John dewey in france

The present article on John Dewey aims at pursuing the traces of the reception of Dewey’s work in France. It is intended as a survey of the writers who have taken note of Dewey and his ideas, and is meant to function as a sort of additive inventory, with no claim to comprehensiveness. Some of the articles mentioned were unfortunately unavailable for direct examination and are thus listed merely for purposes of information. Although the educational and philosophical writings of John Dewey are actually indivisible, Dewey’s oeuvre has not been read in France and Europe generally as of a piece, but has largely been registered in terms of those parts which have relevance to education and teaching. Indicative of this is the fact that it took until 1975 forDemocracy and Education (1916)-the book which, in Dewey’s own view, most clearly presented his linking of pedagogy and philosophy (Delledalle, 1975; Suhr, 1994) — to be published in France. Gérard Delledalle, the translator ofDemocracy and Education, is the only person so far in France to have dealt systematically with the whole of Dewey’s writings. He has translated other works by Dewey and has written several books on him, dealing expressly with Dewey’s philosophy of pragmatism as the foundation of his theory of education. It is actually inadequate to restrict the reception of Dewey’s work to France alone. Rather, one should speak of francophone Europe, for the first translations of Dewey’s educational writings into French were made by Adolphe Ferrière, Ovide Decroly and édouard Claparède — a Swiss, a Belgian, and a Frenchman. It was thanks to them that Dewey’s thoughts on education began to make an impact on the francophone movement for school reform in the early twentieth century. Discussion of his theory of education is typified in France as well by a division into proponents of a concept of ‘learning by doing’ indebted to Dewey (particularly in France) and representatives of authoritarian forms of education, which reject Dewey. Although French thought has not yet concerned itself closely with pragmatism, Dewey’s opponents believed (and still believe) that they could denounce him and his theories simply by levelling the charge of “pragmatism.” This dualistic mode of thinking which appears to be deeply rooted in France has proved to be an obstacle to the reception of Dewey and has led to neglect and rejection of his theories.     

The renewal of dewey — trends in the nineties

This article proposes that the ‘renewal’ of Dewey might contribute to filling the gap between the pedagogical commitment to contingency and plurality and the fact that the pedagogical tradition, until now, has neutralized contingency and denied its systematic meaning for education. Therefore, the main traits of the ‘renewal of Dewey’ are shown in the work of some Dewey scholars who, critically and creatively, reconstruct Dewey in the mirror of poststructural, communicational and constructive theory developments. Following Dewey, these researches balance the objective evaluation of Dewey’s work by a deliberate and overt pursuit of their own intentions and (pre-)selections by the scholars. Intersubjectivity and communication are key concepts in this renewal of pragmatism rejecting the subject-centered philosophy of consciousness, the traditional western epistemology and metaphysics. The turn to the philosophical priority of the unforeseeable also leads to an understanding of action as an essential focus. In this context Dewey’s pragmatistic view of radical democracy is received as a non-foundational theory and the concept of consensus is criticized. The scholars clarify that the boundaries of the subject are broadened by communicative destabilization. At the end of the article it is asked what the renewal-dimensions mean for education located in the public sphere.     

Troublesome Sentiments: The Origins of Dewey’s Antipathy to Children’s Imaginative Activities

One of the interesting aspects of Dewey’s early educational thought is his apparent hostility toward children’s imaginative pursuits, yet the question of why this antipathy exists remains unanswered. As will become clear, Dewey’s hostility towards imaginative activities stemmed from a broad variety of concerns. In some of his earliest work, Dewey adopted a set of anti-Romantic criticisms and used these concerns to attack what one might call “runaway” imaginative and emotional tendencies. Then, in his early educational writings, these earlier concerns were augmented by several other factors, including problematic trends in progressive education, new developments in psychology, and Dewey’s own educational aims. This analysis explores the roots of these criticisms, and explains how they culminate in the stance on the imagination that Dewey eventually outlined in the early educational writings. Notably, these findings have some important implications for certain prominent contemporary critics of progressivism.     

The global community, religion, and education: the modernity of Dewey’s social philosophy

As a starting point this paper takes Dewey’s nowadays often stressed modernity and examines his social philosophy against the background of the current debates on republicanism and communitarianism. Particularly, the anaysis of Dewey’sThe Public and its Problem (1927) concludes that the attention being paid to Dewey is problematic as specific religious assumptions — explicitly developed inA Common Faith (1934) -lie in the background of his social philosophy, and are hardly being recognized. However, as it shall be shown, without considering the religious basis, neither Dewey’s social philosophy nor his educational theory can be properly understood.     

John Dewey’s teaching methods in the discussion on german-language kindergartens — a case of non-perception?

At the beginning of the 20th century, German-language kindergartens were completely overshadowed by Friedrich Froebel’s tradition. The search for new forms of teaching started mainly by taking over the body of thinking developed by teaching reformers. John Dewey’s work was only accorded marginal examination. The person who got to grips most intensively with John Dewey and the American tradition of kindergarten teaching during the first half of the 20th century is Emmy Walser, one of the leading personalities in the kindergarten movement in Switzerland. As a result, the “free working method” developed in Switzerland as the new method. Dewey’s educational philosophy was reduced to the methodology of the free working method which had the effect of giving new life to Froebel’s ideas.     

A Comparison of Dewey’s and Russell’s Influences on China

John Dewey and Bertrand Russell visited China at around the same time in 1920. Both profoundly influenced China during the great transition period of this country. This article will focus on the differences between the two great figures that influenced China in the 1920s. This comparison will examine the following five aspects: 1. Deweyanization vs. Russellization; 2. Dewey’s “Populism” vs. Russell’s “Aristocraticism”; 3. Dewey’s “Syntheticalism” vs. Russell’s “Analyticalism”; 4. Dewey’s “Realism” vs. Russell’s “Romanticism”; 5. Dewey’s “Conservatism” vs. Russell’s “Radicalism”. This examination will highlight that, although their visit left indelible impressions among Chinese intellecturals, for the radical Marx–Leninists, any Western philosophy and socio-political theories, including Dewey’s and Russell’s, were prejudicial, outworn, and even counterrevolutionary. Soon “Marxi–Leninization” was gradually substituted for “Deweyanization” and “Russellization.”     

John Dewey and the development of education in russia before 1930 — report on a forgotten reception

This article explores the kinds of response John Dewey (1859–1952) received in Russia between 1900 and 1930, and the impact he had on the educational debate there. The study’s main findings are: Both before and after the Socialist October Revolution of 1917, Dewey had a significant impact on the development of the Russian school system. The ultimate rejection of Dewey’s pedagogy towards the end of the 20s was not due to educational but to political and ideological reasons.     

German readers of dewey — before 1933 and after 1945

Few pedagogical theories and practices have met with such strong reactive ambivalence in Germany as Dewey’s. As it contained the ideas of democracy and pragmatism it clashed with the monarchial and idealistic patterns of school-practice and pedagogic theory right from the beginning. On the other hand, reformists of all kinds were overwhelmed with enthusiasm. But even in the democratic phases of political development this ambivalence continued. The tradition of setting metaphysical and religious backgrounds stood in the way of a free examination of Dewey. Therefore, the reception has, up until now, been signed by mistakes and misinterpretations, but also by a minority of fruitful debates.     

Neuropragmatism, old and new

Recent work in neurophilosophy has either made reference to the work of John Dewey or independently developed positions similar to it. I review these developments in order first to show that Dewey was indeed doing neurophilosophy well before the Churchlands and others, thereby preceding many other mid-twentieth century European philosophers’ views on cognition to whom many present day philosophers refer (e.g., Heidegger, Merleau-Ponty). I also show that Dewey’s work provides useful tools for evading or overcoming many issues in contemporary neurophilosophy and philosophy of mind. In this introductory review, I distinguish between three waves among neurophilosophers that revolve around the import of evolution and the degree of brain-centrism. Throughout, I emphasize and elaborate upon Dewey’s dynamic view of mind and consciousness. I conclude by introducing the consciousness-as-cooking metaphor as an alternative to both the consciousness-as-digestion and consciousness-as-dancing metaphors. Neurophilosophical pragmatism—or neuropragmatism—recognizes the import of evolutionary and cognitive neurobiology for developing a science of mind and consciousness. However, as the cooking metaphor illustrates, a science of mind and consciousness cannot rely on the brain alone—just as explaining cooking entails more than understanding the gut—and therefore must establish continuity with cultural activities and their respective fields of inquiry. Neuropragmatism advances a new and promising perspective on how to reconcile the scientific and manifest images of humanity as well as how to reconstruct the relationship between science and the humanities.     

Pragmatism as a Philosophy of Education in the Hispanic World: A Response

We concentrate on four questions among the many posed by this special collection of papers on Pragmatism and the Hispanic world. They are, first, what took pragmatism beyond the borders of the United States and into the Hispanic world? Next, what are the ideas of Dewey (or pragmatism) that have had the greatest impact on Hispanic culture? Third, what are the past and present obstacles that has kept the Hispanic world from using pragmatism to deal with many of their educational and social problems? Finally, why does pragmatism still hold great promise and potential for the Hispanic world?     

Wen,Haiming, <Emphasis Type="Italic">Confucian Pragmatism as the Art of Contextualizing Personal Experience and World</Emphasis>

Certain discussions about “relativism” in the philosophy of Zhuangzi turn on the question of the morality of his dao 道. Some commentators, most notably Robert Eno, maintain that there is no ethical value whatsoever to Zhuangzi’s dao as presented in the Cook Ding episode and other “knack passages.” In this essay, it is argued that there is indeed a moral dimension to Cook Ding’s dao. One way to recognize it is to explore the similarity between that dao and John Dewey’s notion of educational method. There are moral traits that Dewey can appeal to in recommending his method. It is argued here that these traits represent the moral features of Cook Ding’s dao as well.     

Dewey in Britain

Dewey’s ideas were slower to be accepted in Britain than elsewhere. Reasons for this are considered under four headings: pedagogical, epistemological, social and political. Of these, only the pedagogical ideas elicited a modicum of support in the first half of the century. Developments after 1960, however, led to widespread implementation of Dewey’s principles mainly in the primary education sector.     

Why are we fighting? A view of the “great war” from across the ocean

This article examines the dispute concerning the meaning of World War I among leading American intellectuals in the period 1915–1918. Taking center stage here are the views of one of the founding fathers of American pragmatism, John Dewey (1859–1952), on the causes of the “Great War,” its higher meaning and goals which led to America’s entry into the War and also its influence on the social reconstruction of American society and the post-War world order. The final section of the article is devoted to a critique of Dewey’s position towards American participation in the War by another famous American intellectual, Randolph Bourne (1886–1918), who laid the foundations for a tradition of social criticism in the U.S. in the twentieth century.     

Dewey and Rawls on Education

In this paper I compare the roles that the explicit and implicit educational theories of John Dewey and John Rawls play in their political works to show that Rawls’s approach is skeletal and inappropriate for defenders of democracy. I also uphold Dewey’s belief that education is valuable in itself, not only derivatively, contra Rawls. Next, I address worries for any educational theory concerning problems of distributive justice. Finally, I defend Dewey’s commitment to democracy as a consequence of the demands of productive public inquiry and education.

John Dewey on Educating the Moral Self

Despite the affirmation below from a chapter entitled “The Moral Self” in his Ethics (1932), Deweyseems not to have used the term “moralself” outside that context. Perhaps he didn’t think it that crucial in his overall philosophy. I argue, on the contrary, that the concept ofthe moralself is fundamental to Deweyan moral psychology and that it provides an illuminating lens through which to view his philosophy of education. This paper explicates Dewey’s perspective on moral education as education of the moral self.     

Context and interaction. how to assess Dewey’s influence on educational reform in Europe?

This article addresses some methodological questions that are at stake in assessing the influence of the ideas of John Dewey on the renewal of European education in the twentieth century, using examples from the history of Dutch education. It is argued that in this kind of research the focus should not be on the process of influence as such, but rather on the activity of reception. This, in turn, requires a contextual reconstruction of the interaction between Deweyan ideas and practices and existing ones. The case studies presented in this article exemplify the more general methodological observations. They not only provide an insight in the role of Deweyan ideas and practices in the development of Dutch education but also make clear for what reasons, mostly unrelated to the significance of Dewey’s work, these ideas and practices did not have any lasting influence on the development of Dutch education, both on the level of early childhood education and primary and secondary schools.     

Capability and Learning to Choose

The Capability Approach (henceforth CA) is in the first place an approach to the evaluation of individual well-being and social welfare. Many disciplines refer to the CA, first and foremost welfare economics, development studies and political philosophy. Educational theory was not among the first disciplines that took notice of the CA, but has a rising interest in it. This paper argues that the CA would also profit from looking into educational theory. The first part of the paper shows why and where educational theory—or more precisely: a theory of learning—is missing in the CA. This is done in three steps: the first section gives a brief overview of the core concepts of Sen’s CA. Section “Capability and Choosing” focuses on the role of choosing in the CA. It states the views of Sen and Nussbaum on choosing and shows the shortcomings in their appreciation of choosing. In consequence, the third section derives some demands on a theory of learning in the CA. The second part of the paper presents Dewey’s educational theory on experience as a possible starting point when looking for a learning theory that lends itself to the integration in the CA. Section “Opportunity of Choosing, Experience and Education” introduces Dewey’s conception of experience, freedom of the learner, conditions of experience and education. Section “Capability and Experience” discusses how Dewey’s concepts fit into the CA. On the first glance, there are three points in which the CA and Dewey’s concepts match: the importance of freedom for human life, the role of participation in education and the need to take internal and external factors as well as their interaction into account in assessing choice situations. This establishes a basis for linking both theories. Yet, more research is needed to explore the issue further. Section “Conclusion and Outlook” concludes and sketches the lines for future research.     

Toward an Epistemology of the Hand

Western philosophy has been greatly influenced by visual metaphors. Knowing something has commonly, yet implicitly, been conceptualized as seeing something clearly, learning has been framed as being visually exposed to something, and the mind has been understood as a ‘mirror of nature’. A whole ‘epistemology of the eye’ has been at work, which has had significant practical implications, not least in educational contexts. One way to characterize John Dewey’s pragmatism is to see it as an attempt to replace the epistemology of the eye with an epistemology of the hand. This article develops the epistemology of the hand on three levels: A level of embodiment and metaphors, of craftsmanship and social practices, and of schooling and education.     

Democracy and Education: About the Future of a Problem

In 20th century’s European theory of education there was little interest in philosophy ofdemocracy. John Dewey’sDemocracy and Education was translated in nearly every European language but did not become the center of discussion. Even “radical education” was much more childcentered than open to radical questions of political democracy. This article discusses the problem in two respects, first the tension between neo-liberalism’s concept of individuality and public education, and second the future problems of a theory of “democratic education”after Dewey. The aim is to overcome traditional European dualisms like that of “citizen”or “man” i.e. to pave the way for a post-Rousseauian theory of education. Inaugural lecture upon taking office at the University of Zurich on 22nd November 1999.     

Crisis and lachrymosity: on Salo Baron, Neobaronianism, and the study of modern European Jewish history

Salo Baron (1895–1989) remains an iconic figure among historians of the Jews, who routinely cite his dissent from the ‘lachrymose conception of Jewish history’ as a ideal to be upheld. Contemporary historians have generally understood the Baronian imperative to favor a historiography that seeks continuities instead of ruptures, deemphasizes Jews’ victimhood in favor of their achievements and successful integration, and affirms diaspora creativity in opposition to Zionist disparagement of exile. They have also affirmed that imperative equally for all periods and places in Jewish history. Close analysis of Baron’s corpus suggests that such a reading is better termed ‘neo-Baronian,’ for Baron himself employed his injunction against lachrymosity in reference to the middle ages only, whereas his depiction of the modern era stressed sustained crisis, conflict, and insecurity throughout the Jewish world. Such a depiction is fully consistent with his conception of the conditions under which Jews were most likely to find safety and prosperity. That conception, which posited the preferability of ‘states of nationalities’ to ‘nation-states’ and stressed the need for a strong international order capable of checking unrestrained state sovereignty, was evidently born out of Baron’s own experience as a refugee in Vienna during and after the First World War.