วีดีโอ

That's not what the guy in the video says. He's giving examples of people saying that this or that thing is useful or not. Dewey himself said that education must have a continuity with life as much as possible. Teaching Latin in school to enable someone to read the classics is less in tune with the needs of modern life than teaching algebra for instance. The old curriculi were designed for the feudal system in which only people who did not work for a living got an education. Dewey argued that in the modern world it makes much less sense to segregate the contents of education from the needs of the everyday world. Today this seems obvious to us but it was not even the dominant view in the world Dewey was trying to reform

Excellent presentation. Unfortunately, Mr. Dewey’s very excellent ideas got caught/damaged in the post WW-2 culture wars and our schools, students and society are the losers. Mel Jenkins

"the ultimate aim of production is not the production of goods, but the production of free human beings associated with one another on terms of equality" dewey

Yes, he believed that we must live in society, and we must consider the effect of our actions on others, not just on ourselves. School is an excellent place to learn and practice this principle. Without it, we have a nation of individuals, all pulling in separate directions. Such a nation will not long serve its citizens and not long endure. We see it happening in the US today.

In fact, a lot of PC culture is exactly the opposite of what a pragmatic theory of virtue urges. What the pragmatist says is to steep yourself in reality with all its contextual complexity and keep revisiting your moral and social judgements. PC culture is basically always judging without context, judging without actual social experience and on the basis of superficial markers. It is to diminish the impact of such rigid modes of social and moral judgement that Dewey wanted socialization skills to be important in school

Because it follows natural inclination with measurable differences in aptitude. Dewey was adamant that education should stimulate individual intellectual curiosity bringing a variety of experiences in concert with one another to further intellectual ideas. Ethics and morality are never to be confused with one another.

@@rendavis9593 i don't think that's what dewey would say. he wasn't naturalistic or utilitarianistic per se in his justification for his view on education; or on anything for that matter. i take his view to be a sort of eudaimonic conception of value/justification. it's not about aptitude or inclination but about learning how to live a good life by applying this process of knowledge. additionally, the process of inquiry dewey talks about in education is also central to our conceptions of morality. given that morality isn't fixed, what we find it to be is something that is born out of a constant process of experimentation and reflection. some of the central points of consideration are first, second and third person perspectives on: desire/intrests; approval/disapproval; problem solving. not to say that these are the end all be all indicators for moral goodness but that they're some of the major important points of consideration in the process of moral inquiry.

Obviously morality is not fixed. It is a constantly changing set of values as human culture evolves over time. And even among contemporary cultures, views on morality can differ. For example, we no longer consider slavery to be moral, but once it was widespread and could happen to anyone if their city were conquered by a another. Did you read the Iliad? And at one time women were considered inferior to men. Did you ever read the bible? Clearly, we see women are the equal of men and often produce better, more humane, and more effective solutions to problems in every discipline then their male peers. Dewey believed that you learned experientially what was moral by seeing the effect of your actions on others. If others benefit, the action was moral; if it caused harm; it was immoral. Is it moral to require working people to pay taxes, when billionaires pay none? Clearly not. So how can the US consider itself a moral nation? It cannot.

@@OriginalSocalgranny but still we'd like to be able to say that the past ways of viewing slavery and misogyny are objectively wrong. dewey isn't an empericist, he's a pragmatist. it's not about experience per se, it's about the process of inquiry for him. morality isn't some kind of static qualifier. it's an active pursuit. if you think it's something so concrete then how can you ever consider yourself a moral person? how can you know that what you are now is what others in the future would consider consistent with "the" moral good. for dewey, the good person isn't someone who has never done wrong, but one that diligently strives to be better than they were yesterday. goodness isn't something achieved, it's a process. rather than ask if anyone has read outdated fairy tales written by men long dead why not read some dewey?