| Line 2: |
Line 2: |
| | | | |
| | Although pragmatism faded in importance in American philosophy after 1930, it has seen a revival since the 1980s with the writings of [[Richard Rorty]], [[Hilary Putnam]], and others. Dewey was a very prolific writer, with dozens of books and 766 articles in 151 different periodicals. His style, however, tended toward vagueness. | | Although pragmatism faded in importance in American philosophy after 1930, it has seen a revival since the 1980s with the writings of [[Richard Rorty]], [[Hilary Putnam]], and others. Dewey was a very prolific writer, with dozens of books and 766 articles in 151 different periodicals. His style, however, tended toward vagueness. |
| | + | ==Career== |
| | + | Born in Vermont to an old Yankee family, Dewey was brought up in a religious environment. He attended the University of Vermont, taught school for three years, then attended the new graduate university, John Hopkins, receiving his PhD in 1884 with a a doctoral dissertation on a phase of Kant's psychology. At this stage Dewey was a strong Hegelian. |
| | + | |
| | + | Dewey taught philosophy at the University of Michigan until 1894, when he was called to the University of Chicago, where President W. R. Harper was creating overnight one of the world's two or three greatest universities. Dewey headed the School of Education, and worked closely with philosophers and with the intellectuals based at [[Hull House]]. His now adopted the philosophy pf [[pragmatism]] that had been developed by [[Charles Sanders Peirce]] and [{William James]]. By 1903 the "Chicago school" of Pragmatic Instrumentalism was in full swing, and the educational experiments initiated in Dewey's "laboratory school" were beginning to influence educational theory at leading universities. After fighting with Harper Dewey went to Columbia University in 1904, where he was based until his retirement in 1930. Worldwide recognition was seen in his invitations to consult on educational policy with emerging nations, notably China, Japan, Turkey, Mexico, and the Soviet Union. |
| | | | |
| | ==Democracy== | | ==Democracy== |
| − | In the 1920s Dewey engaged in a major debate with journalist Walter Lippmann (1889-1974) on the impact of the technology on democracy. Both agreed that the communications revolution had created a large and more complex world, that political and social institutions had not kept pace with the changes wrought by technology, that the masses were more susceptible to propaganda, and that modernity threatened democracy. Their critiques diverge on solutions, especially whether or not democracy could be saved. While Lippmann saw the public as unredeemable and subject to mass manipulation, Dewey thought that more public involvement in sociopolitical affairs was needed and that tools of mass communication could be used to this end.<ref> Walter Lippmann, ''Public Opinion'' (1922) and ''The Phantom Public'' (1925); John Dewey, ''The Public and Its Problems'' (1927)</ref> | + | In the 1920s Dewey engaged in a major debate with journalist Walter Lippmann (1889-1974) on the impact of the technology on democracy. Both agreed that the communications revolution had created a large and more complex world, that political and social institutions had not kept pace with the changes wrought by technology, that the masses were more susceptible to propaganda, and that modernity threatened democracy. Their critiques diverge on solutions, especially whether or not democracy could be saved. While Lippmann saw the public as unredeemable and subject to mass manipulation, Dewey thought that more public involvement in socio-political affairs was needed and that tools of mass communication could be used to this end.<ref> Walter Lippmann, ''Public Opinion'' (1922) and ''The Phantom Public'' (1925); John Dewey, ''The Public and Its Problems'' (1927)</ref> |
| | | | |
| | In his writings from the 1920s and 1930s, Dewey placed his concept of participatory democracy in opposition to both classical liberalism and the technocratic elitism of his contemporary, [[Walter Lippmann]] (1889-1974). Whereas classical liberalism saw in democracy the means for reconciling individual interests, Dewey upheld democracy precisely because the communication that it fostered enabled the individual to identify and understand his interests within a moral framework. In practice, however, Dewey found in the individualist assumptions behind classical liberalism the strongest arguments against leaving policy decisions in the hands of Lippmann's "responsible administrator."<ref> Matthew Festenstein, "The Ties of Communication: Dewey on Ideal and Political Democracy," ''History of Political Thought'' 1997 18(1): 104-124. 0143-781x </ref> | | In his writings from the 1920s and 1930s, Dewey placed his concept of participatory democracy in opposition to both classical liberalism and the technocratic elitism of his contemporary, [[Walter Lippmann]] (1889-1974). Whereas classical liberalism saw in democracy the means for reconciling individual interests, Dewey upheld democracy precisely because the communication that it fostered enabled the individual to identify and understand his interests within a moral framework. In practice, however, Dewey found in the individualist assumptions behind classical liberalism the strongest arguments against leaving policy decisions in the hands of Lippmann's "responsible administrator."<ref> Matthew Festenstein, "The Ties of Communication: Dewey on Ideal and Political Democracy," ''History of Political Thought'' 1997 18(1): 104-124. 0143-781x </ref> |
| Line 15: |
Line 19: |
| | By 1900 the reduction in average family size, new gender roles in middle-class families, and the softening of religious orthodoxy were the social context of Progressive education that led to a new appreciation of childhood. The writings of European educators [[Johann Pestalozzi]] and [[Friedrich Froebel]] drew readers who had bad experiences with traditional schools that valued discipline and memorization at the expense of individuality. Educational practitioners who claimed to follow the views of Pestalozzi and Froebel added their own variations and disagreed among themselves. Nevertheless, Dewey and the advocates of the new education shared and accomplished a new way of thinking about the child, the curriculum, and the purposes of schools.<ref> William J. Reese, "The Origins of Progressive Education," ''History of Education Quarterly'' 2001 41(1): 1-24. 0018-2680; Diane Ravitch, ''Left Back: A Century of Failed School Reforms'' (2000). </ref> | | By 1900 the reduction in average family size, new gender roles in middle-class families, and the softening of religious orthodoxy were the social context of Progressive education that led to a new appreciation of childhood. The writings of European educators [[Johann Pestalozzi]] and [[Friedrich Froebel]] drew readers who had bad experiences with traditional schools that valued discipline and memorization at the expense of individuality. Educational practitioners who claimed to follow the views of Pestalozzi and Froebel added their own variations and disagreed among themselves. Nevertheless, Dewey and the advocates of the new education shared and accomplished a new way of thinking about the child, the curriculum, and the purposes of schools.<ref> William J. Reese, "The Origins of Progressive Education," ''History of Education Quarterly'' 2001 41(1): 1-24. 0018-2680; Diane Ravitch, ''Left Back: A Century of Failed School Reforms'' (2000). </ref> |
| | | | |
| − | The problem is that the progressiv educators encountered a highly bureaucratic system of school administration that in general was not receptive to new methods. education. The failure of Dewey's ideas can be attributed to his assumption that schools exist to promote learning by students. | + | The problem is that the progressive educators encountered a highly bureaucratic system of school administration that in general was not receptive to new methods. education. The failure of Dewey's ideas can be attributed to his assumption that schools exist to promote learning by students. |
| | | | |
| | ===Favors local control of schools=== | | ===Favors local control of schools=== |
| Line 26: |
Line 30: |
| | | | |
| | ==Dewey and religion== | | ==Dewey and religion== |
| − | Dewey mostly avoided religious topics. Important exceptions include his 1892 address "Christianity and Democracy" given to the University of Michigan Students' Christian Association and his 1933 Terry Lectures at Yale University—the basis of his 1934 book ''A Common Faith''. In ''A Common Faith'' Dewey attempted to somehow separate the experience of the "religious" from the supernatural aspects of "God" and "religion".<ref> [http://books.google.com/books?id=lIGBQMkw-v8C ''Reinhold Niebuhr and John Dewey: An American Odyssey''], Daniel F. Rice, 1993, State University of New York Press, ISBN 0-7914-1345-4, pages 43-58 (these pages are Chapter 5 titled "A Common Faih") </ref> According to the scholar Steven C. Rockefeller, Dewey was an American [[Feuerbach]] and keenly interested in gutting what he saw as Christianity's "false" and "harmful" supernatural characteristics. Both Dewey and Feuerbach believed that they possessed a deep philosophical understanding of Christianity. Their shared belief rejected the [[Incarnation]] and all other biblical miracles.<ref> [http://books.google.com/books?id=LOc6q5lmEj8C ''John Dewey: Religious Faith and Democratic Humanism''], Steven C. Rockefeller, Columbia University Press, 1991, ISBN 0231073488, ISBN 9780231073486, 683 pages | + | Dewey mostly avoided religious topics. Important exceptions include his 1892 address "Christianity and Democracy" given to the University of Michigan Students' Christian Association and his 1933 Terry Lectures at Yale University—the basis of his 1934 book ''A Common Faith''. In ''A Common Faith'' Dewey attempted to somehow separate the experience of the "religious" from the supernatural aspects of "God" and "religion".<ref> [http://books.google.com/books?id=lIGBQMkw-v8C ''Reinhold Niebuhr and John Dewey: An American Odyssey''], Daniel F. Rice, 1993, State University of New York Press, ISBN 0-7914-1345-4, pages 43-58 (these pages are Chapter 5 titled "A Common Faith") </ref> According to the scholar Steven C. Rockefeller, Dewey was an American [[Feuerbach]] and keenly interested in gutting what he saw as Christianity's "false" and "harmful" supernatural characteristics. Both Dewey and Feuerbach believed that they possessed a deep philosophical understanding of Christianity. Their shared belief rejected the [[Incarnation]] and all other biblical miracles.<ref> [http://books.google.com/books?id=LOc6q5lmEj8C ''John Dewey: Religious Faith and Democratic Humanism''], Steven C. Rockefeller, Columbia University Press, 1991, ISBN 0231073488, ISBN 9780231073486, 683 pages |
| | *<small> Choice v. 29 (March 1992) p. 1094 Title: John Dewey | | *<small> Choice v. 29 (March 1992) p. 1094 Title: John Dewey |
| | "The way in which Rockefeller (Middlebury College) has presented the generally accepted two periods of Dewey's development (childhood through the Michigan years and from Chicago on) enables him to show the continuous role of religion in Dewey's life and thought as his thought evolved. What emerges is not only a broadened perspective on Dewey's naturalism, but the best intellectual biography of Dewey that we have. . . . The book fills a need that George Dykhuizen's The Life and Mind of John Dewey {BRD 1973} did not, despite all that work's value as a factual resource."</small> | | "The way in which Rockefeller (Middlebury College) has presented the generally accepted two periods of Dewey's development (childhood through the Michigan years and from Chicago on) enables him to show the continuous role of religion in Dewey's life and thought as his thought evolved. What emerges is not only a broadened perspective on Dewey's naturalism, but the best intellectual biography of Dewey that we have. . . . The book fills a need that George Dykhuizen's The Life and Mind of John Dewey {BRD 1973} did not, despite all that work's value as a factual resource."</small> |
| Line 38: |
Line 42: |
| | *"education consists primarily of transmission through communication," | | *"education consists primarily of transmission through communication," |
| | *"education is a constant reorganizing or reconstructing of experience." | | *"education is a constant reorganizing or reconstructing of experience." |
| − |
| |
| | | | |
| | ==External Links== | | ==External Links== |