Since in the Middle Ages every development of thought took place within the framework of the Christian worldview, such a traditionally free sphere of intellectual activity as philosophy also came under its influence. This fundamentally distinguishes medieval philosophy from the preceding ancient and subsequent philosophy of the Renaissance.
Already in the period of late antiquity, there was a tendency towards a rapprochement between philosophy and religion. The source of truth becomes religious mysticism, and not a system of rational proof (neopythagoreanism, the teachings of Philo of Alexandria, neoplatonism). Nascent Christianity fought for its “place in the sun” with ancient pagan philosophy. Therefore, the philosophical elements of Christian thinking developed in confrontation with ancient wisdom (Tertullian, Gnostics, apologists and “church fathers”).
The process of rejection and acceptance of ancient philosophy in the history of medieval thought goes through various stages and forms. The next phase in the development of religious philosophy was the works of Augustine the Blessed (IV–V centuries), in which the foundations of Christian dogmas were laid. Augustine's teaching became the determining spiritual factor in medieval thinking in Western Europe, proclaiming the knowledge of God and divine love as the only goal and only value of the human spirit, asserting the superiority of the soul over the body, will and feelings over the mind. Augustine made God the center of philosophical thinking and the focus of the emerging theocentric worldview. The Augustinian tradition has long been considered the only type of orthodox philosophy (its echoes can be found in the theoretical thought of the Reformation, Jansenism and Cartesianism of the 17th century, in modern Protestant and Catholic theology).
The unity of religion and philosophy, the common language of Latin and the theological unity of Catholicism led to the fact that philosophy was taught only in monastery schools for future priests. Having finally ceased to be free already in the early Middle Ages, philosophy concentrated its efforts not on the study of the general laws of reality, but on the search for rational evidence of what faith proclaimed.
The monopoly of the church on all forms of spiritual life affected not only intellectual knowledge, but also the educational system. The first known schools of the early Middle Ages were created in monasteries for the training of the clergy; monastery schools borrowed subjects studied in the era of antiquity, the so-called “seven liberal arts,” which were now interpreted in accordance with the new religious thinking. Rhetoric was seen as the art of composing sermons; dialectics - as the ability to conduct conversations, argue and prove the validity of one or another position of religious texts using formal logic; arithmetic - as knowledge of counting rules, as well as the ability to interpret symbolic meaning numbers; geometry, which included geography, provided elementary information about measuring spaces and drawing up drawings; astronomy came down to the ability to use the calendar and calculate the dates of religious holidays.
The picture of the universe was also considered in the light of the provisions of the Holy Scriptures. The ancient ideas about the eternity of the world's existence were denied. The universe, like man, was considered the creation of God, the geocentric theory of its structure dominated (the universe was presented as a system of concentric spheres, in the center of which the Earth was stationary, around which the Sun, Moon and planets revolved; then followed by the fixed stars, and in the uppermost sphere were God and angels).
Experimental knowledge and the rational-logical method of comprehending reality were supplanted by the authority of the Holy Scriptures and major church leaders(Augustine the Blessed, Isidore of Seville, etc.), although even the fathers of the church, when developing the dogmas of the Christian religion, sometimes had to turn to the ancient heritage - astronomy, anatomy, Euclid’s geometry, Aristotle’s logic, etc.
The adoption of Christianity contributed to the spread of literacy and writing. The texts of the Holy Scriptures were required to be able to read during worship, and also to be distributed throughout the Christian world. For this purpose, in addition to schools, monasteries had scriptoria (special craft workshops in which monks copied sacred texts). Some revival in enlightenment began in the 8th – 9th centuries during the period of the so-called “Carolingian Renaissance”. This was caused by objective necessity: the vast empire of Charlemagne required an educated administrative apparatus (judges, scribes, secretaries). Prominent scientists from different countries(Paul the Deacon from Italy, Theodulf from Spain, the Anglo-Saxon Alcuin, who was entrusted with the organization schooling). Charlemagne was a fan of ancient culture. His merit was the collection of ancient manuscripts, to which comments were made, explanations and retellings were given. A literary circle, the so-called “palace academy,” was created at court. Members of the circle read the works of ancient authors and, in imitation of them, wrote poetic and prose works themselves.
The religious education system has also undergone significant changes. During the reign of the Anglo-Saxon king Alfred in the 9th century, schools were opened at the episcopal sees, books were translated from Latin into Anglo-Saxon, and a chronicle of all the most important state events began to be regularly kept.
In the era of the mature Middle Ages (XII - XIV centuries), the influence of the church worldview on the process of education weakened. The formation of an urban culture with its secular character and frankly earthly aspirations became the basis for the emergence of the first European universities. However, the role of the church in the organization of educational institutions remains dominant; schools are still created either at monasteries or at episcopal departments. Universities sometimes arose from episcopal schools if the schools had major professors of theology, philosophy, medicine and Roman law. In 1200, the University of Paris was founded, and in the 13th – 14th centuries – Oxford and Cambridge in England, Salamanca in Spain, Heidelberg, Cologne and Erfurt in Germany. At the end of the 15th century, there were 65 universities in Europe, most of which were established with the sanction of the Roman Curia. Teaching was carried out in the form of lectures at Latin. The main object of study were the works of authoritative church and ancient authors. Public debates were held on topics of theological and philosophical nature, in which professors and students participated.
Medieval university science was called scholasticism (from the Latin schola - school). Scholasticism was most clearly reflected in medieval theology. Its goal was not to discover something new, but to systematize what already existed. Scholasticism relied on the provisions of Holy Scripture and Holy Tradition, as well as on ancient philosophers, mainly Aristotle. From Aristotle, scholasticism took not only some ideas, but also borrowed the very form of presentation - in the form of a system of complex judgments and conclusions. Weak side This method in scholasticism was a disdainful attitude towards experience and dogmatism of conclusions. The founder of early scholasticism was Anselm of Canterbury.
The positive significance of scholasticism consisted in the development of formal logic as a method of thinking and in the mandatory inclusion of Aristotle's works in the university curriculum. In addition, the scholastics introduced Western Europe to the works of not only Greek, but also Arab scientists. In an effort to understand many issues of philosophy and theology, they turned not only to faith, but also to the human mind, offering to comprehend the essence of phenomena from the standpoint of study, reasoning, and understanding.
One of the central problems of scholasticism was the dispute between nominalists and realists about the nature of general concepts - “universals”. This dispute was a kind of continuation of the discussion that arose in the ancient period between idealists (followers of Plato) and materialists (followers of Democritus and Lucretius). The consequence of this dispute was the emergence of a new direction within scholasticism - conceptualism, the prominent representative of which was the master of the Parisian school, Pierre Abelard. His main thesis(“I understand in order to believe”) undermined the dogmas of the church, which placed faith above knowledge. Since the main source of understanding of reality for Abelard was the world around us perceived and generalized by our minds, the church recognized his teaching as heretical.
Major representatives of the orthodox school in scholasticism were Albertus Magnus (12th century), the author of works of a theological and natural science nature, and Thomas Aquinas (13th century), who put forward the idea of harmony of faith and reason, but retained priority in matters of knowledge for theology. Considering issues related to the principles of the social structure of society, he proceeded from the thesis that everything created by God is perfect, asserted the priority of spiritual power over the secular state, the principle of class organization of society, and in matters related to economic life of its time - the natural character of private property. Along with the rational principles of comprehending the world and God, proposed by scholasticism, irrational trends emerged during the Middle Ages, in particular mysticism. Mystics believed that religious doctrines are learned through intuition, insight, prayers and vigils (prominent representatives of mysticism were Bernard of Clairvaux, Johann Tauler, Thomas a à Kempis, etc.).
Rare in the Middle Ages were attempts to substantiate the need for an experimental method in the study of nature. Hostile to church ideology, accurate and natural Sciences were perceived as dangerous freethinking. Nevertheless, supporters of experimental knowledge appeared within the church organization itself. Thus, the monk of the Franciscan order Roger Bacon (XIII century) experimentally established methods for obtaining many chemical substances and in his writings he put forward a number of remarkable guesses about the possibility of creating various devices and mechanisms that expand human capabilities and facilitate his work. Like the free-thinking ideas of P. Abelard, the Catholic Church anathematized the works of R. Bacon, and he himself spent 14 years in prison.
The growth of the critical spirit of philosophical thought within the framework of scholasticism led to the withering away of large theological systems at the turn of the 14th – 15th centuries. The main reason for the shock was the deepening class differentiation of society, the flourishing of urban civilization, and the increasing role of the bourgeois class in the life of medieval society. Cultural life, gradually becoming more secular, also affected the spiritual area. The church organization and theocratic ideology are experiencing a crisis, which is accompanied not only by a brutal struggle for power with secular rulers, but also by the strengthening of powerful heretical movements alternative to orthodox Christian doctrine in Western and Central Europe.
Heretical movements.
Heretical teachings were an important part of the spiritual culture of the Middle Ages. Their emergence dates back to the period of official recognition of Christianity as the state religion, and their diversity was a clear expression of the value priorities of different social groups - both the feudal elite and the broad masses. The fact that any dissatisfaction with the existing world order in the Middle Ages took on the character of a theological heresy was indirectly emphasized special role churches in all spheres of life of that time and, in general, the religious nature of thinking and consciousness of the era. Heresies reflected the specifics of the religious consciousness of representatives of the third estate, including the emerging bourgeoisie.
Burgher heresies expressed the protest of small urban owners against feudal orders and, above all, against church institutions; demanded the elimination of privileges for the clergy, proposing the early Christian “apostolic” church as an ideal.
The peasant-plebeian heretical movement was more radical in nature and contained demands for the establishment of actual equality between people in society (Lollards, Taborites). Despite significant dogmatic differences, the burgher and peasant-plebeian heresies were united by one thing - a sharply negative attitude towards the clergy. Heretics called the church the “harlot of Babylon” and the Pope “the viceroy of Satan.” They recognized the Holy Scripture (canonical gospel texts) as the only source of faith and completely rejected the Holy Tradition (writings of the church fathers, decrees of councils, papal bulls). In addition to the ideas of “apostolic poverty”, widespread received mystical sentiments based on a special interpretation of biblical prophecies - primarily the Apocalypse. At the turn of the 10th and 11th centuries, Western European society expected the end of the world, the Last Judgment and the second coming of Christ. Heresiarchs Joachim of Flora and Dolcino predicted an inevitable revolution and the establishment of the “thousand-year Kingdom of God” on earth. These ideas were reflected in the movements of “chiliasm” and “millennialism”. Another direction in mysticism argued that “divine truth” lies in man himself, and thereby denied the need for a church. Heretical movements have become particularly widespread in the most economically developed countries. medieval Europe- Italy and France, resulting in the currents of “Catharism” and “Waldensism”. At the turn of the 14th and 15th centuries, in their most radical forms, they became the ideology of revolutionary uprisings, and also created theoretical basis early reform movements that developed during the Renaissance.
1. Introduction.
In the modern era of the formation of information civilization at the turn of the new century and the new millennium, the problems of education, its present and future are becoming very relevant. Recently, a new science has been actively developing - the philosophy of education, which arose a little more than five decades ago. What connects these two concepts - philosophy and education?
2. From the history of philosophy and education.
In the Vatican Museum there is a fresco by Raphael called “The School of Athens”. On it, the figures of Plato and Aristotle reflect the difference in the approach of these scientists to knowledge. Plato points his finger to heaven, and Aristotle points to earth. The idea of this fresco corresponds to the philosophies of its characters. Aristotle sought answers from reality, Plato strived for the ideal.
It is noteworthy that today educators are faced with the same problem that is symbolically depicted by Raphael. Should we follow the gesture of Aristotle or Plato?
The modern education system in its main features has developed under the influence of certain philosophical and pedagogical ideas. They were formed in the late 18th and early 19th centuries by Comenius, Pestalozzi, Froebel and, further, by Herbart, Diesterweg, Dewey and other founders of scientific pedagogy and together form the so-called “classical” system or model of education (school). Although this model has evolved over two centuries, its basic characteristics have remained unchanged.
Philosophy from the very beginning of its emergence to the present day has sought not only to comprehend the existence of the education system, but also to formulate new values and limits of education. In this regard, we can recall the names of Plato, Aristotle, Augustine, Rousseau, to whom humanity owes awareness of the cultural and historical value of education. An entire period in the history of philosophical thought even called itself the Enlightenment. German philosophy of the 19th century, represented by Kant, Schleiermachel, Hegel, Humboldt, put forward and substantiated the idea of humanistic education of the individual and his self-awareness, and proposed ways to reform the system of school and university education. And in the 20th century, major thinkers reflected on the problems of education and put forward projects for new educational institutions. Let's at least name names
V. Dilthey, M. Buber, K. Jaspers, D.N. Whitehoda. Their legacy is a golden fund of philosophy of education. Although problems of education have always occupied an important place in philosophical concepts, the identification of philosophy of education as a special research direction began only in the 40s of the 20th century at Columbia University (USA) and a society was created whose goals are to study the philosophical problems of education, establish cooperation between philosophers and pedagogical theorists, preparation of training courses on philosophy of education in colleges and universities, personnel in this specialty, philosophical examination of educational programs, etc. Philosophy of education occupies an important place in the teaching of philosophy in all Western European countries.
The upcoming World Philosophical Congress (August 1998) is dedicated to the problems of education, four plenary sessions and five symposia and colloquia are directly related to the philosophy of education. However, there are still difficulties in clarifying the status of philosophy of education, its relationship with general philosophy, on the one hand, and pedagogical theory and practice - with another. In Russia, although there were significant philosophical traditions in the analysis of educational problems (let us recall such names as M.M. Speransky, S.P. Shevyrev, V.F. Odoevsky, A.S. Khomyakov, D.P. Yutkevich, L.N. .Tolstoy), however, the philosophy of education until recently was neither a special research area nor a specialty.
Nowadays, things are starting to change. A Problem-Based Scientific Council was created under the Presidium of the Russian Academy of Education, a seminar on the philosophy of education began to work at the Institute pedagogical research RAO, the first monographs and textbooks on the philosophy of education were published.
Representatives of different philosophical directions, of course, interpret the content and tasks of the philosophy of education differently. Eg
V.M. Rozin (Doctor of Philosophy, Institute of Philosophy of the Russian Academy of Sciences) believes that today, the classical model of education has actually exhausted itself: it no longer meets the requirements for education modern society and production. In this regard, he proposes to look for a new set of pedagogical and philosophical ideas that create an intellectual basis for modern school(p.8).
A.P. Ogurtsov (Doctor of Philosophy, member of the editorial board of the journal “Problems of Philosophy”) believes that the classical paradigm of education that has developed with the works of John Amos Comenius is also difficult to destroy, just as it is difficult to destroy classical physics, since the classical paradigm of education ensured the success of European culture and civilization. According to A.P. Ogurtsova "... a general and compulsory system of primary and secondary education, which was formed by a number of thinkers, including Comenius, was embodied in the practice not only of our country, but also of all European countries. This is an achievement of world civilization, that necessary invariant level on which everything further is based education.To destroy this educational system means to destroy the foundation of education (p. 18).
According to V.G. Tsarev (candidate of philosophical sciences, Institute for Advanced Studies in social sciences Moscow State University), it is precisely the compulsory nature of secondary education main problem education, since the existing education system is not capable of falling into crisis, and therefore responding to the challenges of the surrounding reality. According to V.G. Tsarev, our education is such that it copes well without the need to respond to any challenges, it is self-sufficient and in this sense is not at all on the brink of life and death, it will perfectly exist in this form as long as it is given the opportunity to exist. (p. 15).
IN AND. Kuptsov (Doctor of Philosophy, Russian Open University) draws attention to the fact that despite the traditions that we have and which still allow us to solve many problems, the general situation in education is critical and, if we do not find the means of education today, intellectual and material opportunities, we will simply ruin the country and transfer it to the “Third World” (p.7). Truly, as the greatest mathematician of the 20th century Dieudonné said: - “There are as many mathematicians as there are mathematicians” (p.20)
Perhaps there has not been a single period in history when society was satisfied with its education system. One can remember the years when foreigners highly appreciated the education system in Russia, but it is difficult to remember that people living in this country, as in any other, would be satisfied with the existing education system in it.
In the history of every culture, there has always been a variety of education systems. For example, in ancient Greece, along with the Athenian education system, there was also a Spartan model of education and upbringing. The education system that existed in imperial Rome was significantly different from the Byzantine one.
In Russia, after the founding of Moscow University in 1755 on the initiative and project of M.L. Lomonosov. A three-stage model of a unified education system is emerging - “gymnasium - university - academy”. For the first time, a number of important provisions in the field of education were formulated, in particular the need to replace foreign teachers with “national people”, give lectures in Russian and ensure a close connection between theory and practice in teaching. Later, this principle became the methodological core of progressive views on education in domestic higher education (p. 18-19).
The most significant indicator of the development of an educational institution is a change in methods of perception, teaching, and learning.
As history has shown, the fate of all structural transformations of Russian higher education was directly determined by the extent to which educational and educational procedures met the needs of the individual (p. 25).
On the other hand, the development of these procedures was restrained by the “healthy” conservatism inherent in any education system. However, from the 30s of the 19th century to the beginning of the 20th century, Russia went from the “Bursat approach” - education and training using the “injection through the vine” method in an old-fashioned way” (p. 26), the pedagogical views of K.D. Ushinsky, N.I. Pirogov, K.I. Bestuzhev-Ryumin, N.A. and others, which were advanced for their time.
The most significant milestones on this path were: the establishment of the Professorial Institute on the basis of the University of Dorpat, the development of a conceptual approach to the training of officials “to serve the fatherland”, the division of gymnasium education into classical and real, the opening of higher courses for women (p. 26).
Through the prism of these events, it is clearly visible how not only from the nobles, but also from commoners, a new intelligentsia, creative and free-thinking, is being formed; a core of professors is emerging that understands the importance and urgency of developing new criteria for professional knowledge, skills and abilities for graduates of domestic universities. The introduction of new forms of organization of the educational process, the constant increase in the importance of practical classes, seminars, interviews, independent work of students and, finally, equal and mutually respectful communication with teachers of all ranks led to a certain individualization of training, which in turn could not but have a positive impact on personal development students.
The constant increase in the role of subject-related and professional motivation in learning opened the way for identifying and more fully taking into account the personal interests and inclinations of students. If the main trend in the development of modern higher school can be somewhat conventionally designated as the movement of activity-centered pedagogy to personality-centered pedagogy, then the main trend in the development of the education system in Russia in the 19th century can be designated as a movement from contemplation and absorption to activity; an ideation that is not indifferent, but illuminated by the light of individuality. The personality could not yet become the center educational system of that time, but movement in this direction was becoming increasingly clear.
After 1917, under the conditions of a totalitarian state, the tendency to move “from contemplation to activity” in the education system intensified even more, but at the same time the movement “from activity to personality” slowed down. Our society has developed a state, and unified, education system. “The dominance of totalitarianism led to the destruction of the variety of forms of school and higher education and the creation of a unified state system that transmitted a bizarre conglomerate of knowledge and pseudo-knowledge, values and pseudo-values.” (A.P. Ogurtsov, - p. 18)
It must be said that the classical paradigm of education has received various justifications in the course of history. The ideals and norms inherent in the classical paradigm were modified, supplemented and transformed. The focus on universal education, which was embodied in the system of primary and secondary education, was later supplemented by another idea - the idea of natural individual rights, including the right to education. In our country, the idea of natural individual rights for a long time was not significant at all. In the state system, a certain level of education (very average) was first differentiated by class, and then became general education. At the same time, it was completely lost sight of the fact that there is an individual right to choose education.
3. Interdependence of philosophy and education
According to A.P. Ogurtsov (p. 18), the influence of the education system and philosophy has always been mutual. It is impossible to identify the classical paradigm of education with the Enlightenment idea of a universal, unified Reason, with the normativism of the philosophy of the Enlightenment.
The education system always assumes a certain influence of science and is always based on a certain concept of science.
As early as the beginning of the 19th century, a new philosophical concept of education emerged, focusing on the formation of individual self-awareness, on the self-formation of personality in acts of cultural self-awareness. This approach, non-German classical philosophy(Gerber, Humboldt, Hegel) led to the humanitarization of education and to the assertion of the individual’s right to education: the individual, understood as self-consciousness, forms himself as a subject of culture. This philosophical concept of education, opposed to the educational concept, served as the basis for the search for new forms of education, a number of pedagogical reforms, oriented towards cultural and humanitarian ideals. We can recall, in particular, the reform of higher education in accordance with the program
W. Humboldt. However, already in the middle of the 19th century this direction faced serious problems. In particular, in England, such an education system came into conflict with the social need for specialized training and the development of natural science education. During these years, a discussion took place, in which outstanding English naturalists (Faraday, Tyndall, Herschel) took part about the need to develop natural science education in the country.
In our country we are now facing similar difficulties. There are gaps, firstly, between the level of school and higher education and, secondly, between the level of higher education and the scientific system, including academic science, which is forced to retrain the personnel recruited into it, “pull them up” to the required level.
4. The ideal of education and the goals of education
Search for new forms of organization scientific knowledge- the most important way to reform the education system. Now a new image of science is emerging, alien to the normativism and unitarianism of the Enlightenment concept.
At the same time, approaches to understanding education are changing. Along with the traditional ones, today in pedagogy new ideas about man and education are emerging, and there is a change in the anthropological foundations of pedagogy. An educated person is not so much a “knowledgeable person”, even with a formed worldview, but one prepared for life, oriented in complex problems modern culture, capable of comprehending one’s place in life (p.9). Education should create conditions for the formation of a free personality, for understanding other people, for the formation of thinking, communication, and finally, practical actions and actions of a person.
It is necessary that an educated person be ready for trials, otherwise how can he help overcome the crisis of culture.
“At present, the image of a “knowledgeable person” is often contrasted with “personality,” they say that the goal of education is to form a full-fledged creative personality. Indeed, a person who knows in other words, a specialist is only a part of a person, but personality is a part of a person, although an essential part, there are other “parts” - body (physical being), psyche (mental being), spirit (spiritual being), social individual (clan being), etc.
Education should create conditions for the development of man as such: the knowledgeable, the physical, the experiencing, the spiritual, the ancestral, and the personality - and all aspects of man about which we still do not know enough" (V.M. Rozin - p. 9-10) .
Another requirement that is important for our time is understanding and acceptance of foreign culture. According to M. Bakhtin (p. 10), culture lies on the borders. This can be understood in the sense that within itself it is unconscious; Only through interaction, meeting, dialogue, different cultures become mutual or understandable the foundations and features of their own culture. This means that an educated person is cultured and in that sense understands and accepts other cultural positions and values, knows how to compromise, understands the value of not only his own independence, but also that of others.
We can point out a few more demands that modern life places on man; this is, for example, the task of overcoming the split of culture into the humanitarian and technical: these two spheres are moving further and further away from each other, so that sometimes it seems that two different types of humanity have already formed - “humanities” and “technicians” (scientists, engineers, people in general with a rational technical orientation and way of life).
Probably, if the isolation of technical and humanitarian cultures becomes intolerable and contributes to the deepening of the crisis of our civilization, then we need to work to bring them closer together, to strive for an integral humanitarian-technical personality. The ideal is a holistic, organic person, oriented in both cultures, in whom the “sprouts” of a new culture are visible, where this opposition itself - “humanitarian-technical” - will no longer exist.
Another urgent requirement is to form a morally responsible person. Today it becomes, in terms of a person’s understanding of moral realities, good and evil, one’s place in life, knowledge, responsibility for nature, for the fate of culture, loved ones, etc. In other words, primarily in a humanitarian sense. The natural-scientific worldview, one might say, is imputed by modern culture and education to almost every second person, but the lack of a humanitarian worldview is increasingly felt; it is more often recognized as a vital ideal.
The listed problems, the number of which, of course, can be multiplied, clearly explain why the philosophical, methodological and humanitarian elaboration of the ideas of education is now so important, which should lead to a different pedagogical paradigm, and to a new understanding of education, school, and person.
At one time in the 19th century, V. Latyshev, our excellent methodologist, said that it is necessary to teach not knowledge, but thinking (p. 11) then they said that it is necessary to teach methods of activity, etc. How to teach at a university today? In memory of V.M. Rozina (p. 11), if we continue to teach knowledge, disciplines, subjects, this is a dead end. Knowledge must be translated into reference literature. And this is where the ability to learn is needed. A student cannot be admitted to a university if he does not know how to study on his own and does not know how to use reference literature. What do you need to learn? Reflective ideas. For example, there is no need to present various psychological theories, but rather to “introduce” them into psychology, i.e. it is necessary to demonstrate a psychological point of view, introduce psychological schools, introduce the history of psychology, the evolution of psychological programs, and introduce the types of psychological discourse.
And this is a completely different approach. And specific knowledge, specific theories - a person must learn this himself. We need to move on to fundamentally different types of content and other educational goals. It is necessary to reflexively curtail all educational knowledge and disciplines. From this point of view, all the textbooks that exist today do not work.
A.R. Markov (p. 12), believes that there is an urgent need for very radical changes in our education system.
Among the main things in education reform is getting rid of the system of state dictatorship and monopoly. If this does not happen, it will be impossible to get away from uniformity in education, from the discrepancy between the knowledge acquired by young people and the realities of life. Ultimately, this comes with great social costs.
Bureaucratic centralism in education inevitably leads to the fact that the final product of education is considered to be the preparation of the workforce. Meanwhile, education is, first of all, an investment in the human and humanitarian potential of society. How to most rationally invest in this potential is one of the key questions. It seems that a monopolized system is inherently doomed to contain an excessive number of mediocrely functioning universities; it is not able to overcome the interests of the administration and teachers who are desperately resisting the repurposing or reduction of outdated structures. If, within its framework, a system of continuous education is created, for which the need is already felt today, then here too it will most likely waste enormous resources.
Certain centralized structures and programs in education, of course, must exist. However, in the current situation they should have other, non-administrative and distribution functions. The desire to teach at a university everything that a person may need during his future activities is highly doubtful. But advocating for sufficient investment in education, organizing a system of certification of universities, accreditation of educational programs, creating a high-quality backlog of educational literature are very pressing tasks that in full Only central structures can do it.
It must be said that the lack of independence is a consequence not only of pressure from administrative authorities, but also of the ingrained characteristics of the thinking of teachers and heads of faculties and universities themselves. They are so accustomed to working according to standards, programs and plans approved “at the top” that they are now afraid to take substantive issues of education into their own hands and are waiting for the next letter of instruction. And, it seems, they are not waiting in vain... With all the talk about education reforms, the ideas of independence of universities, a variety of types of curricula, and multi-stage education are emerging with great difficulty. It seems that the decisive shift here will occur with the emergence of new sources of education financing - private, personal. They will be the best indicator of what programs are needed and what universities are competitive.
Such decentralization would at the same time be a way of objective assessment of a particular education and its quality; it would also contribute, finally, to the formation of a national personality who is aware of the choice of a particular education as the most important step in life.
“Nowadays, concerns are often expressed that under the conditions of market reforms, interest in fundamental social and humanitarian education is being lost. Experience shows that this is not the case. Students continue to have a desire for high-level fundamental education; for example, they are against reducing their programs specific gravity courses such as general economic theory, history of philosophy, sociology, etc. and their displacement by applied disciplines like the fundamentals of marketing" (A.P. Markov p. 12).
By the way, new commercial structures, both large and small, are aware that a widely educated person capable of non-standard solutions and quick retraining is a very valuable acquisition for them. But how to provide a serious fundamental education?
It seems that the role of universities here is great and irreplaceable. No matter what they say about the crisis of the education system, the importance of universities will remain and even grow. In our country, the presence of universities with good scientific and cultural traditions is a guarantee that the country will not disappear an intellectual layer capable of leading the country out of the crisis of understanding and solving not only current, but also strategic problems.
The unique and sustainable, historically established combination at the university of fundamental and specialized education, scientific research and general cultural functions allows it not to be confined to the professional task of training young people, but in addition to this, to constantly interact with the surrounding socio-cultural and political environment, to introduce into it a stabilizing and long-term oriented principle.
Judging by the challenges our society faces, it is clear that educated people are very much needed, and this need will only increase. And at the same time, the situation is such that now people with high level education turns out to be unclaimed. Even from large university centers there is a “brain drain” abroad and to commercial structures. “It’s a paradox, but teaching students has ceased to be the main task of the university. But if you do not deal with this matter today, in the not so distant future, the lack of highly educated people will not be compensated for by anything. „(E.V. Shikin p. 13).
The university approach to education, which runs through the entire history of European culture, is distinguished by such thoroughness that it is capable of preserving and developing intellectual traditions even in the most crisis situations. “A university-educated and university-educated person is a person who, first of all, has a broad interdisciplinary outlook, knows fundamental sciences and is a fairly competent thinker” (E.V. Shikin p.13).
The revival and development of the university idea presupposes a corresponding model of an “educated person.” In the 20th century, higher education ceased to be elitist in the sense of its accessibility to various social strata, but essentially universities, and especially universities, must cultivate an intellectual elite. An “educated person” must also be a person of high, in this sense, elite culture. As G. Fedotov noted (p. 14), “the ideal of culture must be high and difficult in order to awaken and strain all spiritual forces.” This task can be solved by creating and maintaining a special university atmosphere; what is especially important here is the cultural tension that should exist in the “teacher-student” relationship.
Who should a university educate: an educated person or a professional?
If we remember M. Mamardashvili - “a person cannot achieve serious achievements in one area if he equal to zero in others" (p. 14). The same applies to society as a whole. It is impossible to develop or absorb advanced technologies against the backdrop of, say, a poor humanitarian or political culture. And it is universities that can lay the foundations of the infrastructure within which the existence of modern high technologies is possible.
According to Doctor of Philosophy A.P. Ogurtsov (p. 21), the crisis of the university, about which we speak so much now, is, first of all, a crisis of universal education, and especially philosophy, which has always performed the function of either universal knowledge or propaedeutics to universal knowledge. The restructuring of university education is inextricably linked with the restructuring of teaching philosophy. What directions can this perestroika take? Philosophy in the education system performs at least two functions. First of all, it should give a methodological introduction to the specialty, explain what science is, what types of scientific knowledge exist, what are the methods of science, how the scientific community works, etc. This is the task of the course “Methodological introduction to the specialty,” which should be taught in the first years of study at universities. Naturally, this kind of methodological introduction should be differentiated and take into account the specifics of engineering, natural science and humanities universities. We do not yet have such developments. In addition, in senior years, the teaching of philosophy should focus on demonstrating the diversity of philosophy, which reflects the diversity of cultures and personalities of philosophers.
Speaking about the crisis of education in Russia, it is necessary to prepare for a radical change in the forms, methods and content of education, so that instead of a unitary approach, a diversity of education systems is formed, including the teaching of philosophy and the training of scientific personnel.
5. Philosophy of education and general philosophy
Since the mid-20th century in the West, there has been a factual separation of the philosophy of education from general philosophy. There are a number of reasons for this, starting from the general trends in the evolution of philosophical thought, to the need to stimulate attention to the possibilities of a constructive approach to solving pressing problems of education from a philosophical position. In our country, the process of forming a philosophy of education as a special direction is just beginning, although the very need for such a direction is manifested quite noticeably.
What exactly is philosophy of education? What relationships exist or should exist between philosophy of education and general philosophy?
It is obvious that these relationships must be constructive and lead to ideological mutual fertilization. Currently, the task of defining as clearly as possible the range of problems of the philosophy of education itself, as distinguished, on the one hand, from general philosophy, and, on the other hand, from the more specific problems of special sciences in education, is very urgent.
The philosophy of education today is just beginning to emerge in Russia as a separate area of research. According to M.I. Fischer, “There are all the signs of formation: in many works one can see the desire to apply the categories and principles of general philosophy to the study of educational and pedagogical activities, although this process lacks the necessary disciplinary rigor and consistency, and many categories allow for ambiguity of interpretation even within the framework of one work. The state of the discipline’s search is also reflected here , its object and subject, its isolation both from general philosophy and, to a certain extent, from pedagogy. In other words, the incompleteness of this isolation presupposes the intersection of the philosophy of education with its source disciplines - philosophy, pedagogy, sociology, psychology, logic, history, cultural studies, etc. This allows us to talk about the interdisciplinary nature of the philosophy of education, but at the same time pushes for an intensive search for its own niche in the system of knowledge. There are no generally accepted approaches to the study of certain objects of educational activity, and the problems have not been established. At the same time, the opportunity is open for scientific creativity, the search for unconventional paths and paradoxical moves.
The philosophy of education, integrating and specifying the theoretical and methodological apparatus of general philosophy and using the knowledge accumulated by the special sciences, develops an attitude towards pedagogical reality, its problems and contradictions, endowing this reality with certain meanings and putting forward possible conceptual options for its transformation" (p. 26).
V.M. offers his understanding of the concept of philosophy of education. Rozin (p. 7): “The philosophy of education is both non-philosophy and not science. At the same time, she uses the approaches and knowledge of all reflexive disciplines - methodology, philosophy, axiology, history, cultural studies. Her interest is pedagogy and education itself, therefore she rethinks and refracts all ideas borrowed from other disciplines in relation to the tasks of understanding the crisis of education, discussing the ultimate foundations of pedagogical activity , designing ways to build a new building of pedagogy.”
According to P.G. Shchedrovitsky, “pedagogy has always been the practice of a certain philosophy” (p. 21).
A.P. Ogurtsov criticizes the one-sidedness of V.M.’s positions. Rozina and P.G. Shchedrovitsky for the fact that each of them deprives the value and autonomy of either the philosophy of education or pedagogy. In his opinion, “the philosophy of education cannot be limited to reflection on the educational system and educational culture as a whole. It must reveal what does not yet exist, what is still taking shape, what is being established in the future, if there are social forces capable of turning these projects into reality.
In other words, the philosophy of education, like general philosophy, cannot help but put forward a certain project - a project of education in the future, its reorganization, schools of the future, etc. Of course, these projects were by no means always correlated with sociocultural resources, but they were always ahead of their time and set the prospect for the development of the educational system and pedagogical thought” (p. 21).
For a long time, the philosophy of education was an important component of the systemic thinking of the “great philosophers” and was developed as an application of the fundamental principles of their concepts in one of the areas of sociocultural reality - education. And this path of development of the philosophy of education is characteristic not only of antiquity and modern times, but also of the 20th century. But even for the first half of the 20th century, the path to forming a philosophy of education was the application of fundamental philosophical principles to educational reality and its rethinking based on these principles (p.21).
The situation began to change by the middle of the 20th century. Associations and associations of philosophers specializing in the field of education and teachers with an interest in philosophy were created.
“The separation of the philosophy of education from general philosophy is a process that is actually observed in modern philosophy. And this process should not be assessed one-sidedly negatively, since new points of growth are formed here, including for philosophical knowledge” (p. 22).
6. Conclusion
At a conference on philosophical problems of education, organized by the Russian Academy of Education, its participants were asked to answer, among others, the question:
- “What do you understand by philosophy of education?” Here are some answers (“Questions of Philosophy” N11 1995, pp. 31-34):
A.G. Asmolov (Deputy Minister of Education of Russia) - “Reflection on the priorities and essence of education as an institution for the development of culture, trying to the best of their ability to influence the strategy of education in modern civilization.”
V.A. Karakovsky (corresponding member of RAO, Moscow) - “Philosophy of education is a branch of modern philosophy of a multidimensional world.”
AND I. Lerner (academician of the Russian Academy of Education, Moscow) - “The most general issues of education that determine the paradigm of approach to fundamental issues of education.”
IN AND. Zagvyazinsky (academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Tyumen) - “The doctrine of prerequisites, sources, guidelines, strategies for influencing the formation of human personality and individuality, creating conditions for the realization of human potential, as well as the corresponding system of views, assessments, and worldview. Philosophy of education - general guidelines for the development of educational theory and educational methodology."
E.G. Osovsky (corresponding member of the Russian Academy of Education, Saransk) - “Philosophy of education is the science of the existence and genesis of Man in the spiritual and educational space, the purpose of education and its role, the influence on the destinies of the individual, society, state, the relationship between the conflicting goals and meanings of education, its paradigmatics, etc. Apparently, the philosophy of education and the methodology of pedagogy “flow” into each other suddenly.”
Johannes J. Beuys (Republic of South Africa, Transvaal) - “Philosophy of education is considered both as an autonomous science and as a way of thinking about education. As a science, it occupies a place next to educational psychology, didactics, comparative pedagogy and tries to describe and understand the basic, universal characteristics of pedagogical facts (events). As a system of principles, it represents a general philosophy as applied to education."
Thomas J. Kinney (USA, New York) - “Without discussions that include philosophical foundations, any attempts at action to resolve educational issues will be actions outside the subject of pedagogy, without its guidance.”
Despite all the diversity of judgments and approaches to issues of philosophy and education expressed by wise men, both burdened with all kinds of regalia of learning, and without them, the close relationship and interdependence of philosophy and education, their common roots, can be considered proven. In other words EDUCATION IS OF A PHILOSOPHICAL NATURE.
LITERATURE
1.Zotov A.F., Kuptsov V.I., Rozin V.M., Markov A.R., Shikin E.V., Tsarev V.G., Ogurtsov A.P. "Education at the end of the twentieth century ("materials" of the round table") - "Questions of Philosophy" N9-1992.
2. Nezhnov P.G. “Problems of developmental education at school L.S. Vygotsky" - "Bulletin of Moscow University" series 14 "Psychology" N4-1994.
3.Shvyrev V.S. “Philosophy and strategy of education” - “Questions of Philosophy” N11-1995.
4. Rozin V.M. “Philosophy of education as a subject of a common cause” - “Questions of Philosophy” N11-1995.
5. Mikhailov F.T. "Education as a philosophical problem"
- “Questions of Philosophy” N11-1995.
6. Alekseev N.G. “Philosophy of Education and Technology of Education” - “Questions of Philosophy” N11-1995 -
7. Bestuzhev-Lada I.V. “Public education: philosophy against utopia” - “Questions of Philosophy” N11-1995.
8. Ogurtsov A.P. “On the way to philosophy of education” - “Questions of Philosophy” N11-1995.
9.Platonov V.V. “Philosophy of education as a field of intersystem interaction” - “Questions of Philosophy” N11-1995.
10. Fisher M.I. “Philosophy of education and comprehensive studies of education” - “Questions of Philosophy” N11-1995.
11. Smirnov S.A. “The philosophy of education is not a discipline, but a therapeutic practice” - “Questions of Philosophy” N11-1995.
12.Zelenina L.M. “Philosophy of education and determination of the goals of education” - “Questions of Philosophy” N11-1995.
13. Karpei Jacques “Following Vygotsky” - “World of Education” N5
14. Smirnov S.D. “Pedagogy and psychology of higher education” - “Aspect-press” M. 1995.
15.Losev A.F. “History of Ancient Philosophy” - “Thought” M. 1989.
1.Introduction 1
2.From the history of philosophy and education. 1
3. Interdependence of philosophy and education. 5
4.The ideal of education and the goals of education. 6
5.Philosophy of education and general philosophy. eleven
6. Conclusion. 13
In the Middle Ages there was no separation of higher education from secondary education, which is why universities had junior and senior faculties. After studying Latin in primary school, the student (scolarius) at 15-16, and sometimes even at age, entered the university at the preparatory faculty. In the Middle Ages there was no separation of higher education from secondary education, which is why universities had junior and senior faculties. After studying Latin in primary school, the student (scolarius) at 15-16, and sometimes even at age, entered the university at the preparatory faculty.
"seven liberal arts" (septem artes liberales), consisting of two cycles - "trivium" (trivium - "crossroads of three paths of knowledge") and "quadrivium" (quadrivium - "crossroads of four paths of knowledge"). Only after studying “philosophy” was the right to enter senior faculties: law, medicine, theology. (septem artes liberales), consisting of two cycles - “trivium” (trivium – “crossroads of three paths of knowledge”) and “quadrivium” (quadrivium – “crossroads of four paths of knowledge”). Only after studying “philosophy” was the right to enter the senior faculties granted: law, medicine, theology. trivium quadrivium trivium quadrivium
Classes at the university were calculated according to the curriculum drawn up for the entire academic year. It was divided into two unequal parts: a large ordinary educational period (magnus ordinarius) from October, and sometimes from mid-September until Easter, as well as a “small ordinary educational period (ordinarius parvus) from Easter to the end of June. Division into half-years or semesters appears only towards the end of the Middle Ages in German universities. Academic classes at the university were calculated according to the curriculum for the entire academic year. It was divided into two unequal parts: a large ordinary academic period (magnus ordinarius) from October, and sometimes from mid-September until Easter. , as well as the “small ordinary educational period (ordinarius parvus) from Easter until the end of June. The division into half-years or semesters appeared only towards the end of the Middle Ages in German universities.
Forms of teaching Lectio (lecture) - a complete, systematic presentation of an academic subject, according to the program set out in the statutes, at certain times. Repetitio (repetition) is a detailed explanation of a separate text from different angles, taking into account all possible doubts and objections. Disputatio (debate) is one of the most common forms of teaching. University management attached great importance to them.
Faith, reason, experience Pierre (Peter) Abelard or Abelard (French: Pierre Abailard/Abélard, Latin: Petrus Abaelardus; April 1142) famous scholastic and theologian of medieval France, repeatedly condemned by the Catholic Church for heretical views.
Abelard's teaching God gave man all the strength to achieve good goals, and therefore the mind to keep the imagination within limits and guide religious belief. Faith is based unshakably only on conviction achieved through free thinking; and therefore faith acquired without the assistance of mental strength and accepted without independent verification is unworthy of a free person. God gave man all the strength to achieve good goals, and therefore the mind to keep the imagination within limits and guide religious belief. Faith is based unshakably only on conviction achieved through free thinking; and therefore faith acquired without the assistance of mental strength and accepted without independent verification is unworthy of a free person. The only sources of truth are dialectics and Holy Bible. Even the apostles and church fathers could be mistaken. This meant that any official dogma of the church that was not based on the Bible could in principle be false. The only sources of truth are dialectic and Holy Scripture. Even the apostles and church fathers could be mistaken. This meant that any official dogma of the church that was not based on the Bible could in principle be false.
Knowledge is power Francis Bacon; January 22, April 1626) English philosopher, historian, politician, founder of empiricism.
The pinnacle of medieval philosophy Scholasticism (Greek σχολαστικός, “scholar, school”) systematic medieval philosophy, centered around universities and representing a synthesis of Christian (Catholic) theology and Aristotelian logic. Scholasticism (Greek σχολαστικός, “scholar, school”) systematic medieval philosophy, centered around universities and representing a synthesis of Christian (Catholic) theology and Aristotelian logic. Main problems Main problems Faith and knowledge Faith and knowledge Proof of the existence of God Proof of the existence of God General and individual (the problem of universals) General and individual (the problem of universals)
Thomas Aquinas philosopher and theologian, systematizer of orthodox scholasticism, church teacher, Doctor Angelicus, Doctor Universalis, “princeps philosophorum” (“Prince of Philosophers”), founder of Thomism, member of the Dominican Order; since 1879, he has been recognized as the most authoritative Catholic religious philosopher who connected Christian doctrine (in particular, the ideas of Augustine) with the philosophy of Aristotle.
Formulated five proofs of the existence of God. Recognizing the relative independence of natural existence and human reason, he argued that nature ends in grace, reason in faith, philosophical knowledge and natural theology, based on the analogy of existence, in supernatural revelation. Formulated five proofs of the existence of God. Recognizing the relative independence of natural being and human reason, he argued that nature ends in grace, reason in faith, philosophical knowledge and natural theology, based on the analogy of existence, in supernatural revelation
§ 26. Education and philosophy
Question 1. How did medieval people’s ideas about the world change during the Middle Ages? What was this connected with?
In the beginning, medieval man had a very rough idea of the world. Even maps have been preserved where the land is shown in the form of a 3-leaf clover, which washes a single ocean. Jerusalem was in the center, and Europe, Africa and Asia were the petals.
This does not mean that medieval Europeans considered Europe to be like a leaf, or that, in their opinion, the only way to get from Europe to Asia by land was through Jerusalem. They simply weren't interested. main idea this map - Jerusalem is the center of the whole world.
Gradually people began to travel more. They went on trade trips and pilgrimages. The Crusades played an important role. Therefore, knowledge about the world became more complete and accurate.
Question 2. How was the medieval university structured? How was the training there?
The classes took place in two forms. During the lecture, the teacher read a book to the students and gave his comments. At debates they argued on a given topic. There were also disputes over free topic, they were usually led by a famous scientist, the topic was suggested to him by his opponents (opponents in a dispute) only at the beginning of the debate, so he did not have time to prepare.
All students began their studies at the Faculty of Philosophy, where they studied 7 liberal arts: grammar, dialectics (logic), rhetoric, arithmetic, geometry, astronomy and music (that is, the science of harmony in the world, playing the musical instruments students were not taught). After graduation, only a few of the students entered the theological, or law, or medical faculty.
Question 3: Prove that the university was a corporation. What other medieval corporations can you name?
There were people at the university who controlled its entire life (rector, deans), and they were elected. Universities had their own charters, which determined the basic standards of life and work (conducting classes). Finally, universities received from the king special privileges for their members, privileges that separated them from the rest of society. This is a classic medieval corporation, combining the features of a craft workshop and the clergy.
Question 4. Fill out the table “Famous Scientists of the European Middle Ages.”
Question 5. How did the views of Roger Bacon differ from the views of most medieval theologians, including Abelard?
Scholasticism as a whole relied only on logical reasoning, like ancient philosophy. Bacon called for a wider use of experiment, relying on it and on the observation of reality. This is exactly how modern science began to work.
Question 6. What is scholasticism? Do you think scholasticism hindered or helped the development of European science?
Scholasticism is a philosophical doctrine, the desire to understand the basic provisions of faith with the help of reason and derive new provisions from them. For most of the Middle Ages, scholasticism could not interfere with European science, because it itself was the science of that time.
In the last stages of her existence she struggled new science, which was based on experiments. But it very often happens that the old teaching does not give way to the new; this does not negate the fact that at one time this teaching was very valuable.