EDUCATION: what purpose(s) should it have?

topic posted Wed, July 15, 2009 - 6:51 PM by  ScreamBrian
Share/Save/Bookmark
Advertisement
Hi everyone! This is the topic of our monthly gathering this Sunday in Santa Monica (7-19-09; see the event listing nearby on this tribe page). I hope to see you there! Whether or not you come to Sunday's meeting, feel free to carry on a discussion by posting your own ideas here, either before or after Sunday's meeting.

Here's this month's topic, which was the winner of the email vote this week:


WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF EDUCATION? What function and purpose does education have in our culture? What purpose should it have?


See you Sunday!

Brian
posted by:
ScreamBrian
Los Angeles
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • Re: EDUCATION: what purpose(s) should it have?

    Wed, July 15, 2009 - 11:43 PM
    OPTIONAL READINGS-- I have several very short articles, quotes and podcasts for you this month. None of these are meant as an overview or balanced assessment of ideas on the purpose of education. They are controversial statements of what education should or shouldn't be, and I offer them as a provocation to agreement or disagreement rather than as an endorsement of their views. Inspire and clarify your thinking on the purpose of education by reading what these philosophers and pundits have been saying!

    1. I came across many quotes from various articles on the purpose of education, so I'll put the more interesting ones on our club's webpage (in a posting further down).

    2. www.nytimes.com/2009/01/27...brooks.html
    "What Life Asks of Us" is a one page Op-Ed from the NY Times opinion page, Jan. '09, by well-known commentator on politics and culture David Brooks.

    3. www.nytimes.com/2005/09/04...LEEPER.html
    Allan Bloom and the Conservative Mind, a 2-page mini-essay in the New York Times Books section, on the famous (or infamous) book, Closing of the American Mind, that harshly criticized education in American Universities.

    4. books.google.com/books
    Liberal Values and Liberal Education by philosopher J Mark Halstead, is a 4-5 page excerpt from a collection of essays on the philosophy of education. Scroll down to the bottom of page 115, the section on "liberal education," and read to the end of page 120. If you're not familiar with Google Books, a few, random pages will be unavailable for viewing on any given day. If one of the above pages is missing, try again the next day and it will likely be there, or read the few pages before page 115 for similar information.

    5. www.philosophytalk.org/pastSh...ty.html
    The Idea of the University is a 50-minute audio podcast of a Jan. '09 episode of Philosophy talk, probably the only radio show in the country about Western philosophy. Two Stanford philosophy professors host the show, and they usually interview a philosopher or scientist specializing in the topic of the week. Listen online or download to your mp3 player.


    Apart from that, if you are interested in a more detailed examination of the specific educational philosophy of an influential thinker, commhum.mccneb.edu/PHILOS/phileduc.htm is a source for a large variety of them. If moved to do so, read one and tell the group what you found interesting in it.
    ----------------


    FYI, here are the full vote-by-email results for the month:

    1) How Do You Know You're Not A "Brain In A Vat,"…? (10.75 Votes)
    2) What Is The Purpose Of Education? (37.50 Votes)
    3) Altruism: Is There Really Such A Thing? Should There Be? (22.50 Votes) .
    4) Is The Idea Of "An Individual Organism" An Arbitrary Biological Notion? (18.50 Votes)
    5) Do We Know Whether Something Is Good Art Rather Than Bad Art? (12.00 Votes)

    Each topic stays on the list until it wins or consistently receives a paltry number of votes. You may have noticed that the votes do not come in whole numbers. This is not because fractions of a person turn in votes, but because you receive one vote for your top choice, a half vote for your 2nd choice (if you had one), a quarter vote for your 3rd choice, and so on. Recent, regular participants at our gatherings have their vote doubled.
    • Re: EDUCATION: what purpose(s) should it have?

      Thu, July 16, 2009 - 2:11 AM
      STRAY QUOTES AND PASSAGES ON THE PURPOSE OF EDUCATION

      • ON THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN EDUCATION AND INDOCTRINATION: “We never would say that students had been indoctrinated by their teacher if he or she had fostered open inquiry and discussion, encouraged exploration in the library and on the net, allowed students to work in collaborative groups, and so on. However, if the teacher did not allow independent inquiry, quashed classroom questions, suppressed dissenting opinions, relied heavily on rewards and punishments, used repetition and fostered rote memorization, and so on, then it is likely we would say the students were being indoctrinated.” From Siegel, philosopher of education, plato.stanford.edu/entries/...ClaKeyCon

      • ON THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN EDUCATION, INDOCTRINATION, AND MERE INSTRUCTION:: Using as a touchstone “normal English usage”, it was concluded that a person who has been educated (rather than instructed or indoctrinated) has been (i) changed for the better; (ii) this change has involved the acquisition of knowledge and intellectual skills, and the development of understanding; and (iii) the person has come to care for, or be committed to, the domains of knowledge and skill into which he or she has been initiated. From Hirst and Peters, philosophers of education, plato.stanford.edu/entries/...ClaKeyCon

      • THE MAIN FUNCTION OF THE UNIVERSITY: "The meaning of life is unclear, but that is why we must spend our lives clarifying it rather than letting the question go. The university's function is to remind students of the importance and urgency of the question and give them the means to pursue it. Universities do have other responsibilities, but this should be their highest priority."-- From Our Listless Universities, National Review, December 10, 1982, by Allan Bloom.

      • ON THE PROBLEMS OF EDUCATING A PLURALISTIC SOCIETY: "the US Supreme Court issued a ruling (Wisconsin v. Yoder) in which members of the Amish sect were allowed to withdraw their children from public schools before they had reached the age of sixteen—for, it had been argued, any deeper education would endanger the existence of the group and its culture. In assessing this decision—as of course philosophers have frequently done (see, for example, Kymlicka, 1995)—a balance has to be achieved between (i) the interest of civic society in having an informed, well-educated, participatory citizenry; (ii) the interest of the Amish as a group in preserving their own culture; and (iii) the interests of the Amish children, who have a right to develop into autonomous individuals who can make reflective decisions for themselves about the nature of the life they wish to lead."
      From the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy entry on the philosophy of education plato.stanford.edu/entries/...SocPolMor
      • Re: EDUCATION: what purpose(s) should it have?

        Thu, July 16, 2009 - 2:46 AM
        MORE STRAY QUOTES AND PASSAGES ON THE PURPOSE OF EDUCATION

        • ON JEAN-JACQUES ROUSSEAU: '…his educational novel written in soaring prose, Emile (1762). Starting with the premise that “God makes all things good; man meddles with them and they become evil” (Rousseau, 1955, 5), Rousseau held that contemporary man has been misshapen by his education; the “crushing force” of social conventions has stifled the “Nature within him”. The remedy adopted in the novel is for the young Emile to be taken to his family estate in the country where, away from the corrupting influence of society, and under the watchful eye of his tutor, “everything should … be brought into harmony with these natural tendencies”... Out in the countryside, rather than having a set curriculum that he is forced to follow, Emile learns when some natural stimulus or innate interest motivates him—and under these conditions learning comes easily. He is allowed to suffer the natural consequences of his actions (if he breaks a window, he gets cold; if he takes the gardener's property, the gardener will no longer do him favors), and experiences such as these lead to the development of his moral system.' From the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy entry on The Philosophy of Education, plato.stanford.edu/entries/...AimFunSch

        • ON C.D. HARDIE: “a child should be educated according to Nature…the teacher should thus act like a gardener” who fosters natural growth of his plants and avoids doing anything “unnatural” From the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy entry on the philosophy of education plato.stanford.edu/entries/...rWorCDHar

        • ON ADAM SMITH: education, hopefully, helps to bridge these gaps [between people], and help to cultivate a unified community where people are encouraged to sympathize with others…The government also has a duty to educate adults, both to help counter superstition and to remedy the effects of the division of labor…
        This, of course, echoes Smith's moral theory in which the impartial spectator moderates the more extreme sentiments of moral agents.
        Regarding the second purpose of education for all ages, and again, anticipating Marx, Smith recognizes that the division of labor is destructive towards an individual's intellect. Without education, "the torpor" (inactivity) of the worker's mind:
        renders him, not only incapable of relishing or bearing a part in any rational conversation, but of conceiving any generous, noble, or tender sentiment, and consequently of forming any just judgment concerning many even of the ordinary duties of private life. Of the great and extensive interests of his country, he is altogether incapable of judging; and unless very particular pains have been taken to render him otherwise, he is equally incapable of defending his country in war.... His dexterity at his own particular trade seems, in this manner, to be acquired at the expence of his intellectual, social, and martial virtues. But in every improved and civilized society this is the state into which the labouring poor, that is, the great body of the people, must necessarily fall, unless government takes some pains to prevent it. (WN V.i.f.50)
        From the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy article on Adam Smith www.iep.utm.edu/s/smith.htm

        • ON PLATO: 'It is interesting to compare the modern “one curriculum track for all” position with Plato's system outlined in the Republic, according to which all students—and importantly this included girls—set out on the same course of study. Over time, as they moved up the educational ladder it would become obvious that some had reached the limit imposed upon them by nature, and they would be directed off into appropriate social roles in which they would find fulfillment, for their abilities would match the demands of these roles. Those who continued on with their education would eventually be able to contemplate the metaphysical realm of the “forms”, thanks to their advanced training in mathematics and philosophy. Having seen the form of the Good, they would be eligible after a period of practical experience to become members of the ruling class of Guardians.'
        From the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy entry on The Philosophy of Education, plato.stanford.edu/entries/...AimFunSch

        • ON ARISTOTLE: A citizen does not belong to himself, "but rather that all belong to the city; for each individual is a part of the city"
        A. The Education of the Young
        Book VIII is primarily concerned with the kind of education that the children of the citizens should receive. That this is a crucial topic for Aristotle is clear from its first sentence: "That the legislator must, therefore, make the education of the young his object above all would be disputed by no one" (1337a10). It is so important that it cannot be left to individual families, as was the custom in Greece. Instead, "Since there is a single end for the city as a whole, it is evident that education must necessarily be one and the same for all, and that the superintendence of it should be common and not on a private basis….For common things the training too should be made common" (1337a21). The importance of a common education shaping each citizen so as to enable him to serve the common good of the city recalls the discussion of how the city is prior to the individual in Book I Chapter 2; as has been quoted already in the discussion above, "one ought not even consider that a citizen belongs to himself, but rather that all belong to the city; for each individual is a part of the city" (1337a26).
        He elaborates on the content of this education, noting that it should involve the body as well as the mind. Aristotle includes physical education, reading and writing, drawing, and music as subjects which the young potential citizens must learn. The aim of this education is not productive or theoretical knowledge. Instead it is meant to teach the young potential citizens practical knowledge - the kind of knowledge that each of them will need to fulfill his telos and perform his duties as a citizen. Learning the subjects that fall under the heading of productive knowledge, such as how to make shoes, would be degrading to the citizen. Learning the subjects that would fall under the heading of theoretical knowledge would be beyond the ability of most of the citizens, and is not necessary to them as citizens.
        From the Internet Encyclopedia Of Philosophy article on Aristotle's Politics www.iep.utm.edu/a/aris-pol.htm#SH14a :

        • ON HEGEL: (C) Education of Children & Dissolution of the Family
        Children provide the external and objective basis for the unity of marriage. The love of the parents for their children is the explicit expression of their love for each other, while their immediate feelings of love for each other are only subjective. Children have the right to maintenance and education, and in this regard a claim upon the family capital, but parents have the right to provide this service to the children and to instill discipline over the wishes of their children. The education of children has a twofold purpose: the positive aim of instilling ethical principles in them in the form of immediate feeling and the negative one of raising them out of the instinctive physical level. Marriage can be dissolved not by whim but by duly constituted authority when there is total estrangement of husband and wife. The ethical dissolution of the family results when the children have been educated to be free and responsible persons and they are of mature age under the law…"
        From the Internet Encyclopedia Of Philosophy article on Hegel's social thought www.iep.utm.edu/h/hegelsoc.htm
        • Re: EDUCATION: what purpose(s) should it have?

          Thu, July 16, 2009 - 4:03 AM
          I thought I'd paste here one of the abovementioned articles, "What Life Asks of Us," since it's only one page long,
          www.nytimes.com/2009/01/27...brooks.html
          It's an Op-Ed from the NY Times opinion page, Jan. '09, by well-known commentator on politics and culture, David Brooks.
          ---------------------------



          A few years ago, a faculty committee at Harvard produced a report on the purpose of education. “The aim of a liberal education” the report declared, “is to unsettle presumptions, to defamiliarize the familiar, to reveal what is going on beneath and behind appearances, to disorient young people and to help them to find ways to reorient themselves.”

          The report implied an entire way of living. Individuals should learn to think for themselves. They should be skeptical of pre-existing arrangements. They should break free from the way they were raised, examine life from the outside and discover their own values.

          This approach is deeply consistent with the individualism of modern culture, with its emphasis on personal inquiry, personal self-discovery and personal happiness. But there is another, older way of living, and it was discussed in a neglected book that came out last summer called “On Thinking Institutionally” by the political scientist Hugh Heclo.

          In this way of living, to borrow an old phrase, we are not defined by what we ask of life. We are defined by what life asks of us. As we go through life, we travel through institutions — first family and school, then the institutions of a profession or a craft.

          Each of these institutions comes with certain rules and obligations that tell us how to do what we’re supposed to do. Journalism imposes habits that help reporters keep a mental distance from those they cover. Scientists have obligations to the community of researchers. In the process of absorbing the rules of the institutions we inhabit, we become who we are.

          New generations don’t invent institutional practices. These practices are passed down and evolve. So the institutionalist has a deep reverence for those who came before and built up the rules that he has temporarily taken delivery of. “In taking delivery,” Heclo writes, “institutionalists see themselves as debtors who owe something, not creditors to whom something is owed.”

          The rules of a profession or an institution are not like traffic regulations. They are deeply woven into the identity of the people who practice them. A teacher’s relationship to the craft of teaching, an athlete’s relationship to her sport, a farmer’s relation to her land is not an individual choice that can be easily reversed when psychic losses exceed psychic profits. Her social function defines who she is. The connection is more like a covenant. There will be many long periods when you put more into your institutions than you get out.

          In 2005, Ryne Sandberg was inducted into the baseball Hall of Fame. Heclo cites his speech as an example of how people talk when they are defined by their devotion to an institution:

          “I was in awe every time I walked onto the field. That’s respect. I was taught you never, ever disrespect your opponents or your teammates or your organization or your manager and never, ever your uniform. You make a great play, act like you’ve done it before; get a big hit, look for the third base coach and get ready to run the bases.”

          Sandberg motioned to those inducted before him, “These guys sitting up here did not pave the way for the rest of us so that players could swing for the fences every time up and forget how to move a runner over to third. It’s disrespectful to them, to you and to the game of baseball that we all played growing up.

          “Respect. A lot of people say this honor validates my career, but I didn’t work hard for validation. I didn’t play the game right because I saw a reward at the end of the tunnel. I played it right because that’s what you’re supposed to do, play it right and with respect ... . If this validates anything, it’s that guys who taught me the game ... did what they were supposed to do, and I did what I was supposed to do.”

          I thought it worth devoting a column to institutional thinking because I try to keep a list of the people in public life I admire most. Invariably, the people who make that list have subjugated themselves to their profession, social function or institution.

          Second, institutional thinking is eroding. Faith in all institutions, including charities, has declined precipitously over the past generation, not only in the U.S. but around the world. Lack of institutional awareness has bred cynicism and undermined habits of behavior. Bankers, for example, used to have a code that made them a bit stodgy and which held them up for ridicule in movies like “Mary Poppins.” But the banker’s code has eroded, and the result was not liberation but self-destruction.

          Institutions do all the things that are supposed to be bad. They impede personal exploration. They enforce conformity.

          But they often save us from our weaknesses and give meaning to life.
        • This post was deleted by ScreamBrian
        • Re: EDUCATION: what purpose(s) should it have?

          Sun, July 19, 2009 - 2:53 AM
          ONE LAST PASSAGE ON THE PURPOSE OF EDUCATION, THIS TIME A NON-WESTERN VIEW OF EDUCATION

          • ON XUNZI (HSÜN TZU): EDUCATION AND "THE WAY"/ THE TAO:

          b. Education

          Like Confucius and Mencius, Xunzi is much more concerned with what kind of person to be than with rules of moral behavior or duty, and in this respect his view is similar to Western virtue ethics. The goal of Xunzi's ethics is to become a person who knows and acts according to the Way as if it were second nature. Because human nature is bad, Xunzi emphasizes the importance of study to learn the Way. He compares the process of reforming one’s nature to making a pot out of clay or straightening wood with a press-frame. Without the potter, the clay would never become a pot on its own. Similarly, people will not be able to reform their nature without a teacher showing them what to do. Xunzi’s concern is primarily moral education; he wants people to develop into good people, not people who know a lot of facts. He emphasizes the transformative aspect of education, where it changes one’s basic nature. Xunzi laid out a program of study based on the works of the sages of the past that would teach proper ritual behavior and develop moral principles. He was the first to offer an organized Confucian curriculum, and his curriculum became the blueprint for traditional education in China until the modern period.

          Practice was an important aspect of Xunzi's course of education. A student did not simply study ritual, he performed it. Xunzi recognized that this performative aspect was crucial to the goal of transforming one’s nature. It was only through practice that one could realize the beauty of ritual, ideally coming to appreciate it for itself. Though this was the end of education, Xunzi appealed to more utilitarian motives to start the student on the program of study. As noted above, he discussed how desires would inevitably be frustrated in the state of nature. Organizing society through ritual was the only way people could ever satisfy even some of their desires, and study of ritual was the best way to achieve satisfaction on a personal level. Through study and practice, one could learn to appreciate ritual for its own sake, not just as a means to satisfy desires. Ritual has this power to transform someone’s motives and character. The beginning student of ritual is like a child learning to play the piano. Maybe she doesn’t enjoy playing the piano at first, but her parents take her out for ice cream after each lesson, so she goes along with it because she gets what she wants. After years of study and practice, she might learn to appreciate playing the piano for its own sake, and will practice even without any reward. This is what Xunzi imagines will happen to the dedicated student of ritual: he starts out studying ritual as a means, but it becomes an end in itself as part of the Way.

          c. The Ethical Ideal

          Xunzi often distinguishes three stages of progress in study: the scholar, the gentlemen, and the sage, though sometimes the sage and the gentleman seem to be equivalent for him. These were all terms in common use in philosophical discourse of the time, especially in Confucian thought, but Xunzi gives them a unique twist. He describes the achievements of each stage slightly differently in several places, but what he seems to mean is that a scholar is someone who has taken the first step of wishing to study the Way of the ancient sages and adopts them as the model for correct conduct; the gentleman has acquired a good deal of learning, but still must think about what the right thing to do is in a situation; and the sage has wholly internalized the principles of ritual and morality so that his action flows spontaneously without the need for thought, yet never goes beyond the bounds of what is proper. Using the piano analogy, the scholar has made up his mind to study the piano and is practicing basic scales. The gentleman is fairly skilled, but still needs to look at the music in front of him to know what to play. The sage is like a concert pianist who not only plays with perfect technique, but also adds his own style and unique interpretation of the music, accomplishing all this without ever consciously thinking about what notes to play. As the pianist is still playing someone else's music, the sage does not make up new standards of conduct; he still follows the Way, but he makes it his own. Yet even then, at this highest stage, Xunzi believes there is still room for learning. Study is a lifelong process that only ends at death, much as concert pianists must still practice to maintain their skills.

          The teacher plays an extremely important role in the course of study. A good teacher does not simply know the rituals, he embodies them and practices them in his own life. Just as one would not learn piano from someone who had just read a book on piano pedagogy but never touched an actual instrument, one should not study from someone who has only learned texts. A teacher is not just a source of information; he is a model for the student to look up to and a source of inspiration of what to become. A teacher who does not live up to the Way of the sages in his own life is no teacher at all. Xunzi believes there is no better method of study than learning from such a teacher. In this way, the student has a model before of him of how to live ritual principles, so his learning does not become simple accumulation of facts. In the event that such a teacher is unavailable, the next best method is to honor ritual principles sincerely, trying to embody them in oneself. Without either of these methods, Xunzi believes learning degenerates into memorizing a jumble of facts with no impact on one's conduct.

          From The Internet Encyclopedia Of Philosophy article on the philosophy of education of the Chinese philosopher Xunzi (Hsün Tzu) (310-220 BCE?) www.iep.utm.edu/x/xunzi.htm#SH3b
          • Re: EDUCATION: what purpose(s) should it have?

            Sun, July 19, 2009 - 3:43 PM
            I compiled a list of the various ideas on the purpose of education I've come across, and summarized them as one-sentence slogans. I've purposely left out arguments for or against; it's up to your own judgment as to the value of each of them. This list is not exhaustive and these ideas aren't necessarily mutually exclusive. For what it's worth, here they are, in no particular order:


            1. The Purpose of Education is: to teach people to think for themselves; critical thinking; abolishing superstition; but not to try to teach morality or political doctrine or to otherwise propagandize, indoctrinate or brainwash students.

            2. The Purpose of Education is: to make good citizens and community members; to cultivate moral, productive, responsible members of society, whatever that entails within one's society.

            3. The Purpose of Education is: to train students in self-discipline and control, and the ability to suppress one's anti-social, aggressive and selfish instincts so one can become an adult who contributes to the betterment of the social order.

            4. The Purpose of Education is: to uphold the social order, help society be stable, provide social unity (especially among a diverse community)

            5. The Purpose of Education is: to develop loyalty, respect and reverence for society's institutions; to weave the rules, obligations and values of these institutions into one's identity.

            6. The Purpose of Education is: job training and the capacity for economic betterment; to train students to compete economically, both as individuals competing against others and collectively, as a nation competing against other nations.

            7. The Purpose of Education is: to teach the knowledge and skills that the student or his/her parents want to know; to help them develop themselves however they see fit; to provide students with the capacity to pursue "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" by their own lights.

            8. The Purpose of Education is: to train students with the skills that will best further the flourishing and interests of society or of humanity as a whole. .

            9. The Purpose of Education is: to enable self-fulfillment and the developing of one's talents, whatever those happen to be.

            10. The Purpose of Education is: to promote creativity and self-expression.

            11. The Purpose of Education is: to train in general intelligence and problem-solving

            12. The Purpose of Education is: to make virtuous, rational, happy, active members of the polity, instruct people on how to be at leisure and how to pursue the Telos/ purpose of humans and to live life in pursuit of "the good." (Aristotle).

            13. The Purpose of Education is: to develop practical wisdom, Phronesis, and character.

            14. The Purpose of Education is: to increase one's personal freedom and autonomy; to give students the ability to make a rational plan for their life, and the ability to pursue it.

            15. The Purpose of Education is: to teach students what is important and life and what is not

            16. The Purpose of Education is: to initiate a person into the knowledge and norms of their civilization.

            17. The Purpose of Education is: to keep students busy with useful things so they don't cause problems for themselves and others; to babysit them and keep them out of trouble until they are able to watch over themselves and become productive members of society. "Idle hands are the tools of the devil."

            18. The Purpose of Education is: to discover and develop the talents each student values and is good at, for to do otherwise is to squander human talent.

            19. The Purpose of Education is: to provide a broad, cultural education of the best thinking the culture has produced; cultural literacy; the acquisition of knowledge is a good in and of itself as well as a means to improve one's character.

            20. The Purpose of Education is: to provide a corrective to the excesses and vulgarities of society at large by being the preservers of the traditions of reason and high culture. (Allan Bloom).

            21. The Purpose of Education is: “The aim of a liberal education is to unsettle presumptions, to defamiliarize the familiar, to reveal what is going on beneath and behind appearances, to disorient young people and to help them to find ways to reorient themselves.” -- From a report on the purpose of education, by a faculty committee at Harvard.
            • Re: EDUCATION: what purpose(s) should it have?

              Sat, September 26, 2009 - 4:00 PM
              [Typographical note: This website does not accommodate italicization, for which I will substitute CAPITALIZATION.]

              It is useful here to distinguish between education’s PURPOSE and its DEFINITION. Defined most simply and broadly, in this context, education is the conveying, to others, of information or knowledge. Whereas, our PURPOSES for educating may vary. For instance, we might educate for the sake of the learners; or for purely selfish reasons, as to enable our own work to live on.

              By way of introducing my own vision of education’s purpose, I offer the following comment on the Brooks article (above).

              In “What Life Asks of Us” (26 January 2009) David Brooks contrasts two approaches to education: respect (for tradition and institutions) versus iconoclasm (and he argues for the former). But I believe such opposition cannot be so neatly drawn. The two modes are interrelated, intermingled, interdependent. The rebel needs the culture, and the culture needs the rebel. To effectively criticize an idea, one must first understand it; to intelligently break the rules, one must first master them. Errors in received wisdom are discovered, in part, by scrutinizing that very body, and are shown by the use of other received elements; while novel thoughts must fit what is still sound. Old work (including that of history’s great iconoclasts) provides present thinkers and artists with inspiration, models, raw material, and points of (even radical) departure, for the making of their own artifacts, the finest of which (including revolutionary ones) in turn becoming essential, and playing the same roles for the future. New vistas are a function of our own stature and the steps laid by generations past. It seems to me that the purpose of education is to hand down the best of man’s existing culture and (thereby) to foster its advancement, for the gratification of our highest intellectual and aesthetic faculties, as both audience and creator.

              – Richard J. Eisner (9/26/2009; 1-818-343-0123; richard@richardeisner.com)