There are deep connections between education and the question of life's meaning, which derive, ultimately, from the fact that, for human beings, how to live—and therefore, how to raise one's children—is not a given but a question. One might see the meaning of life as constitutive of the meaning of education, and answers to the question of life's meaning might be seen as justifying education. Our focus, however, lies on the contributory relation: our primary purpose is to investigate whether and (...) how education might contribute to children's ability to find meaning in life or at least deal with the question. This issue is not only theoretically interesting —it also has practical urgency. For people have a need for meaning that, if unfulfilled, leads to personal and potentially social crises—a need that often expresses itself first and strongly in adolescence; and there are reasons to have doubts about the contribution of today's traditional formal education system to the meaningfulness of children's lives. We argue for the importance of frameworks of values, as well as for a greater emphasis on the affective dimension of meaning, though we reject pure subjectivism. The underlying purpose of this article, however, is not to argue for a particular comprehensive position, but to persuade philosophers of education of the importance of the issue of life's meaning in thinking about education today. (shrink)

ABSTRACT Can Nietzsche's ideal of man, the overman, be conceived as an educational ideal in post-modern democratic societies? Should it be so conceived? This paper answers both questions positively. The affirmative answer to the first question is based on arguments aimed at overcoming two obvious difficulties: the Contradictions in Nietzsche's various references to his human ideal, and his blatant anti-democratic attitude. The affirmative answer to the second question builds on an analysis portraying Nietzsche's conception of man as one that allows (...) us, in a non-objectivist era, to accord a clear meaning to the term the “good life” and to educate in the light of this meaning. (shrink)

Aharon Aviram; The Paradoxes of Education for Democracy, or the Tragic Dilemmas of the Modern Liberal Educator, Journal of Philosophy of Education, Volume 20, I.

There are deep connections between education and the question of life's meaning, which derive, ultimately, from the fact that, for human beings, how to live—and therefore, how to raise one's children—is not a given but a question. One might see the meaning of life as constitutive of the meaning of education, and answers to the question of life's meaning might be seen as justifying education. Our focus, however, lies on the contributory relation: our primary purpose is to investigate whether and (...) how education might contribute to children's ability to find meaning in life or at least deal with the question. This issue is not only theoretically interesting —it also has practical urgency. For people have a need for meaning that, if unfulfilled, leads to personal and potentially social crises—a need that often expresses itself first and strongly in adolescence; and there are reasons to have doubts about the contribution of today's traditional formal education system to the meaningfulness of children's lives. We argue for the importance of frameworks of values, as well as for a greater emphasis on the affective dimension of meaning, though we reject pure subjectivism. The underlying purpose of this article, however, is not to argue for a particular comprehensive position, but to persuade philosophers of education of the importance of the issue of life's meaning in thinking about education today. (shrink)

Fears of alienation and anomie in liberal societies have driven many writers to emphasize care and commitment as essential ingredients of human well-being and as educational aims. Conceiving autonomy to be incompatible with these values, they have concluded that autonomy should be replaced with alternative conceptions of human well-being and of education that emphasize care and commitment. The claim I will try to defend in this paper is that, in contrast to these views, there is no contradiction between autonomy on (...) the one hand and care and commitment on the other; hence acknowledgment of the importance of the latter pair of values need not lead to the rejection of the ideal of autonomy. (shrink)

Aharon Aviram; The Subjection of Children, Journal of Philosophy of Education, Volume 24, Issue 2, 30 May 2006, Pages 213–234, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-97.

This paper reviews Constructivism and the sources of its influence overIsraeli educational discourse. Then, it describes examples ofConstructivists projects in the teaching of sciences and technology inIsrael (Sela, Media Plus), as well as a project that is based on theConstructivist approach to teaching (Together), and several Constructivistexperimental schools, followed by a summary of the obstacles to theimplementation of such projects. Next, it stresses two basic flaws in theConstructivist view and introduces a post-constructivist educationalparadigm, the Autonomy Oriented Education (AOE), which uses (...) `reflectionon experiments in living' as its major tool and aims to enable thedevelopment of autonomous, belonging and moral individuals. (shrink)

Aharon Aviram; The Justification of Compulsory Education: the still neglected moral duty, Journal of Philosophy of Education, Volume 20, Issue 1, 30 May 2006, P.

ABSTRACT The paper is a response to the present crisis of higher education as reflected in the fragmentation of the university, and its increasingly pevformative character. It is based on a criticism of Ronald Barnett's recent attempt to tackle this problem. While agreeing with Barnett's fundamentally radical approach to higher education, the paper criticises Barnetts view on three levels: the methodological, theoretical and practical. It ends with guidelines for an alternative radical approach which avoids the practical problems besetting Barnetts proposal.