Sparks Commentary: Some thoughts about philosophy education

“[I] am a sort of gadfly, given to the state by the god; and the state is a great and noble steed who is tardy in his motions owing to his very size, and requires to be stirred into life. I am that gadfly which the gods have attached to the state, and all day long and in all places am always fastening upon you, arousing and persuading and reproaching you. You will not easily find another like me …”

– Socrates at his trial, as recorded in Plato's “Apology”

I am not the sort of person that you would expect to be an advocate for philosophy education. I am a card-carrying member of the religious right, and I am aghast at the liberal indoctrination that so often passes for “education” today. Moreover, I disapprove of the “ivory-tower academia” that philosophy has sometimes degenerated into today. Yet I am a vigorous advocate of philosophy education. Why?

Socrates, who is quoted above

The great ideas of our heritage should be neither disregarded nor forgotten

Part of it is that I’m very interested in ideas, and philosophy is very much about ideas. But part of it actually comes from my conservatism, the part of myself (besides my Christianity) whose support for philosophy would most surprise people. I may be an old romantic to say this, but I believe that our society has a forgotten heritage of great ideas. I believe that they should not be forgotten. I don’t believe that everyone should be “experts” in philosophy, but I do believe that it should be respected as an ancient and proud discipline. This is not to say that every college student should be required to take a class in it, although I do think that it should be applicable to certain general education requirements (particularly humanities), when students do decide to take them. I think that it would be reasonable to discuss it – from time to time, at least – in history classes, civics classes, and even literature classes. I think that great ideas should be taught, even if they are not always taught correctly. People sometimes will see the greatness of these ideas, even when the philosophy professors that teach about them are less-than-enchanted with these ideas, and even try to refute them in their lectures. Sometimes people find these arguments to be more convincing than the refutations, and adopt them despite their professor’s best efforts to discredit and “debunk” them. At any rate, they should be exposed to them, if they are to be truly educated about the world of ideas.

Abraham Lincoln, who is paraphrased below

It is good (for at least some of us) to be familiar with opposing arguments

To lift a quote from Abraham Lincoln out of context (and I admit this freely), I believe that great ideas should be “breathed by every American mother, to the lisping babe, that prattles on her lap.” I believe that great ideas should be “taught in schools, in seminaries, and in colleges.” I believe that great ideas should be “written in Primmers, spelling books, and in Almanacs.” And I believe that great ideas should be “preached from the pulpit, proclaimed in legislative halls, and enforced in courts of justice.” Such is not the case today, but such could be the case if the great ideas of our heritage were rediscovered and revitalized, and brought to the center of the public consciousness. Philosophy is at the core of what human beings do, simply by virtue of being human. Human beings try to find out what is true, and what is false. They try to find out what is real, and what is imaginary. And they try to find out what is right, and what is “just plain wrong.” In this sense, philosophy is both natural and practical. One might even say that it is “unavoidable.” What distinguishes human beings is whether they do it well or badly, and this is where education can come into play. What passes for “education” today may mislead or misinform, but it is good to be familiar with it nonetheless. If for no other reason, it is good to be familiar with the common misconceptions about philosophical truth (or any other kind of truth), so that one may be able to refute these opposing arguments.

Plato

The Sophists taught the Greeks how to win arguments, regardless of morality or consequences

It is difficult (if not impossible) to refute those arguments that are disreputable, if one has no understanding of the nature and content of these arguments, and the assumptions upon which they are based. Again, this is where education can come into play, if we allow it to do so. Not everyone has the disposition to engage in arguments, of either the formal or informal kinds, in everyday life. But those that do so need to be informed about the opposing arguments, if they are to show why these arguments are wrong, and why they should be discarded. One group that does so for a living are lawyers, who argue these issues in formal contexts when they come into play. If good lawyers are to win the most important cases – the ones that really matter more than others – then they ought to be exposed to the discipline of philosophy, and the commonly-held misconceptions that it sometimes teaches today. Lawyers are a diverse lot, and they range from honest advocates of truth to disreputable practitioners of sophistry and dishonesty. In the earliest-known Greek philosophy, there was a school of thought known as the Sophists, who taught people how to win arguments, regardless of the moral or practical consequences of doing so. They were well-versed in the arts of lying and deceiving, and misleading the gullible into all kinds of errors (sometimes while believing them themselves). This tradition lives on in parts of the legal profession today, and in other areas of everyday life. But there was one who answered their challenge, and who taught people that virtue is more important than ill-gained profit. This man was Socrates, and he is famous today as the man who turned the Athenian establishment on its head. He rebelled against corruption in high places. He was a self-appointed “gadfly,” whose purpose was to reproach those who disdained truth, and to discredit those who openly flouted and rejected it.

Socrates

Socrates taught people how to be virtuous, and was willing to die for his principles

His teachings were not always popular, and ultimately led to his execution at the hands of the Athenian government in 399 BC. But after his death, his teachings gained wide acceptance, in a society that had once voted to execute him for his supposed “impiety” and “corrupting the youth.” The Athenians had a sort of “guilt complex” over killing their most distinguished citizen, and many later listened to his teachings with greater reverence than they had ever done during his lifetime (although some had done so even then). In many ways, Socrates won the battle with his accusers (and accused them in his turn), even if he had to die to do it. He refused to attempt to escape from prison, even when opportunities to do so were helpfully presented to him in good faith. The reason for this was that he believed it “immoral” to reject the state’s right to judge him, and he believed himself duty-bound to accept their verdict calmly and courageously. This is why his death sentence was indeed carried out. Socrates was choosing to accept the rule of law as one of his guiding principles, even when he would have to die for his principles.

The death of Socrates, which was by drinking hemlock poison

This is what philosophy is all about, and this is why it should be taught in the schools

This is what philosophy is all about, and this is why it should be taught in the schools. People need role models to pattern their lives after, and Socrates provides such a pattern for people who want to live justly. There are also a number of less-than-reputable characters in the history of philosophy, whose ideas should not be held in such high esteem. But there are also respectable people who did what was right, and who taught the world how to live morally and justly. Such people do not come from just one faith or background, but come from anywhere that virtue is honored and taught. If our school system forgets these things, it will turn to other sources to fill the void; and these other sources may not be as reputable as the great minds and thinkers of history, who include many philosophers among them.

Aristotle

The bad parts of philosophy should be rejected (although studied anyway), but the good parts should be held sacred and cherished

Philosophy is not the only place that offers such truth, but philosophy at its best is about living better and more virtuous lives. It is about finding truth and rejecting error, and finding the path to true happiness. Philosophers have not always succeeded in finding these things, and many have actually led humanity backwards into still greater errors. But mixed among these not-so-distinguished philosophers are a number of philosophers who were different – who were truly great. A number have made great contributions to humanity, and some have led people closer to timeless truth. Such people should be heeded, and the great ideas of our heritage rediscovered and cherished as precious jewels. The bad parts should indeed be rejected (although studied anyway), but the good parts should be held sacred, and held close to the collective heart of modern society.

“When my sons are grown up, I would ask you, O my friends, to punish them; and I would have you trouble them, as I have troubled you, if they seem to care about riches, or anything, more than about virtue; or if they pretend to be something when they are really nothing,—then reprove them, as I have reproved you, for not caring about that for which they ought to care, and thinking that they are something when they are really nothing. And if you do this, both I and my sons will have received justice at your hands.”

– Socrates at his trial, as recorded in Plato's “Apology”

If you liked this post, you might also like:

Reading about the trial of Socrates in the original Greek

“Man is the measure of all things” … or is he?

Some thoughts about classical education

Some thoughts about history education

Some thoughts about civics education

The difference between skepticism and closed-mindedness

The conservative who liked philosophy

Why I like political philosophy

Part of a series about

Education

General education
Civics education
History education
Classical education