The general rationale for giving priority to freedom of speech can be stated very
succinctly. For any proposed freedom F, being free may turn out to be an illusion if there has been no opportunity to test the freedom claimed against contrary opinions. In short, we cannot know that we enjoy freedom F– we cannot even know what exercising that freedom would be – until F itself has been subjected to and survived unrestricted critical scrutiny. And that in turn requires freedom of speech. For if we rely on anything short of that, the freedom we had imagined we were exercising may be illusory (Harris, 2009. p. 126).
Reference
Harris, H. (2009). Freedom of speech and philosophy of education. British Journal of Educational Studies, 57,111-126.
As noted in Harris (2009)work, what are the differences between “Arsitotelian”, Platonic and Socratic views of education as it pertains to freedom of speech? Which view you would ascribe to? Give your rationale.
There are fundamental differences between the Aristotelian, platonic and Socratic views of education with respect to freedom of speech. However the Aristotelian and Socratic models share more similarities to each other than either of them shares with the platonic model.
ReplyDeleteIn the Aristotelian paradigm there should be no restrictions in the quest for knowledge. Everything should be queried. In the Socratic paradigm, however each individual should decide what is worthy of investigating. in the platonic paradigm the leaders/State should decide what type of education the masses should know.
According to Aristotle books are essential to education and unrestricted freedom should be given to written expressions of speech. In Plato’s view the state sets the limits on freedom of speech. Conversely, Socrates, believe that only "fools" would express in writing their dearest thoughts.
The Aristotelian and Socratic models are more consistent with the "absolutist" view of freedom compared to the Platonic model which would necessitate "circumstantial restrictions".
The latter model can be describe as conservative while the former two above can be describe as liberal, with respect to freedom of speech. Hence, The Aristotelian and Socratic models would fit the democratic form of government while the Platonic model would fit a communist form of government. Therefore, the Aristotelian and Socratic models of education would offer greater freedom of speech than the Platonic model. However, the Aristotelian model would give greater freedom than the Socratic model with respect to written expressions of speech.
Most modern systems of education have elements of all three models of educations. Nevertheless, the Aristotelian model have had the greatest impact on modern educational systems. All three systems have noteworthy elements. Aristotelian thinking is largely responsible for the knowledge explosion and the mind boggling advancements in technology. Platonic thinking is responsible for the development of regulatory bodies such as FDA, FIU, Price Control etc. which has prevented abuse and violations of human rights by unscrupulous and crooked individuals and groups. I particularly like the Socratic models emphasis on debating as a path to education. I believe that there is a battle for truth. Opinions about every area of knowledge abounds. According to the "law of philosophical contradictions" two opposing views cannot both be true simultaneously. For instance, God either exists or he doesn't. Debates can give freedom of expression and allow one to decide what is truth base on the preponderance of evidence. The system of education with respect to free speech that I would recommend would include the "positive " traits outlined above from Aristotle, Plato and Socrates.
In Roy Harris 2009 article “Freedom of speech and Philosophy of Education” freedom of speech is seldom raised as an issue in the philosophy of Education. It is important to distinguish between a freedom and its exercise and different philosophies of Education. Harris acquires masses of information that compares and contrasts various Classical Greek philosophers both morally and ethically to grasp his readers’ attention and to bring across his arguments.
ReplyDeleteOver the centuries there have been many different great philosophers who have walked the earth. According to Harris, Classical Greece was hardly a literate society of the kind we are used to today. Classical Greece had no news papers, no dictionaries, and no printing presses.
Aristotle was the first philosopher who had a passion for books and thought it worth to collect books which was an unusual thing to do in those days. He was a persistent collector of facts and believes that one cannot keep all the information about the world in their head. Aristotelian perspective is that freedom of speech is vital in education. For where there is no freedom of speech in discussion and presenting a topic then, that automatically imposes limits in human knowledge and the process of education.
For Socrates there is only one method of education, which he himself follows. One can only acquire an education by debate and long drawn out confrontations. This is the forum in which the great intellectual questions are posed. What is truth? What is a fact? What is a sound argument? The death of Socrates is one of the greatest landmarks in intellectual history. He was put to death under a democracy. The death of Socrates also teaches us the lesson that it takes a remarkable individual to value personal intellectual integrity above the dictates of society. In other words you must learn how to value your own beliefs and be prepared to defend them.
On the other hand, Plato believed philosophical reflection was the only path to knowledge and that observation was not necessary to acquire knowledge. However, he believed that education was crucial for a just society. Therefore, with Plato, the welfare of the whole community depends on the education that the state provides for it leaders.
In my opinion all theories can be merged into one theory to holistically educate an individual. However, if I have to choose one, then as a teacher I support Socrates philosophy. The free communication of ideas and opinions is one of the most precious of the rights of man. Every citizen may, accordingly, speak, write, and print with freedom, but shall be responsible for such abuses of this freedom as shall be defined by law. Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted in 1948.
Freedom of speech can be used to our advantage in the classroom with the proper guidance. I surely benefited from “Socratic seminars” at the university level. This had allowed me to listen to others respectfully and voice my opinion constructively and critically. I will apply the experience or strategy in my classroom with my students. I believe in allowing students to speak freely at a given time and be guided through meaningful discussions allows them to think critically and brings out their thoughts creatively. And if practiced students will be able communicate with reasoning to every one that they come in contact with in the world.
An educated society, in “Socratic” view, is a society that not only recognizes but acts on the priority of that message.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_speech
Harris,R. (2009). Freedom of Speech.,119-123
Over the centuries there have been many different great philosophers who have walked the earth. According to Harris, Classical Greece was hardly a literate society of the kind we are used to today. Classical Greece had no news papers, no dictionaries, and no printing presses.
ReplyDeleteAristotle was the first philosopher who had a passion for books and thought it worth to collect books which was an unusual thing to do in those days. He was a persistent collector of facts and believes that one cannot keep all the information about the world in their head. Aristotelian perspective is that freedom of speech is vital in education. For where there is no freedom of speech in discussion and presenting a topic then, that automatically imposes limits in human knowledge and the process of education.
For Socrates there is only one method of education, which he himself follows. One can only acquire an education by debate and long drawn out confrontations. This is the forum in which the great intellectual questions are posed. What is truth? What is a fact? What is a sound argument? The death of Socrates teaches us the lesson that it takes a remarkable individual to value personal intellectual integrity above the dictates of society. In other words you must learn how to value your own beliefs and be prepared to defend them.
On the other hand, Plato believed philosophical reflection was the only path to knowledge and that observation was not necessary to acquire knowledge. However, he believed that education was crucial for a just society. Therefore, with Plato, the welfare of the whole community depends on the education that the state provides for it leaders.
In my opinion all theories can be merged into one theory to holistically educate an individual. However, if I have to choose one, then as a teacher I support Socrates philosophy. The free communication of ideas and opinions is one of the most precious of the rights of man. Every citizen may, accordingly, speak, write, and print with freedom, but shall be responsible for such abuses of this freedom as shall be defined by law. Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted in 1948.
Freedom of speech can be used to our advantage in the classroom with the proper guidance. I surely benefited from “Socratic seminars” at the university level. This had allowed me to listen to others respectfully and voice my opinion constructively and critically. I will apply the experience or strategy in my classroom with my students. I believe in allowing students to speak freely at a given time and be guided through meaningful discussions allows them to think critically and brings out their thoughts creatively. And if practiced students will be able communicate with reasoning to every one that they come in contact with in the world.
An educated society, in “Socratic” view, is a society that not only recognizes but acts on the priority of that message.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_speech
Harris,R. (2009). Freedom of Speech.,119-123
There are fundamental differences between the Aristotelian, Platonic and Socratic views of education with respect to freedom of speech. However the Aristotelian and Socratic models share more similarities to each other than either of them shares with the Platonic model. Harrison(2009)outlined the major distinctions between these three models of Education as they differ with respest to their relationship to freedom of speech.
ReplyDeleteIn the Aristotelian paradigm there should be no restrictions in the quest for knowledge. Everything should be queried. In the Socratic paradigm, however each individual should decide what is worthy of investigating. in the platonic paradigm the leaders/State should decide what type of education the masses should know.
According to Aristotle books are essential to education and unrestricted freedom should be given to written expressions of speech. In Plato’s view the state sets the limits on freedom of speech. Conversely, Socrates, believe that only "fools" would express in writing their dearest thoughts.
The Aristotelian and Socratic models are more consistent with the "absolutist" view of freedom compared to the Platonic model which would necessitate "circumstantial restrictions".
The latter model can be describe as conservative while the former two above can be describe as liberal, with respect to freedom of speech. Hence, The Aristotelian and Socratic models would fit the democratic form of government while the Platonic model would fit a communist form of government. Therefore, the Aristotelian and Socratic models of education would offer greater freedom of speech than the Platonic model. However, the Aristotelian model would give greater freedom than the Socratic model with respect to written expressions of speech.
Most modern systems of education have elements of all three models of educations. Nevertheless, the Aristotelian model have had the greatest impact on modern educational systems. All three systems have noteworthy elements. Aristotelian thinking is largely responsible for the knowledge explosion and the mind boggling advancements in technology. Platonic thinking is responsible for the development of regulatory bodies such as FDA, FIU, Price Control etc. which has prevented abuse and violations of human rights by unscrupulous and crooked individuals and groups. I particularly like the Socratic models emphasis on debating as a path to education. I believe that there is a battle for truth. Opinions about every area of knowledge abounds. According to the "law of Philosophical Contradictions" two opposing views cannot both be true simultaneously. For instance, God either exists or he doesn't. Debates can give freedom of expression and allow one to decide what is truth base on the preponderance of evidence. The system of education with respect to free speech that I would recommend would include the "positive " traits outlined above from Aristotle, Plato and Socrates.
Nevertheless, the Socratic model would be my first choice if I had to choose only one. The greatest men of the world are those who can stand up for what they believe like Socrates, and be counted.Many of the great men and women of history and the Bible were men and women who were willing to express their convictions with voice and with pen often paying with ridicule, imprisonment, persecution and even deat.Someone once said, "If you don't have anything dear enough to die for, then you don't have anything to live for."
I found Claudette's comments interesting. Her response addressed all three requirements of the work. She brieftly compared the three systems of education, then she selected her system of choice and gave a rationale for her
ReplyDeleteselection. With the exception of a few gramatical errors Claudette did a good job.
When it comes to freedom of speech and education it is quite difficult to adapt to one theory while neglecting the others especially since times are changing rapidly; and what we once understood to be ‘truth’ then becomes questionable. However, the view I would most likely ascribe to would be a combination of both the Aristotle and the Socratic view of education.
ReplyDeleteSocrates believes that education is a matter of developing your own potential as an individual mind. Nothing of intellectually substance is to be taking for granted (p 123). Therefore with such a belief it allows an individual to question ‘thing’ and by questioning we then gain knowledge. This theory is quite similar to that of the Aristotelian perspective; they believe that freedom of speech is essential, because if there is any prohibition on discussing/presenting in public any set of topics, that automatically imposes limits on human knowledge and to that extent cripple education (p 112) which in my eyes makes perfect sense because if I am not ‘free’ to question things and speak my mind then how could I educate myself if I don’t get to see things from another perspectives?
As was evident in the writing of Harris (2009) the views of education from the various philosophers were indeed different for their own reasons. However, the only major difference between the Socrates and Aristotelian view of education is that Socrates believed that education cannot be had from books. The written text takes on life..., whom it can long outlive. It is an act of irresponsibility (p 121). While Socrates believe quite the opposite, they believe that books are indeed necessary in the quest for knowledge it provides us with the opportunity to retain additional information which the human brain maybe unable to store, it also gives us the opportunity to document additional findings.
On the other hand lies the Platonic view of education; they didn’t belief in finding out the answers to the ‘whys’. Education for them was required for those who are to be in charge of society, the guardians of true philosophical values (p 120). The ‘others’ should just simply follow without question. It is their belief that once society is led by educated individuals and they would be led ‘right’ which then there would be no need to question things.
I liked Onecia's use of the text to substantiate her discriptions of the three systems of education presented by Harris(2009). I think she addressed all the requirements of the work. However, she could have provided more information with respect to her personal rationale for selecting a combination of Aristotle/Socrates models of education.Perhaps, she could have singled out one as her first choice and give specific justifications for her selection.
ReplyDeleteJaclyn Swasey:
ReplyDeleteThe difference among all there paradigms is that all three philosophers did not prescribe to the same views on education. In Roy Harrison’s article on ‘Freedom of Speech and Philosophy in Education’ (2009), Aristotle viewed education as one acquired from books. He believed that knowledge must be stored in books for future reference. He was a habitual collector of facts in quest of knowledge. He believed that prohibiting freedom of speech would limit knowledge and cripple education.
Plato believed that philosophical reflection was the only path to knowledge and could only be guided by these great philosophers. He believed that knowledge cannot be gained by mere observation or senses; hence freedom of speech does not exist. No one should questions these great leaders who govern society and decide what is right or wrong.
Socrates believed that education is developing one’s own potential and cannot be found in books. It should not be confused with training. He believes that one can only acquire an education through debate. One must learn to value their beliefs and be prepared to defend them and not document them. He shared a strong belief in freedom of speech and surrendered to death in the cause of proving that democracy did not exist. In my opinion was truly a radical thinker.
I would tend to lean on subscribing more to Aristotle’s views because as human beings we are limited. We cannot expect to experience all things life has to offer, but we can learn about them in books or from others. We should not limit ourselves in what we can only see. Although both Plato and Socrates are extremists, Plato a dictator and Socrates a liberal, I can relate with Socrates in that we should hold on to our values and beliefs and be prepared to defend them, not just simply accept someone else’s version of the truth.
Harris,R. (2009). Freedom of Speech.,119-123
I can certainly agree with Claudette's statement about not having any documentations of great philosophers other than the ones mentioned. How sure can we be that these were the true documentations of their work? I too have often allowed my students to voice their opinions and interpretation of what is taught at school. I am in constant conflict with guiding them in what is required to pass an exam and still allow them to have the freedom of speech and taught. Are we so caught up in the old ways of Plato? Dictated by others who set standard in education that keeps failing our society? Or should we adopt a more liberal approach to the teaching of Aristotle, learning by discovery? I tend to doubt almost everything now that there is so much knowledge and views about every and anything.
ReplyDeleteAgain I can relate to the same school of thought as Onecia. The world is changing drastically before our eyes that we tend to question everything. We have become more open to others’ views and allow for those you still keep a close door. If we don’t keep up with time it will certainly leave us behind. Everday I learn more from my students than I teach them. We underestimate this new generation and condem them when they simply refuse to be prisoners of an old Platonic paradigm.
ReplyDeleteShaunna said
ReplyDeleteI would like to start by defining Philosophy: is the study of the purpose, nature and ideal content of education other questions the nature of the knowing of the mind and human subject, problems of authority the relationship between education and society.
In the article According to Roy Harris there was no documentation of philosophers work until Aristotle the last in line of the three philosophers had a passion for books which was very unusual in the time when these philosophers philosophize on the earth. I choose to start at the bottom of the hierarchy of the three philosophers. He loved collecting books which were facts that he can go back to for clarification. Aristotle passion for books arguably had far more influence on later liberal views of education than his two predecessors. Aristotle thought about education is very vital and intimately connected with the availability of books. Aristotle believes freedom of speech is essential where there is no freedom of speech in discussion or presenting in public any set of topics that automatically imposes limits in human knowledge and to that extend cripples education. Aristotle strongly believes that a state must not ban from its educational institutions and practices the expression of views about any subject matter. People must have freedom of speech. Aristotle also believes that there should be no warrant for denying teachers in the classroom in freedom of speech.
Plato next in line believed philosophical reflection was the only path to knowledge and that going out carefully observing the world and taking good note of what was found there. He was very skeptical about observations and relying on anything that our sense tells us. Plato equates education with the upbringing of those who were destined to govern society and to decide between right and wrong, justice and injustice. He believed that education was crucial for a just society. Plato believes the welfare of the whole community depends on the education that the state provides for it leaders. He was more dictatorial. Plato believes that the supreme office in any state is the Minister of Education.
Socrates is the third philosopher and the greatest teacher of all three. He believes that there is only one method of education, which he himself follows. One can only acquire an education by debate and long drawn out confrontations. This is the forum in which the great intellectual questions are posed. What are the values? What is right from wrong? What is a sound argument? Socrates view of education was essentially about teaching the young the right social values. The death of Socrates teaches us the unforgettable lesson that it takes a remarkable individual to value personal intellectual integrity above the dictates of society. In other words you must learn how to value your own beliefs and be prepared to defend them even if it is worth dying for.
I would choose and support Socrates Philosophy. In one of his articles known as the biography and paradoxes of Socrates, before his trial and death. He believes in “I only know that I Know Nothing” and he believed that wrongdoings was a consequence of ignorance and those who did wrong new no better. Article from the internet Biography of Socrates, Plato and Aristotle. I also believe in taking actions for what you say so people will be responsible and accountable for what they say.
I believe that Freedom of speech allows our students to speak freely, open minded and can think critically and engage in meaningful discussion. I love the Socratic Seminars I would surely like to get one of the videos because I see it as a useful tool in my Office Administration Class and Principles of business. The students will see this subject more interesting and meaningful, most of the time they look at these courses as stressing them out. More student’s interaction and students will benefit more using the Socratic seminar.
Freedom of speech is the liberty to communicate without restriction or constraints. Great Greek philosophers such as Aristotle, Plato and Socrates distributed contradictory viewpoints as it relates to the fundamental expression today classified as “freedom of speech”.
ReplyDeleteAristotle was of a school of thought that learning is closely associated with the accessibility of books. This statement further implies that books accumulate masses of information needed for everyday learning. Hence, scholastic institutions’ have the viable alternative of viewing knowledgeable information on any subject matter and can use books as a vehicle to increase a journey of knowledge mankind is seeking.
Contradictorily, Socrates had a different philosophy in regards to documentation of his teachings. He indicated that education cannot be had from books. He did not care what others thought about his teaching. Instead, Socrates’ views of education teach us a remarkable lesson. That being you have to learn how to value your own beliefs and be prepared to defend them. Consequently, he had a democratic vision as it relates to freedom of speech.
Oppositely, Plato’s interpretations of freedom of speech focused primary on philosophical reflections being the only pathway to knowledge. He supports the notion that education should be had by a country’s authority figures/leaders. In such a case the scholastic members of a society makes decisions on behalf the members of a given society. Hence, this theory has a more dictatorial view.
These ancient thinkers laid the foundation for numerous views we hold today in respects to freedom of speech. In other words, each outlook holds a valid point and brings some virtuous elements to the table. In today’s society people are free to express themselves through documentation of their writing. This has opened many doors for learning to occur. Additionally, people of a society sought to let their voices be heard as was emphasized by Socrates. He theory supports the notion that if we don’t stand for something we will fall for anything. In the case of Plato’s theory, he recognized that education is needed to build a nation. In light of this fact all three theories has its good; however I must support the notion of Socrates. Our people need to stand up for principles they believe in. If his ideology would be considered more in our country; then we would live more democratically in our homeland Belize.
Harris,R. (2009). Freedom of Speech.,111-123
Shaunna Said
ReplyDeleteI strongly agree with most of the comments of Calbert, I believe most of us had the same reading so things will be very similar depending on our beliefs. I could recall our professionalism teacher made mention that philosophy is not hard we are all philosophers in our own light. We view things in different light but come back to the same fundamental theory. I like how he picture God in his examples; I know he’s an Adventist so he practices what he preaches. I would like to quote from Calbert’s reflection.
Calbert said “I particularly like the Socratic models emphasis on debating as a path to education. I believe that there is a battle for truth. Opinions about every area of knowledge abounds. According to the "law of philosophical contradictions" two opposing views cannot both be true simultaneously. For instance, God either exists or he doesn't. Debates can give freedom of expression and allow one to decide what is truth base on the preponderance of evidence. The system of education with respect to free speech that I would recommend would include the "positive " traits outlined above from Aristotle, Plato and Socrates.”
We are task everyday as professionals of what we ought to do or not do. We are role models for our students and we need to know what is right from wrong. All three of these philosophers help in the development of education as was mentioned by Calbert.
Shaunna Said
ReplyDeleteI would say that I also strongly agree with most of the findings in Claudette’s Reflection. I believe we share the same view of using Socratic seminar in our classroom which would be more meaningful, productive and for sure learning will be taking place. Claudette also believes in a Socratic view point of one can only acquire an education by debate and drawn out conclusions.
I personally did not think about merging all theories to holistically educate an individual. It is just like in education we holistically educate our students with a well rounded education. Trying to offer as many subjects in the curriculum to meet the needs of our students, so when they leave high school they are well equipped for further studies and the world of work.
Claudette also mentioned about Freedom of Speech that can be used to our advantage in the classroom with the proper guidance. This is very true because most of the time various teaching methods are used but it doesn’t meet the objectives of the strategies being taught. As educators our students comes first and foremost we believe that a classroom is where learning takes place.
After revising the three main views of the three Greek philosophers, I can strongly say that those three views are heavily debated in today societies. In certain circumstances one view may be more suitable than the other view, and yet, it may be very subjective due to our different rationales. People act on the basis of their own interest and maximum benefit. In the reality of today’s societies, a combination of the three views are utilized to create a harmonic living. Nevertheless, in my personal opinion the view that is more practical in today’s society’s is the view of Aristotle because he preached the different forms of obtaining knowledge that follow a systematic approach, “Science an organized body of systematically arranged information, deduction, demonstrative argument” (109 Barnes). Through this freedom of speech is useful to discover the unknown. Aristotle claimed that knowledge came from asking question and searching for answers through the use of a standard system( Harris 2009). Teaching and learning never represent merely an interpersonal relationship or the expression of feelings. They are always about disciplined inquiry in some aspect of reality… the school should cultivate and develop each person’s rationality (112-113, Ornstein). We can see clearly that in order for knowledge to be obtained, freedom of speech must never be depressed but elevated to seek knowledge under a theoretical view. In Conclusion freedom of speech and knowledge cripples down when it is been prohibited to inquire about what is behind the point of interest. So, can we say that we have absolute freedom of speech? The answer to that question is that absolute freedom of speech becomes and illusion and human fantasy. According to Tallis, “Given that humans are so completely embedded in a in non-human (or not-specifically-human) material universe regulated according to the laws of nature which are (almost by definition) absolutely unbroken regularities, human freedom must be an illusion”, (Tallis, 2003).
ReplyDeleteReference:
Tallis, R.C.T. (2003). Human freedom as a reality-producing illusion. The monist, 86(2),
Retrived from www.ebscohost.com
Barnes, J. (Ed.). (1995). The Cambridge companion to Aristotle. Cambridge:Cambridge up.
Ornstein, Allan C. & Levine, Daniel U. (1981). An introduction to the foundations of education (2nd ed.) (pp.112-113).Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
“
After revising the three main views of the three Greek philosophers, I can strongly say that those three views are heavily debated in today societies. In certain circumstances one view may be more suitable than the other view, and yet, it may be very subjective due to our different rationales. People act on the basis of their own interest and maximum benefit. In the reality of today’s societies, a combination of the three views are utilized to create a harmonic living. Nevertheless, in my personal opinion the view that is more practical in today’s society’s is the view of Aristotle because he preached the different forms of obtaining knowledge that follow a systematic approach, “Science an organized body of systematically arranged information, deduction, demonstrative argument” (109 Barnes). Through this freedom of speech is useful to discover the unknown. Aristotle claimed that knowledge came from asking question and searching for answers through the use of a standard system( Harris 2009). Teaching and learning never represent merely an interpersonal relationship or the expression of feelings. They are always about disciplined inquiry in some aspect of reality… the school should cultivate and develop each person’s rationality (112-113, Ornstein). We can see clearly that in order for knowledge to be obtained, freedom of speech must never be depressed but elevated to seek knowledge under a theoretical view. In Conclusion freedom of speech and knowledge cripples down when it is been prohibited to inquire about what is behind the point of interest. So, can we say that we have absolute freedom of speech? The answer to that question is that absolute freedom of speech becomes and illusion and human fantasy. According to Tallis, “Given that humans are so completely embedded in a in non-human (or not-specifically-human) material universe regulated according to the laws of nature which are (almost by definition) absolutely unbroken regularities, human freedom must be an illusion”, (Tallis, 2003).
ReplyDeleteReference:
Tallis, R.C.T. (2003). Human freedom as a reality-producing illusion. The monist, 86(2),
Retrived from www.ebscohost.com
Barnes, J. (Ed.). (1995). The Cambridge companion to Aristotle. Cambridge:Cambridge up.
Ornstein, Allan C. & Levine, Daniel U. (1981). An introduction to the foundations of education (2nd ed.) (pp.112-113).Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
“
Reflecting Claudette point of view about how education must be develop posses severe debatable matters about the way education should be work around. In reality on how education must be obtained, viewed and analyzed falls under a series of beliefs and interpretations. She also commented on a view of a “holistic” education, on my belief is the most practical solution in this spontaneous generation. There are too many philosophies that surfeit you with information trying to persuade that their way and method is the right one. I also would say again that what is right is subjective to ones belief. So where should education be based? Under what system would it work best? At this point I leave it as a rhetorical question.
ReplyDeleteCalvert view point on education is inclined towards the Socratic view to develop education. Even so, the real truth that is not of a Socratic View. I belief that knowledge must be obtained by asking questions to find the unknown. This view allows the question, what about the documentation of the information that is found by every individual? I can continue by saying that Calvert commented that three views are used to create a resourceful education systems, but at the end one of them will be exercised more than the other. For example, I am sure that Cuba cannot be fully communist on its education system because they have accepted scientific standard on conducting research. Their developers rely or work with the various disciplines that have been developed in the latter centuries. Through this they can continue to develop liberal views about how education must be disseminated. Nevertheless, their political arena doesn’t determine much their view towards the access of knowledge. Knowledge as a road toward the freedom of mind and body.
ReplyDeleteOnecia mentioned some very reflective thoughts in her blog. It is indeed difficult to decide on one theory while neglecting another. I too have confidence it would be in the best interest of our society to adapt an amalgamation of theories to maximize the full potential as it relates to freedom of speech.
ReplyDeleteI shared your sentiments when you stated that education is a matter of developing your own potential as an individual mind. It is imperative that each person’s philosophy of education becomes clearly defined. In my opinion that would eliminate a lot of social problems we are presently faced with in our country. Students will be able to answer self reflective questions such as “What do I want to be? What will make me a successful person? How will learning enhance my life?”
As an educator I am an advocate for teaching my student to question given information. If students acquire this skillfulness; they will ultimately be able to apply it to other avenues of their lives. In so doing; our future generation will be able to discover the core problems of our society and find adequate solution to various issues plaguing us today.
Calbert presented numerous strong points in his views of education as it pertains to freedom of speech. Indeed, our educational system currently has three models of education as was introduced by the Greek Philosophers Plato, Aristotle and Socrates. Contemporary educators are definitely called cultivate critical thinkers. Through transformation of these learners, our nation will allow them to positively change the future through their actions.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSandra commenting on topic posted:
ReplyDeleteFreedom of speech is the ability to speak without censorship or limitation. Also called freedom of expression, it refers not only to verbal speech but any act of communicating information or ideas, including publications, broadcasting, art, advertising, film, and the Internet. Freedom of speech and freedom of expression are closely related to the concepts of freedom of thought and conscience.
Roy Harris (2009) clearly summarizes that “The ‘Socratic’ ideal is based on taking the individual mind, the ‘Platonic’ on taking the state, and the ‘Aristotelian’ on taking the universe” (p 123). If we digest all three philosophers we can clearly see that most of our knowledge is based on the all three theories of these philosophers. Our values come from within and those are what we believe in and will never change, which is what Socrates defined as “true knowledge” because they are eternal and are inscribed within the soul of every individual. Plato wrote “in dialogue rather than treatise form, however, his ideas on these subjects are not systematically analyzed but presented in the more ambiguous and ironic form of the drama”. He was not keen on the idea that one should learn things on their own but rather believed in educating those persons in charge of society, such as our Ministers. The question I ask myself, are we still not being educated in such a manner that one day we would become leaders of our country and govern with what society thinks “is the only way of living/learning”. In Belize, and this is my personal opinion, our Government somehow still dictates what education we are to receive in schools and they are the ones behind the Ministries “calling the shots” on every aspect of how our country is ran and yet the society knows these things but fail to exercise their “freedom of speech” due to the limitation/consequences imposed by the leaders of our country so we really cannot think for ourselves and if we do “think”, that is what it remains as, just “thoughts” and not actions.
Aristotle’s view of education is that “Education is the inquiry to everything; that is, all there is to be known and learnt” (p 119). If I should ascribe to a view it would be Aristotle’s view and a bit of Socrates because we truly never stop learning. We learn from books, documentaries, educators, philosophers and ourselves, essentially we learn new things everyday and our inner motivation pushes us to keep learning whether we read books or we further our education. Socrates did not believe to put any of his teachings into writing (p 121), an again it puzzles me, how did he learn the things he taught. It would have been interesting to be his student knowing what we know today.
This may have been Socrates principle and it worked and is still legendary because here we are learning by listening and reading each other’s thoughts, which is what Aristotle believed in learning everything and in this case from everyone. I would definitely implement “Socratic Seminars” in class because it will give my students the ability to think for themselves and to some limitation exercise their “freedom of speech”, which will increase their confidence and respect each other’s opinion and know that whatever they say is not wrong. I will also encourage them to never stop learning, which is Aristotle’s view and that their thoughts can also serve as an educational tool to others wishing to learn new things or put into practice what they share in class and one day publish their finding so they can teach others. (Socrates and Aristotle)
References:
Harris, H. (2009). Freedom of Speech and philosophy of Education. British Journal of Educational Studies.
http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Freedom_of_speech
http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Plato
http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Socrates
Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle were leaders of a movement that espoused that truth is real and absolute standards exist. The socratic ideal is based on taking the individual mind, the platonic on taking the state and the aristotelian on taking the universe - as indicating the goals and limits of worthwhile knowledge. Based on these three different views, it is likely that there will be different viewpoints on the freedom of speech in education. (last paragraph on pg 122)
ReplyDeleteSocrates never believed in writing down his teachings. He believed that the mind is a powerful thing and that books and training do not necessarily get u educated. It is the experience and values and beliefs that makes one educated. He did not care what people had to say. he stood up strongly for what he believed and was always ready to defend his point.
On the other hand, plato focused more on the society and how to have proper leadership and initiative. He sought to create a
government that would be stable with an absence of strife between both individuals and classes. He preferred harmony and efficiency over democracy and liberty. He proposed to organize society into three classes based on how he perceived their innate character. The bottom class included farmers, artisans, and merchants because of their tendency to indulge their baser appetites. The middle class comprised soldiers because of their strong wills and spirits. The members of
the uppermost class, because of their reasoning abilities, would be the intellectual aristocracy. The intellectual aristocracy would
possess absolute control of political power.
He didn't care about books and learning things about nature, he cared about the people. This is where i can say that there's a comparison between Plato and Socrates; books were never of interest. Plato, a pupil of Socrates, wrote extensively and this is where they both differ.
lastly, Aristotle rejected both views of socrates and plato; He believed government should promote the welfare of its citizens, recommending it provide the poor with financial means to purchase small farms or to start small businesses. He rejected monarchy, aristocracy, and democracy. He viewed the establishment of governments as being both essential for civilized life and a fundamental characteristic of mankind. He was looking out for the best interest of not only the individula or not only the society but the whole world around us.
After studyin these three philosophers, i can't say that i have pointed out only one of whom i can follow. All of them have their solid points and today i find that most rational societies have compiled a little of each to live and rule by. As individuals, we must be independent and be a part of what we want our society to be, but we can't do it alone otherwise we would be ridiculed at the fact of not saying the correct things while trying to gain our freedom. We must come together in union and assign ourselves responsibilities, giving each other better ideas(2 heads is better than 1) so as to make a better place/country using any necessary tools/information we may find helpful in the world around us. So, putting all these three points together, it can help not for the full freedom we'd want, but at least somewhere closer to it.
Annalee raised some interesting thoughts in her blog, it is true that we need to stand up for what we believe in and not let others influence us in thinking otherwise. In Belize, individuals fear in exercising their voice because they are afraid of the consequences. Crime in our country is an example where ‘freedom of speech’ is not exercised because we fear that when we speak the truth we automatically place a bullet to our forehead. There are some cases where we can be heard but we need a paper that grants us the “honor” of speaking, but should we really need to get permission to speak our thoughts? I guess in a way we do this in class and we request this of our students to establish respect for authority and I guess that is what our Governors do with us. Therefore, we really do not have freedom of speech.
ReplyDeleteThis also concurs with what Lionel mentions, “freedom of speech and knowledge cripples down when it is been prohibited to inquire about what is behind the point of interest. Therefore, we can say that absolute freedom of speech becomes and illusion and human fantasy”. We would only wish to speak the truth of what we know without any repercussion, if this would exist we would run wild. Even the bible states that to every action there are consequences so we would need to be innovative and speak the truth in a manner that we know is free such as articles and blogs because then we would know we speak the truth from our soul.
Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle were leaders of a movement that support that truth is real and absolute standards exist. The Socratic ideal is based on taking the individual mind, the platonic on taking the state and the Aristotelian on taking the universe – as indicating the goals and limits of worthwhile knowledge. A different view will be taken of freedom of speech in education, depending on which three is being pursued. Socrates did not write anything himself, he didn’t believe in writing any of his teachings down. He believed that books and going to school for years does not necessarily make one educated. Socrates believed knowledge could best be acquired through the exchange and analysis of opinions until a universal truth could be uncovered.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, Plato, a pupil of Socrates, wrote extensively and this is where they both differ. His focus was on leading the people and nothing else. He preferred harmony and efficiency over democracy and liberty. He proposed to organize society into three classes based on how he perceived their innate character. The bottom class included farmers, artisans, and merchants because of their tendency to indulge their baser appetites. The middle class comprised soldiers because of their strong wills and spirits. The members of
the uppermost class, because of their reasoning abilities, would be the intellectual aristocracy. The intellectual aristocracy would
possess absolute control of political power. "World Civilizations" seventh edition by Burns et al., WW Norton & Co. (1986) pages 190-195
Lastly, Aristotle rejected the views of Socrates and Plato. He believed that the government should promote the welfare of its citizens, provide the poor with financial means to purchase small farms or to start small businesses. He rejected monarchy, aristocracy, and democracy. He viewed the establishment of governments as being both essential for civilized life and a fundamental characteristic of mankind. He includes not only the individual or the society, but also the whole world because he believes that learning about things around is a part of which we are and can be a big help to us.
Working alone as individuals can be straining and people can ridicule us if we do not say the right things. So, we must come together as a society making bigger and better ideas and using different tactics of getting around people and using the right words(2 heads is better than 1). Without the world, there would be no society and no people, so this is why I believe that a compilation of three of these philosophers’ views can be used to make one view point for the freedom of the people today. It may not be the freedom that we earn for, but at least something close to it.
Onencia's points were very catching and i liked the way she outlined it. i agree with her when she said that the world is changing and every truth has a question. The two views that stood out for her were the Socratic and Aristotelian and she made he point very clear as to why she chose those two.
ReplyDeleteI agree with analee's point made where she stated that all these philosophers brought important points to the table, so this is why i believe that these point must be compiled together to make one. She also stated that we must stand up for what we believe and by doing so we must have followers in order to succeed.
ReplyDeleteAccording to (Harris, 2009) the Aristotelian view of education as it pertains to freedom of speech focuses on the universe, this view believes that freedom of speech is very essential to education and if limits are placed on freedom of speech then human knowledge cannot be gained as this would not allow for inquire into everything.
ReplyDeleteThe Platonic view of education focuses on the state. It believes that in order for a society to have justice education must be acquired; therefore, education is for those who have intentions to govern the society and will be in charge of the justice system. Therefore this view, believes that these leaders will determine what the society will learn.
The Socratic view seems to oppose that of the Aristotelian view; as it focuses on the individual mind. This view believes that the majority of society might not always be right. Therefore, individuals should focus on trying to educate themselves rather than gaining it from others. They should decide what it is they want to learn.
Comparing Platonic view to Socratic view of education it can be seen that the Platonic view believes that education should be gained by those who intent to lead or to show right from wrong and they in turn should pass this education on to others. Therefore, those who are not going to lead should not focus on gaining their own education they should just obtain it from those who are leading. Whereas, the Socratic view believes that education should be gained by everyone, whether you are to lead or not, it is your responsibility to gain education as you might find something different from that of the masses and you might be right and the masses wrong.
When differentiating between the Aristotelian view and Socratic view of education, it is clear that they have a distinct difference in opinion on writing or using books. According to (Harris, 2009), the Aristotelian view believed that books played a prominent role in education as they were considered “storehouses of information”. This view believed that one cannot keep all the knowledge they gain/collected in their heads therefore they must be placed in books and this is where others gain knowledge from and education eventually takes place. On the other hand, the Socratic view completely disputes this belief. As noted in (Harris, 2009), this view believes that “education cannot be handed down from books”. In (Harris, 2009), the Socratic view claims that “writing is a technology which automatically divorces a text from its author and the circumstances of its composition.” This view believes that the text in itself becomes something different form the author, leaving people to have their own interpretation that might not be the one that the author intended. It could be noted that the Platonic view would somewhat lean to support that of the Socratic view as it pertains to books, although the Platonic view does not believe this in its entirety. This can be proven as noted in (Harris, 2009), were it is stated that “Plato himself shared that scepticism to some extent…”
It would be rather difficult for me to ascribe to any one of the three philosophical idealizations. I would prefer to combine all three. For example: I agree with the part of the Platonic view which states that education is for those who will lead but I also disagree with the part where this view limits education to the leaders. Again, I agree with the part of the Aristotelian view which states that knowledge should be documented in books as we cannot retain everything in our minds. I believe we might be taking a bigger risk if we do not document than if we do. If we do not have anything documented then we do not have anything at all, not even something to be misinterpreted. Therefore the question must be asked “which is better?”
In conclusion, I believe that we as individuals would be limiting ourselves if we ascribe or even attempt to ascribe to one of these individual view. Undisputablely, others would agree that collaboration needs to be done.
I would have to agree with what Calbert is saying. As I noted earlier in my entry, collaboration of the three views must be done in order for a society to function properly. Following anyone rigidly would be a receipt for disaster. However, I disagree with the statement he made which states that “Debates can give freedom of expression and allow one to decide what is truth based on the preponderance of evidence.” My reasons for disagreeing are as follows:
ReplyDelete1. Our educational system is set up in such a manner that certain topics cannot be discussed (debated) in certain settings (like schools). E.g. it cannot be discussed if a God exist or not in a religious school. Here is where circumstantial restrictions comes into play but if a freedom is restricted then it is not a freedom as the word “restrict” contradicts the word “freedom”
2. Truth in itself is believed to be subjective as what is truth for one person might not be true for the next. Therefore I cannot say that I will base my truth on facts as this would deny those who obtain their knowledge from revelation or intuition. As noted in “Philosophic issues in education” these are sources of knowledge whereby individuals educate themselves.
In light of what Claudette, as much as we as (educators/teachers) are trying to allow freedom of speech, it is still not freedom of speech. From the moment we are guiding these students in their discussion and confining them to use certain text for discussion then we are restricting their freedom. In actuality, it is not freedom because restrictions are still placed. However, nothing is wrong with that except that we are calling it freedom of speech when in actuality it is not.
ReplyDeleteFor instance, during a Socratic seminar at the university level, you are given a piece of literature and asked to pre-read for discussions. You are asked questions, yes! and these questions stimulates your mind and cause you to critical think but these questions must be answered with supporting evidence from the assigned piece of literature. You are not given that freedom to give your own opinion that might not have any supporting evidence from that particular piece of literature that was given to you. As a matter of fact you are advised to make references from the text and if you say something that does not seem to line up, you may be asked “where do you find that in the text”. With all that being said, the question is “are we really promoting freedom of speech? Or can we really allow students whether at the university level or otherwise to have freedom of speech? ” if there is a “but” to these questions in your minds then lets not attempt to call theses seminars and debates options for freedom of speech.
I agree with what Jaclyn said on July 10, 10:46PM in reference to Onecia comments. However, I believe that we still need to do some form of guiding in the classroom as there are some basic knowledge that should be taught to all students in order to put them on a level playing field with others.This in turn will allow for all students to communicate on a level they can all understand.
ReplyDeleteFreedom of speech is the freedom to speak without censorship or limitation, or both
ReplyDeleteThe differences between the Aristotelian, Platonic and Socratic points of view are Aristotle examine freedom of speech in education from the point of view of the world, he saw everything as whole that is interconnected. Plato thought the little men do no know as much as their leaders therefore freedom of speech should be left up to the leaders or the philosophers. Socrates now enjoyed controversy. He believed that every person should have the opportunity to express themselves through speech and should not be censored. He believes that the only way one can become well educated is through freedom of speech.
The philosopher that i can most identify with is Aristotle because he took a little from both Socrates and Plato and tried to come up with the best solution. Through Socrates philosophy the leaders get to speak and the individuals also get to speak. Because Aristotle looked at everything as a whole it shows that he was taking into consideration the feelings of everyone. He saw that what we say can really affect people deeply, whether it be physically or emotionally. One might say how will you know that what you are about to say will spark controversy without first experiencing. As life lessons have thought us, we need to step back and think about what we are going to say before we say it and who we are going to say it to, because as we all know being humans make us emotional and sensitive.
I agree with Sandy and Annalee in saying that one needs to stand up for themselves. Doing this would mean that you are a supporter of the Humanistic Theory. This theory focuses on the development of the child's self-concept. If the child or individual feels good about him or herself, that is a positive start. Many times we ask ourself why students are afraid to speak out or participate in class or why is it many individuals in our society are afraid to speak out against the criminals in our society. One might say it has a lot do with limitations that come with freedom of speech. Look at what happen to Socrates in his days, I am sure we can see similar things happening in our era. With all I said one can only be heard if they speak out.
ReplyDeleteThinking about Jaclyn's comment on having her students give their thought's about given information and situations and it leading to conflicts is one of the reason why teachers tend to be Platonic in the classroom. Very often as teacher's we tend to want to be dictorial and not give our students the opportunity to voice their opinions because we feel they are trying to be disrespectful. As teachers of the new age we want to take on that discovery approach and grant children the opportunity to discover learning through freedom of speech. There should be no problems as long as students and teachers be discreet with language be used.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe main philosophers in this content are Aristotle, Plato and Socrates. Aristotle is a person who loves books for the fact that it expands his knowledge and for two other reasons which is that, he has far more influence on later liberal views of education than his two great predecessors. And second, is that he thought that education is intimately connected with the availability of books and explains that education is an inquiry into everything, plus a dissemination of resultant knowledge. Aristotle always collected works cover ethics, politics, poetry, astronomy and much more in his life time. He explains that we cannot keep all the information in our heads so we n heed a storehouse for information. He also explains that freedom of speech I essential, because if there is any prohibition on discussing or presenting in public any set of topics, which automatically imposes limits on human knowledge, can cripple the education. Hence, when applying this principles today it has highly controversial implications, for instance there is no warrant denying freedom of speech within the classroom to teachers who hold allegedly views concerning, say, the legitimacy of overthrowing a government by force.
ReplyDeletePlato on the other hand, he did not believe that the acquisition of knowledge consisted in going out, carefully observing the world, and taking good notes of what you can find there, and was deeply skeptical about observation and relying on anything that our senses tell us. He also believed that philosophical reflection was the only path to knowledge and is essential for a just society. Therefore, when both are put together one can reaches the conclusion that the only way to achieve that education was essential for a just society is to have philosophers in charge. Likewise, for freedom of speech, however, is may well conflict in certain cases with the priorities of state education. Plato also mentions that the welfare of the whole community depends on the education that the state provides for its leaders.
Finally Socrates, he refused on the principle to put any of his teachings into writing which is directly related to his understanding of education. He also believes that education cannot be had from books. Which Plato himself shared that skepticism to some extent. Hence, Plato himself did not follow Socrates example in avoiding writing together. Socrates objection to writing hinges crucially on the fact that writing is a technology which automatically divorces a text from its author and the circumstances of its composition. He also states that writing text takes on a life and authority of its own, irrespective of the intentions of author, whom it can long outlive and this is why he condemns any thinker who is foolish enough to publish his serious thoughts in writing. And he was put on trial because of his indifference to society and social values for impiety and corrupting the youth. Socrates view thus distinguishes for the start between education and mere instruction or training and those skills that require training in certain technical proficiencies must be mastered by anyone who is ready to embark on the process of education. And that society is not only recognizes but acts on the priority of that message.
I would ascribe to Plato view, for the fact that it is a combination of both Aristotle and Socrates. I believe that merging the views of Aristotle and Plato would make you a critical thinker of the choices that one would makes in the society. The view I believe in from Aristotle is that you must get an education, read a lot, document, and read a lot. Combine with Socrates that one must understand the basic principles of life, because what one might express could be interpreted differently by someone else.
In regards to Julia's response to Jacyln's blog; Julia made reference in terms of allowing students and teacher to be discreet when it comes to saying what they want to say(freedom of speech)Sometimes they are no other word that would give justice to the feeling one wants to convey and in such light the word must be used, not it the form of disrespect or anything of that nature; simply to express one's true feelings. In deed words are 'powerful', but at the same time what makes it even more powerful is our own ignorance; we as humans tend to take things and twist them and turn them every which direction instead of just letting it be. They are no 'right' or 'wrong' words; to me they are simple words. If we 'guide' people in a desired direction isn't that the same thing as telling them you want them to go ‘this’ way as opposed to the next? That's just my take on it, I could be wrong.
ReplyDeleteThe main philosophers in this content are Aristotle, Plato and Socrates. Aristotle is a person who loves books for the fact that it expands his knowledge and for two other reasons which is that, he has far more influence on later liberal views of education than his two great predecessors. And second, is that he thought that education is intimately connected with the availability of books and explains that education is an inquiry into everything, plus a dissemination of resultant knowledge. Aristotle always collected works cover ethics, politics, poetry, astronomy and much more in his life time. He explains that we cannot keep all the information in our heads so we n heed a storehouse for information. He also explains that freedom of speech I essential, because if there is any prohibition on discussing or presenting in public any set of topics, which automatically imposes limits on human knowledge, can cripple the education. Hence, when applying this principles today it has highly controversial implications, for instance there is no warrant denying freedom of speech within the classroom to teachers who hold allegedly views concerning, say, the legitimacy of overthrowing a government by force.
ReplyDeletePlato on the other hand, he did not believe that the acquisition of knowledge consisted in going out, carefully observing the world, and taking good notes of what you can find there, and was deeply skeptical about observation and relying on anything that our senses tell us. He also believed that philosophical reflection was the only path to knowledge and is essential for a just society. Therefore, when both are put together one can reaches the conclusion that the only way to achieve that education was essential for a just society is to have philosophers in charge. Likewise, for freedom of speech, however, is may well conflict in certain cases with the priorities of state education. Plato also mentions that the welfare of the whole community depends on the education that the state provides for its leaders.
Finally Socrates, he refused on the principle to put any of his teachings into writing which is directly related to his understanding of education. He also believes that education cannot be had from books. Which Plato himself shared that skepticism to some extent. Hence, Plato himself did not follow Socrates example in avoiding writing together. Socrates objection to writing hinges crucially on the fact that writing is a technology which automatically divorces a text from its author and the circumstances of its composition. He also states that writing text takes on a life and authority of its own, irrespective of the intentions of author, whom it can long outlive and this is why he condemns any thinker who is foolish enough to publish his serious thoughts in writing. And he was put on trial because of his indifference to society and social values for impiety and corrupting the youth. Socrates view thus distinguishes for the start between education and mere instruction or training and those skills that require training in certain technical proficiencies must be mastered by anyone who is ready to embark on the process of education. And that society is not only recognizes but acts on the priority of that message.
I would ascribe to Plato view, for the fact that it is a combination of both Aristotle and Socrates. I believe that merging the views of Aristotle and Plato would make you a critical thinker of the choices that one would makes in the society. The view I believe in from Aristotle is that you must get an education, read a lot, document, and read a lot. Combine with Socrates that one must understand the basic principles of life, because what one might express could be interpreted differently by someone else.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe main philosophers in this content are Aristotle, Plato and Socrates. Aristotle is a person who loves books for the fact that it expands his knowledge and for two other reasons which are that, he has far more influence on later liberal views of education than his two great predecessors. And second, is that he thought that education is intimately connected with the availability of books and explains that education is an inquiry into everything, plus a dissemination of resultant knowledge. Aristotle always collected works cover ethics, politics, poetry, astronomy and much more in his life time. He explains that we cannot keep all the information in our heads so we n heed a storehouse for information.
ReplyDeletePlato on the other hand, he did not believe that the acquisition of knowledge consisted in going out, carefully observing the world, and taking good notes of what you can find there, and was deeply skeptical about observation and relying on anything that our senses tell us. He also believed that philosophical reflection was the only path to knowledge and is essential for a just society. Therefore, when both are put together one can reaches the conclusion that the only way to achieve that education was essential for a just society is to have philosophers in charge. Likewise, for freedom of speech, however, is may well conflict in certain cases with the priorities of state education. Plato also mentions that the welfare of the whole community depends on the education that the state provides for its leaders.
Finally Socrates, he refused on the principle to put any of his teachings into writing which is directly related to his understanding of education. He also believes that education cannot be had from books. Which Plato himself shared that skepticism to some extent. Hence, Plato himself did not follow Socrates example in avoiding writing together. He also states that writing text takes on a life and authority of its own, irrespective of the intentions of author, whom it can long outlive and this is why he condemns any thinker who is foolish enough to publish his serious thoughts in writing. Socrates view thus distinguishes from the start between education and mere instruction or training and those skills that require training in certain technical proficiencies must be mastered by anyone who is ready to embark on the process of education. And that society is not only recognizes but acts on the priority of that message.
I would ascribe to Plato view, for the fact that it is a combination of both Aristotle and Socrates. I believe that merging the views of Aristotle and Plato would make you a critical thinker of the choices that one would makes in the society. The view I believe in from Aristotle is that you must get an education, read a lot, document, and read a lot. Combine with Socrates that one must understand the basic principles of life, because what one might express could be interpreted differently by someone else.
To Shaunna
ReplyDeleteI love the way that you compare the three philosophers in your writing. Yes, I do agree that I love Socratic Seminars because they are very educational and a lot of critical thinking. I still believe that the views of Aristotle is equally important to maximum the amount of knowledge that would be acquired by your students, because education and teaching them will intimately connect their views and taught in there mine. but also love Plato View which is a connection of both Aristotle and Socrates.
I conquer with the take of Lionel. I also believe that Aristotle View is one of the best methods of educating our students these days. Aristotle also mentions that knowledge came from asking question and searching for answers through the use of a standard system which is factual. But I believe that if you would consider the views of Plato, you would be able to achieve more in the classroom at any given point. Lastly, would conquer with you also that there is no absolute freedom. Yes we can say what we want, but might face the consequences of such terms.
ReplyDeleteWhile there are many great philosophers Harris suggest that how you see the issue of freedom of speech as impacting on education depends on which out of the Socratic, Platonic and Aristotelian models of education you adopt.
ReplyDeleteAccording to Harris (2009) all three philosophers believed in a literate society but had their own idea of how this was to be implemented. Socrates direct understanding of education was that “Education cannot be had from books”. He never documented anything as he considered this to be dangerous as the reader could misinterpret what the author wrote. His technique also distinguishes between education and training as you may possess the ability to perform a job and not be educated or vice versa.
Plato took on a different view. He was in favour of Authoritarianism. Education was important only to those who would govern the society. These leaders would dictate to the society what is right and wrong, justice and injustice. It would be difficult for anyone in this society to object and exercise free speech without being persecuted. It is not surprising that he did not believe in careful observation of the world.
Finally, Aristotle was an advocate for books. From him education was intimately connected with the availability of books. Books are vital to record whatever information you have collected as well as gaining access to information others have collected. Socrates would detest this.
While all three models have its strengths and its weakness I is difficult to ascribe to just one while a combination seems more ideal. For now I would go along with Aristotelian as if it wasn’t for his passion for books we would probably still be living in the dark ages repeating the same mistakes recurrently. These documentations were vital in our development of modern theories, which proved or disproved our relative truth.
I agree with Julia in that as new philosophers emerge they first learn from their predecessors. Based on documentations and the current knowledge and expertises that an emerging philosopher may possess, she/he is better able to probe into the core of that particular theory and integrate it to from a better theory. One that is not bias and geared only to the elite few along with being assessable to everyone.
ReplyDeleteWe possess the ability to free ourselves from mental slavery. We no longer have to sit passively and believe everything that is put to us as we are all created uniquely and we all possess the ability to think reason and choose for ourselves. This brings be to the quote “The mind is a terrible thing to waste.”
Aristotelian view on education is based on the fact that as humans we cannot remember everything so we need books to reflect on and to develop our knowledge. He believes that freedom of speech is essential for us to acquire our own education. We use others opinions to or perspective to build on whatever knowledge we have gained. By the use of books it provides an expansion of that knowledge we already have. Participating in discussions on various topics from his perspective help broaden our knowledge given you have heard others opinions. He was the first philosopher who thought of a personal library. He collected books although in those days it was unusual. He believed that education is ultimately connected with the availability of books. Aristotle says that as humans there is only so much we can remember so we need books to fall back on. We use books as a form of resource and also to record information collected, that information can be accessible to others when needed if we use books.
ReplyDeletePlato has a different overlook on education. Plato doesn’t believe we should use just our senses to acquire information because they can be unreliable at times, he believes that physiological reflection is the only path to knowledge. With this he said that to have a just society we need to have a philosopher in charge. He focuses on having the leaders in charge to govern the society and decide what is right from what is wrong. He is clearly stating only the leaders are to be educated and the others should be guided by them. Only some will benefit. So automatically the whole community is in the hands of its leaders who will determine the level of education they acquire from there leaders.
Socrates views are different from both Plato and Aristotelian. Socrates believes that education cannot be acquired by books. Discussions are more beneficial because it allow the individual to acquire his/her own knowledge. Through books he believes that what you read may not be true. He doesn’t believe in written text. He just didn’t care about other people thoughts or teachings. He wants you to learn how to value your own beliefs and be prepared to defend them. His views are based basically on controlling or taking over the individual mind, while Plato focuses on taking over the state having a greater authority in charge and Aristotelian focuses on the universe acquiring knowledge from everything around us.
All three views on freedom of speech and philosophy of education are different. They all have there advantages and disadvantages. I wouldn’t want to choose one over the next they all look at different angles. If I was left with no options I would have to go with Aristotelian his views focuses on the broader aspect of life.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteReflecting on Lionel views I agree with him that the three views are debatable in today’s society. While some may find one view suitable for them the other may not. Another view I strongly support with him is the views of Aristotle freedom of speech to allow you as an individual to discover your own knowledge and share that knowledge through debates or discussions.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Stephanie’s points made on Aristotle, Plato and Socrates. I especially agree that we as individuals need to come together as one and realize that it’s us the people that make up a society; as she said, “two heads is better than one”. If the three philosophers had come together and join their views on education maybe it could of made a huge different for us in today’s society to have freedom of speech.
ReplyDeleteGreat discussion! Your blogs are now being assessed.
ReplyDeleteAristotle says that as humans there is only so much we can remember so we need books to fall back on. We use books as a form of resource and also to record information collected, that information can be accessible to others when needed if we use books.
ReplyDeletePlato has a different overlook on education. Plato doesn’t believe we should use just our senses to acquire information because they can be unreliable at times, he believes that physiological reflection is the only path to knowledge. With this he said that to have a just society we need to have a philosopher in charge. He focuses on having the leaders in charge to govern the society and decide what is right from what is wrong. He is clearly stating only the leaders are to be educated and the others should be guided by them.Plato took on a different view. He was in favour of Authoritarianism. Education was important only to those who would govern the society. These leaders would dictate to the society what is right and wrong, justice and injustice. It would be difficult for anyone in this society to object and exercise free speech without being persecuted. It is not surprising that he did not believe in careful observation of the world.
Finally, Aristotle was an advocate for books. From him education was intimately connected with the availability of books. Books are vital to record whatever information you have collected as well as gaining access to information others have collected. Plato on the other hand, he did not believe that the acquisition of knowledge consisted in going out, carefully observing the world, and taking good notes of what you can find there, and was deeply skeptical about observation and relying on anything that our senses tell us. He also believed that philosophical reflection was the only path to knowledge and is essential for a just society.
i agree with that of Lionel because we must have freedom of speech and free will to talk and think on our own. Aristotle advocate for freedom of speech and respect free thinking allow free learning and that also come with free speaking.
ReplyDeleteSYDNEY SAID... The three view of Education by these great Philosophers are very interesting.What is rather more intereting is that Aristole was a pupil of Plato's and Plato in turn was a pupil of Socrates,it might at first sight seem surprising that they take such different views of what education is all about.We read books to gather information but as educators our role is to analyze the information and make use of it.The Aristolelian view of education is liberal.He believes that,education is inquiry into everything, plus the dissemination of knowledge.The Aristolelian perspective on education, freedom of soeech is essential, because if there is any prohibition on speech aristole belives that it cripples education.Similary,the Platonic view of education believes that, education is essential but was skepticala about observation, and about relying on anything that our senses tell us. His view was very much of a dictator who believes that,"the only way to achieve a just society is to have philosophers in charge."
ReplyDelete