In Man and his Circumstances: Ortega as Educator, Robert McClintock says that American educators have forgotten about the influence of Natorp. This essay proposes to discuss Natorp's Platonic and Neo-Kantian view of the human being and of knowledge as a foundation to all education. It will examine the influence of Friedrich Schleiermacher, the distinguished German philosopher, and of the great Swiss educator, Johann Heinrich Pestalozzi, on Natorp's ideas. In Natorp's view of Socialpadagogik (Social Education), it is not possible to have any positive social or political change without great alterations in educational philosophy. The work of the American educator, Robert Hutchins, will be discussed and defended as an exemplary attempt in the practice of higher education of these ideals. Although Hutchin's programs were adapted for only a short time by the University of Chicago and by a few small liberal arts colleges, his influence, as well as that of American disciples of Natorp and Pestalozzi, still has lasting value, since it is based on the idea that we are all souls in development.

Drawing on a distinction between 'primary' and 'secondary' experience derived from J. J. Gibson's ecological psychology, Edward S. Reed argues that our 'psychosocial ills' result from rampant 'degradation of opportunities for primary experience.' That Reed slides easily from 'experience' to 'information' is less due to Gibson's psychology than to the spirit of the time in which he writes: it is a truism that we live in an age of information, where every experience is an act of communication. But, as Reed notes, progress in information technology has been matched by regress in communication. We spend billions on a 'superhighway' that carries every kind of information except the ecological information 'that allows us to experience things for ourselves.' In a pattern familiar from cities shaped by automobiles, the line of this highway traces a virtually impermeable wall. While (sometimes) increasing access to 'processed' information, it (almost always) decreases access to 'ecological' information. This is a 'pedagogical' as well as a 'perceptual' problem; my intent in this paper is to pose the problem clearly as a first step toward addressing it adequately.

Paideiarefers to a particular sort of education which has historically been concerned with learning for the sake of learning, i.e., for the development of mind. As such, paideia is distinguished from specialized learning, training and learning for extrinsic purposes. Paideia is embodied in the traditional notion of Liberal Education which holds that such an education is the development of mind through the achievement of worthwhile knowledge and understanding. A contemporary trend in the literature of philosophy of mind and epistemology is a concern with cognitive functions of the human mind and the role of these functions in the acquisition of knowledge. The functional conception of the mind emphasizes learning (cognitive development) through cognitive training to monitor and control one's own mental processes. The uncritical incorporation of cognitive theories of mind and knowledge acquisition into current educational theory and practice suggests that paideia can be combined with, if not enhanced by, cognitive training. This paper takes the position that such an assumption is misguided and that the 'matter' of mind is an issue which requires clarification for advocates of paideia. The paper contrasts the cognitive approach to a 'conventionalist' conception of mind which, arguably, is the concept of mind assumed by advocates of paideia.

An education for Cosmopolis is a kind of mediation between a cultural matrix and the meaning and value it confers on personal and communal self-appropriation, as genuine human beings, through history. The main strategy for a cosmopolitan educative integrates, around the notion of Cosmopolis, the tasks of an education conceived as a personal achievement and an education conceived as a legacy one generation shares with another. Cosmopolis, as a higher viewpoint of a culture, is based on the power of detachment and disinterestedness of human spirit; it is not an utopia nor an imaginative synthesis. A cosmopolitan education is radically emancipative. It involves a dialectical self-appropriation of the dynamic unit of human consciousness in the variables of development. Self-appropriation involves a fourfold conversion: psycho-affective, intellectual, moral, and religious. A cosmopolitan education also teaches us to think historically, to reach a world-cultural community, and to withdraw from practicality to save practicality. These thoughts are developed from the work of Bernard J. F. Lonergan.

If the educator is characterized by a willingness to stand for something and simultaneously willing to care for someone, then the philosophy of authenticity should help the educator out of the problems that the Enlightenment project and some of its critics have created. While our integrative authenticity should rescue us from despair, it should also correct the possible immobilism occasioned by the interpretation of some postmodernist authors. Here, what we take as somehow fulfilling us, to a certain extent also conceived in a naturalistic way, binds us to the ways of structuring our concerns so that others can participate in a common framework. But such a philosophical perspective is confronted with two objections. First, one asks whether it is still ethics given the importance it gives to the empirical level. Second, it is questioned whether there really is a place for the other, whether it in fact transcends subjectivism. This paper deals with some of Nietzsche's central ideas and argues that the reproach of extreme relativism and scepticism is not justified. It concludes that one may find on the contrary an interesting way of dealing with the necessarily individualistic nature of education as well for the educator as for the educandus.

The transition from 'classical' to 'modern' culture has meant the disappearance of any normative, universal, and absolute culture in which all humanity is to be educated. But that, in itself, does not mean that there is now nothing 'transcending' culture that philosophy can teach humanity. I argue that Bernard Lonergan's analysis of the rational, self-conscious subject, as constituted by the conscious operations of experiencing, understanding, judging, and deciding, provides a 'fixed base, an invariant pattern' as the condition for the possibility of educating humanity.

This paper focuses on the problems of education in the philosophical and sociological legacy of P. Sorokin.

One of the anticipations of this Congress, namely, that of all the world's philosophical traditions address the 'problems of human life, civilization, and residence on earth,' cannot be accomplished by insisting upon the means and prescriptions of any one tradition. In this paper I address the theme of the Congress by considering the views of Johann Gottfried Herder and Hans-Georg Gadamer on education and history. In spite of attacks on his religious loyalties, Herder supported what may today be called pluralism. Having studied history and having watched history in the making of one of its darkest moments, Gadamer also saw the future of the humanities in the global conversation. To educate humanity, I conclude, philosophy should first attempt to understand the existential conditions of human life.

In what follows, I focus on the partiality and fallibility of each of us as individuals, and explore what that means for us as epistemic agents. When we examine the tradition of Western European thought, we note that most epistemological theories assume individuals can know the answer, and are able to critique what is passed down to others as socially constructed knowledge. Many have made the argument that while humanity can be deceived, one individual can know, and therefore teach the others about their deceptions and false beliefs. I argue that because we are embedded and embodied social beings who do not have transcendental, objective, "God's eye views" of the world in which we live, we need each other to help us be potential knowers able to make knowledge claims. Others help us become aware of our own situatedness and help us develop enlarged views. Rather than thinking that individual philosophers, credentialed experts in their field of study, know more and therefore have knowledge they can teach humanity, I argue that all of us, as members of humanity, have much that we can teach each other. My position is that it is only with the help of others that we are able to know anything.

What follows considers the problem of technical improvement as one of the main problems in the philosophy of education. I consider technology in connection with transferring from substantial comprehension to comprehension of the process itself. The creation of educational technologies is the expansion of educational freedom, from freedom inside action to freedom inside reflection. The connection between education and technology ensures creating and modifying a particular, non-formal, and humane pedagogy.

In pre-democratic South Africa, people never learned to listen to the stories of their fellow human beings because that was seen as a threat rather than a challenge. With the long-awaited political and constitutional changes taking place, a different societal structure is being established and a new democratic value system formally and officially being embraced. It would, however, be naive to imagine that policy changes would transform deeply-rooted attitudes, practices and existing structures overnight. The change into a democratic society does not mean, unfortunately, that a political, social and educational utopia is being created instantly. All learners will have to develop the skills, knowledge competence and attitudes to function effectively in a culturally diverse society. It will require a major paradigm shift from most educators, philosophers of education, and teacher trainers, as well as parents. I will argue for a pluralistic, problem-centered approach to teacher education and training that would be helpful in educating students to respect others and diversity.