A modern teacher simply needs to rise to a new, more important and sought-after level, where the main question is not “How?”, which new information technologies can easily cope with, but the question “Why?”, which can only be answered by a competent teacher protected by the state.

Municipal educational institution "Secondary school No. 59 named after I. Romazan of Magnitogorsk"

Ilyasova Svetlana Leonardovna

Philosophy modern education

In the modern world, school plays a decisive role in realizing children's right to education. School is the main institution of universal education and upbringing.

Today, on the eve of fundamental changes in the understanding of the prospects for the development of the education system, focused on finding other ways of innovative development of the modern school, “the main issue remains the question of education, and this means about children, about our future...”.

Society has long perceived education as “a necessary pragmatic period in the life of a growing person, which ultimately ends with the receipt of a certain document confirming that the educational process has been completed with some degree of efficiency,” not realizing that having a certificate or diploma does not guarantee a person’s EDUCATION. This idea does not need proof. A huge flow of information, often of a negative educational nature, the growing importance of the cult of money, social stratification and many other factors have led to a decline in morality in society. Life problems, previously unknown, appeared in every family. This cannot be denied. Alas, all this is projected onto the child. Listen to what most young people are talking about on the street, in transport, in educational institutions... Often the results of work are measured not by the human qualities of the graduate, but by the quality of his knowledge. This is precisely one of the main mistakes of the mass school. But “the value of education is most clearly demonstrated when educated people speak out about things that lie outside the field of their education” (Karl Kraus). Knowledge is extremely harmful if it is an end in itself. Democritus said: “Do not strive to know everything, lest you become ignorant in everything,” that is, the desire to know as much as possible is wrong and destructive. Therefore, what we studied in schools and universities is not education, but only a way to get an education; now, instead of the fundamentals of science, their applied areas are increasingly being studied.

The goals of education and upbringing are success, career, and entry into Western-style society. A system of adaptation education is being formed that allows the student to adapt to living conditions in society, but excludes the conditions for his spiritual, and therefore personal growth. But already today we can feel the still subtle but persistent need of modern society, which is rapidly changing every day and, sometimes, not always for the better, for answers and finding the right solutions. It is at this moment that society feels difficulties and needs advice, since many unanswered questions have accumulated. Who should help answer them? Of course, teachers and, of course, school!

But there are still sincere optimistic teachers who clearly understand, screaming from their hearts, that a qualitatively new and natural, which means philosophical, process of development of the school itself is needed. We need an ideologically new SCHOOL, which would be led by smart, far-sighted and understanding professional teachers who understand the requirements of the 21st century, who are not limited to the Will that was given to the school. Only a true teacher understands that this is not enough - it is important to give the school Freedom. But today one must fight for Freedom (as a philosophical category) in bureaucratic wars, which is a paradox, since freedom is not just the ability to do as one wants, but free will, in essence which is a person’s duty. The principle of FREEDOM OF SCHOOL should be one of the fundamental principles today in the idea of ​​​​creating an elite educational institution.

EDUCATION is the spiritual image of a person, which is formed under the influence of moral and spiritual values ​​that constitute the heritage of his cultural circle, as well as the process of education, self-education, influence, polishing, i.e. the process of forming a person’s appearance (Philosophical Encyclopedic Dictionary). In this case, the main thing is not the amount of knowledge, but the combination of the latter with personal qualities, the ability to independently manage one’s knowledge. Only by gaining independence of existence does the school develop independence of high-quality thinking, so there is no need to periodically introduce something into it; it, the school, itself is looking for something new and useful, effective and valuable. This is probably one of the philosophical aspects of education. It is important that the concept “the school needs help”, which is rooted in the public consciousness, is replaced with “the school will help.” It will help in the education and development of the child, raising a good citizen for OUR FATHERLAND. “Just as there is no man without self-love, so there is no man without love for the Fatherland, and this love gives education the sure key to a person’s heart” (K. Ushinsky). And financial or material support for a school should be perceived not as help, but as a civic duty of every adult who has emerged from this wonderful world of childhood. A modern educational institution needs not just renovations and modern technical equipment, but a new idea, an infinitely variable constructive solution, which is based on the convinced dissatisfaction with the current mass school. If there is no real teacher, a burning enthusiast, design will not help the matter.

It is impossible not to take into account that along with the new technosphere, a new infosphere is emerging, which has far-reaching consequences in all spheres of life, including our education and consciousness. All the changes taking place in society and nature are revolutionizing our ideas about the world and our ability to understand it. This is what should be the BASIS of modern education, a modern NEW SCHOOL.

Based on the above, let us summarize: the general education school remains the basic link in the reform (modernization) of education. Achieving the quality of education presupposes its focus not only on the acquisition by schoolchildren of a certain amount of knowledge, but also on the development of their personality, cognitive and creative abilities. A modern school should form key competencies (a system of knowledge, abilities and skills, experience of independent activity and personal responsibility of the student).

The acceleration of the pace of scientific and technological progress and the emergence of a post-industrial society have led to the fact that new functional requirements began to be placed on a person: a young person is now required to have both well-developed production functions and the ability and ability to analyze, collect information, put forward ideas for solving problems, and design , make decisions and perform creative work. These abilities and skills must be formed from childhood and constantly developed both during training and work. The creative development of students should be carried out throughout all years of schooling, in all educational areas. This work includes a number of stages: assessing the needs and capabilities of the activity, collecting the necessary information, putting forward a project idea, planning, organizing and executing the work, evaluating the work performed.

As a result, without further ado, I allow myself to deeply doubt the effectiveness of the educational process and the full-fledged effective work of the teacher (with rare exceptions), striving for the development of the personality of each student, of those educational institutions (including private ones), where, despite all their other troubles, in classes of 25-30 people. The teacher here is simply a teacher because he is also a class teacher, the head of a methodological association, a member of some commission, or simply good man. The phenomena of superficial activity characteristic of such schools, tedious and ineffective “multi-doing” are a consequence of the insufficiently high (if not to say low) level of education of the teacher, therefore work in such conditions, as a rule, is profanity or purely theoretical. This reality causes nothing but deep regret and disappointment. This is the same as monitoring the efficiency of the growth of cucumbers in beds in winter conditions from the windows of a spaceship, which is also located in a neighboring galaxy, where the concept of cold is a theoretical one.

As you know, the laws of eidos state that the most comfortable situation in which a person can freely develop and remember something is if he can physiologically react to everything he hears: get up, sit down, lie down on the floor, put his feet on the table, breathe deeper . The situation of sitting in the same position makes it difficult to remember. Over the course of his life, every person develops a lot of techniques that help his memory work - snapping his fingers, opening and closing his eyes, changing his posture, tying his shoelaces, finally. If a person cannot do this, then he is deprived of one of the tools of his personality. As we know very well, this is exactly what is prohibited in school.

As Confucius said: what I hear and forget, what I see and remember, what I do myself, I understand. For a person to understand something, he must do it himself. When receiving information, the student must perform certain creative actions that accompany the receipt of this information; these actions will create in him a feeling of understanding what is happening. Therefore, in the context of the globalization of the world economy, the emphasis is shifting from the principle of adaptability to the principle of competence of graduates of educational institutions, which will also seriously affect the quality of education and the content of educational programs, the introduction of modern technologies in educational institutions of all levels.

It is through students that the teacher himself improves. He learns, changes, grows professionally. But today, whether we want it or not, a progressive conflict is emerging between the computer and the teacher for the right to communicate more effectively with students. It is clear that a modern teacher simply needs to rise to a new, more important and sought-after level, where the main question is not the question “How?”, which new information technologies can easily cope with, but the question “Why?”, which can only be answered by a competent, protected teacher by the state. The competence and professionalism of a modern teacher costs money. And the state has turned its back on the teacher, and therefore “loses” education, which has entered the stage of self-survival, abstracting from the real needs of the country. There was a break in the “state-education-society” system.

In this regard, it cannot be denied that the global trend of changes in the field of general education is the transition to standards built on a competent basis. This means that students must not only master the required amount of knowledge, skills and abilities, but also master the ability to use the information received in the educational process. Therefore, along with the transition of schools into the era of information, it is necessary to begin the development of standards for the education system of the 21st century generation. In other words, to implement the idea of ​​restructuring and developing a network of educational institutions that meet the standards of the information age. To do this you need:

• to work out the methodology and new psychological and pedagogical foundations for the development of draft educational standards of the 21st century;
• create model curricula and programs adequate to the new standards, and their educational and methodological support;
• change the conservative system of advanced training for teachers, tuned only to the reproduction of educational technologies that have lost their significance, to solve the problems of modernizing education
• update long-outdated material and technical support, which does not allow us to properly solve the problems of introducing both existing state educational standards and new generation standards;
• expand the possibility of alternative forms of education both in a single country and at the international level;
• provide the opportunity for interaction between general education institutions and primary, secondary and higher vocational institutions, as well as with additional education institutions, including social institutions (culture, healthcare, etc.), enterprises and other economic entities;
• review developments in a timely manner and at a high competent level, test and implement new integrated models of educational institutions;
• create a unified information educational space to ensure equal access to information resources of the state;
• to increase the social status of the teacher (as a more significant and competitive profession) and his professional skills, the quality of pedagogical education, to solve a number of complex problems associated with material and moral incentives for teaching, updating its composition, based on the realities of the economic and social life of our society.

Thus, education should be included in the main priorities of modern society in the post-Soviet space. And the State undertakes to restore its responsibility, play an active role in the development of priorities of the education system, raise the prestige of the work of the Teacher, his role and significance, promote the development of communication and educational technologies, the changing interests of the personality of a young person of the 21st century. National educational policy must reflect national interests in the field of education and take into account general trends in world development.

Test

Philosophy of modern education

Literature

1. Foundations of philosophy in modern education

Currently philosophical foundations the essence of education, the problems of creation, selection and scientific justification of its methods, their axiological orientation become strategically important both for each family and for the country as a whole, laying the foundations for its future survival and competitive ability. At all levels of modern education it is necessary to have a humanitarian component. Its essence is not in the assimilation of ready-made knowledge drawn from the humanities, but in the formation of a special worldview. The connection of the humanitarian component with the natural disciplines lies in the understanding that the natural sciences themselves are only elements of universal human culture.

Philosophy is the most important general educational subject, and nowhere in the world is this questioned. This is what every cultured person should know. On our own philosophical knowledge They teach people not philosophy as such, but only what other people understood by philosophy. In this way a person will not learn to philosophize, but he can gain positive knowledge about it.

The problem of philosophy in modern education is influenced by changes in the cultural space in modern society. The processes of globalization and informatization of society lead not only to visible changes in personal communication, but also to structural changes in the entire culture. This again forces a number of researchers to talk about the crisis of classical culture, the core of which was primarily a positive assessment of scientific and technological progress. At the center of this culture was the classical philosophical formula “Reason-Logic-Enlightenment”. Science was freed from the ethical dimension, but at the same time hopes were placed on it to bring order to the world.

The organizational form of culture was the university. It still performs this function today, remaining a connecting link between classical and modern culture, ensuring continuity between them. The destruction of this core is fraught with the loss of cultural memory.

Traditional cultures were relatively stable. In each of them there were adaptation mechanisms that allowed the individual to adapt to innovations quite painlessly. Changes of this kind, as a rule, went beyond the scope of individual life, and therefore were invisible to the individual. Each culture developed “immunity” to foreign cultural influences. The two cultures were related as two linguistic entities, and the dialogue between them took place in a special localized space, in which the area of ​​semantic intersection was relatively small, and the area of ​​non-intersection was huge.

The informatization of society dramatically changes the described situation, destroying both the very principles on which local cultures are built and the mechanisms of interaction between them. Against the backdrop of a sharp expansion in the possibility of communication between cultures and their representatives, the qualitative characteristics of this communication are changing. Integration is increasing, but on the basis not of the differences between cultures, but of their similarities, which is always associated with the leveling of cultures, which leads to their semantic impoverishment. Despite all the external diversity, a desert of mass averageness arises. Therefore, what is often called a “crisis of culture” is in fact a situation of a sharp change in the communication space, in which the boundaries between cultures are becoming increasingly fluid.

Accordingly, the language that is most capable of spreading itself due to political, scientific, technical and other conditions begins to dominate in global communication. Of course, this comes with a lot of conveniences, but dialogue between cultures then loses all meaning. There is a danger that in the new communication space stereotypes - the most accessible, simplest components of culture - will prevail. In this situation, science also acts as a powerful integrative factor.

Thanks to the latest means of audiovisual influence, the area of ​​difference in cultures that are either subordinate to some artificial superculture (for example, a computer culture with virtually common language), or technologically less developed cultures dissolve into more developed ones. Of course, now it is becoming increasingly easier to understand any person anywhere in the world, but at the level of coincidence or even identity of meanings. This communication does not lead to the comprehension of new meanings, because it is communication with your double in the mirror.

But we can talk about a “crisis of culture” in another sense: on the one hand, there is a sharp increase in formations that claim the status of cultural, and on the other, their adaptation to old value systems occurs in a more compressed time frame. Finally, the “crisis of culture” can be understood as a violation of the traditional balance between high and low cultures. "Grassroots" Mass culture begins to dominate, displacing the “high” one.

Similar processes occur in philosophy, which is realized in the concepts of deconstructivism and postmodernism. They turned out to be adequate to the modern state of culture and are a typical example of formations alternative to classical culture.

Postmodernism in in a broad sense words are a philosophy that is adapted to the realities of a completely new communicative situation. He is a hero and a victim at the same time. Postmodernism claims to be “promoted” among the masses, since it was, and remains, by and large, non-competitive in the academic environment. In order not to disappear among others philosophical concepts, he constantly appeals to the masses, ordinary consciousness. The philosophy of postmodernism is extremely “lucky”: the new communication system, the Internet, turns out to be the embodiment of many of its provisions. Thus, the “death of the author” is fully realized in hypertext, in which an infinite number of authors, including anonymous ones, and infinity of interpretation are possible.

Nowadays, people, as a rule, do not read “thick” texts; they do not have time for this, since it is filled with fragments of cultural new formations. Therefore, we can fully explain the phenomenon of “soap operas”, which are viewed by the majority of people. modern people, and among them there are many who are not at all mistaken about the artistic value of such creations. A person does not have the opportunity to hold in his head a certain ideological structure (as was the case in the classics), which unfolds through a plot. It’s easier for him to look into the TV, as if into someone else’s window, capturing a momentary moment of events, without bothering himself with questions about the essence of the events taking place. Observation instead of reasoning is one of the attitudes modern culture. Such a fragmented, “clip” consciousness, perhaps, expresses its essence to the greatest extent.

In today's sociocultural situation, the problem of the essence and meaning of philosophy arises again and again. They talk about her either with reverence or with disdain. Others are ready to ban philosophy altogether for its, as it seems to them, complete worthlessness. However, time passes, but philosophy remains. As Heidegger wrote, metaphysics is not just some “individual view.” Philosophizing is inherent in human nature itself. No private science can answer the questions of what man is and what nature is.

Thus, in conditions of deep social changes, the most important factor becomes choice and forecast not spontaneously, intuitively, or based on the feelings of previous experience, but on the basis of a reflected philosophical, anthropological and spiritual-methodological basis, since the cost of error in the modern world is too high. In fact, at present the very logic historical process People are faced with the task of proving that man as a species is intelligent. And today, in the process of the semantic space of global communication emerging before our eyes, radically changing the entire system of culture, only a philosophically reasoning person will be able to adequately assess what is happening, identifying its negative and positive aspects and using his understanding as an incentive to build new models of explanation, and therefore , an incentive for actions aimed at preserving and developing culture.

Aspects of philosophy in the modern educational system

Today, specialization in science and production has become widespread and irreversible. The direct result of this specialization is that specialists lose touch with other areas of production and are unable to grasp the world as a whole. And no matter how technically and technologically the foundations of civilization are improved, solving the problem of the future, scientists believe, is fundamentally impossible by purely technical or technological means. It is necessary to change a person’s system of worldview, and this is impossible without changing approaches to education.

Today, schools teach individual “subjects.” This tradition comes from ancient times, when the main thing was to teach techniques of mastery that remained virtually unchanged for the rest of the student’s life. A sharp increase in “items” in Lately and their extreme disunity does not create in a young man a holistic idea of ​​the cultural space in which he will have to live and act.

The main thing today is to teach a person to think independently, otherwise, as Albert Schweitzer wrote, he “loses confidence in himself due to the pressure that the monstrous knowledge that is growing every day puts on him. Being unable to assimilate the information that has fallen upon him, he is tempted to admit that his ability to judge in matters of thought is insufficient.”

IN modern conditions It is necessary for a person to understand the world as a whole and be ready to perceive the new things that he will need in his activities. And no one knows what exactly he will need tomorrow, in ten, twenty, forty years. The conditions and technological basis of our lives are changing so rapidly that it is almost impossible to predict the specific professional needs of future specialists. This means that it is necessary to teach, first of all, the basics, to teach in such a way that the future specialist sees the logic of the development of various disciplines and the place of his knowledge in their general flow. A future specialist is a person who is able to live not only for today, but to think about the future in the interests of society as a whole.

Harmonization of education is a multifaceted problem. It includes issues of the relationship between mental and physical work of schoolchildren, knowledge and cognition, the problem of student health, etc. Today there is a lot of talk about the need to preserve the best of Soviet education. However, there were also shortcomings, which the prominent Soviet philosopher E.V. wrote about. Ilyenkov. It is clear that today encyclopedic education, that is, multi-knowledge, is impossible. Previously, knowledge grew old every 20-30 years, now it is updated annually by 15%, which means: what you learned today will no longer be very relevant in 6 years. The volume of information is constantly increasing. “To know a lot,” wrote E.V. Ilyenkov, is not quite the same thing as being able to think. “Much knowledge does not teach intelligence,” Heraclitus warned at the dawn of philosophy. And, of course, he was absolutely right."

Subjected to deep analysis by E.V. Ilyenkov’s notorious “principle of visual learning.” Recognizing that it is useful as a “principle that facilitates the assimilation of abstract formulas,” it is useless in the fight against verbalism,” because the student is not dealing with a real object, but with its image, created independently of the student’s activities by an artist or teacher. As a result, there is a divergence of knowledge and beliefs, an inability to apply the knowledge acquired at school in practice and actually think independently. “Real thinking is formulated in real life and precisely there - and only there - where the work of the tongue is inextricably linked with the work of the hand - the organ of direct objective activity." Learning mainly develops a person's memory, while education develops the mind.

I. Kant wrote that “the teaching mechanism, constantly forcing the student to imitate, undoubtedly has a harmful effect on the awakening of genius.” There are three types of educational technology: propaedeutics, training and immersion in practice. In fact, today in our school education has replaced propaedeutics, immersion in practice, and even education itself. A huge amount of knowledge is taught in kindergartens and schools. The reason is that educational programs and textbooks are prepared by specialized specialists who have an excellent command of their subject and have been studying it for decades, but who forget that a child needs to study many subjects in a short time.

Education can only be achieved through the internal development of the individual. You can force children to memorize names and words, formulas and paragraphs, even entire textbooks, which is actually done every day in thousands of “educational institutions” in the world, but the result is not education, but learning. Education is the fruit of freedom, not coercion. The inner nature of a person can be excited and irritated, but not forced. Of course, this does not mean that the teacher should not interfere in the moral and mental education of the student. But with coercion you can achieve a certain training, with a stick - memorization, but education blooms only on the soil of freedom.

The International Academy for the Humanization of Education believes that today there is a need for a transition from knowledge to cognition. Knowledge is unconsciously and indifferently absorbed by a person due to the very structure of his body, which is capable of perceiving impressions from the outside world. Cognition is the desire to understand what is already known as knowledge.

A modern school produces a person with knowledge (rational). He is eloquent, even eloquent, he always tries to amaze with quotes from various authors, the opinions of all kinds of authorities and scientists, in a dispute he defends himself only with them, it’s as if he doesn’t have his own opinions and especially abstract concepts at all. He willingly collects material and is able to classify it according to external features, but is not able to notice the typicality of certain phenomena and characterize them according to the main idea. He can be a good performer and referent, accurately conveying the main ideas without any change or criticism. It is unable to apply to individual phenomena and necessarily strives to apply a template. He is a methodologist and taxonomist. All his actions are always confident, he knows everything, he does not allow doubts. He acts based on knowledge of his responsibilities. All his movements and positions are adopted (or copied) and with them he tries to show his position, the degree of his importance in society.

It is necessary to release a person with understanding (reasonable). He, on the contrary, pays little attention to the external form of his speech; he proves and convinces with logical analysis based on his own mental analysis, and not on the basis of images or developed thoughts alone. His knowledge is acquired in the form of concepts, so he is always able to individualize a phenomenon, i.e., by defining it general meaning and meaning, sharply outline its features and deviations from the main type and focus on them in your reasoning and actions. In all his actions he is distinguished by independence and is always rich in creative power and initiative. He can be either a dreamer and idealist, or an extremely fruitful practical worker, always distinguished by the richness of his thoughts and ideas. He usually acts on the basis of an understanding of his responsibilities. His appearance is simple, he has nothing pretentious or biased. He firmly adheres to the principles and ideals he developed and is always distinguished by his philosophical direction. He is very careful in all his conclusions and conclusions and is always ready to subject them to new tests. His method always expresses his personal peculiarity and he modifies it, depending on the conditions under which he has to act, so his activity is always alive.

Innovative activities in modern education should be aimed at: 1) developing students' observation skills; 2) the content of teaching the subjects studied must be interconnected; 3) do not clutter students’ memory a large number terms, but to learn to think independently; 4) in natural science subjects, focus on the philosophy of the development of science and the life of scientists; 5) to form in students a worldview that meets the needs of global development.

Civic education of students and the philosophy of constructivism in education

Civic education in the context of the ideas of humanitarian philosophy of education is considered as a process of interaction (dialogue) between a student and a teacher with the goal of mastering the values ​​shared by society and (or) producing personal meanings regarding the principles of the relationship between the individual and society. This material examines the possibilities of constructivist-oriented socio-humanitarian knowledge in the study of problems of civic education of youth in the modern globalizing world.

In modern pedagogical science, the entire diversity of educational concepts is integrated within the framework of two paradigms - object (traditional) and subjective (non-traditional), focusing on the free self-development of the individual, his self-government. Having enriched the methods of traditional pedagogy with the methodology of socio-humanitarian knowledge, the philosophy of education of the twentieth century simultaneously outlined the boundaries and possibilities of pedagogy as a science in the development of personality.

It was found that if subject-subject interaction is necessary for the development of personality, then science ends there, giving way to pedagogical art. This in no way denies the achievements of pedagogy and other social and human sciences in the study of problems of subject-subject interaction in education.

All of the above is of direct importance in developing a methodology for studying the problems of civic education in the conditions of modern higher education. The pedagogical problem of civic education is based on the socio-philosophical problem of the interaction of personal and general meanings in social space. Therefore, we study this problem in two aspects - sociological and pedagogical.

What are the possibilities of modern socio-humanitarian science in studying the problem of civic education? In our opinion, the methodology of constructivism, which is widely used today in the field of social and humanitarian knowledge, has significant potential in this regard. Constructivism in the narrow sense of the word - as a methodological approach to research - is represented in the constructivist genetic psychology of J. Piaget, the theory of personal constructs of J. Kelly, the constructivist sociology of P. Berger and T. Luckmann, and the phenomenological sociology of A. Schutz. At the same time, a distinction is made between moderate constructivism (or constructive realism) and radical epistemological constructivism.

The basis of moderate constructivism is the idea of ​​the active role of the subject of knowledge, characteristic of classical rationalism, the articulation of the creative functions of the mind on the basis of intellectual intuition, innate ideas, mathematical formalisms, and later - the social constructive role of language and sign-symbolic means; it is compatible with scientific realism, since it does not encroach on the ontological reality of the object of knowledge. In general, many researchers believe that constructive realism is nothing more than a modern version of the activity approach, in particular, in the cultural-historical version of psychology by L.S. Vygotsky.

Radical constructivism represents the evolution of the constructivist attitude within the framework of non-classical science, when the object of knowledge is denied ontological reality, it is considered a purely mental construction created from the resources of language, patterns of perception, norms and conventions of the scientific community. Social constructionism, as radical constructivism in the field of social cognition, arose within the framework of social psychology in the 70s (K. Gergen, R. Harré) and developed into a sociological direction, since it reduces psychological reality (consciousness, self) to social relations.

The merit of constructivism is the emphasis of the researcher on such a person’s ability as the constant and active creation of social reality and himself, the dissolution of the subject’s self in the world around him, in activities, in the communication networks that he creates, and which create, create him.

For the sociological study of problems of education (training and upbringing), it is important that the methodology of constructivism provides for: firstly, consideration of social reality as a semantic structure that sets the subject a system of meanings shared by society; secondly, accordingly, knowledge of the so-understood social world as a study of the process of origin and functioning of social meanings; therefore, phenomenological constructivism of social cognition is second-order constructivism; scientific constructs are “built on” above the constructs of everyday consciousness.

In this regard, we believe that the research program called “psychosemantics” is productive. This research program went beyond psychology; in particular, it is used in: studying such processes as the dynamics of political mentality in modern history, when describing the semantic spaces of political parties, when analyzing people’s ideas about power, about economic and social reforms, as well as ethnic stereotypes, studying the effects of communicative influence, considering the impact of works of art on the transformation of the viewer’s world view. Psychosemantic analysis is based on the principles of constructivist psychology by J. Kelly and involves the following procedures: 1) psychosemantic spaces are constructed, serving as operational models of an individual or public consciousness; 2) the respondent evaluates something, sorts it, makes private judgments, as a result of which a certain database (matrix) is obtained, where the structure of categories of the respondent’s consciousness is at the basis of many private judgments; 3) the structure of the categories of consciousness of the respondent is explicated using the methods of mathematics; as a result of mathematical processing, a geometric representation of the results is created, namely, spaces of different dimensions, where each of the axes of space fixes a certain basis of the category, and coordinate points set the personal meanings of the subject; 4) then follows the interpretation of the constructed semantic space: using individual recognizable components, the researcher completes the picture of the other’s world with the help of his psyche - there is no rigid measurement here, but there is an empathic understanding.

It should be noted that in our study of the problem of civic education, we applied this research program to study the semantic space of sports, fixed by a set of “categories of evidence.” Thus, in the semantic space, or, in postmodern general philosophical terminology, the “symbolic universe” of modern sport, in addition to the general humanistic one, one can distinguish at least three more vectors, which are reflected to varying degrees in the legitimate language - ideology - of sports: political (patriotism, national pride, peaceful rivalry), social (hobbies, leisure, health, recreation, spectacle, profession), commercial (profit, advertising, royalties). We analyzed to what extent the concepts of the symbolic universe of modern sports, in the unity of all its component vectors, are shared by our sports youth? The results of this study were published in the article [1].

For pedagogical research and design of educational content and technologies, it is important that if social reality is the result of individual or joint construction, then the student (pupil, student) has the right to build his knowledge and his educational content. Thus, constructivist methodology contributes to the concretization and technologization of the ideas of the humanitarian philosophy of education about the student’s right to subjectivity - to choose values ​​and build own meanings. This principle, in our opinion, should be guided by a teacher of socio-humanitarian disciplines.

modern society education philosophy

Literature

1.Buiko, T.N. Humanistic vector of modern sports through the eyes of students of a physical education university // World of Sports. - 2008. - No. 4.

2.Dmitriev, G.D. Constructivist discourse in the theory of educational content in the USA // Pedagogy. 2008. - No. 3

Tutoring

Need help studying a topic?

Our specialists will advise or provide tutoring services on topics that interest you.
Submit your application indicating the topic right now to find out about the possibility of obtaining a consultation.

"Knowledge Society". Philosophy of Education. Innovative aspects in the development of education.

INTRODUCTION

"Knowledge Society", " post-industrial society“,” “technocratic society” are popular terms in the media and literature on various topics, from scientific to popular. It's nice to think that we live in some special time, different from previous periods of history. In addition, the topic of preparing a person for the challenges and tasks of functioning in special times, which education solves or is trying to solve, is interesting.

The author's field of scientific interests is related to the development of a system for assessing production personnel in relation to the competency-based modular approach to teaching and assessment in educational institutions. In this regard, the study of a general philosophical approach to the problem of education is of particular importance.

There is no person who, as a subject, object or critic, would not be interested in the topic of education. This determines the relevance of the topic of the essay – “Knowledge Society”. Philosophy of Education. Innovative aspects in the development of education."

The purpose of this work is to study the history, diversity of approaches and the current state of philosophy of education, innovation and continuity.

The objectives are:

1) description of the history of the emergence and development of the philosophy of education;

2) identifying methodological problems in the philosophy of education, their influence on the formation of the goals and objectives of the education system;

3) identifying the connection between the philosophy of education and pedagogy;

4) study of the current situation, problems and prospects of the modern education system in Russia.

CHAPTER I: The concept of “knowledge society”, terminological aspect.

The modern era of human development is perceived as unique. Never before has time seemed so fast. Changes in the social structure, the functioning of social institutions, social stratification, scientific knowledge, and understanding of the very essence of society that occurred in the second half of the 20th and early 21st centuries give reason to truly consider our time special.

Revolutions: scientific, technical and social have changed the world on two sides: on the one hand, making it more comfortable and safer. A person can live longer and be less dependent on the influence of the natural environment and social disasters. On the other hand, the understanding of statuses, roles, and interactions between groups of people, layers and categories of the population has changed. What the residents different countries achieved the abolition of slavery, equality, at least formal, of men and women, representatives of different races, religions and nationalities, speaks of the mutual influence of science and civilization in these processes.

Of course, the approach to achieving knowledge and the capabilities of different people in this regard have changed.

“Considering the “knowledge-based society” as a new sociocultural and civilizational phenomenon reveals the complexity of conceptualizing its initial settings. The reason is the ambiguity of the meaning-forming concept of “knowledge” for this phenomenon. Knowledge is an attribute of homo sapiens. The development of man and the growth of the amount of knowledge he acquires to adapt to the world and to increasingly adapt the world to his own needs are inextricably linked. And since historically human needs have systematically grown, the amount of knowledge necessary for self-realization and satisfaction of these needs has also steadily increased. Naturally, the content of the concept of “knowledge” also changed, which began to cover not only specialized information in the form of concepts and judgments, but also the results of practical experience, traditions, rules, etc.”

The complexity of the issue lies not only in maintaining historical justice and rejecting political bias, but also in correctly identifying signs of change and the criteria for assessing them as unique.

This term has been confirmed in the program documents of UNESCO and the World Bank. This not only adds social significance to it thanks to the work of world experts, but also opens up a large number of questions, primarily of an ontological nature.

The term “knowledge” has been interpreted differently in different eras.

In the pre-literate era, knowledge was secret, revealing the secrets of communication with higher powers. Hence its special character and special attitude towards its bearers. The invention of writing as a tool and product of knowledge is one of the most important stages in the development of humanity as a species. An example that deserves special attention here is Chinese characters. Appearing in an uncertain antiquity and forming into a common sign system in the 8th-7th centuries BC. hieroglyphs denoted a concept, not a sound. Therefore, they could be used by speakers of different dialects and phonetic forms. This feature of hieroglyphs made them not only a tool for transmitting information, but also a way of cultural interaction and maintaining stability. The languages ​​of the ruling dynasties changed, but the cultural code preserved in such writing was accessible and enriched by subsequent generations.

“In this position one can see an analogy with the teachings of Socrates, who considered self-knowledge to be the most important task. It is noteworthy that already in Antiquity there was another interpretation: knowledge as a tool for successful activity. A supporter of this point of view was Protagoras, who understood knowledge as logic, grammar and rhetoric - branches of knowledge necessary for general culture and based on broad education. At the same time, efficiency and usefulness are attributed not to science at all, but to techne, that is, ability, skills. Thus, techne as skill and knowledge as comprehension of the world were already different then, since the latter was not

associated with the ability to act. It is characteristic that both Socrates and Protagoras, who paid tribute to techne, did not consider it knowledge. As a skill or skill, techne could not become the basis for the development of general principles, but only indicated a certain order of actions necessary in specific cases. Techne is characterized by an inextricable connection with its specific bearer, a master, whose skills and techniques can only be adopted by going through a long period of apprenticeship under his supervision.

The classical ideas of Plato and Aristotle determined the conceptual framework of the semantic spectrum of the concept of “knowledge” in the European philosophical thought of the “Axial Age”.

In the era of Plato and Aristotle, knowledge was not opposed

virtue, but was considered in unity with it.”

The invention of printing was significant in its essence: knowledge became as accessible as resources were available. It was no longer thought and status, but money that determined whether a person would be literate, comprehend the true teaching, or make his own contribution to science. The rejection of the sacredness of knowledge in a growing and richer Europe led to an explosion of scientific and social innovations. And as a result, the opinion has taken root that only a lack of knowledge prevents humanity from being happy and prosperous. The learned monk was replaced first by an alchemist, and then by a secular thinker: philosopher, physicist and engineer.

However, the connection with mystery, religious or otherwise, lost at this time, led to the loss of the very meaning of ancient knowledge - as a virtue more than a set of facts and theories. Knowledge became dictionary; it is no coincidence that the main work of the Enlightenment was the Encyclopedia.

In the 19th century, humanity faced a “dictatorship of laboratories.” The philosophy was declared unmodern: it was not capable of creating machines capable of moving or killing. However, already in Mary Shelley’s novel “Frankenstein” the problem of the limit and ethics of knowledge and its connection with virtue was realized. Using the example of a scientist who received opportunities, but not morality, it becomes clear that being God is not the same as turning on an electrical device that produces light.

Thus, in the dispute between physics and philosophy, it became clear that philosophy is something more than science.

The 20th century brought new advances in technology and immediately - disappointment and fear. Most of the members of the Manhattan Group besieged the governments of countries with letters about the inadmissibility of using their invention - the atomic bomb. The achievements of cloning led to an almost simultaneous ban on human cloning. This has created legal and ethical – as yet unresolvable – problems.

According to Umberto Eco, “humanity has not yet recovered”: the growth of opportunities significantly outstrips moral development.

Knowledge is both vocabulary and wisdom. Skill and virtue. The ability to act and the power to refuse it.

Modern features of society fit into various names of the time period:

- “knowledge society” (P. Drucker, N. Shter);

- “risk society” (N. Luhmann, W. Beck);

Post-industrial society (D. Bell, E. Toffler);

Information Society (D. Bell);

Network Society (M. Castells);

Society as a communication system (N. Luhmann);

Postmodern culture (P. Kozlowski).

General features of such a society:

Availability of information both in a systematic form and in the form of any stream;

Easier access to various forms of education;

Identifying the method of transmitting the information itself with its content;

The problem of excess information;

The problem of uncritical perception of information;

Actually network social institutions (blogs, social media, network approval, voting or bullying, online trading, dating and communication, remote financing, etc.)

In a sense, the Internet is the modern agora of the “golden age”, where everyone is free and equal, can speak out and gain power and influence.

But just like in ancient times, man does not solve the main problems:

Education has become more accessible. But perception is not. A person is not able to biologically assimilate more bits of information, perceive it critically and use it in his activities. It becomes practically unimportant where a person read the information from: from a book or from a liquid crystal screen. And most importantly, the availability of knowledge has not led to progress of humanity itself. A blog entry, just like a read book, is a sign, a pointer, a call. But whether a person will follow him is unknown.

The Internet, having made communication accessible, did not make a person a citizen of the world. Of course, it has become easier to find a hotel in an exotic country, a husband abroad, or a rare book. However, a significant problem is “loneliness in the city.” Network interaction is perceived as more lightweight, seemingly simpler, and therefore less valuable. If earlier Mrs. Prostakova, despised by Fonvizin and any schoolchild, relied on cab drivers who compensate for ignorance of geography, now we, considering ourselves not stupid, use navigators and electronic guides, believing that time should be spent on something more important than memorizing facts. What do we spend it on? Excess time and additional opportunities do not lead to the growth of a person as a thinking and spiritual being.

The knowledge society does not solve the problems posed by the Age of Enlightenment, but only intensifies and actualizes them, without finding solutions.

CHAPTER II: PHILOSOPHY OF EDUCATION: ESSENCE AND SPECIFICITY.

“Philosophy of Education (hereinafter referred to as FO) is a research area of ​​educational knowledge at its intersection with philosophy, analyzing the foundations pedagogical activity and education. Their goals and ideals, methodology of pedagogical knowledge, methods of designing and creating new educational institutions and forms... The term “FO” itself arose in the first quarter of the twentieth century. It may be recalled that the problems of education are discussed by Plato, Aristotle, Jan Amos Kamensky, Locke, and Herbart. An entire era in the development of philosophy is directly related to the ideals of enlightenment. And in the philosophy of the 19th century, the problem of human education was considered as central (for example, by Herder, Hegel, etc.). In Russia, it was also central to the pedagogical ideas of V.F. Odoevsky, A.S. Khomyakov, P.D. Yurkevich, L.N. Tolstoy. This period can be called the period of proto-philosophy of education.

In the twentieth century, many philosophers applied the principles of their philosophy to the study of education (for example, D. Dewey, M. Buber, etc.). Moreover, it should be noted that philosophy, turning to pedagogical theory and practice, was not limited to reflection on the existing education system, its goals and levels, but put forward projects for its transformation and the construction of a new education system with new ideals and goals.”

“General scheme for the periodization of the history of philosophy of education .

1. Background FO - the origin of the philosophy of education through the intellectual history of philosophical thinking about education, starting with the disclosure of the relationship of Greek philosophy with "paideia", where paideia(Greek παιδεία - “raising children”, cognate with παιδος “boy”, “teenager”) - a category of ancient Greek philosophy corresponding modern concept"education", passing through all the classical philosophical systems in their connection with educational knowledge until the beginning of the 19th century (Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Augustine, Montaigne, Locke, Rousseau, Kant, Hegel, Scheler, etc.).

2. Proto-philosophy of education(transitional stage: XIX - early XX centuries) - the emergence of some prerequisites for FO in systems general philosophy, which coincides with the isolation of education, the growth and differentiation of educational knowledge (J. Dewey, I. F. Herbart, G. Spencer, M. Buber, etc.)

3. Formation of the Federal District(mid-20th century) - education acts as an autonomous sphere, educational knowledge distances itself from speculative philosophy, at the junction between them the formation of philosophy specializing in the study of educational knowledge and values ​​occurs, i.e. philosophy of education.

By the middle of the 20th century, philosophies were becoming isolated from general philosophy; it was taking on an institutional form (associations and unions of philosophers were created in the USA, and then in Europe, dealing with problems of upbringing and education, and teachers turning to philosophy).

The creation in the mid-40s of the Society for Philosophy of Education in the USA, and after the war - in European countries, the publication of specialized journals, textbooks and reference publications on the philosophy of education (for example, Philosophy on Education. Encyclopedia. New York, 1997), organization in In the 70s, specialized departments in physical education, etc. – all this meant the creation of social and cultural conditions for the formation of a scientific-educational philosophical community and the identification of current problematic situations in the education system.

Consequently, FE has become one of the generally recognized research areas in European countries - Great Britain, France, Germany, both on the part of philosophers and on the part of educators with the aim of creating interdisciplinary research programs in accordance with numerous aspects of education that could provide answers to the challenges of modern human civilization. These research programs made it possible to formulate national educational programs and strategies in the context of universal values ​​and educational ideals: tolerance, mutual respect in dialogue, openness of communication, personal responsibility, formation and development of a person’s spiritual, social and professional image.”

A slightly different version of periodicals, taking into account connections with in-depth studies of man and various aspects of his existence, is given by A.P. Ogurtsov and V.V. Platonov:

“The historical explanation of the social and spiritual foundations of FO is complicated by the fact that the history of this philosophy has not yet been written in any holistic form, allowing a clear and concise representation of the main shifts in its content and, accordingly, periods of development.

...We can formulate a general scheme for the periodization of the history of the Federal District:

1. Background of the Federal District. She. Certainly. It is understood differently and dated differently…. Starting with the disclosure of the relationship of Greek philosophy with "paideia", passing through the entire sequence of classical philosophical systems in their connections with educational knowledge until the beginning of the 19th century.

2. Transitional stage (proto-philosophy of education): XIX-early XX centuries. The emergence of some prerequisites for FO in systems of general philosophy. At the beginning of the twentieth century, FE appears in the form of “journalistic” branches of philosophical systems (like the concept of Bergson or Dewey), fruitful for educational thought. FE is also an academic discipline taught by philosophers who often do not know pedagogy, or by teachers who often do not know philosophy. This is not a specialized financial institution. However, this approach continues in many educational institutions to this day, in particular in Russia.

3. Becoming. Mid-twentieth century: education acts as an autonomous sphere, educational knowledge distances itself from speculative philosophy…. In Europe, these prerequisites are presented in Fichte, Natorp, Spencer, Russell, and Whitehead. Dilthey, Dewey... The development of the basic ideas of FO does not contradict new anthropological data: “it is not the case that philosophical reflection provides foundations. Which will determine educational research, but, rather, on the contrary: all new empirical data about a specific educational life, all new measurements with the changing spiritual and social conditions of a certain time require all new, modified reflection, which is then back illuminated by special research. …. Purely positivist pedagogy, divorced from philosophy, will not achieve its own goals.”

The current state of FO is due to its connection with its foremother, philosophy. Philosophy, like the Colossus of Rhodes, stands on two banks at once:

“Problem nodes for all types of philosophical dialogue exist primarily where other spheres of spiritual culture mutually intersect with philosophy. Where different philosophical directions come into contact, where philosophy addresses social reality..... .

1) Philosophy and Social sciencies conduct a continuous dialogue. ... Overcoming confrontation, both philosophy and special sciences receive new impulses for mutual development.

2) The dialogue (even polylogue) between all kinds of philosophical trends and concepts does not subside.

3) A unique dialogue exists between philosophy and the social needs of society.”

There are two main, at first glance, contradictory directions of FO:

1) Empirical-analytical direction. FO, based on Gestalt psychology, transforms and comes closer to postmodernism. “A fairly clear form of the empiric-rationalistic approach is the critical-analytical FO, focused on the philosophy of science of K. Popper, which is also linguistic. (Analysis of language based on logic). Its goal is to identify various forms of educational knowledge with the help of language (I. Scheffler, R. Peters). Within the framework of this direction, critical-rationalistic FO is actively developing (V. Bretsinka, G. Tsdarcil, F. Kube, K. Klauer, R. Lochner, L. Rössner). It views itself as a methodological justification for “experimental scientific pedagogy.” This scientific part is isolated from scientific teachings in general, and humanitarian concepts related to values ​​in general.”

This direction, presented with expedient simplicity and at the same time strict requirements for methodological logic, is an attempt to “test harmony with algebra,” however, not only from the position of craft and skill, but also a conceptual approach to the formation of a person in a new society.

2) Humanitarian direction of the Federal District represented by the works of A. Bergson and D. Dewey (at an early stage).

More recent developments include hermeneutics (G. Noll, E. Weniger, V. Flitner), the existential-dialogical approach (M. Buber), and educational anthropology in the classical version (I. Derbolov, O. Bolnov, G. Roto, M. .Lavenfeld. P. Kern, G. Wittig, E. Meinberg), postmodern philosophy of education (D. Lenzen, W. Fischer, K. Wünsche, G. Gieseke, S. Aronowitz, W. Doll).

In the history of the development of the two directions, one can observe their mutual complement and mutual influence.

During the period of formation, each concept is dominated by a tendency towards self-affirmation and isolation from other theories.

Since the mid-60s, it has been discovered that concepts have emerged that cannot be reduced. Accordingly, trends in constructing constructive systems emerge, with the focus being on the task of balancing the empirical-analytical and humanitarian approaches.

Since the beginning of the 80s. criticism of the above systems is developed from the position of postmodernism.

In the second half of the 90s, an alternative was put forward - reconstruction.

One of these areas was the pedagogical anthropology of the late period. It acted as an alternative to totalitarian education and pedagogical thinking. Pedagogical anthropology is aimed at synthesizing options within the humanitarian approach and, further, this entire approach with the empirical-analytical one. The synthesis of these parts involves the construction of an image (model) of a person in the educational space.

Critical-emancipatory FO strives for a synthesis of approaches, and gravitates towards the empirical-analytical, especially with an orientation towards sociological and political science issues. ...sociological interest determines educational and scientific interest: education of subjects of social emancipation capable of communicative action.

CHAPTERIII: A modern approach to building an education system in Russia based on a philosophical understanding of knowledge.

« The idea of ​​a humanitarian orientation of knowledge in the context of global problems and the survival of mankind requires its implementation in the fundamentalization of education, in its non-classical form based on humanistic principles and a universal scientific picture of the world.

When considering such a problem as the humanitarization of education, it is necessary to understand its synthetic nature - the unity of general cultural and professional training aimed at ensuring the comprehensive harmonious development of a person. During a period of increased information flow, maintaining mental health requires the ability to highlight the main thing and limit this flow, guided by the principle of selectivity. Ability to navigate information, use educational and additional material allows you to maintain the integrity of your worldview and increases the student’s creative potential.”

The modern economic and social system places increased demands on the content and methods of education, including in Russia.

Taking into account the requirements of orientation towards the basic principles of organizing a single European educational space within the framework of the Bologna and Copenhagen processes, a competency-based modular approach was adopted as the basis for the reform of the vocational education system. The actual set of knowledge is replaced by the ability to solve professional problems in relation to a specific specialty.

The normative transition to competency-based education in Russia was enshrined in 2001 in the Concept of Modernization of Russian Education for the Period until 2010 and the Priority Directions for the Development of the Educational System of the Russian Federation (2005).

It is assumed that the employer evaluates the competencies of specialists when hiring by studying certificates of completion of professional modules and the “portfolio” of yesterday’s student, containing information about academic work, completed projects and participation in extracurricular activities, and can draw a conclusion about the professional attractiveness of a particular candidate . The advantage of this innovation is the flexibility of the content of professional modules, especially in the area of ​​the variable part, and the possibility of annual correction of educational and practical work taking into account the requirements of the employer-customer.

On this moment Professional standards for working specialties have been developed, taking into account not only the complexity of the work, but also the responsibility factor, safety requirements, place in the production cycle of the enterprise, the degree of independence of the work itself and decision-making. These standards are used both in the conditions of the initial assessment and in the process of assigning ranks, increasing coefficients and labor participation coefficients in the organization of team work, certification requirements and determination of professional compliance.

In contrast to the Western approach, the Russian education system assumes an orientation towards collectivist consciousness, traditionally developed in a communal society. Another important feature of the Russian education system is taking into account traditional Russian messianism - the desire to enlighten and correct the very nature of the student.

Borrowing Western practices can become an additional impetus in the development of the Russian education system. Without pretending to generalize, I will give an example of a project work methodology that definitely and purposefully influences the implementation of a practice-oriented approach.

Back in 1981, the International Congress on Science and Technology Education was convened. Its goal is to develop a research agenda and terminology on the topic of Science and Technology Education. “First of all, attention is drawn to the changed objectives of the study. If in the 60s the research field ... was focused on the need to develop a national cadre of technicians and engineers, then in the 80s the emphasis changed - the focus was on continuity of education, the orientation of students towards success in technology and science and attitudes towards science.”

From the perspective of the tasks of the Russian education system described in the development program until 2010, these approaches have been embodied and continue to be developed in the regulatory documents of the Ministry of Education of the Russian Federation. The normative transition to competency-based education in Russia was enshrined in 2001 in the Concept of Modernization of Russian Education for the Period until 2010 and the Priority Directions for the Development of the Educational System of the Russian Federation (2005).

The basis of the approach is the creation of professional modules for each specialty while agreeing on the requirements for graduates with the employer on such positions as learning objectives, selection and structuring of educational content, organization of the educational process, monitoring and evaluation of results.

Since May 2014, a bill on the mandatory consideration of professional standards in the assessment of personnel of state-owned enterprises has been under consideration. However, the private sector still poorly aligns its requirements for graduates with the content of professional modules; this is difficult and unprofitable for small and even medium-sized businesses.

The purpose of education is not only to transfer to the student a body of knowledge, skills and abilities in a certain field, but also to develop an outlook, interdisciplinary flair, the ability for individual creative solutions, self-learning, as well as the formation of humanistic values. All this constitutes the specificity of the competency-based approach. Its implementation involves a shift in emphasis to the developmental functions of education, to the development of the future specialist’s personality in the process of learning, his harmonious spiritual and moral development, high psychological stability and readiness for useful work.

Thus, personnel training takes place in the conditions and in accordance with the accepted sustainable values ​​of the “knowledge society”. These conditions are variability at the level of technology, availability of information, wide opportunities for the dissemination of ideas, and the value of information as the main economic product. The project activities of educational institutions, along with classical training, return us spirally and dialectically to the position of classical knowledge - as wisdom, potential and skill.

CONCLUSION

This paper examined the concepts of “knowledge society,” knowledge as such, and philosophy of education. A comparative analysis was made of various directions in the philosophy of education, the history of their emergence, the influence of various philosophical teachings on the philosophy of education; their common features from the point of view of the object and methods are noted, trends towards integration and mutual enrichment are indicated while maintaining the uniqueness of the approach.

The result of working with sources in preparing the abstract was an understanding of the special function of the philosophy of education as a set of methodological approaches and an ontological approach to the problems of educational activity within the framework of modern civilization.

In the third part of the work, the Russian and Western approaches to educational activities were correlated from the position of the integrating influence of adopted international acts, the Westernization of the Russian system under the conditions of an adequate response to unique cultural characteristics.

It becomes obvious that the philosophy of education is a young and dynamically developing direction of philosophy, which has great potential in a rapidly changing reality.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1) A.P.Ogurtsov, V.V.Platonov. Images of education. Western philosophy of education. XX century. Publishing house of the Russian Christian Humanitarian Institute, St. Petersburg, 2004.

2) Shitov S. B. “Philosophy of Education.” Course of lectures RGTU STANKIN, 2011.

3) A.E. Voskoboynikov Health and education in the conditions of modernization. Materials of the round table “Problems of modernization of Russia in the conditions of entry into the information society.” IX International Scientific Conference « Higher education for the 21st century." November 15-17, 2012

4) K.H. Delokarov “Is a “knowledge-based society” a new type of society?” The concept of a “knowledge society” in modern

social theory: Sat. scientific tr. / RAS. INION.

Social Center scientific information research Dept. sociology and A.P. Ogurtsov, V.V. Platonov. Images of education. Western philosophy of education. XX century. Publishing house of the Russian Christian Humanitarian Institute, St. Petersburg, 2004.

A.E. Voskoboynikov Health and education in the conditions of modernization. Materials of the round table “Problems of modernization of Russia in the conditions of entry into the information society.” IX International Scientific Conference “Higher Education for the 21st Century”. November 15-17, 2012

A.P. Ogurtsov, V.V. Platonov. Images of education. Western philosophy of education. XX century. Publishing house of the Russian Christian Humanitarian Institute, St. Petersburg, 2004. Page 502

Lecture 1, 2. Subject

philosophy of education.

Philosophy of education (PE) is a field of study of goals and value foundations.

concepts of education, principles of formation of its content and orientation, and scientific

a direction that studies the most general and significant patterns and dependencies of modern educational processes in the historical and social context.

Features of FO as a research area:

separation of education into the autonomous sphere of civil society;

diversification and complexity of educational institutions;

modification of education (from school to universities);

multi-paradigmality of pedagogical knowledge (diversity in interpretation of the goals and ideals of education);

transformation of non-institutional education (for example, a continuing education program);

the emergence of new requirements for the education system associated with the transition from an industrial to an information society.

The philosophy of education as a scientific direction defines:

searching for a new way of thinking when solving educational problems;

the need for philosophical understanding of educational problems;

the need to understand the sphere of education as pedagogical and social systems;

awareness of education as a social and cultural-historical system;

research into the social need for lifelong education.

In general, the purpose of studying the philosophy of education is to understand the problems of education.

The term “philosophy of education” arose in the first quarter of the 20th century, and the formation of philosophy of education as an independent discipline occurred in the second half of the 20th century.

The philosophy of education owes its origin to the continuous interaction of various philosophical movements with the education system and the educational experience of generations.

Philosophy of education explores educational knowledge at its intersection with philosophy, analyzes the foundations of pedagogical activity and education, their goals and ideals, the methodology of pedagogical knowledge, the creation of new educational institutions and systems. The philosophy of education considers human development and the education system in an indissoluble unity.

In turn, education is the process of formation and continuous development of personal and personal-professional qualities of a person. Education is the result of the processes of training and education, i.e. pedagogy.

Education refers to the purposeful creation of conditions for the development, training and education of a person, and training refers to the process of mastering knowledge, abilities, skills, etc.

Educational activity is associated with the development and use of sociocultural methods of changing and transforming reality developed in the historical development, fixed in certain settings, norms, programs that set a certain concept of this activity. Hence, the most important function of educational activity becomes the function of social inheritance through the processes of education and training. Consequently, a person’s education is the result of his social reproduction.

The social function of education is to form social relations between social groups and individuals. The social function of education can be considered in a broad aspect: global, universal and more narrow, for example, within the framework of a particular social community. With the help of education, elements of socialization of a universal human nature are realized, human culture and civilization are formed and developed, which is manifested in the functioning of various social communities and social institutions.

The spiritual and worldview function of education acts in the process of socialization as an instrument for the formation of an individual’s worldview, which is always based on certain beliefs. Beliefs form social needs and interests, which, in turn, themselves have a decisive influence on the beliefs, motivation, attitudes and behavior of the individual. Being the essence of personal self-expression, beliefs and social needs determine it value orientations. Consequently, through the spiritual and worldview function of education, the individual masters universal human and moral-legal norms and rules.

General scheme of periodization of the history of philosophy of education.

1. Prehistory of FO - the origin of the philosophy of education through the intellectual history of philosophical thinking about education, starting with the disclosure of the relationship of Greek philosophy with “paideia”, where paideia (Greek - “raising children”, one root word with “boy”, “teenager” ) - a category of ancient Greek philosophy corresponding to the modern concept of “education”, passing through all classical philosophical systems in their connection with educational knowledge until the beginning of the 19th century (Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Augustine, Montaigne, Locke, Rousseau, Kant, Hegel, Scheler and others).

2. Proto-philosophy of education (transitional stage: XIX - early XX centuries) - the emergence of some prerequisites for FE in systems of general philosophy, which coincides with the isolation of education, the growth and differentiation of educational knowledge (J. Dewey, I.F.

Herbart, G. Spencer, M. Buber, etc.) 3. Formation of FE (mid-20th century) - education acts as an autonomous sphere, educational knowledge distances itself from speculative philosophy, at the junction between them the formation of philosophy specializing in research takes place educational knowledge and values, i.e. philosophy of education.

By the middle of the 20th century, philosophic education began to separate from general philosophy; it took on an institutional form (associations and unions of philosophers were created in the USA, and then in Europe, dealing with problems of upbringing and education, and teachers turning to philosophy).

The creation in the mid-40s of the Society for the Philosophy of Education in the USA, and after the war - in European countries, the publication of specialized journals, textbooks and reference publications on the philosophy of education (for example, Philosophy on Education.

Encyclopedia. New York, 1997), organization in the 70s of specialized departments in physical education, etc. – all this meant the creation of social and cultural conditions for the formation of a scientific and educational philosophical community and the identification of current problem situations in the education system.

Consequently, FE has become one of the generally recognized research areas in European countries - Great Britain, France, Germany, both on the part of philosophers and on the part of educators, with the aim of creating interdisciplinary research programs in accordance with numerous aspects of education that could provide answers to the challenges modern human civilization. These research programs made it possible to formulate national educational programs and strategies in the context of universal values ​​and educational ideals: tolerance, mutual respect in dialogue, openness of communication, personal responsibility, formation and development of a person’s spiritual, social and professional image.

In the process of development of the philosophy of education in the twentieth century, two groups of schools emerged:

1. Empirical-analytical philosophical directions, oriented towards science and using the ideas of positivism, focusing on identifying the structure of pedagogical knowledge, studying the status of theoretical knowledge in pedagogy, the growth of pedagogical knowledge from posing problems to putting forward theories.

2. Humanitarian directions are philosophical directions, such as: German idealism of the early 19th century, philosophy of life, existentialism and various versions of philosophical anthropology, which emphasize the specificity of the methods of pedagogy as a science of the spirit, its humanistic orientation, highlighting the method of understanding , interpretation of the meaning of the actions of participants in the educational process.

Empirical-analytical philosophical directions include:

Analytical philosophy of education (early 60s in the USA and England). The founders: I. Scheffler, R. S. Peters, E. McMillan, D. Soltis, etc. In this direction, the goal of FE is a conceptual analysis of the language used in the practice of education (identifying the content of the terms “education”, “training” , “education”, analysis of speech statements of teachers, methods of presenting pedagogical theory, etc.). The content of education is subject to the criteria of scientific verifiability.

Critical-rationalist philosophy of education (late 60s), which, accepting the basic principles of K. Popper’s critical rationalism, seeks to build an experimental-scientific pedagogy, distanced from values ​​and metaphysics that criticize naive empiricism, emphasizing that experience is not self-sufficient, that it is loaded with theoretical content, and its range is determined by theoretical positions. The direction was developed by V. Bretsinka, G. Tsdarcil, F. Kube, R. Lochner and others. Critical rationalistic FO is characterized by: criticism of the totalitarian approach in education and pedagogical thinking, the orientation of pedagogical theory and practice towards the education and formation of a critically examining mind, on the formation of a person’s critical abilities.

Humanitarian areas include:

Hermeneutics - considers pedagogy and FE as a critical interpretation of pedagogical actions and relationships within the pedagogical process, analyzes the structure of the theory, identifying its various levels (G. Nohl, E. Weniger, V. Flitner).

Existential-dialogical philosophy of education (mid-60s), based primarily on central idea philosophy of M. Buber - the fundamental situation of coexistence of the Self with another person, existence as a “co-existence” with other people. The meaning and basis of the pedagogical attitude lies in interpersonal connections, in the relationship between I and You, and dialogue is presented as a fundamental principle of upbringing and education.

Pedagogical anthropology represented by I. Derbolav, O.F. Bolnova, G. Rota, M.I. Lan Gevelda, P. Kern, G.-H. Wittig, E. Meinberg relied on philosophical anthropology (M. Scheler, G. Plessner, A. Portman, E. Cassirer, etc.). At the heart of pedagogical anthropology is the “image of man,” built on the basis of his biological insufficiency and formation in the process of upbringing and education, an understanding of man as an integrity, where the spiritual and emotional is inextricably linked with the physical. The concept of “Homo educandus” comes to the fore.

Critical-emancipatory direction in the philosophy of education (70-80s) Representatives - A. Illich, P. Freire - considered the school the source of all social ills, since it, being a model for all social institutions, educates a conformist, is based on discipline and suppression of any creative endeavors of the child, on the pedagogy of suppression and manipulation. They proposed a project for the reorganization of education, based on professional learning in the course of interpersonal communication between a student and a teacher.

Postmodern philosophy of education was presented by D. Lenzen, W. Fischer, K. Wünsche, G. Gieseke in Germany, S. Aronowitz, W. Doll in the USA. Postmodernist philosophy of education opposes the “dictation” of theories, for pluralism, “deconstruction” of theories and pedagogical practices, and preaches the cult of personal self-expression in small groups.

IN Western philosophy In recent decades, education has developed a methodological basis that serves as the basis for the development of various models of dialogic learning that stimulate the development of rational, critical, creative thinking, which at the same time is not free from the need to search for value foundations of intellectual activity. This is due, on the one hand, to the rapid pace of scientific and technological progress, which requires polytechnically literate specialists who have communication skills and know how to work in a team, and on the other hand, to the multi-ethnicity of modern Western societies, which can successfully develop and function provided that they members are educated to recognize the equal value of all cultures.

In Russia, the problem of human education was central to the pedagogical ideas of V.F. Odoevsky, A.S. Khomyakov, P.D. Yurkevich, JL N. Tolstoy, then, from the end of the 19th century, a philosophy of education gradually began to take shape thanks to the pedagogical works of K. .D. Ushinsky and P.F. Kaptereva, V.V. Rozanov and others, then, in Soviet times, in the works of Gessen S.I., Shchedrovitsky G.P. and others, in modern Russia– in the works of B.S. Gershunsky, E.N. Gusinsky, Yu.I. Turchaninova, A.P. Ogurtsova, V.V. Platonova and others.

Historically, within the philosophical community of Russia, various positions regarding the philosophy of education have developed and exist:

1. The philosophy of education is, in principle, impossible, since it deals with issues related to pedagogy.

2. Philosophy of education is essentially the application of philosophy to pedagogy.

3. Philosophy of education exists, and it should deal with the problems of education.

Today, the philosophy of education in Russia monitors the rapidly changing systems of values ​​and goals of education, searches for ways to solve problems of education, discusses the foundations of education, which should create conditions for the development of both a person in all aspects of his life, and society in its personal dimension.

Relations between domestic and foreign federal districts.

Within the framework of the classical paradigm, philosophical understanding of the problems of education in Western culture, Russian culture of the pre-Soviet period and Soviet culture had its own specifics, due to the uniqueness of sociocultural contexts.

In Western philosophy of education, the main attention was focused on the problem of the intellectual development of the student and, accordingly, on the search for rational methods of teaching and upbringing. In Russian, due to the influence of religious ideology, weak institutionalization of science, low legal culture, strong influence of collectivist psychology, the emphasis was on moral education.

The Soviet education system, which developed under conditions of accelerated industrialization of the country, which needed intensive development of science and technology, is characterized by a rational (scientific) approach to the learning process and special attention to the problem of professional training for the national economy. But due to the dominance of the authoritarian-totalitarian ideology, which was the bond of the entire society, education (ideological, ideological and political) was built on top of education, integrating and subordinating it to its own goals.

The reasons for inattention to aesthetic education are different in each of the analyzed education systems. If in Western European philosophy of education aesthetic education did not develop due to the strengthening of rationalistic tendencies, which found expression in the priority study of the fundamentals of science, then in Russian it dissolved in moral and religious education, and in Soviet - in ideological and political education.

Today there is a lot of criticism of the foreign FO due to the fact that it promotes theories and ideas that are initially focused on the cult of individualism, ignoring the specifics of domestic moral, religious and cultural experience, the peculiarities of worldview and mentality, which leads to a worsening of the situation in the national system. education.

At the same time, it should be noted that the social modernization of Russia, its transition to information technology is impossible without reforming the educational system, and the problems of domestic education should be considered in the context of global development. In the era of computerization and the transition to a new type of society - information civilization - traditional values ​​and norms are opposed to the values ​​and norms of a modernizing society, the values ​​and norms of the emerging information society, where knowledge becomes the leading value and capital.

In FE, first of all, the essence and nature of all phenomena in the educational process are revealed:

education itself (anthology of education);

how it is carried out (logic of education) - education is a process of interaction between systems of the highest level of complexity, such as personality, culture, society;

nature and sources of education values ​​(axiology of education) - axiology of education is based on humanistic and ethical principles, and education plays a leading role in the development of the human personality;

behavior of participants in the educational process (ethics of education) - ethics of education considers patterns of behavior of all participants in the educational process;

methods and fundamentals of education (education methodology);

a set of ideas of education in a certain era (ideology of education);

education and culture (cultural studies of education) - it is understood that the progress of humanity and each individual person depends on the quality of education, methods of understanding the world and learning, as evidenced by the history and theory of culture and civilization.

Philosophy of education studies:

principles and methods of upbringing and education in various historical eras;

goals and value foundations of upbringing, training, education, ranging from ancient civilizations to the present day;

principles of formation of the content and orientation of education;

features of the development of pedagogical thought, the formation and development of pedagogy as a science.

The main functions of the philosophy of education:

1. Worldview - affirmation of the priority role of education as the most important sphere of life of any society and human civilization as a whole.

2. System-forming - organization of a system of views on the state and development of education in various historical periods.

3. Evaluative - assessment of specific historical and pedagogical phenomena.

4. Prognostic - forecasting the directions of development of education.

The following approaches are used in research in the philosophy of education:

worldview approach - allows you to approach education issues from the point of view of spiritual and social values;

cultural approach - allows us to consider the phenomenon of education as part of the culture of society;

anthropological approach - provides an opportunity for philosophical understanding of the significance of man in the world and understanding of world processes from a human point of view;

sociological approach - makes it possible to introduce sociological premises into assessing the development of the history of education;

formational approach - serves as the basis for clarifying the features of cultural development within the framework of various class and economic formations;

civilizational approach - allows you to approach issues of education and upbringing taking into account the peculiarities of the development of civilization, era, country, nation.

Philosophy of education and other sciences.

The philosophy of education promotes the unification of various areas of educational knowledge. The human sciences themselves - biological, medical, psychological and sociological - are not united into a monolithic positivist “single science” without reductionist costs. Philosophy contributes to the development of scientific hypotheses based on the experience of overcoming reductionism, and contributes to special research and pedagogical practice.

Applied aspects of philosophy of education:

formation of individual and collective mentality, education of tolerance in human relations;

harmonization of the relationship between knowledge and faith;

justification of policies and strategies for educational activities (educational lithology);

problems of educational and pedagogical prognostics - organization of systemic prognostic research and interdisciplinary prognostic monitoring in the field of education;

problems of substantiating the methodology and methodology for selecting content, methods and means of teaching, education and development of students at different levels of education;

problems of educational and pedagogical science - clarification of the real status, functions and capabilities of the entire complex of educational sciences, taking into account their interdisciplinary interaction.

The importance of FE for optimizing education reform in Russia.

The crisis of the educational system in Russia is aggravated by the crisis of the world education system, which does not respond to the challenges of our time, and is drawn into the transition to a new value system of the information civilization. If the Russian educational system does not find a way out of the crisis, then Russian culture, Russia as a civilization, may find itself on the sidelines of world development.

The Russian Federal Educational Institution must monitor and quickly respond to changing value systems and educational goals. Analyze dynamic philosophical and sociological concepts of education. Identify inconsistencies between the various components of the educational system: philosophical, pedagogical, organizational, cognitive, general cultural, social, in order to ensure the sustainability of society, its dynamic development and co-evolutionary development of all its levels.

Today in Russia we are not talking about the reproduction of a social mentality focused on stability, but about determining the type of culture and civilization that education intends to reproduce in the future, while at the same time the characteristics of an individual who is ready for self-change must be determined, his attitudes that enable the individual change yourself and the surrounding circumstances.

The transitional nature of modern Russian society stimulates the development of pluralism in all spheres of activity, including education. The main difficulty lies in the absence of a more or less common system of value guidelines that would contribute to the consolidation of society around universally significant goals.

As the economy modernizes, high technologies spread, and the value of technical education increases, the school is reoriented towards the intellectual development of students, towards the development of their critical thinking necessary for building a democratic state and civil society. Educational models are being actively implemented, built on the principles of a dialogic approach, which contributes to the establishment of mutual understanding between all participants in the educational process, as well as the development of individual communicative qualities.

Thus, the FO is searching for ways to solve educational problems, discussing the ultimate foundations of education, which should create conditions both for the development of a person in all aspects of his life, and of society in its personal dimension.

Russia's transition to a new value system of information civilization implies the development of information technology.

The development of information technology is associated with a number of processes:

1. The merger of telephone and computer systems, which leads not only to the emergence of new communication channels, but also to the intensification of information transfer.

2. Replacement of paper storage media with electronic media 3. Development of a television cable network.

4. Transformation of methods of storing information and requesting it using computers.

5. Changing the education system through computer education, use of disks and library data banks, etc.

6. Creation of an information and communication global network.

7. Diversification, miniaturization and high efficiency of new information technologies, the service sector for their use and the growth in the scale of information services.

8. Production and distribution of information independent of space, but dependent on time.

9. Interpretation of knowledge as intellectual capital, and investments in human capital and information technology become decisive and transformative for the economy and society.

10. Formation of a new system of values, political and social norms of modern society, where knowledge is the basis of culture. The main value is the value embodied in knowledge and created by knowledge.

The process of development of information technology is recorded by many scientists (Tai ichi Sakaya, T. Stewart, O. Tofler, M. Malone, D. Bell, etc.).

In developed countries, the main economic activities include the production, storage and dissemination of information. In developed societies, not only information technologies have been created, but also a knowledge industry, where education becomes the largest and most knowledge-intensive branch of industry, and knowledge is the leading value of culture.

Computerization creates new opportunities for the educational process: learning with the help of computer programs is becoming commonplace. The so-called distance education is occupying an increasingly important place in education.

Many sociologists and philosophers say that “today the center of gravity should shift to science and the development of intellectual activity and courage, thanks to which graduates will grow professionally throughout their lives” (Martin J.). " Modern society necessary new system education of a person throughout his life. With rapid changes in the information environment, people should have the opportunity to receive new education from time to time” (Stonier T.).

The relationship between educational philosophy and educational practice.

Philosophy must focus on the range of real problems posed in the sciences of its time; it must find its refraction and change in the discursive practices of other areas. Therefore, philosophy of education has become one of such research areas, which allows us to overcome the emerging and deepening gap between philosophy and pedagogical theory and practice.

The variety of forms of relationships between philosophy and educational knowledge is determined by the heterogeneity and multidisciplinary nature of pedagogical knowledge, which, in addition to the pedagogical disciplines themselves, includes:

empirical-analytical sciences - psychology, sociology, medicine, biology, etc.;

humanitarian disciplines - cultural, historical, political science, legal, aesthetic, etc.;

extra-scientific knowledge - experience and value orientations of the individual, etc.;

teaching practice;

ideas of general philosophy that are used in FO.

Thus, the creation of FO set a different strategy for research in philosophy and pedagogy: the strategy of philosophical research was supplemented with methods and techniques of pedagogical experience, the strategy of pedagogy - with “high” theoretical reflections.

Two forms of discursive practice - philosophy and pedagogy, two forms of research strategy, various research programs turned out to be complementary, and gradually a general attitude and overall strategy between philosophers and educators - a strategy for combining efforts in developing a joint field of research.

On the one hand, philosophical reflection, aimed at understanding the processes and acts of education, was replenished with theoretical and empirical experience of pedagogy, and in the course of this replenishment, both the limitations and shortcomings of a number of philosophical concepts of education were revealed. On the other hand, pedagogical discourse, which has ceased to be confined to its own field and has entered the “great open space” philosophical reflection, made the subject of his research not only specific problems of educational reality, but also the most important sociocultural problems of the time.

So, the pedagogical discourse turned out to be covered by philosophical attitudes, and philosophical discourse became less global and speculative, becoming more and more imbued with the formulation of new problems characteristic of pedagogy.

In summary, it should be noted that the main problems of the philosophy of education of the 21st century are:

1. Difficulties in defining the ideals and goals of education that meets the new requirements of scientific and technological civilization and the emerging information society;

2. Convergence between different areas in the Federal District.

3. Search for new philosophical concepts that can serve as a justification for the education system and pedagogical theory and practice.

Lecture 3, 4. The main stages of the evolution of education as a sociocultural phenomenon.

Ancient type of education: the teachings of the Sophists, Socrates, Plato, Aristotle about man.

Sophistry. The beginning of the classical period in the development of ancient Greek philosophy was marked by the transition from cosmocentrism to anthropocentrism. At this time, questions related to the essence of man come to the fore - about man’s place in the world, about his purpose. This transition is associated with the activities of the sophists - teachers of wisdom.

Initially, sophists meant philosophers who earned their livelihood teaching activities. Subsequently, this was the name given to those who in their speeches sought not to clarify the truth, but to prove a biased, sometimes deliberately false point of view.

The most famous among the sophists were Protagoras of Abdera (480-410 BC) and Gorgias (c. 480-380 BC) of Leontin.

The sophists proved their rightness with the help of sophisms - logical techniques, tricks, thanks to which a conclusion that was correct at first glance ultimately turned out to be false, and the interlocutor became confused in his own thoughts. An example is “horned” sophism:

“What you have not lost, you have;

you haven’t lost your horns, that means you have them.”

Socrates is considered the founder of pedagogy Ancient Greece. The starting point of his reasoning was the principle that he considered the first duty of the individual - “know yourself.”

Socrates believed that there are values ​​and norms that are the common good (the highest good) and justice. For him, virtue was definitely equivalent to a volume of “knowledge.” Socrates viewed knowledge as knowledge of oneself.

The main theses of Socrates:

1. “Good” is “knowledge.”

2. “Right knowledge necessarily leads to moral action.”

3. “Moral (just) actions necessarily lead to happiness.”

Socrates taught his students to conduct a dialogue, to think logically, encouraged his student to consistently develop a controversial position and led him to realize the absurdity of this initial statement, and then pushed his interlocutor to the right way and led to conclusions.

Socrates taught and considered himself a person who awakened the desire for truth. But he did not preach the truth, but sought to discuss all possible points of view, without joining any of them in advance. Socrates considered man to be born for education and understood education as the only possible path spiritual development of a person, based on his self-knowledge, based on an adequate assessment of his own capabilities.

This method of seeking truth and learning was called “Socratic” (mayevti ka). The main thing in the Socrates method is the question-and-answer system of teaching, the essence of which is teaching logical thinking.

Socrates' contribution to pedagogy is the development of the following ideas:

knowledge is acquired through conversations, reflection and classification of experience;

knowledge has moral and therefore universal significance;

The purpose of education is not so much the transfer of knowledge as the development of mental abilities.

The philosopher Plato (a student of Socrates) founded his own school, this school was called the Platonic Academy.

Plato’s pedagogical theory expressed the idea: delight and knowledge are a single whole, therefore knowledge should bring joy, and the word “school” itself translated from Latin means “leisure”, therefore it is important to make the cognitive process pleasant and useful in all respects.

According to Plato, education and society are closely related to each other and are in constant interaction. Plato was confident that education would help people improve their natural abilities.

Plato raises the question of an ideal education system, where:

education should be in the hands of the state;

education should be accessible to all children, regardless of origin and gender;

Education should be the same for all children aged 10-20 years.

Plato lists gymnastics, music and religion as the most important subjects. At the age of 20, the best are selected to continue their education, paying special attention to mathematics. Upon reaching the age of 30, selection occurs again, and those who pass continue their studies for another 5 years, with the main emphasis being on the study of philosophy.

Then they participate in practical activities for 15 years, acquiring management skills and abilities. And only at the age of 50, having received a comprehensive education and mastered practical experience, having passed a careful selection, are they allowed to govern the state. According to Plato, they became absolutely competent, virtuous and capable of governing society and the state.

Those who do not pass the first selection become artisans, farmers and merchants.

Those eliminated at the second stage of selection are managers and warriors. Those who have passed the third selection are rulers who have competence and full power.

The thinker believed that a universal system of education and upbringing would provide every person with a place in society in which he would be able to perform a social function.

Society will become fair if everyone is engaged in what he is best suited for. To a certain extent, the thought of social justice can be traced in Plato’s teachings.

Plato distinguished three levels of education:

primary level, at which everyone should receive the basics of general education;

the middle level, which provides more serious physical and intellectual training to students with strong abilities for military and civil service, and jurisprudence;

the highest level of education that continues to train highly selected groups of students who will become scientists, teachers and lawyers.

Plato’s idea is positive that the function of education is to determine a person’s inclination for a particular type of activity and, accordingly, prepare for it.

Plato was one of the first supporters of female education. A worthy defender of the state is one who combines the love of wisdom, high spirit, ability and energy, believed Plato.

Plato, following Socrates, believed that students should be taught according to their abilities, and not give everyone the same education, but the main goal is the smooth functioning of ideal state. According to him, the true realization of human nature is associated with the revelation of the spiritual essence of man, which occurs in the process of education.

Plato developed the theory of the ideal state. The purpose of this state, according to Plato, is to approach the highest idea of ​​good, which is realized mainly through education. Education, says Plato, must be organized by the state and must correspond to the interests of the dominant groups.

Aristotle (a student of Plato) created his own school (lyceum), the so-called peripatetic school (from the Greek peripateo - walking).

The purpose of education according to Aristotle is the development of body, aspirations and mind in such a way as to harmoniously unite these three elements in their concerted pursuit of the best goal - a life in which all virtues, moral and intellectual, are manifested.

Aristotle also formulated the principles of education: the principle of conformity to nature, love of nature.

According to Aristotle, for each individual the goal is to realize his abilities in the society in which he lives;

finding your own style and place in society. Aristotle believed that people should be prepared for their rightful place in life and they should be helped to develop the qualities necessary to solve the corresponding problems, while, like Plato, he believed that the needs and welfare of the state should prevail over the rights of the individual.

According to Aristotle, it is not enough to receive the right education and attention in youth: on the contrary, since, already as a husband, we must deal with such things and become accustomed to them, we will need laws concerning these things and generally covering our whole life.

Aristotle distinguished between theoretical, practical and poetic disciplines.

He proposed a model of moral education, quite popular in our time, - to train children in appropriate types of behavior, that is, to practice good deeds.

Based on the Aristotelian theory of development, there are three sides of the soul:

plant, which manifests itself in nutrition and reproduction;

animal, manifested in sensations and desires;

rational, which is characterized by thinking and cognition, as well as the ability to subjugate plant and animal principles.

According to the three sides of the soul, Aristotle identified three sides of education - physical, moral and mental, which form a single whole. Moreover, in his opinion, physical education should precede intellectual education.

Aristotle paid great attention to moral education, believing that “from the habit of swearing in one way or another, a tendency to commit bad deeds develops.”

The thinker saw the goal of education in the harmonious development of all aspects of the soul, closely connected with nature, but he considered the development of the higher aspects - the rational and strong-willed - to be especially important. At the same time, he believed it was necessary to follow nature and combine physical, moral and mental education, as well as take into account the age characteristics of children.

According to Aristotle, a truly educated person is one who studies throughout his life, starting from youth. His concept of education is consistent with his concept of the virtuous person as a person who combines many virtues.

Thus, Aristotle viewed education as a means of strengthening the state, believed that schools should be public, and all citizens should receive the same education. He viewed family and public education as parts of the whole.

Philosophical views on education in Europe during the Middle Ages.

In the Middle Ages, upbringing and education were based on a religious-ascetic worldview. Man was seen as something dark and sinful. Strict rules of education and behavior were introduced: fasting and other restrictions, frequent and sometimes grueling prayers, repentance, cruel atonement for sins.

Representative religious philosophy Aurelius Augustine (354–430) recognized the achievements of ancient education and pedagogical thought. He called for treating the child with care and not harming his psyche with punishment. But Augustine at the same time warned that the ancient tradition of education was mired in “fictions,” “the study of words, but not of things.” Therefore, secular knowledge was viewed as secondary and auxiliary, subordinate to the study of the Bible and Christian dogma.

However, the education of children of individual classes differed in content and character. A departure from religious education was the predominantly secular education of feudal knights.

The children of secular feudal lords received the so-called knightly education. His program boiled down to mastering the “seven knightly virtues”: the ability to ride a horse, swim, throw a spear, fencing, hunt, play checkers, compose and sing poems in honor of the overlord and the “lady of the heart.” Mastering literacy was not included, but life demanded that secular feudal lords be given a certain general educational training so that they could occupy commanding government and church positions.

During this period, a new type of medieval scholarship emerged - scholasticism, the goal of which was to present dogma in the form scientific knowledge.

The main representative of this trend was Thomas Aquinas (1225/26-1274). In his treatise “Summa Theologica” he reinterpreted church tradition, tried to subordinate secular knowledge to faith. All the activities of Thomas Aquinas were aimed at giving religious doctrine the form of scientific knowledge. The teachings of Thomas Aquinas, his postulates represented a kind of philosophy of religion, contributed to the connections between religion and science, although rather artificial.

The development of scholasticism led to the decline of the old church school with the predominant study of grammar and rhetoric, which were supplanted by the study of formal logic and the new Latin language.

In connection with the growth in the number of scholastic schools, a category of people engaged in teaching began to emerge. Teachers and students gradually united into corporations, which later received the status of a university. Scholasticism united theology and individual sciences and accelerated the creation of the first universities.

Despite the religious orientation, the medieval understanding of the diversified development of a child practically corresponded to the ancient idea of ​​\u200b\u200bthe harmony of soul and body. Labor was viewed not as God's punishment, but as a means of personal development.

Philosophical views on education in Europe during the Renaissance.

In the Renaissance (XIV-XVI centuries), the idea of ​​the comprehensive development of the individual as the main goal of education again becomes relevant and is interpreted only as the liberation of a person from the ideological and political shackles of feudalism.

Figures of this era criticized medieval scholasticism and mechanical “cramming”, advocated a humane attitude towards children, liberation of the individual from the shackles of feudal oppression and religious asceticism.

If the church taught that a person should place his hopes in God, then a person of the new ideology could only count on himself, his strength and reason. The pedagogical triad of the Renaissance is classical education, physical development, and civic education.

Thus, Thomas More (1478-1533) and Tommaso Campanella (1568-1639), dreaming of creating a new society, raised the question of the need for comprehensive development of the individual, and linked its implementation in combining education and upbringing with productive labor.

The French philosopher Michel Montaigne (1533-1592) addressed man as the highest value and believed in his inexhaustible possibilities, setting out his views in his work “Essays”.

Montaigne saw in the child, first of all, natural individuality. He was a supporter of developmental education, which does not overload the memory with mechanically memorized information, but promotes the development of independent thinking and teaches critical analysis. This is achieved by studying both humanities and natural sciences, which were almost not studied in schools of that historical period.

Like all humanists, Montaigne opposed the harsh discipline of medieval schools and advocated careful attention to children. Education, according to Montaigne, should contribute to the development of all aspects of the child’s personality; theoretical education should be supplemented by physical exercises, the development of aesthetic taste, and the cultivation of high moral qualities.

The main idea in the theory of developmental education, according to Montaigne, is that such education is unthinkable without establishing humane relations with children. To achieve this, learning must be carried out without punishment, coercion or violence.

He believed that developmental training is possible only with the individualization of training; he said: “I don’t want the mentor to decide everything alone and only to speak;

I want him to listen to his pet too.” Here Montaigne follows Socrates, who first forced his students to speak, and then spoke himself.

Philosophical views on education in Europe in the era of Modern Times and Enlightenment.

In contrast to the previous humanistic education, the new pedagogical thought based its conclusions on experimental research data. The role of natural science and secular education became more and more obvious.

Thus, the English scientist Francis Bacon (1564-1626) aimed scientific knowledge believed in mastering the forces of nature through experiments. Bacon proclaimed the power of man over nature, but considered man a part of the surrounding world, that is, he recognized the principle of natural knowledge and education.

IN early XVII V. Bacon was the first to separate pedagogy from the system of philosophical knowledge.

Rene Descartes (1596-1650), a French philosopher, believed that in the process of education it is necessary to overcome the costs of children's imagination, in which objects and phenomena are seen not as they really are. Such properties of a child contradict the norms of morality, Descartes argued, because by being capricious and getting the things he wants, the child “imperceptibly acquires the conviction that the world exists only” for him and “everything belongs” to him. Convinced of the moral and intellectual harm of children's egocentrism, Descartes advised making every effort to develop students' ability to judge (independent and correct comprehension of their own actions and the world around them).

Among the teachers of the early modern era, a special place is occupied by the Czech classic teacher, the founder of pedagogical science, Jan Amos Comenius (1592-1670).

Comenius wrote 7 volumes enormous work“General Council for the Correction of Human Affairs” (only 2 volumes were published during his lifetime, the rest were found only in 1935 and later published in the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic).

Comenius was the founder of modern pedagogy. A distinctive feature of Comenius’ pedagogical views was that he considered education as one of the most important prerequisites for establishing fair relations between people and nations. One of the most important ideas in Comenius’ pedagogical heritage is the idea of ​​developmental education.

Comenius's worldview was formed under the influence of the culture of the Renaissance.

Comenius taught that man is “the most perfect, most beautiful creation,” “a wonderful microcosm.” According to Comenius, “a person guided by nature can achieve anything.” Man is harmony in relation to both body and soul.

Comenius considered the means of moral education to be: the example of parents, teachers, and comrades;

instructions, conversations with children;

exercises for children in moral behavior;

the fight against child promiscuity and indiscipline.

Didactics of Comenius. Following the sensualist philosophy, Comenius put sensory experience as the basis for cognition and learning, theoretically substantiated and revealed in detail the principle of visibility as one of the most important didactic principles, theoretically developed a classroom-lesson system and practically applied it. Comenius considers visibility to be the golden rule of learning. Comenius was the first to introduce the use of visibility as a general pedagogical principle.

The principle of consciousness and activity presupposes such a nature of learning when students do not passively, through cramming and mechanical exercises, but consciously, deeply and thoroughly assimilate knowledge and skills.

The principle of gradual and systematic knowledge. Comenius considers the consistent study of the fundamentals of science and systematic knowledge to be an obligatory principle of education.

This principle requires students to master systematized knowledge in a certain logical and methodological sequence.

The principle of exercise and lasting mastery of knowledge and skills. An indicator of the usefulness of knowledge and skills is systematically conducted exercises and repetitions. Komensky introduced new content into the concepts of “exercise” and “repetition”; he set a new task for them - deep assimilation of knowledge based on the consciousness and activity of students. In his opinion, the exercise should not serve the mechanical memorization of words, but the understanding of objects and phenomena, their conscious assimilation, and use in practical activities.

Empirical-sensualist concept of education by J. Locke (1632-1704).

In his work “Thoughts on Education,” J. Locke paid great attention to the psychological foundations of education, as well as the moral formation of personality. Denying the presence of innate qualities in children, he likened the child to a “blank slate” (tabula rasa) on which one can write anything, pointing to the decisive role of education as the main means of personality development.

J. Locke put forward the thesis that there is nothing in the mind that would not have previously existed in sensations (in sensory perceptions, in experience). This thesis assigned a person's personal experience the main place in his education. Locke argued that all human development depends primarily on what his specific individual experience turned out to be.

The philosopher, in his theory of education, argued that if a child cannot receive the necessary ideas and impressions in society, therefore, it is necessary to change social conditions. It is necessary to develop a physically strong and spiritually whole person who acquires knowledge useful for society. Locke argued that good is that which gives lasting pleasure and reduces pain. And moral goodness is the voluntary submission of the human will to the laws of society and nature. In turn, the laws of nature and society are found in the divine will - the true basis of morality. Harmony between personal and public interests is achieved through prudent and pious behavior.

The ultimate goal of education according to Locke is to ensure a “healthy mind in a healthy body.” Locke considered physical education as the basis of all subsequent education. All components of education must be interconnected: mental education must be subordinate to the formation of character.

Locke made a person's morality dependent on the will and the ability to restrain one's desires. The formation of will occurs if the child is taught to endure difficulties steadfastly, his free, natural development is encouraged, and humiliating physical punishment is fundamentally rejected (excluding daring and systematic disobedience).

Mental training must also be based on practical needs. In learning, according to Locke, the main thing is not memory, but understanding and the ability to judge. This requires exercise. To think correctly, Locke believed, was more valuable than to know a lot.

Locke was critical of schools; he fought for family education with a tutor and teacher.

The system of upbringing and education according to J. Locke had a practical orientation: “for business activities in the real world.”

The purpose of education, according to Locke, is to form a gentleman, a businessman who knows how to “conduct business intelligently and prudently,” belonging to the highest strata of society. That is, Locke's system of education is applicable to the education of children from a wealthy environment.

Locke was convinced of the advisability of social (class) determination of school education. Therefore, he justifies different types of education: the full education of gentlemen who come from high society;

limited to encouraging hard work and religiosity - education of the poor. In the project “On Workers' Schools”, the thinker proposes to create special shelters at the expense of charitable foundations - schools for poor children aged 3-14, where they must pay for their maintenance with their labor.

The French thinker Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778) strongly criticized the class system of education, which suppressed the child’s personality. His pedagogical ideas are permeated with the spirit of humanism. Having put forward the thesis of active learning, the connection of education with the life and personal experience of the child, insisting on labor education, Rousseau pointed out a progressive path for improving the human personality.

Rousseau proceeded from the idea of ​​the natural perfection of children. In his opinion, education should not interfere with the development of this perfection, and therefore children should be given complete freedom, adapting to their inclinations and interests.

Jean-Jacques Rousseau outlined his pedagogical views in the book “Emile, or on education.” Rousseau criticizes the bookish nature of education, divorced from life, and proposes to teach what is interesting to the child, so that the child himself is active in the process of learning and upbringing;

you need to trust the child with his self-education. Rousseau was a supporter of the development of independent thinking in children, insisting on the activation of learning, its connection with life, with the child’s personal experience, special meaning attached to labor education.

On the pedagogical principles of J.-J. Rousseau include:

2. Knowledge should be obtained not from books, but from life. The bookish nature of teaching, isolation from life, from practice are unacceptable and destructive.

3. It is necessary to teach everyone not the same thing, but teach what is interesting to a particular person, what corresponds to his inclinations, then the child will be active in his development and learning.

4. It is necessary to develop the student’s observation, activity, and independent judgment on the basis of direct communication with nature, life, and practice.

Factors influencing the development of personality, according to Rousseau, are nature, people, things. Rousseau developed a harmonious program for personality formation, which provided for natural mental, physical, moral, and labor education.

Ideas of J.-J. Rousseau received further development and practical implementation in the works of the Swiss teacher Johann Heinrich Pestalozzi (1746-1827), who argued that the purpose of education is the development of humanity, the harmonious development of all human powers and abilities. The main work is “Lingard and Gertrude”. Pestalozzi believed that education contributes to the self-development of a person’s abilities: his mind, feelings (heart) and creativity (hands).

He believed that education should be in accordance with nature: it is designed to develop the spiritual and physical forces inherent in human nature in accordance with the child’s inherent desire for all-round activity.

Pestalozzi's pedagogical principles:

1. All learning must be based on observation and experience and then rise to conclusions and generalizations.

2. The learning process should be built through a consistent transition from part to whole.

3. Visualization is the basis of learning. Without the use of visualization, it is impossible to achieve correct ideas, development of thinking and speech.

4. It is necessary to fight against verbalism, “the verbal rationality of education, capable of creating only empty talkers.”

5. Education should contribute to the accumulation of knowledge and at the same time develop mental abilities and human thinking.

Philosophical and psychological foundations of pedagogy by I. F. Herbart.

The German philosopher Johann Friedrich Herbart (1776 - 1841) played a significant role in the development of the pedagogical foundations of education. The main work is “General Pedagogy Derived from the Purpose of Education.”

He understood pedagogy as the science of the art of education, which knows how to strengthen and defend the existing system. Herbart did not have a labor education - he sought to educate a thinker, not a doer, and paid great attention to religious education.

The goal of education is the formation of a virtuous person who knows how to adapt to existing relationships and respects the established legal order.

The goal of education is achieved by developing the versatility of interests and creating on this basis an integral moral character, guided by five moral ideas:

inner freedom, perfection, goodwill, law, justice.

Objectives of moral education:

1. Retain the student.

2. Identify the pupil.

3. Establish clear rules of behavior.

4. Do not give reasons for the student to doubt the truth.

5. Excite the child’s soul with approval and censure.

Formation and development of classical education in the 19th – 20th centuries.

The classics of German philosophy (I. Kant, I. G. Fichte, G. W. Hegel) paid attention to the problems of upbringing and education in their theories.

Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) believed that a person can achieve a rational life, personal freedom and tranquility only if he masters the “science of morality, duty and self-control”, which he brings into line with certain, established forms of knowledge .

I. Kant noted that a person must improve himself, educate himself, develop moral qualities in himself - this is the duty of a person... It is not necessary to teach thoughts, but to think;

The listener must not be led by the hand, but guided, if they want him to be able to walk independently in the future.

Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770-1831) argued that man is a product of history, and that reason and self-knowledge are the results of human civilization. G. W. F. Hegel assigned man the role of creator and creator. He highly appreciated the transformative role of education.

G. Hegel believed that pedagogy is the art of making people moral: it considers man as a natural being and indicates the path by which he can be born again, transform his first nature into a second - spiritual, in such a way that this spiritual becomes for him habit.

Johann Gottlieb Fichte (1762-1814) viewed education as a way for people to become aware of their nation, and education as an opportunity to acquire national and world culture.

Karl Marx (1818-1883), Friedrich Engels (1820-1895) proposed a new approach to solving the problem of personality formation and the place of education in human development. The development of communist ideology, class intransigence, a communist vision of the world and attitude towards it, devotion to the cause of communism - these are the decisive requirements of Marxists for the education of the personality of a new person in a new society. Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels believed that the development of large-scale production and scientific and technological progress do not in themselves lead to the replacement of the “partial worker” with a comprehensively developed personality. They associated the positive meaning of the law of “change of labor” with the conquest of political power by the proletariat, and the development of the individual with his involvement in the class struggle - “revolutionary practice”.

In the 20th century big influence Education was influenced by existentialism - the philosophy of the existence of the individual. Within the framework of the existentialist idea of ​​the world, education begins not with the study of nature, but with the comprehension of human essence, not with the development of alienated knowledge, but with the disclosure of the moral “I”. The teacher is only one of the sources of self-directed growth of the student; he creates an environment that allows each student to make informed decisions. What is studied must have some meaning in the life of the student; he must not just accept certain knowledge and values, but experience them.

In this regard, educational anthropology (I. Derbolav, O.F. Bolnov, G. Roth, M.I. Langeveld, etc.), based on philosophical anthropology (M. Scheler, G. Plessner, A.

Portman, E. Cassirer, etc.), understands a person as a spiritual-physical integrity that is formed in the process of upbringing and education.

One of the founders of philosophical anthropology, Max Scheler (1874-1928), believed that man occupies a place in the universe that allows him to understand the essence of the world in its authenticity. Scheler said that there are stages in the development of life - from plants and animals to human existence.

Scheler placed man at the highest place in the Cosmos. All living things are permeated by impulses of desire. Scheler distinguished three stages in this impulse of desire:

in the plant world, attraction is still unconscious, devoid of feelings and ideas;

in the animal world, the impulse of drives acquires the ability to express itself in behavior, instincts, associative memory and practical mind;

The highest level is the life of a person who has a spirit. Thanks to the spirit, a person is able to put a distance between himself and the world, turn to history and become a creator of culture.

Educational concepts in the philosophy of pragmatism (J. Dewey) and existentialism (M. Buber).

One of the leaders of the philosophy of pragmatism John Dewey(1859 - 1952) understood education as the acquisition of knowledge in the process of life experience. According to Dewey, the degree and type of human development that we found in him currently, and there is his education.

This is a constant function, it does not depend on age.

He advocated a narrowly practical, pragmatic focus on education and believed that it was possible to positively influence the life of every person by taking care of the health, leisure and career of the future family man and member of society. It was proposed to make the child an object of intense influence of diverse shaping factors: economic, scientific, cultural, ethical, etc.

Education, in Dewey's understanding, is a continuous reconstruction personal experience children based on their innate interests and needs. Dewey's ideal of pedagogy was " a good life" Pedagogy, according to Dewey, should become only an “instrument of action.”

The pragmatists developed a method of learning by doing. Dewey considered labor training and education at school as a condition for general development. According to Dewey, labor studies should become the center around which scientific studies are grouped.

Martin Buber (1878-1965) – theistic-existential philosopher and writer. The initial concept of Buber's philosophy is the concept of dialogue between I and You. This dialogue represents a relationship, a correlation between two equal principles - I and You.

Dialogue does not imply the desire to change another, to judge him or to convince him that he is right. This attitude of hierarchy is alien to dialogue.

Dialogue, according to Buber, is of three types:

1. Technically instrumental dialogue, due to the need to carry out everyday concerns and the subject-oriented focus of understanding.

2. A monologue, expressed in the form of a dialogue, is not directed at another, but only at oneself.

3. A genuine dialogue in which not just personal knowledge is updated, but the entire existence of a person and in which being-in-oneself coincides with being-in-another, with the being of a dialogue partner. Genuine dialogue involves turning to the partner in all his truth, in all his being.

He defined the educational relationship as dialogical, including the relationship between two personalities, which is to one degree or another determined by the element of coverage (Umfassung). Coverage is understood by Buber as the simultaneous experience of comprehending both one’s own action and the action of a partner, due to which the essence of each of the dialogue partners is updated and the fullness of the concreteness of each of them is achieved.

The educational and educational attitude is constituted by the moment of coverage.

The act of inclusion for upbringing and education is constitutive; it, in fact, forms the pedagogical relationship, however, with one caveat: it cannot be reciprocal, since the teacher educates the student, but the teacher’s upbringing cannot exist. The pedagogical relationship is asymmetrical: the teacher is at two poles of the educational relationship, the student is at only one.

Specifics of setting the solution to education in Russian philosophical thought of the 19th – 20th centuries.

At the beginning of the 19th century. ideas of the European Enlightenment began to spread in Russia.

The main provisions of the educational concept were the ideas of Orthodoxy, autocracy and nationality. The first two principles (Orthodoxy and autocracy) corresponded to the idea of ​​statehood in Russian politics. The principle of nationality, in essence, was a transposition of the Western European idea of ​​national revival onto the nationalism of the Russian autocratic state.

For the first time, the government asked itself whether it was possible to combine global pedagogical experience with the traditions of national life. Minister of Education S.S. Uvarov saw the value of this experience, but considered it premature to involve Russia in it in full: “Russia is still young. We must prolong her youth and in the meantime educate her.”

The search for an “original” enlightenment divided the Russian intelligentsia of the 1840s. into two camps: Slavophiles and Westerners.

Slavophiles (philosopher and publicist Ivan Vasilyevich Kireevsky, philosopher and poet Aleksey Stepanovich Khomyakov, literary critic, poet and historian Stepan Petrovich Shevyrev put forward and actively defended the idea of ​​educating a “whole person”, combining national character traits and universal human qualities in his education. They put forward its task is to coordinate the development of Russian education itself with world achievements in the field of education.

They reflected on the problem of mutual enrichment of Western and national pedagogical traditions. The Slavophiles saw religiosity, morality and love for one's neighbor as the basis of popular, national education.

Thinkers who are commonly called Westerners (Alexander Ivanovich Herzen, Vissarion Grigorievich Belinsky, Nikolai Vladimirovich Stankevich, Vladimir Fedorovich Odoevsky, Nikolai Platonovich Ogarev) advocated the development of Russian pedagogy according to models historically developed in Western Europe, and opposed the class-based serfdom traditions of education and training. , defended the rights of the individual to self-realization.

From these positions, resolving issues of education was seen as an urgent need. Many Westerners expressed radical pedagogical ideas. In contrast to the official position, they interpreted the best features inherent in the people differently, focusing on the desire of the Russian people for social change, and proposed encouraging such a desire through education.

It would be wrong to reduce the social Russian pedagogical thought of the first half of the 19th century. to the ideological polemics of Slavophiles and Westerners, in particular, Nikolai Gavrilovich Chernyshevsky (1828-1889) saw the task of education in the formation of a new person - a true patriot, close to the people and knowing their needs, a fighter for the embodiment of the revolutionary idea. The most important principle of education is the unity of word and deed.

The great Russian writer L. N. Tolstoy (1828-1910), being critical of the borrowing of Western experience, believed that it was necessary to look for our own ways of developing domestic education.

At all stages of his educational activities, Tolstoy was guided by the idea of ​​free education. Following Rousseau, he was convinced of the perfection of children's nature, which is harmed by the direction of education. He wrote: “The deliberate formation of people according to known models is unfruitful, illegal and impossible.” For Tolstoy, education is self-development, and the teacher’s task is to help the student self-develop in the direction that is natural for him, to protect the harmony that a person possesses from birth.

Following Rousseau, Tolstoy at the same time seriously disagrees with him: if the credo of the former is “freedom and nature,” then for Tolstoy, who notices the artificiality of Rousseau’s “nature,” the credo is “freedom and life,” which means taking into account not only the peculiarities and interests of the child, but also his lifestyle. Based on these principles, Tolstoy at the Yasnaya Polyana school even went so far as to give children the freedom to study or not study. Homework was not given, and the peasant child went to school, “carrying only himself, his receptive nature and the confidence that school today will be as fun as yesterday.”

There was “loose disorder” at school; a schedule existed, but was not strictly observed; the order and curriculum were agreed upon with the children. Tolstoy, recognizing that “a teacher always involuntarily strives to choose a convenient way of education for himself,” replaced lessons with fascinating educational stories, free conversation, games that develop imagination and are based not on abstractions, but on examples of everyday life that are close and understandable to schoolchildren. The count himself taught mathematics and history in high school and conducted physical experiments.

The principles of Russian religious and philosophical anthropology were largely expressed in pedagogy. The anthropological paradigm of education was most developed in Russian cosmism, which affirmed the idea of ​​the inextricable connection of man with the Cosmos, the Universe. Man is constantly in the process of development, changing not only the world, but also yourself, your idea of ​​yourself.

The values ​​of Russian cosmism are God, Truth, Love, Beauty, Unity, Harmony, Absolute personality. According to these values, the goal of education is the formation of a whole person, an absolute personality; the more creatively educated a person is, the more harmony, love, and knowledge he will bring to the life of society and the Universe. The idea of ​​a close, inextricable connection between man and nature is proclaimed, which leads to nature-conformity in education, i.e. human development cannot be isolated from the experience of comprehending oneself and the surrounding world.

Solovyov V.S. (1853–1900), having formulated the concept of God-manhood, attached the most important importance to education in fulfilling the divine mission of man.

Bulgakov S. N. (1871-1944) defines man as the center of the universe, the unity of microcosm and macrocosm, puts forward humanity as a whole, as a true subject of creative activity.

Karsavin L.P. (1882-1952), developing the philosophy of personality, proceeded from the understanding of it as “a bodily-spiritual, definite, uniquely original and multi-faceted being.” Personality, according to Karsavin, is dynamic; it is revealed as self-unity, self-separation and self-reunion.

Berdyaev N. A. (1874–1948) in the work “The Meaning of Creativity: Justification of Man”

(1916), considering a person as the intersection point of two worlds - the divine and the organic, was convinced that education should proceed from a person - a “microcosm”, who needs “initiation into the secret of himself”, salvation in creativity. Berdyaev N. A.

recognized the individual as the primary creative reality and the highest spiritual value, and the whole world as a manifestation of the creative activity of God. Berdyaev spoke about the boundless creativity of the individual, believed in the possibilities of self-knowledge and self-development of his spiritual essence, saying that any existence devoid of creative movement would be flawed.

Frank S. L. (1877-1950) noted that man is a self-overcoming creature, transforming himself - this is what precise definition person.

Rozanov V.V. (1856–1919) notes that the richest inner world of a person awaits “touch” in order to “crack and reveal its content.” It is about enlightenment that “awakens, unfolds the wings of the soul, elevates a person to the awareness of his self and his place in life, introduces him to highest values"(which Rozanov saw in religion).

Rozanov V.V. emphasizes activity, creative character individual consciousness, which is not exhausted either by rational thinking (although it is precisely to such a mind that ordinary education appeals), nor by simple reflection of the external world in sensations and perceptions, but has a selective, personal (intentional) character.

True education is based on deeply individual experience, understanding, on the “experience of the heart,” on a “felt” biased attitude towards the world - only in this way is a person’s inner culture achieved. Therefore, V.V. Rozanov speaks about the first principle of education - the “principle of individuality,” from which follows the requirement for an individual approach to the student in the educational process itself, which must be elastic in its forms, “flexible in application to the inexhaustible variety of individual developments "

The second principle of education is the “principle of integrity,” which requires continuity of perception, absence of discontinuity in knowledge, artistic sense, due to which the integrity of the individual and the integrity of her perception of the world are preserved. Rozanov V.V.’s aesthetic education is the key to preserving the integrity of the person himself and the integrity of his worldview.

The third principle of education is the principle of “unity of type,” i.e., “impressions must come from the source of some one historical culture (Christianity, or classical antiquity, or science), where they all developed from each other.” We are talking about knowing the principle of the historical character of any culture and the historicity of man, who is always involved in a particular culture.

Rozanov V.V. comes to the conclusion that classical education is the most acceptable for school, but, of course, if it complies with the three principles stated above. He does not deny the importance of science, but views it as a “difficult and solitary matter”, interest in which may arise in universities.

The restructuring of classical education in accordance with the above principles will allow, according to V.V. Rozanov, to talk about a “new school” - free and flexible, where relations between students, as well as “selected teachers and freely chosen students” are based on deep personal communication. Criticizing the state education system, the philosopher pinned his hopes on the development of private educational institutions, where a “warm atmosphere” is possible family relations between teacher and student."

Lecture 5, 6. Development of philosophical and anthropological ideas in education.

Pedagogical system of Ushinsky K. D.

Ushinsky Konstantin Dmitrievich (1824-1870) - an outstanding Russian pedagogical theorist and practitioner.

Justifying his view on upbringing and education, Ushinsky proceeds from the position that “if we want to educate a person in all respects, we must know him in all respects.” He showed that "to know a person in all respects" is to study his physical and mental characteristics.

The purpose of education, according to K. D. Ushinsky, is the formation of an active and creative personality, the preparation of a person for physical and mental labor as the highest form of human activity, the education of a perfect person.

This is a very capacious, complex definition, including humanity, education, hard work, religiosity, and patriotism. Considering the role of religion in the formation of public morality to be positive, the scientist at the same time advocated its independence from science and school, and opposed the leading role of the clergy in school.

To achieve educational goals, K. D. Ushinsky considered a wide range of pedagogical phenomena in line with the ideas of nationality and public school. He said that the Russian national school is an original, distinctive school, it corresponds to the spirit of the people themselves, their values, their needs, and the national cultures of the peoples of Russia.

Problems of moral education are presented by K. D. Ushinsky as socio-historical. In moral education, he assigned one of the main places to patriotism. His system of moral education of a child excluded authoritarianism; it was built on the power of a positive example, on the rational activity of the child. He demanded that the teacher develop active love for people and create an atmosphere of camaraderie.

Ushinsky K.D.’s new pedagogical idea was to set the teacher the task of teaching students to learn. Ushinsky K.D. approved the principle of educational training, which represents the unity of teaching and upbringing.

Thus, K. D. Ushinsky is rightfully considered the founder of scientific pedagogy in Russia.

Ushinsky K.D. believed that in education and training it is necessary to adhere to certain principles:

1. Education should be structured taking into account the age and psychological characteristics of the child’s development. It must be feasible and consistent.

2. Training should be based on the principle of clarity.

3. The progression of learning from the concrete to the abstract, abstract, from ideas to thoughts is natural and based on clear psychological laws of human nature.

4. Education should develop the mental strength and abilities of students, as well as provide the knowledge necessary for life.

5. Following the principle of developmental education, he protested against the separation of the functions of education and training, pointing out the unity of these two principles in the formation of a harmoniously developed personality.

6. He identified two factors of educational influence on a child - family and the personality of the teacher.

7. In relation to Russia, he identified three principles of education: nationality, Christian spirituality and science.

Development of the doctrine of man and personality in the Soviet period (Hessen S.I., Shchedrovitsky G.P.).

Pedagogical ideas of Hessen S.I.

Gessen Sergei Iosifovich (1887–1950) - philosopher, scientist, teacher. The main work “Fundamentals of Pedagogy” (with the characteristic subtitle “Introduction to Applied Philosophy”) (1923) is now recognized as one of the best in the 20th century.

Hessen’s main idea is about the cultural function of education, which introduces a person to the values ​​of culture throughout the entire massif, transforming a natural person into a “cultured” one. Sharply contradicting the educational policy and ideology of the Bolshevik state, the concept of Hessen not only was not used, but made him an enemy of Soviet power, subject to expulsion, if not destruction. S. Gessen turned out to be one of the passengers on the “philosophical ship”, on which in 1922 the flower of its intelligentsia was expelled from Russia.

Hessen interprets pedagogy as the science of the art of activity, as a practical science that establishes the norms of our activity. Pedagogy appears as applied philosophy, as a general theory of education that promotes the assimilation of cultural values ​​by a person, for philosophy is the science of “values, their meaning, composition and laws.”

Accordingly, all sections of pedagogy correspond to the main sections of philosophy.

Gessen points out the coincidence of the goals of culture and education: “Education is nothing more than the culture of the individual. And if in relation to a people culture is a set of inexhaustible goals and tasks, then in relation to an individual education is an inexhaustible task. Education in its essence can never be completed.”

Gessen, quite in the spirit of Russian philosophy, focuses attention on the vital nature of education, its significance for solving vital, rather than abstract, theoretical problems. The process of individualization, autonomization of personality is considered by Hesse not as isolation, but as inclusion in the superpersonal.

The assimilation of cultural values ​​in the process of education is not limited to passive familiarization with what has already been achieved by generations, but involves individual creative efforts that bring something new and original into the world.

Hessen interprets freedom broadly, identifying it with creativity: “Freedom is the creativity of something new, something that did not exist in the world before. I am free when I solve some difficult problem that confronts me in my own way, in a way that no one else could solve it. And the more irreplaceable and individual my action is, the more free it is.

Thus, becoming free means becoming a person who, step by step, overcomes coercion and at the same time strives for self-realization.

Over the millennia of its existence, philosophy finds itself in many movements, directions, concepts and teachings. Science has managed to accumulate a huge arsenal of theories, ideas and discoveries. As in science, in philosophy the processes of differentiation and integration of knowledge are constantly carried out. As a result of the differentiation of knowledge, the formation and development of entire scientific fields occurs. One of such sciences that arose within the framework of philosophy is the philosophy of education.

Definition 1

Philosophy of education is the field of study of the goals and axiological foundations of education, the principles of forming its orientation and content; a scientific direction, the focus of which is the general patterns, mechanisms and dependencies of modern educational processes in the social and historical context.

Features of the philosophy of education as a research field

• isolation of education into a separate sphere of society;
• diversification, modernization of educational institutions;
• modification of all parts of the educational system;
• multi-paradigmality of pedagogical knowledge, synthetic nature of the content of education;
• transformation of non-institutional education;
• the emergence of updated requirements for the education system, due to the transition from industrial to “post-industrial”, information society.

The purpose and objectives of the philosophy of education

Definition 2

The main goal The scientific direction is the understanding of problems in the education system, the study of educational knowledge at its intersection with philosophy.

This goal is specified in a number of tasks scientific field, including the following:

• searching for a new way of thinking in the process of understanding educational problems;
• developing an understanding of the sphere of education as a social, pedagogical system;
• developing an understanding of education as a cultural, historical, social system;
• constant monitoring of social needs in education;
• analysis of the foundations of pedagogical activity;
• identification of goals, objectives, ideals, methodology of pedagogical knowledge.

Categories of philosophy of education

Definition 3

Education is the process of formation and constant development of the personal and professional qualities of an individual;

Definition 4

Education is the purposeful creation of optimal conditions for the development, education and training of an individual;

Definition 5

Training is a purposeful process of mastering a system of knowledge, skills and abilities, and developing key competencies.

Directions of scientific research in philosophy of education

In the most general form, all research within a scientific direction can be presented in the form of two main groups:

• empirical-analytical philosophical movements focused on the study of status, identifying the structure of pedagogical knowledge, the development of pedagogical knowledge from the stage of identifying problems to the final stage of putting forward and testing theories. The studies of this group include analytical, critical-rationalist philosophy of education;
• humanitarian studies - philosophical directions, including idealism, existentialism, etc., emphasizing the specificity of the methods of didactics as a science about the spirit, soul; focusing on the humanistic orientation of pedagogy. This group of studies includes hermeneutics, existential-dialogical philosophy of education, educational anthropology, critical-emancipatory direction and postmodern philosophy of education.

Thus, the philosophy of education is one of the promising scientific directions, the focus of which is education in all its diversity, problems, goals, objectives, methodology, intentions for the development of a targeted process of developing the personal and professional properties of an individual.

Events