Natorp on Social Education: A Paideia for all Ages :: Teaching Education Philosophy

Natorp on Social Education A Paideia for all AgesABSTRACT In humanness and his Circumstances Ortega as Educator, Robert McClintock says that American educators have forgotten about the regularise of Natorp. This essay proposes to discuss Natorps Platonic and Neo-Kantian wad of the human being and of familiarity as a foundation to all education. It will examine the ferment of Friedrich Schleiermacher, the distinguished German philosopher, and of the great Swiss educator, Johann Heinrich Pestalozzi, on Natorps ideas. In Natorps view of Socialpadagogik (Social Education), it is not possible to have any positive social or political change without great alterations in educational philosophy. The work of the American educator, Robert Hutchins, will be discussed and defended as an exemplary attempt in the practice of higher education of these ideals. Although Hutchins programs were adapted for exclusively a short age by the University of Chicago and by a few small boastful arts col leges, his influence, as well as that of American disciples of Natorp and Pestalozzi, still has enduring value, since it is based on the idea that we are all souls in development. capital of Minnesota Natorps several important works on the philosophy of education, such as Pestalozzi Sein Leben und seine Ideen, (1) are grounded in his Neo-Kantian epistemology. The post 1900 Natorp expanded his theory of noesis from the purely Neo-Kantian idea that the Ding an Sich and the noumenal world were not only unknowable exclusively also could not even be posited as existing. He expanded it to include the idea that the Ding an Sich is the X at the borders of the cognize which always moves into the unknown. As Natorp puts it in his own words, Erkenntnis ist nicht stillstand, sondern ewiger Fortgang. (2) (Knowlege is not standing still, but is eternal movement.) Our experience builds on itself. Each individual must be treated as a living soul constantly structure on experience in life (Erle bnis). Science is not the only criterion for knowledge, but the philosophical examination of the growth or degradation of the soul becomes the standard. In this sense, Natorp is a Neo-Platonist, because he does not see limits to the possibilities of the soul. However, he never actually speaks of metempsychosis. This idea is noumenal. Finally, Natorps view of religion is essential here. worship is also not knowledge, but it is a repository of the rules of moral sort which should, nevertheless, be determined by reason.