did Aristotle lay considerable stress on dualism in his philosophy?
3. Criticize the view of Aristotle that the state should determine the children who should
live and the ones to be destroyed soon after birth because of physical deformities.
4. Compare and contrast the stress placed on the concept of nature in the philosophies of
naturalism and realism
5. Plato held that knowing is a matter of recognizing ideas already lodged in
consciousness. Aristotle on the other hand held that knowledge begins as objects that
are external to the learner. Discuss how these apply to teaching and learning.

5.8. References
1. Gerald Lee Gutek, Philosophical Alternatives in Education (Ohio: Charles
Merrill Publishing Co., 1974), p. 29
2. Ibid., p. 34.
5.9. Bibliography
Aristotle, Politics New York: Modern Library, 1943.
Breed, Frederick S., Education and the New Realism, New York:
The Macmillan Company, 1939.
Broody, Harry S., Building a Philosophy of Education,
Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1961.
Gutek, Gerald Lee, Philosophical Alternatives in Education,
Ohio: Charles Merrill Publishing Company, 1974.
Martin, William O., Realism in Education. New York: Harper and
Row Publishers, 1969.
Locke, John, John Locke on Education. Edited by Peter Gay.
New York: Teachers College Bureau of Publications, 1964
Ozmon, H. and Craver, Sam, Philosophical Foundations of
Education. Ohio: Charles Merrill Publishing Co., 1976
Rune, Dagobert D., Dictionary of Philosophy, Ancient-, Medieval-
Modern, Paterson, New Jersey: Littlefield Adams, 1963
Whitehead, Alfred North., The Aim of Education and other
Essays. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1979.

CHAPTER SIX
 PRAGMATISM
6.1. Meaning and Advocates of Pragmatism
Pragmatism originated from the Greek word “Pragma”, meaning “things done”. In
other words, pragmatism; challenges us, according to Ozmon and Craver, “to seek out the
processes and do the things which work best to help us achieve desirable ends”. Pragmatism
wishes that man re-examined the old ways of achieving ends in order to find out whether
there are other approaches which could be more desirable and favourable to living a better
life.
In his Essays in Experimental Logic, John Dewey defined pragmatism as “the rule of
referring all thinking, all reflective considerations, to consequences for final meaning and
test”. Thus pragmatism refers to the attitude of the mind to subject all ideas to test. The mind,
thus, becomes a laboratory. Pragmatism, which was adopted as pragmatism in 1905 and
flourished between 1910 and 1950, was popularized by William James. Pragmatism was not
identified with philosophy for a long time because it was often thought to be more intimately
identified with radicalism in a society where the schools were basically conservative and
traditional.
Several philosophers influenced pragmatic thinking. For example, the initiators of the
movement felt strongly that the scientific ideas began and preferred by Francis Bacon (1561-
1626) should be reflected in the schools. Thus, they felt that schools should be introduced to
those ideas being popularized by the physical sciences, the social sciences and technology.
Through these, pragmatic education would be in a vantage position to influence and reflect
the ideas of justice and freedom, which are crucial to democratic theory.
John Locke’s (1632-1704) influence is based on his view that the mind is a blank slate
(tabular rasa) and that the human mind should be exposed to various experiences, which in
turn would shape human existence. Jean Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778) influenced pragmatic
education with his strong emphasis on the child being educated in open, stimulating and
natural environment. He led the pragmatists to insist that education should take place in a
natural environment and should be related to the natural development of the child.
6.2. John Dewey’s Pragmatism in Education
John Dewey’s emphasis on pragmatism began when he rejected the doctrine of Hegel.
George-Wilheim Friedrich Hegel (1770-1831) conceived history as a dialectical process,
meaning that history consists of a ceaseless succession of ideological conflicts. That is, that
every idea embodies both partial truth (thesis) and its contradiction (antithesis). From the
conflicts of thesis and antithesis emerges a synthesis – a new and higher idea that in turn
becomes a thesis, which generates a new conflict.
Darwin’s theory of evolution, which Dewey preferred, postulated an environment in
which organisms must adapt to survive. The organism lives in an environment that threatens
and at the same time nourishes its ongoing existence. According to Dewey, the human
organism encounters problematic situations, which threaten his ongoing existence. The
successful person solves these problems. Dewey believed that man endeavoured to solve his
problems by interacting with his environment. This interaction constitutes experience. In his
famous book: Experience and Education. Dewey stated that things interacting in certain ways
are experiences; they are what are experienced. He believed that environment is a matter of
the interaction of organism with its environment, an environment that is human as well as
physical. It is through this environment that man forms life promoting groups which enrich
experience by providing opportunities for increased human interaction.
John Dewey believed that human intelligence is the sum total of this shared
experience. According to him, human association is educative. Therefore, to ensure cultural
continuity, the social group employs education to transmit group experience from the mature
to the immature members of society. Education, thus, becomes a cultural transmitter allowing
the group experience to be imposed upon children. John Dewey claimed that without this
necessary transmission, human nature would revert to the state of nature that is, a state where
there is no justice because there are no laws; no equality because each differs in his ability to
acquire property and retain them; no freedom, only license, because each man strives to
satisfy his own desires.
In order to avoid this state of nature or savagery, there must be formal education,
which will assist members of the group to participate in matters affecting the group. Dewey
believed that formal education would assist members of the group of participate in maters
affecting it. Dewey believed that formal education should be viewed as a selective process.
For him, culture included the entire experience of the human race. Parts of this culture are
valuable and others are detrimental to human growth and association. Therefore, the school,
according to Dewey, should have three functions: to simplify, to verify, and to balance (the
cultural heritage transmitted).
(1) The school selects parts of the culture and classifies them into units that are
appropriate to the learner’s maturity and readiness.
(2) The school emphasizes those parts that are of cultural value and rejects those
that are detrimental
 (3) The school harmonizes what have been transmitted, thus creating integrated
individuals in the society.
The school simplifies, verifies and balances by helping the student to encounter and
solve problems, which add to his experience. Thus, if a teacher is a pragmatist, that is, if he
believes that man creates his knowledge by interacting with his environment through series of
problem-solving episode, he should adopt problem-solving method to teach his students. For
Dewey, this is called “The Complete Act of Thought” or the Scientific Method. There are
five steps to this method:
1. the learner faces a problematic situation, a perplexity, confusion or doubt.
Thus, the learner’s activity is blocked by this uncertainty
2. the learner defines the problem in order to locate the difficulty
3. the learner tries to clarify the problem by surveying it, by examining it and
even tries to analyze the various elements that could cause the incomplete or
problematic situation.
4. the learner constructs tentative hypotheses, which may lead to the solution of
the problem
5. the learner tests the projected hypotheses to secure the desired result. If the
problem is solved the learner resumes activity until he encounters another
problem.

6.3. Topics for Discussion

1. How is John Dewey’s “Complete Act of Thought” related to Pragmatism?
2. Examine briefly the historical development of pragmatism
3. Discuss the importance of environment and organism in the theory of
Pragmatism
4. Do you agree with John Dewey’s claim that the role of the school is to simply,
verify and balance? Give reasons for your position.
5. Discuss the role of experience in John Dewey’s “Complete Act of Thought”.
6. Expand Dewey’s pragmatic philosophy based on his claim that if living is
broadly construed as problem solving, then education involves learning the
methodology of how to solve problems

6.4. References
 1. Howard Ozmon and Sam Craver, Philosophical Foundations of Education.
(Ohio: Charles Merrill Publishing Company, 1976), p. 70.
2. John Dewey, Essays in Experimental Logic, (Chicago: University of Chicago
Press, 1916)
3. John Dewey, Experience and Education. (New York: Collier Books, 1963),
pp. 27ff.
4. Gerald Lee Gutek, An Historical Introduction to American Education, (New
York: Thomas Crowell Co., 1970), p. 193.
5. Gerald Lee Gutek, A History of the Western Educational Experience, (New
York: Random House, Inc., 19720, p. 384.

6.5. Bibliography
Bayles, Ernest, Pragmatism in Education. New York: Harper and Row, 1966.
Childs, John L., Education and the Philosophy of experimentalism. New York: Century,
1931.
Dewey, John, Democracy and Education. New York: Free Press, 1966.
Dewey, John, Essays in Experimental Logic, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1916
Dewey, John, Experience and Education, Chicago: Open Court Publishing Company, 1938.
Dewey, John, Freedom and Culture. New York: G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1939.
Gerald Lee Gutek, A History of the Western Educational Experience. New York: Random
House, Inc., 1972.
Handling, Oscari, John Dewey’s Challenge to Education. New York: Harper and Row
Publishers, 1959.
Ozmon, H. and Craver, Sam, Philosophical Foundations of Education, Ohio: Charles
Mewrrill Publishing Company 1976.
 CHAPTER SEVEN
EXISTENTIALISM

7.1. Meaning and Advocates of Existentialism

The man generally regarded as the first major existential thinker – Soren Kierkegaard
– was a man beset by public scorn and personal heartbreak. He was a Danish theologian, born
in 1813, lived most of his life in Copenhagen and died in 1855. In Existentialism in
Education, Morris described Kierkegaard as “… an iconoclast in the classic tradition, trying,
among other things, to erase the pretty diagrams which the Hegelians had chalked on the
European conscience”.
In the 19th century while Kierkgaard and other existential thinkers like Gabriel
Marcel, Albert Camus, Jean-Paul Satre, Martin Heidegger, Paul Jaspers and so on, were
preoccupied with the search for the truth concerning the existence of man as an individual in
the world. Western scientists were busy with what they considered an appropriate pursuit, the
search for the truth in the outside world. It will be wrong, though to entertain the impression
that existentialism’s goal was analgesic or a kind of panacea. Admittedly, existentialism is a
crisis philosophy but offers no analgesic medication to the resolution of the crisis. As Van
Cleve Morris stated: “If existentialism is a philosophy of crisis, let this be understood to mean
that it is a feature of the crisis rather than a shield against it.”
 Existentialism is the philosophy of the individual. It is concerned with the
examination of human life, the significance attached to our being in the world. We are all
besieged by the puzzlement of the meaning of our human existence to which we are
consciously or unconsciously chained. But there is power attached to this consciousness and
it is this: that we human beings share in the continual amelioration of life (human life in
particular).
Kneller pointer out that one of the difficulties encountered by existentialism is that
since it embraces differing viewpoints; it is not regarded as a systematic philosophy in the
traditional understanding. Rather existentialism is viewed as ‘an act of philosophizing, which
permeates various philosophies.” Existentialism allows us to philosophize about what are
consistently persisting in human endeavours such as love, life, death and meaning. Man
philosophizes about the apparent meaninglessness of human existence in the world.
Existentialism wants to know the reason for human life.
Briefly, the following three sentiments underscore the philosophy of existentialism:
(a) it takes for granted man’s existence as a form of living experience,
(b) each individual is called upon to authenticate and concretize his life through
self-definition in order to create a meaningful lifestyle,
(c) its educational philosophy stimulates each man to be conscious of his
responsibility to create and inject meaning and definition into his life.

7.2. Existentialism Epistemology – Appropriation

Because existentialism is not generality considered a systematic philosophy, its
educational theory can only be inferred. Existential philosophy, as has been pointed out
above, teaches that the individual is responsible for the definition of his life. It follows
therefore, that existentialist epistemology challenges the individual to be responsible for his
educational knowledge through appropriation, freedom and choice. Appropriation is a crucial
word in the epistemology of existentialism. It is the personal choosing, taking and adopting of
something that is available to all.
Morris in his Existentialism in Education reacted to the possible misconception and
misunderstanding of the etymological meaning of ‘appropriation’ in and exploitative
materialistic and capitalistic civilization. According to him, existentialist epistemology is not
an attempt to subscribe to selfish deprivation of others of their democratic and rightful means
of survival. Rather – it can mean simply the personal taking and adopting of something that is
common property. What is uncommon and really unique is how each of us uses and
appropriates these “data” in interpreting the world. The rationale for all of the above is that
knowledge is subjective. This claim to epistemological subjectivity is clearly expressed by
Harper thus: “…neither the world nor truth has a label on it, telling what it is and how it is
related to the other. There is no way but the way of individual judgment.”
In a country like Nigeria, existentialist epistemological appropriation cannot be over-
stressed. To bring this point clearly to focus, one may wish to extrapolate the historical fact of
our civil war. That our civil war occurred is a hard brute fact. And of course, that it took place
is an objective reality. The metaphysical question to be answered is this: What is the
existential role of the individual, capable of choosing and appropriating, in that historical
occurrence? Firstly, an existentialist does not accuse the individual of causing the civil war.
In other words, the existentialist is not concerned about who caused an occurrence. Rather,
he is worried about the effect on the individual, such that the individual is responsible for
attaching human meaning to the fact of the occurrence of the war.
It is in the attachment of human meaning and significance that the individual becomes
responsible (for attaching meaning). He makes the judgment for choosing, taking and
adopting from the occurrence of the civil war, the reality of which is available to all who are
capable of the reality. Those Nigerians who know that the civil war took place should be able
to ask for its existential meaning and significance. They must choose for themselves the
meaning of the historical objectivity of the civil war in their own life. Every Nigerian should
be prepared to understand that there was a civil war in this country and therefore shares in the
burden of adopting an attitude towards it and also should hold a point of view regarding it, as
it will be naïve to be indifferent to a national historical fact of such magnitude since its effect
is evident in the behaviour of each of us. Morris stressed thus:
The meanings to be attached to the past are created by each of us in the light of our
own personal life projects. Events in the past take on significance… only by virtue of our
individually having first decided to live in a certain way or on behalf of certain values. Only
when this primary choice has been made does history shape up as being meaningful or
meaningless. In this sense, then, I create my own history. And my act of creation, the
creation of meaning, is referred to by the existentialist as “appropriation”.
This “appropriation” will foster human meaningful integrity and serve as future guide
to the knowledge, which will be the destiny and the panacea of human individual ignorance.
The individual is always teetering in the balance as he is constantly on a serious threshold of
knowledge. Epistemological existentialism of appropriation will relieve the individual of the
sense of uncertainty, which plagues him due to the oppressive democratic nature of the
intellect. The abstractness of our thoughts heightens this behaviour of the intellect. The
knowledge, which will ensure from appropriation, will be responsible for the integrity of the
individual as an ethical creature. Thus, it will be diametrically opposed to the cadre of
knowledge saturated with facts. Existentialist epistemology realizes how crucial and
necessary the freedom to choose and appropriate by students are. Nigerian students are faced
with the challenges of choosing freely – out of available alternatives. The role of the teacher
in this choosing endeavour will become apparent in the next section dealing with the
curriculum of existentialism.

7.3. Existential Curriculum

The curriculum, which will serve in the epistemology of the existentialist, will create
an avenue for the promotion of subjectivity. As Kneller suggested: “The existentialist attitude
toward knowledge radically affects the teaching of those subjects which are dependent upon
systems of thought or frames of reference: it states that school subjects are only tools for the
realization of subjectivity.”
This “realization of subjectivity” is the pivot of existentialist curriculum. It is a
curriculum which is diametrically opposed to either the essentialists’ or the realists’
epistemology in which the learner is a spectator rather than the actor or the active agent. To
choose here is to be presented with alternatives and to freely appropriate within the
alternatives. All the time, the student is and in the centre of action while the teacher remains
at the background as a seemingly tangible but dispensable facilitator. Morris categorically
likened the ability to choose to a library where there are books to take for personal academic
advancement but the taking has to be done by the student himself. According to Morris, ‘the
curriculum is not here to be chosen. The subject matter and experiences in a curriculum shall
be merely available to be learned, they must first be opted for, sought out and appropriated by
the student.”
Such school subjects, which; are as a result of motivation, accentuate the learner to
concentrate on his experiential subjectivity would occupy a significant area in an
existentialist curriculum. Music, dance, drama, creative writing, fine arts, the film and so on,
provide such an experience. Also such normative subjects like literature and history are
among subject areas, which contribute to the understanding of the existentialist curriculum.
The experience of music, dance and others as executed in these subjects are the
consequences of the fervidness emanating from the subjective personality of the learner. The
rationale for this assertion is deducted from the progressive educators as the learner ins
expected to be liberated of traditional educational endeavours. The learners’ performance in
the dance, drama, music for example, are expected to reflect the authentic expression of what
his world looks like, as a result of his own private experiences. The learner is the principal
actor in subjects like drama and dance. He interjects by incorporating meanings into what he
appropriates. Morris put the above very succinctly.
Whatever experiences in the school are most likely to arouse an individual’s own
private way of looking at life will be elevated to the first position in anything that might
someday be called an existentialist school.
The nature of these self-creating subjects gives authenticity to the subjective
epistemological tenet of existentialism. These performing arts subject matters have unique
roles to play in the development of aesthetic experience. For the existentialist therefore,
drama, music, painting, film, creative writing, plastic arts and others, are not aimed at the
evocation of selected styles of model artists but rather to stimulate personal subjective
aesthetic expression. The teacher in this aesthetic dimensional experience aims at a barrage of
creative media to assist the learner in the creation of his own art object. The provision of
creative medium by the teacher is his stimulus tool in preparing the learner for the pivotal
activity for appropriation and subjectivity.
The areas of literature and the humanities (history, philosophy, religion) are also
viable and integral in the development of existentialist curriculum. In literature, for example,
the learner faces how to make a choice as a basic personal concern. Also he is helped to be
able to appropriate for subjectivity. Gutek put the point this way:
By using literature, the drama and film, the learner places his capacities for feeling at
the disposal of the author. The vicarious involvement of the learner in the basic human
questions of love, death, suffering, guilt, and freedom are excellent means of portraying the
human condition and for finding personal meaning in an apparently indifferent world.
History is also crucial in the analytical development of existentialist curriculum.
History has been a tangible vehicle in the examination of how men have answered and faced
the recurrent problems, which have plagued them. For the existentialist therefore, the factual
knowledge of past events has an equivocal dimension. But more important is the
appropriation and the freedom for choice and hypotheses for alternatives which through
personal appropriation and historical events the individual attempts to integrate. History
contributes to personal contemporary alternatives for living. The meaning and significance of
these past events for their learner is his concern rather than just wishing to accumulate and
stuff one’s head with past historical facts. And of course, the aim of all this for the
existentialist is to see to it that man lives a personal subjective life of choices and alternatives.
Existentialism in educational history is relevant for social action endeavours. In
Nigeria for example, an existentialist may ask: What has one learned byway of future
understanding of our society by the fact of the Nigerian civil war? The crux of the matter here
is that historical realities should be understood not in the mere sense of assisting us to
understand the present, as that will be mere presentism, but rather our understanding history
ought to lead to the contemporary understanding of the future of our society. History’s form
of understanding transcends the then and the now to the when. It is the when that suggests
that social actions ought to be perpetrated to create other historical alternative events for
further living. History should at least suggest ways to social action, as history penetrates to
surge forward rather than digging backwards. As humanity plunges forward seemingly
blindly for the amelioration of the various societies, the gains and credits accruing from the
events of the lessons of social action propel and advance us more for the understanding of
humanity.

7.4. Teaching and Learning

The phrase employed by the existentialist in an attempt to analyze the relationship
between teacher (teaching) and learning (learner) is I-Thou. The teaching methodology most
appropriate for the I-Thou perspective is an attempt to make the learner conscious of his life’s
existential condition, in which case, the teacher posing the question does not posses the
answer. The question is personally subjective in nature. A lot of attention should be placed by
the teacher to elicit intensity of awareness in the learner. The stress here is on teacher and the
learner relating to each other responsibly, truthfully. Only the learner can appropriately define
his personal truth, as he is responsible for his subjectivity and choice.
But the teacher has a role of personal awareness and truth to play in the learner’s
endeavour to realize and be conscious of his life condition. The learner must be given an
opportunity to reason to arrive at his objective personality for life appropriation of the
various dimensions of human existence such as ethics and aesthetics.

7.5. Topics for Discussion.

1. Why is existentialism not generally regarded as a philosophy?
2. Discuss the importance of responsibility, freedom, choice and absurdity to
existentialism
 3. How is appropriation related to existentialist epistemology?
4. Would you agree with the suggestion that Nigeria should adopt Existentialism
as her philosophy of education? Give reasons for your point of view.
5. Why do you think that subjectivity is important in existentialist curriculum?
Give cogent reasons for your position.

7.6. References
1. Van Cleve Morris, Existentialism in Education (New York: Harper and Row
Publishers, 1966), p.1.
2. Ibid, p. 2
3. Ibid, p. 19
4. Gerald Lee Gutek, Philosophical Alternatives in Education (New York:
Charles Merrill Publishing Company, 1974), p. 194.
5. George F. Kneller, Existentialism and Education (New York: John Wiley and
Sons, Inc. 1966), pp. 141-148.
6. Van Cleve Morris, Existentialism of Education, p. 120.
7. Ralph Harper, “Significance of Existence and Recognition for Education” in
N.B. Henry (ed. 0, Modern Philosophies and Education, 54th Year Book of the
National Society for the Study of Education, 1955, p. 233.
8. Van Cleve Morris, Existentialist in Education, p. 122.
9. George F. Kneller, Existentialism and Education, p. 63
10. Van Cleve Morris, Existentialism in Education, p. 124.
11. Ibid, pp. 124-125
12. Gerald Lee Gutek, p.
13. Philosophical Alternatives in Education, p. 205.

7.7 Bibliography
Brameld, Theodore and Others (Editors), “Existentialism and Education” Educational
Theory, II (1952), pp. 80-91.
Brubacher, J. S., Modern Philosophies of Education, New
York: McGraw-Hill, Inc., 1969.
Colins, Jones, The Existentialists: A Critical Study,
Chicago: Henry Regnery Company, 1963.
Fallico, Arturo B., “Existentialism and Education”,
 Educational Theory, IV, (1954), pp. 166-172.
Greene, Maxine, Existential Encounters for Teachers,
New York: Random House Inc., 1967
Greene, Marjorie, Introduction to Existentialism. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press, 1959
Gutek, Gerald Lee, Philosophical Alternatives in Education, Ohio: Charles E. Merrill
Publishing Company, 1974.
Harper, Ralph, “Significance of Existence and Recognition
for Education” in N.B. Henry (ed.), Modern Philosophies and Education, 54 th Year
Book of the National Society for the Study of Education, 1955.
Howick, William H., Philosophies of Education, Danville, Illinois: The Interstate Printers and
Publishers, 1971.
Kneller, George F., Existentialism and Education, New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.,
1966.
Kneller, George F. (Editor), Foundations of Education (Third Edition), New York: John
Wiley & Sons Inc., 1971.
Marcel, Gabriel, The Philosophy of Existentialism, Secaucua, N.J.: The Citadel Press, 1973.
Morris, Van Cleve, Existentialism in Education, New York: Harper and Row, 1966.
Satre Jean-Paul, Existentialism and Human Emotions, New York: The Wisdom Library,
1957.
Vandenberg, Donald, Being and Education: An Essay in Existential Phenomenology,
Englewood, Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall Inc., 1971.
 CHAPTER EIGHT
TEACHING
The purpose of this chapter is not to add anything new to the available materials on
the topic. Rather, the chapter will examine some of the ways our students perceive us as
teachers. Ordinarily teaching aims at knowing, thus by knowing, it is hoped that the learner
preserves some of what he has been taught, thereby preserving the culture of the society.
However, this cannot be the sole aim of teaching, lest teaching becomes static rather than
being a dynamic and evolutionary endeavour. For a teacher to operate as either a preserver or
conservator and improver of the culture, he might hold one of the following attitudes:
(1) A teacher as a cultural architect,
(2) A teacher as a conservator of the culture,
(3) A teacher as a democratic leader.

8.1. A Teacher as a Cultural Architect

He is a radical innovator
He designs the specifics of an ideal culture
He teaches the values and attitudes commensurate with that ideal
He can propagandize
He can indoctrinate
He is prepared to organize civil disobedience
Since he is discontented with the culture, he accepts to be known as a cultural re-
constructionist.
The basic educational tenets of a cultural re-constructionist include:
(a) that education must commit itself to the creation of a new social and cultural order to
fulfill the basic values of the culture of the society,
(b) the new society must be a genuine democracy, whose major institutions and resources
are controlled by the people themselves,
(c) the child the school and education itself are conditioned inexorably by social and
cultural forces so that education becomes an avenue for social self-realization.
(d) the teacher must convince his students, in a democratic fashion, of the urgent validity
of the social and cultural deconstructionist’s solution.

8.2. A Teacher as a Conservator of the Culture

He preserves the traditional attitudes, values and beliefs of the people. He is not an
active agent of cultural change, however, he welcomes changes. He expects changes as
historical accidents so long they aim a t contributing to the welfare of the people.
Unorthodoxy bothers him. He can propagandize, indoctrinate and suppress unconventional
thinking.
The conservator of the culture should realize, notwithstanding his noble intentions,
that there are universal and unchanging standards of value, which form the criteria for
judging the goodness or the badness of life. These need to be improved upon in order to
foster development and continuity of life.

8.3. A Teacher as a Democratic Leader

He is not primarily concerned with the issue and problem of preservation. He is
involved with the appraisal and strengthening the cultural values. He points out
contradictions in the culture of the society. He also seeks ways to resolve contradictions. He
hopes and believes that through education the citizens themselves will contribute to the
refinement of their culture through problem-solving activities. Though he holds his own
views, he teaches democratically and for democracy. He welcomes democratic social change.
He constantly subjects his own cherished views to the scrutiny of his students. He believes
that there is no limit to human nature and its endeavours. He also believes that human
intelligence should be very highly valued and should be dynamically perpetuated.

8.4. Relationship of Teachers to Students

Three ways by which a teacher can relate to his students form the focus of this last
section of this chapter. A teacher may be an authoritarian, a laissez-faire or democratic or all
of the above.
1. Authoritarian Teacher
An authoritarian teacher exercises firm and centralized control of his class. He closely
directs and monitors the actions of his students. In order to enhance his authoritarian control,
he does all the planning, issuing all the directives, tells the students what and how to think
and shows them how to do everything. In other words, he is the sole agent of all the activities
in his class.
As a result, the students become passive receivers of information, directives and
instructions. Also, in such a classroom situation, little or no learning takes place. The students
tend to resent authoritarian leadership and occasionally there are evidences of aggressiveness
towards fellow classmates.

2. Laissez-faire Teacher
This type of teacher does not really control his class. He is always present in the class
to answer the student’s intermittent questions, however, he allows them to respond to their
initiatives and creativity. Thus he is not unduly concerned about each student’s decision on
what to do and how to do it.
The teaching effect of this approach seems more acceptable pedagogically. The
students seem to get along better than under the authoritarian teacher. They are aggressive but
this is not directed against fellow classmates. However, they appear insecure as they
repeatedly have recourse to their teacher for assistance.

3. Democratic Teacher
Democratic teacher makes every effort to fulfill the role of a democratic group leader.
That is, he studies the significant problems in his pedagogical discipline; he encourages
interchange of evidence and insights. He fosters the spirit of give and take, thus enhancing
the spirit of tolerance, which leads to the respect for one another’s ideas. He moderates
criticisms. He learns as he teaches the students. He encourages and challenges the students to
think for themselves by holding views that emphasize purposiveness in human experience
and behaviour.
In a democratic classroom, the students are more friendly, relaxed and show external
mutual recognition. They work on a higher level of efficiency, much less dependent on their
teacher. They show more initiative and work more effectively without a teacher. Thus, there
is more retention and transfer of learning.

8.5. Topics for Discussion

 1. Supposing you are a teacher who believes and practices the principles of a
cultural architect and your headmaster or principal thinks that you are too
radical, how would you defend yourself? Will you give up your ideas and
ideals? Why or why not?
2. How would you describe the relationship of Nigerian teachers to their pupils
or students?
3. How do you think that education can assist to improve on our diverse cultures
for national unity?
4. What type of teacher are you? Give reasons to support your stand.

CHAPTER NINE

PLAY IN EDUCATION
This chapter presents the concept of play under the following headings: (1) historical
development, (2) the concept of play, (3) theories of play, (4) play in the National Policy on
Education, (5) play in the educative process.
9.1. Historical Development
Historically, play as a necessary but not sufficient means of understanding the nature
of children could be traced to Plato (427-347 B.C.), Jean Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778),
Johann Heinrich Pestalozzi (1746-1827), Friedrich Froebel (1782-1852) and Maria
Montessori (1870-1952). There were other educators who contributed to the understanding
and development of play method. Such educators include Andrew Bell, an Anglican Minister,
the developer of the monitorial method and Robert Owen, the English humanitarian and
utopian who proposed a programme of infant schools designed to provide a wholesome
environment for the young children of factory operators.

9.2. Plato (427-347 B.C.)

Plato was the first to suggest the establishment of state nursery institutions. In his
Republic, the first treatise on education ever written, Plato suggested that children be
separated from their parents and be placed in state nurseries to be reared till he age of six.
According to him, parents were often a corruptive influence on children in that they
transferred their biases, prejudices and ignorant behaviours to their children.
Plato believed that the play method could be regarded as the most reasonable method
to commence the education of children. He asserted that free persons such as children should
be compelled to learn through this activity, their abilities and skills could be detected. Plato
was particularly interested in studying the child’s abilities because of his philosophical belief
that each member of the society must be educated to fit into certain roles and social classes.
According to him, play would enable one to see whether a child was of gold, silver or baser
metal.

9.3. Jean Jacques Rousseau (1712-1889)

With the publication of Emile in 1762, Rousseau started a seemingly radical approach
to the education of children in general. Instead of the rigid and traditional approach to the
education of children, he proposed and favoured a permissiveness, which fostered the
emergence of the natural goodness and intelligence of the child. In Emile, he wrote:
Everything is good as it comes from the hands of the Creator
of Nature; everything deteriorates in the hands of man. God
makes all things good; man meddles with them and they become
evil. He forces one soil to yield the products of another, one three
to bear another’s fruit. He confuses and confounds time, place and
 natural conditions. He mutilates his dog, his horse, and his slave. He
destroys and defaces all things; he loves all that is defamed and
monstrous; he will have nothing as nature made it, not even man
himself, who must learn his paces like a saddle-horse, and be shaped
to his master’s taste like the trees in his garden.

Rousseau believed that the “worst thing” about the school was that it made everything
effort to mould the child against his nature. According to him, nature provides for the child in
her own way and this should never be thwarted; do not make him sit still when he wants to
run about, nor when he wants to be quite. Rousseau’s permissive education did not prevent
him from stating a positive view of education. He called on the teacher to direct and guide the
child in such a way as not to disorient the child’s natural inclinations, which should
contribute to the growth and development of the child. Rousseau’s ideas on the value of play
significantly influenced Pestalozzi and Froebel.

9.3. Johann Heinrich Pestalozzi (1746-1827)

The renowned Swiss educator was prominent among those who sought and
established an educational philosophy based on the need to return to nature. Pestalozzi was
greatly influenced by the naturalism and rationalisms of the enlightenment period. The
enlightenment, which ushered in optimism until the beginning of First World War, has often
been referred to as the “Age of Reason” (Rationalism). It was a time when man employed his
intelligence for the purpose of reconstructing the social order by using scientific principles.
Emmanuel Kant (1724-1804), explained enlightenment as man’s coming of age from the
state of infancy which rendered him incapable of using his reason without the aid of others.
According to him, enlightenment is a cultural period distinguished by the fervent efforts of
leading personalities to make reason the absolute ruler of human life and to shed the light of
knowledge upon the mind and conscience of any individual.
Thus, Pestalozzi attacked the excessive verbalism, which characterized essentialism
and pressed for a pedagogical reformation, which laid considerable emphasis on the child’s
interests and needs. Consequently, he endeavoured to discover the universal natural laws that
govern learning and recommended a pedagogical atmosphere where such natural laws would
be considered veritable foundations. Like Rousseau, therefore, Pestalozzi embraced the
romantic nature of the child. He believed that the child is naturally active. The duty of the
educator, therefore, is to capitalize on the child’s need for activity by initiating and providing
exercises that stimulate vocational, moral and intellectual development. According to Crary
and Petrone, “the teacher must be constantly with the child, always talking, questioning and
repeating. The pupils, however, by this process are brought into very close intimacy with the
instructor”.
In order to translate his ideas of the child’s education in relationship to is activity
propensities and needs, Pestalozzi developed his “ABC of Anschuung”. Through this method,
he reduced the child’s instruction to its simplest components. According to him, (1915), in
How Gertrude Teaches Her Children:
I sought in all ways to bring the beginnings of
spelling and counting to the greatest simplicity
and into form. So that the child with the strictest
psychological order might pass from the first
step gradually to the second; and then without
break, upon the foundation of the perfectly
understood second step, might go on quickly
and safely to the third and fourth.
Pestalozzi taught spelling by introducing the shortest words first, then the longer ones later
on. This method is psychologically sound since it is always advisable to introduce simpler
ideas to children before the more complex ones. He employed the same method in teaching
arithmetic: concrete objects such as pieces of sticks and such other counters were used before
the children were introduced to the actual figures that these concrete objects represented. In
teaching fractions, for example, Pestalozzi divided such fruits as oranges, pineapples and
grapefruits among the children.
At the heart of Pestalozzi’s ideas concerning play in education is his concept of
nature. He often described nature both as “reality and the totality of the physical environment
that appears to the senses as a vast array of seemingly discrete and independent objects”.
According to Pestalozzi, these discrete and independent objects exist regardless of man’s
knowledge of them. But if man wishes to know them through sensation and the reflection of
the sensory data.
Pestalozzi always compared human development to the growth of a tree. According to
him, the seed of a tree contains all the potentialities of their mature tree. Thus, if given all the
necessary and sufficient environmental conditions, the seed will develop to a tree. In the same
way, man possesses the necessary germinal potentialities for physical, moral, social and
intellectual growth. According to Pestalozzi:
 Man imitates this action of high nature,
who out of the seed of Largest tree first
produces a scarcely perceptible school,
then just as imperceptibly, daily and hourly,
by gradual stages, unfolds first the beginnings
of the stem, the bough, then the branch,
then the extreme twig on which hangs the
perishable leaf. Consider carefully this
action of great Nature-how she tends and
perfects every single part as it is formed, and
joints in every new part to the permanent
growth of the old.
Man’s active participation in the natural process is substantiated by Pestalozzi’s belief,
according to Gutek that:
(1) man as a part of nature is subject to its laws
(2) human nature is distinguished from the brute nature by possession of
intellectual, moral and physical powers.
(3) the development of these powers should follow the natural laws
(4) a natural education will facilitate the harmonious development of these natural
powers.
(5) three existence of accidental variations among men does not contradict the
essential laws of human development.

9.4. Friedrich Froebel (1782-1852)

The term kindergarten is very naturally associated with Froebel. Shortly after he came
under the influence of Pestalozzi, he began to develop his own theories about early childhood
education based on his conviction like Pestalozzi that there are certain laws which could be
studied to enhance the improvement of childhood education. Froebel, however, was
convinced that the method needed refinement and systematization. Thus, when he developed
his own theory, it was more mystical and transcendental than that of Pestalozzi. Froebel
believed that man is endowed with spiritual goodness and enjoys eternal unity. These form
the basis of his ideas for the kindergarten.
 At the University of Gottingen in Germany, Froebel studied such natural sciences
subjects like physics, chemistry, mineralogy, natural history, philosophy and history. After
his release from active military service in 1813, he set up an experimental school for young
children where he emphasized music, play and self-activity methods. In 1873, he established
his famous kindergarten school for young children of ages three to eight. In this institution,
he elaborated on his ideas of kindergarten education. He introduced and developed games,
songs, plays and such other activities, which stimulated the child’s activity.
Froebel’s knowledge of such divergent subjects as idealism, mysticism, Christianity,
romanticism and natural science led him to believe that he could attempt to unite all of them
into a philosophical synthesis upon which he could base his educational method. According
to him, all existence is in God. In other words, God is the Alpha and Omega of the universe.
Froebel reasoned that if he purpose of existence is to reveal God, then education should aim
at leading man to be more conscious of God. According to him, the purpose of education is to
lead “…man, as a thinking, intelligent being, growing into self-conscious, to a pure and
unsullied, conscious, and free representation of the inner law of Divine Unit and in teaching
his ways and means thereto.”
His application of the philosophy of idealism made him emphasize the doctrine of
interconnectedness in education. Thus, he asserted that although the children of the
kindergarten institutions play with different discreet objects, their interrelatedness should be
stressed. Since the teacher functions as a co-operative agent, Froebel believed that in order
for the teachers to be able to stimulate the children to bring out their potentialities, educators
and teacher should:
(1) study the external laws of human development
(2) construct an educational theory that specifies the directions to be followed in
co-operating with human development
(3) apply these directions actively to achieve the development of rational beings.
(4) direct education to realize a faithful, pure, and holy life that actualizes the
divinely implanted potentialities.
Froebel did not believe in child depravity. Therefore, the teacher should do all in his power to
direct the child to develop according to the laws that are working within him and to ward off
influences that might hinder that development. In this regard, Froebel established his
kindergarten school on plays since, according to him, “through play, the child exhibits his
simple and natural life”. In the Education of Man, Froebel stated:
 Play is the highest phase of child development – of human development at this period;
for it is self-active representation of the inner-representation of the inner necessity and
impulse. Play is the purest, most spiritual activity of man at this stage, and at the same time,
typical of human life as a whole – of the inner hidden natural life in man and in all things. It
gives, therefore, joy, freedom, contentment, inner and outer rest, peace with the world.
Froebel was not totally given to allowing the child unguided freedom. He agreed that
the child needs some degree of external guidance. This, however, is within the context of the
educational environment. The necessity for this controlled situation stems from Froebel’s
philosophical belief that, educationally speaking, the child has no aim. It is the adult teacher
who injects aims into his activities. This rational guidance, therefore, prevents the child from
aimless ‘educational’ endeavours. If the teacher achieves his aim, it is possible that the
child’s play, needs and interest will be more productive and creative, therefore, having
relevance and importance to adult community.
Froebel wished school authorities to build a natural and spiritual curriculum into the
kindergarten educational system. This is to enhance the necessary self-development activity
and socialization of the child. According to the knowledge, understanding and development
of (1) himself, (2) human relations, (3) nature and external world, (4) God, the Divine Source
and Cause of all excellence, Gutek succinctly put the importance of songs, games and plays
in Froebel’s kindergarten:
Songs, stories and games were a most important
part of Froebel’s kindergarten. The songs and
stories stimulate the child’s imagination and
introduce him to his cultural literature. The games
give the child a sense of community and an
opportunity to share in co-operative activities that
contribute to his socialization and motor competences.
The child’s instructional play materials have been referred to by Froebel as “gifts”.
Such first objects like ball and ‘lego’ are gifts because they are supposed to have been given
by God. According to him, the ball, for example, should be the first in the series of gifts
introduced to the child. The ball signified an undifferentiated unity through which other gift
objects such as ‘lego’ cube, brick, surface and point are implicit. Through these objects, the
child’s unconscious unity could be built to one that is “differentiated and conscious”. With
the emphasis on these objects, Froebel interpreted the child’s play activities mystically. Thus,
he interpreted the child’s play with water, sand and clay mystical. For example, he stated that
a child’s play with water allows him to see his images reflected in the water so as to have a
glimpse into his soul. Sand and clay afford the child to shape his life and “master raw
materials”.

9.5. Maria Montessori

Maria Montessori is not generally reckoned with in the consideration of play in
education because her achievements in childhood education concentrated on mentally
deficient children. Some of her works, however, were relevant and applicable to normal
children. Standing in Maria Montessori: Her Life and Work, recognized five major
contributions of Montessori to childhood education:
(1) children are capable of sustained mental concentration when genuinely
interested in their work.
(2) they love order and enjoy the repetition of actions that they have already
mastered.
(3) they prefer work to play and prefer didactic materials to toys
(4) rewards and punishments are unnecessary to activate them.
(5) the child has a deep sense of personal dignity that is easily offended.

9.6. The Concept of Play

It is presumed that a child does not regard his play activities as serious. This is to say
that play is neither the pursuit of purposes dictated by common prudence, nor the fulfilling of
obligation to anybody. We could therefore scarcely neglect to play: a child or an adult on the
field may or may not be playing depending on whether he does as he pleases – if he does as
he pleases he is playing, otherwise he is not.
In considering the concept of play we would realize that the child does not always do
only what he please, that is, his interest is not all in play – contrary to Cook’s claim, that the
child’s interest is all in play. The child as can be seen likes to do some ‘work’ in the form of
helping adults to wash clothes, sweep the floor and assist in other household chores.
Moreover, for a school age child, going to school is considered as ‘work’ yet he sometimes
does it with interest. Therefore the concept of play can b seen as explaining three kinds of
functions: playing at, playing with, and playing (sometimes involving rule-governed
activities) like playing soccer and ludo games.
 The child ‘plays at’ a role when he acts out a person’s role – make believe kind of
play. In this case, the roles of adults and others are though of an acted out. The roles of the
father, mother nurses, patients, teachers and relatives are generally played at.
The child also ‘plays with’, for example, objects. That is, he does not act out people’s
roles in playing with rather he manipulates objects like sand, clay, bricks and water. He
labours to build a house, a vehicle with playful materials, or with any object of his fancy. The
third kind of play generally involves the child in running around (physical play) with the
view to perform some rule-governed or non-rule-governed activity like: sliding, chasing, and
playing soccer.
The concept of play generally brings out the meaning of play from the point of view
of the observer not from the point of view of the child at play. This can be easily confirmed
by thinking of possible answers that a child with a doll would give when asked about what
she is doing. The child would probably respond thus: I am ‘bathing her’, ‘teaching her how to
walk’, ‘feeding her’ or ‘lulling her to sleep’. The child is not likely to say I am ‘playing at’
the role of the father, mother or teacher, neither is she likely to say that she is preparing
herself for life by learning the role of a mother or any such serious obligation. But the
observer would want to read all sorts of meanings into the child’s play; this could include
psychological, therapeutic, learning, the unfolding of the child’s essence and nature.
Moreover, while the child would want to see her play as a very serious concentration, the
observer would rather want to see it as non-serious because in contrast to work, it is not done
to fulfill any ethnical obligation – the child is simply doing what she pleases.
What the observer (e.g. the educational psychologist) considers the child to be doing
in his play may tell us nothing of what the child is aware of doing in his play. The educational
psychologist, for instance, might tend to tell us the function of play in relation to growing up.
Other observers might want to mention the function of play in relation to some ethical values:
like societal co-operation, health, learning, courage and discipline. In essence when we are
considering the concept of play we are preoccupied with considering its ‘function’ in ethical
perspectives. It is therefore important to note that when considering the function of play we
are really considering what is brought about by play. In the process we might have been
considering: what is in fact brought about by play; or what people think is achieved through
play; or what ought to be the consequence of play. These three ways of considering the
function of play represent only some of the ways in which its role can be considered.
Moreover the function of play from the three perspectives does not always coincide.
That is, what is in fact brought about by play is not always what ought to be brought about.
Actually, when we are considering the function of anything, be it plays or work, the three
perspectives mentioned above do not always coincide. For instance, a priest ought to be a
religious minister, whereas he might be thinking of himself as a man who is ordinarily
working for his livelihood; on the other hand, a socialist observer might want to consider the
priest as in fact diverting the attention of social discontents from their proper course. If the
educational psychologist represents the last point of view above, then he (the observer) would
certainly not be considering the child’s function as the child himself sees his function.
From the foregoing, it can be seen why the concept of play may not always state what
the child at play is aware of doing. Play involves a class of participatory rather than
spectatorial activities. This is to say that the child is aware of the real situation, in which the
play activity takes place, he is aware of how he stands in relation to other things in the
activity. It follows that infants in the first weeks of life cannot be said to play, because as at
the age they are not aware of their situations. On the other hand, when an older child ‘plays
at’ the role of a father, mother or doctor, he certainly is aware that he is not a father, mother
or doctor.
Play is natural to the child, that is, it comes naturally to him. He does not have to be
prompted to play, he just bubbles into play activity. Thus, play is a spontaneous activity. It is
also natural to the child in the sense that it is opposed to the artificialities of social
conventions. Moreover it is natural to the child in the sense that through it the essential nature
of the child is easily unfolded without distortion. Play involves emotional satisfaction, the
activity is orientated towards personal satisfactory ‘assimilation’ rather than towards
‘accommodation’. Children often show a lot of concentration and absorbed interest in their
play. But these facts of spontaneity, emotional satisfaction and absorbed interest are not
limited to play activities. They are also found in non-play activities. For example, one could
have spontaneous attraction to do some painting or weeding. Similarly, one could have
absorbed interest in perhaps, typing out a message on a cell phone or in doing some kinds of
schoolwork.
It has been said that play is not a serious activity – in the objectively evaluative sense.
That is, in the sense that it is not done to fulfill any obligation to anybody, nor is it
instrumental to the accomplishment of ethical values. Play is therefore regarded as a non-
serious activity in this sense because it is intrinsically unimportant. Ethical values can be
seen in terms of basic interests that concern matters of private prudence and social morality
like: health and security. Moreover ethical values can be seen in terms of cultural values as in
the case of matters of friendship, religions, aesthetics and scholarship. It can therefore be
seen; that since play is a spontaneous activity, it could not have been originally designed to
acquire any of the above-mentioned ethical values.
The foregoing discussion about the non-seriousness of play in terms of ethical and
social values shows that the more children grow to understand the ethical values of the adult
society the more they appreciate what can permissibly be regarded as play in the society. That
is, they get progressively conscious of how far they can play at roles, ‘play with’ objects and
engage in certain ‘physical plays’ without offending the ethical norms of the adult society.
For instance, by the time the child starts to handle matters of drugs, alcohol, cigarettes, guns
and schooling in the non-serious ways of play, he would progressively get very fast warning
that would make him appreciate that he is already treading in t he realms ethically serious. In
the same vein, when a school child attempts to treat a matter that is ethically non-serious as if
it is serious, he is also reminded of the reality. For instance, when a school child is prepared
to fight a member of a visiting soccer team in the course of a friendly football match, he is
immediately reminded that it is ‘only a game’.
Although it has been said that play has no ethical value, because it is intrinsically
unimportant in the objectively evaluative sense, it can be seen that play is nonetheless
valuable when compared to work. This is because work demand continuous seriousness,
which could be impracticable without moments of relaxation, refreshment and enlivenment of
the spirit, all of which can be derived from play. Therefore, although a life of nothing but
play may be unworthy of a human being, at the same time a life of continuous work without
moments of play may be unrealistic.
It can be said that play is self-contained. This is because; it is set apart and
disconnected from the routine duties, deliberations and other serious demands of societal
norms. Play has its own special places, times, objects, apparati and toys, such as resources
would allow.
In contrasting play with work, Sparshott put it schematically thus:

Play in Education
Play Work
i. For children For adults
ii. Trivial Important
iii. Fun Unfunny
iv. Imaginative Disciplined
v. Free Compulsory
vi. Spontaneous Committed
vii. For leisure time Clock-bound
viii. Anywhere Place-bound
ix. Game-oriented Task-oriented
x. Endotelic Valueless in itself, exoteric
xi. Realm of Culture Pre-cultural
xii. Results in art and beauty Hideous: factories, e.g.
(Plato)
xiii. Faculties fully employed Deformed
(Schiller)

9.8. Theories of Play

The theories of play do not generally tell us what we mean by play or what we are
aware of doing in playing, rather they generally tell us about the functions of some play
activities. For instance, if a girl with a doll is asked what she is doing with the doll, she might
ordinarily say she is feeding the doll or teaching it how to behave. The little girl is certainly
saying what she is aware of what she is doing with the doll, but the theorist on the other hand
might want to say that the girl is ‘playing at’ the role of a mother or effecting a therapeutic
release of aggression. Thus, the theorist, who is a sophisticated observer, tells us about the
functions that are brought about by play – event though the player himself may not be aware
of the functions.
An observer who is a physiologist might see the child deriving a lot of exercise and
strength from his play, whereas the child might not at all see his play in this way. An
educational psychologist might see learning functions in the child’s play. There could have
been a great deal of inadvertently picking-up of some practical skills of balance, social co-
ordination, speech making, healthy rivalry, loyalty imitations and persistence in the child’s
play. On the basis of the foregoing some theorists might say that the child’s play is in
preparation for his later life. One thing is however clear about stating the function of anything
(including play) – this is that the statement would tell us what is brought about by that thing.
In this connection, when we are stating the function of play, we would have been stating what
is brought about by play in at least one of the following ways: we might have been stating
what ought to be brought about by play, or what we think is brought about by play or what is
in fact brought about by play.
9.9. Play in the Educational Process
Activities in the nursery and infant schools ensure that children are secure, happy, and
healthy and enjoy safe amusement. Children are also able to achieve some amount of
balanced emotional development; they learn to talk to each other freely, to share, co-operate,
help others and work out personal difficulties. But it is not enough for children only to be
able to pick up these qualities of ethical value from their play without being able to acquire
some ‘cognitive perspective’ in their experience. It is when the play activities of children also
enable them to develop ‘cognitive perspective’ in their experience that their play could be
strictly regarded as educational. This means that the child’s play experience in nursery and
infant schools has to serve as a basis of continuity with the kind of serious educational work
that is expected in later schooling.
It has been seen that play can be of high educational value in the sense that it can
motivate the acquisition of ethical and cognitive values. It may therefore be added that the
play activities that would be educational might warrant the use of adequate apparatus,
materials and qualified staff. Adequately qualified teachers are needed for instance in the use
of child-centered method of arranging the play experience of the child such that the child
could actually be educated through the play-way.

9.10. Topics for Discussion

1. Why has the concept of play in education not been taken seriously in our
educational system?
2. What do you think should be the roles of the government in the development
of the concept of play in our schools?
3. List and discuss some of the locally made toys that can be adapted for use in
our nursery and primary schools.

9.11. References
1. Plato, Laws 643C, translated by A.E. Taylor, 1961. Also, Plato, Republic 536e
translated by Hamilton, [Link]. The Collected dialogue of Plato. (New Jersey: Princeton
University Press, 1961).
2. R. W. Crary and L. A. Petrone, Foundations of Modern Education, (New York:
Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., 1969), p. 70.
3. J. H. Pestalozzi, How Gertrude Teachers Her Children. (New York: L.H. Holland and
F.C. Turner (translators), C.W. Bardeen, 1915, p. 23.
4. Ibid., p. 77
5. Gerald Lee Gutek, A History of Western Educational Experience. (New York:
Random House, 1971), p. 199.
6. F. Froebel, The Education of Man. (New York: Appleton, 1896), p. 1.
7. Gerald Lee Gutek, A History of Western Educational Experience, p. 227.
8. F. Froebel, The Educational of Man, p. 5
9. Gerald Lee Gutek, A History of Western Educational Experience, p. 228
10. E. M. Standing. Maria Montessori: Her Life and Work, (New York: Mentor Omega
Books, 1962), pp. 40-43.
11. H. C. Cook, The Play Way, (London: Heinemann, 1917), pp. 3-4.
12. F. E. Sparshott, “Work… The Concepts, Past, Present and Future” Journal of
Aesthetic Education (Oct. 1973), pp. 26-27
9.12 Bibliography
Cook, H. C. (1917), The Play Way, London: Heinemann, 1917.
Crary, R. W. and Petrone, L. A. Foundations of Modern Education, New York: Alfred A.
Knopf, Inc., 1969.
Dearden, R. F. “The Concept of Play”, in The Concept of Education, Peters, R. S. (ed.)
London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1967.
Froebel, F., The Education of Man, New York: Appleton, 1896.
Gutek, Gerald Lee, A History of the Western Educational Experience, New York: Random
House, 1972.
Pestalozzi, J. H., How Gertrude Teaches Her Children, L. E. Holland and F. C. Turner
(translators), New York: C. W. Bardeen, 1915.
Plato, Laws 643c trans. Taylor, A. E. The Collected Dialogues of Plato, Hamiton, et. Al.
(ed.), New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1961.
Plato, Republic 536c trans, Hamilton, et. Al. (ed.) The Collected Dialogues of Plato, New
Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1961.
Rousseau, J. J. Emile, New York: Bacon’s Educational Series, Inc., 1964.
Sparshott, F. E., “Work… The Concept: Past, Present, and Future”, Journal of Aesthetic
Education, (Oct. 1973), pp. 26-27.
Standing, E. M., Maria Montessori: Her Life and Work, New York: Mentor Omega Books,
1962.
 CHAPTER TEN

SHOULD OUR INSTITUTIONS TEACH?

The Nigerian educational system is faced with an acute dilemma, which when
analyzed, simply ask the question should our institutions teach just as good as the teachers?
Teaching can both be normative and descriptive. Normatively, it is an instructional choice of
alternative paving the way for other optional activities within its own pedagogical activities.
In its descriptive concept, teaching is nothing more than what the teacher does in his capacity
as teacher. The question is, should the institutions be structured to teach just as the
“physically structured” persons can teach? And if so, how so and why so?
The crucial argument which will dominate this chapter is that for a long time, we have
been equating pedagogical endeavours with the personalities engaged in the teaching office.
This view is misguiding and atomistic since teachers cannot engage in their professional
know-how without the institutional structure of the school as an ineluctable determinant of
pedagogical behaviour. The claim here is that what controls the activities of the teacher is the
institutional structure and since it is the controlling determinant, the question of
accountability in success or failure is relegated to the institutional structure which is the chief
behavioural determinant. It means to attempt to engage in success or failure modifications,
those that affect the institutional structural must be attempted first.
We often hear and listen to statements, which postulate that institutions rather than
individual teachers function as teachers. Such statements as: “X school is a good one, and I
cannot send my child to that school” are either asserting that institutions do in fact teach or
that there is a generalized connotation implying reference to individual teachers. Next in this
chapter is an attempt to analyze an assertion about an institution’s “potentiality” to teach and
at the same time describe a contextual situation feasible for implying the pedagogical role of
an individual teacher.
XYZ school cannot even teach my child to add and subtract. This analogous and
hypothetical statement is subject to descriptive analysis of certain presuppositions capable of
attributing culpability to the institution rather than to an individual teacher. Suppose that my
child has not been actually taught to add or subtract, let us also presume that the school has
all the authority (as indeed it should have) to teach my child simple rudiments of calculation,
and let us further agree that my child has fulfilled all the necessary and sufficient learning
conditions imposed on him to be taught how to do simple calculations of addition and
subtraction. In short, beyond all reasonable pedagogical doubt, my child could be found not
wanting in his readiness to be taught adding and subtracting. And of course, the institution
has been authorized to function to teach adding and subtracting. And of course, the institution
has been authorized to function to teach my child simple calculations of ordinary daily
experience. With the above can the failing assertion attributable to such a school be legible
and literal? At the same time, can an accusing failing finger be pointed at the institutional
structural pedagogical endeavours as deficient? In this situation the assertion of failure is
attributable to the teachers and not the structural school institution. But there is need for
analysis here.
In the first place, the substantive assertion of failure attributed to teachers is rather
general as it is possible to determine whether a particular teacher has succeeded or failed, as
this is the rationale for judging the teacher rather than the school. One point is debatable, how
fair will it be not to point an accusing finger of failure at a particular teacher or even at all of
the teachers of the school? In other words it could be some or all of the teachers who are at
fault. But one thing is obvious, if my child has not learned the necessary calculation he is
expected to be taught in the school, somebody, not something, following the previous
argument, is to be held responsible. What are the necessary and sufficient modifications to be
made for my child to learn the rudiments of basic education?
Next is the consideration of implying failure of the teaching enterprise as a result of
the conditions of the institutional behaviour. Of course, I am asserting that the institution can
be regarded as a pedagogical master or teacher. Suppose a close investigation of the school is
conducted and the school is found wanting in the following respects: the school structure is
dilapidating, that is, no meaningful teaching and learning exercises can be carried out as the
structure remains a dangerous risk to human life; the teachers do not enjoy the necessary and
sufficient authority needed as teachers, thus their professionalism can be called to question
and even tagged spurious and also the school enjoys scanty, ineffective and in-appropriate
school materials vital to the success of the learn ability of the students.
A replacement of the entire school staff may be suggested to enhance pedagogical
possibility even that cannot alter the teaching-learning conduciveness, as the matter is being
complicated by the fact that due to the condition of the school structure, some of the students
become uncooperative, rebellious, and incapable of mental functioning. In brief, the above is
tangible enough to warrant the conclusion that under the limited circumstances, no reasonable
teaching can be carried out to yield success. Can it be argued that the teaching behaviour of
the institution is dependent on that of the teacher or vice versa. Whatever the case may be,
can one conclude that the teaching enterprise has failed as a result of the inappropriate
situation to which the teachers have been exposed, as a result of their teaching in that
particular institution? To give a straightforward answer, because of the demands and
limitations placed on the teacher by the institution he cannot reasonably teach with any
amount of success. It is the teaching enterprise that has failed and not any individual teacher
as it may be difficult to hold any individual teacher accountable for any failure except it is
reasonably feasible to justifiably point an accusing finger of failure at any particular
individual teacher. Any modifications necessary to enhance future success will be that of the
institution. In short, if the institution determines the teaching behaviour, the institution rather
than the individual may be regarded as a teacher.
If one realize that an institution is an abstraction and all behaviour ultimately is that of
an individual, can it be argued that to speak of institutions as teachers is to commit a basic
and fundamental error? If human actions occur, it is a fact that accountability of an action is
at stake – in this case, accounting for teaching behaviour? Let’s try to look at the situation by
asking an analogous question. Is a teacher related to an institution in the same fashion as a
pen relates to the writer? Is the teacher an agent of the institutional fulfillment? There is no
one single methodology of attacking any of these questions. But the question of a pen being
related to the one using the pen is crucial to this exercise and more demanding for the
elucidation of this argument. Let’s begin with the pen. Is it writable may seem an appropriate
initial question in order to answer its relationship to the writer. We can further inquire
whether the writer had picked this pen to accomplish his writing endeavours. Is it his task to
see that the pen is filled with ink in order to write? Is it the responsibility of the teacher to
find out if the institution discourages or encourages successful teaching? What if the
institution is the stumbling block? But on the other hand, realizing that human beings are
unlike pens in the hands of the writer, as they are capable of individual rational judgments,
there is no guarantee that when it comes to accounting for one’s action, human beings cannot
be analogous to pens in the hand of the writer. The fact that human actions are performed by
an individual does not guarantee any control over the actions, why could he not be a pen – a
tool – in the hands of the writer (the institution). The point I wish to stress here is that not all
actions for which human beings are responsible are individual actions.
Another point to stress is that human actions occur and continue in time and it is
possible that the original human actors may disappear from the scene while their influences
remain. For example, the accomplishment of a painter takes place at a particular time but the
influence objectified in the painting lingers on and affect others. The point here is that the
organization which has prevailed in the institution through “forgotten” actors lingers on and
affects the teachers. The teacher may be held accountable if his action is truly an individual
one, and it is this primary action of an individual teacher that needs modification to effect the
unison of the individual and the institution. It means that an institution may be held
responsible for the failure or success of the teacher. But can the teacher be held responsible
for the failure or success of the institution? May be an examination of the components in our
educational institutions is needed. For example, how conducive to teaching, learning and
studies are the total infrastructure of the institution, are the libraries stocked with relevant
books? How competent and qualified are the teachers of these institutions.
Briefly, the intent of this chapter is not to dehumanize the individual especially in his
relationship to the institution. Somehow, man will remain human and humane to some extent
the same way the institutions are humane. But one may ask, what is the effect of humanity of
the institution on teaching? Of course the teacher has to be an individual human being to be
able to teach except that his humanity does not guarantee his control over his action. His
success or failure cannot be demarcated from the institution though instead of expecting
constancy in his teaching endeavours, variability ensues because the structure of the
institution is inescapable. However, when and where the necessary and sufficient variables
for successful teaching occur in the institutional structure, individual teachers dominate in
their endeavours. The same argument can be categorized for the institution. If that is so, one
can say that both the institution and teachers teach.

Bibliography
Ennis, Robert H. Logic in Teaching Engliwood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice- Hall, Inc., 1969.
Gagne, Robert M. The Conditions of Learning (Third Edition) Chicago: Holt, Rineheart &
Winston 1977.
Highet, Gilbert The Art of Teaching New York: Vintago Books, 1950
Hyman, Ronald T. Ways of Teaching New York: J.B. Lippincott Company, 1970
Hirst, P. H. and Peters, R. S. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1970.
Peters, R. S. Authority, Responsibility and Education New York: George Allen & Unwin
Ltd., 1977
Peters, R. S. The Concept of Education London: Routledge & Kegan Paul., 1967
Richmand, W. Kenneth, Education & Schooling, London: Methuen & C. Ltd, 1975.

CHAPTER ELEVEN

DISBELIEF IN THE CLASSROOM

Introduction
A true story will, however, serve as a background to the chapter. In 1979, I had a
student in one of my tennis coaching lessons. During one of my introductory lessons, I spoke
of tennis as one of the several popular sports in the world. During question time, a student
asked: “Have you heard of the sport in which metals, slender irons and materials like cocoa-
cola tabs are chewed”? I responded that I had not heard of any sporting event like that. I
asked him in return: “How can any human teeth be employed that way”? He responded that
some people’s teeth are double-edged. He appeared serious and seemed to believe in what he
was saying. But none of us in the classroom believed him. And we told him. That was a case
of disbelief in the classroom.
11.1 Reflections On the Story
Let us briefly reflect on the story, which forms the background to this chapter. It
seems the subject matter of this story was obviously outside the experiences of those of us in
the tennis class.
We had never heard of a person or persons having double-edged teeth. It is not always
that one bluntly refuses to believe another person. Sometimes one may challenge what seems
unbelievable, thereby warranting the speaker to throw more light on his statement. It may
seem we (my students and I) had refused belief in this case because practically the story is
adjudged to be contrary to our previous experiences. But the point is why total disbelief? We
could at least have suspended our judgments, as that might have been more commonsensical
and less embarrassing.
The following comments may serve as possible reflections. Maybe the student who
interrupted the class to tell this story of the double-edged teeth was to blame! No person
could have doubled-edged teeth for the purpose of ‘chewing’ metals and such objects. How
legitimate could it be for a student to liken a set of human teeth to a grinding machine? His
analogy is obviously metaphorical rather than literal. How can one blame a listener when a
speech suddenly changes from a literal one to a metaphor? In this situation, the student was
saying one thing on a different level and we were hearing something else on another level.
Let us consider the following points by way of clarifications. Firstly, whenever there
is disbelief, confusion and gross misunderstanding follow. Ordinarily, one may seek
clarification but not an outright disbelief. Secondly, one thinks it is perfectly normal to shift
from the literal to the metaphorical or vice-versa without any previous notice. For example,
we say things like: “Can you imagine that Shylock saying things like that”. Thirdly,
metaphors are acceptable since they assist to clarify and make more vivid, explicit and
understandable something that does not necessarily have to be a part of one’s experience. For
example, in the video film ‘The King and I’, the School Teacher – Mrs. Anna from England –
described to the king’s children water frozen in the winter season thus: “Sometimes it could
be so hard that you could walk on it”. Hearing this description, one of the children exclaimed,
“Walk on water”? Mrs. Anna replied emphatically “Yes, walk on water”. And the children
yelled out chorusly but individually “I don’t believe you can walk on water”. One child in
particular bluntly and loudly objected, “I don’t believe in snow”. The king himself had to
wade in to settle the confusion that ensured as a result of his children disbelieving their
teacher. But that was a case of students the justifications for disbelief in the classroom. In
other words, at what points of a techer’s pedagogical endeavours does he safely tell a student
without hurting his feelings, enthusiasm, and readiness to learn that he does not believe him?

11.4. Justification of Disbelief (In The Classroom)

However, there are some beliefs held by certain categories of people that come about
by deliberate and conscious processes. These include beliefs held by medical doctors and
nurses, priests, judges and lawyers, scholars and students. These beliefs are not necessarily
reasonable since they are freely held and the believer is not constrained to one and only one
conclusion. This is why, for example, retrials are ordered in certain court cases.
It is now time to face the thesis of this chapter squarely: When is disbelief justified in
the classroom and when is it not? Baldwin and Stout; Quine and Ullian. According to
Baldwin and Stout, the opposite of belief is not disbelief that we have a state of belief in a
contrary truth. Quine and Ullian reiterate the same theory more emphatically:
It is important to distinguish
between disbelief and non-belief
between believing a sentence false
and merely not believing it to be
true. Disbelief is a case of belief; to
believe a sentence false is to believe
the negation of the sentence true.
We disbelieve that there are ghosts;
we believe that there are none, non-
belief is the state of suspended
judgment; neither believing the
sentence true nor believing sit false.
The views expressed above do not seem to have done sufficient and necessary justice
to the thesis of this chapter. Disbelief cannot simply be another form of belief. To disbelieve
someone is to reject that person’s thesis, to challenge him to prove his thesis. In the
classroom setting, the normal expectation is that a teacher believes a child, though it may not
be in all circumstances. But the authors have opened one’s eyes that the necessary and
sufficient conditions for disbelief are difficult to fulfill.
Supposing a student makes a claim to the effect that there was a young man near his
house with the double-edged teeth. And supposing the teacher responded thus: “I do not
believe you. You must even be wrong because I know where you live”. These two statements
by the teacher cannot be interpreted differently that the student cannot be believed. But who
or what authorizes a teacher to categorically tell a student that he did not believe his answer?
However, the teacher may be making use of his professional authority. It does not seem that a
student can reasonably challenge that authority since his own authority in the classroom is
limited to that of being s student. But to accuse a student of being wrong has psychological
implications. In fact, it is intimidating. No student will wish to offer a wrong answer even
though no one is perfect. By telling a student that he is wrong or not being believed, the
teacher not only becomes a teacher-judge but also an authority-judge.
Should a teacher challenge a student’s concept by saying “I do not believe you”? How
does one argue against that? Certainly, so it seems to me, the necessary and sufficient
conditions to deny a student’s concept must be difficult to fulfill. One of the reasons for this
is that no matter how the teacher views the students, he must have got some reasons for
saying what is being flatly rejected. In any case, one can argue that disbelief frustrates a
student’s desire to continue to communicate with the teacher. One can argue also that
disbelief in the classroom can render a teacher’s effort ineffective. The situation may become
understanding. But that does not mean that what is true cannot be otherwise without one
contradicting himself. For example, “God is the Creator of the world”. The known qualities
of God do not permit Him not to be regarded as the creator of the world. In this case, truth is
regarded as timeless and eternal.
There is another aspect of truth in relationship to belief and disbelief to be recognized.
That is, that truth can be argued to be an opinion, even though one accepts the reality of the
independence of truth. for example, due to my experience and knowledge, I disbelieved the
student’s claim to knowing someone with double-edged teeth. My opinion (the truth of the
matter to me) was based on my experience (one could say narrow) and knowledge. It is the
author’s categorical belief that one’s opinion can lead one to certain knowledge. If that is
accepted, it follows that if truth is not regarded as an opinion somehow, nothing can be
regarded as knowledge. One does not wish to pursue the matter of the relationship between
truth and the concepts of belief and disbelief since this is not a discourse on truth perse.
However, one point still remains in this regard. One needs to distinguish between the
nature of truth and the tests to ascertain truth. for example, one needs to be certain that
someone had doubled-edged teeth capable, in actual fact, of cutting through metal objects
(that is, the rest of the truth). The coherence theory of truth which stipulates that a proposition
coherent whole, is directly applicable here. In other words, are human beings generally gifted
with such saw-like teeth? The proposition of the truth of this claim to double-edged teeth
should be viewed in the totality of the human race. The teacher in this case felt that such teeth
are not common with known human beings. It is on the basis of this that he disbelieved the
claim of the student.

11.3. Influence of Beliefs

Let us briefly review the influence of beliefs on one’s behaviour. To a very large
extent people tend to behave in a manner, which is consistent with what they believe to be
true. in this sense, seeing does just not believe; it is also behaving. A fact is just not what is;
a fact becomes what one believes to be true. when a man believes that what he was doing was
worthwhile, he pursues it to its logical conclusion not minding any opposition. For example,
when a lecturer believes that his thesis is legitimate, he is more prepared to find evidence(s)
to support it than if he did not believe it. Our beliefs influence our perception, nurture our
assumptions and to a very reasonable extent determine our behaviour. No one is known to
have easily given up that which he believed to be true and worth pursuing. Examples of this
abound in history. Jesus Christ and His claim as the Son of God; Adolf Hitler and the
extermination of the Jews; Karl Mark and the classless society; Tai Solarin and the non-
existence of God; Nelson Mandela and the restoration of the rights of the blacks in South
Africa through non-violent means, Martin Luther King, Jnr., in North America (U.S.A.) and
his non-violent agenda against segregation and so on.
Beliefs are difficult to change. This is even more so when a person has strong
prejudices, which have become permanent propos in one’s personality structure. Consider
this letter about how one’s beliefs are hard to change: “Dear Father, the season of our village
masquerade festival is next month. My friends tell me that your spirit cannot come unlike the
others because you were so cruel while you lived with them physically. I still hope you will
come. I do not care how cruel you were to them. You were not cruel to me as you died before
I was born. I believe you will still come. Please come like the others. “Your son”.
That is an example of a diehard belief. This is observed in all the facets of our
endeavours. However, one is concerned with disbelieving the teacher. That seems perfectly
normal. Our own concern is the teacher disbelieving a student. And one’s point is that a
metaphor is allowed to describe something that is not part of one’s experience. How else
should a foreign teacher from England describe the effects of snow to children from the
tropics?
Why an outright rejection of the student’s story? Perhaps this is due to the
incompatibility of qualities. It may be tolerated that someone possesses double-edged teeth.
The logical and biological applications and employments of these seem incompatible with
normal human understanding. But who dictates to another person how to employ what he
possesses the way he feels fit? In this particular case, someone feels that his teeth have been
designed in such a way that they are capable of special duties. But why is anyone so sure that
some qualities were incompatible? Could it be that my disbelief is as a result of my lack of
such previous experiences? (Double-edged teeth cutting metals and other such materials)? Or
could it be that I felt somehow insulted that a student seemed to be making a fool of me?
Normally, we often believe those we interact with and those who discuss or speak with us. It
is not always usual to disbelieve someone speaking with us. Something fundamental about
the disbelief of the story of the student concerning the double-edged teeth is that there is
something about the story, which makes it unbelievable.
The types of beliefs sought after by the schools are reasonable, sane, and intelligent,
against unreasonable, silly and superstitious beliefs. This sort of belief is contrary to Hume’s
idea of belief. According to Hume, beliefs arise in us immediately, as soon as the appropriate
sense impression occurs without any previous process of questioning of evidence for and
against, and without any consideration of alternatives to the proposition believed. According
to Hume:
Belief is an operation of the soul, when we
are so situated, as unavoidable to feel the passion
of love. All these operations are species of natural
instincts, which no reasoning or process of the
thought and understanding is able either to
produce or prevent. And in philosophy, we can go
no farther than assert, that belief is something felt
by the mind which distinguishes the ideas of the
judgment from the fictions of the imagination.
11.2. Disbelief, Belief and Truth
Let us discuss briefly the fundamental question about truth raised above. The question
is, how legitimate and true could it be for a student to liken a set of human teeth to a cutting
machine? The relationship between belief, disbelief and truth cannot be easily discerned. But
one can gain an insight into this if one understands:
(i) that to believe someone is to acquiesce in the existence of objects (in this case,
double-edged teeth, or God, other minds and objects)
(ii) that disbelief is not assenting to the truth of another person’s propositions.
 (iii) that truth itself is understood as a characteristic of some proportional
meanings, that is, being in accordance with known or acceptable logical facts,
for example, no human being exists with two heads.
The relationship between these concepts is in the understanding that one involves the
other. For example, one may say that he disbelieves someone because his propositions are not
in accordance with known and acceptable facts. The relationship can be said to be
psychological and largely due to compatibility of qualities and in some cases to clashes of
personal experiences and more embarrassing in a country like Nigeria where teachers may
just not limit their denial of a student’s concept to “I don’t believe you”.
Due to the acquired authoritarian nature and training of our teachers, some accuse
their students of telling lies instead of telling them “I don’t believe you”. The task of a
teacher in the classroom is to teach and hopefully, someone learns. This task of the teacher
challenges him to believe the student if the teacher wishes to achieve his objective – to teach
someone to learn. It is presumed that one accepts what someone says as true and the speaker
is also truthful. This is especially so since it is not common-sensical to tell someone to his
face that he is not believed or that he is telling a lie. It cannot be argued in this case that
teachers do not possess common sense. Teachers are supposed to be both the wholesale and
retail distributors of common sense.
But why should a teacher believe the story or claim of a student who does not always
tell the truth? It is possible that because a student realizes that his teacher knows that he
always tell lies, he will pose a surprise challenge and tell the truth. So there may not be strong
evidences that someone who always tells lies will desist from telling lies. It would not sound
fair to deny such a student belief assertion all the time. But the issue is when does a teacher
know that such a regular liar will meet truth requirements? It is difficult to tell. But a teacher
should always be prepared for students’ surprises.
As pointed out above, we normally wish to believe a speaker. But there are categories
of speakers even in their classrooms. Let us compare the university undergraduate as a
speaker in the classroom with a primary school child. both obviously have rights and
authority to speak in the classroom. But the normal presumption to believe a speaker seems to
work against the primary school child. The reason for this may be due to adult chauvinism
and prejudice. A child cannot be trusted with the truth. Also he cannot be regarded as an
expert except at playing. We are not sure if children realize that adults view them as lacking
credibility, expertness and trustworthiness. If the child cannot be presumed trusted and
believed, how can the issue be resolved? In other words, one still needs to proffer the
necessary and sufficient conditions for responding to a child “I do not believe you”.
But a child may not be believed for several other reasons (apart from those mentioned
above). Suppose a teacher does not like a child, can the teacher suspend or even refuse to
believe the student? And how does a teacher justify such a denial? A teacher may refuse to
believe a child for some reasons. It will be too demoralizing to have as his reason that he does
not like the child’s looks or such-like excuses. Such prejudicial behaviours cannot be justified
publicly. Again, it seems that dislike cannot be a necessary and sufficient condition for
disbelieving a student. A teacher’s weapon for disbelief may rest in his knowledge. It an be
argued that the teacher’s knowledge should be the necessary and sufficient conditions for
withdrawing belief in the classroom.
Thus, disbelief needs to be well grounded in knowledge rather than in some kind of
belief. Disbelief becomes meaningful when grounded in the teacher’s knowledge as a teacher.
In other words, a teacher should be able to say, “I do not believe you because I know that
your concepts are wrong” instead of an excuse like “I do not believe you because your eyes
are too dark”. Teachers are in the best position to exhibit the epistemic conditions. These
include that the teachers create the necessary and sufficient atmosphere for the pupils to
learn. Through this exposition, one can see the difference between belief and disbelief.
Children, for example, tell us what they believe because someone has told them to, and they
rarely question this primitive credulity. For example, most children do not always
(1) respect for the worth and dignity of the individuals;
(2) faith in man’s ability to make rational decisions;
(3) moral and spiritual values in inter-personal and human relations;
(4) shared responsibility for the common good of society;
(5) respect for the dignity of labour, and
(6) …emotional, physical and psychological health of all children.

From the above statements of the main objectives of the national development plan as
well as the implications in terms of the expected areas of emphasis and values, it is clear that
Nigeria intends to embrace democracy for her educational and social development. However,
are the statements of the areas of the statements of objectives of the national development
plan, sufficient indicators of Nigeria’s willingness to embrace democracy in her educational
and social system? Besides, is democracy even worth embracing for educational and social
development, as against for instance, autocracy, aristocracy, and communism? Thus, the
focus of this chapter is to take a critical look at the extent to which Nigeria through her stated
objectives of national development and national policy on education, as well as her
implementation of the objectives pursues the concept of democracy in education.

12.2 Meaning of the Concept of Democracy

Historically the ancient Athenians regarded and viewed democracy as the
involvement of all citizens as rulers. According to Entwistle, “the concept of political
equality is apart of the justification of democracy.” The assumption that democracy requires
the continuous and active participation of all citizens in governmental affairs of their
community is subscribed to by Aristotle in his argument that the citizen is one because he
does a certain job in the city, and this constitute his real right to be a citizen. In the ancient
Athenian society, for one to claim citizenship, one had to be prepared to accept to undertake
some responsibility in government. That was why Pericles suggested in Athens that a man
who held aloof from the affairs of the state should not be regarded as quiet, but as useless.
Also, according to Glotz in The Greeks at Work, the emphasis upon the democratic
man “was upon responsibility rather than upon rights, upon activity and work.” Such
procedural words as responsibility, participation, work, activity and sharing were frequently
employed in the discussion of political democracy. Thus a democratic man was expected to
be prepared to be responsible to the state as he accepted whatever task the state assigned to
him. He had to be ready to participate actively in government affairs, as his citizenship
depended on this. He had to be ready to work for the good of the society. The democratic
Athenian was active and expressed delight as he shared in the responsibility of the affairs of
the community. An Athenian whose right was based upon the work he performed for the
community realized that he was merely sharing in the monumental task of the government.
No one felt and arrogated the work of the community to himself or his family.
It was generally believed that Englishmen learned to be democratic at home and in the
colonial settlements of the New World (especially from the Puritan sects) “through the
government of the dissenting congregations in which each member could take his part.”
According to Webster Encyclopedia:
In the colonies especially, the direct, active
participation of all citizens in the government of
their community was considered essential… the
democratic implications of Puritanism were underlined
by the fact that the colony (that is, the
Gutek, Gerald Lee, Philosophical Alternatives in Education Columbus, Ohio,
Charles E. Merill Pub. Co, 1974.
Hume, David (1966) Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, La Salle, Illinois, Open
Court, 1966, p. 49.
Krolikowski, Walter P., An Alphabetical Companion to Education Foundations 420
Philosophy of Education. Chicago: Loyola University Press, 1974.
White, Alan R. Truth, Garden City, New York: Anchor Books, 1970.
Quine, M. W. & Ullian, J. S. The Web of Belief, N. Y. Random House. 1978.

CHAPTER TWELVE

DEMOCRATIC EDUCATION
12.1. Introduction
The country in her Second National Development Plan listed five main national
objectives that clearly indicate Nigeria’s endorsement of democracy for development.

These are:
(i) a free and democratic society;
(ii) a just and egalitarian society;
(iii) a united, strong and self-reliant nation;
(iv) a great and dynamic economy;
(v) a land of bright and full opportunities for all citizens.

These five main national objectives of the development plan are expected to serve as
the foundation for the National Policy on Education. Thus, the national policy on education is
expected to serve in building a free and democratic society, wherein the individual would be
integrated into effective citizenship and wherein there would be equal educational
opportunities for all at all levels of education. The education is expected to emphasize
individual and national efficiency, effective citizenship, self-realization, better human
relation, national consciousness, national unity and socio-cultural, economic, political,
scientific and technological development. It is also expected to promote the following values:
demand a proof in order to gain certain knowledge when adults answer their questions.
 Before attempting the last thesis of this chapter, that is the pedagogical implications of
disbelieving a student, let us briefly consider the psychological ramifications of a teacher’s
remark “I do not believe you.” A teacher who says to a student “I do not believe you” is
obviously rupturing the existing – if there had been any epistemic bond between them.
Whereas, to assure a student “I believe you”, an effective epistemic condition is being solidly
cemented.

11.5 Pedagogical Implications of Disbelief

Finally, how epistemic is disbelief? As pointed out above, disbelief can disrupt and
shatter the line of epistemic communication between two people – teacher and learner. From
that angle, disbelief seems certainly demoralizing, disruptive, and rupturing. Psychologically,
these are the areas of human existence that teaching wishes to solidify. Pedagogically,
however, disbelief can be reasonable and indeed necessary. Students cheat, they are lazy, and
wish to reap where and what they have not sown. Students are in a pedagogical relationship
with their teachers to correct them and direct them to responsibility. That way, one of the
fundamental aims of education is being fulfilled – introducing the immature to the adults.
One does not therefore feel bad bringing to public recognition through responses like “I do
not believe you” if some of the abhorred short cuts to life by the students are to be
obliterated. What this amounts to is that the teacher disbelieves, the student realize why he is
not being believed, he is pardoned by the teacher and the student promises to reform himself,
thus paving the way to being believed in the future.

11.6. Conclusion
This chapter has discussed disbelief in the classroom from two perspectives: logical
and psychological. Logically, it was argued that disbelief couldn’t be maintained on the basis
of the teacher’s authority, or on the personal characteristics of the student. Rather, a teacher
can disbelieve a student relying on his teacher’s – epistemological authority. It also submitted
that psychologically, disbelief ruptures the epistemic relationship that should be the
sustaining bond in the classroom.

11.7. Topics for Discussion

1. Discuss some of the criteria for belief and disbelief in the classroom.
2. Should a teacher disbelieve a student at all? What of the student?
3. Compare disbelief in the classroom and in the church
4. Describe the feelings of someone who was disbelieved but later believed
What caused the turn around?
11.8. Bibliography

Baldwin, J. M. and Stout G. F. “Belief” in Dictionary of Philosophy and Psychology, New

York: Peter Smith & Smith Publications, 1978
Crittenden, Brian, Education and Social Ideals Canada: Longman Canada Ltd., 1973
Dearden, R. F. The Philosophy of Primary Education: An Introduction. London: Routledge
and Kegan Paul, 1968
Fafunwa, A. B. New Perspectives in African Education. London: Macmillan Education Ltd,
1980. community) was undifferentiated from the congregation which, had removed itself as a
body from the religious intolerance of old world.

According to Webb and Webb in History of Trade Unionism, when trade unions
became conscious of the need for democracy their constitutions were written deliberately to
reflect “the representative model”. Thus, “representative government” was adopted “slowly,
reluctantly and incompletely.” What was evident in the deliberations resulting in their
policies was that’s they began to recognize no other authority other than the voices of the
majority. Although the majority could at times lord it over the minority, it was becoming
more and more obvious that the people cherished involvement, participation and
responsibility in the affairs affecting the government of their community.
The Athenian assembly relied on continuous participation of the members through
debate and discussion. They believed that policies had to be debated and discussed before an
approval was appended. Discussion, however, was regarded as most paramount since it was
believed that sound judgments could not be reached without the thorough discussion of the
issues at hand. Pericles asserted that the people were not bored by prolonged discussion.
According to him: “far from believing that prolonged discussion might blunt the appetite for
action… the Athenians were bolder in action for having paused for reflection.”
The importance of the opportunity to engage in the discussion of the issues affecting
the people cannot be over-flogged. According to Lindsay in Essentials of Democracy,
discussion was not for its own sake or merely a means of criticizing the established authority.
Rather, democratic discussion was believed to have a worthwhile product; it was a means for
the people to know what concerned them in relationship to their government.
 Another important means of achieving democracy is by engaging in responsible
discussion. This simply means that those engaged in discussions should be attentive and
participate actively, since any of them could be called upon to carry out the decisions
emanating from the discussions. It was also envisaged that the measure of one’s
responsibility in such discussions dictate the willingness to accept the opportunity of an
office and to participate in the affairs of the state. This responsibility to participate in
discussion is essentially important in our times, especially in Nigeria where people seek
rational method in assuming the affairs of governance.

12.3. Education and Democracy

The purpose of this section of the chapter is to examine: (a) the classical democratic
ideals and (b) the roles of education in relationship to democracy. It does not seem
appropriate to merely tell what democracy means without attempting to examine its general
principles, at least, as it is understood and operated by one of the most reliable democracies in
the civilized world. George F. Kneller, a distinguished American educator, in his edited book,
Foundations of Education, examined nine ideals underscoring the practice of democracy in
the United States of America. Kneller agreed, that just as in ancient Greek, democracy has its
weakness in the United States of America. For example, franchise was granted only to
freedom made Greeks and in the United States of America, democracy did not become a
reality until the enfranchisement of slaves and women.
These examples do not suggest, however, that our embracement of the democratic
way of life should be fractionalized. The world has become more civilized scientifically and
technologically than during the times of ancient Greece and when the Americans embraced
democratic constitutions. We can and indeed should practice democracy the best way our
culture, intelligence and custom allow. We revert to ideals, principles and history in this
matter because of the international nature of the world and its embrace of democracy as a
political system of government.
The following democratic principles as suggested by Kneller are therefore offered as
suggestions.

1. The state is not an end in itself but a means to the attainment of human ends. The
suggestion here is that the state established by human ingenuity and creativity should
always seek the interest of the majority of its citizens. This responsibility is squarely
placed on the shoulder of those elected to run the affairs of the state. The state
 managers, therefore, should not relent in their efforts to cater for the welfare and other
needs of the majority of the populace. Each member of the state should also be given
the encouragement to develop his or her potentialities and be prepared to serve the
state responsibility.
2. All men posses certain inalienable rights. One’s inalienable rights are his/her human
rights to life, freedom and the pursuit of happiness. In other words, anyone who
attempts to deprive a person these rights does not recognize that person as a human
being, and every effort must be made to resist this challenge. These universal rights
arising from the nature of our humanity aim at the continuity of the human race. They
call for corresponding responsibility, commitment and service. Because politics
should be understood as the science and art of service towards the development of the
community, these inalienable rights challenge us to be prepared to participate directly
and actively in the political life of the community.
3. Democracy preserves and enhances individual freedom. The individual’s freedom at
stake is the type that allows one ample opportunities for choices out of the available
alternatives. It is the freedom to be vigorously guarded as in a situation when an
individual is being coerced out of his volition. Just as it is in the case of the
endowment of certain inalienable rights, to be free is to be responsible and generous
in one’s readiness to participate in the affairs of the welfare of the people.
4. All men are to be regarded equal in certain respects. To be regarded as equal,
obviously, does not mean absolute equality in all respects. But at the same time, one
should be treated as if equal in certain respects such as, educational opportunities,
equality to participate in political endeavours equality before the law. It is realized
that people have been factitiously and fraudulently deprived of their equal rights in
certain of these respects. In such cases, powerful attempts should be made to resist
such deprivations. It is acknowledged that nature itself is not a democrat. That means,
nature has endowed each person with certain unique characteristics. We are not the
same in character neither are we the same in intelligence, nor are we equally
physically built. These are understandable aberrations. According to Kneller
“however widely men may differ in their attributes, they are the same in their
common humanity, which differentiates them from other living things.”
5. Democracy implies faith in human intelligence. It is accepted that we are not equally
intelligently endowed. This notwithstanding each person must be accorded due
respect and given equal opportunity to realize himself within the limits of his
 intellectual capacities. The state is in the best position to assist individuals to develop
their intellectual capacities by providing avenues for equal educational opportunities.
6. Democracy grants the right to peaceful dissent. It was pointed out in the section on the
meaning of democracy that to criticize an authority should not be regarded as an act
of rebellion but rather as an attempt to make a responsible contribution to ameliorate
situation. To criticize is to seek for truth and no one should obstruct the inclination.
This right may not be inalienable however; it behooves the government to protect
one’s quest for truth.
7. Democracy requires a party system. It is envisaged that through political associations,
individuals have ample opportunities to express their ideas, which may lead to the
improvement of the welfare of the people. There is no political agreement regarding
whether a multi-party system is more democratic than a single party one. Each system
has its own merits and demerits. For example, in a multi-party arrangement, it may be
a problem for one of the parties to form a government on its own. But the resultant
coalition provides opportunities for a wider range of political attitudes. It is assumed
that the two party systems can “lead to a greater governmental stability at the cost of
expressing fewer shades of opinion.” Modern democracy is widely representative.
Unlike ancient Greece and Roman city-states where, due to the nature of the
communities, people participated directly in the affairs of the government, modern
democracies are based on representations. In other words, the people or the political
parties nominate their candidates. Those nominated are the ones allowed to campaign
and run for elections and if elected (they) become the mouthpieces of the people.
Such representatives deliberate on the affairs of the state-on behalf of the people.
9. Democracy involves separation of powers. This aspect of the ideal of democracy aims
at protecting the rights of individual citizens from the powerful influences of either
the executive branch of government or the legislative branch. The role of the Supreme
Court in a democracy is to act as the supreme “watch-dog of the constitution” to
protect both the national interests and the rights of individual citizens. According to
George F. Kneller, the idea of the separation of powers has two weaknesses:
(a) the states can employ their doctrine of states right to obstruct the necessary
centralization of power in a highly organized society.
(b) the three arms of government can be at loggerheads, thereby frustrating the efforts of
each branch. But, as the saying goes, where two equal elephants fight, it is the grass
 that suffers. It is therefore necessary that’s each arm of government works hand in
hand to achieve its objectives.

12.4. Principles Guiding Democracy and Education

Kneller listed and discussed certain principles guiding democracy and education:
1. since the people themselves elect their government, they should be educated to do so
responsibly.
2. through education, every individual is expected to develop his own talents to the full
3. men must be educated to be free
4. education should train the open mind
5. education should develop the habit of productive co-operation as well as healthy
competition
6. wherever feasible, democratic principles should be adopted in school behavior
7. political control over education must be kept to a minimum

Let us now turn to the topic of democracy and education and find out whether the
education of all the citizens is a necessary condition for democracy. Thus, the hypothesis: is
the formal education of all the citizens a logical necessary feature for the success of a
democracy? This question is interesting as Nigeria is embracing this political way of life. In
other words, should all Nigerians be formally educated in order to achieve their desired
political ends? (It can be argued that, informally, all Nigerians including those in their
mothers’ wombs at this moment enjoy ample doses of informal education).
One of the strongest arguments for contending that education is a logical and
necessary condition for democracy goes like this: ‘since the people themselves elect their
government, they should be educated to do so responsibly.” To claim that one can only make
a responsible choice through education sounds naïve. The claim does not say anything
concerning the type (formal or informal, descriptive of normative) and standard of such
education. It may be asked, who sets the limit and standard of education for a political
choice?
If one is aware of what voting is as a political act and right, which can be acquired
through reasons and informal education, can such a person not make a responsible choice, by
at least putting marks on ballot papers? One of the issues at stake is the role of education in
making political decisions. It does not seem that possessing a special competence such as
education is necessarily compatible with the success of the endeavours of government. There
is no doubt that certain aspects of political decisions, such as economic decisions, need expert
knowledge but it is assumed that no one can claim sole competence in the entire political
process as a result of education.
A strong case can, however, be made for education being capable of assisting in the
process of democratic life, that is, that education is desirable in fostering the healthy
existence of a democratic society. Undoubtedly, with this case being made the prospects of
education seem enlarged. This way, according to John Dewey, democracy becomes “a mode
of associated living, of conjoint communicated experience. In this vein, that education is a
desirable characteristic of democracy does not imply that it is logically necessary. It is merely
desirable, not a necessary or a sufficient condition for democracy.
Education can of course, serve democracy in a number of ways. It can contribute,
according to Brian Crittenden to the necessary “forms of understanding: which assist the
public in its attempts to learn “to perceive, think, feel, imagine, desire, choose and act in a
way that is fully and distinctively human.” If the above forms of understanding are necessary
for the survival of democracy and if they can only be supplied by education – formal or
informal – how then can one say that education is not logically necessary for democracy? The
point being raised and stressed in this section is not just whether education is a logically
necessary condition for democracy but whether educating all the citizens is a logically
necessary condition. So far the argument has been in favour of education not being logically
necessary for the survival of democracy. In fact, it could be stated that it is an unnecessary
emphasis to claim that education of all the citizens will contribute to the survival of
democracy. If not so, democracy would have to be understood as the ideal form of
government and way of life that no society has ever attempted. We know, of course, that
some countries have practiced and are still practicing democracy as a form of government.
And all their citizens were not and are not educated.
In summary, as already pointed out above, what can sustained with some confidence
is this: that the education of as many citizens as possible is compatible with the achievement
of democratic ideals. A question may be posed thus: what percentage of the citizenry should
be educated to qualify for democratic compatibility? Since the general quality of life which
politics aims at improving is difficult to quantify, it may not be easy to answer the question.
But it needs to be stressed that a relatively large proportion of the population should be
educated. It was asserted above that Nigeria, in spite of several obstacles, could achieve
democratic principles. The assertion will now be modified. Certain “habits” as R. S. Peters
put it, are necessary as preconditions for the attainment of democracy.
One of the conditions is that as many members of the society as possible should be
committed and prepared to adhere to such democratic procedural principles as tolerance
fairness, respect for others’ views, liberty and so on. This majority commitment is necessary
for the survival of as democracy in order to make it a reality. In the area of discussion, for
example, which is an important element in a democracy, unless there is a committed
willingness to share and listen with respect to the ideas of others, democracy could, in the
words of R. S. Peter, “degenerate into propaganda or abuse.”
The second precondition has been mentioned earlier on while discussing he meaning
of democracy. It is that competent members of the community must be ready to participate in
public life. Those at the center of affairs of government in a democracy ought to fish out
those who are ‘administratively competent and eminently reasonable’ to participate in public
affairs. In this regard, government may need to appeal to competent and selfless members of
the society to participate and contribute to the development and welfare of the people.
It is time to discuss how democratic principles should be taught. The school is in a
special position to transmit those procedural principles, which form the foundation of the
democratic tradition. These principles include: respect for each individual as human beings,
fairness, tolerance, and freedom. Thus, the role of the school is to develop the skills and
breadth of understanding on which intelligent participation in the political life of the society
depends and to encourage a corresponding sense of responsibility. The school in a political
democracy should strive towards the development of patriotic citizens for the specific
purpose of unifying the nation.
The school can achieve these by developing what Crittenden termed “the tradition of
reasonableness.” That is, the school should educate the citizens to develop the “democratic
ideal, which requires the procedure to reasoned discussion to the exclusion of arbitrary
settlement. The school is also in a unique position to give primacy to moral considerations in
order to foster the ideals of the procedural principles, which are very crucial to the survival of
a political democracy.
The school should also teach for democratic commitment by stressing the need for
responsibility as this will obviously assist in cultivating the sense of accountability. This
sense of accountability is crucial as the taxpayers especially those who support the
educational institutions would like to know how their money is spent.
 R. S. Peter’s idea of initiation into the ways of ancestors presumes that the ways of the
ancestors have been in practice for sometime. In the case of Nigeria struggling to embrace
democratic ways of life formally, it does not sound sensible to speak of initiating the children
into the ways of the ancestors. There must be some in the society, however, who may know
how to act democratically. Our children, therefore, will have to be initiated into the
democratic ways of life of these people. It means, in order to teach democracy, the young
ones have to be initiated into the democratic way of life by imitating (not minding whether
they understand the reasons for asking them to imitate or not) those who already posses the
habit of democracy. By not caring whether the young ones understand why they have to
imitate the elders or not, it is presumed that when they grow to be adults, they will be in the
best position to understand the reasons for these habits. For, how does one make a child
reason to understand why one has to be truthful, tolerant, have respect for the feelings of
others and so on?
Another way to teach for democracy is through direct instruction. In this regard, the
instructors have to expose their students to the historical development of countries that have
successfully practices democracy. The children also need to be exposed to practical
experiences in relationship to democratic practices. They should be encouraged to practice
democracy in their various student committee meetings and other similar gatherings. Field
trips should be planned to various places where people area gathered in the name of
democracy. Such places may include local council meetings, town and family meetings, state
and national assemblies and so on.

12.5. Some Implementation of the Concept of Democracy in Educational

Establishments

In Western democracies many of the educational establishments go about the

implementation of the concept of democracy by doing some of the following. They provide
free and compulsory education for children up to the ages of sixteen or eighteen years,
whereby the children might acquire an appreciable amount of education to enable them make
reflective decisions about their society and to equip them with the ability to perform minimal
socio-economic and political functions. Thus, such education enables the children to make
reflective decisions in terms of choosing their representatives and in terms of ascertaining
whether certain of their representatives are only charlatans or genuine ones. Such free and
compulsory education also promotes equality of opportunity for the individuals in terms of
minimal academic attainments, political consciousness, economic realization, and overall
self-actualization.
The democracies also establish these free and compulsory schools as comprehensive
educational establishments. That is, academic, commercial, technical, arts and science
subjects feature prominently on the school curriculum such that children of various socio-
economic, religious, racial, sexual and vocational inclinations could have the opportunity of
sharing the various human experiences in their society jointly. Therefore, the comprehensive
schools promote interaction between the various individuals and groups in the society; they
promote fraternity and community living. They promote integration within the community,
and toleration of members of different cultural and religious groups. But much as the
comprehensive schools promote social cohesion they are not to be desirable if they promote
indiscriminate toleration among members of different groups.
The comprehensive schools, however, are inclined toward promoting indiscriminate
toleration among members of different social, cultural, religious, economic and political
backgrounds in the society. For when members of particular socio-cultural inclination choose
to attend a private school in line with their particular socio-cultural inclination rather than
government comprehensive schools, they are often faced with the penalty of paying school
fees. This is not supposed to be so because democracy also supports freedom of association.
Therefore rather than ask students who wish to attend certain private schools in line with their
various religious or other inclinations to pay for their education in such schools, the
government is expected to employ some other means to make such students use government
comprehensive, public schools. This is very important because democracy embraces sharing
as well as freedom of choice. But this time around students are being asked to pay for their
choice. Besides, democratically speaking, the government is not supposed to have monopoly
of the channels of information, therefore that the students who choose to attend private
schools have to pay penalty of school fees suggests that the government wishes everybody to
attend public schools which are non-fee-paying and thereby constitute itself to being the only
channel of information in the society.
Finally, educational establishments in democratic societies are no doubt in pursuance
of the critical tradition, whereby every individual is groomed to make intelligent decisions. If
every individual in a democracy is ultimately the best judge of what is in his interest, then
educational establishments should continue to encourage the critical tradition in the child
such that every issue is critically discussed. This is where academic freedom is supposed to
be seen as an aspect of great educational importance in democracy.
12.6. A Critical Look at Some Implementation of the Concept of Democracy in the
Nigerian Education System

As found in many Western democracies, Nigeria also aspires to implement the

concept of democracy in its education by recommending free education to certain levels (the
primary and secondary school levels) and by actually establishing comprehensive schools
that intend to promote social integration, social unity, intellectual reflection, as well as the
development of the various abilities in the citizenry, physical, emotional, moral, scientific,
technological, commercial, etc. These educational designs are found in the old 6-3-3-4
system of education. However, if the free education recommended is really to produce an
individual with equal educational opportunity for critical function, then the education would
not only be free but would also be compulsory at the primary as well as at the secondary
levels of schooling. This would enable the children to receive equal education up till the time
that they would be matured enough to take political decisions about their representatives in a
representative democracy (i.e. up to the age of about eighteen years when the Nigerian child
is deemed matured enough to take political decisions).
Besides, equal education should enable the children to enter the job market directly if
they want to, and this would be impossible if the education does not last up till the time that
the child reaches the age of fourteen. In effect, Nigerian education would not have given the
child minimal political and economic equality if it does not last till the child reaches the ages
of fourteen and eighteen years respectively. Besides the ‘Universal Primary Education’ is not
really universal if children still have to pay fees and buy some books and materials. Certainly,
books and materials should be supplied free, and fees should not be taken from the children if
education is regarded as free. The quality of the political, economic and social decisions that
the matured populace succeeds in making would certainly determine the quality of society
that the populace would have. Therefore, free education up to the age of political maturity
and decision-making in a democracy is very important.
The comprehensive schools because of their various curricular bearings are admirable
and they should be continued. They encourage equal opportunity for all citizens to develop
their various talents; they promote equality in self-realization and embrace the democratic
principle of freedom of the child to develop along his own line and talent. The comprehensive
schools also promote the democratic principle of sharing experiences among the various
members and groups (religious socio-cultural) in the school and society. The shared interests
promote interaction and communication, which lead to continuous reconstruction of the
societal experiences in the democracy.
Thus, comprehensive schools promote tolerance of other people within the society, in
effect, they promote social cohesion. But if a child wants to receive secondary education
outside the public comprehensive secondary school system for reasons of religious, social,
cultural or other similar inclinations, he is likely to pay more at the private schools. But this is
not supposed to be so, for the child is not supposed to suffer any penalty for exercising his
freedom to associate with certain other groups in the democratic society. Besides, democracy
does not sanction indiscriminate toleration anyway; therefore the government should see to it
that students who attend private secondary schools do not pay much higher.
The Nigerian democracy has for over ten years been under the influence of fledgling.
For how long will this be? I wish to suggest that if we are still interested in democracy it may
need to be modified to accommodate our culture and tradition.

12.7. Topics for Discussion

1. How has Nigeria adhered to her principle of ‘free and democratic society?’ Support
your points with examples.
2. What contributions do you think transparent voluntary associations such as Rotary
Club can make to the development of democratic principles in Nigeria?
3. Do you think that our schools are run democratically?
4. How can the etymological definition of democracy – government of the people, for
the people and by the people – be made realistic in Nigeria?
5. Do you agree with the statement that because most Nigerians are not formally
educated, democracy will suffer?
6. What suggestions do you have for the positive development of democracy in Nigeria?
7. How can politics be kept to the minimal in our educational system?

12.8 References
1. National Policy on Education, p. 7
2. Ibid., p. 7
3. Ibid., p. 7 -8
4. Ibid., p. 7
5. H. Entwistle, “A Concept of Democracy and Its Implication for Education”, M. Ed.
Thesis, University of Manchester, 1958, p. 68.
6. H. Entwistle,. Political Education in a Democracy (London: Routledge and Kegan
Paul, 1971), p. 68.
7. G. Glotz, The Greeks at Work (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1926), p. 147.
8. Webster Encyclopedia, Vol. 1, P. 32.
9. S. Webb and B. Webb, History of Trade Unionism (London: Longmans, Green,
1920), p. 11.
10. H. Enstwistle, Political Education in a Democracy, p. 72.
11. A. D. Lindsay, The Essentials of Democracy (Oxford: Oxford University Press,
1929), pp. 76 ff.
12. George F. Kneller, Foundations of Education (New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.,
1971), pp. 145 ff.
13. Ibid., p. 145
14. Ibid., p. 146
15. Ibid., p. 147
16. Ibid., p. 147 ff
17. Ibid., p. 148
18. John Dewey, Democracy and Education (New York: Free Press, 1966), p. 87.
19. Brian Crittenden, Education and Social Ideals: A Study in Philosophy of Education
(Canada: Longmans Ltd., 1973), p. 136.

12.9. Bibliography
Agard, W. R. What Democracy Meant to the Greeks.
North Carolina: University of North Carolina Press, 1943.
Baker, E., The Political Thoughts of Plato and Aristotle. Menthuen, 1906
Brubacher, J. S., Modern Philosophies of Education.
New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1962.
Coleman, J. S., (Ed.), Education and Political
Development. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1965.
Counts, George S., The School Can Teach Democracy.
New York: John Day Inc., 1939.
Dewey, John, “Democracy in Education: Elementary
School Teacher: 4, December, 1903, pp. 139-204.
Dewey, John, School and Society, Phoenix Books, 1959.
Federal Republic of Nigeria (1981), National Policy on Education, Lagos: NERC
 Press.
Freire, Paulo, Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York:
Penguin Books, 1972.
The Guardian, January 22, 1991, p. 3.
Gutek, Gerald Lee, Philosophical Alternatives in
Education, Ohio: Charles Merrill Publishing Company, 1974.
Kilpatrick, William H., “Democracy and Respect for
Personality” Progressive Education, 16, February, 1939.
Laski, H. J., (1933), Democracy in Crisis. London: Allen and Unviwn, 1933.
Macpherson, C. B., Deocratic Theory: Essays in
Retrieval. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1973.
Oyo State Ministry of Education (Implementation
Secretariat on National Policy on Education).
(Dec. 1988. Post Junior Secondary School
System in Oyo State. Ibadan: Ministry of
Education, pp. 1-3
Pennock Roland J., “Democratic Political Theory – A
Typological Discussion””, The Monist, 55, No. 1,
January 1971, p. 73.
Sunday Sketch, March 18, 1990, p. 2; also see The
Guardian, October 11, 1990, p. 9; and The
Guardian, April 9, 1991, p. 9.