Abstract

It is often taken for granted that Paul Hirst’s switch from emphasis on liberal education to a social practices view of education is a radical one. This depends on how we understand the relation between the two views. From the perspective of a ‘weak’ interpretation I argue that Hirst’s later position differs little from his earlier one in the light both of the relation between the forms of knowledge and social practices, and of the rationalistic character of Hirst’s conception of social practices in their connection with education.