In the philosophical tradition of the problems of education had independent significance, rather, they were applied nature. Some ideas about the processes of training and education and the theoretical basis for teaching activities can be found as shown in the first section already in Plato and Aristotle. Pedagogy is not yet separated from philosophy and served as one of the aspects of the application of philosophical doctrine. This, above all, was about becoming a man virtuous and knowledgeable. At the same time, it was considered becoming something other than mastery of Art. Actually philosophy of education has not yet taken shape in any form of the concept, nor as an isolated system of views. Apparently, she begins to take shape only in the Middle Ages, when there is systematic training and formed a circle of school disciplines; there are tutorials and stable institutions. Gadamer, referring to the thesis Schaarschmidt, notes that the term “education” has its origins in medieval mysticism Baroque. “The final sanding of the term, stimulated Herder, – he writes – over between Kant and Hegel” [1]. Gadamer also mentions him close understanding of education in Herder and Humboldt. Moreover, in Herder it is thought of as the rise to humanity, and at the Humboldt – as the pursuit of the spirit of humanity.
The philosophical concept of education contained in the Philosophical propaedeutics Hegel. Defining a person as being twofold, Hegel sees the duty of man to himself is to: become a cultural being through education. He writes: “Man as an individual to treat himself. He has two sides: the individual and the universal essence. In this regard, it is a duty to the part of the physical preservation of themselves, and in part to raise their separate entity to its general nature – the form itself” [2].
The latter is necessary because of the fact that man is by nature not be what it should be. Thus, he talks about some artificial process that requires special attention and effort conditions. However, later in this paper on the process of education, he does not stop, and only describes the state of education through its priznaki separately for theoretical and practical education. From the point of view of philosophy of education can be interpreted other work of Hegel: “In all that man becomes something internal, general performance, all that he is doing his own, entered the language, and all that he turns into a language and expresses in language, contains hidden there, coiled or a developed form, some categories, to the extent it is natural for a logical or, more correctly, the latter is itself its inherent nature” [3].
The body
However, life is not squeezed into the narrow confines of reproductive structures; inevitably there is a selection of reproducible elements and all kinds of simplifications that – as expected – should facilitate the transfer from one generation to another fact, the main frame playback society, leaving behind brackets irrelevant or obvious. While education is not considered a separate subsystem, this transfer was carried out through the “getting used” and thus could ensure the integrity of the transition of society from generation to generation. If this process is not successful, then it leads to deformation of the human person, and, consequently, of society itself. Therefore, attempts are being made to understand the research process and to identify the conditions for its normal functioning. However, the nature of education has to be judged only by circumstantial evidence. Hence the desire to reveal it through its results, or the activity by which it is carried out, or a natural process that is behind it.If we try to understand how education is understood today, it is brought before us in a frame of complex categorical connection. It refers to both the process and the structure, quality and condition, and the form and content of the activity, it is both natural and artificial, subjective and objective, etc. And for each of the categorical definitions is its own special significance and appropriate subject content.
The question of thinkability education is: firstly, the question of its representability by the means at our disposal means thinking and, secondly, the question of its givens in some objectified forms. The third aspect of this question is related to the efficiency of thinking about education, which implies the need to correlate with the actual processes taking place with the community and education, ranging from changes in organizational forms and ending with what is happening now reviewing the whole ideology of education.First of all, education is associated with two processes: learning and development. The fact that these processesare took place or in any of its stages can be judged by the intermediate and final results. These processes as they relate deeply and comprehensively dealt with in pedagogical, psychological, philosophical and methodological studies (Rubinstein, Vygotsky, Leontiev, Galperin, Piaget and others.). Heated debate on training and development was developed in the 60s. In particular examined the roles of these processes are in the society and its relationship to culture. This material is still waiting for a special analysis, especially in terms of philosophical development of the proposed approaches to the study and design of these processes in a broad social context and related fundamental methodological problems.Erich Fromm believes that the learning process and its result are fundamentally different depending on what his main form of man’s relationship to the world, from the mode of its existence (mode of existence or mode of possession). When targeting “possession” the result of the learning process becomes a certain amount of information assigned to a person, but remained for him something external tool that can be used to achieve some goals, and the generation and social characteristics assigned to the educated person and the associated her social status. In the case of orientation to life the learning process becomes getting used to the element of thinking, knowledge and change in student substance for which the acquired knowledge becomes their own, internal, part of him.
Both in terms of research and in terms of planning is one of the central problem of educational content. Reference to the process of learning and development allows you to bypass many difficulties that arise here, for example, the content of consciousness. After all, the content of education is largely determined by the content of these two processes, although it can not be completely reduced to them. Learning content is presented in the relevant educational subjects and samples of activity and thinking exhibited by the teacher. The content development may be recorded, for example, using research procedures developed in psychology. Yet the content of education as a certain level of education, allowing a person to navigate freely and consciously act not in vitro study situations and problems, and in terms of social (material and spiritual) production, in real social and cultural situations of interaction with other people, there is still understudied. Identify the residue apparently can be turned to the content of those branches of knowledge and activity, which should be free to feel educated specialist and analyzing the difficulties faced by graduates in practice.
It should be noted another point of educational content, at which point John. Art. Miles as indispensable for university education as opposed to professional. This ability to navigate in the field of human knowledge, the ability to grasp the relationship between the individual items, special methodical look at things, which allows you to operate with the new and unknown, based on the knowledge of the whole. For the formation of the content of education offered to introduce courses in philosophical subjects.If philosophy owes much to education, because education is and no less obliged to philosophy. In the depths of philosophy have been developed not only the key concepts and ideas that are used today in the theory of education, but also those concepts and ideas that are an indispensable part of the arsenal of modern thinking means an educated man. Such a close relationship allows a simple answer to the question of whether there should be a philosophy of education. Moreover, the latter is necessary as philosophy itself, if it wants to be effective, efficient, and a society that is committed to the progressive development. After all, without a full understanding of what is education and what is its place in society, it is impossible to get a true picture of society, and the picture of the world as a whole. After all, education is largely determines the vision, the forms of representation of reality, within which the socio-cultural or significant effect on the different levels of the social system.
Thus the status of philosophy of education is very difficult to determine. As you know, philosophy literally means “love of wisdom” (from trech. – I love -mudrost). There is a variety of meaningful interpretation of the term “philosophy”: a form of social consciousness; the doctrine of the general principles of being and knowledge of man’s relation to the world; science of the general laws of nature, society and thinking, etc.To the question “What is philosophy?”, Apparently, is to follow a twofold answer: both science and ideology. Meanwhile, very often deal with one-sided polar views. So, for example, M. Mamardashvili, “philosophy is not a system of knowledge that could be transferred to others and thus train them. The formation of philosophical knowledge – it is always an act of domestic ... Moreover, philosophy, as I understand it, and there was never a system of knowledge ... In short, philosophy – it’s design and development to the limit states using universal concepts, but based on personal experience” [3].
The main thing – do not consider themselves superfluous in this world. Imagine what the world would be completed, and is regarded there is some great theory that explains what the thought that this is a reason that is love. If it were so, then why worry about individual feelings of love. But the feeling of love is still there. The question is, what my feelings if it was a million times. What’s the point? So the world is like an unfinished process. My feelings are unique, unrepeatable. Otherwise, did not need any of my feelings or my experiences. My experience could only be idiotic. As Shakespeare said, the world would be a fairy tale full of fury and noise, tells an idiot. Consequently, the world is constantly evolving, changing and there is always a place for me there, if I’m ready to start over, to pass his life itself, though it may be a lot of repetition, borrowing.So, philosophy – it is solely the personal outlook, attitude, based on the experience gained individually. In other words, philosophy – not a science ... Let us compare, however, this statement with the following: “Since philosophy is a science – read in Yu. Bohenskogo – the philosopher should be only one goal – knowledge. Therefore, any other motive philosophizing, for example desire to convince in something other, protect any point of view, and so on – can not be called honest ... In the study of philosophy is guided only by the desire for knowledge” [4]. Denying the extreme, we still adhere to this view: philosophy – a system of knowledge, a science, on the basis of which produced both individual and mass (public) worldview. But at the same time – it is a science, as if inspired, science, based not only on purely formal logic in the interpretation of the extracted knowledge, but, above all, on the relation of man to the knowledge in terms of spiritual, moral criteria, informed and taken internally them.
These extreme points of view related to the recognition of the importance and role of philosophy, found mainly in the works of professional philosophers. It is necessary to recognize the existence of certain negative trends in philosophy and other social sciences and humanities in the post-Soviet space. This is due both to discredit the social sciences, as apologetic doctrines of the old social system, and causes of socio-cultural order.Our Kazakh scientist Mukhashev ZA gave the following plausible explanation: “The process defilosofizatsii social consciousness is primarily associated with the birth of mass culture, which antifilosofichna on the merits. It systematically reproduces the conditions of rejection of philosophy, and attempts to keep the latter is in vain. Even an unparalleled extension of the notion “philosophy”, for example, the emergence of phrases such as “the philosophy of tea”, “philosophy of life” and so on. are a manifestation of mass culture” [5].
For many years it was thought that the Marxist-Leninist philosophy – this is the philosophy of education, we need only to interpret the general philosophical position in line with the educational issues and give them educational and pedagogical coloring. As for chastnonauchnogo philosophical knowledge, it is considered an intrinsic methodology of pedagogy. Not by chance in almost all publications on methodological educational and pedagogical issues traditionally pays tribute to general philosophical canonical provisions, and in the best case, only adapted to the specifics of education, and at worst – mechanically, technically advanced on this area of public life.
Currently identified three basic approaches of the determination, of the status, of philosophy, of education. The first relates to the assumption that the philosophy of education, as well as many other industries chastnofilosofskogo knowledge, there is a specific applied philosophy. With this approach, it is considered that it is sufficient to use general philosophical position to justify the status of education and the laws of its development in the most general terms and in relation to the value-targeted, systemic, and procedural aspects of effective multidisciplinary educational activities. In fact, it is such an extremely lightweight and quite formal approach is used to characterize the status of philosophy of education in many countries, particularly in the US, and multivolume editions devoted to this field of knowledge, and even tutorials on very specific issues of education abound with endless comparisons most different philosophical schools and movements and attempts to illustrate the usefulness of direct application to the solution of philosophical knowledge of specific educational problems. Not by chance in the English version to describe this area of philosophical knowledge, along with the phrase “Philosophie about!” Eёisayop “is often used, and the phrase” Philosophie APS! Eyisayop. “With this approach, it is not so much about the philosophy of education, but about philosophy and education”.
Such interpretation of the status of the philosophy of education is shared by many Russian scientists. For example, in a fairly typical for such an approach N.G. Alekseeva presentation: “The philosophy – not a science, and science – not philosophy ... Philosophy (including the philosophy of education, ie, philosophy, addressed to education) updated in anticipation of major changes affecting all areas and aspects of social life, and it becomes really acting theory, actively influence the practice ... The essence of the philosophy of education – philosophy, turned to education, understood as a template reproduction of society ...”. [6] This statement draws attention not only focus on the application status of the philosophy of education, but also denial of the scientific content of this field of knowledge in general ... This philosophy of education imparted some momentary functions callable only in conditions of great changes in the development of society, and it is in this time it is allowed to become a functioning theory, that is, to find, at last, some scientific status.The above “applied” the concept of philosophy of education, sometimes beyond the scope of individual assumptions and opinions and is proclaimed in a fairly serious international instruments. So, in the final report of the “philosophy of education in the perspective of the XXI century”, summing up the results of the International Symposium in Prague (1990). Says: “Among the approaches to the understanding of the philosophy of education support for its definition as” the image of the world and man’s place in it. “More specific definition of educational philosophy focused on cognitive, methodological, design and function akseologicheskoy philosophy regarding education” [7]. Clearly consciously identified with the philosophy of philosophy of education in general, leaving the latter the right to exercise their functions with respect to education ...
Uncertainty of the status of philosophy of education, naturally produces the temptation to use a fashionable phrase, when virtually any educational problems are more or less general nature are brought under the phrase “philosophy of education”. A typical example of such an appeal to the visual appeal title -in general, very interesting work P.G. Schedrovitskogo “Essays on the Philosophy of Education”, in which you can find ideas on the system of training, active forms of learning and educational content, the basic ideas of “sistemosmysldeyatelnostnoy pedagogy” and even a “pedagogy of freedom”, which are essential in themselves in terms of content itself. It is not clear, however, why, in fact, all these really urgent and important issues to be discussed under the heading of philosophy of education, what distinguishes a system of philosophical and educational knowledge of unsystematic knowledge, local, “snatched” from the context of the general philosophical doctrine of education ... ? [8] The danger of hasty, premature institutionalization rightly pointed N.S. Rozov. Indeed, the introduction of new categories and concepts in science, especially those that claim to be the proclamation of fundamentally new fields of knowledge, requires special care, because in this case instead of the areas of research activities and to enhance its effectiveness it is easy to fall into a state of full scientific and institutional voluntarism and chaos. .. “Philosophy of Education, writes N.S. Rozov – begins its life in the original isolation from the real problems of education and educational policy. This first danger I call scholastic instigutsializatsiey ... logical mechanism is designed to connect the general philosophical ideas through the circuit specification with educational decisions, projects and programs of reform, practice training and education” [9].
If the first part of this statement raises no objections, the reliance on a logical mechanism that would connect the “general philosophical ideas” with educational decisions, again reduces the philosophy of education to the level of applied general philosophy. In another words, again and again held the idea that only deductive spread of philosophical knowledge on education can lead to the formation of the philosophy of education.
Unfortunately, even the most fundamental authoritative publications on theoretical grounds of education, sin is full of uncertainty in the characterization of the status of philosophy of education. For example, in the section “Philosophy of Education” at the end of the XX century published “International Encyclopedia of Education” in 12 volumes includes articles on curricula and programs to all the world’s religions and philosophies of the XX century.Commenting on this extensive list, N.D. Nikandrov writes: “Set a show. First, it is striking that in some cases belonging to the philosophy of reference specifically states” philosophical foprosy because otherwise it is clear that the issue is related to the philosophy. Secondly, it really is the most common, and in this sense the philosophical questions of education and science of education, especially teaching. Third, one article is not only in this list. It is available in both: in the category “Pedagogical research . Methodology and measurement” ... Thus, there is some overlap in our traditional common methodology of pedagogy and philosophy of education”.
Thus, at a sufficiently high level of international educational philosophy or interpreted in a very broad form with access to general philosophical doctrines (positivism, scientism, empiricism, relativism, realism, postmodernism, existentialism, pragmatism, neo-Thomism, personalism, etc.), or coincides with pedagogy, encroaching on its identity and self-sufficiency.
Actually, the second approach to the interpretation of the status of the philosophy of education is precisely to mobilize conservative, defensive resources pedagogy, in order to prevent such an attack and leave all the common issues of education in all its many facets exclusively for themselves ... Thus, generally placed questioned the appropriateness of the development of philosophy of education as an independent branch of scientific knowledge. Enough, it turns out to solve all the difficult questions of a philosophical nature in the methodology of pedagogy or general pedagogy.
Findings
A third approach to understanding the status of philosophy of education is fundamentally different from the previous two. At its heart – the harmony of deductive and inductive logic of becoming a full-fledged philosophy of education as an interdisciplinary branch of scientific knowledge. Of course, the proliferation of philosophical ideas and positions on specific education and may continue to need. Especially that pluralism of philosophical approaches where more democratic and more attractive than strictly required to follow the only philosophical doctrine and caused it monoideologicheskim standards. But it is actually ignored logic of the philosophy of education, when the flow of ideas that reflect the problematic situations in all aspects of the practice of broadly understood education alone can give vitality and specific targeting formed the philosophical and educational knowledge, which does not exclude, of course, data assimilation of different sciences, including general philosophy. In-depth analysis of just such a course of development of the philosophy of education is extremely important.
Thus, the philosophy of education – is not applied philosophy. This is quite independent area of scientific knowledge, the foundation of which are not so much the general philosophical teachings, turned to education as the objective laws of development of the education sector itself in all aspects of its operation.
General philosophical knowledge alone will remain only an abstract scheme, unless they are enriched with knowledge related to economics, sociology, ethics, aesthetics, culture, ecology, different fields of engineering and technology, computer science, physiology, medicine, law, demography, education, psychology etc. And each of these sciences considers the problems of education in its aspect, in its particular perspective.Philosophy of Education, assimilating all this knowledge in their most general, conceptual form, is essentially a scientifically based research paradigm, meaning (for Kuhn) “recognized by all the scientific advances that have for some time given model posing problems and their solutions to the scientific community” [9].
In general, among the most pressing problems of modern education to be social and philosophical reflection and hence constituting the content and structure of the philosophy of education must include the following:
1. The conditions and possibilities of full self-realization in the period of transition from socialism to capitalism society.
2. Search for a way out of the former imposed, the Soviet system of philosophy and thinking zaideologizirovannogo perception of all phenomena of social and natural world, change in the overall mental attitudes towards the world and society.
3. Problems of quality to meet the rapidly changing social order to the new structure of Humanities and technologically saturated professions, development and implementation of training competent paradigm of modern professionals.