Phileducation Humanist

ENHANCING HUMANITY
Philosophy and Education

VOLUME 9
Series Editor:
Robert E. Floden, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, U.S.A.
Kenneth R. Howe, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO, U.S.A.
Editorial Board
David Bridges, Centre for Applied Research in Education, University of East Anglia,
Norwich, U.K.
Jim Garrison, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA, U.S.A.
Nel Noddings, Stanford University, CA, U.S.A.
Shirley A. Pendlebury, University of Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa
Denis C. Phillips, Stanford University, CA, U.S.A.
Kenneth A. Strike, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, U.S.A.
SCOPE OF THE SERIES

There are many issues in education that are highly philosophical in character. Among these
issues are the nature of human cognition; the types of warrant for human beliefs; the moral
and epistemological foundations of educational research; the role of education in
developing effective citizens; and the nature of a just society in relation to the educational
practices and policies required to foster it. Indeed, it is difficult to imagine any issue in
education that lacks a philosophical dimension.
The sine gua non of the volumes in the series is the identification of the expressly
philosophical dimensions of problems in education coupled with an expressly
philosophical approach to them. Within this boundary, the topics-as well as the audiences
for which they are intended-vary over a broad range, from volumes of primary interest
to philosophers to others of interest to a more general audience of scholars and students of
education.
The titles published in this series are listed at the end of this volume.
Enhancing Humanity
The Philosophical Foundations of Humanistic
Education
by
NIMROD ALONI
Hakibbutzim College of Education,
Tel Avh~ Israel
~ Springer
A C.I.P. Catalogue record for this book is available from the Library of Congress.
ISBN-I0
ISBN-13
ISBN-I0
ISBN-13
ISBN-I0
ISBN-13
1-4020-6167-6 (PB)
978-1-4020-6167-7 (PB)
1-4020-0961-5 (HB)
978-1-4020-0961-7 (HB)
1-4020-6168-4 (ebook)
978-14020-6168-4 (ebook)
Published by Springer,
P.O. Box 17, 3300 AA Dordrecht, The Netherlands.
Printed on acid-free paper
All Rights Reserved

2007 Springer
No part of this work may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted
in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, microfilming, recording
or otherwise, without written permission from the Publisher, with the exception
of any material supplied specifically for the purpose of being entered
and executed on a computer system, for exclusive use by the purchaser of the work.
Printed in the Netherlands.
For Sima
My wife and fellow musketeer
This page intentionally left blank
CONTENTS
xi
Preface
Acknow ledgments
XIII
Introduction:
Contradictory Encounters with Humanistic

Education
Chapter I
Between the Classical and Post-modern:

Milestones and Central Approaches in
Humanistic Education
1. The Initial Question: How to be a Human Being

2. The Cultural-Classical Approach and the Longing for
Human Perfection
3. The Naturalistic-Romantic Approach and the Yearning
for the Authenticity of Self-Actualization
4. The Existential Approach and the Yearning for the
Authenticity of Self-Creation
5. The Critical-Radical Approach and the Yearning for
Empowerment and Emancipation
6. Humanistic Education in the Age of the Repudiation
of "Man": The Postmodern Challenge
Chapter II
An Integrative and Normative Model for

Humanistic Education at the Advent of the
21 st Century
Introduction
1. Humanism as a Worldview and Moral Stance: A Normative
Definition
2. Humanistic Education: An Integrative and Normative
Definition
3. Three Principal Goals: Quality of Culture, Autonomous
and Critical Thinking, and Authentic Personality
(a) Quality of Culture
(b) Autonomous and Critical Thinking
(c) Authentic Personality
vii
9
12
37
42
47
52
61
61
77
85
85
92
97
VIII
4. The Ways of Humanistic Education

(a) Balanced Combination Between Approaches
and Goals
(b) Between Orientation and Information
(c) Educational Climate
(d) The Curriculum
(e) Connective and Communicative Teaching or the
Tree of Knowledge as the Tree of Life
Chapter III
Education Towards Humanistic Morality

in an Era of Value Crisis
1. Point of Departure
2. The Sphere of Morality and its Manifestations in
Everyday Life
(a) Values
(b) Qualities of Character
(c) Moral Principles
3. Characteristics of a Value Crisis
4. The Sources of the Authority of Moral Judgment
5. The Methods and Limitations of Moral Humanistic
Education
(a) Reciprocity as a Point of Departure for Moral
Consideration
(b) Nurturing the Moral Point of View
(c) Sensitivity to Justice and Ensuring that Justice be
Done
(d) Nurturing the Love of Fellow Humans, Benevolence
and Amiability
(e) Nurturing a Striving Towards Perfection
(0 Nurturing a Positive Self-Image and a Feeling of
self-worth
(g) Reinforcing Character and Personality
(h) Sensitive Caring for the Other, Empathic
Understanding, Compassion and Tenderness
(i) Nurturing Moral Knowledge of Good and Bad
6. Pedagogical Means
104
105
107
108
110
111
119
119
122
126
128
130
132
136
142
145
146
148
154
154
156
157
157
159
162
IX
(a) Personal Example and the Inculcation of Habit

(b) Nurturing Cultural Literacy
(c) Nurturing Critical Literacy
(d) Teaching that Nurtures Moral Awareness and
Sensitivity
Chapter IV
162
164
165
168
Humanistic Education in the Test of

Current Events
Introduction
1. The Goal of Education and its Manifestations in the
Professional Ethics of Educators and Teachers
2. Education Toward Peace and Democracy
3. Education Toward Culture or Submission to the Culture
of Ratings
4. The New Literacies and their Possible Contribution to
Humanistic Education
173
173
176
183
194
204
Epilogue
215
Bibliography
219
PREFACE
In Jean-Paul Sartre's Nausea, Roquentin feels bound to listen to the
sentimental ramblings about humanism and humanity by the Self-Taught
Man. "Is it my fault," muses Roquentin, "in all he tells me, I recognize the
lack of the genuine article? Is it my fault if, as he speaks, I see all the
humanists I have known rise up? I have known so many of them!" And then
he lists the radical humanist, the so-called "left" humanist, and Communist
Humanist, the Catholic humanist, all claiming a passion for their fellow men.
"But there are others, a swarm of others: the humanist philosopher who
bends over his brothers like a wise older brother with a sense of his
responsibility; the humanist who loves men as they are, the humanist who
loves men as they ought to be, the one who wants to save them with their
consent, and the one who will save them in spite of themselves ...." Quite
naturally, the skeptical Roquentin ends by saying how "they all hate each
other: as individuals, not as men."
Fully aware of the misuse and false comfort in the use of the term,
Professor Aloni proceeds to restore meaning to the word as well as
appropriate its educational significance. There is a freshness in this book, a
restoration of a lost clarity, a regaining of authentic commitment. No longer
oriented to an "essence" of what it means to be human, "humanism" in the
context of this book cannot be used to paper over what has become a kind of
wasteland where values are concerned. Nor can it be used to suggest that
contemporary education (public or private or religious) is governed by
identifiable principle or communally defined and accepted ideal.
Perhaps most important in the pages that follow is the light cast on the
problem of human existence in these days of blank indifference on the one
hand, a search for sensation on the other. Professor Aloni is as interested in
individual uniqueness as he is in community, and in what it means to
become human in a postmodem moment of receding universals and an
emptying out of meaningful purposes and goals. He knows as well as anyone
the importance of empowering students to be not only wide-awake but also
critical in their adoption of world-views.
Beginning as he does in classical times, concluding with open questions
regarding education - and the prospects of humanism - in the face of
postmodemism, Professor Aloni weaves the past of humanism into the
present. For him, the past does not press down upon the present or determine
what we think and dream and try to teach today; but the possibilities in a
revised humanism remain -sfor the individual as well as for the community.
Xl
XII
Preface
We can only hope that under the deceiving brightness of an oversimplified

and conventional "humanism," there are fewer instances of professed love
for "humanity" coupled with hatred of particular persons. Professor Aloni
hopes to pull aside the screens of obfuscation that have allowed so much of a
so-called humanist education hide an erosion of ethical concern as well as
concern for the individual self. At once he hopes to point the way towards
the thus far undiscovered: a new philosophical consciousness in education, a
humanism that works to liberate and at once to bring together, to make
visible and palpable heretofore undefined possibility.
Maxine Greene
Professor of Philosophy and Education (Emr.)
Teachers College, Columbia University
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I wish to thank Kibbutzim College of Education and Beit Berl College of
Education for providing me academic and material support without which
this work would not have come to completion.
The Gilo Familiy Foundation has provided me with a generous grant that
enabled me to concentrate on this work and bring it to successful
completion. For this I am most thankful.
Two good philosophers-friends have made important contribution to the
book: Maxine Greene, of Teachers College-Columbia University, who was
my mentor during my doctoral studies, has inspired me since then with her
sensibilities and sensitivities, and wrote the Preface to this book; and Zvi
Tauber, of Tel Aviv University, with whom I have discussed many of the
ideas presented in the book and who contributed insightful comments on
early versions of the various chapters.
Finally, my mother, Shulamit, my wife Sima, and my sons Adam and Tal
have always given me the emotional and intellectual backing that is so
needed in the long and lonely odyssey of writing a book. I love them.
XIII
Chapter I
BETWEEN THE CIJASSICAL AND POSTMODERN: MILESTONES AND CENTRAL
APPROACHES IN HU:MANISTIC EDUCATION
To you is granted the power ofdegrading yourself into the lower forms oflife, the
beasts, and to you is granted the power, contained in your intellect and judgment
to be reborn into the higherforms, the divine.
Pico Della Mirandola
Every individual man carries in disposition and determination a pure ideal man
within himself, with whose unalterable unity it is the great task of his existence,
throughout all his vicissitudes, to harmonize.
Schiller
In man creature and creator are united.
Nietzsche
1. THE INITIAL QUESTION: HOW TO BE A

HUMAN BEING
Like a shark that is born a shark and a dolphin born a dolphin, human
beings are born human beings. But unlike the shark whose life embodies its
shark-like nature and the dolphin whose life manifests its dolphin-like nature
(and it appears that this is true of all other animals), human beings live
wondering about their nature, seeking in vain to characterize and define it,
and do not know (in the words of Ecclesiastes) "what was that good for the
sons of men, which they should do under the heaven all the days of their
lives." In other words, from the time humans are capable of thinking, they
are aware of their own reality and life in the world next to other creatures:
but how to live their lives, what content and meaning to give it, and what
character or ethos they will adopt in their relationships with their natural and
human environment - these are no longer facts, but weighty and challenging
questions that compel the individual, day in, day out, to choose and decide.
The attempt to follow the developmental process of human individuals
reveals that they are also natural beings, whose development and formation
10
Chapter I
the biological level, for example, the genetic heredity with which a person is
born (and as of now, also dies) plays a most significant role in defining the
individual's character. To a great extent the genes in our body's cells
determine our physical appearance, mental potential, temperament, life
expectancy and talents for various human occupations. Moreover, numerous
physical attributes have a far-reaching effect on the directions our lives take,
our social status and self-image. Many opportunities for promotion and
success are open to the "the bold and the beautiful" and remain inaccessible
to the majority. This is also true of those who have outstanding talents for
sports, music or scholastic studies. Another example is the implications that
a person's skin color or gender has on his or her life. It is indubitable that
until recently, the fact that people were born dark skinned doomed them, in
many parts of the world, to a life of bondage to the white man; the very fact
that a person was born female - a woman - made her part of her husband'sa man's - property, and deprived her of the right to fully develop and realize
her human skills.
As to the rules governing the development and activity of the psyche, we
can also deal on the psychological level with the causal relationships that act
in forming human character and behavior. As early as the 4th century B.e.E.,
Aristotle maintained that the way in which we are formed in early childhood
has a cardinal effect on our character as adults; Jean Jacques Rousseau
redeveloped this understanding in the early days of the New Era. In the zo"
century, this notion was substantiated and broadened in the theoretical
frameworks of Freud (with a psycho-sexual emphasis), Erikson (with a
psycho-social emphasis), Piaget (with a cognitive emphasis), and others. A
great deal of evidence regarding this insight on causal relationships in the
psychological sphere is demonstrated in ordinary life and does not
necessarily require scientific formulation. As a rule, human beings' thinking,
modes of expression, artistic sensitivity and characteristics stem to a great
extent from the relations and interactions they have within the family and in
the social surroundings; and in extreme cases, we know that events such as
sexual abuse or exploitation, loss of a dear one, or traumatic encounters with
animals have long-term implications on the individual's life and often leave
a deep mark on his or her personality.
Man is also a social creature and reflects his environment. Like a sapling
that grows and develops within the factuality of the surrounding earth and
climate, so humans breathe and absorb the landscapes of their culture: their
mother tongue, the religious beliefs prevalent in their culture, their ethnic
and national singularity and perception of human purpose. When they are
very young, human beings do not realize their individual freedom or make
rational and critical decisions regarding cultural and social alternatives.
During their socialization . process, children internalize the culture's values
Between the Classical and Postmodern
"
and customs and rapidly become an integral part of it - a product that

represents a well-defined and differentiated social culture. Moreover, the
social sciences put predictive (at a fairly high level of probability) tools at
our disposal for ascertaining the worldview, occupation and social status of a
specific person during his or her adult life. This is based on the cultural and
socio-economic characteristics of the individual while he or she was young
(for example, in the case of a group of infants from the communist and
atheistic community of the Israeli kibbutzim in comparison with infants from
community of the ultra-orthodox Jews of Jerusalem; or black children from
New York's Harlem ghetto in comparison with their white counterparts who
live ten blocks south on Fifth Avenue).
To these three perspectives - biological, psychological and sociologicalwe could add various conceptions claiming the existence of a set of rules that
dominate human life and affect their content and direction: from divine plans
and personal destiny, through materialistic, historical or socio-biological
determinism. Yet there is nothing in any of them that can invalidate or
desensitize our most basic human experience regarding freedom and
responsibility for our character and our relationships with our environment.
Whether we prefer the religious description, "everything is foreseen, yet
freedom of choice is given,'" Nietzsche's philosophical description that "in
man creature and creator are united.T'or a biological description, which
claims that man has a very flexible nature and "relatively very few innate or
inborn patterns of behavior'" - we will arrive at the same conclusion that
human beings are to a great extent free vis-a-vis the reality of their lives, and
through their self-awareness are capable of perceiving themselves as their
very own project. We care a great deal about how we and our actions appear;
in many and varied moments in our lives we examine and evaluate our
personal character or social order through intellectual mirrors (truth and
falsehood, correct or erroneous), moral mirrors (good and evil, just or unjust)
and esthetical mirrors (beautiful and ugly, refined or coarse) - and are often
totally dissatisfied with what we see. At times (particularly during
adolescence) we defy our parents and say that we are tired of being what
they planned us to be, and from now' on we are on our own and onlywe will
decide on our way. At times, we point an accusing finger at society's wrongs
and demand that they be rectified; at times, we change our religious belief,
become pious or tum our backs on religion; and often, we modify our
positions and pave new ways for ourselves.
1 Ethics
ofthe Fathers, 3:19.

Good and Evil, sec. 225.
3 Neumann, The preeminence ofMan, p. 46.
2 Beyond
12
Chapter I
This possible basic experience of human beings in their relationship to

themselves as free and sovereign subjects - as beings who mold their own
character and establish their world while being aware of the reflective,
autonomous, critical, moral and creative character of their consciousness does not negate the fact of our existence in the world as natural, historical
and social objects. It is rather this consciousness that enables and creates
humanistic discourse, at the center of which lies our basic question: how to
be a human being. If indeed, in contrast to the shark, dolphin or any other
animal, human beings are to a great extent the thinkers, scriptwriters,
directors, actors and audience ofthe reality oftheir lives, then it follows that
they shoulder a great responsibility for the quality of this drama which is
their - and our - lives. As human history has taught us, this drama can be
the source of our dignity and hopes as well as the source of our disgrace and
end. Man, whose essence is not constant and whose nature is open and
incomplete, is capable of anything and everything: exemplary heights of
wisdom, sensitivity, conscience, refinement and creativity, but who is also
capable of descending into the heinous abysses of instinctual savagery, evil,
ugliness, crudity and murderousness. In other words, humanness is both the
generator and product ofthe attempts ofMan - as an autonomous, rational,
worthy and creative being - to be a human being (in the nonnative sense of
the term),
In this chapter, which is an historical overview, we will examine four
answers to questions which address the idea of "humanity at its best," "full
humanity," or of "good and worthy human life," and the educational ways of
realizing it. These four answers manifest the positions of four central
approaches that developed in the heritage of humanistic education in
Western culture: the classical-cultural, romantic-naturalistic, existentialist
and radical-critical approaches. The chapter will conclude with a discussion
of the implications of the postmodem standpoint on the status of humanistic
education: an examination of the feasibility and significance of humanistic
education in an era that to a great extent renounces Man.
2. THE CULTURAL-CLASSICAL APPROACH AND THE

LONGING FOR HUMAN PERFECTION
Conventional wisdom identifies the roots of Westem culture's humanistic
worldview in Judaism and Hellenism, the ethics of the Israelite prophets and
the Athenian philosophers, scientists and artists. A central contribution to the
humanistic perception of ethical values is accorded to Biblical Judaism,
which places special emphasis on the sanctity of human life, equality of
human value, social justice,.. charity, solidarity with the weak, and a striving
13
towards world peace. A notable expression of these ideas can be found in the
story of the creation of Man in the image of God, which imparts a unique
status to him, and imposes on each and every one a duty to act towards all
humankind with the special respect that they deserve. We can find additional
notable expressions of the Bible's humanistic spirit in the following
elements: absolute superiority of "benevolence and justice" as the salient
characteristics of "the Chosen People"; forbiddance of spilling human blood;
special concern for the proselyte, the orphan, and the widow; negation of
discrimination and strict adherence to equality before the law; and the love
of one's fellow men and women.
Notwithstanding the ancient contribution of Judaism to the sphere of
moral values, academic research on the heritage of humanistic education
usually begins its historical survey with classical Athens and avoids dealing
with Jewish heritage. The reason for this, with which I agree, are that despite
the existence of significant humanistic values in Jewish cultural heritage, it
mainly comprises a religious worldview that places God, not Man, at the
center of being. Although human beings are afforded unique status in the
universe, their dignity, the significance and purpose of their existence and
their way of life and customs, all derive from a supreme and omnipotent
holy being, which human beings are compelled to revere and follow through
their entire life. We should not infer from this that Judaism, Christianity or
Islam, as monotheistic religions, cannot dwell in harmony with a humanistic
worldview, but they should not be regarded as humanistic in essence, since it
is not humankind that is the source of authority, and it is God, not human
beings, who are responsible for their fate. God is considered the king of the
universe, and the believer must accept the yoke of the kingdom of heaven,
fear God and fulfill His precepts.
We will tum first to the roots of humanistic education in the culture of
classical Athens in the 5th and 4th centuries B.e.E. Unique to ancient
Athenian culture was an anthropocentric and humanistic worldview that
situated Man at the center. In the framework of this culture, Man's
excellence and happiness were perceived as ultimate goals and every person
who respected him- or herself strove to prove his or her skills in the most
general and arduous task of all - the art of human life. A condition for this
general excellence of Man qua man was a harmonious and proportional
development of the assemblage of human skills - physical, mental, moral
and artistic - while any deviation in the direction of excessive specialization
or professionalism was perceived as marring Man's complete humanness.
This humanistic and anthropocentric spirit also characterized the religious
dimension of Greek life: the world of nature and the divine world were, for
them, a single unity. They feared the gods but did not efface themselves
before them and regarded their own lives on this earth - and not somewhere
14
Chapter I
in the next world - as the only arena for realizing their full humanness and
demonstrating their excellence as human beings.
Humanistic education first appears as a central subject for public
examination and discussion in the second half of the 5th century B.e.E., and
its echoes can be heard in Plato's4 early dialogues. Socrates and the Sophists
systematically and critically examined the basic question regarding human
virtues and the proper way of imparting them. The content and form of these
dialogues exhibit what is known as "the humanistic turnabout in Western
culture." In contrast with the earlier Greek philosophers - the pre-Socratics Socrates and the Sophists do not focus solely on cosmological questions that
deal with the basic elements and the laws of nature, but on the essence of
human life and the proper way of life for Man qua Man. Regarding the
character or form of study, the dogmatism and obsessiveness that
characterized religious, political and cultural authority is now negated and
replaced by Socrates and the Sophists with a discussion of rational and
critical principles of thinking. It is based on open-mindedness and the
expectation to ground ones positions with evidence and reasoning. That is to
say, at the center stage of their discussion lies the question of how we are to
conduct our lives as human beings in the best possible way, while we
ourselves are required to provide the answers through study and discussion relying on the best intellectual, moral, and creative abilities bestowed on
man. With this humanistic watershed, Man turned to self-definition as a
sovereign autonomous being.
These humanistic dialogues revolved around two central notions - Arete
and Paideia - which became the cornerstones of classical-humanistic
education. These concepts assume a perfectionistic quality par excellence.
The first, arete, means skill, excellence or virtue, and is usually related to the
activity or function in which you can be expected to demonstrate your
essence or vocation. For example, speed and stamina are the principal merits
of a horse, since they are what make it a good horse that can perform
admirably; courage, physical strength and maneuvering are the virtues of a
warrior; a beautiful, harmonious and moving performance constitutes the
excellence of a musician; while honesty, justice, wisdom, generosity,
courage and obeying the law were considered the virtues of Man qua Man
and a citizen of society. The second notion, paideia, can be translated as
education or culture. From the 5th century B.e.E. it held a more general
meaning of the ideal assemblage of human virtues - of the body, spirit and
character - which should be regarded as a model of excellence for a good
and full human life (and from this stems the identification of classicalSee in particular Protagoras and Gorgias and to some extent also the Apologia, Meno
and Crito, in The Writings of Plato,
15
humanistic education with the model of excellence of a good and full human
life).'
We can find a concise expression of this cultural educational ideal and

the virtues it comprises in Pericles' "Funeral Oration" as it appears in
Thucydides' The Peloponnesian War. Athens' political regime, Pericles
boasts, is an open democracy that strictly adheres to the individual's
freedom, equality before the law, equality of opportunity based on individual
ability and special protection of the poor and weak. In contrast with the
citizens of Sparta, whose entire existence was focused on the military
efficacy of their state, Athenians enjoy a humanistic education that engages
in a multi-faceted and harmonious development of their character and their
formation as autonomous and sovereign people. In Athens, Pericles adds,
decisions and actions were taken only after open and well-informed public
discussion took place, in which the various issues were examined from
numerous and diverse directions.
In conclusion, Pericles outlines the way of life worthy of human beings,
which is the source of their vitality, value and dignity. It is a life motivated
by love and commitment to truth, justice and beauty as the objectives of
human leisure, a guiding light in quotidian thinking and action. In this
context the concept of schole is worthy of note: it indicates "school" in
Greek - and its additional transformations in Latin and numerous other
languages - derive from the notion of leisure time. The meaning of leisure
time in Greek was not "free time" (as many people understand it today), but
rather engagement in activities and subjects suitable for the individual as a
free person who is not completely subjugated to earning a living and which
advance him or her towards fuller humanity. School, therefore, is an
assembly place for people who want to engage together in activities and
concentrate on subjects that contribute to the sublime elements of their
humanity.
In the beginning of the 5th century B.e.E. education in Athens was
already public and institutionalized (although only for the sons of wealthy
Athenian citizens), and was founded on two basic principles: the first was
music, the purpose of which was to create a fine harmonious soul, and
comprised of - in addition to practicing -language, literature, poetry, ethics,
and some arithmetic. The second component was gymnastics, or physical
education, which was designed to promote the student's health, strength and
physical ability, as well as nurturing virtues of character such as courage,
willpower and self-restraint. From the mid-S" century, studies and training
See Jaeger's formulation, in his Paideia, [vol. I, p. 286], as the "highest arete possible
to man ...the sum total of all ideal-perfections of mind and body."
16
Chapter I
in geometry, arithmetic, astronomy, rhetoric and dialectics or philosophy

were also added to higher education.
With regard to the aims of education, various trends in humanistic
education are revealed in Plato's early dialogues. The two main debators,
Protagoras and Socrates, seemingly do not disagree on the general purpose:
finding that human quality, beyond all individual talents and skills that
embodies human perfection; that human virtue "in which all must share and
which must enter into every man's actions whatever other occupations he
chooses to learn and practice.?" The two disagree on the status of that human
perfection. On the one hand, Protagoras, the most important Sophist
philosopher, presents a relativistic approach that maintains that Man (both as
an individual and as society) is the "measure of all things'"; an educational
approach, the purpose of which is to bring about the success of students in
their personal and public life, as these were defined by the society to which
Man belongs. Socrates, on the other hand, disagrees with the Sophists and
identifies human perfection with the nurturing of the soul in light of a
universal and objective idea of wisdom and moral character.
Beyond the description of the confrontation between Socrates'
educational conception and that of the Sophists, we can find in Plato's
writings a systematic presentation of his educational concept, the principles
of which have become the immutable assets of classical-humanistic
education.' Plato subscribes to ten educational principles:
1. Nothing is more important to human beings than the concern for their
human image and the nature of their character.
2. Life devoid of critical examination of the good, just, true and
beautiful is pointless and worthless
3. Human virtue, superior to all others and all-embracing, is wisdom,
and it is manifested first and foremost in knowing good and evil.
4. Human freedom, morality and happiness are a consequence of
expanding knowledge and therefore intellectual education should be at the
core of Man's education.
5. Good human life depends on the power of wisdom to dominate the
elements which are considered more inferior (such as drive, emotion and
imagination), and channeling them into the realization of aims that reason
identifies as worthy.
Protagoras, 325.
These words are attributed to Protagoras in Plato's Theaetetus
8 The main thrust of Plato's educational conception presented here are taken from the
following writings: Protagoras, Gorgias, Apologia, Meno, Crito, Charm ides, the
Republic, and the Symposium.
17
6. The beginning of all knowledge is human beings' self-awareness of

the limits of their knowledge.
7. In morality, reasoning should be matter-of-fact, rational, consistent
and impartial.
8. The good teacher does not put the right answers into the mind or
mouth of his students, but leads them towards an inquisitive and focused
dialogue, so that they will themselves discover the truths, whose vitality,
once accepted, will be maintained in their memory for life.
9. From early childhood, one should nurture in children a liking for
behaviors worthy of praise and an abhorrence of those deserving
condemnation, so that when reaching maturity they will not experience
contradictions between their natural propensities and intellectual ideals.
10. It is both worthy and worthwhile to conjoin with people who have
good and fine souls, since the essence of such friendship is that it mutually
develops, enriches and enhances the character of its partners.
These ten principles represent Plato's educational perception and should
be viewed in the context of his rationalistic philosophy, which assumed the
existence of essences and rules both in the natural world and that of human
values. Against the background of Plato's belief in the ability of human
wisdom to know these essences and rules, we can better understand the
weight he attributed to knowledge in humanistic education, beyond any other
component. This standpoint also explains the absolutist, paternalist and
authoritative approach which characterizes Plato's philosophy of education,
and which often runs counter to the principles of equality, freedom of
thought and the pluralism of modem humanism.
In Plato's view, and that of contemporary conservative humanists,
freedom of thinking and development of intellectual abilities have no value
per se if they do not lead to a rational and moral life. As we know, Plato says
in the famous "parable of the cave'" that there is a multitude of clever and
ingenious people who make malicious and harmful use of their minds, and
numerous free people who their entire lives follow their momentary
appetites and the manipulative promises that shrewd conscienceless
politicians heap upon them. For all these there is only one true, befitting
remedy: the knowledge of truths, values and purposes that have passed the
test of reason and time, and in which light the next generations should be
educated. It is desirable to realize such an education by creating interest and
inner motivation in the student; but even if this is successful, in light of the
danger of other influences, the young should be molded by authority and
coercion. It is better that students be limited in their personal freedom and
9
TheRepublic, book VII.
18
Chapter I
behave properly than enjoy unlimited personal freedom and live a worthless
life, or worse - a life of stupidity and injustice. 10
The desirable measure of personal freedom, Plato thought - and
following him, numerous other thinkers of the classical school - will always
depend on the degree of the individual's intellectual and moral maturity.
Bestowing freedom on the child (and frequently on the adult) when proper
maturity is lacking is similar to abandoning our life and all that is dear to us
to the arbitrariness of appetite and the randomness of foolishness. Plato's
attitude towards aristocracy (as the preferable form of regime) also derives
from this, since in it the intellectual elite of the "wise and the good," i.e., the
philosophers, serve as a political leadership that manages social issues
according to the guidelines of wisdom and justice, for the benefit of all.
It would be unfair to Plato and his contribution to humanistic culture if
we take leave of him here, with his exacting intellectual demands on the
individual, and ignore his fine and important words on emotional and artistic
education. In the most basic sense, Plato manifests the emphasis placed by
contemporary Greek education on musical education, as an enrichment and
refinement of the soul through learning to play a musical instrument, poetry
and literature. As early as Protagoras we read about teachers who "teach
them the works of good poets of another sort, namely the lyrical, which they
accompany on the lyre, familiarizing the minds of the children with the
rhythms and melodies ... [making them] more civilized, more balanced and
better adjusted in themselves ... for rhythm and harmonious adjustment are
essential to the whole of human life."ll In a later dialogue, The Republic,
Plato expands on the contribution of artistic education to the nurturing of
differential and judiciary skills and the refinement of taste: "musical training
is a more potent instrument than any other, because rhythm and harmony
find their way into the inward places of the soul, on which they mightily
fasten, imparting grace, and making the soul of him who is rightly educated
graceful." 12
Plato made a singular and original contribution on these issues in The
Symposium in which the discussion focuses on the question of the essence
and contribution of eros: What is the essence and function of love; to whom
and towards what is it worthwhile striving and yearning? These are
seemingly irrelevant questions, since we love whom we love and are
attracted to whom we are attracted, and it would seem odd to attempt to
control and plan these emotional issues. In fact, as it is well-known, these are
by no means absurd questions: all parents relate to the nature of their
for example, The Republic, 488-489, 561-564, and 588-589.
326-327.
12 The Republic, 40 J-402.
10 See
11 Protagoras,
19
children's friends (some of whom have a positive influence, others, a

negative one), as well as to the nature: of the leisure time activity that attracts
their children (what they read, watch on television, to what activity they
volunteer, what attracts them in youth culture, and which personalities
captivate them). Parents are similarly not indifferent to the dreams, visions,
ideals and human attributes to which their children are attracted as a basis for
their motivation which leads them to make themselves into human beings of
one kind or another.
Plato's answers to these questions are relevant to everyone at any time,
and particularly the portrait he painted of "Platonic love." He sets out with
mythological explanations of the figure of Eros as an ancient and important
god, whose contribution to the hum.an race is embodied in the fertility of
love as a driving force for great deeds. In other words, the lover who longs
for mutual love from his beloved, motivated by the power of his love to do
great and singular deeds that will im.press his beloved and win her heart. In
this context, one of the interlocutors says that we often seek to impress our
beloved with extraordinary deeds, but often these acts are ostentatious and
reckless and their results are totally negative. Therefore, says another
interlocutor: "thus I say that even loving and Love are not wholly good, nor
worthy of praise, but only that loving which urges us toward noble action.t''?
There are people who by nature are crude and common and are attracted to
and yearn for physical and sensual beauty only; they do not pay heed to
others' wisdom and soul, their only interest being physical and sexual
satisfaction. In contrast there are others whose soul is refined and sensitive,
their eros is mainly spiritual and they crave for the good and beauty of the
personality of the other no less than their physical beauty: "The man who is
a lover in the common way is base -- he loves the body rather than the soul.,
Nor is he constant, since he loves things which lack constancy. Why, with
the flower of the body fading, his favor, too, disappearing... but the person
who loves the character of a good man endures throughout life, merging with
what is lasting.'?"
Another enchanting mythological story appears in the Symposium, which
tells about the god Zeus who was angry at human beings, at a time when
there were still three types of mortals: those with four hands and four feet,
two faces (one facing each direction) - some of which were male on both
sides, others female on both sides, while others were androgynous, with one
side male and the other female. As a result of his rage, Zeus severed all
creatures into two, thus love was created as the yearning of each half for the
part that was separated and removed. But the most important version, which
13
The Symposium, 181.

183-184.
14 Ibid,
20
Chapter I
Socrates contributes to the discussion, is presented towards the end of the

Symposium. With his fine-honed logic, Socrates claims that since eros means
yearning, passion and longing - as both physical attraction and a yearning
for truth, good and beauty - Eros is not a god (since gods are perfect and
lack nothing), neither can he be crude and vulgar since "those who are
ignorant don't desire wisdom" and do not yearn for beauty or the sublime.
From this Socrates infers that he is a hybrid demon: the son of the god
"Plenty" and the woman "Poverty." One day, the story goes, when the god
Plenty (or Resource) "having gotten quite drunk" the woman "Poverty" lay
down beside him, and in her cunning she became pregnant and bore Eros.
This is the source of Eros' unique nature: a creature that combines the
human and the divine, the worldly and the spiritual, the transient and the
immortal, and he is all longing and yearning for the perfect, supreme, lofty
and immortal - the essence he will never attain. These are Eros' activities in
human beings: it motivates the attraction for and love of a person of the
opposite sex, so that the subject will enjoy this beauty, and the two will
copulate, "so that through the conception of children they achieve
immortality, memory and joy.':" But there are those "who are pregnant more
in their souls than in their bodies, with things which are fitting for the soul to
bear and bring to life";" intellectuals and creators, who are prolific in ideas
and actions, who do not love or yearn only for the beauty of the body and
soul of this person or another, but for pure beauty and the sublime and the
exemplary. In their relations with and commitment to these spiritual ideals
they produce masterpieces and exemplary deeds that confer on them eternal
glory and memory in human consciousness - they are the founders and
leaders of the supreme culture of the human race. And Plato concludes:
"Here above all places ... is the life that is worth living for a man, lived in the
contemplation of the Beautiful itself. ,,17
The philosophy of education of Aristotle, who was Plato's disciple,
constitutes both a continuation and a shift in comparison with his teacher.
The classical spirit of humanism is engraved in his contention that "clearly
there is no more important lessens to be learned or habit to be formed than
that of right judgement and of taking pleasure in good morals and noble
actions.?" Like Socrates and Plato, Aristotle too claimed that wisdom or
knowledge is the supreme human virtue, but, in contrast to them, he believes
that this virtue does not guarantee the development of a moral and happy
human being. Aristotle's innovation lies in his assertion that there must be a
Ibid, 208-209.
Ibid, ibid.
17 Ibid, 211.
18 Aristotle, The Politics, VIII, 5.
15
16
21
distinction between the virtues of int.ellect and virtues of character and that
each kind of virtue has unique characteristics and ways to be nurtured."
Human beings can acquire knowledge on the order of nature, historical
events and human standpoints through systematic learning provided both by
teachers and self-learning. Each person's degree of success in acquiring
knowledge depends on their skills, the means at their disposal and their
invested effort. In contrast, moral attributes - such as courage, generosity,
honesty, decency, self-restraint and moderation - are not, as Plato claimed,
the product of this kind of knowledge but are in fact the fruit of extensive
training, practice and guidance, partly conscious and partly sub-conscious,
for example, acquiring the required skills for horseback riding, playing a
lyre, military command, or (in contemporary activities) driving a car, playing
the piano or windsurfing. Clearly, some theoretical knowledge is required in
order to achieve skill in these spheres, but the crux of the matter is that what
characterizes a high level of morality, skiing, playing chess, driving a car,
playing a musical instrument or military command is a human being's ability
to recruit all his or her senses and skills at a certain moment in time,
interpreting the situation correctly, identifying the rules that should guide
him or her, controlling his or her ern.otions and desires, and orchestrating all
these together, quickly and without conscious thought, so that his or her
reaction or action will be the right and most efficient one in a given situation.
Keen perception, heightened senses, intuition, knowledge and reasoning,
decision-making ability, coordination and finding the golden mean, the
correct measure or the suitable proportion - all these are part of successful
activity. On the one hand, almost everyone can attain a reasonable level of
functionality in these spheres and skills; on the other, it is impossible to
clearly and systematically define the required qualities, not to mention
teaching them through ordinary didactic means. The combination of certain
qualities and skills in a person's personality makes him or her an excellent
dancer, driver, military commander, etc., according to the type of qualities
and skills, while the combination of attributes and skills that are related to
his or her quotidian behavior and attitude to the other create. what we call a
human being's moral character. In the case of moral excellence, Aristotle
says that this is manifested in a constant tendency to do the right deed for the
right person, at the right time and place, in the correct measure, and as a
result of the right motive and full awareness of the rightness of the deed."
In light of the singular character of the moral act and of the fact that
numerous people who suitably distinguish between good and bad, choose the
bad or yield to it, it is clear that education of a full and active human being
19
20
See particularly the Ethics, Book II.

Ibid, ibid; see also Book VI, ch. 12.
22
Chapter I
cannot rely solely on knowledge, and we should not limit the meaning of
education to its intellectual dimension. What is required of us, as parents and
educators, is to mold the character of children from their earliest stages their desires, behavior and conscience - by personal example, instruction
and habituation so that they will develop for themselves a moral character as
"second nature," which will spontaneously and regularly incline towards the
good and move away from the bad, pursue justice and rebel against injustice.
Another significant contribution by Aristotle to the sphere of humanistic
education is embodied in the naturalistic model of self-actualization or selfrealization. According to this model, everything in nature, including human
beings, strives to actualize its full potential which is embodied in it by its
very essence: the oak tree's acorns strive to develop and become widebranched, sturdy oaks with a plethora of acorns; the raising of a foal is
directed towards becoming what an adult and successful horse can be; girls
and boys, by their very nature, seek to actualize the assemblage of skills that
are embodied in them and transform them from potentiality to actuality, to
become human beings endowed with full and well-developed humanity.
When we speak of the nature ofa thing, says Aristotle, we should understand
this as its singular existentiality, not in its initial stage, but as its final stage,
when it has already actualized the telos (essential purpose and vocation)
towards which it strived during its development." It follows that the art of
education, similar to the art of medicine, concentrates on providing
assistance to a person so that he or she will be able to properly actualize the
powers that nature bestowed on him or her and make the best of his or her
life (without help and instruction, the purpose inherent in Man's nature will
not be actualized because his tendencies are raw and general and mandate
nurturing and educational formation in order to fulfill their aim).
Aristotle equipped us not only with a naturalistic model for full human
development but also a clear-cut definition of that final purpose towards
which we all, as human beings, should strive. Here too, in contrast with the
idealistic Plato, Aristotle chose to seek the answer to the concrete and
quotidian reality of man's existentiality. In Book I of the Ethics, Aristotle
asks what is the thing that men desire above all else? What is that final
purpose that people imagine that if they actualize it, they will need nothing
else? The universal answer to this is happiness, the good and successful life.
Or in Greek eudaimonia, which means the good human life on both the
objective level of good quality in human functioning, and the subjective level
of a relatively permanent feeling of enjoyment and contentment from life.
But this is a mixed blessing: it appears, Aristotle says, that different
people identify different things as the way to happiness and a good and
21
See, for example, in the Politics, Book I, ch. 2.
23
successful human life. Some identify happiness with a life of pleasure and
sensual gratification, others with a life of fame and public status, while still
others, with a theoretical life of rational inquiry and contemplation. Aristotle
comes down in favor of the third course, a spiritual life of study, based on
the principle that a good and successful human life is attainable only by
nurturing and improving the most excellent elements in our singular nature
as human beings. 22 In this test, the course of "sensory pleasure" and the way
of "public honor" fail on both counts: (1) happiness cannot be stable,
because it is at the mercy of external factors (that pleasure the senses or
those who bestow honor) and when these are absent the individual will be
frustrated and wretched; and (2) happiness is not human par excellence
because in these cases human beings do not actualize the excellent and
singular element with which they were blessed - "for man, therefore, the life
according to reason is best and most pleasant, since reason more than
anything else is man.,,23
Aristotle therefore believes that the way of the eudemonic man - whose
human life is full and worthy - is paved by "liberal" or humanistic
education. The intention here is that in addition to forming a moral character
(which we discussed earlier), education should focus on a general and
manifold nurturing of man's rational and free spirit. It should refrain from
overstressing its focus on professions and crafts, because specialization in
them will cause harm to one's general education, nor should it overdevelop
any specific skill of body or soul - the intensive development of which can
leave voids in the soul or impair full humanity. This is education essential to
mankind, "not because it is necessary, but because it is fine and worthy of
free men.?" In other words, the guiding ideal of this kind of liberalhumanistic education is that free human beings actualize and develop the
best in themselves by leisure activities (contrary to activities that derive from
the necessity of making a living). It refers to human beings who have freed
themselves from subjugation to drives, ignorance and prejudice; those who
possess general education and judgmental abilities enabling them to wisely
contemplate theoretical and practical matters in various and diverse spheres
- "the best men choosing the best and that which has the fairest source.?"
Another element in Aristotle's philosophy that is worthy of note is the
nature of the link or relationship between intellectual development, moral
character and the educational process. As we have seen, Aristotle identifies
the most distinctive human virtue with the ability to acquire knowledge on
the Ethics, Book I, chs. 7-8; and Book X, chs. 7-9.
Ethics, Book X, ch. 7.
24 The Politics, Book VIII, ch. 3.
22 See
23 The
25 Ibid, ibid.
24
Chapter I
natural and human reality, combined with the ability to organize the social
life, not merely according to drives and needs (similar to the animal world),
but also according to laws that they determine for themselves as free,
rational and political beings. We have also seen that success in human life
(as it is worthy of being lived) is founded on the integration of virtues of
intellect with virtues of character. Like his predecessor Plato, Aristotle warns
us that under no circumstances should one identify the education of the mind
with nurturing clever and quick intelligence, which has nothing whatsoever
to do with knowledge and virtue. The reason for this is simple: when human
beings are at their best, and knowledge and moral character serve one
another, they reach the height of perfection, but when they reject law and
justice, their reason can serve evil purposes, and then they deteriorate and
become more savage and cruel than all animals." (Human history has
proved time and again - and with a heavy toll - how right Aristotle was in
this observation).
Isocrates is the last of the Ancient Greek humanist educators whose
philosophy we will review here. He was a contemporary of Plato and
Aristotle (436-338). Like them, he founded and headed a school for higher
education; unlike them his contribution to philosophy was relatively small the main part of his activity focused on shaping the patterns of educational
thought and endeavor. Isocrates presented his educational conception as an
alternative both to the Sophistic and Platonic approaches. On the one hand,
he negated the Sophists' relativistic and egocentric approach and regarded
the cleavage from the traditional cultural heritage as the source of Athens'
military weakness and cultural degeneration. On the other hand, he criticized
Plato's philosophical-scientific approach as over-theoretical and alienated
from the real challenges that faced the citizens of Athens.
The proper humanistic education of a complete man and good citizen,
Isocrates claimed, cannot focus only on imparting scientific and
philosophical thinking, but on learning and internalizing the best virtues of
Greek cultural heritage.I' In his opinion, the shaping of an excellent
character depends on the encounter between those being educated and
excellent individuals, great deeds, lofty values, refined emotions, noble
virtues and wondrous styles of expression as these are manifested in
literature, poetry and cultural traditions. In this spirit, Isocrates proposed the
ideal of educated man. He is neither an economic and social "go-getter," as
the Sophists proposed, nor is he necessarily one who possesses scientific and
philosophical knowledge as Plato proposed, but a man whose quotidian life
The Politics, Book I, ch. 2.
standpoint and words that appear here are taken from the chapter on
Isocrates in Paul Nash's Models ofMan.
26
27 Isocrates'
25
embodies the best human and civil attributes. He is a man who successfully
copes with the daily challenges of life and tasks. He is endowed with
circumspection and composure; he is polite, shows respect and is civil
toward his fellow men and women. He (today this should equally apply to
"she") has a courageous spirit and his reason reigns over his instincts and
emotions. He has a broad education and his brave spirit does not give way
when faced with failure and does not yield to the temptations of conceit or
aggressiveness, which are the bedfellows of success. In short, in all his deeds
the educated man strictly adheres to his human image and moral character.
As we will see later, Isocrates' traditional and conservative worldview,
which emphasized cultural heritage, bore a strong influence on the
coalescence of the patterns of humanistic education of Rome, the
Renaissance and the New Era. This trend in classical-humanistic education
places heavy emphasis on language, literature, poetry, history and rhetoric,
and its most prominent representative is the orator. This, as we have seen
earlier, lies in contrast to the Platonic-Aristotelian trend whose main
affiliation was to science and philosophy, and whose main representative
was the philosopher. According to this approach the orator is a man of both
words and deeds, and the perfect orator combines natural talent, rational and
moral virtues, love of the homeland, a commitment to justice and general
welfare, and of course, the skill of oratory and persuasion that can impel the
public to chose the desirable way.
Isocrates' emphasis on linguistic skills was not arbitrary. It was grounded
in the Greek worldview which held that language is what separates man
from the beast and is the basis of his humanity. It should be noted that by
language the Greeks did not mean only its communicative function - which
also exists in the animal kingdom. They thought highly of language mainly
as words that are logically arranged which, as an inner language, serves us
for thinking, careful consideration a.nd the formation of positions, and as a
public language serves us in scientific-philosophical discourse, politicalmoral discussion and in creating artistic literature. Rational thinking and
speech, i.e., logos in its Greek meaning, is the medium or the singular means
for human beings to mediate between themselves and the world, enabling
them to depart from the attributes of animals (whose entire existence is
engaged in satisfying their natural needs), and create for themselves a
spiritual and political culture.
Language enabled humankind to move away from the world of nature
and establish a cultural world in which words replaced the club, logical
argument replaced conquest and the social treaty replaced the law of the
jungle by which might is right. 'Through language, Isocrates says, we
distinguish between good and evil and justice and injustice; through it, we
learn from one another and enrich our world with meaning, knowledge and
Chapter I
26
beauty. Through it, we become free beings who have the power to envisage
alternatives for each given reality, to choose one of them and act towards it
actualization. Therefore, according to Isocrates, since language is the
greatest of all man's blessings, we are obliged to develop our linguistic skills
as much as we can and make the most efficacious use of them for our own
benefit and for that of all humankind.
In ancient Rome, whose culture was greatly influenced by Greek culture,
as early as the 1st century B.e.E. we find the term humanitas, which in the
fullness of time became the linguistic source of the term "humanism." By
humanitas, which is a Latin translation of the Greek paideia, the Romans
meant both the educational process and its product. First, it denotes the
process of educating man into his "true form": actualizing the individual's
humanness and shaping the individual towards his essential nature and
designation as a human being. Second, as the product of education,
humanitas symbolizes a quality that characterizes the most excellent in
humankind: "the quality which distinguishes man, not only from animals,
but also, and even more so, from him who belongs to the species home
without deserving the name homo humanus; from the barbarian or vulgarian
who lacks ... respect for moral values and the gracious blend of learning and
culture.T" It was also the Romans who coined the terms artes libera/is and
studia humanitatis, i.e., liberal education and humanistic studies, and
institutionalized them as a formative educational system for Rome's free
citizens. It is worthy of note that by the term "free citizens" the Romans
meant the social elite that was free of the mastery of others and the need to
work and acquire a profession in order to make a living. As they were free,
they were able to devote their time to those activities of study and training
which developed and actualized their humanity - of the body, spirit and
character - and which made them a leading and serving elite in Roman
society. In other words, humanistic, liberal and general education in Rome
was perceived as proper for the free citizen and its objective was to broaden
the individual's humanity and freedom so that he would be a man of
excellence both in his private and public life.
After Greece and Rome, the Renaissance can be regarded as the third
period in which classical humanism plays a prominent and formative role in
the culture of Westem Man. In the 14th, 15th and 16th centuries the heritage of
humanist creativity and thinking reached a new level of self-awareness, the
most prominent manifestation of which is the self-definition of its followers
and innovators for the first time, as "humanists." An ideal expression of this
new spirit and breakthrough in all matters pertaining to the perception of
man's image and status can be found in Pico della Mirandola's Oration on
28
Panofsky, "History of Art as a Humanistic Discipline," p.92.
27
the Dignity of Man. The author identified man's distinctive dignity with his
having an undetermined or open essence and his ability of forming his image
through his reason and creativity:
God made man a creature of indeterminate and indifferent nature, and,
placing him in the middle of the world, said to him "Adam, we give you
no fixed place to live, no form that is peculiar to you, nor any function
that is yours alone. According to your desires and judgment, you will
have and possess whatever place to live, whatever form, and whatever
functions you yourself choose. All other things have a limited and fixed
nature prescribed and bounded by our laws. You, with no limit or no
bound, may choose for yourself the limits and bounds of your nature. We
have placed you at the world's center so that you may survey everything
else in the world. We have made you neither of heavenly nor of earthly
stuff, neither mortal nor immortal, so that with free choice and dignity,
you may fashion yourself into 'whatever form you choose. To you is
granted the power of degrading yourself into the lower forms of life, the
beasts, and to you is granted the: power, contained in your intellect and
judgment, to be reborn into the higher forms, the divine. 29
From this it is clear that the Renaissance humanists did not seek to
propose a secular alternative to the religious position, but were determined to
free themselves of the ignorance, narrow-mindedness and depreciation of the
value of man that characterized the Dark Ages. As a rebellion against these
cultural characteristics and an alternative to the dwarfing of Man's humanity
before divine grandeur, the humanists posited a striving towards freedom,
knowledge, beauty and human dignity as objectives which can be realized
through correct and consistent nurturing of human skills - as they believed
this was achieved in Greek and Roman classical culture. In these cultures,
the humanists believed, human beings were at their best, and their
humanness was revealed in all its glory: in the free spirit and inquisitive
reasoning, in scientific activity and artistic creativity, in the love of life and
belief in humankind, in literary style and philosophical thinking, and in an
adventurous spirit and restraint of instinct. The adherence of Renaissance
humanism to the spirit of classical culture produced the second meaning of
classical-humanistic education: an education which can exist in any
historical period (and not only in the classical one), but its main affiliation is
with the classical culture of Greece and Rome as an exemplary model and
basis for the nurturing of mankind's humanity.
Against this background, Renaissance humanist teachers sought to arouse
and nurture the kinds of human excellence and beauty in their students, as
29
Pico della Mirandola's, Oration on the Dignity ofMan.
28
Chapter I
they are known in classical culture. The means for achieving this were the
basic and systematic learning of the literary masterpieces that in their content
and style represent the sublime in mankind and which have the power to
broaden, enrich and refine the souls of the students towards actualizing the
essence of humanity. Thus the Renaissance humanists laid the foundations
for the educational approach known in the 20th century as the "Great Books"
or "Masterpiece" approach. This is an approach which the conservative neohumanists in the United States posited then and posit today as an alternative
to the innovations of open, progressive and technical education. Its main
thrust, as presented by Hutchins, its main spokesperson, is two-fold: (1) A
person cannot be considered educated unless he or she is well versed in the
masterpieces of human culture; (2) the best way of nurturing human virtues
is through systematic familiarization with the masterpieces and
internalization of the qualities embodied in them in one's active
personality. 30
However, it is worthy of note that there is often a vast gap between lofty
talk about humanistic ideals and excellent attributes and the depressive and
boring routine of educational endeavor - a fact that is manifested in
historical studies and is well known to some of us through personal
experience. The non-critical worship of the masterpieces and the ritual of
imparting classical culture to the young produced in numerous instances
authoritative and strict teaching patterns which required students to
memorize literary content and exercise language skills which had no
relevance whatsoever to their real-life experience and no connection
whatsoever to future challenges with which they would cope in their
quotidian life. Greatness of spirit, fertile imagination, moral sensitivity,
wisdom and artistic sense - all these devoid of personal examples or
inspiration - were experienced by numerous students as lofty but hollow
words. While the ideals were worthy of recitation and the style worthy of use
for ornamental purposes, they lacked in the original vitality that makes
knowledge the source of wisdom, moral character and pleasure.
It was Montaigne, a late Renaissance French philosopher, who more than
any other realized the hann in over-scholarship for the human spirit. In his
critical essays, he indicated the true vital sources of classical culture reason, the power of judgment, moral character and the sensitivity of taste.
His clear-cut statement in his essay "On the Education of Children" deals
with this subject:
The usual way is to bawl into a Pupil's ears as if one were pouring
water into a funnel, and the boy's business is simply to repeat what he is
30 Hutchins,
Great Books: The Foundation ofa Liberal Education, pp. 3-7.
Between the Classical and Postmodem
29
told. I would have the tutor amend this state of things, and begin straight
away to exercise the mind that he is training, according to its capacities.
He should make his pupil taste things, select them, and distinguish them
by his own perception.... A tutor must demand an account not just of the
words of his lesson, but of their meaning and substance, and must judge
of its benefit to his pupil by the evidence not of the lad's memory but of
his life. He must make him consider what he has just learnt from a
hundred points of view and apply it to as many different subjects, to see
if he has yet understood it and really made it his own.
Our minds never work except on trust; they are bound and controlled
by their appetite for another man's ideas, enslaved and captivated by the
authority of his teaching. We have been so subjected to our leading-string
that we have lost all freedom of :movement. Our vigor and independence
are extinct .... The tutor should make his pupil sift everything and take
nothing into his head on simple authority or trust."
The Age of Enlightenment in 18th century Europe is the fourth stage of
the development of classical-humanistic education: an era in which human
beings' natural rights (life, freedom and possession) become a central
element in the political worldview a.nd in which scientific reason takes on a
supreme status in intellectual discourse. The spirit of modernity also made
its mark on educational thinking and endeavor, and side by side with the old
education's conservative and elitist trends, a skeptical, critical and
democratic spirit grew and developed. In the educational thinking of the
enlightenment philosophers, critical and autonomous thinking takes on
supreme importance. They regarded it as a barrier to blind acceptance of
external authority and social conventions and as a critical screen which every
human being should develop and irnprove so to be able to differentiate by
him- or herself between what is important and what is not, between truth and
lies, good and evil. The earlier Renaissance patterns of servile acceptance
and non-critical memorization of the "exemplary truths" were replaced by a
new trend that demanded of every position and custom to pass the test of
critical and scientific rationality. "Dare to think for yourself' was the battle
cry of Enlightenment education, the objective of which was to free the
personality from naive and blind obedience that characterizes small children
and great fools. We must extricate consciousness from its heterogeneous
existence, says Kant, from inertial servility to external authority and social
conventions, and instead develop and establish autonomous and critical
consciousness which it, and only it, is suitable for the adult personalityr"
Essays, pp. 54-56.
"What is Enlightenment." This message was also manifested in Kant's lectures
in which he underscored for his students that the most important thing is not learning
31 Montaigne,
32 Kant,
30
Chapter I
Kant's words in his book On Education are a fine example of the

systematic presentation of the principles of humanistic education and the
intellectual and ethical tension that exists between classical heritage and the
modem spirit." Like his predecessors of classical heritage, Kant believed
that we cannot rely on the natural and spontaneous development of man's
personality; it should be formed in light of the objective ideal of human
perfection. Only man, says Kant, is in need of an educational framework in
order to actualize what his nature allows him to be. Animals become what
they are by virtue of their innate instincts: fish become fish, a donkey foal
becomes a donkey, a lion cub turns into a lion, and a female cub into a
lioness without having to cope with questions of identity and self-definition
during their lifetime. Man, on the other hand, is at birth an animal-biological
being, but has the unique potential to exist as a cultured-human being.
In other words, man is endowed with reason, freedom of will and the
ability to know the natural order and use it for his benefit, determine values
and ways of life for himself, and create for himself beauty and meaning in
his artistic and creative endeavor. In order to actualize this human potential,
Kant adds, man is in need of the art of education that is based on five
principles: (1) devoted care for the child's physical and spiritual needs; (2) a
multi-faceted and harmonious nurturing of the skills embodied in him,
including the refinement of thoughts, emotions and artistic taste; (3)
reinforcement of willpower and the ability for self-control, which enable the
individual to adhere to rational ways and stand firm in the face of obstacles
and temptation; (4) inculcating knowledge and developing thinking skills
and reasoning; (5) forming moral thinking and behavioral patterns, the most
important of which is the "goodwill" or the willingness and commitment to
always act in accordance with the moral imperative.
With regard to the character of the source of educational authority, Kant
adopts Socrates' approach and rejects that of Protagoras. He states that
educational endeavor should not be directed towards the success of the
young in society as it is in reality, but towards the development of their
character according to the model which is worthy of characterizing human
beings in an ideal human society. Kant was aware of the fact that this
educational undertaking might meet with the objections of various bodies in
society. First, parents might object as a result of their tendency to drive their
children to be successful in society at any price, even if society is corrupt
and degenerate. Second, different rulers would object on egotistical grounds,
thoughts but developing thinking; not the study of philosophical theories but the ability
of human beings to think and philosophize on their own.
33 Immanuel Kant, Education.
31
since they prefer gullible and servile citizens rather than inquisitive and
critical ones.
In this description of the struggle between the good of man and society
and the egotism of political, religious and economic power factors lies the
seed of rebellion that later developed in open and radical education. We are
witness here to the coalescence of modem humanism. In Kant's philosophy
there is still a balance between the heritage of classical culture and the spirit
of democracy, individualism and pluralism. Kant's humanism places the
advancement of man's development and happiness as the ultimate goal of
human beings, one that is beyond any other, be it religious, political or
economic. In his humanistic vision, he saw the Family of Man as an
assemblage of individuals who behave towards one another with equality,
courtesy, respect and decency worthy of rational and free human beings. In
this spirit, as we know, the American constitution and the human rights
charter in France were written, as were the United Nations Charter of Human
and Children's Rights in the 20th century.
At the beginning of the 19th century the central term of our discussion
humanism was coined (the adjective, humanistic, as mentioned earlier, was
in use as early as the Renaissance). It was the German educator Neithammer,
who, in 1808, coined the concept of humanism as indicating "an educational
system that considered the study of classical languages and culture to be the
best education toward full humanity.t'" (From the mid-19 th century a second
meaning of "humanism" was added - as a worldview that places man at
center stage of existence and humanity as the measure of all things). A
second term that became central at that time in Germany was hi/dung, and
like the concepts of the Greek paideia and the Roman humanitas, this
cultural-educational ideal indicated the "highest and most harmonious
development of [the distinctively human] powers to a complete and
consistent whole.,,35 We can learn more about this concept from von
Humboldt, who viewed hi/dung as "the attitude of mind which, from the
knowledge and the feeling of the total intellectual and moral endeavor, flows
harmoniously into sensibility and character.T"
Among the 19th and 20th century education philosophers who spoke in the
name of classical-humanistic education, there were many whose orientation
was Christian-Aristotelian, while th,e minority were secular humanists. The
most notable among them in the 19th century were von Humboldt, Mathew
Arnold and Cardinal Newman; in the 20th century - Irving Babbitt, Jacques
Van Praag, Foundations ofHumanism, pp. 15-17.

Mill, On Liberty, p. 186.
36 Gadamer, Truth and Method, p. 11.
34
35
32
Chapter I
Maritain, T.S.Eliot, Richard Livingston, Robert Hutchins, Mortimer Adler,

Russell Kirk and Allan Bloom.
In the writings of Arnold, who worked in the second half of the 19th
century as an inspector in the school system, literary critic and poet in his
own right - we can find a fluent, concise and modem articulation of the
ideas of classical humanism. As the title of his important book Culture and
Anarchy says, Arnold posited that human society is situated on an axis, on
one side of which is spiritual anarchy, materialism and barbarism, and on the
other "culture" as a unity of sublime values and the high standards of human
excellence. The way to distance oneself from anarchy and barbarism and to
promote the actualization of the cultural ideal is first of all, according to
Arnold, through education that nurtures all that is excellent in man. In this
context it should be noted that Arnold does not use the term culture in its
sociological meaning, as a way of life unique to a specific group,
distinguishing it from all others. Culture, as Arnold defines it, has an ethical
and normative meaning. It is an assemblage of the virtues and achievements
of the human race in a variety of spheres of life: in science's greatest studies
and findings, in literary masterpieces, in art and philosophy, in the figures
and deeds that serve as models of human greatness and moral character. In
other words, education towards culture is education towards love, study and
internalization of all that is excellent in human thinking, speaking and
endeavor. This is education towards constant enrichment of the human
world with meaning, knowledge, moral sensitivity, justice and beauty.
In this approach Arnold remains loyal to the principles of excellence,
harmony and the art of life of the classical period. He also remains loyal to
the trends of the Renaissance vis-a-vis the nurturing and refinement of man's
humanity through studying literary masterpieces. Arnold also adds the
principles of equality, democracy and society's commitment to provide
excellent education for all. Contrary to Plato and Aristotle's conservativearistocratic approach before him, to the radical-aristocratic approach of his
contemporary Nietzsche, and to T.S.Eliot's and Erwin Babbitt's
conservative-elitist approach after him, Arnold called for the inculcation of
higher education and cultural heritage for all citizens. He regarded this as the
only guarantee for the strength and thriving of democratic and enlightened
human culture.
A contemporary expression of this approach can be found in the
educational endeavor of Mortimer Adler and the Paideia group he heads. In
1982 Adler, who was the chief editor of Encyclopedia Britannica and one of
the prominent representatives of the "great books" approach at the
University of Chicago, presented the American public with a model for
general humanistic education which combined a conservative-classical trend
33
with a democratic one that called for excellent humanistic education for al1. 37
In this educational model there is a uniform curriculum for all, without
optional subjects or academic compromises, the purpose of which is to equip
all students with the same cultural resources, knowledge and skills required
by human beings in order to live like human beings in the full sense of the
term.
Adler speaks in great detail of the three ultimate goals of education. The
first is to assist learners in actualizing the talents embodied in them and
expand their awareness and spiritual resources. In this way learners will
learn how to elicit the best from their lives and the treasures of knowledge
and art that culture has put at their disposal. The second is that educators
must nurture in learners the values, skills and attributes required for active
and responsible participation as citizens in a democratic society. Adler, it
should be noted, placed special emphasis on the nurturing of knowledge,
critical thinking and civil responsibility without which democracy turns into
mobocracy: from the rule of educated and caring citizens to the rule of the
mob, which is guided by emotion and prejudice rather than reason. The third
principle pertains to the development of abilities, knowledge, values and
skills that constitute an appropriate foundation for all types of vocational
training that will be available to young people when they conclude their
general studies at school.
With regard to the content and methods of study, Adler presents a model
that is divided into three dimensions, each of which has its own goals, study
methods and unique spheres of knowledge. The first is directed towards
systematic and basic inculcation of corpuses ofknowledge in the main fields
of knowledge: the exact sciences, the humanities and the social sciences. In
order to inculcate these, Adler designates accepted teaching methods of
lecture and discussion, while the textbook plays a central role in the teaching
and learning process.
The second is directed towards developing thinking and learning skills,
where the emphasis is placed on the "how," not the "what." These academic
skills comprise the language and discourse skills of reading, writing,
speaking and listening; the skills of observation, evaluation, calculation,
measurement and problem solving; and the skills of critical and autonomous
thinking. The teaching aspect of this educational dimension is different from
the previous one. Here the goal is not the acquisition of corpuses of
knowledge but improving and enhancing the students' execution abilities.
Teachers must function as coaches and instructors, giving a personal
example by exposing students to the best and exemplary in the different
spheres, providing individual tutoring that assists learners in acquiring the
37
Adler, ThePaideiaProposal: An Educational Manifesto.
34
Chapter I
required skills and achieving the highest level their abilities allow them to
attain.
The curriculum's third dimension comprises enrichment, extension and
deepening students' awareness of human culture's intellectual and ethical
spheres. This directs educational activity towards heightening sensitivity to
beauty, developing a moral sense and enhancing openness to ideas and
values embodied in literary works and life traditions. The study subjects
suitable for these goals are: history, literature, philosophy and art, not as they
are presented in textbooks but as they are embodied in the original works.
The teaching method of this dimension are different from the two preceding
ones. It focuses mainly on Socrates' "midwife approach" that brings the
leamer, through guided and fertile dialogues with intellectual and artistic
works, to "give birth" to new and more profound insights.
Any digression from this model, Adler claims, constitutes a betrayal of
the principles of humanism and democracy. The authority in such a school is
undoubtedly external and at times even mandates coercion, but the
alternative and its price are worse tenfold. Relying on children's desires and
will and assuming that they know what is really good for them better than
adults is an unfounded idealization of childhood. If we add the fact that
today's youth are incessantly bombarded with commercial and political
propaganda that shapes their desires and preferences, then relying on
children's wishes is like abandoning them to the manipulations of factors in
society whose interest in children is not their development but their use as
consumers or political supporters. Adler, and others who support this
standpoint believe that it follows that for the benefit of individual
development, a prospering culture and a strong democracy, it is mandatory
for parents and educators to wisely and strictly shape young people's
personality. They should equip them with the best knowledge, attributes and
tools, so that when they complete twelve years of compulsory education they
will join the society of adults as civilized human beings and good citizens in
the full sense of both terms.
The last two examples of classical-humanistic education in the 20th
century, which I will present here, relate to modem nihilism. Nihilism is a
concept that indicates nullification, negation or rejection of all meaning,
reason, value, purpose and sanctity. Serious attention to the idea of nihilism
mandates clarification and analysis of context: "who calls whom a nihilist
and on what ground?" From the liberal-humanistic standpoint, "the death of
God," "shattering idols," and collapse of the "great ideologies" are nihilistic
events only if they are present only as negations: offering no alternative
content that expands human freedom, raises dignity and enriches life with
meaning, reason and value. When these positive elements are added to the
rebellion against oppressive absolutism, we can speak about nihilism as an
3S
emancipatory process that promotes humanism (like uprooting weeds in

order to nurture fertile crops).
In the modem age, nihilism has been associated with the "death of God"
and the brutal awakening from utopias and ideologies. It is also associated
with the loss of faith in the spirit of man and human reason, a severing from
all objective touchstones in morality and art, repudiation of authority and
social responsibility, and the dismantling of important social frameworks
such as community and family. The marks of nihilism can be seen
everywhere: in the tens of millions who were killed and murdered in the
wars and great revolutions, in the destruction of the world of nature, in the
violence and cultural deprivation that dominates the big cities, in the
corruption of language, in crude materialism that identifies the quality of
human life only by the economic standard of living, and in the spiritual
inertia of people who function in their work like robots and in their leisure
time shrink into passive consumers of the mass media."
The first example of the attempt of classical humanism to cope with
nihilism is embodied in Richard Livingston's book, Education for a World
Adrift, written at the end of World War II as an expression of the deep pain
attending the physical and spiritual destruction associated with that war. The
book does not deal with war and destruction but with the hollow and
destructive image of modem man whose culture lost direction and purpose
and lacks standards of good and worthy human life." The solution
Livingston offers is a return to the classical virtues of reason and character
without which human beings become - as they have indeed become in the
20th century - the wildest and most brutal of all creatures on the face of this
earth.
In his discussion of the importance of the nurturing of an intellectual
approach to life, Livingston opposes restricting the intellect to problemsolving and underscores the centrality of "knowing good and evil" as the
most important knowledge of all - the wisdom to differentiate between using
and misusing all other kinds of knowledge and skills. In the spirit of
Aristotle's approach, Livingston calls for a repositioning of the ideal of the
good and moral character in education, the components of which are
honesty, decency, trustworthiness, independence, self-dignity, courage,
generosity and civic spirit. In the curriculum, he gives pride of place to
teaching literature and poetry as the best way of having students encounter
visions and models of human greatness and enriching their spirit with
sensitivities and insights that expand their humanness and shape their moral
38 On different meanings of nihilism in Western culture see my book, Beyond Nihilism,
chs.4-8.
39 Livingstone, Education for a World Adrift, ch. I.
36
Chapter I
image. In short, Livingston says that in our perception of education we

should not be satisfied with less than assistance in learning the art of life.
Allan Bloom's book The Closing of the American Mind, published in
1987, will serve as a second example of the battle of conservative humanism
against modem nihilism. Bloom's criticism includes Livingston's arguments
and analyses and adds criticism that deals with post-modernist culture. In
essence, Bloom claims, Western culture has lost its intellectual vitality and
its spirit is left hollow and diminished. Not only did culture shed its
traditional values (modernism) but it lost all interest even in the
philosophical dialogue on truth, justice and beauty (post-modernism).
Today's youth grows up with the prejudice that there is no knowledge
whatsoever in the sphere of values. The majority tend to adopt the relativistic
doctrine that all positions in the sphere of morals, politics and art are relative
to the individual or to the society in which he or she lives; that there are no
objective and universal criteria for favoring one position to another, and
therefore no one has the right to judge the preferences or ways of life of
others. Limitless equality, tolerance and pluralism devoid of any qualitative
differentiation whatsoever have become the supreme imperatives of the
period.
Bloom says that the young people who adhere to this position are
seemingly endowed with a great deal of openness. In reality, since they
waived a priori any attempt to find a worthy way of life, which is a badge of
honor for man, their approach excels in indifference and disbelief towards
any serious worldview, and in an amazing ignorance of the trends and
phenomena of human culture. In such a world - in which everything is
relative, "anything goes," everything is possible, and importance is no longer
attributed to the aspiration to achieve human perfection - man's spirit is
diminished and the only thing that remains is an efficient human being who
functions like a machine, and a hedonist engaged in satisfying physical
drives. The equilibrium between knowledge and reason and skepticism and
relativity has been undermined to the extent that when Bloom asks his
students about their attitude towards the Indian custom of burning the living
widow with the body of her dead husband, they are angered by the very
question and reply that they cannot and are not allowed to take a stand on
this issue. The worst part of it, says Bloom, lies in the fact that education
systems and higher education institutions accept these nihilistic trends. This
acceptance borders on betrayal of the very essence of education, and if the
institutions do not take immediate steps to rehabilitate the traditional ideals
of research, philosophy, morality and art, we are doomed to spiritual
degeneration and the annihilation of human culture.
We will now summarize the central characteristics of the classicalhumanistic educational trend as we have reviewed it from the classical
37
Athenian period up to the present. The objective of education is defined in

terms of achieving perfection or human excellence. Educational endeavor is
perceived as the art of shifting man's awareness from the world of sensory
experience to that of real experience with its rational order and eternal
values. In contemporary terminology, the role of education is to expand,
deepen, refine and improve our human ways of experience through
familiarization with the virtues and achievements of the human spirit as
these are manifested in the best masterpieces, writings and deeds of human
culture.
Humanistic education, according to this tradition, deals with broadening
human beings' humanity and freedom by inculcating knowledge, enriching
imagination, nurturing love of and sensitivity to their fellow men and women
and shaping interpersonal behavioral patterns that include courtesy, honesty,
decency, generosity and social responsibility. As the contemporary
conservative humanist Russell Kirk says, our objective as humanistic
educators is to teach students the rneaning of a full and moral human life,
arouse in them a yearning and desire to fulfill this ideal in their real lives,
and inculcate in them respect and moral commitment towards values and
virtues which should guide us all as human beings." It seems that the most
pertinent definition of classical-humanistic education is provided by the
educator, the Renaissance man, Pierre Paulo Vergerio. Humanistic
education, he says, consists of "those studies by which we attain and practice
virtue and wisdom; that education which calls forth, trains and develops
those highest gifts of body and mind which ennoble man.?"
3. THE NATURALISTIC-ROMANTIC APPROACH AND

THE YEARNING FOR THE AUTHENTICITY OF SELFACTUALIZATION
The romantic approach in humanistic education (which in certain
contexts is also known as naturalistic, permissive, individualistic and
therapeutic) first appears in the 18th century in the writings of Rousseau.
Rousseau presented his educational theory as an antithesis to traditional
education: he argues against the identification of education with the
consumerism of knowledge, culture and skills as a means for social success,
and against the use of authoritative and artificial teaching patterns which
hinder the individual's development and alienates human beings from their
real needs. Rousseau believes that the social values and educational patterns
40
41
Kirk, ''The Ethical Purpose of Literary Studies," pp. 35-36.

Quoted in Green (editor) The Meaning of the Humanities, p. 20.
38
Chapter I
of the bourgeois ethos of his time (and ours) are the reasons for the distorted
and hollow image of modern human beings whose unbridled passion for
social success corrupts and makes them miserable, rendering them
egotistical and herd-like in their attitude towards others. Rousseau presented
an alternative perception of the good life that attributed positive value to
human beings' natural inclinations, to free and playful application of their
natural abilities and self, and to authentic direction of their life. Nurturing
human beings according to these principles, Rousseau claimed, will bring
about the "growth" of good people and good citizens, whose full humanity
will be tempered with sensitivity and wisdom, advancement of personal
benefit and the good of all.
Rousseau's ideas brought about revolutionary changes in educational
thinking and endeavor: emphasis on educational thinking was shifted from
culture to nature and from philosophy to psychology; from reason to feeling
and from society to the individual; from structured and uniform didactics to
experiential discovery learning; and from duty grounded in social
conventions to action deriving from and guided by the good nature of the
individual. It should be noted here that in his revolutionary ideas Rousseau
did not aim at negating or destroying the foundations of humanistic
education. On the contrary, his objective was to bring people from the alien
domains to which they exiled themselves - back to themselves. He aimed to
guide education towards a healthier path where man's primal nature is not
perceived as an obstacle to human perfection but as the only basis upon
which one can rely, and if only we are attentive to it, man will develop and
grow into his full glory. We can learn from the following that Rousseau's
conception of education was humanistic in the fullest and most basic sense
of the word:
In the social order where all positions are determined, each man ought to
be raised for his. If an individual formed for his position leaves it, he is
no longer fit for anything .... In the natural order, since men are all equal,
their common calling is man's estate and whoever is well raised for that
calling cannot fail to fulfill those callings related to it.... Prior to the
calling of his parents is nature's call to human life. Living is the job I
want to teach him.... He will, in the first place, be a man. All that a man
should be. 42
In his pedagogical doctrine Rousseau says that "humanity has its place in
the order of things; childhood has its in the order of human life. The man
must be considered in the man, and the child in the child. To assign each his
place and settle him in it, to order the human passions according to man's
42
Emil, pp.41-42.
39
constitution is all that we can do for his well-being.'?" Moreover, he

demands that adults should first of all be humane towards children: "Be
humane. This is your first duty. Be humane with every station, every age,
everything which is not alien to man. What wisdom is there for you save
humanity? Love childhood; promote its games, its pleasures, its amiable
instinct. ... Why do you want to deall with bitterness and pains these first
years which go by so rapidly and can return no more?,,44
Here we will summarize Rousseau's position: educational theory should
be based on the nature of man; the educational endeavor should be tailored
to fit the nature of the child and the level of his or her maturity; learning
should be relevant and meaningful by basing it on the child's interests and
intrinsic motivation as well as on direct and holistic experiences with natural
and human phenomena.
In the 19th century, and particularly as a result of the educational work of
Pestalozzi and Froebel, the components of love, trust, support and affective
nurturing were afforded a central status in educational thinking: they were
perceived as necessary conditions for the development of man's humanity
and actualization of the powers inherent in him (according to the botanical
metaphor of the child as a tender plant and the educator as gardener). At the
beginning of the zo" century, the British educator A.S. Neill, in his hook
Summerhill, continued Rousseau's criticism of learned and oppressive
education. Books, he states, are the least important component of the
educational process: the remedy for our unhappy and violent civilization
does not lie in the shaping of man but in setting individual happiness as the
ultimate goal of education. Education that acts towards actualizing this
objective will always side with the child - even when he or she is criticized and will provide a just and humane social climate recognizable by mutual
respect and trust, the freedom of thought and individual expression,
supportive relationships and sexual permissiveness.
In early zo" century America, an additional branch of the romantic
approach developed in the form of progressive education. It presented itself
as an alternative to the old form of education: no longer authoritarian and
strict, hut democratic and permissive; no longer education for its own sake
with a commitment to "the exemplary" of past culture, but knowledge and
skills that equip the learner with tools for coping with present and future
challenges; no longer education that "prepares for life" in alienating school
frameworks, but education as an active experience of "real life," where the
school organized as a miniature society that exhibits caring involvement in
43
44
Ibid, p. 80.
Ibid, p. 79.
40
Chapter I
the "big society.?" To the optimism of progressive education - which placed

personal growth, pluralistic democracy, and critical intelligence as the
objective of education - was added the humanistic psychology stream, which
advocated trust in the good and unique nature of every individual and a
commitment to provide the young with the vital psychological conditions for
actualizing this nature. From the cooperation between progressive educators
and humanistic psychologists, the educational pattern called "child-centered
education" was molded, the objective of which was to assist the student in
authentic and autonomous actualization of his or her inner nature.
This is the place to expand somewhat on the humanistic psychology of
Maslow and Rogers, which gained a great deal of popularity in the second
half of the zo" century as a theoretical basis for humanistic education.
Maslow's "hierarchy of needs" theory became a classic in his lifetime. At its
base lies the perception of man as a natural being, with a well-defined nature
that combines general humanistic elements with ones unique to each
individual. Under suitable conditions, Maslow claims, the nature of man
strives to reach full actualization of the potential embodied in him, according
to set humanistic patterns, together with unique tendencies which derive
from the singular characteristics of each individual's personality.
The developmental continuum and its direction are nourished and guided
by the human "hierarchy of needs." At its base lie physiological needs that
are concerned with the physical existence of the human organism (food,
fluids, vitamins, air, climatic conditions, etc.). Above it lies the stage safety
needs; for a sense of confidence that includes stability, freedom from fear
and arbitrariness, and all other qualities that provide emotional stability.
Above it is the need for belonging and love, which includes expressions of
caring, sympathy, liking and solidarity on the part of the human environment
relevant to the individual. Above it is the need for esteem and social prestige,
which is related both to recognition on the part of others of the value, status
and dignity of the individual and the feeling of self-worth and self-respect of
the individual in perceiving him- or herself as they are reflected in the eyes
of others. Still above, at the apex of the pyramid, is the stage of selfactualization or self-fulfillment, at which conditions for the full development
of the essential and unique nature of the individual have matured.
Those who have reached this stage enjoy the best fruits of knowledge and
art; they treat their fellow men with justice and humanity (in an overall
humane moral perception) and experience mental health, harmony and peace
in their relationships with themselves and their environment. In light of this
perception, the role of humanistic education is self- evident: to create
conditions for students that promote their self fulfillment, both in enriching
45
In this matter see Cremin, The transformation ofthe School.
41
their life environment with factors that encourage development and prevent
"noise," "weeds," and artificial desires that distance man from sensitive and
wise attention to messages that his irmer and original nature sends.
With regard to the conditions necessary for learning and personal growth,
Carl Rogers plays a central role as the chief developer of ways of
interpersonal communications that help the individual in making the best of
him- or herself and his or her life. Educators, according to his conception,
should regard themselves, not as shapers of souls or as life instructors, but as
those who enable and facilitate in the natural growth of the child. In his book
Freedom to Learn, Rogers characterizes those attitudes that appear effective
in promoting learning: "First of all, is a transparent realness of the facilitator,
a willingness to be a person, to be and live the feeling and thoughts of the
moment. When this realness includes a prizing, a caring, a trust, and a
respect of the leamer, the climate for learning is enhanced. When it includes
a sensitive and accurate empathic listening, then indeed a freeing climate,
simulative of self-initiated learning and growth, exists. The student is trusted
to develop.,,46
In his book Climate for Growth, Dov Darom discusses Maslow's and
Rogers' theories and deals with their implications on humanistic education.
Pertinent to us at this stage of our discussion are the practical educational
qualities that characterize the naturalistic-romantic approach as they are
derived from these psychological theories. Based on Darom's conclusions,
this educational approach can be characterized by the following: it is holistic
in character (in its relating both to knowledge and the leamer's personality);
stresses the importance of a social climate that is founded on mutual respect
and trust; promotes relevant and experiential learning; all this with a special
emphasis placed on autonomous and authentic growth, interpersonal
closeness, pluralistic diversity and a democratic spirit.
A representative example of the combination of these components in the
educational endeavor can be found in Paul Ritter's Educreation and
Feedback. In the spirit of Maslow's and Rogers' psychological theories,
Ritter presents an alternative model (naturalistic and therapeutic) for the
prevailing conservative education. In this model, self-direction replaces
compulsion and external authority as a basis for learning and social order;
cooperation replaces competition as the guiding logic of learning and
endeavor; a distinguishing and supportive therapeutic attitude replaces the
judgmental and achievement-oriented approach; procedural and continuous
evaluation replace the standard test and grading approach; an appeal to life
experiences and social reality replace the narrow experience of disciplinary
learning; and an appeal to teachers' and students' lull life - their physical,
46
Freedomto Learn (third edition), p. 167.
42
Chapter I
intellectual, emotional, moral, creative, cultural and singular elements replaces the functional approach that sterilizes the human elements of both
teachers and students.f
Let us now summarize the discussion of the naturalistic-romantic
approach in humanistic education. It can be characterized through the basic
assumption that there is a "fixed self," or an "inner nature" in each of us,
which is essentially good and unique to the individual, and drives to
actualize and fulfill itself - according to an inner code inherent in it towards mental health and moral conduct. The naturalism of the romantic
stream is broader or more extreme than that of Aristotle's, in that it assumes
an inner pattern that comprises a natural tendency towards moral goodness,
and relies on the individual's self-development and self-guidance. Romantic
naturalism is also more individualistic, since it focuses more on the unique
"inner self' of every individual, while Aristotelian naturalism focuses on the
"general humanness" common to us all. Contrary to their classical
counterparts, Romantic educators regard the way to human perfection in
terms of guiding awareness, not towards the universal and objective, but
towards the inner essence of individuals and their initial and singular "I."
Hence real education deals with helping children - with extreme care and
awe - actualize the skills embodied in them by virtue of their singular
personality to become what their nature guides them to be.
4. THE EXISTENTIAL APPROACH AND THE

YEARNING FOR THE AUTHENTICITY OF
SELF-CREATION
Existentialist educators reject both the classical image of man as a
"rational being" and the romantic basic assumption that in each of us there is
a "fixed self' or "inner nature," the essence of which is good and unique to
us. The alternative presented by the existentialists maintains that man is
freedom, and not only in the general meaning of the ability to depart from
inner and external idees fixes, but also the real experience of the individual
who cannot avoid recognition of the fact that there is no inner pattern
whatsoever, no fixed pattern or supreme authority from which the worthy
life can be derived. It follows, therefore, that in the sphere of values, human
beings have no external or supreme authority to which they can tum, neither
in the universal world of the spirit nor in their "inner self'. Therefore, people
are destined to be those who choose, shape and create their identity and
image - and the greater the freedom the greater the responsibility. On these
47
Ritter, Educreation and Feedback, pp. 33-39.
43
characteristics of the existential approach - such as the individual's caring

about his or her personal identity, together with his or her recognition of the
scope of freedom and the weighty responsibility that are part and parcel of it,
Sartre says the following in his essay "The Humanism of Existentialism. "
Atheistic existentialism... states that if God does not exist, there is at
least one being in whom existence precedes essence, a being who exists
before he can be defined by any concept, and that this being is man .... It
means that, first of all, man exists, turns up, appears on the scene, and
only afterwards, defines himself. If man, as the existentialist conceives
him, is indefinable, it is because at first he is nothing. Only afterward will
he be something, and he himself will have made what he will be. Thus,
there is no human nature, since there is no God to conceive it. Not only is
man what he conceives himself to be, but he is also only what he wills
himself to be after his thrust toward existence.
Man is nothing else but what he makes of himself. ... Thus
existentialism's first move is to make every man aware of what he is and
to make the full responsibility of his existence rest on him.... Indeed
everything is permissible if God does not exist, and as a result man is
forlorn, because neither within him nor without does he find anything to
cling to. He can't start making excuses form himself."
From the historical point of view, it is accepted to regard the mid-Iv"
century Danish philosopher Soren Kierkegaard as the first existentialist
philosopher. In his writings he presents the argument that the most important
and relevant truths in our lives are not objective but subjective - they deal
with the way in which individuals perceive and regard themselves in the real
world of their decisions and actions. According to Kierkegaard, this precedes
every weighty and challenging process of choosing your image and shaping
your personality as a subject and an "individual." It is a process in which
individuals are required to cope not only with the abstract thoughts and
general truths that alienate them from their real and unique existence, but
also to cope with the spirit of the: masses, whose herd-like tendency and
demand for conformity threaten to erode any emotion or manifestation of
individual independence and authenticity.
It was Nietzsche who, from a different perspective, declared that "God is
dead" and that there are no absolute truths in the world but only
perspectives; no objective facts but only interpretations; not one way of
living worthy of man, but numerous, diverse and contradictory ways in
48
Sartre," The Humanism of Existentialism," pp. 35-41.
44
Chapter I
which man can be at his best." Man's human dignity, Nietzsche added, is
revealed in the authentic life of self-overcoming and self-creation, in a life
that actualizes Man's singular existence as a being in which "creature and
creator are united.i" The "true life" does not exist by virtue of affiliation to a
divine plan or an "inner and singular I" - two images or fictions that people
have created for themselves - but by virtue of individuals' ability to shape
themselves as sovereign and singular people who legislate for themselves
their goals and values and actualize and implement them in their life.
On the basis of this perception, Nietzsche appeals to educators to first of
all educate themselves and create themselves as exemplary images of full
and authentic human life. Secondly, he calls upon them to demand of their
students to break free from a certain stage of their education, the influence of
their educators and themselves shape a singular, ethical and sovereign way
of life. In his writings he repeats his call to students to follow themselves and
create for themselves. In his early writings as well as in Schopenhauer as
Educator, Nietzsche calls on young people seeking their freedom and
personal identity, and instructs them not to be tempted to find the given and
well-trodden path - neither in public life nor in their inner life. If they
respect themselves, they must create for themselves their own unique path:
"No one else can build a bridge on which you must cross the river of life, no
one but you alone. It is true that there are numerous paths, bridges and
demigods that wish to carry you across the river, but only at the cost of your
self: you would pledge yourself and therefore lose yourself.... For your true
being does not lie hidden deep inside you but immeasurably high above
your, or at least above what you usually consider to be your ago.'?'
Nietzsche opens a later work, The Gay Science, with guidance for the
enthusiastic reader: "Lured by my style and tendency, you follow and come
after me, follow your own self faithfully - take time, and thus you follow
me."S2 When Nietzsche speaks from the lips of Zarathustra, he reprimands
his students who beseech him to show them the way: "This is my way; where
is yours? For the way - that does not exist."s3 The values of life, he
interprets, are not found in something given in the world but only as the fruit
of human beings' evaluation and creation: "Verily, man gave themselves all
their good and evil. Verily, they did not take it, they did not find it, not did it
come to them as a voice from heaven. Only man placed values in things to
See for example The Will for Power, sees. 3,12,481,600,604,606; The Gay Science,
108,25, 143,343,374.
50 See for example Beyond Good and Evil, sees. 61, 203, 225; Thus Spoke Zarathustra,
"On the Way of the Creator."
51 Schopenhauer as Educator, eh. 1.
52 The Gay Science, p. 43.
53 Thus Spoke Zarathustra, p. 307.
49
see~
4S
preserve himself - he alone created a meaning for things, a human

meaning. ,,54
When his students decline and become disciples and foolish followers,
Zarathustra is appalled to have to defend them from their self-disparagement,
and directs the following demand to them:
Now I go alone, my disciples. You too go now, alone. Thus I want it.
Verily, I counsel you: go away from me and resist Zarathustra! And even
better: be ashamed of him! Perhaps he deceived you ....
One repays a teacher badly if one always remains nothing but a
pupil. ...
You say you believe in Zarathustra? But what matters Zarathustra?
Your are my believers - but what matter all believers? You had not yet
sought yourselves: and you found me. Thus do all believers; therefore all
faith amounts to so little.
Now I bid you to loose me and find yourselves; and only when you
have all denied me will I return to you ... with a different love shall I then
love yoU. 55
An additional example of the character of existential education can be
found in Martin Buber. In his article "The Education of Character," he opens
with a presentation of an adamant position according to which no technical
teaching or learning content can replace the present, spontaneous, full and
concrete existence of the educator's personality: "Only in his whole being, in
all his spontaneity can the educator truly affect the whole being of his pupil.
For educating characters you do not need a moral genius, but you do need a
man who is wholly alive and able to communicate himself directly to this
fellow being. His aliveness streams out to them and affects them most
strongly and purely when he has no thought of affecting them.?"
He goes on to say of himself that the educational problem that troubles
him is how to educate character - the personality's behavioral patterns that
operate in the reality of its life - in a reality that has lost all agreement on a
system of ideals and mandatory values. Buber's answer is not related to
content but rather to form. What is productive from a pedagogical
perspective is not the pedagogical tendency but the pedagogical encounter a real human dialogue, the "I-thou" relationships that help individuals to
experience an open, comprehensive and multi-lateral encounter with their
humanity and that of their fellow humans, and the profundity of this
encounter to make them into human beings:
54 Ibid,
171.
p. 190.
56 Buber, "The Education of Character," p. 488.
55 Ibid,
46
Chapter I
Today host upon host of men have everywhere sunk into the slavery
of collectives, and each collective is the supreme authority for its own
slaves .... This is true, not only for the totalitarian countries, but also for
the parties and party-like groups in the so-called democracies. Men who
have so lost themselves to the collective Moloch cannot be rescued from
it by any reference, however eloquent, to the absolute whose kingdom the
Moloch has usurped. One has to begin by pointing to that sphere where
man himself, in the hours of utter solitude, occasionally becomes aware
of the disease through sudden pain: by pointing the relations of the
individual to his own self.,,57
We can therefore summarize the uniqueness of the existential approach

towards humanistic education: it relies not on a god in heaven, nor on the
regularity of the order of nature, nor on the "real self' latent in the
individual's soul- which constitute ready-made answers and paths, and even
if their basic intentions are good, they inhibit students' humanization
processes. Being a human being, according to this perception, means the full
and active acceptance of your freedom and the responsibility for what you
are: to shape your image and that of your environment, to express your
singularity and make your mark by imparting significance, value, meaning
and purpose on the reality of your life. Existentialist educators seek more
than to inculcate knowledge and virtue; they act to arouse, motivate and
encourage their students towards caring, interpretive, evaluative and creative
involvement in their own lives. They wish to empower students to become
aware of the social forces acting to shape and determine their characters; to
extend their personal freedom so that they will be able to see what is
possible side by side with what exists, and will "choose themselves"
differently than what is expected and accepted. Educational success,
according to this existentialist approach, is demonstrated in a kind of selfaffirmation in which individuals dare to express their being in a personal,
direct and significant manner - defining themselves and creating beyond
themselves without losing themselves.f
p. 492.
On such activities of self-affirmation see Paul Tilich's The Courage to Be.
57 Ibid,
58
Between the Classical and Postmodem
47
5. THE CRITICAL-RADICAL APPROACH AND THE

YEARNING FOR EMPOWERMENT AND
EMANCIPATION
Radical education, by its very nature, strives towards the root of things
(radix in Latin means "root") and is not satisfied with gradual reforms and
other "cosmetic changes" to reality, since these tend to continue to cover up
the wrongdoings and lies of society's high-ranking and powerful figures. In
other words, radical educators direct their actions in such a way as to bring
about fundamental - and therefore revolutionary - change in the existing
order of things. The ideal guiding the struggle, however, can be different for
different radical educators in accordance with their respective
Weltanschauungs and the specific social conditions in which they operate.
In the context of our discussion, the term "radical education" will specify
the educational theory and practice of the "New Left" as these were
manifested in the "counter culture" of the 60s and the critical and NeoMarxist approaches of recent years. In the opinion of these radical thinkers
and educators, examining educational topics divorced from the broad social
and economic context shows, in the best case, ignorance and naivete, and in
the worst - cynical and perhaps even criminal pleasure vis-a-vis the social
forces that actually determine the character and level of the education our
children receive. Poverty and illiteracy, crime and drugs, wars and social
gaps, ecological crises, discrimination against women and minorities,
technocratic thinking, interpersonal alienation and the destruction of the
community and family unit - these grave problems are the facts of life for
the majority of the world's children and directly or indirectly affect the
development of children on the physical, emotional, mental, social and moral
levels.
Moreover, radical educators do not perceive these problematic and
oppressive elements of our lives as a product of some scientific weakness or
technological difficulty, but as a practical expression of certain ideologies
that serve the interests of powerful groups at the expense of weak or
oppressed ones. Understanding this "picture" of social reality - perceived as
such from a radical perspective that is committed to an egalitarian and
enlightened democracy - also explains the militant criticality of the radicals
that characterizes their approach to humanistic education. These thinkers and
educators created a discourse of "critical pedagogy" controlled by images of
power, struggle, opposition and possibility. Pedagogical nurturing and the
rehabilitation of man's humanity are perceived as serving two purposes: (1)
as education towards a emancipation from thinking patterns and patterns of
life that endanger individuals, dwarf their full development, and reduce their
48
Chapter I
consciousness to the lowest common denominator; (2) as education towards

empowering individuals, or reinforcing them, so that they will be able to
critically and autonomously "read" reality, identify in it the forces and
elements that shape the conditions of their lives, and develop for themselves
directions and skills that will enable them to direct their lives for their own
benefit and that of society .
As stated earlier, an idea was formulated at the end of the 60s (and also
implemented to a certain extent) regarding radical education as one of the
elements of the protest movement that acted toward humanizing life through
the replacement of capitalistic and nationalistic values with those of peace,
social justice and human solidarity. We will mention three of the educators
who were predominant at that time: the Brazilian, Paulo Freire, and the
Americans Neil Postman and Jonathan Kozol.
Paulo Freire, who began his educational work in Brazil, was forced to
leave his country when it was taken over by the generals' junta. Finally, he
returned as the minister of education of Sao Paulo state and posited an
original conception which he called "the pedagogy of the oppressed." By
this he means education directed towards the rehabilitation of the humanity
of the poor and abused population of the Third World, where the
perpetuation of the poverty and ignorance of the masses serves as a
mechanism for preserving the superiority and regime of the elite social
classes. At the basis of Freire's pedagogy lies the idea of a human dialogue
of equals, directed towards rehabilitating the sense of self-worth and selfconfidence, nurturing the basic literacy required for understanding the reality
of life, and for developing attentive and critical political awareness - all this
as a means for building the motivation and ability of the masses that will
enable them to take their fate into their own hands and act towards changing
and improving the reality of their lives.
In 1968, Neil Postman published (with Charles Weingartner) Teaching as
a Subversive Activity, the essence of which underscores the claim that
education should mobilize itself to prevent humanity's self-destructive
processes that take place in murderous wars and the arms race, destruction of
the natural environment, crimes and violence, addiction to drugs and
technology, cultural-deprivation in the weaker strata, and the false and
stupefying manipulation of mass media. 59 At center stage of educational
endeavor, he claims, one should place the development of critical awareness
and moral sensitivity among students, that will inform them of the main
problems of modem civilization, equip them with a "crap detector kit," and
train them to rationally, moraIIy and responsibly cope with the main
challenges facing humanity in the last third of the zo" century.
59
Postman & Weingartner, Teaching as a Subversive Activity.
49
Jonathan Kozol presented a more radical view, according to which the

United States' political system intentionally acted to culturally deprive the
black minority, viewing them as an inferior and oppressed class, and to
shape the better-established strata as servile and efficient cogs in the
capitalistic and military machine of American society (in the United States
of the mid-90s one percent of the public hold forty percent of the material
assets, some fifty percent of the black population and some twenty percent of
the population of children live below the poverty line, over thirty percent
lack basic literacy for understanding the social and cultural reality,
approximately one million citizens are behind bars - relatively ten times
more than similar data reported in developed European countries). We can
find the essence of Kozol' s criticism against the American education system
in Adir Cohen's article "Education for Youth According to Your Way or
Lessons in Castration":
One can hardly find schools that cultivate skepticism regarding the
validity of social conventions or endorse critical examination of social
issues, government policies, and educational curricula. For twelve years
they are habituated to think only "positively," to accept reality as a given
fact, and to smoothly function in it. Consciously or unconsciously, this is
how the castration of the future citizens begin...
The graduates of such schools come out of them informed about
reality, but not engaged with life, aware of social processes but alienated
from them. There are plenty of words in their vocabulary, but these are
empty words, lacking any personal meaning, social position, and practical
implications. They eventually become nothing more than religious
believers, obedient soldiers, automatic consumers, and robot-like job
holders. ,,60
In the same spirit of social criticism and moral rage the American
philosopher Maxine Greene writes on schools that are totally sterile of any
social engagement and moral consideration:
Little, if anything, is done to render problematic a reality that includes
homelessness, hunger, pollution, crime, censorship, arms build-ups, and
threats of war, even as it includes the amassing of fortunes, consumer
goods of unprecedented appeal, a world travel opportunities, and the
flickering faces of the "rich and famous" on all sides. Little is done to
counter media manipulation of the young into credulous and ardent
consumers - of sensation, violence, criminality, things. They are
instructed daily, and with few exceptions, that human worth depends on
60 Cohen,"Educationfor Youth According
to YourWay or Lessons in Castration," p. 14.
50
Chapter I
the possession of commodities, community status, a flippant way of
talking, good looks. What they are made to believe to be the "news" is
half entertainment, half pretenses at being "windows to the world" .... In
the midst of the marketing and the sounds of sitcom shotguns, there are
opportunities to become voyeurs of starvation, massacres, torture, and the
beat ofMTV goes on and on."
We will tum now to Michael Apple and Henry Giroux, among the most
prominent of the radical education thinkers, who are co-partners to the idea
that "pedagogy should become more political and the political more
pedagogical.?" Applying this principle to the curriculum, as Michael Apple
says, will lead us to the awareness that the central question regarding "What
knowledge is of most worth" is deceptive and misleading/" This
pedagogical question is always related to the social and political reality: to
struggles and the balance of power between the races, classes, religions and
ethnic groups and, of course, between men and women. The alternative to
this misleading perception of the curriculum is a new articulation of the
question and awareness of society's political power struggles; in other words
"Whose knowledge is ofmost worth" - a phrasing that focuses our awareness
on the fact that knowledge, values and cultural hierarchies are always related
to the desires and interests of people and social groups. It therefore follows,
Apple adds, that the creation of a true democratic culture - egalitarian, open
and pluralistic - mandates the abandonment of the image of the "melting
pot" and the conservative-classical ideal of a uniform "cultural literacy" for
all (Adler and Bloom's version), and adopting in its place the commitment to
"maintain conditions that enable all members of the community to actively
and continuously participate in the creation of meaning, knowledge and
values. ,,64
Therefore, Giroux says, we should regard critical pedagogy as "a cultural
praxis that empowers teachers and fellow citizens to conceive education as a
social, political, and cultural endeavor. It is a pedagogy of struggle, hence
being a critical praxis that looks into modes of oppression, discrimination
and dehumanization - aiming to make the teachers agents of social
transformation and political democratization.Y" We should also know that
modification of education involves first and foremosta change in the selfimage of teachers. Those who engage in education should, according to the
Greene, The Dialectic ofFreedom, pp. 12-13.
Aronowitz and Giroux, Education Under Siege: The Conservative, Liberal and
Radical Debate Over Schooling, "Dedication."
63 Apple, Ideology and curriculum, "Preface."
64 Ibid.
65 Giroux, "Education of Border and the Politics of Modemism-Postmodemism," p. 51.
61
62
51
critical-radical approach, stop regarding themselves as agents of the

socialization process and as responsible for maintaining existing order. They
must regard themselves as agents of change whose goal and endeavor lies in
transforming schools into institutions that provide young people with a
genuine experiencing of freedom, equality, independence, and strength for
the sake of influencing and improving their own lives and that of the
community. In such a school, "we will have to struggle collectively as
transfonnative intellectuals... to m.ake public schools democratic public
spheres where all children regardless of race, class, gender, and age, can
learn what it means to be able to participate fully in the ongoing struggle to
make democracy the medium through which they extend the potential and
possibilities of what it means to be human and to live in a just society. ,,66
In summary, the critical-radical approach focuses on revealing those
elements in education that serve social and political trends of oppression,
dispossession and the cultural deprivation of man. These trends have an
extensive history. In ancient times, sons and daughters were sacrificed to the
gods on the altar and in modern times they are brainwashed with national
ideologies so that they will hasten to shed their own blood of their own
volition. Throughout history, the main religions crushed all human vitality
related to independent thinking and emotional spontaneity, and in modern
times capitalism reduces the spirit of man to a common denominator of
"entertainment for the masses" and causes people to define their humanity in
terms of manufacturer-consumer. Women and blacks were stripped of their
humanity, groups and nations were stripped of their culture, broad strata of
society were made culturally deprived, reaching a level of degeneration, and
children were required to sacrifice their childhood. To all the above
phenomena of human exploitation radical education requires us to look
sensitively as well as critically. It expects us to undertake responsibility for
reality and act towards its transformation,
As educators, their claim is that we should first and foremost nurture and
empower our students with critical awareness, moral sensitivity and political
activism. This, they believe, will protect them from the trends of oppression,
dispossession and cultural deprivation as well as make them alert and skilled
in timely identification of the threatening writing on the wall before they
become a reality and tattoo the image of mankind.
66
Giroux, "Educational Reform and Teacher Empowerment," p. 186.
52
Chapter I
6. HUMANISTIC EDUCATION IN THE AGE OF THE

REPUDIATION OF MAN: THE POST-MODERN
CHALLENGE
As we have seen earlier, the different humanistic versions share a general
commitment to promoting the development, dignity and welfare of human
beings. In the zo" century this agreement expanded into a perception whose
content can be presented in two categories: first of all, as a worldview
obligated to nurture the personal freedom and growth of individuals towards
self-actualization and broadening of their human abilities, and to the moral
code that places man's dignity and welfare as the supreme purpose of human
thinking and endeavor - beyond the imperatives of any religious,
ideological, national or economic theory. Secondly, there is agreement on
the political translation of this worldview in the image of a democratic,
enlightened and humane society, based on the equality of the value and
dignity of man, moral sensitivity and social solidarity, respect for man's
rights and placing the required resources for normal development and
dignified human existence at the disposal of all. However, these approaches
disagree on all matters concerning the perception of the nature of man, the
meaning of the "good and full human life," and the educational and political
ways leading to the actualization of the humanistic vision.
On the question of this development in humanistic education, different
positions were formed in our century, two of which, the modern and the
post-modem, are of interest to us in this context. The thinkers and educators
who identify with the basic beliefs and ideals of modernity are characterized
by a belief in the powers of rationality, sensitive morality and creative
imagination to advance humanity towards an enlightened, just and thriving
existence - in other words, an optimistic approach towards the possibility of
progress. From this point of departure, modem thinkers continued the same
line of thought in their attempt to establish a preferred model of humanistic
education, which was in most cases integrative in character. This humanistic
education fed on the different elements of humanistic education's heritage
and on an evaluation of the situation in relation to unique problems and
challenges facing us.
We can find examples in the words of numerous humanistic thinkers.
Russell's philosophy of education comprises classical, romantic and radical
positions. Whitehead's approach to education combines classical and
progressive perceptions. Yanosh Korczak actualized in his life a model of
humanistic social education that combines placing the child at center stage
(without the romantic idealization relating to the nature of the child) with
radical involvement in rectifying society. John Dewey was careful to
53
maintain a balance between "making the child a partner-inheritor of

humanity's intellectual and moral assets" and actualizing the child's singular
nature, needs and inclinations. Martin Buber's existentialist thinking
maintains an affiliation to classic and transcendental experience. Paulo
Freire's emancipatory and empowering pedagogy combines existentialism,
radicalism and neo-Marxism. Neil Postman's educational perception
attempted to simultaneously hold both ends of the "pedagogical rope" and
combine classical visions with prag:matic philosophy and radical critique of
technocratic society. And the last example we may find in the theory of
Mortimer Adler, who carries the, banner of conservative neo-humanism, the
elitistic-classical approach mellows towards a democratic and egalitarian
approach committed to "excellent education for all."
A different kind of modern discourse on the desirable image of
humanistic education can be found in the books confronting the various
approaches, such as Education and the American Dream, edited by Holtz,
which presents and challenges the contemporary visions and methods of the
neo-classical, the liberal, and the radical approaches. The fruits of this
discourse - as I see it - is the awareness of the great value of insights and
sensitivities in each of the approaches, as well as an understanding that the
real decision we have to make is not between different approaches, but rather
a balanced and wise choice of different elements taken from each of them. In
other words, we should not choose between "cultural literacy" and "critical
literacy," between morality and good citizenship and autonomy and
authenticity, between human excellence and self-actualization, but combine
in correct measure, and according to the population and unique conditions
available to us, those elements of humanistic education which will best
promote man's development and welfare. Although "wisdom" has become
more modest in the 20th century, it has still maintained a supreme status in
the theories of modernistic thinkers as the best skill and human faculty at
human beings' disposal in their attempt to actualize their humanity and
better their lives.
On the other hand, the post-modernist approach rejects a pretension of
objectivity and universality of "reason." It regards the universalistic
approach as fiction or myth that developed in a specific historical and
cultural context, serving the interests of the social group that adopted it.
Therefore, the post-modernists claim, "reason" cannot provide what it had
promised: advancement towards a truer understanding of reality, the creation
of a just and enlightened human world, and the nurturing of a more superior
or educated people. The deconstruction of the positive standpoints of
modernism by the post-modernists seeks to: (1) expose the elements of
personality and the cultural, historical and class contexts that lie at the basis
of intellectual and ethical standpoints; (2) situate the various positions in the
54
Chapter I
historical-cultural space of aggressive, albeit latent, struggles for cultural

dominancy; (3) deny the pretense of all the worldviews, ideologies, ethical
theories, and life styles of possessing a preferred status - scientific,
philosophical or ethical.
Post-modem society, as Ronnie Aviram points out, no longer believes in
the possibility of human truths and values having an objective and universal
status, and therefore, it turns to "a kind of multi-culturalism and moral
relativism that is uncritical and tolerant towards almost any ideological
outlook and social practice.?" On the basis of this point of view, postmodernist educators would be expected to discuss with their students the
character of both democratic and tyrannical regimes, but should avoid any
democracy-oriented education. They would expose their students to human
and universal ethical perceptions as well as to racism and nationalism, but
avoid any objective determination that indicates a preferred position. They
would arouse their students to examine the issues of juxtaposing "high
culture" and "mass culture," but mainly in order to "inform" them of the
refutability and arbitrariness of this distinction.
The goal of such an educator is not shaping or nurturing the student
towards any cultural ideal whatsoever, such as humanitas, bildung, paideia,
culture, "autonomous personality," or "individual growth," since these
reflect a biased attempt on the part of a specific group to gain social power
and cultural hegemony while relegating weaker groups whose culture is
perceived as worthless and illegitimate to the periphery. This will also be
their standpoint in regard to the modern humanist's argument that a
democratic society in which women and minorities will enjoy equal
opportunities and rights will be objectively more developed, enlightened and
just than a social organization of monolithic, tyrannical and patriarchal
character. From the standpoint of the post-modem, as stated earlier, this
perception of enlightenment and justice, that is also seemingly universal and
impartial, expresses aggressive interests and is not preferable from the
philosophical point of view.
A manifestation of this post-modem spirit (even when it is not conscious
of itself) can be heard in almost all the philosophy of education lessons I
teach in the various frameworks of teacher training. The very attempt to
focus discussion on the "qualities that add dignity and value to a person's
personality" is often received in such classes with great reservation by the
students. They claim that there is no point in discussing ethical issues since
they are culture-dependent and subjective. Moreover, the attempt to posit
characteristics of the figure of a more developed, fuller, refined or educated
(without quotation marks) person usually enrages students since "everyone
67
Aviram, "Adopting a Comprehensive Look at Education."
55
has his or her own good, justice and beauty." The very attempt to conduct a
reflective and nonnative discussion on this subject is perceived as irrelevant
and meaningless, and recently even as patronizing and oppressive.
It is well known that there is nothing new in this relativistic standpoint; it
has deep roots in classical skepticism and modem positivism that identifies
knowledge only with the tangible and measurable knowledge of the exact
sciences. The innovation lies in the fact that next to the old skepticism,
postmodemist thinkers argue that "the assets of humanity's knowledge and
morality" constitute no more and no less than focal points of power and
means of dominance camouflaged as cultural achievement and refinement.
They serve, as mentioned earlier, the social elites in their attempt to establish
a cultural hegemony in their own image.
Adherence to this standpoint presents humanist educators with a
tremendous difficulty: they are aware of the justness of some of the postmodem arguments, but at the same time are unwilling to relinquish the
universal ideals of reason, equality, freedom and solidarity. They are not
only challenged by the modem positivistic and emotivistic view, according
to which moral positions are merely subjective and lack any cognitive
validity (as in the case of liking Coca-Cola more than Pepsi-Cola, or chicken
breast more than the drumstick), but also with a post-modernistic claim that
holds the "inalienable assets of culture" as possessing no intrinsic value but
being only conventions of interest.
According to this logic, there is no objective criterion for deciding
between "the Nazis' justice" and the "Jews' justice"; there is no possibility
of speaking about the extraordinary and immanent greatness of the works of
intellectuals like Shakespeare, Mozart, Dostoyevsky, Virginia Woolf, Garcia
Marques or Picasso; there is no essential advantage in the wisdom of
philosophers like the prophet Isaiah, Buddha, Plato, Aristotle, Spinoza or
Nietzsche vs. the man in the street. The only thing we need to understand,
according to the post-modem "truth," is that these are traditionally perceived
as great and exemplary in their sphere. They were simply moved from the
periphery to the cultural center as a result of aggressive battles for cultural
hegemony.
One way of coping with the challenge and burden that the post-modem
approach confronts us with is to tum to Nietzsche's philosophy, which is
considered one of the primary and central sources of inspiration for postmodem thinking. Indeed, in his writings we find numerous insights and
analyses that have become the foundations of post-modernism: "God is
dead" and "the other-worldly reality" is a plain myth; there is no objective
and impersonal outlook but only personal perspectives; there are no facts in
the world, but only interpretations. In reality itself, Nietzsche argued, we can
find only those values and meanings that humans have molded into it; the
56
Chapter I
striving towards "truth" rises out of a "will to power"; and the "I" and "free
will" are not independent entities, as it is customary to think, but only
linguistic images and conceptual constructions.
Post-modem thinking adopted these insights and analyses of Nietzsche
and used them in the critical analysis of reality, thus giving an important and
welcome contribution to society in general and humanistic education in
particular. As Asher Idan states in his article "From Integration to
Pluralism," post-modem thinking brought about "disclosure of hidden
mechanisms of discrimination and oppression in the processes of
modernization and social integration.t''" The intention is mainly directed at
forcing the interpretation of the world of the "white European male" on all
other societies, while relegating their cultures to the periphery. Thus postmodern thinking advanced the transition from a monolithic patronizing
cultural approach to one which was more democratic, pluralistic and just. Or
as Yossi Yonah presented it, post-modernism substantiated the normative
meaning of cultural pluralism and contributed to education "the obligation of
relating openly, with dignity and tolerance to the existence of diversity in the
ethical-cultural sphere.T" It is, however, worthy of note that both in these
critical insights and in the commitment to communal and pluralistic
democracy, there is nothing essentially different from modem humanism's
perception of enlightenment or from the basic commitment to "equality,
freedom and solidarity." In this limited meaning of post-modem criticism it
is no more than an additional stage in the "enlightenment project" of the
modem age.
On the other hand, the consistent post-modem standpoint (if it indeed can
be thus called), which comes to a halt at the negatory stage and does not go
beyond criticism of cultural heritages and powers, is totally nihilistic. As an
anti-rational approach it returns to the Sophists the senior status that was
taken away from them by critical reason. It replaces relying on the
foundations of reason and ethics, as a basis for shaping social patterns, with
the power of power (since it believes that everything begins and ends with a
struggle for power) and leaves demagogy as the legitimate and dominant
means of attaining it.
The stylistic ornamentation of post-modem philosophizing in linguistic
sophistication, heavy academic jargon and elusive dialogues between various
"discourse spaces" holds perhaps esthetic value and theoretical volume, but
it eliminates any possibility of carrying on a serious, sound and responsible
discussion of basic humanist questions - moral, political and cultural. The
Idan, "From Integration to Pluralism," p. 48.
Yonah, "Cultural Pluralism Versus Cultural Integration and Their implications in the
Practice of Education," p. 123.
68
69
57
struggle against "logos" and rational talk that seeks to loyally describe
reality results in the loss of orientation and ideological and practical anarchy:
it creates a post-cultural jungle in which symbols do not symbolize anything,
signs have no instructions or meaning, and similar to Orwellian language all
distinctions between justice and injustice, executioner and victim, war and
peace, truth and fraud - a colorful festivity perhaps, but nonetheless
dangerous for humankind - dissolve and disappear. It leads, as Moshe
Zuckerman says, to "moral and political indifference" and undermines the
basis of every humanistic endeavor. "Postmodernism" he writes, "is an
impotent kind of philosophy, a kind of stylistic and colorful intellectual
game, manifesting helplessness and despair - giving up the quest for
progress in the intellectual and social spheres of life. Their complete
cognitive and moral relativism strip people from any ability to make
meaningful and valid judgment regarding their lived reality, hence being
unable to change reality for the better. All in all, postmodemists are actually
joining conservative and oppressive groups in maintaining the social and
political order unchanged.Y"
In this context it is important to return to Nietzsche who warned that
stopping at this negatory and critical stage is a dangerous cultural
pathology. 71 Particularly in light of the "death of God" and "moral and
authoritative crisis," Nietzsche stated that we must support life, be loyal to
humanity, see before us the human ideal of "ubermensch" and establish a
superior and noble culture motivated and nourished by a perfectionist
demand of continuous self-perfection and self-overcoming. There is nothing
more destructive and decadent for man, Nietzsche said, than "to sacrifice
God for the nothing."72 He therefore calls for the establishment of a new
nobility of "philosopher-artists" who have overcome both dogmatic
absolutism and dogmatic relativism, and in their creative endeavor - which
is both qualitative and unique - they give human life meaning, value,
direction and purpose." Against this background we can understand his
clear-cut word on the education of man in post-modem existence: "Never
were moral educators more needed, and never was there less chance of
finding them.?" "Educators are needed who have themselves been educated,
superior, noble spirits, proved at every moment, proved by words and
silence, representing culture which has grown ripe and sweet - not the
Zuckerman, "On Postmodemism and Education," p. 99-101.

The Will/or Power, sees. 7, 13, 55.
72 Beyond Good and Evil, sec. 55
73 On the Genealogy ofMorality, Part II, sec. 24; Thus Spoke Zarathustra, "on the GiftGiving Virtue" and "On the Thousand and One Goals. "
74 Schopenhauer as Educator, p. 12.
70
71
58
Chapter I
learned louts whom secondary schools and universities today offer our youth
as 'higher wet nurses.':"
Indeed in the zo" century, a philosophical approach developed side by
side with relativist post-modernism that accepted on the one hand the idea of
the "great narratives" as supra-logics that developed in the framework of
cultural heritages and regarded "conversation of mankind" as the sole
context for understanding phenomena. On the other hand, this position was
adamant that the existence of common human needs and desires as well as
the participation of people and societies in the cultural heritages, practices,
and professional occupations - which had inner criteria of excellence and
worthlessness, success and failure - enables the possibility for common and
objective yardsticks for what is good, just and beautiful in the human world.
We find examples of this approach in the thinking of Arendt, Habermas,
Gadamer, Oakeshott, MacIntyre, Taylor, Nussbaum and Bernstein who
presented, each in his or her own way, the possibility of moderate
rationalism and moderate objectivism that preserve commitment to the true,
just and sublime in human existence. They have all advanced their ideas
without rejecting the basic tenets of the humanistic outlook, on the one hand,
and without the pretense of pure, absolute, impartial and a-historic reason,
on the other."
Unlike traditional philosophy, according to this approach, identification
of the sublime elements of man does not mandate pure philosophical
observation of the "world of ideas," but rather combined, critical,
interpretive and creative involvement in the cultural heritages, spheres of
knowledge, shared practices - and all their goals, basic principles, prominent
achievements and conditions of excellence and success. The world of human
culture is indeed perceived here as the fruit of human creation and the
expression of Man's unique "tools," but there is nothing in it, according to
these thinkers that negate the possibility of the existence of "practical
reason." In other words, our ability and duty to evaluate at every moment
and in every situation - with varying degrees of differentiation, preciseness
and objectivity - the relative level of functionality in the sphere, of some
aspect or preoccupation that belongs to our common public world. This
principle applies to football and skiing in the same way it applies to physics,
dance, theatre, literature, ethics, education or politics. In this matter, the
words of Spinoza in the fourth part of the Ethics are particularly relevant:
"Perfection and imperfection, then, are in reality merely modes of thinking,
Twilight ofthe Idols, p. 510.

This approach is extensively and clearly presented in Richard Bernstein's books The
New Constellation, and Beyond Objectivism and Relativism.
75
76
59
or notions which we form from a comparison among one another of

individuals of the same species.'?"
Against the background of this alternative - which offers humanist
education a theoretical foundation in the image of a rational, historical,
normative, hermeneutic and pluralistic discourse - the total post-modem
approach seems a sure way of reaching the annihilation of humanistic
education. It turns its back on the intellectual and moral idea of
enlightenment and relinquishes the very attempt to educate the generation of
young people in the light of common humanistic ideals. Thus postmodernism joins hands with positivistic functionalism and both abandon the
rational, moral and pedagogical discussion of the image of man and society
as they can and deserve to be. This relinquishment is conducted for the
benefit of the description, albeit in-depth and sophisticated, of the real man
as the market forces have shaped hirn.
In conclusion of this review of the milestones and central approaches to
education, humanistic education always strives towards a fuller and more
sublime human existence through nurturing qualities unique to human beings
and making their lives better, more meaningful, moral and happy. In other
words, it is an education that helps people - of both genders and all groups
and communities - to actualize their humanity and reach their best, as
individuals who actualize their potential, as involved and critical citizens in
society and as human beings who develop and expand their humanity
through an educational encounter with the best achievements of human
culture. However, in the post-modem world - where "anything goes" and
everything has equal value, in which justice is relative and beauty is no more
than a personal issue - yearning and striving towards more sublime human
life loses its meaning and humanistic education is perceived as totally
irrelevant.
As we have seen here, humanistic education was born and raised in
classical Athens as a result of a rational, moral and esthetic caring about our
human image. It changed and developed different heritages as a unique
discourse in the broad cultural discourse setup. Now, in the beginning of the
21 st century, there is a danger that it will decline and degenerate as a result of
the post-modem estrangement from that same rational caring, moral passion
and erotic yearning for human beings as they can be, in their full dignity and
glory, if only they actualized and properly developed the superior elements
embodied in them.
77
Spinoza, Ethics, Part IV, "preface."
Chapter II
AN INTEGRATIVE AND NORMATIVE MODEL
FOR HUMANISTIC~EDUCATION AT THE
ADVENT OF THE 21sT CENTURY
The classical is meaningful and relevant anywhere and anytime.
Roth
Living is the job I want to teach him.
Rousseau
Lured by my style and tendency, you follow and come after me, follow your
own selffaithfully - take time, and thus you follow me.
Nietzsche
If we educators are to prevent democracy from collapsing into a new form of
barbarism we will have to struggle collectively as trasformative
intellectuals making democracy the medium through which they extend the
potential and possibilities of what it means to be human and to live in a just
society.
Giroux
INTRODUCTION
In this chapter I wish to present an integrative and normative concept of
humanistic education that draws on the four approaches presented in Chapter
One. This concept seeks to view these approaches not as disqualifying or
exclusive of the others, but rather as complementary approaches that can be
integrated into a model that will successfully address the tribulations and
challenges of the period. The basis of this integrative approach is the
perception that "educational truth and justice" are to be found not only in
one of these approaches, but that each of them encapsulates values,
sensitivities, insights and skills of great and prolific potential for a
contemporary theory of humanistic education. Moreover, I feel that we have
learned from the historical review in the previous chapter that what is
61
62
Chapter II
common to the four approaches is greater than the variances between them.
Beyond the intellectual and pedagogical contention, they have two basic
components in common that classify them as members of the humanistic
education family. First, they are committed to the "humanization" of
humankind (fulfilling and broadening its humanity) by means of employing
educational experiences that will enable all human beings to develop the
human resources inherent in them, and live a full and dignified human life.
Second, they are committed to an educational endeavor that strives to free
humankind from the shackles of ignorance and prejudice, from the
arbitrariness and capriciousness of the human experience, from the
conformist herd instinct and individual alienation, from parochial narrowmindedness and the false consciousness shaped by political propaganda and
commercial advertising.
My presentation of the proposed model will be in a number of stages. In
the first stage I shall present an updated, detailed and normative definition of
Humanism, both as a worldview and an ethical code that places human wellbeing, freedom, development and dignity as the ultimate human end, beyond
all political, religious, ideological and economic ideals and interests. It is my
hope that this definition will be sufficiently clear and incisive in order to
distinguish between humanists and pseudo-humanists, while at the same
time sufficiently broad and open in order to enable a pluralistic humanism,
with a multiplicity of interpretations and approaches that is neither
monolithic nor dogmatic.
In the second stage I will present a detailed normative definition of
humanistic education which will seek to do justice both to the classical
components of humanistic education and to its developments in the Modern
Era. The third stage constitutes a kind of continuation and detailing of the
second stage. There, I will present three ultimate goals of the proposed
model: (1) education towards cultural quality that maintains a special affinity
towards classical heritage (West and East); (2) education towards
autonomous and critical thinking that feeds particularly on the classical
heritage of Socratic Dialectics and the radical and critical approach of
modernity; and (3) education towards an authentic personality that draws its
content and modes both from romantic-naturalistic and existential pedagogy.
The chapter will conclude with the fourth stage, in which I will present
both theoretical and practical guidelines for pedagogy: I will relate to the
infrastructure and physical appearance of the educational institution, the
social climate and nature of interpersonal relations, relevant and meaningful
teaching that strives to render the "tree of knowledge" into the "tree of life"
for students as well as for the entire society.
Integrative and Normative Model for Humanistic Education
63
1. HUMANISM AS A WORLDVIEW AND MORAL

STANCE: A NORMATIVE DEFINITION
The proposal of the nonnative definition of humanism presented here
relates to humanism as a worldview and moral stance that should direct both
the theory and the practice of humanistic education. I hope that this
definition is broad enough to enCOITLpaSS diverse trends and styles, but is also
clear, obligating, and is not a toothless tiger, in the sense that it holds
specific criteria for differentiating between humanistic stances and actions
and those running counter to them.. As a nonnative worldview, humanism
means regarding human beings as sovereign individuals who are
responsible for their destiny, attributing to all people an unconditional selfvalue equal to that oftheir fellow men and women, and striving to establish
a just, democratic, and humane social order, which is committed to the
sanctity of human life and the furthering of human equality, freedom,
solidarity, growth and happiness. 'The meanings of this definition will be
detailed and explained on four levels of reference. 1
First, on the philosophical level, humanism posits Man (homo in Latin) at
center stage of existence and considers the enhancement of human
development, freedom, well-being and dignity as the ultimate goal, above
and beyond all others - be they religious, national, ideological or economic.
At the root of this view, as H.Y. Roth says, lies the commitment to cultivate
"the humanity within all humans'F; in other words, to have special concern
and responsibility for the dignity of human beings by virtue of their being
endowed with free will, reason, moral sensitivity, esthetical sense, and the
powers of imagination and creativity. Humanism identifies these unique
attributes of humankind as the source of human dignity and the ability of
human beings to shape an enlightened and flourishing culture for
themselves.
Despite the attempt on the part of numerous establishments, both political
and educational, throughout the world, to adorn themselves in a humanistic
worldview, their version should never be taken as self-evident, and in most
cases the truth is quite the opposite. Let us take, for example, religious
I The four levels or aspects of Humanism that I present in the following discussion
include the Philosophical, Socio-Political, Intellectual, and Educational-Cultural. Among
the many ways of categorizing and presenting the elements of Humanism, I find most
valuable the one of Paul Kurtz, in his Living without religion, where he speaks about four
main characteristics: (1) Rational and Critical Method of Inquiry, which he often calls
Critical Intelligence, (2) Naturalistic Worldview, (3) Ethics of Rational and Universal
Humanism, (4) Democratic Political Order that is liberal, pluralistic, just, tolerant and
humane.
2 Roth, Educationand Human Values, pp. 910.
64
Chapter II
messages. Throughout history, and to a great extent in the New Era as well,
we are witnesses to the fact that people's attempts to place human
intelligence (inquiry and contemplation) rather than divine imperatives at the
core of existence have brought in their wake grueling sanctions that include
excommunication and ostracism (at best) or a death sentence by stoning,
torture, burning at the stake, or other creative methods (at worst). The basic
assumption of orthodox religious perceptions, not to mention fundamentalist
ones, is that divine truth which originates in revelations and the holy writ is
absolute and eternal and obliges human beings to live according to it,
whether it is compatible with their worldview or not. Should they not obey,
God and his authorized earthly representatives will settle accounts with
them.
Furthermore, religions also have a clan-like or sectarian nature that
differentiates between "us" and "them," according to which followers of the
"true religion" enjoy a privileged status, and the others, the "heretics" or
those who have "erred," are relegated to an inferior status. In this context we
should not forget religion's decisive contribution to the determination of the
inferior and deprived status of women; not only are they not sovereigns over
their life (which is also true of men) but in most cases their status and place
in the world is dictated by religious laws which deny them the freedom and
right to actualize and develop their human skills according to their best
judgment and cognition.
We can find further examples of anti-humanist forces in both left- and
right-wing political ideologies. The extreme right, in its nationalist version
(in moderate cases) and its Nazi and Fascist versions (in extreme cases),
posits an ideology and practice that upholds the oppression of individual
freedom, denial of human rights, ethnic discrimination, and in extreme cases
even racism and genocide; all this in the name of a supreme ethical
commitment to "the greatness of the homeland and the glory of the nation" as ultimate values in relation to which the self-value of human beings is
negligible. This is also true of the status of the individual in totalitarian leftwing regimes, who in the name of the "great truths" of communism (which
are humanistic in origin) trampled basic human rights underfoot, condemned
its critics as deviates or traitors, and sent them to "re-education" camps (in
moderate cases) or executed them (in the worst cases). It is well known that
the anti-humanist results of these ideologies are documented by the millions
of victims of murder and oppression in the 20th century, and by the hundreds
of millions whose human image was trampled in the past and is being
trampled at present by virtue of the power of tyrannical right- and left-wing
regimes.
Together with fundamentalist religious approaches and totalitarian
ideological stances, we must also mention in this context the anti-humanistic
65
character of capitalistic ideology in its extreme form, According to this

perception, life is an egotistical and aggressive competition for fortune and
assets - I am my fortune - and similar to the Darwinist nature - the fittest
survive and the weakest diminish and disappear. In a social Darwinism of
this kind, as is well-known to anyone who has walked the streets of the big
cities in the United States, people who have lost their fortune are promptly
expelled from the circle of distinguished citizens, losing their human image
- as homeless, drug-abusing people or violent criminals. Particularly
pertinent in this context is the staternent of Olaf Palme, the former Swedish
prime minister, who said that like the United States, in his country, too, the
economic market is free and competitive, but unlike the United States,
human dignity is posited as an ultimate value, regardless of a person's
economic status; i.e., as a welfare state it is mandatory that society places at
the disposal of human beings the opportunities and conditions necessary for
maintaining a dignified human existence even if they have lost their property
and livelihood.
The last anti-humanistic element in this context - which relates directly
to the capitalistic element - is technocratic functionalism. By this term I
mean the concept of the efficacy of performance as a supreme value, the
logic of which should be revered by all, regardless of purpose and cost. With
regard to the deprecation of purpose, it was pointed out by Jacques Ellul, in
The Technological Society, that nowadays more and more people, with more
and more efficacy, produce more and more products that are directed to the
fulfillment of goals in which less and less has been invested in their
usefulness and value to humanity. Regarding the harm to human beings'
humanity - Charlie Chaplin as a cog in the production line in Modern Times,
clerks who are required to replace their human sensibility with bureaucratic
logic, abrogating spontaneous emotions and independent thoughts for the
sake of automatic and robot-like functionality, nullifying moral sensitivity
for maximal exploitation of natural resources and human strength - all these
and the like are quotidian scenes that strip people of their humanity and
impose on their multi-faceted and multi-paced personality the mechanical
and purpose-oriented logic of the production apparatus. A human being as a
function, Man as a cog in a machine, an automaton, a robot, a "player of
roles" and a "hanger for all clothes" - very little humanity is left in Man in
the wake of this kind of functionalistic dehumanization.
The second level is socio-political. The humanistic worldview does not
negate organizations in religious, national, ethnic or other communities, but
as a common foundation for human pluralism, as well as a condition for its
existence, it posits the "family of man" as a normative and binding frame of
reference. In other words, on the basis of humanity common to all people with no difference of gender, race, religion, nationality, ethnic origin,
66
Chapter II
economic status or political stance - the humanistic worldview posits the

principles of equality and dignity as a basis for the overall solidarity of
humankind, global (universal) ethics, intemationallaw, and the preservation
of our planet's ecology (our common, and as of now, our only home).
With regard to the political community, democracy is the politics of
humanism. Democracy should not be regarded as a technical mechanism
designed for organizing power and arranging counter interests in society: in
the spirit of Pericles in democratic Athens in the second half of the 5th
century B.C.E., but devoid of the class distinctions that characterized his
times, humanistic democracy is not only liberal and pluralistic but also takes
care to be just and humane. At its core it ensures the freedom, development,
wellbeing and dignity of all its citizens, and is mandated to serve all. It is not
only committed to the formal principles of the protection of individual
freedom and the equality of civil rights, but is also obligated to the
cultivation of well-educated, caring and critical citizens, to advancing
qualitative and diverse culture, to fair trial and fair treatment of its citizens.
In the spirit of the welfare state, it is also committed to putting the necessary
resources for dignified human existence - decent housing, health services,
education, the ability to make a decent living, and aging in dignity - at the
disposal of all.
Regarding the nature of interpersonal relations, in the spirit of Rousseau,
albeit contrary to his behavior, what matters is to "be humane. This is your
first duty. Be humane with every station, every age, everything which is not
alien to man."? In this matter we are again faced with the Roman humanitas:
one of its meanings, as we have seen in the previous chapter, was a striving
towards cultural and educational excellence, but it also meant human
emotions and a human attitude towards all human beings qua human beings.
Whether we define this kind of human relationship as humane or
philanthropic, its meaning is the love of humankind and concern for its
welfare, in the vein of "love thy neighbor as thyself' and "happy is the man
made in God's image." It stresses the importance of interpersonal
relationships that are characterized by good will that seeks the good of
others, openness and sensitivity for others and consideration of their needs
and desires, sensitive and empathic caring for the condition of others, a
tolerant and non-condescending attitude, mutual respect and trust, courtesy
and generosity, and regarding all people as ends in themselves and not only
as a useful function that serves the system.
The third level is intellectual. In its framework the humanist is committed
to open-mindedness, broad education, and critical and rational spirit as the
most worthy basis for understanding reality, resolving conflicts, organizing
3
Rousseau, Emile, p. 79.
67
social order - for the benefit of both the individual and society. As we have
seen in Chapter One, in the early days of humanistic culture, in classical
Athens, the imperative "know thyself' was accepted as a life-guiding
principle, followed by Socrates' no less well-known principle that human
dignity lies in rational and critical examination of individual personality and
social reality. Along these lines, Aristotle argued that Man's most
appropriate and worthy occupation is rational inquiry, Renaissance
humanism posited the ideal as the polymath, and the 18th century contributed
the ideal of enlightenment: consciousness that frees itself from the shackles
of ignorance, prejudice, superstition, and the heteronomy of blind obedience
to external authority and social conventions, and establishes itself as free,
educated, autonomous and critical consciousness.
However, one should take care to avoid identifying enlightenment with a
narrow positive scientific approach or an instrumental and goal-oriented
rationality. In the spirit of Aristotle, who said that an educated person is
defined by his ability to demand in all spheres the degree of precision that
the nature of that sphere enables," the intellectual humanistic approach does
not relinquish truths and criteria in the moral, legal, political and artistic
spheres, nor does it ignore the truths of the exact sciences. In all cases this
intellectual approach negates the pretension of individuals and groups to
hold a monopoly over what is true, good, just or sublime. It seeks to cultivate
a skeptical, inquisitive, critical, pluralistic and tolerant stance on the one
hand, and on the other, as we have seen earlier, it advocates that we conduct
our lives according to the best knowledge and tools that have been
accumulated in common human experience.
The fourth level is educational-cultural. Here, to my regret, the modern
era displays a regression in comparison with the classical age. Contrary to
Greek paideia and Roman humanitas, which express a commitment to the
cultivation of the spirit of Man towards a full and good human life, in the
modern era there is a tendency to emphasize the liberal principles of
individual freedom and pluralistic democracy, while commitment to
edification or educational and cultural nurturing of the individual is less
emphasized. "Universal suffrage and universal schooling," as Mortimer
Adler argues, "are inextricably bound together. The one without the other is
a perilous delusion - suffrage without schooling produces mobocracy, not
democracy . "s Moreover, it .divides students into those who will enjoy their
full humanity and culture, while others are doomed to serve as hewers of
wood and drawers of water. A good educational system, Adler contends, is
one that provides equal educational opportunity:
4
Aristotle, Ethics, Book I, 3.

The Paideia Proposal, p. 3
S Adler,
68
Chapter II
Not only the same number of years in school, but also making sure to
give to all of them, all with no exception, the same quality of
education .... [it should enable all] to earn a living in an intelligent and
responsible fashion, to function as intelligent and responsible citizens,
and make both of these things serve the purpose of... enjoying as fully as
possible all the goods that make a human life as good as it can be.6
In other words, the issue here is the humanist's commitment to assist all
individuals in maximally developing the human and individual potential
embodied in them, which stems from an interest both in their development
and happiness, and acknowledgment of their possible contribution to the
establishment of a better society. The French philosopher and humanist
Jacques Maritain summarizes this idea:
Humanism ... essentially tends to render man more truly human and to
make his original greatness manifest by causing him to participate in all
that can enrich him in nature and in history .... It at once demands that
man make use of all the potentialities he holds within him, his creative
powers and the life of reason, and labor to make the powers of the
physical world the instruments of his freedom,"
This four-level division (philosophical, social, intellectual and
educational) holds conceptual and analytical value, but it cannot clarify the
contemporary humanistic spirit. To complete the picture we will now add
two additional aspects: the first deals with a review of humanistic charters
and conventions in three periods of the New Age - the end of the is"
century, the mid-20 th century, and the last decade of the zo" century; the
second focuses on the humanistic theories of three prominent New Era
philosophers - Baruch Spinoza, John Stuart Mill and Sidney Hook.
The United States Declaration of Independence of the 4th of July 1776 is
the first landmark: "We hold these truths to be self evident" so it declares,
"that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with
certain unalienable Rights, that among them are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit
of Happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among
men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That
whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is
the right of the People to alter or to abolish it."
During the same period, in 1789, approximately one month after seizing
the Bastille, the French National Assembly passed the "Declaration of the
Rights of Man and the Citizen," which is similar in spirit to the American
Declaration of Independence, and states that:
6
Ibid, p. 18.
7 Maritain,
TrueHumanism, p. xii.
69
Men are born and remain free and equal in rights .... The aim of all
political association is the preservation of the natural and imprescriptible
rights of man. These rights are liberty, property, security, and resistance
to oppression ....
The principle of all sovereignty resides essentially in the nation. No
body nor individual may exercise any authority which does not proceed
directly from the nation ....
Liberty consists in the freedom to do everything which injures no one
else hence the exercise of the natural rights of each man has no limits
except those which assure to the other members of the society the
enjoyment of the same rights ....
Law is the expression of the general will. Every citizen has a right to
participate personally, or through his representative, in its foundation. It
must be the same for all, whether it protects or punishes. All citizens,
being equal in the eyes of the law, are equally eligible to all dignities and
to all public positions and occupations, according to their abilities, and
without distinction except that of their virtues and talents.
If the American and French declarations focus almost entirely on the
equality of the value of man, natural rights and the democratic nature of the
regime, the UN's "Universal Declaration of Human Rights" 1948, contains
all four levels (philosophical, social, intellectual and educational) presented
at the beginning of this chapter. Following are several paragraphs from the
Declaration, which are innovative in comparison with previous ones:
Recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable
rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom,
justice and peace in the world ... and the advent of a world in which
human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from
fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the
common people ....
It is essential to promote the development of friendly relations
between nations ... [and] reaffirm the faith in fundamental human rights,
in the dignity and worth of the human person and in the equal rights of
men and women ... [and] promote social progress and better standards of
life in larger freedom ....
The General Assembly proclaims this Universal Declaration of
Human Rights as a common standard of achievement for all peoples and
all nations, to the end that every individual and every organ of society,
keeping this Declaration constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching and
education to promote respect for these rights and freedom ...
All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They
are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one
70
Chapter II
another in a spirit of brotherhood.... Everyone has the right to life, liberty
and security of person ... [and] everyone has the right to freedom of
thought, conscience and religion ....
This declaration goes beyond reaffirmation of the central values of

human equality, dignity, freedom, and solidarity, and beyond the inclusion
of women as equal human beings, to the sphere of social rights to health,
education, work, and housing:
Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just
and favorable conditions of work and to protection against
unemployment ... has the right to equal pay for equal work ... has the
right to rest and leisure ...has the right to a standard of living adequate for
the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food,
clothing, housing and medical care ...has the right to education ... [that]
shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to
the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms.
It shall promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all
nations, racial or religious groups.
Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be
given to their children ... [and] everyone has the right to freely participate
in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in
scientific advancement and its benefits.
Despite the fact that it often seems that science alone is innovative, we
see here that the meaning of "advancing Man" in the framework of a
humanistic worldview has developed and has become broader since the days
of the American Declaration of Independence through The Universal
Declaration of Human Rights in the mid-20 th century (the concept of the
"family of man" has changed, as blacks and women were not included in the
category of human beings in the full sense of the term). But since the UN
Declaration of Human Rights the humanistic world-view has not rested on
its laurels. In UNESCO's 1996 "Report of the World Commission on
Culture and Development" we find direct reference to new issues pertaining
to post-modernistic multi-culturalism. This report of UNESCO, titled Our
Creative Diversity, opens with a reference to the concept of human
development in terms of the fulfillment and extension of the skills embodied
in each individual, and the necessary political, social, economic, health,
educational, cultural and ecological conditions for enabling all people to
conduct free, meaningful and dignified lives. Regarding the concept of
culture, the report's contributors did well when they did not relinquish any of
the two meanings: culture in the sociological and anthropological sense,
which relates to the assemblage of values, beliefs, modes of thinking, ways
71
of life and expression that characterize de facto a specific human group; and
culture in the humanistic normative sense as human prosperity and
prolificacy through successful and worthy fulfillment of the spirit of
humankind in the realms of thinking, creativity and morality.
The use of these two meanings of culture in the contemporary context of
a multi-cultural society constitutes a challenge for the report's authors, and
in my humble opinion, offers a worthy and honest humanistic solution: on
the one hand they sound a call to negate the traditional tendencies of cultural
hierarchies that allowed subjugation, colonization, and the derision of one
culture by another, but on the other, they seek to reject the relativistic
positions that renounce objective and universal criteria for protecting the
equality, dignity and welfare of Man. In other words, in the spirit of the
times, the committee recommends renouncing the old vision (which until
recently was considered new and enlightened) of the "education and
acculturation" of all human beings according to the model of "the
progressive and enlightened melting pot." This homogeneous vision was
repudiated as serving the colonialism and hegemony of the "white European
male" and as the one responsible for undermining the image and cultural
identity of numerous communities and cultures. It should vacate its place for
the vision of open, productive and harmonious coexistence of a plethora of
diverse cultural identities - communal cultures that preserve their unique
heritage and maintain mutual relationships of recognition, respect and
creativity .
On the other hand, not all cultures are worthy of respect and tolerance:
there are basic global or overall human standards of humanistic ethics that
everyone is obliged to respect. The rules of global ethics, states the report,
are limited only to the core of basic principles related to the protection of the
dignity and welfare of Man qua Man, but they should be attributed a
mandatory objective and a universal validity. This ethical code comprises:
the sanctity of human life, the equality of the value of human beings in
general and gender equality in particular, respect for the freedoms and
natural rights of human beings, and the protection of civil, social and cultural
rights, within the framework of a pluralistic, just and humane democracy.
The message is loud and clear: pluralism and multi-culturalism - yes; but not
moral relativism according to which "anything goes," and everything is
equally just. The relinquishment of obligatory global humanistic ethics also
means exhibiting tolerance towards national and cultural communities whose
words and deeds are directed towards the liquidation, oppression,
exploitation, subjugation or degradation of people who belong to other
human communities - and the cost in human lives, suffering and misery of
this type of experience in the zo" century is well known.
72
Chapter II
We will now move on to the philosophical aspect as it is reflected in the

theories of Spinoza, Mill and Hook. Similar to Montaigne in the late
Renaissance of the 16th century, who was outstanding in his free spirit and
criticism of the pedantic scholarliness of conservative humanism, Spinoza
was equally prominent in the 17th century, "the century of the rationalists,"
as a pioneer of atheistic, enlightened and democratic humanism. Similar to
other humanist pioneers - Socrates before him and Rousseau after him - he
too was forced to pay a personal price for his positions: the Jewish
community excommunicated him (forbidding members of the community to
meet with him and read his works), and after his death the Dutch
government banned all his works and presented them as a symbol of all the
evil embodied in heresy. On the distress and deliberations from which his
philosophy developed, Yinniyahu Yovel writes in his book Spinoza and
other Heretics:
He is extremely familiar with the Bible, finds in it many contradictions,
and the whole notion of divine revelations and miracles seems to him
irrational and inconsistent with the laws of nature. The Biblical law
seems to him historical and arbitrary, unlike the laws of nature which are
universal, eternal and constant.... In the face of the death that awaits us
all, the foolish notion of "after-life" gives no consolation. On the
contrary, if we are to find purpose, value and joy in our life, let us find
them in "this worldly reality" - in enlarging our rational understanding of
nature and hence our personal freedom and well being as parts and
inhabitants of this nature."
Similar to Aristotle, Spinoza's philosophizing is motivated by a quest for
the ultimate good of Man; stable and secure inner happiness that will fill him
with peace of mind and contentment. Again, like Aristotle, Spinoza finds
that the world of sensual pleasure, material wealth and social prestige does
not address the demands of happiness, and that the way most suitable for
Man in his quest for happiness is the development of his or her singular
intellectual elements, i.e., life in accordance with reason. The path to reason,
Spinoza says, develops in four stages: knowledge deriving from hearsay;
knowledge deriving from direct and unmediated sensual experience;
scientific knowledge, that induces particular experiences and reaches
formulas that indicate the laws that are at the basis of natural phenomena;
and intuitive knowledge, which relies on scientific knowledge but is
experienced as holistic, reorganizes the relationships between particular
"sections" of knowledge, and form a clear and coherent understanding of full
existence and the inevitability of individual cases within the whole.
8
Yovel, Spinoza and other Heretics, p. 6.
73
Spinonza's theory - as a philosophy of life and ethics - is regarded "as

the most serious alternative to the historical religions.?" All there is in the
world, according to Spinoza, is "the single nature," or "God." Spinoza denies
the existence of a personal, world-creating, law-giving, and personalsupervising God - who at times is loving and merciful towards his creatures
and at times vindictive and wrathful. Although this fictitious idea well serves
the manipulations of the religious and political establishment, it is
incompatible with the judgment of reason. In the framework of nature,
Spinoza claims, every entity - including Man as a natural entity and a
"mode" of nature - has an inner drive to preserve and empower his or her
existence according to his or her inner nature. As far as this relates to human
beings, the way to achieve this is embodied in a life conducted according to
reason, which as a result of its awareness of the nature of things, knows how
to promote the development and prosperity of human beings: to free them
from the misery and frustration which are the result of ignorance, prejudice
and external influences, and empower their existence towards achieving
stable and secure personal happiness.
Spinoza's naturalistic-humanistic ethics derives from his metaphysical
theory. In other words, our human nature is the only source of our values and
judgments: good and bad should not be regarded as absolute terms that stem
from the imperatives of God or religious laws, but as characteristics of things
that bring us closer to, or distance us from realizing our happiness in
accordance with our nature." "In so far only as men live in obedience to
reason," Spinoza contends, "do they always necessarily agree in nature";
"the highest good of those who follow virtue is common to all, and therefore
all can equally rejoice therein"; [and] "the good which every man who
follows after virtue desires for himself, he will also desire for other men. ,,11
From here he continues to specify those humanistic "goods," the main ones
of which are knowledge, love, generosity, freedom and peace.
We will conclude our review of Spinoza with his topical words on the
relationship between reason, liberty and peace; or to be more precise, the
value of these human qualities in light of the ignorance, prejudice,
oppression and wars characteristic of tyrannical regimes. In his preface to A
Theologico-Political Treatise Spinoza points out that the majority of people
who are ruled by superstitions, abandon reason and turn to nonsense and
illusions which they attribute to God's endeavor. These people, whose minds
are addled by religious superstition, reach a state in which "they may fight as
bravely for slavery as for safety, and count it not shame but highest honor to
Ben-Shlomo, The Philosophy ofSpinoza, p. 7.
Ethics, "Preface" to Book IV.
II Ibid, Book IV, Sentences 35, 36, 37.
10 Spinoza,
74
Chapter II
risk their blood and their lives for the vainglory of a tyrant?" - something
that could not happen within the realms of a free and rational community.
Through prejudice, he adds, they "degrade man from rational being to beast,
which completely stifle the power ofjudgment between true and false, which
seem, in fact, carefully fostered for the purpose of extinguishing the last
spark of reason"; or even worse, "men who despise reason, who reject and
turn away from understanding as naturally corrupt, these, of all people, are
thought to possess light from on High."13 Spinoza concludes this point: in
order to free oneself from the subjugation of the kingdom of nonsense and
prejudice "everyone should be free to choose for himself the foundations of
his creed, and that faith should be judged only by its fruits; each would obey
God freely with his whole heart, while nothing would be publicly honored
save justice and charity."!"
The second philosopher in this review is John Stuart Mill, who was
outstanding in the 19th century as the most eloquent spokesman of
humanistic liberalism. He believed that the ultimate good of man is
happiness (of all members of the community), and that the most appropriate
means for realizing this goal is strict observance of individual freedoms,
cultivation of rational and critical thinking, and multi-faceted and
harmonious development of the individual's character. It is worthy of note
that the combination of these elements in this form differentiates between
humanistic liberalism and "pure" liberalism: in both cases the individual is
regarded as a sovereign and autonomous being; but contrary to "pure"
liberalism that commits itself to ethical neutrality regarding the issue of the
proper life for human beings, humanistic liberalism believes that developing
the individual's personality according to universal yardsticks should be
recognized as the ultimate commitment, both of the individual towards
himself or herself and of society towards its citizens.
In the preface to On Liberty, Mill posits the first condition for Man's
development and prosperity: Man's freedom of consciousness should be
protected, both from the overt tyranny of authoritative regimes and from the
covert tyranny of "majority opinion" and social conventions. In other words,
basic political tolerance will not suffice in preventing the abomination of
burning philosophers and creators at the stake, for we need true pluralism
and tolerance that will prevent society from shackling by its conventions the
development of autonomous people, even if their position runs counter to the
accepted public stance. "This Principle," he argues, consists in the
understanding "that the sole end for which mankind are warranted,
A Theologico-Political Treatise, "Preface."
ibid
14 Ibid, ibid.
12 Spinoza,
13 Ibid,
75
individually or collectively, in interfering with the liberty of action of any of

their number, is self-protection. That the only purpose for which power can
be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against
his will, is to prevent harm to others.':"
The model of a proper regime that respects Man is, therefore, a liberal
democracy that provides all with the "liberty of tastes and pursuits; of
framing the plan of our life to suit our own character; of doing as we like,
subject to such consequences as may follow: without impediment from our
fellow-creatures, so long as what we do does not harm them, even though
they should think our conduct foolish, perverse, or wrong.?" A society
committed to the protection of all individuals' rights to the freedom of
thought, belief, conscience, quest for happiness, expression, association and
action (as long as it does not deny others the equal right to exercise these
liberties) has a special value associated with these rights, which is the
advancement of Man through the advancement of truth. In the spirit of
scientific thinking, Mill claims that any supposition, standpoint, assumption
or claim to truth is susceptible of being erroneous, and that the story of the
extension of human knowledge is the story of truths that were refuted and
replaced by other truths after they achieved substantiation through joint
human experience. Hence we learn that the freedom of thought, research and
debate is a necessary condition for advancing truth, and that people have the
right to claim that their positions are valid and true only if they succeed in
permanently standing the test of scientific and critical reason. Conversely,
imposing truths by virtue of authority, or inculcating them in young people
through indoctrination, has nothing whatsoever to do with the truth, but only
with corrupt, thought-stagnating and ignorance-perpetuating abusive power.
We have reached the last issue concerning the development of the
individual's personality. Men and woman as individuals, and humanity in
general, do not possess assets more promising than a free spirit, rational
thinking, moral sensitivity and creative imagination - human beings' vital
sources that constitute the basis of their unique dignity and ability to create
for themselves an enlightened and flourishing culture. These assets, by their
very nature, are successfully realized only in the proper habitat: in the
personalities of human beings who are allowed to use their reason,
sensitivity, conscience and imagination in a free and critical manner, within
a pluralistic and tolerant society, with a plethora of life styles, public
controversies and competitive theories. In other words, "he who lets the
world, or his own portion of it, choose his plan of life for him, has no need
IS
16
Mill, On Liberty, p. 135.

Ibid, p. 138.
76
Chapter II
of any other faculty than the ape-like one of imitation. He who chooses his
plan for himself, employs all his faculties.?"
Mill's conclusion is that the subjugation of the spirit of Man to a
tyrannical regime, authority based on tradition or the "majority opinion,"
results only in stupidity, misery and mediocrity. The way to human
happiness and human progress should be paved with humanistic education,
which will encourage "the highest and most harmonious development" of
the students' powers "to a complete and consistent whole"; making them
"well-developed human beings" with "greater fullness of life" and far
greater contribution to mankind." This kind of personality - that activates
the full spectrum of its abilities, and betters them, in intensive and
autonomous involvement in cultural existence - is worthy of the word
"personality"; in other words, a personality that in its unique way well
expresses the sublime in human beings and is worthy of its masters.
The third humanistic philosopher presented here is Sidney Hook, who
served for a number of years as president of the American Humanistic
Association. In The Humanist Alternative, after an introductory discussion
by Paul Kurtz of the various cultural and ethical meanings of Humanism,
Hook addresses "The Snare of Definitions." Examining the difficulty that
lies in defining terms such as democracy and humanism, Hook points out
that the difficulty, pitfall or snare results from the need to be at the same
time both clear - so that the definition will have "teeth" and will be able to
serve as a basis for distinction and criticism, as well as open, flexible and
pluralistic - so as not to dogmatically and monolithically negate all those
who disagree with the interpretation of the concept under discussion.
Ultimately Hook chooses the converse and in six points presents those that
he believes are unworthy of being considered humanistic: (1) who support
practices that impose one pattern of culture on all members of the
community; (2) who believe that by virtue of their religious belief or their
belonging to a special group or class, they are entitled to privileges and
rights that are denied to other people; (3) who support minority rule and
tyranny and stand as opponents to democratic regimes; (4) who deny
community responsibility to provide all with civilized standards of
education, health, welfare, and housing; (5) who solve intellectual and social
conflicts by the use and abuse of force rather than by rational, open and fair
discussion; (6) who place loyalty to a group or an ideology, in the name of
which they neglect their commitment to human dignity and the basic and
universal rights that make it possible."
17Ibid,pp.187.
18 Ibid, p. 186-193 (here Mill quotes the German humanist Von Humboldt).
19 Hook, The Snare ofDefinitions, pp. 33-34.
77
2. HUMANISTIC EDUCATION: AN INTEGRATIVE

AND NORMATIVE DEFINITION
Assuming that a central condition for the success of humanistic education
is a clear and detailed definition, and based on the four humanistic heritages
and the definition of the humanistic worldview I presented earlier, I would
like to propose the following definition of humanistic education. Humanistic
education is characterized by general and multi-faceted cultivation of the
personality ofthose being educated, in a climate of intellectual freedom and
respect for human dignity, towards the best and highest life of which they
are capable in three fundamental domains of life: as individuals who
harmoniously and authentically realize their potential, as involved and
responsible citizens in a democracy, and as human beings who enrich and
perfect themselves through active engagement with the collective
achievements ofhuman culture.
Since this definition of education aspires to be integrative, normative and
humanistic, and no definition of this kind can be accepted as self-evident,
distinctions, clarifications and expansion are necessary. The simplest is the
integrative characteristic: as I explained in Chapter One, I do not believe that
the entire humanistic truth (with its different intellectual and pedagogical
aspects) can be comprehensively found in anyone of the humanistic
approaches to education, thus negating the validity and vitality of all others.
The challenge, as I understand it, is to combine selected insights and
practices of the various humanistic approaches, and choose the proper
emphases and measures, in accordance with the abilities and needs of the
students and teachers who participate in the educational endeavor. A
significant manifestation of the integrative character of the proposed model
can be found in the section (later in this chapter) that deals with the ultimate
goals of humanistic education. Quality of culture, autonomous thinking and
authentic personality will be presented there as both counter and
complementary ideals.
Clarifying the status of the normative definition is slightly more
complicated. The concept of education, like that of culture and morality,
functions in everyday language on two different levels: one is descriptivefactual, while the other is judgmental-normative. On the descriptive-factual
level there is no one who has not received an education, there is no one who
is not cultured, and there is no one who does not act in accordance with
moral values. On this factual level of reference, there is no good or bad,
worthy or unworthy, high or low, but only qualities or characteristics that
identify and define. One example of this is the dictionary definition, the like
of which we can find in The Random House Dictionary of the English
Language, "the act or process of imparting or acquiring general knowledge,
78
Chapter II
developing the powers of reasoning and judgment and generally of preparing

one's self or others intellectually for mature life."
We cannot argue with such a definition, and therefore it is useless to our
discussion: it explains a concept in accepted terms that are true everywhere
and at all times, ignoring the central questions that the concept raises both in
relation to worthy ideals (an autonomous or herd-like person, a racial or
egalitarian society, a democratic or dictatorial society), and the proper means
(rational convincing or threatening coercion, open-mindedness or
indoctrination, grounded in the assets of culture or in the nature of the child).
This is also the case in relation to sociological definitions that identify in
education, for example, a process in which society inculcates in young
people its knowledge, values and all other cultural assets, in order to
maintain its existence and unique character and promote its development.
This kind of definition regards education, first and foremost, as a social
function in the framework of the socialization process, and in this respect
there is no essential difference between socialization in Sparta or Athens, the
United States or Cuba, an oppressive dictatorship or a democratic and peaceloving nation.
When they impose standards and criteria, definitions acquire a nonnative
meaning and accordingly a philosophical and moral meaning, which if not
fulfilled, disqualify the theory or the endeavor as illegitimate. As an
example, let us examine the following definition: "education is an intentional
intervention in the process of the evolvement and formation of personality,
which is characterized by the kind of goals and means that contribute to the
prosperity of the individual and of society." This definition, even if it is not
"closed" from an ethical point of view, declares that education worthy of the
name will be regarded as such if it can prove - by means of theoretical and
factual evidence - that its goals and ways indeed promote the development
and welfare of both the citizen and society in general. We will find
normative definitions par excellence in the frameworks of religious and
ideological worldviews. Examples for this we find in a religious perception
that regards education as a learning and internalization process of the
"straight and narrow path" who God, by his grace, has shown us, as well as
in a liberal perception that identifies education with the nurturing of an
enlightened person with a democratic personality. In such cases, educational
systems (in the factual sense) that do not strive to nurture the prescribed
image of Man will be disqualified as un-educational, and perhaps even antieducational (in the nonnative sense).
Now that the meanings of "integrative" and "normative" have been
clarified and the humanistic worldview presented - in the historical, ethical,
intellectual and pedagogical frameworks - we can set out to clarify the
components of the definition of humanistic education presented above. At
79
the beginning of the suggested normative definition of humanistic education

lies the act of cultivation: not inculcation, not acquisition, not shaping and
not learning. Cultivation is defined here as an activity directed towards
developing and improving the potential embodied in Man - the latent human
ability inherent in the student, to which we attribute value, and to which we
mobilize ourselves to assist in realizing itself, and also expand and improve
it. The obvious analogy is to the sphere of agriculture: by the same token that
we speak about cultivation of the soil so that yields will be greater, both in
quality and quantity, we cultivate the physical, intellectual, moral, and
artistic powers of our students so that their yield will be better, for the
benefit of both the individual and society. Further in this analogy: cultivating
an orange tree according to its orange-ness, and caring for the avocado
according to its avocado-ness will benefit them both: any interchange cultivating oranges according to the nature of the avocado and vice versa means the death of both or retardation. In this sense "cultivating" the child is
"educating the child according to his or her nature," while manifesting
sensitivity to and consideration for his or her immanent attributes and
inclinations.
The second characteristic of the definition indicates that cultivating
according to humanistic education should be general and multi-faceted This
characteristic differentiates between education qua education and teaching
and occupational training. At times teaching and vocational training are
compatible with educational endeavor, but this is not a necessary condition,
and are often anti-educational. In the sphere of teaching, as we all know, a
teacher can teach his or her students computer science, physics, literature or
playing a musical instrument, and totally focus on the student's
achievements in the specific sphere. This is also the case in vocational
training, during which a person is trained to become a reception clerk, a
computer programmer or a salesperson - interest in the person being trained
is, first and foremost, in the quality of his or her functioning in the
profession in which he or she is being trained. In education, on the other
hand, there is no specific sphere of knowledge in which achievement is
measured, and there is no professional sphere of specialization: training in
education is for the art of life; "toward the most complete achievement of
varied activity expressing the potentialities of that living creature in the face
of its actual environment'Y" for the gradual introduction of the person being
educated to skilled, successful, and just activity in the various spheres of
human life. For this reason, as we have already seen in both Aristotle and
Rousseau, education should not be specialized or particularized. It should be
20 Whitehead,
The Aims ofEducation, 39.
80
Chapter II
generalfrom the point ofview ofbroad education and multi-facetedfrom the

point ofview ofpersonality.
There is a great deal of truth in the criticism leveled at the contemporary
specialist and professional - who knows almost everything about one minute
thing and knows almost nothing about everything else; this is a tried and true
recipe for narrow-mindedness, cultural paucity and moral and political
irresponsibility. It is extremely dangerous to intensively cultivate one facet,
skill or specific talent in a child, while ignoring or consciously sacrificing
other facets of his or her personality. A coach in a field of sports such as
gymnastics, or in an intellectual field such as mathematics, has a strong
interest in the maximal utilization of the student's talents (physical or
mathematical). On the other hand, from the viewpoint of the child's
educators, attention is given to the proportional and harmonious
development of his or her physical, emotional, mental, social, artistic or
other facets. They are concerned about any exaggeration of one facet at the
cost of temporary, and at times permanent, damage to the child's full
personality .. Curiosity and love of knowledge, broad horizons and learning
skills, moral virtue and social skills, consideration and a sense of proportion,
criticality and creativity, a healthy mind in a healthy body, and the various
types of intelligence - are all qualities that educators strive to cultivate, in a
well-balanced and integrative way, while their guiding light is the
advancement of their students towards attaining a fun, decent and successful
human life.
An additional aspect of the general and multi-faceted characteristics of
humanistic or liberal education is related to going beyond the "provincial
mentality," beyond fixity to the "here and now," which "applies standards
acquired within limited area to the whole human experience [hence]
confounding the contingent with the essential, the ephemeral with the
permanent.?" This means freeing people from the shackles of prejudice,
social conventions and distorted perceptions of reality that all forms of
socialization with which the consciousness of those being educated is linked.
The process of emancipation is gradual and related to students' maturation
processes, empowering their inner strength in the face of socialization's
gravitational forces. This process can be described as a tree which develops
simultaneously on three levels: one, as development of the autonomy of the
student who frees him- or herself from heteronymous conformity and grows
into independent and critical formation of beliefs and positions; the second,
an authenticization process of those being educated, who free themselves
from passive acceptance of their collective identity, and develop towards the
definition of self-identity, which stems from their unique nature and free
21 Eliot,
"What is Classic?" p. 397.
81
decisions; and the third, as a universalization process of those being

educated, who free themselves of the provincial patterns of the "here and
now" towards a comprehensive, profound and multi-directional vision of
human spirit in a variety of past cultures and the diverse facets of present
human existence.
The third characteristic of the proposed definition consists in adherence
to intellectual freedom and human dignity, as two criteria that serve to
distinguish between humanistic education and other forms of shaping human
personality, such as indoctrination, propaganda, and conditioning. Here
"intellectual freedom" or "open-mindedness" represents the intellectual
criterion that mandates humanistic teachers to conduct an open discussion,
free of threat and coercion, that is research-oriented and critical, and in
which teachers and students alike are committed to rational and responsible
substantiation and reasoning of their positions. In this definition, "human
dignity" represents the moral criterion, according to which humanistic
teachers are obliged to treat their students equally, decently, courteously, and
with the respect they deserve as autonomous, rational, sensitive and singular
beings, students who are entitled, like everyone else, to seek their happiness,
shape their own worldview, and define themselves according to their best
understanding and awareness. This kind of educative teaching, says Israel
Scheffler, is marked by "its special connection with rational explanation and
critical dialogue: with the enterprise of giving honest reasons and welcoming
radical questions .... The teacher is revealing his reasons for the beliefs he
wants to transmit and is thus, in effect, submitting his own judgment to the
critical scrutiny and evaluation of the student; he is fully engaged in the
dialogue by which he hopes to teach, and is thus risking his own beliefs, in
lesser or greater degree, as he teaches. ,,22
This is not true of indoctrination and propaganda, humanistic education's
two major competitors (and often pretenders) for the soul of the student.
Their common point of departure regards the student not as an end in himself
or herself per se (as an equal and autonomous person), but as a means or
function of fulfilling exterior goals - religious, ideological or economic; yet
each of the two has its own singular characteristics on the road to fulfilling
its goals. Indoctrination, in its accepted sense, indicates tendentious,
authoritative and oppressive intervention in the lives of human beings,
similar to brainwashing and taming, striving to take over the content of their
consciousness and shape their way of life. It is defined by both its goals and
its modes of influence: from the standpoint of goals, indoctrination attempts
to inculcate a worldview, ideology, theory or position so that it will become
strongly and permanently based in personality and behavior; from the point
22
Scheffler. Conditions ofKnowledge. p. 299-300.
82
Chapter II
of view of its ways and means, it is embodied in the ways of teaching, which
on the one hand present ideas, values and positions as unequivocal absolute
truths, and on the other, bind and oppress any inquisitive, critical and
creative search that seeks alternative perceptions.
As such it is clear that indoctrination contradicts the principle of "openmindedness," which both negates the pretense for monopoly of groups or
individuals about what is true and right, and encourages students to critically
question the self-evident and be original and creative as far as possible.
There is also a blatant contradiction between indoctrination and the principle
of human dignity: indoctrination oppresses the spirit of man (totalitarian
regimes in the 20th century are good examples) and deprive them of their
natural right - as free, rational, ethical, and unique beings - to actively and
critically participate in the shaping of their personality and worldview.
Like indoctrination, propaganda (religious, political or commercial)
disseminates and presents its ideas and values as completely magical and
valid. Their difference lies in the fact that propaganda's messages are less
complex, designed for a shorter range of time (short-term deception) and its
manipulation of people is more sophisticated and focused (the election
propaganda of any party candidate or marketing a new snack, in comparison
with indoctrination towards a religious or ideological way of life). A.A.
Simon's'" eight criteria for differentiating between methods of propaganda
and education are enlightening:
1. Education appeals to the individual while propaganda appeals to the
masses: the first appeals to the individual through personal and basic contact
as well as to the individual's independent and critical consciousness; the
second appeals to the masses both by employing mass psychology and by
appealing to the vulgar (vulgar drives and primitive emotions present in all
individuals ).
2. Education deals with the future, it is patient and is therefore
prepared to relinquish shortcuts and immediate results, while propaganda
races to realizes its achievements and harvest its fruits in the here and now even at the cost of causing people harm.
3. Education employs ideas and values with the clear-cut intention of
cultivating the ability of students to examine the relationship between the
symbol (of ideas and values) and the symbolized (in human reality), while
propaganda uses language not to describe reality, but to freely present it in a
way that is compatible with its needs - therefore it obfuscates public
discourse and voids symbols of any concrete meaning or content.
23 Simon,
"On Educational Influence."
83
4. The educator employs rational, critical and well-grounded discourse

in order to present positions and argue their validity, while the propagandist
offers parables, metaphors and associations that do not prove much, but
arouse memories and emotions and terminate the volition and ability to
perform mental criticism.
5. Education appeals to students' self-awareness and acts towards
reinforcing its clarity and responsibility, while propaganda appeals to drives
and instincts (straight to the hormones) of the unconscious, as the more
efficient way to motivate human beings to perform deeds, or consume items
without really considering their value or necessity.
6. The educators-instructors present themselves as one of the people,
one among equals, whose strength and weaknesses are open to their
students' criticism as a basis for their own development, while
propagandists-leaders present themselves as being above the common herd,
having sublime qualities that overshadow the mediocrity of others, while
directing their audience to revere them and relinquish the critical
examination of their standpoints and actions.
7. The educator's goal is to clarify opinions and assumptions, examine
their validity and offer alternatives, and therefore he or she encourages the
continuation of discourse and argument, while the propagandist seeks to
inculcate in people dogmatic positions and fix them permanently in their
minds. Therefore he or she acts towards silencing critical discussion and
blunting its importance.
8. Education treats the student's psyche with caution, limiting the
spheres of its intervention and respecting the privacy of those being
educated, while propaganda knows no boundaries or limits. It strives to
achieve total and intrusive influence even over the individual's most
sensitive and latent foundations.
The next characteristic of humanistic education (in the above-mentioned
definition) indicates the general purpose of humanistic education: to assist
human beings in attaining their best in the main spheres ofhuman existence.
First we must clarify the meaning of good humanity, or man at his best. As
we have seen in Chapter One, those who support humanistic education
disagree about the guiding ideal of "full humanity at its best." However, I
think that we can show a certain formalistic perception of "Man at his best"
(men and women), which will be common to them all. By this I mean that it
is our duty as humanistic educators to examine "good human life," both in
its objective-qualitative and subjective-experiential meanings. In the spirit of
Aristotle's view on eudemonic man, whose human life is full and good, we
must help students and guide them so they will become excellent human
beings; Le., that from an objective point of view, by comparing their human
84
Chapter II
functioning in common spheres and challenges, we may say of them that

their personality and way of life manifest excellence or high quality in the
main human functions (such as inquisitiveness, open-mindedness, broad
horizons, rationality, criticality and creativity - in the intellectual sphere;
honesty, decency, generosity, consideration of fellow men and women,
courage, and blamelessness - in the moral sphere).
On the other hand, we cannot speak of an educational ideal of good
human life without the individual experiencing it as good and successful. In
other words, when we wish human beings a good human life, a subjectiveexperiential meaning of a relatively permanent personal feeling of happiness
or satisfaction or gratification from life, is added. It seems to me that this
combined perception of "good human life" can also pass the test of human
reality: parents wish for themselves that their children be developed or
excellent human beings as well as happy individuals. In order to fulfill this
qualitative goal they will occasionally prefer to somewhat impair their
children's spontaneous and immediate happiness (since after all, a "happy
fool" is not really their heart's desire). In other times, in order to fulfill the
"happiness" criterion, they will lower their level of demands and qualitative
expectations of their children, so as not to make them miserable (the image
of a bitter talented child or a miserable martyr is also incompatible with the
ideal of "man at his best"). In any event, as we will see later, the appropriate
balance between these two meanings of "man at his best" is of decisive
importance. It is important both in the direct experience of educators in
advancing their students to achieve their best according to their perception
(that of the educators), and in their attempt to equip their students with the
same storehouse of knowledge, critical consciousness, individual autonomy
and feeling of self-value that will allow their students to form their own
independent perception of "the good life" and realize it in practice,
according to their own understanding and choice.
We are now left with addressing the last characteristic of the proposed
definition: the central spheres of human existence. As we have seen in
Chapter One, humanistic educators agree that humanistic education is a
training for the art of life, which should not be subjugated to collectivistic
purposes (religious, national, ideological or economic) or professional
training in any sphere whatsoever. In Plato's Pro/agoras, for example,
Protagoras declares that he will make his student into "a better man"; and in
his response to Socrates' question regarding the sphere in which he will
improve him, Protagoras responds that he will make him skilled and
successful in both the private and the public spheres of his life. In Emile,
Rousseau presents a similar standpoint, according to which it does not matter
ifhis student is "destined for the military, the church or the law," because he
must first be a human being: "all that man should be" - in a merging of self-
Integrative and Normative Modelfor Humanistic Education
85
realization and good citizenship, sensitivity and reason, personal benefit and
the good of all. We also find a similar standpoint in Adler, the neo-classicist,
and Giroux, the critical-radical, two 20th century humanistic educators. They
believe that educational cultivation should equip students with the best
knowledge and skills so that they will be able to live a meaningful and
dignified life, as individuals and members of the community.
Stemming from this is that the common denominator is devoting thought
to two spheres in parallel: the personal sphere of self-fulfillment and the
public sphere of the space in which the individual develops and acts and
where he or she gradually becomes a partner, responsible for its shaping and
regularity. In the above definition of humanistic education I employed one
category of personal fulfillment - that of authentic and harmonious selfrealization. In the public sphere I employed two categories: the first political, the second - cultural. An alternative way of treating the public and
the personal spheres is to include good citizenship in a democratic society in
the framework of education towards culture, while dividing the cultivation of
the individual into two categories: the autonomy of thinking and the
authenticity of personality. In this spirit I will now present the three ultimate
goals of humanistic education.
3. THREE PRINCIPAL GOALS: QUALITY OF

CULTURE, AUTONOMOUS AND CRITICAL
THINKING, AND AUTHENTIC PERSONALITY
(a) Quality of Culture
At the beginning of this chapter we clarified the difference between the
descriptive-factual definition and the normative-prescriptive one, and
pointed out that concepts like education, morality and culture function on
both levels in language. Discussion of culture, not to mention education
towards quality of culture (some may say "high culture"), is extremely
problematic, particularly in light of post-modem arguments related to the
craving for power and hegemony latent in every argument dealing with
culture's qualitative hierarchies. As a result it seems to me that there is no
escape from briefly discussing culture's different meanings, as a preface to
discussion of the principal goals of education towards quality of culture.
In Chapter One we dealt with a number of milestones in the perception of
culture as a central component of the idea of humanistic education. We saw
that in ancient Athens the concept of paideia indicated what we today call
the ideal of high culture - as an assemblage of physical, intellectual, moral
86
Chapter II
and civic virtues, which all human beings should strive to fulfill in their
lifetime. In 1st century Rome, the Greek paideia was translated into
humanitas, as a concept that stood for both the educational process of
developing Man's humanity, and as the desired product of civilized
humanity - full and at its best. During the Renaissance, "Cultured Man" was
identified mainly with a polymath who was knowledgeable, educated, and
proficient in a wide range of fields, possessing broad horizons and
conversant with the masterpieces. From the 17th century, a perception
became prevalent in Europe that identified the educational process with
cultivation and the educational product with culture - a perception that
compared educational endeavor to agricultural endeavor. According to this
perception, similar to the process of tilling, bettering and improving the land
so that it will give a better and more abundant yield, educational endeavor
was perceived as an activity directed towards fulfilling, developing and
improving the potential embodied in human beings - our physical,
intellectual, emotional, moral and artistic powers - in order to promote them
from an initial condition of ignorance, instinctual behavior, savagery and
coarseness, to a more advanced cultural level of education, reason,
autonomy, morality and refinement. In the 19th century, as we have seen in
Arnold's perception, culture is first and foremost a striving towards the most
sublime in us: the love, learning and internalization of the excellent and
sublime in human existence. "Culture," in its original and classical sense
should be understood as "the nobleness of life,,;24 the epitome ofthe spirit of
Man; a high level of thinking, morality and creativity in the most essential
spheres of human existence: philosophy, science, ethics, law and the arts. A
cultured person is therefore one who knows, respects, and embodies in his or
her quotidian life those attributes and virtues that should be present in Man
qua Man.
From the 19th century, culture acquired an additional meaning: culture as
the assemblage ofbeliefs, values, customs, modes ofthinking and expression
that characterize the ways of life of a given society. Culture in this
sociological and anthropological sense is different from the philosophicalpedagogical (classical) perception on at least four counts. First, it does not
deal with the developmental goals and processes of Man qua man, but
focuses on the heritage and patterns of life that characterize societies and
communities. Second, it does not feign to be a normative judgment on a
vertical-hierarchal axis of developmental grades, but is satisfied with a
descriptive-normative position on a horizontal-equalitarian axis of a given
social reality (there is no one who is not cultured). Third, contrary to the
classical perception of culture which focuses on the best, sublime and lofty
24
Mann, "Nietzsche's Philosophy in the Light of Contemporary Events," p. 359.
87
created by the spirit of Man (in the philosophical, scientific, moral and
artistic spheres), the new perception of culture also comprises technology,
folklore, bureaucracy and all other components of quotidian social existence
(and thus also bestows on culture the meaning usually attributed to the term
"civilization"). And fourth, education according to the new perception is
regarded mainly as a process of socialization that directs towards the
internalization of the modes of thinking and behavior accepted in a specific
society among the younger generations; this, without any pretense of
transcendental human ideals beyond those accepted in a specific point in
time and place.
Together with the humanistic-classical and sociological-anthropological
approaches, culture has another, third, meaning which can be successfully
combined with the first two. In its third meaning, the term "culture"
indicates a system ofgoals, values, knowledge, skills, norms and criteria that
direct the proper modes of action in a sphere of life or in a specific and
shared social practice: on the communal, ethnic, national, religious or
universal levels. In this context, we tend to speak of the culture of thought
and the culture of speech, the culture of morality and the culture of law, the
culture of dwellings and the culture of environmental preservation, driving,
singing, theatre, government, civil service, culinary culture, etc.
Public discourse and educational theory employ the different meanings of
culture, at times separately and at times combined, but usually in an
undifferentiated manner - a fact that makes a serious and fruitful discussion
difficult. Moreover, in contemporary (modern-post-modern) society, which
is characterized by multi-culturalism, moral relativism and intellectual
pluralism, and the breaking down of the barriers between high and popular
culture, the meanings attributed to culture have a direct implication on
educational policy. Among these implications are the following social
issues: social integration and the "melting pot" model; the curriculum and
the desired image of the school graduate; the character of cultural literacy
and its status in relation to critical literacy; equal opportunity for both
genders and equal opportunity for ethnic groups and minorities; as well as
the desirable stance regarding the division between high, popular and low
culture. One should also mention that in our times a teacher who strives to
educate his or her students towards culture is faced not only with cynical
skepticism (which is based on ethical relativism) but is often also accused of
(according to post-modernism's code of political correctness) interestoriented and oppressive patronizing.
Equipped with these insights and reservations, we will now proceed to
the issue of education towards cultural quality. We usually perceive the
acculturation of Man (which includes processes of development and
formation) as the inculcation, acquisition and internalization - usually of
88
Chapter II
young people - of the thinking and behavioral patterns that are considered
valuable to society. In the framework of our discussion of the goals of
humanistic education we will use this principle of acculturation on two
levels: as foundational and qualitative principles. The foundational aspect
indicates that every person is formed and develops in the framework of
specific cultural horizons, within an inter-subjective human existence that
comprises three spatial spheres: the sphere of connotations and denotations
that constitute the shared ideational and normative consciousness of the
community; the sphere of ideals, standards and criteria for appreciation and
evaluation of the lived experience; and the sphere of emotion and affections
that makes one a caring member of the community - son or daughter in a
large family." Therefore, as presented by Taylor, the "I" (of each of us)
always exists in the fabric of public discourse; i.e., "there is no way we could
be induced into personhood except by being initiated into a language. We
first learn our languages of moral and spiritual discernment by being brought
into an ongoing conversation by those who bring us Up.,,26 In the course of
the individual's maturation process, he or she can of course create and form
an independent and singular stance in relation to society and his or her
image, but this innovation will materialize only in the linguistic and ethical
fabric in which he or she lives. In other words, our cultural foundations
participate in our endeavor throughout our lives - at times of acceptance and
of rebellion - as a central factor in shaping our positions, emotions and
artistic taste; and the better and richer this foundation is, the better the
individual will be equipped for coping with the challenges of life. In
Livingstone's words: "What more important service can school or university
do for their pupils than to show them the best things that have been done,
thought and written in the world, and fix these in their minds as a standard
and test to guide them in life?,,27
Aristotle says that we cannot overrate the importance of the foundation of
cultural formation: "It makes no small difference, then, whether we form
habits of one kind or of another from our very youth; it makes a very great
difference, or rather all the difference. ,,28 And from another angle, which
focuses mainly on the educational value of literary works, Booth says that
our education depends to a great extent on the friends we make and "the
company we keep.?" As every parent knows, our human, communicational,
and literary environment has a considerable effect on the formation of our
adult image. Therefore, says the philosopher Montaigne, long before the
Silbert, "Educations towards Culture in a Multi-Cultural Society" (Symposium), p. 10.
Taylor, Source ofthe Self: The Making ofthe Modern Identity, p. 36.
27 Livingstone, Education/or a World Adrift, p.52.
28 Aristotle, The Ethics, book I, 1.
29 Booth, The Company We Keep: An Ethics ofFiction.
2S
26
89
communications era, "as our mind is strengthened by communication with

vigorous and well regulated minds, it is not to be imagined how much it
loses and deteriorates by continual intercourse and association with vulgar
and feeble-minded people. There is no infection that spreads like that.,,30
John Dewey, one of the founders of progressive education, also pointed
out the importance of cultural formation. In My Pedagogic Creed, Dewey
discusses the social elements of the individual's personality and claims that
"all education proceeds by the participation of the individual in the social
consciousness of the race...shaping the individual's powers, saturating his
consciousness, forming his habits, training his ideas, and arousing his
feelings and emotions.'?" In Democracy and Education, Dewey speaks about
"a fact of life" - in all societies inculcation and the imparting of habits of
work, thinking and feeling are a vital mechanism that ensures the continual
renewal of social and cultural life. In this context it is worthy of mention that
Dewey is not only descriptive in his attitude towards society and culture but
also presents a normative position: "unless pains are taken to see that
genuine and thorough transmission takes place, the most civilized group will
relapse into barbarism and into savagery.,,32
In Dewey we find a synthesis of the descriptive and normative
approaches of the concept of culture, and this synthesis is of course not
accidental: culture, as we mentioned earlier, has one (descriptive) meaning
that indicates an assemblage of ways of thinking, life and expression that
characterize a specific community and makes it unique; and a second
(nonnative) meaning that indicates a progressive, sublime and refined way
of life, the opposite of which is barbarism, ignorance and discourtesy. And
these two meanings of culture, as we can see in Dewey's writing, are bound
together in an closely-tied knot: every culture, in the descriptive-sociological
sense of the word, has an ideal of culture, or high culture, which comprises
standards of excellence in the spheres of activity important to the
community; while any nonnative and qualitative perception of culture
necessarily maintains affinity to qualitative standards and criteria embedded
in specific societies.
Despite all that has been stated above, the humanistic perspective, by its
very nature, strives to break through and go beyond the historical and
cultural boundaries and instate the qualitative ideal of the "culture of man":
the universal ideal of paideia, humanitas, bildung or culture which
constitutes an exemplary model for full, ethical and satisfying human life;
human life at its best which all human beings, as human beings, should strive
Montaigne, Essays, p. 287.
"My Pedagogic Creed," p. 19.
32 Dewey, Democracy and Education, ch.l.
30
31 Dewey,
90
Chapter II
for and act towards its realization. Acculturation in this qualitative sense,
Gadamer says, has a double meaning: "the properly human way of
developing one's natural talents and capacities" as well as "promotion to the
universal.Y' The final goals of such an educational process is: "the attitude
of mind, which from the knowledge and feeling of the total intellectual and
moral endeavor, flows harmoniously into sensibility and character.":"
It entails a process of humanization through an ever widening exposure to
the multiple and diverse modes of human experience, aiming toward a
synoptic and deep understanding of what it means to be human and of the
standards we should live up to in order to reach true and full humanity. Such
pursuit, he tells us, could be carried out by means of an on-going, openminded, and sensitive hermeneutical process: utilizing our best existing
resources - in the sciences, ethics, and the arts - to identify and appropriate
those meanings and values that seem most enlightening and edifying. This
task, of "reaching up to humanity," surely requires acts of distancing oneself
from one's own idiosyncratic beliefs and purposes: not, however, towards
any Platonic extra-perspectival position, but rather towards the diverse
human ways of seeing, thinking, and acting that constitute the "conversation
of mankind.t" so as to later "return" to oneself a more "multi-stringed,"
"synthetic," and humane individual." It is to engage oneself in the
distinctively human activity of overcoming, transcending, and creating
oneself without losing oneself.
An additional component that should be discussed in this context of
culture as a qualitative principle is the student's self-motivation. A necessary
condition for a student's successful cultural formation is a passion or drive
for perfectionism, which stems from an awareness of qualities higher than
those we normally exhibit and an attraction to everything that is excellent
and sublime.
Numerous philosophers have dealt with the centrality of this drive or
passion as a condition for cultural flourishing: as we have seen in Chapter
One, the Athenian leader Pericles praised the heroes who "were ashamed not
to meet the standards of excellence"; Plato posited the "educational Eros" as
a basic principle underlying all human excellence; Aristotle posited the
moral obligation to make every effort possible to live in accordance with the
Gadamer, Truth and Method, pp. 11 and 13.
ibid.
3S The "conversation of mankind" serves here as an anthropocentric or sociocentric
epistemological notion, one which has been endorsed by philosophers such as Michael
Oakeshott, Richard Rorty, Richard Bernstein, H. G. Gadamer, Martha Nussbaum,
Charles Taylor, and Jonas Soltis as an alternative to both absolutism and relativism.
36 On the nature of these personal qualities see Nietzsche, The Portable Nietzsche, p. 57,
sec. 281 and p. 320, sec. 19; also in The Will To Power, sees. 259, 881, 883, 1051.
33
34 Ibid,
91
noblest elements embedded in our human nature; Arnold identified culture

with the harmonious expansion of all the forces that add beauty and value to
human life; Nietzsche claimed that personal growth is possible only by a
strenuous and perfecting self-overcoming. Most significantly, it was Ortega
in his book The Revolt of the Masses, who focuses all these insights in his
statement that the quest for perfection is the touchstone that divides human
beings into those whose lives are "noble" and those whose lives are
"regular." On the one hand, "a life of effort, ever set on excelling oneself, in
passing beyond what one is to what one sets up as a duty and an obligation";
and, on the other hand, the inert life of "those who demand nothing special
of themselves, but for whom to live is to be every moment what they already
are, without imposing on themselves any effort towards perfection; mere
buoys that float on the waves. ,,37 If this theme is sound, that nothing of value
could be achieved without an active engagement of the will, than it should
have special implication for education: a failure to cultivate and generate
such perfectionist passions in students would only solidify the already
prevalent phenomenon that knowledge and virtue rarely meet.
To conclude the discussion on the issue of education towards quality of
culture as one of the ultimate goals of humanistic education, I believe it is
important to underscore two central points: firstly, that at the end of the 20th
century, the time has come to free ourselves from the destructive dichotomy
of "all or nothing"; i.e., either we possess unquestionable and absolute
knowledge about what is true, sublime, lofty, beautiful and just, and thus it is
legitimate for us to impart to everyone the worthy cultural perception; or we
do not possess any objective criteria whatsoever for the nature and quality of
human life, and therefore everything has equal value, everything is equally
genuine, just, beautiful and worthy, and education towards quality of culture
is a meaningless idea and devoid of any content.
Resolution of the distress that is related to the "all-or-nothing" dichotomy
can be found in the understanding that the continuous conversation of
mankind" is the only context in which we can ground evaluations and
judgments: that religion, philosophy, science, ethics, art, law and sports, etc.,
are different social practices, through which human beings establish their
human cultural world, giving meaning, reason, value and purpose to their
lives. According to this perception there is nothing sacred or absolute in the
assets of human culture, but then again it is the best we have at our disposal.
It would therefore be irrational and irresponsible to ignore our collective
experience and relinquish the best achievements of humanity in philosophy,
37
38
Ortega, The Revolt ofthe Masses, p.65 and p. 15.

On the meaning of this concept see the writings of Oakshott, Rorty and Bernstein.
92
Chapter II
science, morality and art as the basis for developing and advancing our lives
in the present and in the future.
This "middle-point" perception of moderate objectivism, situated
between absolutism and nihilism, also indicates pluralism as the central
characteristic of "human discourse"; no longer a demand for monolithism
and cultural hegemony in the name of ethereal ideals, inherent genes or an
advanced ideology. The proposed alternative can be found in the image of a
multi-cultural humanistic discourse - not lacking criteria but egalitarian,
open, rational and attentive - in which on the one hand every community
enjoys the right to present and preserve its singular characteristics in its
authentic voice, and on the other, is committed to the basic and overarching
humanistic standards, and chooses for itself the proper equilibrium between
the elements particular to its culture and those that originate in the encounter
between other cultures and communities.
The second point is particularly important at present in light of the
contemporary repudiation of the foundational and qualitative foundations of
culture. The education system should continue acculturation: (1) as an
extension, refinement and improvement of the students' modes of experience
through guided familiarization with the achievements of human spirit; (2) as
the cultivation of inner motivation and perfectionist commitment, directed
towards the highest standards that can be achieved in the diverse spheres of
life. Since intelligent discourse requires resources in the areas of "knowing
that" and "knowing how", and in light of the sophisticated forms of
manipulation that exist in society, a rich cultural heritage and perfectionist
sensitivity are the minimum with which we can equip our students so that
they will be able to understand the reality of life, examine it in the context of
its alternatives, and choose their path as rational, moral and free entities.
This is also true of our public life: a democracy made up of uneducated
citizens rapidly deteriorates into a mobocracy, a tyranny under the aegis of
the mob. If for no more than these two reasons, we should not relinquish the
classical ideal of cultured man: a person whose thoughts are directed to the
high standards of truth, justice, beauty and social responsibility, and in his or
her actions is careful not to descend below certain standards of morality and
culture.
(b) Autonomous and Critical Thinking

Education towards autonomous and critical thinking, as the second
principal goal of humanistic education, symbolizes on the one hand the
acculturation of the student, but on the other it is also a critical and often
subversive element in light of, and at times in opposition to, dominant
cultural order. It seeks to nurture human beings who have the ability and
93
tendency to form their positions in rational, critical, and independent

manners, so that they will be master of their thoughts and actions and not
herd-like prisoners of external authority, social conventions, prejudice,
superstition, habits and fashion. It cultivates autonomous-critical thinking as
a supervisory and screening element in the processes of internalizing culture,
with the intention of examining the essence, validity and value of things,
beyond their external impression and accepted meaning.
The literal meaning of autonomy (in ancient Greek) is self-legislation or
self-determination of values and principles according to which a social
organization or individuals lead their lives. The nomos or law component in
autonomy - which is a component of action-guiding principles of relatively
permanent and balanced character - shows us that individual autonomy
should not be confused with different kinds of individual freedom such as
spontaneous behavior, "doing your thing," or freeing drives and momentary
emotions. We can define critical thinking as the intellectual ability to
thoroughly and unbiasedly examine the essence, quality, value and validity
of things (phenomena, people, statements) beyond initial impression and in
light of relevant criteria and evidence. In accordance with Socrates and
Kant's rational-critical philosophies, I seek to regard critical autonomy as the
quest for the "good life," based on the individual's relying on his or her
knowledge and intellectual skills: by developing a high degree of thinking,
not enslaved by external authority and personal inclination; by a continuous
examination of the validity, value and relevancy of the goals and criteria that
serve him or her in decision-making; by rational and critical involvement in
cultural and societal life; by being accountable for their decisions and
actions. On the unique value and dignity that are added to human beings'
personality when they are autonomous, Isaiah Berlin writes:
I wish my life and decisions to depend on myself, not on external forces
of whatever kind, I wish to be the instrument of my own, not of other
men's acts of will. I wish to be a subject, not an object; to be moved by
reasons, by conscious purposes which are my own, not by causes which
affect me, as it were, from outside. I wish to be somebody, not nobody; a
doer - deciding, not being decided for, self-directed and not acted upon
by external nature or by other men as if I were a thing, or an animal, or a
slave incapable of playing a human role, that is, of conceiving goals and
policies of my own and realizing them... I wish above all to be conscious
of myself as a thinking, willing, active being, bearing responsibility for
his choices and able to explain them by reference to his own ideas and
purposea."
39 Berlin,
"Two Concepts of Liberty. "
94
Chapter II
The importance of critical autonomy, which is first and foremost an

intellectual quality or virtue, touches on all spheres of life. Scientific and
technological development, as well as progress in ethical theory and human
rights, would not be possible if it were not for this stubbornness of people to
think and judge for themselves independently of what their parents, teachers,
employers and rulers have considered right and proper. In people like the
Israelite prophets Isaiah and Amos, the philosophers Socrates and Spinoza
and Rousseau, the scientists Galileo and Sakharov, the authors Henry David
Thoreau and Virginia Woolf, we find examples of autonomous and critical
individuals who, when faced with a hostile and corrupt community, voiced
their opinions which in their times threatened social convention, and today
have been adopted as culture's assets of permanent value. The regretful fact
is that in most cases people who are prominent in their critical autonomy are
forced to pay a high personal price as a result of persecution by the regime.
The regime, as Nietzsche harshly put it, "they call themselves the good and
the just... the believers in the true faith .... Whom do they hate the most? The
man who breaks their values, the breaker, the lawbreaker; yet he is the
creator.':" "They crucify those who invent their own virtue for themselves they hate the lonely one.?"
In this context we can examine the "negative" aspect of the contribution
of autonomous and critical thinking, as critical consciousness or critical
literacy which enables the examination of the value and vitality of cultural
myths, exposure of false "masks," reading the "writing on the wall," and
strengthening oneself against manipulation and political deceit. In the spirit
of the radical approach to education, critical literacy should be regarded as
obligatory equipment for every citizen living in a modem society: equipment
that will serve as a trenchant and critical perspective of the reality of his or
her life, that will enable him or her to properly identify the forces and
interests that shape the trends of society and its way of life, and bring in its
wake attentive and sensitive consciousness to everything that calls for
personal involvement and mobilization.
A shining example of this can be found in the life and death of Socrates,
who was accused of impiety, sophistry, and of corrupting the young
Athenians. But as we learn from Plato's testimony in the Apologia and in
Criton, he was "framed" only because his autonomous and critical
philosophizing exposed the true nature of the dignified members of Athenian
society, as people who pretend to be learned and wise but in fact are simply
arrogant and ignorant. Even in face of a death sentence, Socrates announced
that he adhered to his goal of "examining myself and others" because, "life
40
41
Nietzsche, Thus Spake Zarathustra, p. 135.

Ibid, p.176.
9S
without enquiry is not worth living for man.." When he was offered a
conditional punishment, he rejected the compromise so as not to be untrue to
himself and thus relinquish his independent thinking. When it was suggested
that he escape from prison, he sought to examine, together with his student
Criton, whether such an action would be proper and just: would it not be the
victory of sentimentality over reason, would it not mean subjugating wisdom
to the opinion of the majority, would this not be a victory of opportunist
egotism over commitment to consistent and unbiased thinking, would this
not mean injustice and a breach of contract of his relationship with the state,
and would the good of adhering to his moral principles be equal to the
misery and sorrow he would inflict on his children who would become
orphans after his execution?
A second example of the nature of critical autonomy can be found in the
American philosopher Henry David Thoreau, who, in the middle of the 19th
century, preferred to go to prison rather than pay income tax to a government
which would use his money to enact moral injustice: a government that
perpetuated black slavery and began a war of conquest against the Mexican
nation. The following words, from On the Duty of Civil Disobedience,
clearly present his position on the matter:
Must the citizen ever for a moment, or in the least degree, resign his
conscience, to the legislator? Why has every man a conscience, then? I
think that we should be men first, and subjects afterward. It is not
desirable to cultivate a respect for the law, so much as for the right. The
only obligation which I have right to assume, is to do at any time what I
think right. It is truly enough said, that a corporation has no conscience;
but a corporation of conscientious men is a corporation with conscience.
Law never made men a whit more just; and, by means of their respect for
it, even the well disposed are daily made the agents of injustice.
The mass of men serve the State thus, not as men mainly, but as
machines, with their bodies .... In most cases .there is no free exercise
whatever of the judgment or of the moral sense; but they put themselves
on a level with wood and earth and stones; and wooden men can perhaps
be manufactured that will serve the purpose as well .... And as they rarely
make any moral distinctions, they are as likely to serve the devil, without
intending it, as God. 42
An additional example of this issue of critical awareness or critical
literacy in its negative and purifying actions can be found in George Bernard
Shaw's Man and Superman, in which he exposes the barbaric nature of
many of the values and habits in which British society took pride. "When a
42
Thoreau, "On the Duty of Civil Disobedience," pp. 334-334.
96
Chapter II
man wants to murder a tiger," writes Shaw, "he calls it sport: when the tiger
wants to murder him he calls it ferocity... The conversion of a savage to
Christianity is the conversion of Christianity to savagery... [and] self
sacrifice enables us to sacrifice other people without blushing"? Man, Shaw
says, measures his strength by his destructiveness: "in the art of life man
invents nothing; but in the arts of death he outdoes Nature herself... The
plague, the famine, the earthquake, the tempest were too spasmodic in their
action; the tiger and crocodile were too easily satiated and not cruel enough:
something more constantly, more ruthlessly, more ingeniously destructive
was needed; and that something was Man, the inventor of the rack, the stake,
the gallows, the electric chair ... above all, of justice, duty, patriotism, and all
the other isms, by which even those who are clever enough to be humanely
disposed are persuaded to become the most destructive of all the
destroyers.T" What is needed, says Shaw, "is not to replace a guillotined
criminal: it is necessary to replace a guillotined social system."
In conclusion, we have seen that the value of the autonomous-critical
approach goes beyond the philosophical, scientific and literary dimensions
towards the existential subjects of life and death, human rights and social
justice. This approach exposed awareness to the fact, particularly through
culture's courageous critics, that most of the bloodshed in the world was
performed in the name of the most sublime values; that rulers, legislators,
men of the cloth, judges and military officers are often revealed as the most
brutal and corrupt of men; and that the great preachers for equality and
modesty are exposed time and again as egotistical and greedy misleaders.
Since this is the state of affairs in human reality, it seems to me that
contemporary educators have an obligation to redefine their goal so that they
can equip their students with individual autonomy and critical literacy thus
enabling them to protect themselves from the disguise of deceit and trickery
to which they are exposed; we must equip them, in the terms of Neil
Postman, with "crap detecting kits.?" Autonomous and critical thinking,
based on solid cultural literacy, is undoubtedly the most vital equipment or
tool for human beings for their survival, as well as their development and
prosperity; it is far more essential and vital for life than computer literacy
which so many parents and teachers tend, in their short- sightedness, to place
at the apex of our pyramid of knowledge.
Shaw, Man and Superman, "Maxims for Revolutionists."

Ibid, pp. 151-153.
4S Ibid, "Maxims for Revolutionists."
46 Postman & Weingartner, Teaching as a Subversive Activity, p. 218 and also in Ch, 1.
43
44
97
(c) Authentic Personality

Personal authenticity, as the third principal goal, is different than critical
autonomy, mainly because it is not limited to conscious and reflective
intellectual activity but is all-embracing and expresses the individual's
overall personality and set of dispositions - including the unique and latent
elements for which people cannot give a rational account. In other words,
authenticity is expressed in peoples' lives not only as "thinking for
themselves" but "being what they are." This involves leading ones life with
special attention, respect and loyalty to his or her human existence and
unique nature. Such individuals produce their life-plan and spiritual content
through self-nourishment and self-motivation, and adhere to the
compatibility between the content of their inner world and its manifestation
in public behavior. In praising people for their personal authenticity, we are
actually expressing our special respect for them for not being "inertial,"
routine, "molded," "die cast," "standard," banal, artificial, fake, selfalienated, robot-like, or simply a poseur - whose inner life is hollow and he,
or she, is nothing more than pretentious and empty of any real content.
As I indicated in Chapter One, the romantic and existentialist approaches
interpret authenticity each in his own way, while both perceive human
beings as entities capable of estranging themselves or turning their backs on
the goal their nature has determined for them. This image of Man first
appears in Rousseau's philosophy, becoming a foundation of the romanticnaturalistic perspective of education. According to it, children, from an early
age, are required to obey external authority instead of being attentive to their
inner voice and unique personality. They are supposed to fall into line with
social convention, instead of deriving the meaning of their existence and
defining their identity based on the yearning, emotions and insights that
characterize their inner world. The result of such a counter-authentic and
alienating education, says the humanistic psychologist Maslow, is that most
people are "out of touch with their own inner signals. They eat, defecate, and
go to sleep by the clock's cues, rather than by the cues of their own bodies.
They use external criteria for everything from choosing their food and
clothing to questions of values and ethics.,,47 The remedy, Maslow says, is
embodied in true humanistic education which will assist students in
becoming honest with themselves, discover their unique identity and goal in
life, cultivate an attentive and sensitive ear that can penetrate beyond the
noise of cultural conditioning and absorb the sounds and messages that
emanate from their original and inner "I."
47
Maslow, TheFartherReachesofHuman Nature, p. 184.
98
Chapter II
Let us look at a representative example of the cultivation of the authentic

personality in the framework of the naturalistic-romantic approach. It is
taken from Strain's Modern Philosophies of Education, which presents the
perception that situates the "child at the center" and regards educators as
learning facilitators and generators of a climate for growth:
Direction is provided by the child's own level of development, by the
maturation processes of inheritance, and the aim for well-rounded
personality. Since the controls and goals of nature are built into each
child, education must cooperate by giving the child free reign in his
growth. He must not be restrained or coerced by adult traditions and
manners. The child must learn to be himself by following his own natural
rules, and he can follow them only in an environment of freedom and
self-initiative. A child is good, not evil. He becomes a tyrant or a misfit
only through adult interference. A teacher or parent is like a husbandman
whose task is to cultivate the environment and destroy the weeds in order
that the organism can unfold according to its own internal developmental
plan."
In contrast to this naturalistic and romantic conception, the existentialist

interpretation of authenticity negates the botanical model and replaces it with
the artistic model - in the vein of "you are what you make of yourself."
Since "God in heaven," "true reality," "the world in-itself," "the real I in us"
are perceived by existentialism as cultural fictions and conceptual
constructions, regarding these terms as objective realities and sources of
authority is nothing less than self-deception and "philosophical suicide." The
alternative they offer can be found in the identification of authentic life with
individuals undertaking the conscious and courageous responsibility to
define their identity, shape their image and determine their values, give
meaning to their lives and leave their mark on the world, through awareness
that in all their actions they participate in determining the image of Man and
the world.
In a specific and certain sense, it was Renaissance humanist Giovanni
Pico Dela Mirandola who presented a perception of existential authenticity
when he describes Man as having an open and unfinished nature - "Creating
oneself and shaping one's own form." But in the full and accepted
contemporary meaning, as we have seen in the previous chapter, it was
Soren Kierkagaard and Friedrich Nietzsche in the 19th century, who brought
to the "stage of history" the argument that the value of human life is mainly
measured by its subjective truths: by the relationships between Man and
himself, in the framework of which he, as a free person, is accountable for
48
Strain, Modern Philosophies ofEducation, p. 21.
99
creating his image and self-definition, by providing meaning, content and

direction for life in general and his own life in particular.
Three well-known examples will be presented here of the meanings
involved in an authentic personality, from the writings of Nietzsche, Camus
and Sartre. As we have seen in the previous chapter, Nietzsche repeats time
and again the educator's demand that his students be loyal to themselves,
follow in their own footsteps, not denigrate their free selfhood in the face of
religious or romantic fables, and with the power of their free creativity
impart meaning and purpose to life. "We want," Nietzsche says, "to become
those we are - human beings who are new, unique, incomparable, who give
themselves laws, who create themselves.?" The image of man to which we
are committed here is one who lives his life as a work of art: "to give style to
one's character - a great and rare art! It is practiced by those who survey all
the strengths and weaknesses of their nature and then fit them into an artistic
plan until every one of them appears as art and reason and even weaknesses
delight the eye."so And in other words: "a person achieves full and worthy
existence only by means of placing upon himself the strenuous demand to
achieve full and valuable existence: my existence will be full and worthy
only to the extent that I make of myself something of value - living as a
work of art.'?'
As we have seen in the above paragraphs and in those that appeared in
the previous chapters, humanistic educators' concern for cultivating the
authentic personality of their students obliges them to empower their
students so that they can separate themselves from their teachers and create
for themselves the source of their vitality and their own path - the personal
"generator" and "compass" which are what give human beings their dignity
and human uniqueness. No public or objective truth, according to this
perception, great and important as it may be, can replace personal truth or
replace the most authentic of human activities - giving value and content to
life in self-overcoming and continual self-creation. However, Nietzsche also
believed that not everyone is ready for this type of creative maturity. He
believed that the process of self-creation involves pain and danger, and that
as long as man is incapable of being his own master, it is desirable that he
commits himself to society's conventions. We find some of the pains of
creation and self-overcoming on Man's path to self-definition, in the section,
. "On the Way of the Creator":
Is it your wish, my brother, to go into solitude? Is it your wish to seek
the way to yourself? Then linger a moment, and listen to me.
49 Nietzsche,
The Gay Science, sec. 335.
so Ibid, Sec. 290.

51 Zemach,
"Personal Identity as a Work of Art."
100
Chapter II
He who seeks easily gets lost .... But do you want to go the way of
your affliction, which is the way to yourself? Then show me your right
and your strength to do so. Are you a new strength and a new right? A
first movement? A self-propelled wheel? ...
You call yourself free? Your dominant thought I want to hear, and not
that you have escaped from a yoke.
Free from what? As if that mattered to Zarathustra! But your eyes
should tell me brightly: free for what? Can you give yourself your own
evil and your own good and hang your own will over yourself as a law?
Can you be your own judge and avenger of your law?52
In Camus' philosophy, like that of Nietzsche, authenticity is associated
with an existential predicament and strenuous self-overcoming - a creative
and courageous overcoming which refuses to accept self-deception and false
consolation. The Myth of Sisyphus opens with a profound certainty of the
absurd: the divorce between man and his life: the estrangement from a world
in which we sought to find a God, purpose, meaning, justice, or even some
moral order and logical coherence. The world, in other words, seems to be
empty of all these and totally indifferent. With the inability to bridge the gap
between the soul's yearning to find itself as part of a rational, just and
meaningful world, and the certain and daily awareness that the world is not
so - devoid of God, rational order, moral reward and sublime purposes - in
such a world, "divested of illusions and lights, man feels an alien, a
stranger.t''" Human beings feel themselves in exile, alienated to the backdrop
of their life, lacking an anchor in which they can place their trust, as a safe
haven for their life's journey. Camus compares this man - numerous among
us in the 20th century - to the mythical figure of Sisyphus, living our lives
with all our might, facing the future, motivated by strong drives and high
hopes, all this beneath the permanent horizon of nothingness, devoid of
meaning and hope, of final and certain death.
Under the yoke of this burden, human beings are left with a choice: either
to deny their consciousness and condition and invent consolation through
belief in false gods, or to courageously and lovingly accept their human
singularity and decide that since there is no meaning or purpose to human
life except that which they themselves give it, they will be, through freedom
and responsibility, the ones who give reason to life and enrich it with content
and meaning. Human beings, by choosing the truth of their consciousness,
Camus says, in their adherence to human authenticity even when it is absurd,
affirm their life and human world: he "makes of fate a human matter, which
S2 Nietzsche,
S3
Thus Spoke Zarathrustra, "On the Way of the Creator."
Camus, The Myth of Sisyphus, p. 5.
Integrative and Normative Mode/for Humanistic Education
101
must be settled among men.?" In a world devoid of God, absolute truths and
magical solutions "the struggle itself toward the heights is enough to fill a
man's heart.,,55
For the final image of an authentic existence in the existentialist spirit, we
will tum to Jean Paul Sartre. Similar to the previous examples we have given
in the writings of Nietzsche and Camus, here, too, our interest in authenticity
is not purely abstract or philosophical but seeks a way to highlight
contemporary Man's authentic modes of coping with life's challenges.
Sartre's point of departure, following Nietzsche and Heidegger, is that man
is a creature "which is what it is not, and which is not what it is.,,56 In other
words, since human nature is not closed and defined, and because the most
essential attribute of humans is freedom - which is actualized in affirmation
and negation, in emotion and in thought, in sense-making and in creativity any attempt to define our identity in a final or reductive manner will miss the
truth and erode human dignity. The nature of human beings as subjects in the
world is actualized in their freedom to make of themselves, at every moment
during the course of their life, what they want; nothing in any belief, stance,
act, inclination or profession at a given stage of their life, can constitute a
basis for defining their nature as a concrete person. Human beings'
singularity, the source of their dignity and vitality, are derivatives of their
being open (towards the future) entities that form themselves as a selfproject, and therefore receive their final definition only after death. In other
words, the identity of all individuals is the sum total of the decisions they
made by themselves and for themselves during the course of their life.
This image of human authenticity, which seemingly appears to be
promising and optimistic, embodies the burden of Man's absolute
responsibility for his or her stances and deeds. "No excuses," Sartre says:
there is no God or Satan in heaven, no instruction of the clergy or the
military, no drunken father or prostitute mother, no orders from society's
political tyrants, no tyranny of our own libido - we are accountable for all
our actions, and any attempt to shift responsibility from ourselves will be
lying to the other or self-deception, and in most cases, both.
Sartre's perception of authenticity can assist us in understanding the
processes of the cultivation of human dignity as well as its being trampled
underfoot. In No Exit Sartre puts in the mouth of one of the characters the
well-known saying "hell is - other people." An accepted explanation is that
since human dignity derives from human beings' being open and free
subjects who continually define themselves in their thoughts and deeds, any
54 Ibid, p.
91.
ibid.
56 Sartre, Essay in Existentialism, pp. 160-180.
55 Ibid,
102
Chapter II
attempt on the part of the other to "catalogue" the individual (adult or child)
sociologically and stereotypically, thus negates his or her human essence and
reduces him or her to objects, things or articles in the world. Moreover, if it
were not enough that the other wants to fix his or her personality for his or
her own needs, at times we do not succeed in escaping the external image we
tried to make for ourselves in our relationship with our fellow men and
women, and so, caught in our own web, we can perceive ourselves only as
our image gazes back at us through the eyes of the other - and then he or she
is our hell.
A different explanation of the infernal dehumanization the other inflicts
on us (as individuals) is also related to the nature of Man's relationship with
himself. Every person has intimate moments with himself, as he wanders and
examines the content of his consciousness, and seeks his singular and
original foundations. At times, the only things we find are the routine and
banal element common to the masses - dreams, desires, values and stances
that are present in the consciousness of all our friends and neighbors. At
moments like these, against the backdrop of our yearning for selfhood, for an
identity that is mine alone, the "collective other," which like a malignant
tumor consumes any spark and iota of originality and singularity is infernal,
is the Angel ofDeath for the subject which is me.
Another type of inferno, more concrete and public, is the one we can
bring upon our fellow men and women when we fix not only his or her
personality but especially our own. By this I mean, Sartre's analysis (as well
as that of other philosophers and psychologists) that at times we seek an easy
and convenient escape from the burden of our freedom and human
responsibility, and find refuge, albeit for a short time, in the "rocklike" or
"woodlike" existence - impervious to all emotion, reflection, criticism or
conscience. The dangers that this kind of escape entails - of a person who
wishes to replace authenticity that burdens human existence with a natural
and undefined existence of an object in the world - Sartre describes in
Portrait ofthe anti-Semite:
A man can be a good father and a good husband, a zealous citizen,
cultured, philanthropic and an anti-Semite at the same time .... It becomes
obvious that no external factor can induce anti-Semitism in the antiSemite. It is an attitude totally and freely self-chosen, a global attitude
which is adopted not only in regard to Jews but in regard to men in
general. ...
But how can one choose to reason falsely? Because one feels the
nostalgia of impermeability. The rational man seeks the truth gropingly,
he knows that his reasoning is only probable, that other considerations
will arise to make it doubtful; he never knows too well where he's going,
103
he is "open," he may even appear hesitant. But there are people who are
attracted by the durability of stone. They want to be massive and
impenetrable, they do not want to change: where would change lead
them? This is an original fear of oneself and a fear of truth. And what
frightens them is not the content of truth which they do not even suspect
but the very form of the true - that hinge of indefinite approximation. It is
as if their very existence were perpetually in suspension. They want to
exist all at once and right away. They do not want acquired opinions, they
want them to be innate; since they are afraid of reasoning, they want to
adopt a mode of life which reasoning and research play but a subordinate
role, in which one never seeks but that which one has already found, in
which one never becomes other than what one already was ....
He considers himself an average man, modestly average, and in the
last analysis a mediocre person.... He is afraid of any kind of
solitude ... he is the man of the mob: no matter how short he is, he still
takes the precaution of stooping for fear of standing out from the herd
and of finding himself face to face with himself.57
In conclusion, education towards an authentic personality in the two
meanings discussed here, strives to revive and reconstruct in students the
feeling of the "original and singular I" which in our times is constantly
exposed to pressure and temptations to denigrate itself before the great
authorities of religion, state, ideology, science and technology, bureaucracy,
majority opinion, the "boss," tradition and routine. It cultivates in the
individual the belief to give his life meaning that is singular to him; to pave
his road in life for himself, through freedom and responsibility; to produce
the content of his life through self-motivation and self-nourishment; to
develop original perspectives and modes of expression; and to preserve
compatibility between the contents of his inner world and the modes of his
public behavior.
The value of this kind of quality of personality for the development of
human culture is self-evident: it enriches life with insights, meanings and
sensitivities, which would be difficult to expect of the opposite of an
authentic personality - of an artificial and false or routine and banal person,
who evades his human designation to actualize his singularity and shape his
image. The point of departure of the educator towards authenticity is that
"there is no more detestable and empty creature in nature than the man who
runs away form his daimon [Genius], and then casts furtive glances right,
left, backwards and all around. One can no longer seize hold of such a man,
for he is all exterior without any core.,,58 The educator towards authentic
57 Sartre,
"Portrait of the anti-Semite," pp.329-335.

Schopenhauer as an Educator, p. 2-3.
58 Nietzsche,
104
Chapter II
personality must say to his student that "one repays a teacher badly if one
always remains nothing but a pupil," and that "no one can build a bridge on
which you must cross the river of life, no one but you alone."s9 However,
educators must not only arouse and encourage young people to pave their
own unique path in life, but also challenge them that the path they chose will
be their source of dignity and pride from the point of view of its content and
value. Without this stipulation, that ties the authentic and the subjective to
the objective and universal, we may be left with the nihilistic position
according to which everything is equally good and beautiful and just as long
as the individual's choice was authentic - a position that has no place in the
intellectual and ethical framework of humanistic education.
4. THE WAYS OF HUMANISTIC EDUCATION

The transition from a discussion on the essence and goals of education to
a discussion of the ways and forms of realization and implementation is
difficult. The test of theoretical statements is first and foremost in the sphere
of abstract ideas, while the test of principles that guide educational practice
is first and foremost in concrete reality. In such situations it is only natural
that the gap between the content of words and the quality of action comes
into the limelight.
Philosophers of education, as education theorists find themselves
immersed in a problem similar to that of the philosopher and esthetician: like
the philosopher, the lover of wisdom who envies the wise man for his real
wisdom, and like the esthetician, in whose words tries to characterize the
beauty which artists create and bring into the world, the philosopher of
education, who excels in outlining educational programs and building
educational bridges, is in most cases left behind, gazing in admiration at the
skilled educator marching confidently forward - navigating through syllabi
and crossing bridges - towards the promised land. In the spirit of Aristotle's
words on the wisdom of action (presented in Chapter One), words will
always fail to explain the how of the good dancer, the skilled skier, the
successful military commander or the talented educator. This is the art of the
total organism, that recruits a variety of its skills - sensory, motoric, rational,
emotional simulatory - and orchestrates them at the right measure and
appropriate harmony in time and place, for well-skilled and successful
practice. Therefore, again in the spirit of Aristotle, good education is
education performed by the good educator. On the other hand, without the
citations are from Nietzsche: the first is taken from Thus Spoke Zarathustra, p.
190; the second from Schopenhauer as an Educator, p. 4.
59 Both
105
theoretical categories with which educational theorists equip us, we would

not know what to look for, not to mention the fact that we would not be able
to locate and identify the qualities that make an educator "good," and
distinguish him or her from their lesser colleagues.
In the most general terms we can say that the basic characteristics of the
teacher-educator worthy of the name comprise broad education and erudition
in the field of teaching that enable him or her to place this knowledge in a
broad intellectual and ethical context. These consist of a caring attitude,
openness and respect for the students and an interest in their development
and wellbeing; an aspiration towards quality and development in the diverse
spheres of life and the ability to inspire the students with this aspiration; a
didactical and pedagogical ability to inculcate knowledge and develop moral
virtues and life skills; and of course, teachers who in their speech and
manners will constitute examples of humanistic values and virtues.
With the same degree of generality we will suggest here the
characteristics of the graduate of classical humanistic education: from the
intellectual perspective, he or she will be endowed with curiosity and
intellectual flexibility, open-mindedness and broad horizons, skills of
distinction and reasoning, and rational, autonomous, critical, interpretive and
creative thinking. From the social perspective, it is important that he or she
be characterized by love of his/her fellow men and women, courtesy,
honesty and decency, a sense of justice and sensitivity to the needs of the
other, as well as involved caring and responsible solidarity in the community
and society. From the intra-personal point of view we must strive towards a
graduate who excels in sincere, sensitive and demanding caring for the
nature and identity of his or her personality as it is manifested both in his
relationship with others and with himself.
These are but several clarifications on the in-principle possibilities and
limitations of any discussion of the educational endeavor, and the
presentation of a general outline of the concrete goals towards which we
should guide our actions. We will now deal with several principles raised in
the theoretical discussion, but which demand additional clarification vis-avis the modes of their application.
(a) A Balanced Combination Between Approaches and Goals

The first principle is a balanced combination between the four humanistic
approaches and the three principal goals of education reviewed above, in
which time, place and the student and teacher population should be taken
into account in all cases. The basic insight upon which this principle rests is
that similar to the art of life that demands the correct balance between
emotion and mind, family and career, physicality and spirituality, the art of
106
Chapter II
education also requires us to critically examine the widest variety of

elements and resources that will be at our disposal, and interweaving them in
such a way that they will maximally advance the student (in terms and
directions of the humanistic approach presented above). Hence, in the spirit
of the classical approach, it is important to bring the students into an
encounter with the best assets of human culture, cultivate their pedagogical
eros towards the most sublime, develop their spiritual skills, and encourage
them towards idealism and moral commitment. All this, however, must be
done by "infecting" them with the sensitivity and passion of the radical
approach - so that they will not be blinded by sterile and alienated elitism
from seeing the profusion of falsity, oppression and injustice in our everyday
existence. An additional example should be given in this context, and here
perhaps is the place to learn something from John Keating, the teacher in
The Dead Poets Society, that the way to the apex of culture must also pass
through the heart and soul 'of the student: if romantic and existential insights
into the autonomous and authentic involvement of the entire personality, are
not taken into account, we will reap misery instead of happiness, and recited,
indifferent knowledge, alienated from both man and society, instead of
rational and sensitive wisdom of life.
Further examples of the principle of the balanced combination will clarify
the necessary interweaving between the ultimate goals of quality of culture,
autonomous and critical thinking and authentic personality. The basic insight
in this matter is that culture devoid of individualism is sterile and uninspired,
and that individualism devoid of cultural content is empty and of little value.
Let us imagine a guitarist like Eric Clepton who seeks to improvise on a
well-known theme: equipped with musical knowledge and skills, his
individualistic improvisation will lead the music to new, unique and
wondrous realms. However, lacking the appropriate cultural basis, the
sounds of this spontaneous creativity may yield discordant and worthless
"nonsense." This is something like students in a classroom: one must strive
to cultivate a "cultural growth medium" for all students, so that their souls
will be sufficiently mature and fertile for absorbing the most subtle and
complex of the manifestation of the human spirit. It further requires to enrich
their consciousness with insights and sensitivities, in order that they will
serve them as "litmus papers" for making sense of experience.
We should not, however, be satisfied with "acculturated" students whose
statements always express what the consensus wants to hear. A student who
does not analyze and interpret what he studies in an autonomous and critical
way, who does not seek to shatter social convention and cultural myths, who
does not at times rebel against the abyss that lies between reality and what is
worthy should be cultivated and empowered in such a way that his
statements, choices and actions will express his independent and critical
107
opinion. A student whose modes of action are both cultured and

autonomous, but who tends to derogate the unique "inner grammar" of his
personality before official and public language - for him one must develop
intimate educational spaces in which he will dare to say directly: I think, I
feel, I prefer, I chose myself, express myself, respect myself and ask you too
to respect me as I respect you. Of course balance is also important in the
opposite case; namely, in those cases in which "super" autonomous,
authentic and spontaneous students trample, with their egocentric or
narcissistic individualism, any cultural criteria of knowledge, logic and
courtesy. These students should be shown explicitly, courteously but
decisively, that not "anything goes" and one cannot be tolerant of
everything, and that their individualism would be more powerful and
significant if they would only bother to charge it with a grain of culture.
(b) Between Orientation and Information

The second principle is related to the proper combination of ideas and
values, that constitute a frame of reference or a network of coordinates for
guiding thought and practice, and mastery of knowledge and skills that
enables us to skillfully and successfully follow the path we have chosen. The
essence of this principle, so it seems to me, is embodied in the following
statements: "Where there is no vision, the people perish," (Proverbs, 29: 18)
or in Neil Postman's contemporary assertion that "if education has no end it
will come to its end.,,60 In Nietzsche's words that "scholarship that is not
guided and limited by higher maxims of education" can "barbarize men just
as much as a hatred of knowledge'{" in Whitehead's critique on the
deterioration of modem education from direction towards humanistic
idealism to satisfaction with the mastery of "text-book knowledge of
subjects"62; and in T.S. Eliot's questioning lament in his poem "The Rock"
"Where is the wisdom we have lost for Knowledge? Where is the knowledge
we "have lost for information?"
These statements express the basic idea we discussed earlier in relation to
the worldviews of Plato, Aristotle and George Bernard Shaw: the value of
both theoretical and practical knowledge should be measured not only within
the spheres of knowledge, but also in the cultural and ethical trends it serves.
Put differently, the blessing and curse of science and technology are always
Postman, in "Education is in Need of a Vision not Technology" and in "The End of
Education."
61 Nietzsche, Schopenhauer as an Educator, p. 10 and Philosophy in the Tragic Age of
the Greeks, pp. 30-31.
62 Whitehead, The Aims ofEducation, ch.3.
60
108
Chapter II
embedded in the use we make of them, no less than in the potential they put
at our disposal. We find explicit examples of this in the use of science and
technology for advancing the well-being of man, side by side with their
destructive and annihilating usage, and in Dr. Schweitzer's use of medicine
for saving life side by side with the use made by Dr. Mengele for its
destruction and distortion.
Against this background, humanistic educators and teachers should
cultivate in themselves and in their students the understanding that science
and technology will never be able to serve as a substitute for philosophy and
ethics; that it is a dangerous illusion to assume that technology in general
and computers in particular can address the basic human questions. The
science of physics does not include laws about the correct usage of its
powers, technology is indifferent to the ethical results of its actions, and the
computer is a complete idiot in all matters related to the autonomous and
ethical examination of the goals it serves. It performs the tasks its creators
programmed it to do with wondrous technical efficiency.
Hence we can learn three things: (1) humanistic education should be
valued in terms of the human quality of life and not by conversancy in
spheres of knowledge; (2) the intellectual quality appropriate to the
actualization of this goal is wisdom (as the art of employing knowledge for
advancing Man's development and well-being) and not knowledge or
information; (3) humanistic education in this spirit mandates continuous and
critical occupation with the general orientation of things - from the point of
view of social context, intellectual meanings and ethical implications of the
knowledge gained. Ignoring these insights and diminishing the place of
intellectual and moral education at schools will increase the disasters that
humanity has experienced in the zo" century: extermination and oppression
of millions of human beings (in the name of religious and ideological ideals),
systematic damage to the natural world (by greed that feeds on nature
instead of with it and next to it), the cultural deprivation of broad strata of
the population (by perpetuating their poverty and ignorance), the dwarfing of
the humanity of so many people and reducing them to conveyor-belt and
consumer functions (by propaganda and advertising in the mass media,
which are directed towards perpetuating the spiritual poverty of the
individual and relegating him to the lowest common denominator).
(c) Educational Climate

The third principle (in the practice of education) relates to the educational
climate desirable in the school. The key points are amiability, human
dignity, taking needs into account and a promise of the good. In the physical
aspect of the structure, classrooms, and open spaces, schools should
109
"broadcast humanity" in its size and design: it should serve as a space for
activity for the community of teachers and students (and to a certain extent
for parents as well), a space that enables individual safety, an esthetic
atmosphere, a home and communal feeling, familiarity, group and
interpersonal learning and social encounters, areas delineated for individual
work and areas designed for games and alleviating stress. In any event, large
buildings, similar to prisons or industrial buildings (and there are still many
of this kind), that give an atmosphere of functional, cold and alienated
massiveness, should be avoided.
The human-social facade is no less important: if we wish to make the
young caring, amiable and fair, then we should provide them with a social
culture that reflects, in actuality, these very human qualities. One should
ensure that students feel wanted on a daily basis, from the moment they enter
the school area: a warm, empathic, inviting and accepting "Good morning" face-to-face and with a personal intention - is the basic vocabulary of a
humanistic social climate. This humanity, as an interpersonal means of
contact should also pass the test of demands and confrontation: the ultimate
challenge of the humanistic teacher is to impart to his student the belief that
he, the educator, is there for him, and that beyond any criticism, grade or
punishment, this educator has the good of his student in mind, as a purpose
and value in itself. We should ensure that the student feels that always and in
every situation - besides the demands for quality of thinking, endeavor and
creativity - his environment follows him and attends him with human
tenderness and unconditional sympathetic caring. He must be confident that
even if he falls and fails, there will be someone who will take care of him so
that he does not disintegrate, so he does not break down, and that he has not
been abandoned.
Demands or expectations of students are an integral part of the
educational climate, if only because possibility of enjoying the rights and
goods by some are a consequence of commitments and demands that others
have directed towards themselves in their relationships with others. By
demands and commitments - directed towards teachers and students alike - I
mean first and foremost human relationships characterized by equality and
decency, open-mindedness and tolerance, attentive and supportive dialogical
relationships. It also implies freedom of expression and the right to be
different, common responsibility for the atmosphere and practices, and the
avoidance of any harm or injury to individuals and the community. The
importance of fulfilling these commitments is twofold: it imparts habits of
thinking and behavior that join forces and are transformed into a moral
character, and it posits necessary conditions for the existence of a learning,
moral and pluralistic community. In the absence of these conditions, students
110
Chapter II
may be deprived of their basic rights and of the possibility of attaining selfactualization and individual well-being.
(d) The Curriculum

In light of the definition of humanistic education presented above, we
should regard the curriculum (the fourth principle) as one of the main means
of developing and actualizing the student's personality, reinforcing an
enlightened democratic society, and making students active partners in the
assets of national and human culture. Guided by the four educational
approaches and the three ultimate goals discussed above, the preferable
curriculum should clearly be of an integrative, rather than an extremist or
uni-directional, nature. At the basis of every humanistic school curriculum
should be a basic compulsory curriculum directed towards cultivating all the
humanistic elements and values discussed earlier. This compulsory
curriculum will be spread over approximately 14 years of schooling (from
kindergarten through high school graduation) and perhaps over 17 years,
thus including B.A. studies in the institutions of higher education.
The curriculum may be organized in various ways, but in all cases it
should adhere to two principles: generality and choice, or in the opposite
order - choice in the framework of boundaries. The principle of generality
relates to the fact that students must be exposed to a wide variety of spheres
of knowledge in order to enable multi-faceted development of their
personality and capacities for rationality and sensibility. These acquired
qualities would enable them to make the best of their lives and enjoy its
cultural assets, and so that they will be citizens who are involved in society
in an informed and critical way. In this context one may think of the
"paedeia curriculum" presented by Mortimer Adler, which comprises three
learning clusters - science and mathematics, the social sciences together
with history and geography, and the humanities subjects including language
and art. 63
We can also use the division proposed by Paul Hirst - into mathematics,
the natural sciences, the social sciences, history, philosophy, religion,
literature and art." The curriculum can also include, in the spirit of our
times, the new literacies: linguistic, numerical, technological and computer,
scientific, cultural-historical, philosophical-critical, health, moral-political,
humanistic-artistic, and social-communicational literacy (see the extensive
discussion on literacy in Chapter Four). The principle of generality
(according to the holistic approach) also implies that the curriculum must
63
64
Adler, The Paideia Proposal.

Hirst, "Liberal Education and the Nature of Knowledge."
nt
challenge and activate the full spectrum of human skills, sensitivities and
knowledge: as accumulated knowledge of reality, as thinking strategies and
creative skills, as theoretical insight and practical wisdom, as ethical
sensitivity and a sense of proportion and tact, as esthetical discernment and
refined taste - as intelligences in the verbal, logical, spatial, musical, plastic
arts, emotional, social, interpersonal, technical, etc., spheres.
With regard to the principle of choice, it is designed to enable a certain
degree of freedom without which learning will be purely mechanical and
devoid of relevancy, interest and personal involvement. Choice will be
manifested in openness and flexibility towards tendencies and preferences of
communities, schools, teachers and students on three levels: in emphases,
content and ways. The emphases level relates to a certain flexibility in
measure, while allowing the broadening of selected study spheres; content
relates to a certain openness about subjects, works or periods which will be
taught de facto; ways relates to the fact that the most efficient way of study
should be adjusted to each student according to his or her ability and
inclinations (for example, everyone will be obliged to study the natural
sciences, literature, art, history and civics, but within these frameworks
variance and flexibility should be allowed in accordance with learners'
individual or cultural uniqueness).
(e) Connective and Communicative Teaching or the Tree of

Knowledge as the Tree ofLife
The fifth principle denotes the singular character of humanistic learning
and constitutes a kind of conclusion or summary of the idea that has been the
leitmotif from the beginning of Chapter One: in the review of the theoretical
approaches, normative definitions, the three ultimate goals, and the practical
principles of pedagogy. By this I mean the idea that humanistic education is
first and foremost the development ofthe human spirit and a training for the
art of life - directed towards full and successful actualization of every
individual's personality, and closely linked to the most sublime, both in the
individual's personality and in human culture. Thus in the first two chapters
we have seen a refusal to adhere to a single defined theoretical conception
(thus relinquishing other alternatives) or to accept the devaluation of the
humanistic ideal, reducing it from "full humanity at its best" to erudition,
education, justice, beauty or any other single component that is unique and
specific to the human race. The clear message of humanistic education is that
through the entire process of education (or formal education at least), from
kindergarten through high school and the initial stages of academic studies,
the acquisition of knowledge should not be regarded as the supreme goal and
certainly not an exclusive one. We should regard it not as an end to itself but
112
Chapter II
as an important means for the overall and multi-faceted nurturing of the

student's personality, in order to bring him closer to a meaningful, good and
honorable human life. In other words, in the framework of humanistic
education we must regard the Tree ofKnowledge as the Tree ofLife both for
those being educated andfor society as a whole.
Most significantly we have seen in the works of Socrates, Aristotle,
Montaigne, Spinoza, Mill, Nietzsche, Whitehead and Dewey an overall
tendency to view education's most significant test in overall human
excellence, well-being, spiritual strength, self-actualization and personal
growth - each of them according to his own worldview and style. In each of
these examples, however, their intention was not merely an accumulation of
knowledge but rather a certain ideal of overall human vitality and excellence
that combines the qualitative-objective element with the experientialsubjective one.
As we have seen earlier, Aristotle states explicitly that his interest lies in
the proper way toward a profound and successful human life, thus implying
that our main concern with matters of morality and education should be not
for the purpose of knowing how to speak of them eloquently, but in order to
be moral and wise. In the 16th century, it was Montaigne who viewed with
contempt the learned scholars whose erudition gave them neither vitality nor
wisdom. Spinoza, in the 17th century, believed that learning was a means for
Man's actualization of his unique nature and for the extension of his
happiness. Mill, in the 19th century, considered the combination of maximal
development of personality and maximal extension of overall happiness as
the supreme goal. Nietzsche, also in the 19th century, stated that "I hate
everything which merely instructs me without increasing or directly
quickening my activity," and longed for the day when "artistic energies and
the practical wisdom of life will join with scientific thinking to form a higher
organic system. ,,65 Whitehead and Dewey, both 20th century thinkers, argued
against the inertial erudition which lies worthless in our consciousness and
neither contributes to nor yields any benefit for the individual or society.
From this we may posit that humanistic education cannot be identified
with any sphere of learning other than human life itself, with all its rich
strata and facets - with human experience per se and its multitude of aspects
and avenues as a broad human repertoire that offers the free and creative
spirit life materials with which to build itself. In other words, the heart of the
matter is a longing for humanistic knowledge that is wisdom in the art of
life: in the words of Ecclesiastes, a longing for wisdom that "giveth life to
them that have it" (Ecclesiastes 7:12); in Terence's famous aphorism, "I am
The first citation is from On the Advantage and Disadvantage ofHistory for Life,
Preface; the second is from The Gay Science, sec. 113.
6S
113
a man, I count nothing human foreign to me"; in the words of Faust, who
seeks: "Whatever to all mankind is assured! I, in my inmost being, will enjoy
and know/ Seize with my soul the highest and most deep/ Men's weal and
woe upon my bosom heap/ And thus this self of mine to all their selves
expanded, Like them I too at last be stranded.T" And we find this spirit
again in the words of the first godless prophet, Zarathustra, who longs for a
noble soul: "for the soul that has the longest ladder and reaches down
deepest ... the most comprehensive soul, which can run and stray and roam
farthest within itself...the soul which, in having being, dives into
becoming ... the soul which flees itself and catches up with itself in the
widest circle.,,67
This kind of learning, which is not measured by disciplinary yardsticks
but by the art of life, must touch all of personality: it must significantly and
experientially combine the objective layers of life with subjective
interpretation and meaning and create a new existential truth. Dewey called
this kind of learning an educative experience, but it seems to me that the
term does not fully elucidate the desired goal. It may well be that we should
speak in terms of "experinsight" (experiential insights or insightful
experiences) as humanistic education's basic educative units. What is meant
by this is a kind of insight through which a facet or basic element of the
human prototype found in each of us becomes clear to us; in which truths
essential to a life-style or the spirit of the times are revealed; in which
longings and meanings and goals of the soul's deepest strata are revealed
and manifested in conceptual, metaphorical, plastic or other symbolic forms.
These insights affect us, modify our perceptual framework and the ways in
which we think, give us new eyes and open windows onto new realities and
meanings, excite and deeply penetrate us, at times generating a prolonged
silence, trembling or sweating, and leave us slightly different, knowing
ourselves differently in the world.
Let us take, for example, historical knowledge (we might as well take
geographical knowledge, as did Saint-Exupery in the encounter between the
Little Prince and the learned geographer who never left his planet). We can
learn and become familiar with dates, institutions and prominent
66Goethe,Faust, "Study," part 2.
67Nietzsche Thus Spoke Zarathustra, p. 320-321. This perception of knowledge of life also
appears in The Gay Science, sec. 382, "Whoever has a soul that craves to have experienced
the whole range of values and desiderata to date ...whoever wants to know from the
adventures of his own most authentic experience how a discoverer and conqueror of the ideal
feels, and also an artist, a saint, a legislator, a sage, a scholar, a pious man, a soothsayer, and
one who stands divinely apart in the old style - needs one thing above everything else: the
great health."
114
Chapter II
personalities; we may also become experts in processes and trends; but how
can we (more or less) experience the spirit of the times? We can, for
example, learn about the technological advances of the modem era, and do
so in technical terms; but we can also experience history in the making. We
can, for example, join a wagon-driver on his wooden-wheeled cart, and
perhaps even the neighborhood watermelon man in his rubber-tired cart and during this very ride, try to feel, smell and sense, sit and listen. We can
then do the same thing - sit and listen attentively - in an old-fashioned bus
(still found in the country-sides of third world countries) and sense the
vibrations of the motor chugging along, and the jerks and bounces when the
driver changes gear, take in the noises, sounds, music, crowdedness, talking
and relationships that take place on the bus and between its passengers.
Finally, we should sit and listen in the spaceship-like bus in one of those
highly developed countries, and listen to the mechanical smoothness, human
silence, the melody of the automatic shift, and the atmosphere of modem
humanity. It is through such sensual, emotional, and cognitive impressions
accumulated in the above three different experiences that a true and
profound historical understanding is formed.
Justice and injustice, love and friendship, beauty, generosity, vitality,
death and bereavement - how can we know these stuffs of life from the
inside? Not verbally or numerically, but in a seemingly personal way, as if
we are swimming in the "lake of the symbolized" itself. There is no answer
other than making students part of the drama of life, which the humanistic
educator should attempt to generate in the classroom. Experiencing justice,
for example, is possible by reviving the Prophet Isaiah and Reverend Martin
Luther King, and through the contexts, facts and words, kindle the students'
thoughts, arouse their emotional distress and mobilize their cognition, move
their interpretive imagination and moral conscience towards coalescence into
a concrete statement relating to themselves and their community.
Experiencing old age, which is not only geriatric but also always tragic, is
also possible through an encounter with King Lear's hubris of old age that
impaired his judgment, turning good into bad and bad into good'"; and with
the Duke of Gloucester in his dotage, whose eyes were finally opened only
when they were plucked out, and only then could he truly differentiate
between his disloyal and loyal sons'"; and with Israeli poet David Avidan,
who so wanted to escape old age since "An old man, what does his life hold
for him ... what do his mornings hold ... what does his evening? No king, he
will fall on no sword.,,70 Experiencing the anxieties of death and sorrow and
Shakespeare, King Lear.
Ibid, ibid.
70 Avidan, A Sudden Evening.
68
69
Integrative and Normative Mode/for Humanistic Education
"5
bereavement is possible (in Israel, for example) through the poet T. Carmi
on his deathbed, who understands that he is nothing other than "terminal,"
and must notify all his friends that cancer is consuming his body which will
soon become a corpse; namely "A jackal besiege my home/ hasn't wiped the
mucus from his nose/ nor wiped its wet claws/ No ring, No greeting! coming
at dawn! its belly distended from howling! its eyes dripping night.':"
One can also experience the human anxieties about the horrors of war,
through the mother who rejects the logic of all wars, since it means "finding
myself one day on a road with my house in ruins, and my boy dead in my
anns.,,72 It can likewise be experience by the shock of post-war bereavement,
through the poet Yehuda Amichai, who meets Mr. Beringer, who "lost the
weight of his son who fell on the Suez Canal front.,,73 And we can equally
experience the cruel truth of unrequited love and deep despair at the
graveside, through despondent Margaret who as a result of a forbidden love
lost mother, brother and son, and now her lover estranges himself from her.
Then she tells him: "The best place give to my mother/ And close beside her
my brother/ Me a little to one side/ A space - but not too wide!/ And put the
little one here on my right breast! No one else will lie beside me!/ Ah, in
your arms to nestle and hide mel That was a sweet, a lovely bliss!/ But now,
much as I try, it seems to go amiss/ It seems to me as if I must force myself
on you and you thrust me back, and yet it's you, so kind, so good to see.?" It
is the curriculum of life, guided journeys through the realms of the human
soul; images and metaphors that broaden and extend our lexicon of life and
enrich our repertoire in ways of being human (and their cost as well).
The meaning and credibility of this kind of example - of this type of
human truths - stems from the fact that our encounter with them causes the
reader to encounter himself and his world: our very gazing into the sights of
the human spirit embodied in philosophical texts and works of art causes
something latent and obscure in our consciousness to be discovered and
clarified. With such existential insights, says Maxine Greene," the educator
motivates his students to go beyond what is taken for granted and the
humdrum of day-to-day reality - from the vulgarity of the city, industry and
trade, from indifference to suffering and wrongdoing, from the sacred cows
and cultural myths, from the lies of life and politicians' deceit, and from the
penetration of technology and bureaucracy into all of life's strata. By
addressing the student's freedom and stimulating his consciousness with
alternative perceptions and facts - about what is not but can still be - the
T., Poems and Images under Duress.
Sartre, The Reprieve, p.89
73 Amichai, Elegy, p.87.
74 Goethe, F'aust, "Prison."
7S Greene, "Literature, Existentialism and Education," p. 76.
71 Carmi,
72
116
Chapter II
educator seeks to assist the pupil in breaching the banality of quotidian life
and through the cracks and fissures thus created enable him to see reality in a
new light, define himself within it, again and again anew, by according it his
own interpretation, meaning and value.
My task, says the educator to those learning the skills of life, is "to make
you feel - it is before all to make you see. That - and no more, and it is
everything. If I succeed, you shall find there according to your desserts:
encouragement, consolation, fear, charm - all you demand - and, perhaps,
also that glimpse of truth for which you have forgotten to ask.,,76 No doubt
not all examples and sights are relevant to all people: there is a certain
nucleus of the classics whose power lies in actualities that go beyond time
and place, and there are works of art that build themselves roads to groups
and individuals who have specific characteristics. In light of this situation,
the great challenge for the humanistic educator is to know how to select
those examples through which he will succeed in generating experiential
insights in his students. It is the ability to present to his students, and through
them, life dramas and realms of life that will arouse the full mobilization of
their senses and talents, will leave them with rational, emotional and ethical
impressions and will ultimately effect the meaningful learning of the entire
personality. We will call this educative activity, which renders the Tree of
Knowledge the Tree of Life, connective teaching (between fields of
knowledge, value judgments, cultural ties and personal experience) and
communicative teaching (as a dialogue between teacher-educator and the
student's direct world of experience).
Connective teaching is marked by its employing inter-disciplinary and
multi-dimensional learning in order to establish meaningful humanistic
learning. The inter-disciplinary approach is currently accepted in teaching
and learning: it combines, for example, Bible, geography and history studies
in order to render a complete, multi-directional picture of specific events' in
the ancient Eastern world. By the same token it combines geography,
biology and ecology in order to learn about the state of nature in a specific
region. And as I demonstrated earlier, it can combine geriatrics, literature
and philosophy in order to comprehensively "know old age."
Multi-dimensionality adds another layer: an approach that seeks to view
the studied issues as problematical and challenging on the extra-disciplinary
dimensions as well - on the value and interpretive dimensions as they
coalesce in social and individual consciousness, i.e., how all "these things"
affect me, are relevant to my life, blend into my cultural vision, my
weltanschauung, my personal life plans, and the place they should be
allotted in public and individual priorities. Multi-dimensionality seeks to add
76
Ibid, ibid.
"7
the actual, political and existential, to the curriculum. The value of the
Prophet Isaiah can also be found in opening students' eyes to abuse and evil
around them and in "kindling" in them the flame of his admonition against
the corruption that took over the regime (and this is almost always true). The
value of American history is also in critical awareness of the gap between a
glorious constitution and oppressive slavery, between national slogans and
avaricious and murderous imperialism. And the value of the civics lesson is
also in its success in arousing dismay regarding the image (for example) of
the State of Israel as "the only democracy in the Middle East," in light of the
fact that for over thirty years it has occupied territories, ruling over
approximately three million Palestinians who have no human or civil rights.
It is certainly not out of place to emblazon the question on the escutcheon of
advanced technology - is this really progress?
Communicative teaching is a bridge, the spiritual highway, merging the
realms of consciousness, turning the distant and foreign into the close and
familiar. It is the outstretching of a pedagogical hand to freeing and
gathering the ends of the thread, from the teacher to the student and from the
student to the teacher, in order to rise to loftier realms, to a more lucid,
comprehensive and farsighted vision. The teacher has no other way of
reaching his students but by openly and sensitively becoming closer to their
concrete world and routine daily life - their language, images, desires, selfimage and all their other personal and cultural life materials. As we stated
earlier (in relation to Rogers, Maslow and Buber), the way to the student
must be dialogical and directed to his complete personality. This is what
happened in cinematic pedagogies such as Dead Poets Society and Les
Liaisons Dangereuses, in which the ways to development and educating
were paved from the students' concrete and authentic realities of life; and
more important, this is what numerous educators actually do in the
classroom and on street corners.
Here the humanistic educator is in need of a rare talent: to be

simultaneously "multi-cultural" and send out sensitive sensors
towards many and different people, adapt his image to changing
situations, and at the same time maintain unity and integrity within the
variant and the ever-changing. Such educators are required to possess
the ability to be empathic, to have a discerning eye, tact and the ability
to tempt, while being critically alert to the corruptive element of
manipulative temptation. They need, in the language of the wellknown image, a flexible key to the souls of many and different
children. In the spirit of Plato's parable of the cave, we must always
imagine them in action: on their way to their students and on their
elevating march with their students - creating, changing and
118
Chapter II
reconstructing educational communicational channels for building the

materials of "full humanity at its best."
Chapter III
EDUCATION TOWARDS HUMANISTIC
MORALITY IN AN ERA OF VALUE CRISIS
By three things is the world sustained: by truth, by justice and by peace.
Simeon ben Gamliel
Where I could not be honest, I never yet was valiant.
Shakespeare
. The highest good ofthose who follow virtue is common to all, and therefore
all can equally rejoice therein. .
Spinoza
The philosophers have only interpreted the world in various ways, the point,
however, is to change it
Marx
The important thing is not, as yet, to go to the root ofthings, but the world
being what it is, to know how to live in it.
Camus
1. POINT OF DEPARTURE
In this chapter I seek to present an outline of a conception of moral
education that expresses the spirit and principles of the humanistic
worldview, and to locate it in our daily and concrete reality - in a period
which due to its modem-post-modem characteristics is termed by many, "an
era of value crisis." I do not wish to reinvent the wheel of morality or
presume to have devised far-reaching innovations in my method of moral
education, but rather to somewhat refurbish some of its components and
integrate them into new orders and structures so that the "morality wagon"
will be suitable to the present day and will efficiently serve us in the
domains of moral education.
Despite my modest goal, the challenge is of the utmost importance:
restoring vitality and meaning to the discourse of morality, to which on the
one hand (almost) everyone accords supreme importance (therefore
incessantly argues about its role in the formation of the image of the
individual and society), while on the other, (almost) everyone regards it as
119
120
Chapter III
lacking objective foundations, as if it is all a matter of personal taste, thus

rendering it sterile, superfluous and burdensome. I therefore believe that
success in enriching the moral discussion with vitality and meaning can
contribute to the most practical matters with which those dealing with the
educational endeavor and teaching have to cope, day in and day out.
Since we usually ground the majority of our arguments in the discourse
on morality on some primary principles - beliefs, values, intuitions and
assumptions regarding the nature of humankind - it is crucial from the outset
to openly assume them; in other words, we should present the primary
principles that will serve us as the central axes of our discussion.
"Showing our hand" at the outset is not only logically and technically
important (as a strategy for developing arguments), but also bears ethical
importance as it expresses a commitment to critical consciousness and
intellectual integrity. It manifests the idea that no moral position is engraved
in stone, but is rather the result of human thought and creation. It further
suggests that "no person speaks from nowhere," but rather from an affinity
to a certain philosophical or cultural tradition, and that all progress in ethical
discourse mandates a basic agreement on 'the part of the participants
regarding certain basic principles related both to content (such as the sanctity
of life and the equality of the value of humankind) and form (such as
freedom of expression and the obligation to provide reasoning). With regard
to the primary principles per se, which I seek to accept as the basic
assumptions for the entire discussion, these are grounded in the
weltanschauung that was presented in the previous chapter, and comprise (1)
a humanistic worldview; (2) a democratic approach, with regard to the
desirable political order; (3) an enlightened intellectual approach towards the
pursuit of truth and resolution of social disputes.
(1) As we have seen in the previous chapter the humanistic worldview
maintains that the development, well-being and dignity of human beings
should be regarded as the ultimate goal of human thinking and endeavor. It
regards human beings as free individuals who establish their own world and
are responsible for their destiny, and accords to all people unconditional and
equal self-value, as free, thinking, moral, creative and singular entities. As a
worldview it also aspires to social justice grounded in the sanctity of human
life, equality before the law and equal opportunity, the love of humankind,
respect for individual freedom, and solidarity between people and nations.
(2) The democratic approach is not confined, as many erroneously tend
to think, to "majority rule." If we were to seek short and succinct
formulations, it would be better to use the literal meaning of "government of
the people," to take Lincoln's famous statement that democracy is the
"government of the people, by the people and for the people," or the
statement (which I like best) that democracy is the government offree and
Education towards Humanistic Morality
121
equal citizens who form together - in manners that are fair, pluralistic and
tolerant - the character and customs of their society. In our context it is
important to examine the necessary characteristics of contemporary liberal
and pluralistic democracy: (a) the source of the legitimacy and authority of
government is the citizens of the state; (b) all society's adults are free
citizens who enjoy human and political rights; (c) periodic free elections are
held under this regime; (d) government policy is determined by majority
decisions made by the elected representatives of the people (when the
majority does not have the right to impair the three previous principles).
(3) An enlightened intellectual approach is characterized first by
inquisitiveness,
open-mindedness, broad-mindedness,
critical
and
autonomous thinking, pluralism and tolerance. It has its foundations in an
awareness that truth has numerous facets and variations, that no belief or
position is resistant to error, that all human beings have the right to believe
in their own truth and justice and act towards their personal fulfillment. It
further implies that, on the one hand, no person or group should be permitted
to hold a monopoly over what is true, just and proper, while on the other,
scientific research and ethical discourse should be conducted with openness,
by employing a rational and critical approach, and a willingness to resolve
disagreements on the basis of the most valid knowledge at our disposal at
any given time.
These three primary principles were not chosen by chance. They express,
as they were presented at length in the two previous chapters, the humanistic
and democratic ideals that constituted the main social contracts of modem
times: the United States "Declaration of Independence," in the French
"Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen," and in the United
Nations "Universal Declaration of Human Rights" and "Declaration of the
Rights of the Child. These historical facts have particular relevance to our
discussion.
In order to succeed in advancing moral education it is not enough that we
think that our basic principles are defensible per se on a purely moral basis,
but there should also be wide agreement on the part of the public and a
willingness to cooperate. In other words, the fact that the principles of
humanism, democracy and enlightenment have been accorded high rank
among the community of nations over the years, will on the one hand
facilitate their being accepted as the central axes and delineating boundaries
of my proposal vis-a-vis the image of desirable moral education in our times;
on the other hand it also constitutes certain support for my argument that any
racial, power-abusing or other position that a priori denies certain
populations equal opportunities for enjoying full and dignified human life,
should be disqualified as illegitimate.
122
Chapter III
2. THE SPHERE OF MORALITY AND ITS

MANIFESTATIONS IN EVERYDAY LIFE
In the Biblical Hebrew, the word "morality" - moosar - indicates
guidance, admonition and punishment, which are all directed towards the
inculcation, acquisition and fulfillment of the code of proper behavior.
Ethics, as a parallel concept in Ancient Greece (that acquired status and
usage in international language) denotes customs, habits and virtues that
characterize the character or the way of life of individuals or a specific
public. When we use these concepts today to characterize a specific group
such as the morality of Judaism or Protestant ethics, we mean the setup of
values and rules that shows members of a specific group the ways of proper
behavior in all matters pertaining to their inter-personal and social conduct.
But it is common knowledge that ethics is also something else - moral
philosophy and ethical theory. According to this meaning ethics indicates a
sphere of knowledge - in a philosophical framework - that methodically,
rationally and critically deals with the nature of the proper and desirable life
for humankind and the ways of attaining the just and humane organization of
social order.
Hence we learn that in the initial stages of our discussion we should
make the same differentiation that we made previously with regard to
education and culture: i.e., we should make a distinction between the factualneutral aspect in which the various ways of morality, devoid of gradation of
ethical judgment, are presented side by side on a lateral axis, and the
normative-judgmental-hierarchal aspect in which moral ways are gradated
on a vertical axis, in accordance with the degree of compatibility with the
objective criteria of moral quality.
This is easy to explain: the American philosopher Thoreau, who was
mentioned in the previous chapter in the context of autonomous thinking,
expressed his discontent at the fact that accepted morality in his time was
totally immoral, since it unquestionably condoned black slavery and the
conquest of Mexican territories. It is also worthy of note that the figure of
Levin, the moral protagonist in Tolstoy's Anna Karen ina, who cannot
concede to accepted morality vis-a-vis the exploitation and oppression of the
Russian serfs, and who, in the name of higher, absolute or objective moral
values, regarded it as his duty to free them and treat them with the respect
worthy of all humankind. There is no lack of examples in every culture at all
times. The important thing, however, is to be aware of the fact that in every
philosophical discussion of morality the objective is not to deliberate on the
nature of any given moral order and use it as a yardstick, but rather to rely on
the best knowledge and skills at our disposal, to move beyond what exists,
and form or legislate the principles for proper moral conduct.
123
We will embark on our voyage to the "morally proper" of normative

ethics with our basic human experience: we care about what happens to our
environment and us and the conscious expressions of this caring manifests
itself in our judgment of the nature and value of the events under discussion.
All of us - some more, some less - attribute importance to our human image,
our image as individuals and the nature of our behavior towards our fellow
men and women in the variety of communities in which we are members
(familial, communal, professional, religious, national, as well as
humankind). Or, in the spirit of the first chapter of this book, from the day
human beings become aware of themselves they are conscious of the fact
that their lives were shaped, and continue to be shaped, by numerous and
diverse factors - hereditary, psychological, cultural, linguistic, etc. - but
nothing in these can conceal from human beings the fact of their freedom
and responsibility for their relationship with themselves. Hence, we
challenge our being with existential questioning and wandering, such as:
what do I want to be when I grow up; what kind of son or daughter do I want
to be to my parents; and what kind of parent do I want to be to my children;
which objective will I set for myself in the framework of self-actualization,
and which "red lines" will I take care not to cross on the way to achieving
my objectives; how will I gain a good reputation among my friends and how
will I plan my actions so that in the future I will be able to look back with
pride and say to myself: I lived a beautiful, decent and worthy life.
There is nothing new in these statements. The same Ecclesiastes who said
"there is no new thing under the sun" is the same one who asked "see what
was that good for the sons of men, which they should do under the heaven
all the days of their life" (Ecclesiastes 2:3). In The Ethics of the Fathers, the
question is "Which is the right course that a man should choose for himself?
That which he feels to be honorable to himself, and which also brings him
honor from mankind." In Socrates' words, the main question involves the
"supreme virtue" that will . make the soul "as good as possible" and from
which "comes both money and all other good things for mankind, both in
private and in public."! Or as Aristotle pointed out: our search for what "is
fine and just," and for "the highest of all good achievable by action," will
enable us to be like "archers who have a mark to aim at, and more likely to
hit upon what is right.,,2 These are only a few of the examples to be found in
both the philosophical and literary works of all cultures, and in the daily
burden of freedom that seethes in every one of us as human beings.
This preoccupation of human beings with the individuals' overall proper
and worthy life, in directing their desires and actions according to what is
Apologia, p. 28-29.
Aristotle, Ethics, book I, 1-3.
1 Plato,
41
124
Chapter III
true and just, is what establishes the sphere of moral discourse we presented
earlier as ethics.' To the best of our knowledge this sphere is unique to
human beings and distinguishes between them and all other creatures living
on our planet. We will first clarify this point by indirect demonstration: a
raging storm that causes the death of hundreds of people and leaves
thousands homeless is not locked up behind bars; a snake that bites and kills
an innocent child who merely put out his hand to pick a piece of fruit is not
judged or censured; a female praying mantis that beheads its partner after it
impregnates her is not called an exploitive and murderous witch; and a lion
who lazes under a tree and sends his lioness off to hunt is not called a malechauvinist. We believe that animals have a primal instinctual nature and
inherent behavioral patterns, and in the words of the scorpion who, in the
middle of the river stung and killed the frog who was carrying it on its back
across the river (thus dooming itself to death) - nature is strongest of all (and
is what dictates animal actions and reactions).
Human beings are different. The fact that they are conscious of their selfawareness, their ability to logically and imaginatively examine the
implications of the actions of others, their freedom of choice and autonomy
in any given context and their willpower and self-restraint in the face of
inner desires and external pressure - all these establish in them the category
or dimension of moral experience - as a sense, sensitivity, awareness and
conscience. In other words, "the fact that human beings' awareness can
become the subject of their observation ...to reflect on their selves as if they
are outside their selves ... and to perceive themselves as differentiated from
others ...to recognize their thoughts and actions as belonging to
themselves ... to be proud of themselves or ashamed of themselves ...to be
aware of their characteristics, regard them as positive or negative, and in
such a way accept their responsibility for them" - all these distinguish
human beings from the "kingdom of nature," and render them moral
creatures who can be judged, and establish the culture of morality and law."
In light of this, it is clear why morality should be regarded an inherent
element in human existence: human beings (at least sane and healthy ones)
cannot live outside or escape this dimension of their humanity. This,
however, does not negate the possibility that human beings, as "rational
creatures" will live unreasonable lives; as "moral creatures," they will act
immorally, and as "civilized creatures" they will behave in an uncivilized
manner.
For an inclusive and systematic discussion of the characteristics of ethics as a theory of
morality, see the following: Ewing, Ethics; Frankena, Ethics; Peters, Ethics and
Education; Williams, Morality: An Introduction to Ethics.
4 Neumann, The Preeminence ofMan, pp.147-155.
3
125
Moral discourse on human experience is of a unique nature not only in

comparison with the world of other creatures but also in comparison with the
diverse ways in which human beings perceive and evaluate their own world
and the reality of their lives. Moral debate is characterized by the judgmental
categories of good and evil, justice and injustice, praiseworthy and
reprehensible, duty and right, legitimate and illegitimate, permissible and
prohibited, noble and contemptible, a source of respect and pride or a reason
for shame and condemnation. These categories distinguish, for example,
between morality and the scientific categories of true and false and correct
and incorrect, categories which relate to the degree of correspondence of
statements to phenomena in reality. Moral discourse similarly distinguishes
between morality and the artistic categories of beautiful and ugly, refined
and crude, harmonious and discordant, sublime and kitsch, which relate to
subjective and sensual feelings on the esthetical dimension of experience.
And likewise it distinguishes morality from the categories of efficacy, output
and self-interest, which relate to the relative value of a thing from the
standpoint of its economic benefit.
An additional characteristic of morality that renders it unique from other
aspects of human experience is its all-embracing exigency. Morality is a
kind of edict imposed upon human beings, obligating all of us to constantly
take stock - with regard to ourselves and to others. In contrast to the
dimensions of scientific knowledge and esthetical judgment that do not
necessarily oblige everyone, the moral dimension obliges us all, all the time.
No one will reprimand us or regard it as a flaw in our personality if we are
not scientifically updated or if we ignore magnificent works of art, but in the
moral sphere of our public conduct our entire personality is always in the
balance - we are either guilty or not guilty - and deserve either praise or
condemnation. Each of our decisions and each avoidance of making a
decision, every conscious and unconscious choice, every sensitivity and
attention and every act of indifference or ignoring - in all of these we are
perceived as responsible, as if they were our conscious choices that make us
morally accountable. People, the philosopher Tillich says, live under a
constant moral burden - similar to the constancy of barometric pressure - of
choosing their image and human vocation:
Man's being, ontic as well as spiritual, is not only given to him but also
demands of him. He is responsible for it; literally he is required to
answer, if he is asked, what he has made of himself. And he who asks
him is his judge, namely he himself, who, at the same time stands against
him.... In every act of moral self-affirmation man contributes to the
fulfillment of his destiny, to the actualization of what he potentially is....
The judge who is oneself and who stands against oneself, he who knows
126
Chapter III
with conscience everything we do and are gives a negative judgment,

experienced by us as guilt. The anxiety of guilt ... is present at every
moment of moral self-awareness and can drive us toward complete selfrejection. "S
The second instance is public. In this case the characteristics of an a11embracing exigency is related to the fact that there is almost no event or act
in the public behavior of human beings that is not part of the "moral
coordinates grid." Morality is not like a sphere of knowledge or a profession,
neither from the point of view of the differentiation of content nor from the
aspect of theoretical or skilled specialization. Morality is not optional but
present - everywhere and on all levels - in the day-to-day existence common
to us all: How will I survive in this world, in which direction will I strive to
develop, by which "red lines" will I restrain my ambitions; what stance will I
take on minority rights and gender equality, what action will I take on the
suffering of distressed populations, and what will be my attitude towards
tyrannical regimes and acts of genocide; how will I behave towards the
elderly and the disabled, will I bother to "move inside" on the bus in order to
make room for more people who seek to reach their destination, and to what
degree do I adhere to the rules of driving and parking; how do I behave with
regard to children's rights and violence against women, and what position do
I hold with regard to the gaps between the rich and poor and between the
developed and the Third World countries. The list of demands with which
reality - mediated by our morality - challenges us is endless. The
philosopher Sartre goes further still and says that every person is responsible
not "for his own individuality, but is responsible for all men .... I am
responsible for myself and for everyone else. I am creating a certain image
of man of my own choosing. In choosing myself, I choose man.?"
Let us move on to a different kind of clarification regarding the singular
characteristics of moral experience, now not in comparison to other creatures
or spheres, but to the three elements it comprises - values, virtues and
principles - each of which uniquely contributes to the establishment of a
moral order and the educational cultivation of a moral person.
(a) Values
In the most general meaning of the term, values are materialistic or
spiritual qualities, in diverse spheres of life, to which we attribute
importance and by which we wish to be characterized: esthetical values
(beauty and harmony), economic values (money and a well-developed
The Courage to Be, pp.51-53.
Sartre, Existentialism is Humanism, pp.56-57.
5 Tillich,
6
127
economy), health values (physical and psychic strength), technological

values (efficacy and simplicity) and moral values (decency and honesty). In
this general meaning of the term, the person who tells us about the great
value of his watch (for instance) will be totally clear to all of us: it tells the
exact time - hence its functional value; it is made of gold and its price is
high - hence its economic value; the person received it from his young
beloved - hence its sentimental value; he thinks it is beautiful - hence its
esthetical beauty; it is equipped with a heartbeat meter - hence its healthrelated value. From a more focused and functional point of view, values are
a special kind of ideas (in the private consciousness of the individual as
much as in the shared normative consciousness of the community) to which
we accord importance as a touchstone for evaluation, judgment and action.
Values, in other words, constitute a sort of basic standpoint which relates to
things as they should be, serves us as criterion for evaluating things as they
are, and guiding us towards actions whose purpose is to reduce the gap
between the ideal human reality and the actual reality of our daily
experience.
Within the discourse of moral education, it seems to me best to envisage
values as consciousness' antennae or radars (and perhaps litmus papers) that
constantly follow up processes -in the public overt reality as well as in the
private one of our inner life, and transfer their judgment to our reflective,
nonnative and deliberative consciousness. Let us tum to the following
example: a person who believes in the importance of gender equality enters
a meeting of a board of directors of a governmental institution, where he
realizes that it is attended by 18 male managing directors (determined and
full of self-importance) assisted by 18 female secretaries (who obediently
and subserviently serve their "bosses"). From what we know of his ethical
commitment, it seems reasonable to us that in this given situation his
"equality" antennae will send out angry alanns, since a situation in which a
person's gender determines his or her status blatantly contradicts the value of
equality in general and the value of gender equality in particular. It is
reasonable to assume that this person will undergo a similar experience and
his antennae will "fly off the handle" when he discovers that all those who
enjoy life's pleasures belong to the same ethnic group or have the same skin
color, and that those who serve the "pleasure seekers" come from a different
ethnic background or have a different skin color.
Another example is related to the value of truth. People who are
particularly devoted to the "truth," to which they accord central importance
in their thoughts and actions, will probably manifest it in manifold ways: in
broadening their education so that they will have deep knowledge of what is
happening in reality, in seeking the "roots of truth" in matters relating to
allegations and disputes, in expecting of themselves to act truthfully and
128
Chapter III
honestly with their fellow men and women, in keeping their promises, and in
authentically being truthful and honest with themselves. Along these lines,
we may generalize that no matter what the values are (moral, aesthetic,
economic or ecological) and who hold them (people of all nations and
cultures), the "antennae" of the valuators would critically report any
impainnent to the values they uphold, praise people who promote them, and
guide towards actions that actualize those values in the lived reality.
By the same token we should be conscious of the fact that things will
often be incomprehensible to a stranger, since a value judgment in reality is
often relative and biased: what appears to one person as a grave injustice,
such as discrimination against women and black people, will be regarded by
someone else as natural and matter-of-course; the evil that one person will
see in abandoning the weak and the poor will be experienced by another as a
necessary and vital product of the "survival of the fittest"; concern about
flora and fauna will be called by some "the eccentricities of the Greens," and
the "red lines" and "black flags" of "blatant illegality" will not be seen at all
by many, as they were raised to be oblivious to these tones of morality.
From these examples we can learn that cultivating moral values>- in the
family, the education system and society in general - means first and
foremost equipping people with tools for seeing and feeling that enable the
very identification of moral situations. We learn further that the problem of
education towards values is twofold. The first difficulty lies in fostering
vigilance, sensitivity and ethical vitality in diverse spheres of human
experience (as a preferable alternative to a personality with dull senses,
vague feelings, crude differentiation, and a superficial ability to analyze).
The second difficulty surfaces when people are endowed with ethical
sensitivity, replete with alertness and vitality, but among some of them the
concrete content of values runs totally counter to those of others (or in the
worst case, counter to the basic and most universal humanistic values of
equality, dignity and freedom).
(b) Qualities of Character

Character qualities, attributes or traits are the actual patterns of behavior and
reaction that characterize the personality in its interactions with people and
situations. Several examples of the attributes of character are (by
juxtaposition): courage vs. cowardice, temperance vs. impatience, generosity
and unselfishness vs. misery and petty calculating, modesty vs. conceit,
meticulousness and thoroughness vs. sloppiness and superficiality, empathic
and sympathetic consideration vs. egocentric and alienated selfishness, will
129
power and strength vs. a weak and irresolute will, kindheartedness and
compassion vs. malice and hardheartedness.
In a certain sense one can definitely see in the qualities of character the
translation of values from the language of thinking to that of praxis.
Moreover, the moral virtues (desirable qualities of character) are the most
important and decisive product from the point of view of moral education,
since, as Aristotle said, our interest in studying morality is not in order that
we know how to speak eloquently about morality but so that we be moral in
our relationships with others, i.e., that we should possess moral virtues' It
was indeed Aristotle who disagreed with his teacher Plato and called our
attention to the fact that intellectual excellence or theoretical knowledge of
morality is insufficient for being a moral person (high intelligence and broad
education per se, as history has shown us on numerous occasions, are not
enough to make a person moral). There is a vast distance between attributing
importance to values such as equality, honesty, courage, empathy, tolerance,
decency or loyalty and the practical fulfillment of these values, in quotidian
attributes and behavior (as evidenced by those who "love humanity but hate
people"). Courage, empathy and honesty, for example, are not things that
can be learned by listening to lectures, but rather through authentic life
experiences that challenge us to perform courageous deeds, feel empathic or
behave honestly; a courageous, empathic or honest human being will be one
who will again and again, in the face of harsh reality and its temptations,
successfully overcome the challenges and embody in his or her behavior the
sought-for attributes.
It is clear therefore that the task of nurturing a moral character must take
the elements of temperament and emotion into consideration, side by side
with intellectual nurturing: negative qualities of temperament such as a
tendency towards anger, servility, aggression and impulsiveness can
overshadow even the purest intentions; the positive qualities of
temperament, such as tranquility, peace of mind, stability, balance,
attentiveness and concentration can constitute a moderating effect even on
an "evil mind." This is also true of our emotional elements. To a great extent
they are formed during an interaction with the human environment during
childhood and have a considerable influence over our character: sensitivity
vs. obtuseness, a feeling of self-value and self-respect vs. self-effacement
and self-contempt. Empathy and love for the other vs. selfish egocentricity,
love of life andjoie de vivre vs. depressed passivity, the ability to give and
receive love vs. distant and distancing coldness, attentiveness to the
emotions and feelings of yourself and the other vs. self and social alienation;
all these and the like (which have been recently classified as emotional
7
Aristotle, Ethics, book II, 2.
130
Chapter III
intelligence or emotional literacy) are qualities that affect our desires,

motivation, actualization of goals, interpersonal relationships, and the overall
setup of things about which we care, that "touch" us, and motivate us
towards thought and endeavor.
In conclusion, theoretical knowledge, ethical consciousness, temperament
and emotion, join forces as the elements that establish character. The
attributes of character manifest these elements, not as raw material but
integrally: as habits and patterns that have been nurtured and internalized externally by the significant environment, and internally by the individual's
free choice - to coalesce into basic behavioral tendencies that are integrated
into the creation of a "second nature." In any event, as the Roman Stoic
Seneca said, the shaping and preservation of moral character mandates
constant and arduous labor by the individual on him- or herself: "You have
to preserve and fortify your pertinacity until the will to good becomes a
disposition to good.t"
(c) Moral Principles

Moral principles are guidelines for deliberation, decisions and actions in
the sphere of morality - they show us what we should consider and how we
should think, choose and act in diverse human situations. The best known
example of a system of moral principles is the Ten Commandments, the
most universal of which are: honor thy father and thy mother, thou shalt not
kill, thou shalt not commit adultery, thou shalt not steal, thou shalt not bear
false witness against thy neighbor, and thou shalt not covet (Exodus 20; see
also "to do justice and judgment" as a characteristic that defines the People
of Israel as a light to the nations in the book of Genesis 18: 18-19).
Additional contribution of Judaism includes the following guiding
principles: "Keep thee far from a false matter; and the innocent and
righteous slay thou not ...And thou shalt not take no gift ...thou shalt not
oppress a stranger" (Exodus, 23: 7-9); "Ye shall do no unrighteousness in
judgment: thou shalt not respect the person of the poor, nor honour the
person of the might but in righteousness shalt thou judge thy neighbour. "
(Leviticus, 19: 15-18; see also Deuteronomy, 16: 19). "But the stranger that
dwelleth with you shall be unto you as one born among you, and thou shalt
love him as thyself; for ye were a stranger in the land ofEgypt (Levitcus, 19:
34); "Depart from evil and do good, seek peace and pursue it." (Psalms, 34:
15); "Nation shall not lift up sword against nation" (Isaiah, 2: 4); "Hate the
evil and love the good and establish judgment in the gate" (Amos, 5: 15); "If
8
Seneca, Lettersfrom a Stoic, p.63.
131
ye oppress not the stranger, the fatherless and the widow and shed not
innocent blood" (Jeremiah, 7: 6); "Wisdom is the principal thing, therefore
get wisdom" (Proverbs, 4: 7) and "Let not mercy and truth forsake thee"
(Proverbs, 3: 3); "What is hateful to you do not do unto others" (Hillel, the
Talmud); base your life on "truth, judgment and peace" and "Let thy
friend's honor be as dear to thee as thine own" (Ethics of the Fathers 2: 15).
A further example of moral principles in ancient times can be found in
the words of Socrates when he argued with his friend and student Crito on
the idea of escape from prison." First, he said, not life itself but the good and
worthy life is the ultimate goal and therefore survival per se should not
justify all means. Second, as in matters of medicine, great importance should
not be accorded to the majority opinion but to the opinion of those who are
in the possession of knowledge and reasoning. Thirdly, moral decisions
should be based on rational reasoning and should not be taken according to
desire and emotional disposition. On the fourth count, moral reasoning
should be treated consistently and without bias; i.e., the situation should be
examined in light of general principles, and one should not abandon a
principle simply because its meaning to you now is a loss, or a payment for
damage that you must bear. On the fifth count, and this is the arch-principle
of all and any moral considerations, injustice should not be done: there is a
prohibition against and injury to the life, body, soul, freedom, dignity and
possessions ofinnocent people.
There is not enough room here to present, let alone explain, all the moral
principles that have been added to human culture since ancient times and
until the present day, but I will mention the most notable in modem times.
First, it is important to present the view of the French philosopher Jean
Jacques Rousseau, who identified moral consciousness with the "general
will" and moral judgment with insistence that individual goods that we
desire to achieve will be compatible with the general good." In contrast to
Rousseau, who avoided presenting his moral perception in terms of
imperatives, the German philosopher Immanuel Kant, who was greatly
influenced by Rousseau, posited two categorical (absolute) imperatives as
the touchstones for human beings' moral thoughts and decisions: the first,
"act only on that maxim through which you can at the same time will that it
should become a universal law"!' (so that this kind of behavior by all people
in a similar situation will be justifiable); the second, that one "should treat
himself and all others, never merely as a means, but always at the same time
9
Plato, Crito.
Rousseau's position appears in various forms in Emile or On Education, and also in
10
The Social Contract.

II Kant, Groundwork ofthe Metaphysic ofMorals, p.88.
132
Chapter III
as an end in himself,12 (never dwarf your personality or that of the other to

the degree of functionality in any social or interest-oriented system).
A different moral perception, which focuses on results rather than on
intention, was presented by the British philosophers Jeremy Bentham and
John Stuart Mill, who identified moral reasoning with the utilitarian
principle; acting in such manners that would produce the greatest happiness
for the greatest number of people (or that would minimize human suffering
to the smallest amount possible).13 Another approach was presented by the
philosopher Nietzsche, who grounded the supreme morality of authentic and
sovereign human beings as an antithesis both to the deontological moral
theories of Socrates and Kant and the result-oriented utilitarian morality of
Bentham and Mill. According to Nietzsche, "in man creature and creator are
united" and therefore there is nothing more worthless than conformity to
"herd-like morality" - be it rational or hedonistic. Nietzsche's perception can
be presented in two principles: those who wish to lead a full and meaningful
life should live in such a way that in every moment of their lives they will be
able to say to themselves that they would want to continue and live their
lives (as they have lived them) innumerable times and for eternity; the
second principle is to live one's life as an authentic person, being truthful to
yourself and making more of yourself by constant self-perfection and selfovercoming that are guided by the ideal of creating one's own style and
identity." The last in this catalogue of examples is the Jewish philosopher
Martin Buber who, in the spirit of the principle of the dignity of Man and
through awareness of the barbarism embodied in the dehumanization of the
other, postulated a demand to base our social life on the "l-Thou"
relationship: human relations that comprise mutual interest, openness,
sensitivity, enrichment, trust and respect, avoiding as far as possible relating
to a person as "the other," like an object, tool or function for one's own use.
3. CHARACTERISTICS OF VALUE CRISIS

In the mid-Iv" century Dostoyevsky said, through Ivan Karamazov, that
"if there is no God than everything is permissible," and towards the end of
that century Nietzsche announced, "God is dead ...we have killed him! ...
What were we doing when we unchained this earth from its sun? Whither is
12 Ibid., p.IO}.
13 J.S.
14 On
Mill, Utilitarianism and Other Writings.
the integration of creature and creator in Man, see Beyond Good and Evil, sec. 225.
On the characteristics of "Master Morality ," see The Gay Science, Sections 270, 335;
Thus Spoke Zarathustra, "The Way of the Creator," "On the Generous Virtue," "On
Tablets Old and New"; Beyond Good and Evil, sees. 203, 211, 260.
133
it moving now? Whither are we moving?.. Is there still any up and

down? .. Is not night continually closing in on US?lS Dostoyevsky was a
religious man while Nietzsche was a proclaimed atheist, but they both shared
the same anxiety about a barbaric direction that would overpower the human
race as a result of a drastic transition from absolute faith in moral values
(grounded in God's imperatives) to total negation of all cultural and moral
yardsticks regarding the existence of a proper and dignified human life. "Is
not the greatness of this deed too great for us?" asks Nietzsche." And he
adds his analysis: now that dogmatic belief in religious truth is replaced by
zealous belief that all is false and irrelevant, and therefore everything is
permissible: "the entire idealism of mankind hitherto is on the point of
changing suddenly into nihilism - into the belief in absolute worthlessness,
i.e., meanlnglessness.t''" (It is worthy of note that Nietzsche understands the
necessity of the crisis and believes that it is merely a pathological stage in
the life of Western Culture, and that it will be overcome by people who have
themselves overcome both absolutism and nihilism - who have triumphed
over both the divine and the emptiness).
Belief in God was the first victim, and in fact some regard the
combination (in the 17th century) of the scientific revolution and Spinoza's
naturalistic philosophy as its primary undertakers, but belief in God was
surely not the last victim. Jokingly, but somewhat painfully, someone said
that "God is dead, Marx is dead, Darwin is dead, Nietzsche is dead, Freud is
dead, and Sartre and Camus are dead, and we're not feeling too well either."
It seems to me that recently a growing number of people are stating that
communism is dead, capitalism is committing suicide, the ideologies have
collapsed, idealism is on its deathbed, even post-modernism is loathsome,
and cynicism and hedonism are having a ball. With the shattering of all the
gods there is no longer a belief or a standpoint that is accepted by the general
public as possessing absolute validity (in the religious and metaphysical
sense), or even objective validity (in the scientific knowledge sense).
This is true not only on the religious and ideological level but it can also
be seen in the fabric of daily life: in positions relating to masculinity,
femininity, childhood, and the rights that pertain to them; in the status of
scientific knowledge, moral values and artistic judgment; in the kind of
resources necessary for survival and developing strength; in the boundaries
between the national and the international, between home and the workplace
IS
Friedrich Nietzsche, The Gay Science, sec. 125.
16 Ibid.,ibid.
17 Nietzsche, The Will to Power, vol. 2, p.80. See also vol. 1, pp.9-45; and also Beyond
Good and Evil, sec. 55.
134
Chapter III
- in such an ever-changing reality the task of self-definition and moral

education becomes more difficult than ever.
One might add that the distress and crisis (mentioned earlier) do not stem
from the strengthening of one position at the expense of another, but from
the emptying of all standpoints of real and significant content. This is due to
the all-embracing agreement that has become the prejudice of an entire
generation, that in any event "this whole moral thing" lacks meaning and
validity, and does not change anything in the world.l'' Truth, justice, beauty,
generosity, courtesy and all the virtues that traditionally constituted the core
of moral and educational discourse have been currently relegated from the
public arena to a personal niche. Morality has become privatized and thus
moral knowledge and moral discourse have been emptied of content,
rendering individuals, allegedly for the good of their personal freedom,
devoid of the basic tools for conducting an intelligent and critical
examination of their own personal morality and that of society.
According to this logic, since every person has his or her conception of
truth, good, justice and beauty, and there is no objective and common
yardstick for evaluating their validity and value, any engaging in cultural,
moral and educational ideals is perceived as a superfluous bother and some
even regard it as tendentious and depressive patronizing. As a conclusive
slogan of the spirit of the times one might say that "ought is out, is is in,"
"the ideal is dead, long live the actual and the concrete." The "rating"
principle has replaced striving towards cultural quality, public relations shift
serious deliberation and moral considerations into the periphery, economic
and marketing logic overcome educational and pedagogical ideals, "one
night stands" and momentary excitement become the main "materials of
life," and technocratic and bureaucratic considerations of utility replace
serious consideration of moral values. Hence it seems that there is a great
deal of truth in the argument of cultural critics that this combination of
scientific positivism, ethical relativism, technocratic consciousness and
capitalistic economies become the hegemonic ideology in the second half of
the zo" century, and proves highly efficient in neutralizing any critical
discourse that can present alternative ideas and values.
And again, from the moral point of view, it is not theoretical matters per
se that are disturbing but their practical representation in our daily life. Side
by side with the benefits gained by humankind as a result of its freeing itself
of the various types of absolute and totalitarian systems - benefits gained
from expanding freedom and deepening democracy, extending life
18 For an analysis of this phenomenon and its being an obstacle to the acquisition of
education and culture, see Allan Bloom's The Closing ofthe American Mind; and also
my book, Aloni, Beyond Nihilism, chs. 3-6.
135
expectancy and raising the standard of living - we cannot ignore, as the sons
and daughters of the 20th century, the horrendous barbarism that we have
brought upon ourselves. We have witnessed barbarism of the murderous
annihilation of over one hundred million human beings in wars, national
revolutions, civil wars and attempts at genocide. We have also "succeeded"
in creating many other forms of barbarism: the barbarity of the destruction of
the natural environment; the barbarity in dwarfing numerous people and
transforming them into producers/consumers who identify the human quality
of life exclusively with the material standard of living; the barbarity of the
big cities, in which the culture of wealth expanded together with the
expansion of a culture of disadvantage, poverty, neglect, illiteracy, violence
and hopelessness; the barbarity in inflicting calculating, quantitative and
practical thinking on all spiritual spheres; and spiritual barbarism that in
leisure time seeks entertaining excitement and immediate satisfaction - in
the tabloids and light television - because the great majority lacks the
strength for and interest in what is profound, serious, qualitative and
demanding.
This state of a value and authority crisis makes moral and humanistic
education almost impossible. In philosophical terms we speak of the "death
of God," the "smashing of idols" and an "earthquake," after which there are
no longer facts but only interpretation, no longer objective vision but only
perspective, no longer a common humanity but only isolating multiculturalism; no longer philosophers who demonstrate the moral path and
living according to it, but only "professional philosophers" who wrestle with
the meaning of concepts, divorced from life's distresses, no longer
exclamation points but only question marks, no longer the sublime vs. the
lowly, deep vs. superficial, fine vs. crude, but only the different, dissimilar
and unique.
On the philosophical level we are perhaps faced with interesting and
fruitful problematics, but in education this is translated into a loss of value,
meaning, and a sterilizing and paralyzing course. How can one educate
without a belief in human destination, cultural ideals, common normative
ethics or any other kind of educational vision that will provide logic, purpose
or meaning to the entire educational effort? To which content and trends
should the awareness of students be directed and with which virtues should
they be challenged, when all the clear markings have been erased from the
"signposts" of life, and they are dominated by arbitrariness and fashion?
How will we activate moral reasoning when the "coordinates of conscience"
have faded and have become unrecognizable, when humanistic knowledge,
relegated to the periphery, is dwindling and replaced by functional and
success-seeking knowledge of science, technology, "the science of money"
and the technical skills of life? It must be made clear that we are not
136
Chapter III
speaking here of the problem related to teachers' and educators' loss of

respect and authority, but of the fact that both educators and students no
longer accord value and importance to certain human and cultural qualities
as revered things that should challenge them into exerting a special effort qualities such as human excellence that arouses respect, serves as a source of
inspiration and action, and is accepted by the individual as a guiding and
directive authority towards the fulfillment of a worthy human ideal.
I believe that a possible solution for the present crisis can be found in the
words of the disease's diagnostician: Nietzsche, who described the inevitable
and destructive character of nihilism in Western culture, also demanded that
we regard it as a temporary pathology that needs to be overcome; that a lifecraving and culture-craving humanity will attempt to overcome this
pathology regarding the loss of value and direction as the essence of its
existence and as a guiding logic for its thoughts and deeds. For the notable
representatives of this perspective, Nietzsche and Camus, the matter is first
and foremost a feeling of love, affirmation and loyalty towards human life:
towards human beings as wondrous and singular creatures, who in their
freedom, reason and imagination establish their world and afford it meaning,
significance and value. And in the spirit of humanistic pragmatism (whose
characteristics will be presented later) we must seek and identify within the
wealth of human qua human creation neither an absolute all-embracing
principle, nor an "eternal continent" for grounding our lives, but the best that
common human experience offers us in each sphere at a given point in time
in our life. It seems to me that this is what Socrates meant when he said that
what is good for Man stems from his tireless engagement in what is good,
just and beautiful - constantly learning from past experience, overcoming
faults and mistakes, and seeking alternative approaches. The alternatives are
familiar to us and are less desirable: the one, absolute dogmatism, whose
character is false and depressive; the second, relativistic dogmatism, whose
character is nihilistic and whose fulfillment lies in the destruction of
education and culture.
4. THE SOURCES OF THE AUTHORITY OF

MORAL JUDGMENT
There is something problematic in the attempt to examine the sources of
the authority of moral judgment at this stage of the discussion, after we have
already "declared" (in the previous chapters and at the opening of this one)
the humanistic approach as the binding frame of reference. Despite this
difficulty, it seems to me to be unavoidable, the reason for this being that in
cultural and educational matters the lines of progress are multi-directional
137
and never linear, a kind of dynamic system that constantly examines the
value and vitality of each of its components according to its modes of
relating to other components. In this kind of hermeneutic activity scholastic, interpretive and creative - each new component of knowledge
enables us to see things slightly differently, and may challenge and
undermine our prejudices and "firm" standpoints. The new overall
perspective that we adopt eventually serves us for a richer and fuller
examination of each of the old and new components that are at work in it.
It is common practice to divide the sources of the authority of moral
judgment into five approaches or basic standpoints. The first regards the
source of values and moral imperatives as a supreme, superhuman and
sacred being - God - who gave the human race the "straight and narrow
path." This perception, accepted by the three monotheistic religions, accords
an absolute and eternal status to the principles of morality, as a result of the
supreme source of moral law. The second standpoint grounds morality in
human rationality, while some thinkers attribute moral knowledge to
cognitive intuitions related to the nature and content of the good and proper
(Plato); others, like Kant, focus on the structure and logic of human
rationality and rely on it as a basis for the articulation of the formal
principles of moral consideration (universalization). The third, bases moral
consideration on the nature of Man (Aristotle, Mill, Maslow); i.e., an
empirical examination of the final goals to which human beings strive - such
as happiness, self-actualization and development - and finding conditions
and ways (as efficient means) that will maximize attaining and fulfilling
those goals. The fourth approach attributes moral principles to the cultural
framework that various societies (Western civilization, Far-Eastern
civilization, the Eskimo civilization and other civilizations and social and
communal sub-civilizations) developed for themselves, and therefore
morality - like religion or pornography - depends on geography; i.e., a
standpoint of cultural relativism. The fifth standpoint, which is often called
subjectivism, claims that moral principles and values cannot be substantiated
or rationally justified in any way because they are nothing more than an
expression of the personal preferences of each individual according to his or
her singularity, just like our priorities that relate to food or clothing.
Against the backdrop of these differentiations I wish to propose an
alternative approach, which I will call humanistic pragmatism. Let us first
define it indirectly, suggesting that it negates both the religious and
subjectivist approaches. The religious approach cannot be accepted for three
reasons: because it presents moral principles as deriving from a supra-human
source (that is relevant only to believers and not to all thinking people),
because their supra-human source renders them "resistant to the critique of
reason and human knowledge," and because different religions have
138
Chapter III
different perceptions of morality (leaving us with no objective and impartial

criteria for examining their value and validity).
The subjectivist approach should also be rejected on three counts. First, it
is misguided when it situates moral arguments on the same plane as
preferences related to food or clothing. True, a culinary preference of
chicken over pork, and an esthetic preference of a turtleneck over an open
collar cannot be argued or rationally explained, but with regard to moral
questions concerning killing innocent people, racial prejudice, child abuse,
and the perversion of justice, one can argue, and resolutely so. In such
arguments an attempt to convince is conducted by the substantiation of facts
and ways of thinking which have an objective nature. This process includes
the following: clarifying facts that are relevant to a given event, researching
the involved factors, examining the consistency and logical coherence of
arguments, striving towards a neutral and unbiased judgment, examining the
possible implications of specific processes on the public - these are
examples of the public aspects of moral discourse that accord it objective
foundations.l" A second reason for rejecting the subjectivist standpoint lies
in the fact that it does not lend itself to critical scrutiny - denying a priori the
very possibility of the existence of any objective basis whatsoever for overall
human morality. Thirdly, this standpoint should be rejected on pragmatic
grounds, since it serves as fertile soil for moral nihilism according to which
any deed or form of behavior is considered good, just and proper just like
any other.
More positively, in the spirit of Martha Nussbaum's worldview,
humanistic pragmatism begins with Protagoras' famous determination that
"man is the measure of all things": neither the subjectivist sense that every
individual is a yardstick for his- or herself, nor according to the cultural
relativistic approach that claims that every society is the yardstick for itself,
but rather in the sense that the human race - whose humanity is common to
us both in biological existence and cultural creativity - is the basis for and
sole context of moral judgrnent." This approach, which has a variety of
names - ethological, anthropocentric, and socio-centric - is humanistic both
in essence and purpose. Its point of departure relates to the distinctively
human qualities - free will, the powers of reason and judgment, moral
sensitivity and creative imagination - as the source of human dignity and the
ability of humans to shape their image and lead their lives for their own
benefit. Its final purpose is advancing human beings on essential dimensions
19 See Bernstein, Beyond Objectivism and Relativism; Morgenbesser, "Approaches to

Ethical Objectivity"; and Schemer, "Moral Education and the Democratic Ideal."
20 Nussbaum, The Fragility ofGoodness.
139
relevant to their existence - health, well-being, freedom, development,

happiness and self-actualization.
This approach is also pragmatic on two counts. Firstly, it does not pretend
to expose the absolute and eternal basis of morality, but, similar to the
scientific approach, seeks to expand knowledge and eradicate erroneous
perceptions in the light of accumulated human experience. Secondly, it is not
dogmatic but rather enables, by its openness, the use of insights taken from
numerous and diverse moral approaches, and examines to what degree they
"work" for us - contributing, in real life experience, to the advancement of
Man's development, well-being and dignity.
In the combination of these two elements (if this can be termed as such)
the authority of humanistic morality is created: people who do not
necessarily enjoy formal authority (like judges or military generals), but
whose ethical positions, moral deliberation, and personal qualities
"convince" us to give special weight to their moral judgment (in the spirit of
the "decent people" to whom Socrates directed his student Crito, telling him
that their opinion was preferable to the "majority opinion"). In light of the
characteristics of humanistic pragmatism it appears that these people, who
can assist us as a moral authority (as a kind of serving elite) should meet
three criteria: (1) their words and actions will prove their caring and
commitment to values, principles and virtues that promote human beings'
development, wellbeing and dignity; (2) they should be equipped with a
broad knowledge of culture, morality and psychology as well as with a wide
variety of sensibilities and abilities for evaluation and judgment, so that a
suitable basis will be created for placing issues in relevant cultural,
theoretical and normative contexts; (3) they exhibit open-mindedness,
flexible thinking and a willingness to examine their standpoints in the light
of the evidence of experience and alternative standpoints.
When these conditions are fulfilled, it appears to me that it would not be
groundless to compare morality to a bridge and the sages of morality to
engineers: pedestrian bridges and moral paths can exist in countless formal
and stylistic variations; nevertheless, beyond variance and variety, there are
certain basic principles that must be strictly observed so that crossing the
bridges and walking along the paths will be safe and successful - otherwise
both bridge and morality will collapse and the human toll in both cases will
be heavy and unnecessary.
In this context it is important to highlight three additional aspects. The
first is that the humanistic pragmatic approach provides some protection
against modem-post-modem nihilism: by renouncing any pretense for
absolute and eternal truth, it assists in our immunization against the human
"disease" of "all or nothing." In other words, if a person whose hope of
finding an absolute and permanent anchor in life (such as absolute morality)
140
Chapter III
is proven false, there is the danger that he will "surf' in the direction of the
opposite extreme - a total negation of all moral criteria. On the other hand,
those who recognize morality as acquired knowledge - and therefore also
open to error - will not despair as a result of their disappointment, but will
be stimulated to continue to learn and improve their moral strategy, as a
human mechanism for furthering human growth and well-being.
The second aspect offers a way of coping with cultural relativism. In the
spirit of the humanistic worldview presented in the previous chapter, the
pragmatic approach differentiates between the core of morality, whose
content should be accorded an objective and universal status, and everbroadening circles, from the center to the periphery. At the basic core of
morality we are committed to the values of human life, equality, dignity and
freedom (and to an absolute prohibition to injure the life, body, freedom,
dignity and well-being of innocent people). As the circles expand, we pass
through "gray areas" about which we may still argue with regard to common
criteria, finally reaching absolute freedom and ethical preferences
(communal and individual) about which there is no point in arguing."
The third aspect deals with a preference to foster virtues rather than
repress wrongs. In the spirit of Aristotle, Spinoza, Rousseau, Dewey and
Maslow, and counter to the approach of the monotheistic religions and Kant
and Freud, the moral perception of humanistic pragmatism maintains that the
worthy and effective way of cultivating human beings to behave morally
with their fellow men and women, is bound up primarily with a directive
nurturing of their abilities and natural tendencies (in the mental, emotional
and volitional spheres) towards virtues of character, and less with a
restraining or normative suppression of the nature of the child (which is
ostensibly instinctual and problematic). In other words, "the imagination of
man's heart" (Genesis 8:21), according to the humanistic moral perception,
is not naturally good or bad but contains an infinite repertoire of
possibilities. It is better to rely on the positive powers embodied in the child
and on a positive self-image than on a battle against the negative powers and
an image of man as a fundamentally evil sinner.
The list of prominent philosophers that belong to this heritage of thinking
includes (with a variety of emphases) Protagoras (according to Nussbaum's
interpretation), Aristotle (whose moral perception I presented extensively in
the first chapter), Spinoza and Mill (upon whom I expanded in the second
chapter), Dewey (as a philosopher of "human growth"), Abraham Maslow
(as a humanist psychologist of "self-actualization"), Erich Fromm (as a
philosopher who believed in the objective and universal status of lifeenabling and life-expanding values), Albert Camus (upon whom I expanded
21
Foot, "Morality and Art."
141
in the second chapter) and Jorgen Habennas. More than any other
contemporary philosopher, Habermas represents striving towards an
objective and universal humanistic moral contract, on the one hand, which
will freely and by common use of reason be accepted by the public, and, on
the other, will be totally committed to preventing another "Auschwitz".
As an example of the importance of a moral philosopher whose
perception expresses pragmatic humanism I will mention Albert Camus
here: he is the one who in the midst of the human Plague sought a way to be
"a saint without God.,,22 When he was awarded the Nobel Prize for literature
it was said of him that he was "the conscience of Europe in its darkest hour."
In his "Letters to a German Friend," a polemic that Camus sent to a German
"friend" who chose to become a Nazi, we find the most powerful and
succinct expression of the acceptance of "man (or humanity) as the measure
of all things" and a commitment to the sanctity of life and human solidarity:
I have never believed in the power of truth in itself. But it is at least
worth knowing that when expressed forcefully truth wins out over
falsehood. This is the difficult equilibrium we have reached. This is the
distinction that gives us strength as we fight today .... What is truth, you
used to ask. To be sure, but at least we know what falsehood is.... What
is spirit? We know its contrary, which is murder. What is man? There I
stop you, for we know. Man is that force which ultimately cancels all
tyrants and gods. He is the force of evidence. Human evidence is what we
must preserve.
For a long time we both thought that this world had no ultimate
meaning and that consequently we were cheated but I have come to
different conclusions than you used to talk about
You never believed
in the meaning of this world, and you therefore deduced the idea that
everything was equivalent and that good and evil could be defined
according to one's wishes. You supposed that in the absence of any
human or divine code the only values were those of the animal world - in
other words, violence and cunning ....
Where lay the difference? Simply that you readily accepted despair
and I never yielded to it. Simply that you saw the injustice of our
condition to the point of being willing to add to it, whereas it seemed to
me that man must exalt justice in order to fight against eternal injustice,
create happiness in order to protest against the universe of
unhappiness.... I merely wanted men to rediscover their solidarity in
order to wage war against their revolting fate.... I chose justice in order
to remain faithful to the world. I continue to believe that this world has
22 Camus,
The Plague, p. 237.
142
Chapter III
no ultimate meaning. But I know that something in it has a meaning and

that is man, because he is the only creature to insist on having
one... hence he must be saved if we want to save the idea we have of
life.23
5. THE METHODS AND LIMITATIONS OF

HUMANISTIC MORAL EDUCATION
Engaging in the moral education of others invokes weighty responsibility.
This is the result of both the potentially pretentious and intrusive
intervention in the freedom of others in matters pertaining to the formation
of character and the fact that the greater the chance to mend and better, the
greater the risk of spoiling and corrupting. As we have seen in the zo"
century, teachers and educators (by their vocation) were often partners to
and collaborators with tyrannical and murderous regimes, joining forces in
the corruption of the character of the young and in the shaping of monsters
who disseminated murder and destruction. Instead of education in the
humanistic sense of the word, they operated methods of indoctrination and
propaganda that impaired the discretion of the young, emasculated any
critical thinking and moral emotion, stripped them of their human form, thus
creating conditions for the negation of the humanity of groups and nations both by their physical annihilation and by trampling their rights and human
dignity.
In light of this, when we seek to outline the characteristics and methods
of moral education, we should first impose limits or initial cautionary rules
that will prevent us from "slipping" away from educational methods that
better the character of human beings and expand their humanity, and from
allowing them to fall into the hands of those who corrupt them and impair
their human image. For this reason we will employ three limiting principles
mentioned in the previous chapter as being fundamental to the characteristics
of humanistic education.
The first relates to the student's overall and multi-faceted development.
This is stated in the spirit of the Athenian educator Protagoras, who defined
education as the art of guiding the young person towards attaining a full and
successful human life,24 as well as in the spirit of Whitehead's modem
version, that education is the instruction of individuals in the art of life and
towards maximal and successful actualization of their abilities in the
23
24
Camus, "Letters to a German Friend," letters 1 and 4.

Plato, "Protagoras."
143
concrete reality of their lives.2s In other words, as humanistic moral

educators, we have an interest in the full and harmonious development of
their full abilities and skills. We care about them not as learners of corpuses
of knowledge, not as trainees in professional specialties, not as devoted
soldiers in the service of God, not as functionaries in the civil service, not as
efficient robots in the service of industry, not as greedy consumers in a
capitalistic economy, and not as emissaries of the "right" ideology - but first
and foremost in their normal development and well-being as full
personalities who enjoy meaningful and dignified human lives. For this
reason, we should be on our guard not to use the name of moral education in
vain, and, for the sake of its alleged progress, cause students to mortgage
their critical awareness, moral sensitivity, independent thinking and
authentic self-actualization.
This issue of extending the range of student abilities and sensitivities
brings us to the second principle: strictly adhering to open-mindedness and
human dignity. In the spirit of commitment to humanism, democracy and
enlightenment, this attribute leads to the total negation of indoctrination,
propaganda, blind training, conditioning and all other manipulative and
power-abusing methods for shaping human beings' worldview and character.
As we have seen in the previous chapter, it is mandatory that teachers
conduct discussions on education, even on the most sensitive subjects, in an
atmosphere of open-mindedness and human dignity. It should be pluralistic,
tolerant, free of threat, and encouraging the formulation of critical and
autonomous normative positions - in writing as much as in free and open
discussions.
The third limitary principle is based on the previous two. It indicates that
we should prevent our students from becoming foolish and obedient
followers of the values that we, as educators, seek to nurture in them - even
if they are, in our perception, worthy. In other words: "one repays a teacher
badly if one always remains nothing but a pUpil,"26 and educators who have
not empowered their students' freedom and ability to go beyond what they
have imparted to them, have not faithfully fulfilled their duty. According to
this approach, educators who are worthy of the name, do not merely focus on
nurturing conformity to existing norms, but also attempt to cultivate their
students' individual autonomy so that they will be capable of criticizing and
going beyond these norms. They are not satisfied with their students
internalizing the community's collective identity, but also urge and empower
their students to achieve a definition of their individual identity as unique
individuals in the community. They certainly are not satisfied with their
25
Whitehead, The Aims ofEducation, ch. 3.

Thus Spoke Zarathustra, p.190.
26 Nietzsche,
144
Chapter III
students' tribal mentality, provincial perspective or ethno-centric pride, but

encourage them to extend and deepen their spiritual world through a
geographical, historical and cultural voyage through the domains of human
existence and creativity. The success of true educators is thus measured by
their students becoming active personalities who are able to differentially
and effectively utilize their acquired knowledge and values; going beyond
the framework of the external influences that shaped them, and in their
critical and creative vitality screen and mend reality and establish new and
better moral insights for the future.
On the basis of the approach and principles I presented regarding the
essential characteristics of education and morality, I seek to offer a formal
definition of the main objective of moral education: to create among
students, both in theory and practice, a commitment to a system of values,
virtues and principles which will outline for the individual the norms of
worthy behavior in all matters pertaining to inter-personal and social
behavior. We have also seen that as a result of our basic commitment to
humanism, democracy and enlightenment, and in light of a cultural reality
characterized by a value crisis, we do not and cannot want to ground moral
education in absolutes - be they religious, ideological or philosophical. In
my opinion the desired approach has been outlined by the educational
philosopher John Dewey, who regarded education as a process directed
towards human growth, of both the individual and society, by shaping young
people as the "inheritors-partners" of the accumulated treasures of
knowledge and morality."
Assuming that the purpose of morality is enabling optimal human
conditions for the development, well-being and dignity of humankind, it has
accumulated in its sphere, similar to science and technology, values, virtues
and principles that have objective credibility as effective promoters of the
desirable purpose. In the context of moral aggregation, similar to what has
been manifested in the UN universal declarations regarding human rights
and non-discrimination, nothing in the humanistic moral code is held sacred,
but by virtue of being more rational and more universal than its alternatives,
it is the best moral code that is currently at our disposal.
For this reason, moral education cannot but rely on the assets in moral
cultural heritage, and nurture these qualities among the young generations.
But at the same time, in order to respect the freedom, reason and
independence of those being educated, and in order to prepare them so that
they will be capable of repairing the existing ills and shaping a better future,
we also need to train them in thinking, debating, moral deliberation, and
decision-making, which bear the attributes of pluralism, rationality,
27 John
Dewey, "My Pedagogical Creed" and also Democracy and Education.
145
autonomy, criticism and creativity. In the following sections I will present

the aspects that in my opinion are the most significant for the promotion of
moral education.
(a) Reciprocity as a Point ofDeparture for Moral

Consideration
In a humanistic, democratic and enlightened society, not only political
rule enjoys legitimacy and authority by virtue of the people's free and equal
choice. This is true also of "moral rule." Any moral debate, like any political
one in such a society must assume the basic equality of all human beings as
free, rational, autonomous, sensitive, creative and unique beings. The point
of departure for a moral discourse or debate is one that is conducted in an
open atmosphere, free of threat, aware of the equal value of human beings
and their right to be different. It is characterized by a shared effort to reach a
rational agreement on society's desirable character as well as on the
principles and priorities that will maximally ensure that everyone has an
opportunity to lead a meaningful and dignified human life.28
Such moral debates do not constitute a periodic event in the entire
society, but one that takes place simultaneously at all times in the various
cycles of life: within the family unit, sports, the school, the youth movement,
the neighborhood, the workplace, the legal system, the political system, the
international system, and so forth. What is common to these debates,
assuming that they are indeed moral, can be defined as the awareness of
mutuality or reciprocity, which possesses both psychological and
philosophical facets.
From the psychological point of view, mutuality consists in experiencing
the humanity of the other: awareness that he or she has a body,
consciousness, emotions, drives and desires that are familiar to us through
our knowledge of ourselves. This consciousness develops into a
consciousness of the common denominator that links all of us as human
beings: the preference of security, health, sympathy and freedom over threat,
illness, rejection and subjugation, as well as the quest to actualize our
abilities and desires, to safely raise our children, to enjoy the respect,
fairness and appreciation of others.
Next to psychological or phenomenological experience, mutuality is
conceptualized to create a philosophical tenet, in the willingness to base
interpersonal, social and international relationships on principles that will
apply equally to all parties because they are directed towards equally
28 On the preliminary point of departure of moral discourse, see: Rawls, A Theory of
Justice.
146
Chapter III
promoting the good of all parties. Or in a different version, mutuality is a

kind of awareness and commitment, that is based on the recognition of
human equality and a feeling of partnership in the various communities in
which people live, guiding the individual to prefer behaviors that contribute
to the flourishing of the entire community as well as to the well being of any
individual in it as an equal member in that community.
(b) Nurturing the Moral Point of View

The moral point of view is essentially a cognitive component (a
"philosophical conscience" that is different from a "psychological
conscience") and comprises the content and formal elements upon which
moral thinking should be based. The essence of the moral point of view is
that in all matters pertaining to interpersonal and social relationships to
which judgments of good and evil, justice and injustice, worthy and flawed
apply, we will judge and act through an aspiration to promote the
development, well-being and dignity of all; together with a commitment to
the basic values of human life, freedom, equality and dignity; and through
adherence to deliberation that is rational, empathic, impartial, universal,
and consistent.
This version of the moral point of view is directed towards focusing
thinking on three aspects that should be accorded moral consideration: (1)
basing the ultimate end of moral thinking on striving towards establishing
conditions that will maximally and equally promote the development, wellbeing and dignity of humankind; (2) defining the content core of values on
which all humanity's agreement is mandatory: the sanctity of human life, the
equal worth of all humans, strict adherence to human and civic rights; (3)
conducting moral deliberations that are rational (relying on facts and logical
arguments), impartial (unbiased, objective or impersonal), universal
(applying to all human beings in similar situations) and taking the other into
account (relating to the needs and concrete desires of others and practicing
caution with regard to the possible implications of my behavior on others).
Among the various attempts to situate the moral point of view within the
developmental-educational context, Lawrence Kohlberg's psychological
theory is particularly notable. Kohlberg's point of departure is cognitivist:
from philosophy, he adopted Plato's notion of justice as the supreme good,
and from Immanuel Kant he adopted his insights concerning the active part
of consciousness in building reality as well as the universalibility principle
as an essential element in any moral consideration. From psychology, he
adopted Jean Piaget's theory of the maturation of mental abilities along a
uniform and regular continuum of developmental stages. His innovation lies
in his claim that beyond all social and cultural variance, human beings have
147
the same formal patterns of moral reasoning as well as in the process of

maturation towards this conception.
According to Kohlberg' s theory, which he examined and substantiated in
empirical experiments, there are six stages of moral thinking, or six moral
logics, which are discernable in types of considerations and ways of
reasoning. Kohlberg also maintained that there is a uniform and regular
developmental continuum of moral stages that are uniform and immutable in
all human societies. Kohlberg assembles the first two stages under one
category of.pre-conventional egocentrism. The first stage is characterized by
direct egocentric calculation related to the avoidance of punishment or
unpleasantness, the source of which is external authority perceived as
powerful and prestigious; the second is characterized by a desire for
satisfaction and pleasure that can be achieved by utilitarian and instrumental
mutuality (the "profitability" of self-seekers).
Kohlberg classified the third and fourth stages under the category of
conformist conventionalism, whose frame of reference is the group or
society's accepted "togetherness." The third stage is characterized by an
aspiration to please the dominant expectation of the group and win sympathy
for being "okay," "good," "a contributor." The fourth stage is characterized
by the according of importance to authority, norms, discipline and the
fulfillment of duties directed to the actualization of social order as something
that has inner value per se.
Kohlberg places the fifth and sixth stages under the category of
autonomous post-conventionalism, as a term that indicates going beyond
egocentric utilitarian accounting and the authority of social conventions,
towards grounding moral thinking in human reason. The fifth stage is
characterized by intent towards a social contract between free citizens who
possess equal rights, who together establish a liberal and flexible consensus
of a legalistic-contractual nature. The sixth and highest stage is characterized
by moral autonomy, the basis of which is the individual's philosophical and
autonomous conscience as supreme legislator, which is intended as valid for
all human beings qua human beings (the universalization of moral
principles) and its content consists of the basic humanistic values of equality,
dignity, freedom, and solidarity.
Kohlberg's theory has two distinct merits: the first, theoretical in essence,
is that his arguments are compatible with the principal insights of the
philosophical sphere of morality regarding the nature of the moral
perspective; the second, practical by nature, is that according to this theory it
is relatively easy to prepare educational programs for the development of
moral ways of thinking and reasoning, by dealing with moral dilemmas that
represent real social experiences. However, Kohlberg's theory has two
148
Chapter III
significant weaknesses that are related less to what it contains and more to
what it lacks.
The first criticism relates to its exaggerated grounding in cognitive
abilities, which places the entire theory in doubt. As Aristotle claimed in the
4th century B.C.E., there is no knowledge in the sphere of morality that
makes human beings perform moral deeds without the complementary
recruitment of emotions, will power and dispositions of character. Therefore,
Aristotle contended, the essential objective of moral education is not that we
become conversant in philosophizing on the subject of morality, but that we
become moral people in our daily dealings with our fellow men and women.
The "wondrous" ability of human beings to act with villainy and
shamefulness and at the same time adorn themselves with first-rate moral
reasoning must serve as a warning light. Hence, we should conceive of
Kohlberg's theory as promising and valuable, not as an overall theory of
moral education but only as a theory designated for the cultivation of one
important element - reasoning or the intellectual power of moral judgment.
The source of the second criticism is feminist, but it appears that its
validity is objective and universal. At the core of the criticism lies the
argument that the criteria that substantiate a Kohlbergian developmental
scale are not scientific, neutral or unbiased, but are "contaminated" (so claim
the critics) by a cultural bias of "Western masculinity." Basing the entire
moral perspective on rational and autonomous consciousness, so the
criticism goes, is an unfounded pretense. One well-known alternative to the
cognitivist model focuses on benevolence, good will or a "good heart" that
seeks the good of others (manifested, for example, in helping others and
performing acts of charity). Another alternative is the focus of the feminist
theory on sensitive, attentive and sympathetic caring that motivates the
humanity of one person to care for the welfare and dignity of the other. I
believe that in this controversy it would be appropriate to adopt an
alternative approach, similar to the one I adopted in relation to the various
heritages of humanistic education. One should not be restricted to one
approach or another, while relegating all others to the periphery, but rather
regard them as complementary approaches that contribute, each in its own
way, to a proper coping with the great complexity of mora} experience.
(c) Sensitivity to Justice and Ensuring that Justice be Done

Justice is a social situation in which each person receives what he or she
deserves by virtue of his or her rights, merits, needs and deeds. In a
formulation that takes humanistic values into consideration, justice is a
social situation in which the division ofrights, resources, opportunities and
reward is carried out according to a fixed pattern, in such a way that people
149
receive what they deserve: by virtue of human equality, human and civil
rights, and their special achievements and needs as individuals.
The core of justice is the demand for the equal treatment of human
beings. In Jewish heritage the idea of the equality of the value of human
beings is embodied first and foremost in the idea that all human beings were
"created in the image of God." In Genesis the nature of equality is the central
axis of a moral and just life: "So God created man in his own image, in the
image of God created him; male and female created he them" (Genesis
1:27). And as all human beings are the descendents of the same man who
was created in the image of God, all people should be treated with equality
and the respect they deserve: (1) we must observe the principle of the
sanctity of life embodied in the determination that "Whose sheddeth man's
blood, by man shall his blood be shed," (Genesis 9: 6); (2) we must fulfill
the designation given to Abraham as the father of the Jewish people, which
is to "do justice and judgment," (Genesis, 18: 19); (3) do justice impartially:
"Ye shall do no unrighteousness in judgment: thou shalt not respect the
person of the poor, nor honor the person of the mighty; but in righteousness
shalt thou judge thy neighbor thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself,"
(Leviticus, 19: 15-18, and also in Numbers 15: 19). "But the stranger that
dwelleth with you shall be unto you as one born among you, and thou shalt
love him as thyself, for ye were stranger in the land of Egypt" (Leviticus, 19:
24). We can also find a lesser and different form of the commitment to
equality in classical Athens as the basis for a democratic regime. On this
matter Pericles boasts: "our constitution is called a democracy because
power is in hand not of a minority but of the whole people [and] when it is a
question of settling private disputes, everyone is equal before the law.,,29
The demand for equality, says the philosopher Michael Walzer, should
not be confused with demands for unity and conformity." Human beings
differ from one another in all the common elements that make them a single
species - the human species. They are different from one another in their
physical profile, their physical and mental skills, their temperament and
proclivities, value sensitivities, artistic talent and esthetical taste. Based on
these elements people choose their way of life and trends of selfactualization, which shape each individual's personal identity and locates
and grants him or her a specific place and status in the social cultural fabric.
As a manifestation of the wondrous variance among people there is
nothing wrong in this. By the same token there is no reason to nullify the
interpersonal differences in the spheres of prestige, sympathy, income,
"Funeral Oration" in Thucydides' The Peloponnesian War, pp. 145.
On the various meanings ofjustice and the centrality of the value of equality in the just
organization of society, see Michael Walzer, Spheres ofJustice.
29 Pericles,
30
150
Chapter III
property, education and all other social goods - any attempt to impose
uniformity on these spheres is doomed both to failure (on the practical level)
and injustice (in power-abusing and authoritative politics). The demand for
equality, therefore, does not strive towards uniformity but rather towards
affording all human beings the opportunity to enjoy full and dignified human
life. It aims to provide all human beings with a fair chance to conduct a good
and worthy human life which contains individual liberties, civil rights, and
the social rights of education and economic security, the right to fair trial, the
right to actively participate in the political and cultural arenas, and, of
course, the right to be different.
In this spirit the demand for equality should be understood as a battle
against trends of discrimination, exploitation, oppression and subjugation
displayed by groups that regard themselves as favored and thus take
privileges for themselves and deprive other groups of the right to a dignified
life. As we know, they strive to this end on the basis of claimed superiority
of race, gender, religion, nationality, ethnic belonging, economic status,
political position or by the mere virtue of power. None of these pretexts pass
the test of reason:
Egalitarianism in its origins is an abolitionist politics. It aims at
eliminating not all differences but a particular set of differences, and a
different set in different times and places. Its targets are always specific:
aristocratic privilege, capitalist wealth, bureaucratic power, racial or
sexual supremacy. In each of these cases, however, the struggle has
something like the same form. What is at stake is the ability of a group of
people to dominate their fellows. It is not the fact that there are rich and
poor that generates egalitarian politics but the fact that the rich "grind the
faces of the poor," impose their poverty upon them, command their
deferential behavior. Similarly, it's not the existence of aristocrats and
commoners or of office holders and ordinary citizens (and certainly not
the existence of different races or sexes) that produces the popular
demand for the abolition of social and political difference; it is what
aristocrats do to commoners, what office holders do to ordinary citizens,
what people with power do to those without it....
The aim of political egalitarianism is a society free from domination.
This is the lively hope named by the word equality: no more bowing and
scraping, fawning and toadying; no more fearful trembling; no more
high-and-mightiness; no more masters, no more slaves."
Together with the idea of doing justice, which derives from a
commitment to equality, there is an additional meaning which focuses on the
31 Ibid.,
Preface.
151
recognition of the difference or specific singularity of the individual: both in

the demand for special respect that is fitting for unique excellence
(meritocracy) and in the protest against the disgraceful phenomenon of "the
righteous suffer, the wicked thrive" (in the workplace, classroom, public
office, etc.). The essence of injustice, as the converse of justice in the above
mentioned sense, is when the compensation a person receives is
incompatible with his or her virtues and actions - in comparison, of course,
to the virtues and actions of others (favoritism, discrimination, pushiness and
bribery are among the notable elements of this kind of injustice).
In Jewish heritage we find an expression of this perception of justice as
early as the hook of Genesis. When Abraham received God's supreme
imperative to "do justice and judgment," he rebelled against God's intention
of harming the population of Sodom and Gomorrah, without differentiating
between the innocent and the guilty: "Wilt thou also destroy the righteous
with the wicked? .. that be far from thee to do after this manner, to slay the
righteous with the wicked; and that the righteous should be as the wicked,
that be far from thee; Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?" (Genesis,
18:23). A plethora of complaints and allegations exist in the Bible, which
relate to the wicked who have succeeded and the righteous whose reward
was "unripe fruit instead of grapes": "For I was envious at the foolish, when
I saw the prosperity of the wicked ... Behold these are the ungodly, who
prosper in the world; they increase in riches" (Psalms, 74); "And moreover I
saw under the sun the place of judgment, that wickedness was there; and the
place of righteousness, that iniquity was there" (Ecclesiastes, 3: 16); "For the
wicked doth compass about the righteous, therefore wrong judgment
proceedeth ... wherefore lookest thou upon them that deal treacherously, and
holdest thy tongue when the wicked devoureth the man that is more
righteous than he?" (Habakuk, 1). And the most notable example is "There
was a man in the land of Uz, whose name was Job; and that man was perfect
and upright, and one that feared God, and eschewed evil." Nonetheless,
contrary to any logic of human justice, God was cruel to him with no reason,
casting upon him the plagues of bereavement and despondence that were
unparalleled in human suffering.
In Judaism and the other monotheistic religions the traditional response to
these iniquities is that God will recompense the righteous and wicked as they
deserve, if not in this world, than no doubt in the next: "Blessed is the man
that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly, nor standeth in the way of
sinners, nor sitteth in the seat of the scornful. But his delight is in the law of
the Lord; and in his law doth he mediate day and night. And he shall be like
a tree planted by the rivers of water, that bringeth forth his fruit in his
season; his leaf also shall not wither; and whatsoever he doeth shall prosper.
The ungodly are not so; but are like the chaff which the wind driveth away.
152
Chapter III
Therefore the ungodly shall not stand in the judgment, nor sinners in the
congregation of the righteous. For the Lord knoweth the way of the
righteous; but the way of the ungodly shall perish" (Psalms, 1); "For the
upright shall dwell in the land, and the perfect shall remain in it; But the
wicked shall be cut off from the earth, and the transgressors shall be rooted
out of it," (Proverbs, 2: 21).
The perception of justice as the appropriate recompense for virtues and
deeds is even more notable in the Hellenistic world, in which the context is
humanistic rather than theistic; namely, where excellence is in "being a
human being" according to human (and not divine) yardsticks, and where
responsibility for recompense is not borne by God but by human beings who
are members of the political community. In ancient Athens, it was held as a
moral and cultural duty to praise and obey virtuous persons, and Pericles, the
Athenian leader, describes the embodiment of this idea in the Athenian
"order of things": in putting people to public positions, the only thing that
counts is "the ability which the man possesses," and the recompense of those
who are excellent, those who nobly and valiantly endanger themselves for
the sake of actualizing the Athenian ideals, are those who "won praises that
never grow old, the most splendid of sepulchers - not the sepulchre in which
their bodies are laid, but where their glory remains eternal in men's
minds.,,32
In his Apologia Socrates expresses absolute loyalty to this perception of
justice as it is evil and despicable not to obey those who are your betters by
their nature. Plato, Socrates' pupil, applies in his Republic the perception of
justice as "an order of things in accordance with special qualities." He claims
that the wise philosophers should be placed at the apex of the pyramid, under
whom should come the strong and brave guards, while the craftsmen and
those who sustain society should be at its base. According to the same
aristocratic perception of justice, Aristotle describes the image of a "noble"
man: contrary to the man who boasts and demands more respect than his
qualities and deeds merit, and counter to the meek who attribute to
themselves less respect than they deserve by virtue of their special qualities
and deeds, the "noble" man "demands for himself that which he deserves" because he is superior to others in qualities and deeds, and he justly demands
the special respect and glory which people of his kind deserve - those who
possess a rare and perfect personality.r'
Next to justice as an egalitarian attitude towards human beings, and
justice as the proper compensation for virtues and deeds, there is also a third
meaning: justice as charity, mercy, compassion, pity and generosity. It is a
The Peloponnesian War, "Funeral Oration," 145-149.
Ethics, Book IV, 3.
32 Thucydides,
33 Aristotle,
153
justice that through special recruitment and affirmative action is directed

towards both reducing the misery and cultural-deprivation of those who are
innocent and suffer a cruel lot, and creates equal opportunity for the weak
and the needy to lead a human life of dignity and self-fulfillment. At times
the battle is directed against natural destiny (such as the various types of
disability), and at times against fateful social conditions (slavery, oppression,
discrimination, the culture of poverty and ignorance, cultural deprivation and
various types of abuse), but in both cases doing humanistic justice is like
willingly assuming responsibility so that no human being will be deprived of
the basic conditions required for a life appropriate for them. We find the
roots of this perception of justice time and again in Jewish heritage - with
special emphasis placed on the rights of the stranger, the orphan and the
widow (Isaiah, 10: 1; 11:4; Jeremiah, 7:6; Amos, 5:12); and to a lesser
degree in Hellenistic heritage - with special emphasis placed on obeying the
laws "which are for the protection of the oppressed.t'"
In our times this has become the accepted moral truth of almost all
philosophers of ethics: affirmative action in cases of needy and weak
populations is justified, since it also reduces humanity's ills that are related
to misery and cultural deprivation and contributes to equal opportunities; it
also reduces the social ills of animosity and violence that exist among the
various strata of society." In conclusion, in order to promote the "just life"
according to the three meanings ofjustice we have discussed, and in order to
reduce the ills of inequality and inappropriate compensation, I propose a
"justice strategy" which combines four criteria. (1) The principles of human
equality and human dignity mandate a basic attitude of fairness, decency and
respect towards all humans. (2) The principle of meritocracy, a special
compensation for particular excellence and the performance of justice,
mandate the promotion (or some other token of recognition and the bestowal
of respect) of those whose excellence - in thinking, practice or creativity constitutes a unique contribution to culture and society. (3) On the basis of
the principle of "wicked and badly off' or the prevention of the prosperity of
thos.e who advance themselves while trampling the dignity of others
underfoot, doing justice mandates penal action (in the framework of the legal
system) and identifying clear-cut boundaries for public tolerance: behaviors
that categorically belittle the rights and well-being of others should not be
tolerated, because in such a way villainy and injustice will be perpetuated as
accepted and prevalent norms, (4) On the basis of the principles of charity,
generosity and kindness, performing justice also mandates the special
support of the weak and needy, those whose fate precluded them from
The Peloponnesian War, "Funeral Oration," p. 145.
A Theory ofJustice, ch. 2.
34 Thucydides,
3S Rawls,
154
Chapter III
enjoying appropriate conditions or basic abilities, in order to give them too

an equal opportunity to conduct a meaningful and dignified human life.
The application of this "justice strategy," seems to have advantages on
four counts. First, it imparts to everyone the assemblage of virtues of
egalitarianism, honesty, decency, respect for Man, empathy and solidarity, as
a cultural and educational ideal. Second, when we promote those who are
outstanding (in thinking and in practice), we endow individuals with the
proper appreciation, and society with qualitative and suitable leadership
(instead of a power-abusing elite and favoritism). Third, the clear message
that the public will be unwilling to tolerate malicious behavior that belittles
human dignity and harms well-being will render injustice less profitable, and
hence less prevalent. And fourth, through affirmative action for the benefit
of society's weaker groups, we are acting towards lessening social
inequality, reducing misery and cultural deprivation and reinforcing a feeling
of stability and communal solidarity.
(d) Nurturing the Love ofFellow Humans, Benevolence, and

Amiability
Unlike the cognitive nature of the two previous moral qualities, this
quality has a personality-emotional character." By this I mean that this
moral quality - friendliness, well-wishing, sympathy, solidarity, the will and
willingness to help others and share their happiness - should be regarded as
a basic proclivity, both inherent and acquired, which flows spontaneously
from the nature of personality. The value of this quality is beyond compare:
without it life is experienced as a path strewn with obstacles, replete with
sorrow and disputes, in which dog eats dog; with it, you may enjoy solid
protection that dulls the stings of life, supporting shoulders that mobilize
themselves to help you in times of decline and falling by the wayside. But
the greater the promise the greater the bewilderment: how to nurture this
quality in others is not at all clear or known. If the solution can be found
anywhere, it seems to me that we can find it in the sphere of personal
example and in a social climate that bestows much of this good on the
young, thus "infecting" those who experience it.
(e) Nurturing a Striving Towards Perfection

By striving towards perfection or human excellence I mean that
individuals should demand ofthemselves high quality and proper standards
36 See Frankena's discussion on benevolence in his Ethics, and MacIntyre's discussion of
amiability, Chapter 16 in his After Virtue.
155
in coping with the main challenges with which human life confronts them.
The value of striving towards perfection, as a component of moral education,
lies mainly in the sphere of motivation, i.e., in the process of a person's selfmotivation towards achieving a higher moral existence; or as Jubran points
out, the foundation of goodness lies in the pursuit of the good, and that
yearning is an essential element in all humans." The importance of this
component stems from recognition of the fact that accepting the yoke of
morality and meeting the high standards that are part and parcel of it is only
possible on the basis of human beings' self-demanding and perfectionist
drive that strives towards perfection or to a high quality of human
functionality.
According to numerous thinkers this kind of humanistic perfectionism
was the driving force behind the development of classical culture in Athens.
It is manifested in Pericles', Plato's and Aristotle's exacting perfectionism"
and in Plutarch's words that "it becomes a man's duty to pursue and make
after the best and choicest of everything, that he may not only employ his
contemplation, but may also be improved by it... [and] that a man ought to
apply his intellectual perception to such objects that, with the sense of
delight, are apt to call it forth, and allure it to its own proper good and
advantage. ,,39
This idea was prominently expressed in Nietzsche's 19th century
"philosophy of power," according to which the things of value are born only
through a process of critical and creative self-mastering and selfovercoming. In other words, meaningful and valuable things are brought to
life by people who are hard with themselves, challenging their human
faculties and powers in strenuous manners - legislating for themselves,
defining their own identities, and endowing their lives with meaning and
value which go beyond the banality of the routine and mediocre." As we
have seen in the previous chapter, in the zo" century it was the philosopher
Ortega who stated in his book The Revolt of the Masses, that striving
towards perfection is the touchstone that divides people into those whose
lives are "noble" and those whose lives are "regular." It is the difference
between, on the one hand, "a life of effort, ever set on excelling oneself, in
passing beyond what one is to what one sets up as a duty and an obligation,"
and, on the other hand, the inert life of "those who demand nothing special
The Prophet, "On Good and Evil."
Pericles' "Funeral Oration" in Thucydides' The Peloponnesian War; Plato, The
Symposium; Aristotle, Ethics, Book X; and the discussion of quality of culture in the
~revious chapter.
9 Plutarch, Lives ofNoble Grecians and Romans, "Pericles."
40 Nietzsche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra, HOn the Three Metamorphoses, " HOn the Way of
the Creator, " On the Thousand and One Goals. "
37 Jubran,
38 See
156
Chapter III
of themselves, but for whom to live is to be every moment what they already
are, without imposing on themselves any effort towards perfection; mere
buoys that float on the waves. ,,41
Even if the differentiation and analysis are only partially true, there is no
doubt that cultivating the nisus for perfection is a necessary condition for the
establishment of a moral life. Without it there is nothing to motivate human
beings to be ashamed of barbaric behavior that serves as an outlet for their
drives and needs, on the one hand, and to adapt civilized behaviors which
take into consideration intellectual, moral and esthetic criteria, on the other.
In other words, without this striving towards quality, this quest to excel the
gap that lies between existing reality and the reality we believe should exist
will be perpetuated.
(j) Nurturing a Positive Self-Image and a Feeling ofSelfWorth

This component pertains to nurturing a kind of awareness of one's own
self, so that individuals would perceive and experience themselves as moral
beings in the world. By this I mean that for human beings to be able to
morally cope with their reality they must perceive themselves as
autonomous, rational, sensitive, valuable, creative and unique creatures.
Otherwise, they may fall into the ways of life of "herd-like animals" who
follow, undiscemingly and without consideration, the conventions of the
majority and passing fashion. Likewise, and equally bad, they may adopt the
life of the "foolish follower," who worships, while being self-effacing,
various kinds of leaders, priests, "idols," and gurus (emperors, kings, rabbis
and priests who will eventually become, as suggested by Hamlet, food for
the worms, who will become food for the fish, who will become food for the
poor ... ).
In order to prevent this herd-like mentality and cultivate a moral back
bone, we must ensure that the individual is equipped with a positive selfimage, a feeling of self-worth, self-respect, legitimization of his or her
emotions and positions, belief in his or her right to maintain a personal and
long-term life plan, and the belief in his or her ability to actualize it.42 In
nurturing this component in the personality of the person being educated we
are helping him or her, according to Kohlberg's perception of moral
development, to go beyond heteronomous and conventional morality and
reach the highest level of autonomous morality: to a perception of his or her
Ortega y Gasset, The Revolt ofthe Masses, ch. 7 and ch.l.
On the importanceof self-respect and self-worth see Rawls, A Theory ofJustice, pp.
440-446.
41
42
157
moral conscience as the highest instance of moral judgment whose ultimate

commitment is to the just construction of human society.
(g) Reinforcing Character and Personality

In addressing Man's "character" we mean the relatively constant
uniformity of motives, virtues, habits, dispositions and priorities which are
manifested in the individual's overt behavior in facing the stimuli and
challenges that life presents. As we have seen previously, at times we speak
of character attributes in a general way (such as modesty and arrogance,
courage and cowardice), and at times we speak of a "good character" (as in
my previous example in which I referred to the love of one's fellow men and
women and the good will that seeks the good of others), and at times we
focus on the degree of strength of character (like the Hebrew saying, "the
greatest hero is one that conquers himself').
This third aspect of strength of character is extremely relevant to moral
life. By this we usually mean the ability of people to actualize their values,
commitments and goals, towards themselves and their fellow humans, while
resisting pressure, temptation and opposition - whether their source is
external-social or inner and personality-oriented. One should stress that
there are numerous people who are capable of differentiating between good
and evil, but nevertheless perform bad acts, on both material and human
levels, due to their weak will or spineless character. Responsibility,
credibility, the fulfillment of promises, adherence to tasks and overcoming
drives - all these are moral qualities which rely heavily on strength of
character and enable human beings to be masters of themselves and act
justly in their relationships with others. One should also stress that similar to
what has been said about "good character," it is extremely difficult to
influence moral quality by preaching or endless talk; it is nurtured mainly by
the individual's significant experience with challenging tasks that activate
the "character muscles" - thus strengthening them. (Woe to King David
whose lust overpowered his conscience when his desire for Bathsheba
caused him to send her husband Uriah to his death; Woe to Macbeth whose
ambition overpowered his conscience, thus bringing down a tragedy of
bloodshed on him and his victims.)
(h) Sensitive Caring for the Other, Empathic Understanding,

Compassion and Tenderness
One of the important contributions of the contemporary feminist
movement calls our attention to the fact that side by side with the rational
and exacting "morality of principles" there is also a "morality of sensitive
158
Chapter III
and empathic caring.?" Not only historical knowledge of "impassioned

ideals" and "principled reformers," but also the direct and everyday
observation of life teaches us that one should beware the evil impact of
incisive intellect, honed logic and principles carved in stone that contain no
tenderness, sensitivity or compassion. (Think of how much evil and misery
came into the world as a result of a position adopted by the likes of the
wealthy man in Howard's End, who defied the Schlegel sisters, who wanted
to ameliorate somewhat the harsh fate of the poor man: "Never become
sentimental with the poor.")
Two points are worthy of note: the first, that in nurturing this moral
quality one should strive so that the sphere of sensitive and empathic caring
should expand, one circle after the other, from people's relationship with
themselves and their families, to the communal and social circle, reaching
the circle of the foreign, the different and the anonymous." The second point
is that despite the fact that it was feminist-oriented scholars like Carol
Gilligan and Nell Noddings who made a special contribution to shifting this
kind of morality from the periphery to the center, men should not be
deprived of or exempt from these moral experiences. Examples of men who
possess this kind of morality can be found in the mobilization of Dr. Rieux
and his friend Tarrou to the saving of human life in Albert Camus' The
Plague; Thoreau's call (in the mid-Iv" century) for the freeing of the black
slaves in the United States by civil disobedience; Levin's insistence, in
Tolstoy's Anna Karenina, not to accept the exploitation of the serfs and their
treatment as beasts of burden; and Don Quixote's commitment to help the
wretched, poor and humiliated who do not enjoy the freedom and respect
they deserve by virtue of their humanity.
In these four examples, or at least this is the way they impress me, it is
not divine imperatives or rational and universal moral principles that serve as
the driving force, but the manifestation of sensitive caring which from
empathic identification mobilizes itself to protect the integrity, well-being
and respect of the other's humanity. In light of its unique characteristics I
have no doubt that this kind of morality, which embodies sensitive and
empathic caring, should be in the possession of all people, men and women
alike, not instead of "a rational-principled morality" but as the
complementary equipment for rendering coping with the complexity of
moral situations more effectively. "To every thing there is a season,... a time
43 This kind of morality is dominant in the poetry of Yehudah Amichai and Jubran Khalil
Jubran. For the morality of care as an approach in the theory of morality that developed
from feminist thinking and research, see Carol Gilligan, In a Different Voice:
Psychological Theory and Women's Development; Noddings, Caring: A Feminine
proach to Ethics and Moral Education.
In this matter it is especially worth attending to Bertrand Russell's Autobiography.
1!,
159
to embrace and a time to refrain from embracing": a time for sensitive

caring, for empathic understanding, spontaneous empathy, mercy and
tenderness, and a time for imposing rational arguments on the voices of
sensitivity and emotion.
(i) Nurturing Moral Knowledge o/Good and Bad

In the fourth part of the Ethics, Spinoza presents his position that "as for
the terms good and bad, they indicate no positive quality in things regarded
in themselves, but are merely modes of thinking, or notions which we form
from the comparison of things one with another.?" In light of this
conception, there is nothing sacred in our concepts of good and evil, and
their recognition does not derive from an immediate encounter with the
"divine presence" or from a philosophical observation of the "world of
ideas." Moral knowledge of good and bad (or evil), similar to other spheres
of knowledge, is the fruit of a particular circle of human inquiry and
discourse in the framework of human culture, which comprises well-defined
purposes, basic terms and assumptions, and an accumulation of knowledge,
research methods, and standards of excellence and validity.
"Good," Spinoza says, is everything that brings us closer to actualizing
the ideals or models of excellence we have set for ourselves, and similar to
the statement that "the yield of this mango tree is high" receives its meaning
from a prior knowledge of mango trees in a wide variety of fertility, so the
determination that someone is good at dancing, skiing, chess, military
command, teaching, or in his or her moral behavior, receives its meaning
from knowledge of diverse forms of functioning that maintain an affinity
with the ideals and exemplary models that we envisage. Our knowledge and
understanding of these spheres of practical reason are always based on our
previous experience, which enables us - through our powers of imagination
and reason .- to diagnose, identify, define and place every new phenomenon
in the framework of our overall worldview. Hence, just as we can talk about
music that it is strident, words that are out of place, a chess move that gone
wrong, thus our experience in the moral sphere enables us to express our
opinion (which can be justified according to public criteria) that a certain
behavior was tactless, insensitive, evil or unfair.
I will elucidate this point with several examples. The opinion that King
Lear's daughters, Goneril and Regan behaved evilly and despicably towards
their father (bad behavior from the moral point of view) receives its meaning
and validity by comparing it to their younger sister Cordelia's different
behavior. Similarly, Edgar's (the Duke of Gloucester's son) noble (morally
4S
Spinoza, Ethics, Part IV, "Preface."
160
Chapter III
good) behavior, becomes clear to us only by comparing it with the

unrestrained ambition of the second son, Edmund. In both cases the moral
stance becomes clear against the backdrop of common criteria related to
parent-children relationships that developed over thousands of years of
human experience. And another example: the moral condemnation of
soldiers who murdered, raped and plundered receives its validity in the light
of other soldiers who chose to preserve their humanity and that of those
conquered - and all this again on the basis of thousands of years of
experience in wars and conquests of numerous and varied people throughout
history.
A third example was recently provided by American singer Bruce
Springsteen who, in a television interview, protested that the nature of a
society is measured not by its economic victories but by the compassion it
shows towards its weaker sons and daughters and its willingness to help
them. His arguments are illustrated by comparing the way in which the
United States abandons its weaker citizens vs. the way in which Canada, its
neighbor, and Scandinavian Sweden care for the well-being and dignity of
the individual, even if they are penniless. Perhaps the best example for
clarifying this issue is "Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations"
(Genesis 6:9). In other words, Noah's unparalleled righteousness acquires its
meaning only by comparing the way in which he withstood morality's
challenges (in the context dealt with here) with the ways and customs of his
generation.
This kind of model, of the functional judgment of good and evil, has been
presented by the philosopher John Rawls. On the question of those things
that are rationally and justly considered good, he answers, that it is rational
to consider objects, tools, professionals, or deeds "good" if the they possess
to a higher degree than average those properties that rational people would
want them to have. And, "by analogy, a good person .. .is one who has to a
higher degree than the average person the broadly based properties that it is
rational for persons to want in one another.?" It is true that it is relatively
simple to use this test to examine the nature of washing machines, pens and
computers; it is more complex and difficult to evaluate the nature of
teachers, psychologists, physicians and politicians; and it is extremely
difficult to reach incisive answers in the field of moral activity. However,
despite the complexity and ambiguity of the moral sphere, this index should
not be relinquished, in the vein of "throwing out the baby with the
bathwater." Awareness of the moral and cultural heritage, with all its goals,
values and indices, and sensitive and critical vigilance of a person to him-or
herself and towards social reality, can no doubt establish a kind of network
46
See Rawls, A Theory ofJustice, pp. 399-439.
161
of coordinates for ethical orientation and intelligent and responsible moral

judgment.
Some of the coordinates in this grid are noticeable from afar as
lighthouses whose directives are dos and don'ts. Another part serves as
guiding clues, and yet another serves as an invitation to non-binding ethical
realms, given to unique preferences of communities and individuals. The
following are qualities and characteristics that are not difficult to recognize
as they are good for all: joie de vivre is better than a life of misery and
bereavement, a healthy and active life is better than a life of sickness and
suffering, peace and brotherhood are better than war and alienation,
knowledge is better than ignorance and sensitivity is better than crudeness,
freedom is better than subjugation and performing justice is better than
performing injustice, equality and decency are better than racism and
discrimination, self-respect and self-actualization are better than selfdeprecation and neglect of one's abilities, beauty and refinement are better
than ugliness and coarseness, and moderate and balanced leaders are better
than "strong people" whose power is usually manifested in an uninhibited
abuse of power that exacts a high price in human life, individual freedom
and social justice.
We will conclude this issue: knowledge of good and bad is not only
possible but also active in the life of everyone, and similar to the case of
knowledge of the natural environment, the moral knowledge of the majority
of us is partial, lacking and often erroneous and false. The special difficulty
of "the knowledge of good and evil" derives from the fact that contrary to
truth of the sciences - that describe the set of laws that lie at the basis of
natural phenomena - the truths of morality are not "available" for
generalization, presentation, formulation and proof at high levels of
precision, clarity, unequivocalness and objectivity. But let us not be
mistaken: we are unable to prove the nature and existence of love, but this
fact does not annul its actuality; the immense difficulty involved in
explaining the greatness and beauty of a work of art does not nullify the
esthetical truth embodied in it. Similarly, the fact that we do not have the
differentiated and precise tools for proving the evil embodied in the
annihilation of people and the murder of individuals, racism, abuse of the
weak, deprivation of freedom, deceit and fraud, etc., cannot diminish the
validity of these truths.
Let us examine a few examples of moral truths. A pharmacist who
diluted a costly medicine with inexpensive water for his personal profit, thus
causing the death of a patient, is morally guilty of murder, fraud and breach
of confidence. A politician, who, in the name of patriotism, prohibits the
freedom of expression, is morally guilty of trampling the dignity of Man and
of false and oppressive manipulation. A teacher who lowers the grades of his
Chapter III
162
or her students due to their ethnic origin is morally responsible of lack of

racial justice. And a person who fought for his or her rights as a member of a
minority group in one country, and later oppresses the rights of minorities in
another in which he or she is member of the majority, is morally guilty of
interest-oriented opportunism. These moral truths are self-evident to anyone
equipped with the accumulated moral knowledge of the human race, and on
the basis of that same knowledge they can be demonstrated and proved. It
should be stressed that the problem of proof in these cases is not based on
the truths themselves but on the illogical expectation of some to obtain proof
of a mathematical nature for problems that are human by nature (similar to
the lumberjack who goes off to work with a surgical scalpel or a surgeon
who enters the operating theater with an axe).
We may have, for example, a vivid memory of ice cream that is fresh and
wondrous in texture, and a memory of innocent and captivating young love,
and these memories serve us as criteria in evaluating new experiences.
Similarly, "memories" of a warm and friendly glance, a supportive helping
hand, caring and sensitive concern, restraint and overcoming instinct,
rebellion against injustice, blamelessness and performing justice (and, of
course, also moral decadence and deception) - our memories of morality charged with the richness of the moral insights of culture, become, through
the tools of thinking, the active knowledge of good and evil.
6. PEDAGOGICAL MEANS
In this book I will not go into a fundamental and detailed presentation of
the pedagogical means necessary for advancing moral education, and so a
presentation of the guidelines must suffice. In my view the four most
important pedagogical principles are: personal example and the inculcation
of habits, nurturing cultural literacy, nurturing critical literacy, and the
availability of experiential and relevant learning in which the unique value of
knowledge is measured by its ability to serve as foundation and motivation
for a moral life.
(a) Personal Example and the Inculcation ofHabit

Based on the philosophical positions of Aristotle- and Dewey and the
modeling and imitation theory of educational psychology, it seems that we
may generalize and say that our moral character is formed primarily by the
personal example to which we are exposed, and by the behavioral habits
which our educators inculcate. As I mentioned earlier in the section on
character attributes, we acquire the skills and tendencies that establish moral
163
behavioral patterns in a way similar to that in which we acquire the skills

necessary for success in carpentry, playing an instrument, riding, driving,
military command, medicine and teaching. We are, in fact, speaking here of
the ability to properly combine accumulated knowledge, perception, sensory
keenness, intuition, sensitivity, factual knowledge, reasoning, a sense of
proportion, decision-making ability and all the other components that render
activity successful. This ability is acquired both by observing exemplary
characters, professionals and artists, and by strict training and guidance that
gradually shape the desired patterns of activities in those being educated.
A very general conception of education as habituation was presented by
Dewey, who contended that "education is the process of forming
fundamental dispositions, intellectual and emotional, toward nature and
fellow men.?" With regard to the concrete activities involved in the
habituation process, it was Aristotle who wrote in his Ethics that "the things
we have to learn before we can do them, we learn by doing them, e.g. men
become builders by building and lyre-players by playing the lyre; so too we
become just by doing just acts, temperate by doing temperate acts, brave by
doing brave acts...in one word, states of character arise out of like
activities.?" For this reason we should present activities of a certain kind
and train students in them until they become a permanent habit and second
nature (caring for the well-being of fellow men and women, rebellion against
injustice, and preserving public property).
In the process of inculcating habits, the educator's personal example is of
crucial importance. As moral education will not be successful "apart from
the habitual vision of greatness.?" and without a "shared normative
consciousness.T" so it will be doomed to failure in the absence of a living
and present example of moral excellence which can be pointed out, and
which constitutes a source of inspiration that can be imitated, and from
which one may receive guidance and training. For this reason children's
educators - parents, kindergarten teachers and school teachers - should
begin with self-education: with self-overcoming and self-formation, so that
their behavioral patterns will be good and worthy of imitation and not
something that will later involve rigorous efforts to eradicate. In their speech
and attentiveness, in their behavior with people and while driving a car, in
their attitude towards the law and public property, and in their treatment of
their natural environment - in short, their public behavior will embody the
best moral virtues, so that the moral learning of which Buber spoke, that
Dewey, Democracy and Education, p. 328.
Aristotle, Ethics, Book II, 1.
49 Whitehead, The Aims ofEducation, p. 69.
so Gadamer in Bernstein, Beyond Objectivism and Relativism, p. 262.
47
48
164
Chapter III
same immediate education through the very presence and existence of the
educator, will take place during those moments in which the educator had no
intention of educating them. 51 "Educators are needed who have themselves
been educated, superior, noble spirits, proved at every moment, proved by
words and silence, representing culture which has grown ripe and sweet not the learned louts whom secondary schools and universities today offer
our youth as higher wet nurses. ,,52
(b) Nurturing Cultural Literacy

By cultural literacy I mean that the spirit of Man or one's mind is rich
with a diversity of knowledge, insights, sensitivities, points of view,
reference contexts, thinking strategies and criteria that allow him to
intelligently refer to the central issues of public discussion and cultural
endeavor. Cultural literacy or broad-mindedness is undoubtedly not
sufficient to establish moral life, but without it, it is impossible: as I
mentioned earlier in the section on the characteristics of morality, the fact
that people are equipped with an aggregation of values, perspectives and
moral thinking principles is a necessary condition for the very identification
of human phenomena as "moral situations" that mandate reference and
decision ("red lines" of human morality and "warning flags" of the clearly
illegal). Moreover, the person who possesses cultural literacy can be likened
to one who possesses numerous floodlights that throw light on the moral
situation from numerous and diverse angles, thus protecting him, and us,
from the damages of narrow-minded ignorance and intolerant dogmatic
fanaticism. Cultural literacy contains a special blessing as a prophylactic
drug against democracy becoming mobocracy; in other words, from the
democracy as a regime of involved, well-educated and critical citizens to a
regime of the "mobs."
John Dewey, the American educational philosopher, expanded on the
importance of the cultural shaping of the student. In My Pedagogical Creed
Dewey discusses the social elements of the individual's character: "all
education proceeds by the participation of the individual in the social
consciousness of the race...shaping the individual's powers, saturating his
consciousness, forming his habits, training his ideas, and arousing his
feelings and emotions.Y' And in Democracy and Education he adds that:
"unless pains are taken to see that genuine and thorough transmission takes
51 Buber,
"The Education of Character."

Nietzsche, Twilight ofthe Idols, "What the Germans Lackk,"; and Schopenhauer as
Educator, chps. 1 and 2; and Thus Spoke Zarathustra, "On the Gift-Giving Virtue."
S3 Dewey, "My Pedagogical Creed," p. 19.
52
165
place, the most civilized group will relapse into barbarism and into
savagery. ,,54 Contrary to educational innovators with a leaning toward
romantic and permissive naturalism, Dewey understood that philosophy,
literature and poetry "are the most powerful of all the architects of our souls
and societies'Y' that "reason does not work in an experiential
vacuum ... [and] the individual's imagination and character must be such that
new ideas be permitted entrance into that innennost sphere of the personality
where our view of reality is formed.t'"
In other words, just as with the process of introducing students to the
achievements of science, technology and art, human culture is extremely
important for shaping his or her moral character in light of the best of the
thinking and practice in the moral sphere. Nietzsche referred to this idea in
saying that the student should be nurtured to develop "antennae for all types
of men."S7 The British educationalist Richard Peters argued that students
should be initiated into worthwhile modes of thought and action." And in
the words of the classicist Livingston: the most important service that
schools and universities can do for their pupils is to "show them the best
things that have been done, thought and written in the world, and fix these in
their minds as a standard and test to guide them in life.,,59
(c) Nurturing Critical Literacy

Critical literacy (which I discussed in the previous chapter in the context
of autonomous thinking) plays a central role in moral judgment, first by
preventing and exposing injustice: it is embodied in the ability of human
beings to examine the nature of the reality of their lives in an inquisitive,
rational, autonomous and multi-directional way; to identify the powers and
logic working in and shaping society; to understand the meaning of current
processes and their future implications; to examine the validity and value of
positions in the framework of cultural contexts and the relevant spheres of
knowledge. Critical literacy means not only the ability but also the way of
"being a human being in the world": it is a caring and critical awareness that
seeks - as a rational and conscientious watchdog - to continuously examine
the value of the ideals that guide our lives and the degree of compatibility
between what is generally worthy and that which exists (in practice) between rhetoric and practice, between symbols and symbolized, between
Democracy and Education, chp. 1.
The Company We Keep, p. 39.
56 Ryne, "The Humanities and Moral Reality," p. 16.
57 Nietzsche, The Will to Power, sec. 259.
58 Peters, Ethics and Education, ch. 5.
59 Livingston, Education for a World Adrift, p. 52.
54 Dewey,
55 Booth,
166
Chapter III
the high-flown slogans and quotidian facts. At its best, critical literacy
consists of abilities of discernment and judgment that have been culturally
bettered, together with a radical temperament that resolutely and decisively
refuses to accept fraud, distortion, injustice and deception.
In the spirit of Thoreau, Shaw and Chomsky, we can perhaps define the
role of critical literacy in the realms of morality as the prevention, or at least
reduction, of the prevalent phenomenon in which even good people and
decent citizens consider the killing of others as one of their duties." This
task is part and parcel of going beyond the limited and submissive "herd-like
mentality" towards an "independent and critical consciousness," from the
biased and inflamed perspective of the "fervid sports fans" to the in-principle
and overall perspective of the "referee," from tribal ethnocentrism of "we vs.
them" to the anthropocentrism of "Man qua man," from a deterministic or
fatalistic perspective, which accepts random reality as necessary existence,
to a sober and free perspective that perceived the order of things as one
possible (factual) reality side by side with alternative (potential) possibilities.
The need for this kind of "remedial" process is particularly notable in
light of two phenomena that have already taken their gory toll in human
history. The first is the sanctity of a particular religion and nationality,
including the sanctity of war in their name, despite the fact that people
acquire their religious and national identity in the same way as they acquire
their mother tongue - hence, their collective ideals possess no special value,
truth or sanctity that can be rationally justified. The second is the tendency to
sanctify the laws of the state, and in their name do the worst injustices,
despite the fact that the laws of the state express no more and no less than
the position of the sovereign - Pharaoh's plagues to drown every boy of the
Hebrew people, the slavery laws in the United States, the Nuremberg laws in
Germany and the apartheid laws in South Africa are all examples of past
laws that the moral point of view requires us to oppose and dismantle.
Distinct examples of critical literacy at work can be found among the
classical "preachers at the gates". Among the Greek philosophers Socrates is
particularly notable. He claimed that in moral matters "we must not consider
at all what the many will say of us, but only the expert in justice and
injustice.'?" and he also showed publicly that those considered wise in the
eyes of the public and themselves are often empty vessels who hardly know
anything of what they pretend to knoW. 62 Among the Hebrew prophets,
particularly notable was Isaiah, who exposed the villainy of the rulers who
60 See Chomsky, Language and Freedom, ch. 1; Thoreau's On the Duty ofCivil
Disobedience; Shaw's, Don Juan in Hell; and Camus' The Rebel.
61 Plato, Crito, p .452.
62 Plato, Apologia.
167
"decree unrighteous decrees" and who "call evil good, and good evil; that
put darkness for light, and light for darkness," (10: 1; 5:20; and see also
Ecclesiastes, 3:16, "the place of judgment, that wickedness was there"). In
light of these examples one may say that to some extent the history of human
progress is the history of critical literacy exposing false pretense, malice
dressed as sanctity, superstition and prejudice adorned as confirmed truth,
egotistical aggressiveness camouflaged as patriotism, evil disguised as love,
war under the banners of peace, and labor camps under the pretense of
"reeducation."
In the New Era, when critical thinking is more prevalent and information
is readily available, it is seemingly easier to advance and nurture critical
literacy. But on the other hand the mechanisms of distorting reality through
propaganda, "Orwellian language" and "word Laundromats," tum
identification of the "writing on the wall" into a particularly difficult task.
Despite this, we are not impotent and are also able to learn more from the
New Era: on the connection between interest-oriented nurturing of religiosity
for herd-like domination of the masses, one may learn from Napoleon's
saying that "only religion gives the state firm and lasting support ... you must
form believers, not reasoners.rf On the mechanisms of colonialism we can
learn from the words of Jomo Kenyatta that "when the white Europeans
approached us we had the lands and they had Bibles in their hands; and
when we opened our eyes, after praying the prayers they had taught us, they
had our lands and we were left with their Bible.,,64 We can equally learn
from the widening gap between the righteous preaching of leaders in the
Communist world and their power-abusing and greedy egotism (revealed
when their regimes toppled), and we can likewise learn from American
society's betrayal of the values of equality and freedom of which it was so
proud - betrayal which Martin Luther King (in his famous speech "I have a
dream") compared to an "empty check" and which means a reality of the
blacks' humiliation, discrimination and suffering.
At times we recognize injustice as the fruit of a continual and pedantic
effort to expose the true face of reality, and at times injustice cries out to us
intuitively with a feeling of "lacking" - we expect to find honesty, justice,
decency or courtesy, as a necessary and obvious characteristic of a given
reality, but this characteristic is more conspicuous by its absence than any
other existing component that tries to hide it. Critical literacy at its best,
which combines the two processes with incisive and penetrating vision, we
find in the following paragraph, in which George Bernard Shaw exposes the
vulgarity, shallowness and pretense of the social elite of his times:
63
64
Stromber, European Intellectual History Since 1789, p. 21.

Quoted in Naveh, The Twentieth Century: The Era that Generated Turnabouts, p. 162.
168
Chapter III
Your friends are all the dullest dogs I know. They are not beautiful:
they are only decorated. They are not clean: they are only shaved and
starched. They are not dignified: they are only fashionably dressed. They
are not educated: they are only college passmen. They are not religious:
they are only pewrenters. They are not moral: they are only conventional.
They are not virtuous: they are only cowardly. They are not even vicious:
they are only "frail." They are not artistic: they are only lascivious. They
are not prosperous: they are only rich. They are not loyal, they are only
servile; not dutiful, only sheepish; not public spirited, only patriotic; not
courageous, only quarrelsome; not determined, only obstinate; not
masterful, only domineering; not self-controlled, only obtuse; not selfrespecting, only vain; not kind, only sentimental; not social, only
gregarious; not considerate, only polite; not intelligent, only opinionated;
not progressive, only factious; not imaginative, only superstitious; not
just, only vindictive; not generous, only propitiatory; not disciplined, only
cowed; and not truthful at all: liars every one of them, to the very
backbone of their souls."
(d) Teaching that Nurtures Moral Awareness and Sensitivity

In the previous chapter we saw that teaching of a humanist nature should
be connective and communicative, in order to render "the tree of
knowledge" into the "tree of life." As clarifying examples we indicated
Ecclesiastes' yearning for "Wisdom [that] giveth life to them that have it"
(Ecclesiastes 7:12) or Montaigne's position which held that critical and
sensitive thinking is more important than knowledge per se, Nietzsche's
position that learning must add to the vitality of character, Whitehead's
complaint that learning ends in many cases with useless inert ideas, and
Postman's approach that education does not require a machine, but vision,
and not information but wisdom. As stated in Proverbs, we should direct
towards knowledge which is "a tree of life to them that lay hold upon her:
and happy is every one that retaineth her" (Proverbs 3:18).
Since the moral education of students is not conducted - and cannot be
conducted - only in the framework of classes that focus on moral issues but
in all the varied classes studied at school, teachers should implant moral
meaning in all their lessons. Teachers should weave into their study subjects
the ethical, cultural and topical contexts relevant to the matter at hand,
nurture insights, sensitivities, intentions and ways of thinking that advance
proper coping with the moral challenges that reality poses. Great potential
6S
Shaw, Don Juan in Hell, pp. 82-83.
169
for cultivating moral awareness we can find, for example, in the Biblical
stories of King David and Queen Isabel who abused the weak for their
gaining personal satisfaction. Likewise, teachers can discuss the importance
and relevance of the Prophet Isaiah and the philosopher Socrates as
preachers at the gate against the depravity of the regime; Galileo and Andrei
Sacharov as scientists opposed to the dogmatism and domination of the
establishment; Virginia Woolf and Martin Luther King against a racist and
discriminative society; the three Karamazov brothers as three different types
of human beings; the "various animals" in confronting the moral dilemmas
in Orwell's Animal Farm.
I will give a somewhat wider example of this matter through the works of
Shakespeare, who is unequaled in creating a real and vital encounter
between his readers and the moral contretemps and challenges of routine life
common to us all. We will begin with the tragedy of King Lear: an elderly,
very wealthy man, and the question of the division of the inheritance (which
is present in the lives of all of us) arises. How should one behave in such
matters, to what degree can the power of inheritance be exploited in
dominating the life of one's inheriting offspring, and to what extent is it
desirable to preserve resources that will suffice for maintaining a proper
existence in old age and avoid being dependent on the mercy or goodwill of
others? And the inheritors themselves, us, the sons and daughters of our
parents - which is the worthy way to act with our "elders," to preserve their
dignity, return their love and not exploit their weakness? And valuable
friendship - what shape will it take? Is this a kind of obsequious friendship,
falling into line with every wish and whim, that says what is expected, or
perhaps friendship like that of the Duke of Kent who out of true concern for
a friend also dared to say the harshest and most critical things. And when
victory is promised and justice is about to be done - is that the time to settle
accounts, without differentiation or limits, or perhaps, like the Duke of
Cornwall, we should employ a measure of self-criticism and self-restraint
and say, together with him, that we must not exercise our power unless it is
for the right and just cause."
The second example is from Macbeth. Is there anyone who is not familiar
with passionate ambition, the hope and promise to be more than we are? And
Macbeth, as one of us, is no better and no worse. From the time the witches
inform him that he will be king, a titanic struggle begins between ambition
and decency. Is there anyone who is not familiar with this inner battle
between instinct and desire and reason and conscience? And who is
unfamiliar with the attempt of Lady Macbeth to desensitize herself and
silence her conscience in preparing herself for committing her treacherous
66
Shakespeare, King Lear, Act v.
170
Chapter III
and murderous act: "And fill me, from the crown to the toe, top-full of direst
cruelty! Make thick my blood, stop up the access and passage to remorse,
that no compunctious visitings of nature shake my fell purpose, nor keep
peace between the effect and it! Come to my woman's breasts. And take my
milk for gall... ,,67
But all in vain. Nature in its entirety, humanity in its entirety, and the
single soul in each of us cannot accept murderous injustice: Macbeth has
murdered the king: "Macbeth does murder sleep...Macbeth shall sleep no
more.,,68 Lady Macbeth's conscience exacted its vengeance and killed her,
Macduff (whose family Macbeth murdered as well) kills Macbeth and puts
his head on display. And in all this plot and plotting comes Banquo's modest
voice; Macbeth's friend (and later his adversary) suggests an alternative to
the cycle of blood: he will cooperate, but only "in seeking to augment it, but
still keep my bosom franchised and allegiance clear,,69 (that in my attempt to
greaten my public honor my human dignity will not be diminished).
In concluding this chapter, I would like to present an example of
nurturing sensitivity and moral knowledge through teaching "learning
materials": this time not Shakespeare, but from the heritage of the bible and
Hebrew literature, from a heritage that is spread out over two thousand five
hundred years, which underscores concern for the exploited - a heritage of
morality in which the contemporary Israeli poet Aharon Shabbtai, connects
to the biblical Ecclesiastes. So says Ecclesiastes: "So I returned, and
considered all the oppression that are done under the sun; and behold the
tears of such as were oppressed, and they had no comforter" (4:1). And in
our times Aharon Shabbtai continues these words in his poem "Morality
doesn't come with a smile":
It seems that morality doesn't come with a smile like an uncle with candy
Only when the fire falls in the wheat the fat snakes burn.
Oh, it's such a shame about the wheat, the good, innocent wheat!
Only when the rich wallow in the tears of the poor, does it come.
And these tears gather slowly, and slowly they tum into a sea,
And in the meantime they water the pumpkins with them, the ox in the
alley,
Use them for showering, washing clothes, washing the office floor.
Build more high-rises, more steel doors and glass windows,
So that the tidal wave rises,
And drowns the man taking a shower on the top floor.
Shakespeare, Macbeth, Act I, 5.

Act II, 2.
69 Ibid.Act I, 1.
67
68 Ibid,

Only when the stick destroys the hump will the heart hear."
70
Shabbtai, "Morality does not come with a smile," Ha'aretz, 8.8.1997.
171
Chapter IV
HUMANISTIC EDUCATION IN THE TEST OF
CURRENT EVENTS
Education should not only dress wounds ofpast wars, but also prevent, as far as
possible, situations that endanger the existence of society and the normal
existence ofthe individuaL
ZviLamm
Anyone who has not been to Jabalia {refugee camp] in Gaz cannot conceive
human life that is lowlier than the trampled weeds.
S. Yizhar
Democracy does not safeguard itself. If we do not safeguard it, it will not
safeguard us.
Aharon Barak
Education is in need ofa vision, not technology.
Neil Postman
INTRODUCTION
It is not easy being a teacher-educator these days. The value and authority
crisis whose characteristics we examined in the previous chapter is more
detrimental to the status of teachers-educators than in any other occupation
or profession. The erosion of teachers' status can be described on the three
levels of teacher-student, teacher-parent and teacher-ministry.
On the teacher-student relationship level, the distress of teachers is an
inevitable consequence of a pedagogical trend that places the "child at the
center." As a rule, teachers make no effort to clarify the meaning of the idea
and only rarely attempt to actualize it. Furthermore, almost all teachers today
have a tendency to adopt it, only to understand later that they have fallen into
a self-laid trap. If the children are at the center, then teachers, educators and
adults, the assets of culture and wisdom of generations are only marginal,
and their relative value is measured by their contribution to the child.
Who knows and how does one know what is good for the child? If the
only measure is the child's spontaneous and momentary wish for fun,
pleasure and happiness, then schools are superfluous and the compulsory
173
174
Chapter IV
education law should be abolished. However, if the child's good is also

determined by the views of philosophers (regarding worthy content and
values), psychologists (regarding the ways of emotion and mind), and
sociologists (regarding social and cultural patterns), we no longer have one
center but two - child and culture. And children themselves - what are they?
How much truth is there in the myth that the "real I," latent in the core
personality of the child, seeks to realize its singular tendencies (and the task
of the educator is to assist him or her in this process)? And how much weight
should be attributed to the view that claims that the individual is always a
product of the environment (cultural fields of power in postmodem lingo)?
Assuming that there is a measure of truth in both perceptions, attention to
the child's hidden desires is to a great extent not "the child's inner and
singular nature," but rather his or her wishes and desires that cunning
marketing people in the political systems and commercial market have
instilled in him or her (and they could not care less about the good of the
child). In short, the widespread simplistic perception that "the child is at the
center" is suicidal to education. It offers no respect towards cultural
standards (in the adult world) which are worthy of aspiration, nor awareness
that teacher's role in advancing the child's development is based on a
combined affinity with the sublime in culture and the uniqueness of the
student. Without all these, it is not surprising that students regard teacher
authority as arbitrary and power-abusing. By the same token, they "get back
at the teacher" by conducting aggressive battles, using coarse language, and,
at times, both physical and verbal violence.
On the teacher-parent relationship level, the problem is embodied in the
transition from "supportive" to "determining involvement." Parents want the
best for their children, and they want it the way they want it; and if the
school (whose prestige is low) does not properly understand this, "we'll
show them what we expect." This is more or less the way numerous parents
of the upper-middle class feel, and they feel they are justified: children are at
the center; parents are often not less educated than teachers. In a liberal
society there are no common agreements about value scales; thus parents
expect teachers to teach, but they should not attempt to educate.
Under current conditions, in which education is a free market with "open
registration zones," some parents say openly: "we are the consumers, and we
know what's best for us"; "the customer is always right," and "we have the
right contacts (among position-holders) to exert pressure on the school
principal to meet our demands." Against this backdrop, numerous teachers
and principals feel they are fighting for the survival of the remaining
educational territories: determining the character of the school and forming
its policy, selecting curriculums and teaching methods, performing routine
activities and marking special events. (My own experience in this shows that
Education in the Test ofCurrent Events
175
when teachers simply submit to parental dictates, without any cooperation in

decision-making and action, everyone loses).
On the third level, teacher-Education Ministry of education relationships,
the problem is twofold: on the one hand, in recent years the ministry of
education in many countries has made "innovation and initiative" its leading
ideology, and, in its name, has every now and then enforced "innovative and
progressive" approaches on teachers, before the previous approaches were
internalized and effectively and productively applied to the curriculum. On
the other hand, very little has been done on the level of the overall ethical
and pedagogical viewpoint, wherein teachers could find logic and meaning
in their work. In religious schools, the problem is less acute. They share a
common commitment to actualize religious ideas, and all other subjects
related to the curriculum, such as teaching methods, technology and cultural
enrichment are dwarfed when compared with the common religious ideal.
But in the general-state education the situation is disastrous: without a
common overall purpose, without a uniting and guiding vision, an end or a
telos.' nothing will arouse and impel the teacher's sense of idealism and
mission, a feeling of educational vocation that sustains teachers and
motivates them to offer the best of themselves to their students. Just as
children cannot open up to alternatives without a certain feeling of stability
with regard to what exists, so teachers lose their ability to develop and
become' rejuvenated without an intellectual, ethical and pedagogical basis
that will serve them as a professional anchor for educational thinking and
endeavor.
The purpose of these introductory remarks on the distress of teachers and
the factors that erode their status is not to nullify their responsibility for their
part in this deplorable situation (in their behavior with their students and
their demands upon themselves), nor to determine a standpoint regarding the
relative responsibility of each of the factors involved in the devaluation of
education's status. My intention is twofold: (1) to heighten the understanding
that without broad public cooperation in advancing "teachers' quality and
status we will all suffer from an education system that is not worthy of the
name; and (2) that developing the professional ethics and awareness of
teachers (I will use the word "teacher" to denote both educators and
teachers) is the best method" of advancing the status and quality of education.
As might be expected (in the framework of this book), the humanistic
worldview and theory of education will serve as the intellectual, ethical and
pedagogical frame of reference for grounding the spirit and principles of the
proposed professional ethics. I will begin with a presentation of the potential
I On the importance of shared ideals and ends for the existence of vital moral and
educational practices see McIntyre's After Virtue and Postman's The End ofEducation.
176
Chapter IV
embodied in a professional ethics for teachers, continue with an outline of

the characteristic and unique goals of the education profession, and conclude
with the implications of a professional ethics on the various relationships in
the school framework. Subsequently, our discussion will shift from the
school to the social and political arena: dealing with the obligation of
humanistic teachers to act in society as a contributing, and often critical and
subversive, elite group, even if this means educating in opposition to the
spirit ofthe times vis-a-vis the most urgent current issues.
1. THE GOAL OF EDUCATION AND ITS

MANIFESTATIONS IN THE PROFESSIONAL ETHICS
OF EDUCATORS AND TEACHERS
Next to a substantial increase in teachers' salaries that will allow a more
exacting choice of the teacher and educator workforce, the development of
professional ethics is the most significant element in advancing the quality
and status of education. Such a step has two clear-cut advantages: the first
pertains to gaining the respect and trust of the general public. Contrary to the
mixed and often critical attitude raised by the demands of trade unions
regarding the improvement of working conditions, the free initiative of
teachers to raise demands for themselves in all matters regarding the quality
of their work as professionals, can only arouse sympathy and esteem, and
serve as a basis for a respectful and trusting attitude in the future.
The second advantage relates to improving the quality of education both
in the teacher-training process and in safeguarding quality and responsibility
in various educational endeavors. This goal will be advanced as a
consequence of heightening teachers' professional awareness and accepting
a commitment to higher standards - in knowledge, expertise and conduct which should characterize them as professionals and make them worthy of
the name of teacher. At the same time, we should be aware of the fact that in
light of the moral turpitude prevalent among numerous physicians and
lawyers professional ethics alone cannot guarantee public prestige and
professional quality; for this, there is a need for professional idealism,
appropriate remuneration and attentive supervision on the part of the
professional bureau and the general public.
It is important to make clear that in developing professional ethics I mean
something far broader than the formal and technical meaning of an ethical
code of conduct. The wider notion I am referring to comprises conscioussubjective elements of self-image, a sense of vocation and professional
identity, together with public-objective elements of personal example,
177
communital involvement, interpersonal relationships and quality of thought

and action. As I stated in the previous chapter, the term "ethics" derives from
the root ethos (in ancient Greek) and indicates an assemblage of values,
attributes and principles which directs the proper ways of human behavior in
all matters relating to their relationships with themselves and others.
Throughout the development of human culture, an awareness evolved
regarding the need for ethics specific to certain liberal professions, side by
side with ethics as an all-embracing moral system: ethical codes that define
nonnative patterns of knowledge and behavior which should characterize
professionals as qualified and worthy of their profession. In the beginning,
this related to the medical and legal professions, later psychologists, social
workers, and in some places, teachers and other populations achieved this
kind of professional status. In other words, when I note the importance of a
professional ethics for teachers, I mean the nurturing of a normative
awareness common to educators an-d teachers that distinguishes them from
the general public and other professionals, and which is embodied in the
specific norms of intention, thinking and behavior - some of which are
defined in the professional code of the education profession and others that
are intrinsic to the expectations and demands related to the images of
education and teaching in public consciousness.
Before we define what distinguishes the professional ethics of teachers,
we shall briefly examine what is common to teaching and other occupations
that enjoy a professional status. A profession, in comparison to other
occupations, is a kind ofsocial practice characterized by its intent to better
the condition ofhuman beings in an essential and common sphere ofhuman
existence, through specialization in a recognized academic field of
knowledge, and by a commitment to high ethical and professional standards
- both in the processes of training and certification of its members and in
strictly adhering to professional ethics in ongoing routine work.
More specifically, it is generally accepted that six basic characteristics
render an occupation a profession: (1) an ideal or vocation for bettering the
condition of human beings in a cardinal aspect of human life (physical
health, mental health, fair trial, education and care-giving); (2) a discrete and
reliable corpus of knowledge that comprises theoretical tradition and public
discourse; (3) an extended and controlled process of training and
professional certification; (4) a specialization recognized and respected by
the public for which professionals are given certification and autonomy in
professional opinions; (5) a professional ethical code that defines the
assemblage of values, attributes, skills, commitments and conduct that
characterize members of the profession as certified professionals worthy of
their name; (6) a self-regulatory professional bureau where complaints
178
Chapter IV
against members are discussed, with regard to behavior that is incompatible

with the professional ethical code.
It appears that in order to define the singularity of the education and
teaching profession we must note two fundamental characteristics: (1) the
students - who are usually young - as the target population to whose good
and advancement educators and teachers are committed; (2) the assets of
knowledge, morality and art of human culture, which serve teachers as a
guiding frame of reference for their educational endeavors and towards
which teachers - according to the simile coined by John Dewey - seek to
link students both as "inheritors" and "partners." These two aspects of
educational endeavor are manifested in any overall definition of education.
Let us look at two examples which are separated by 2,500 years: Protagoras
the Athenian (fifth century B.e.E), who characterizes the unique skill of
pedagogues in their ability to guide young people towards a full and
successful human life so that they will be "fine and good" citizens in society;
and the 20 th century philosopher Whitehead, who defined education as the
guidance of individuals in acquiring the art of life towards a maximal and
successful actualization of their abilities in the concrete reality of their lives.'
We clearly cannot be satisfied with general definitions of this kind as a
basis for the professional ethics of teachers. As I emphasized time and again
in the previous chapters, educational activity never takes place in a cultural
and ethical void. A great deal of importance is attributed to a clear-cut and
focused formulation of the ideals and values, which will serve as the content
core of professional ethics and the teacher's professional conscience. In the
context of our discussion the ultimate commitment is to a humanistic
worldview as it was presented in the previous chapters.
More concretely, let us note that the humanist's ultimate commitment is
to regard human beings as sovereign individuals who are responsible for

their destiny, attributing to all people an unconditional intrinsic value equal
to that of their fellow men and women, and striving to establish a just,
democratic, and humane social order, which is committed to the sanctity of
human life and the furthering ofhuman equality, freedom, solidarity, growth
and happiness. I further stated that this humanist position is based on a
special relationship of respect for Man qua Man: to Man as a creature
granted a free will, reason, moral sensitivity, esthetic sense, and powers of
imagination and creativity. In other words, for the humanist these human
attributes are the source of human beings' dignity and ability to shape an
enlightened and prosperous culture for themselves. Thus the humanists'
decisive opposition to any attempt - in the name of national, religious or
Plato, "Protagoras"; Whitehead, "The Aims of Education," ch. 3.
179
ideological values - to restrain the sources of human vitality and subjugate

them to other goals.
These clarifications lead us to the standpoint of humanistic educational
ethics, according to which it is mandatory for educators to attribute supreme
value to the imperatives embedded in it beyond commitments to all other
systems of values. Just as supremacy should be attributed to the normative
ethics of global humanistic morality over any religious or national ethical
code; just as physicians have a supreme commitment to save human life and
cure illness, regardless of differences in national and ethnic groups or
religious or political worldviews; just as legalists have a supreme
commitment to reveal the truth and conduct a fair trial without their
judgment being tainted by foreign elements (personal or ideological); and
just as psychologists have a supreme commitment to promote the mental
health of their patients, over and above matters related to personal benefit or
society's demands; so we must say that educators have a supreme
commitment to advance the normal development and well-being of young
people so that they will be able to lead a meaningful and dignified human
life. Put differently, it is a commitment to establishing an enlightened, just
and humane democratic society that will place the vital conditions for
human development and prosperity at the disposal ofall.
Just like being a physician, lawyer or psychologist, being an educator is
"a way of being" - a unique form of involvement in life. Unlike the
economist or taxi-driver, the industrialist or farmer, whose occupations are
one part of the totality of their existence, in the world ofeducators (like that
ofthe physician) their occupation is their backbone. An (idealistic) educator
of this kind does not regard his- or herself as an agent of socialization for a
national consensus, or as an official or technocrat whose sole vocation is the
implementation of the curriculums that are invented in government
ministries. They perceive reality through educational sensitivities and
expectations, and everywhere they go - at work and during their leisure time
- they experience a caring and responsible vigilance for safeguarding the
conditions that will allow young people to develop, experience vitality, wellbeing and happiness.
In more practical terms: beyond egotistical, religious or ideological
considerations, the following commitment works as the prevailing logic for
the humanist educator: to assist young people in realizing their inherent
abilities for acquiring knowledge and skills for successfully and fairly
coping with life's challenges, developing moral and civic virtues, and
becoming sensitive and critical learners whose knowledge serves as the
"tree of life" for themselves and . for society. Conversely, and in a more
radical spirit, educators should nurture in themselves and their students the
critical awareness and moral sensitivity required for effectively coping with
180
Chapter IV
all those factors - natural and human - that threaten to impair their students'
normal development and human image.
We should note further that the educator's professional vocation is not
manifested in developing one dominant facet of human beings, but in a
comprehensive, proportionate and harmonious nurturing of the entire
personality, and that all his or her actions should be guided by respect for
their students' personality as rational and sovereign partners in this unique
dialogue called education. It seems to me that here, too, we can draw a
comparison with medical ethics: like the physician who is committed to the
promotion of human beings' overall health, not sacrificing the normal
functioning of specific organs for the physical excellence of any other one
(prohibiting performance-enhancing drugs in sports or preventing threats to
the overall development of children as the result of the excessive
development of a specific skill), and like the physician's commitment to
inform his or her patients of their condition, respect their decisions and avoid
any manipulative craftiness in treatment or experiments, so we must expect
educators to adhere to the proportionate and harmonious development of
their students' personality (with all their diverse aspects and variety of
spheres of knowledge), as well as nurture in them intelligent and critical
awareness as a basis for their self-ability to evaluate the validity and value of
the content studied.'
In this context, we will note three broad definitions of humanistic
education, which can serve as a guiding frame of reference for professional
ethics. The first, by the moral philosopher William Frankena, attributes the
educator with the responsibility to "prepare men [and women] to do what is
necessary, what is useful, and what is noble or excellent, but it must prefer
the excellent and consider the necessary and the useful as means to it.',4 The
second, by the educational philosopher Maxine Greene, identifies education
with "moving people to what are conceived to be more desirable states of
mind, to bring them to care about what is significant and worthwhile ... [and]
to enable them to learn how to learn, to make cognitive sense of their
experience, to engage with their environments as perceptual and imaginative
and feeling beings." The third, which was presented earlier in Chapter II,
identifies humanistic education with general and multi-faceted cultivation of
the personality of those being educated, while strictly adhering to the openmindedness and dignity of humankind, towards the best and highest life of
which they are capable in three fundamental domains of life: as individuals
3 See the words of Sockett in the first chapter of his The Moral Base ofTeacher
Professionalism.
4 Frankena, Three Historical Philosophies ofEducation, p. 64.
5 Greene, "Contexts, Connections and Consequences: The Matter of Philosophical and
Psychological Foundations."
181
who realize and develop their potential, as involved and responsible citizens,
and as human beings who enrich and perfect themselves through active
engagement with the collective achievements ofhuman culture.
The logic and influence of educational ethics can be examined in two
main arenas: one is in the space of the school, in the framework of teachers'
activities with their students in educational institutions; the second is in the
community and society in general, as professionals who by virtue of their
unique sensitivity and professionalism gain the public's special attention as
well as influential power in social and cultural issues. We will begin with the
school arena and the teacher-student relationship. Here one should expect the
teacher to act towards creating an educational climate and encounter based
on mutual trust and respect, building a supportive approach and an
interpersonal closeness, and nurturing open-mindedness, tolerance and
sensitivity towards others and the community's needs. From the moral point
of view, it is mandatory that educators act with equality, fairness and respect
towards their students, be attentive to their singular needs, maintain
confidential information that is disclosed to them in the course of their work,
and avoid abusing their status and authority for personal gain.
On the intellectual level, they should strictly adhere to open-mindedness
and intellectual fairness in presenting study content and in discussing social
issues. They should nurture natural inquisitiveness, joy of learning and
mutual enrichment, as well as cultivate their students' inclinations towards
rational, autonomous, critical, multi-directional and creative thinking. On the
personality level, they should assist their students in realizing their inherent
abilities and talents, nurture their feeling of self-worth and self-respect,
develop their emotional intelligence, and guide them in the formation of
desirable dispositions, such as benevolence, fairness, courtesy and tolerance.
In the teacher-parent relationship, the teacher should be expected to
cooperate with parents on a basis of mutual trust and respect, treat them as
equals and in an impartial manner, inform them of their child's scholastic
and social situation, and maintain the confidentiality of family details that
have come to their knowledge in the course of their work. In the spirit of the
communitarian approach, teachers are expected to encourage the supportive
involvement of parents in advancing the scholastic and educational goals of
the school; all this stemming from a common recognition that parents have
the authority and responsibility for the child's upbringing at home and in
society, while at school teachers have the authority and professionalism to
determine the study content and methods of education and teaching.
In the sphere of their relationships with their colleagues, teachers are
expected to act respectfully and cooperatively, share knowledge and
professional experience, help in welcoming new colleagues, and avoid
slander and impairing their dignity when working with students, colleagues
182
Chapter IV
and educational and public authorities. As a public of "colleagues" they must

work together to establish an institutional work culture characterized by
caring and responsible involvement in the school and the community. They
should strive to reach high standards in the spheres of knowledge, personal
example, pedagogical expertise, interpersonal relations and work ethics; in
common adherence to pedagogical logic vs. the demands of education
authority, pressure groups, community and parents' committees; and in
maintaining a communal atmosphere of empathic support, constructive
criticism and mutual enrichment.
In the arena of the second group of activities - the community and the
state - educational ethics is characterized by the involvement of educators as
a society-serving elite. Like physicians and lawyers, educators too are given
a special authority by society (by virtue of their expertise in matters relevant
to the life of all people), and this authority is a measure of the way and
extent professional conscience operates to expose hidden and problematic
aspects of social reality and strengthen the general public's ability to make
well-considered decisions on public issues that are on the agenda. For
example, we expect physicians to make their professional voice heard
publicly and warn the public in cases when food products, environmental
pollution, governmental development projects, or military closure of a
specific area may be hazardous to public health. We expect lawyers, based
on their expertise in the principles of law and justice, to boldly warn us of
cases in which a corrupt government, bureaucratic abuse, or racial (religious,
gender, or other) discrimination may impair the basic rights of citizens.
The principle of social involvement also applies to humanist educators.
We must examine to what extent the professional obligation to go beyond
daily topics and routines in the educational-institutional framework and take
autonomous and active initiative as a society-serving elite applies to
educators (often running counter to the spirit and trends of the times). It is
clear to me, for example, that humanist educators cannot accept the injury
and suffering of young people caused by malnutrition, lack of proper
medical care and proper living accommodations. Nor should we remain
neutral and silent in the face of discrimination against gender, religious and
ethnic communities; religious or national fanaticism that sends young people
to their death as "living bombs" or "cannon fodder"; young girls who are
sold by their families to pimps into a life of prostitution; and deprivation of
young people of educational opportunities under conditions that perpetuate
ignorance. In regard to all these - as anti-humanist elements in the social and
cultural space in which the educational endeavor takes place - educators
must make their voice heard: in teachers' organizations, the media, the
neighborhoods and communities, political frameworks and social
organizations.
183
Among these, I have chosen to concentrate on three subjects or central

aspects of our lives, in which educators should have a special say:
commitment to expanding peace and democracy as a means of protecting the
lives and freedom of human beings in general and young people in
particular, a battle against the sacrifice of the assets of education and culture
on the altar of "ratings" and economic greed, and an examination of the
quintessence and value of the "new literacies" as a way of renewing
education and improving teacher training.
2. EDUCATION TOWARD PEACE AND DEMOCRACY

The struggle to expand peace and democracy directly derives from the
teacher's professional vocation: there is no action more crucial to the
advancement of the development and well-being of young people than
protecting their lives, well-being and freedom. Moreover, the fact that
throughout the 20th century, humanity has annihilated over a hundred million
people and has compromised the freedom of hundreds of millions more,
presents educators with a supreme ethical-professional imperative to
promote world peace and democracy. As humanistic educators in this kind
of brutal reality our conscience should not rest. As Zvi Lamm noted in War
and Education, throughout history teachers and educators cooperated with
murderous and oppressive regimes, thus paving the way for bloodshed and
other horrendous atrocities. He adds in this context that the role of education
is not only to dress the wounds of past wars, but to prevent the creation of
conditions for the breaking out of the next one."
It is also worthy of note that the commitment to human life, peaceful
relationships and individual freedom does not apply only to the international
level. These commitments also apply to the internal, social and communal
level: bloodshed in the civil wars, such as in Yugoslavia and Rwanda, and
the murder of Israeli prime minister Yitzhak Rabin on religious-nationalistic
grounds, are examples of agony and suffering that populations devoid of
democratic awareness bring upon themselves. For all these reasons, teachers
must regard it as their right and duty not only to inculcate in their students
political wisdom after the fact, but also to concentrate on preventing future
wars and actively endeavor to promote peace and democracy, here and now.
Let us begin with peace. Not arbitrarily, but because peace is the greatest
blessing people can wish themselves. Peace is the best attribute in the life of
the natural organism, since it implies that everything works well and to our
Lamm, War and Education, p.S.
184
Chapter IV
satisfaction - a full, secure, peaceful and prosperous existence.' Peace is

primarily life (not death), personal security (not terror and fear), health (not
sickness), vitality and development (not fixated passivity), psychic
wholeness (not madness), wholeness of the organism (not deformity or
disability), free will and action (not slavery and addiction), well-being and
happiness (not distress and anguish), belonging to a family and a community
(not loneliness and alienation), longevity and old-age (not a short life and
miserable old-age), and finally - a normal reality in which children bury
their parents (not where parents bury their children).
The blessing of peace is so great that it is the duty of educators to remove
it from the election jargon and politicians' ceremonials and bring it back to
the daily life of the individual and the community. People want to live in
peace and be at peace with themselves, and not to be "tom" inside by
conflicting mental powers (despite the fact that people who are in conflict
with themselves, like Tolstoy and Nietzsche, can be extremely productive
from the artistic point of view). People wish themselves bodily wholeness not to lose limbs, and the wholeness of their homes - and not to lose family
members. In interpersonal relations, when we ask other people how they are
- "are you well?" or "how are you?" - we mean nothing more than a general
interest in their existential condition, from the perspective of the good and
well-being that people wish for themselves. And with a view to the future,
we greet people with the "Go in peace," "Peace be with you," as an empathic
and solidary concern regarding the well-being of the other through our
awareness of the dangers, hindrances, and stumbling blocks with which life
challenges us.
In the life of the society and the nation, peace is a reality of mutual
openness and respect, pluralism and tolerance, consideration of the other and
special support of the weak. Its opposite, as we all have witnessed too often,
is wretchedness, hate, isolation, fanaticism, violence and bloodshed in the
violent battles over religious, ethnic, status and partisan issues - battles that
culminate in political murder and civil war. In international relations, peace
means good neighborliness based on cooperation and mutual recognition of
the singularity and dignity of the other, insistence on ways of rapprochement
and compromise rather than aggressive and obdurate oppression, positing the
sanctity of life and human dignity as supreme values as opposed to the
territorial wholeness of the country and sanctity of religious law or
ideological doctrine. It is worthy of note that in an age of ever-growing
ecological crises, in our relationship with the natural world, peace has a
clear-cut meaning: life with nature, close to nature, and a respectful
In the discussion of "peace" I draw mainly on Ravitsky, "Peace" and Yas'ur, "Will the
Sword Devour Forever?"
185
relationship with it instead of living at its expense as greedy and exploitive

people who lack sensitivity to its unique value, and lack understanding of the
destructive implications for us all as a result of the damage caused to it. In
short, the imperative "Seek peace and pursue it',s commends a wide range of
relationships: good neighborliness with all those who surround us, drawing
on a sense of openness, sensitivity and respect for the unique value of others
(human and natural), and mutual sympathy and cooperation.
As an Israeli humanistic educator, I believe that our main interest in
peace should focus on the most painful and urgent issue: preventing
processes that further inflame the prolonged and gory conflict between the
Palestinian people and us. In all matters pertaining to the reasons for the
conflict, there is nothing new under the sun. Again, as in most conflicts
throughout history, religious and aggressive nationalistic fanaticism is the
main reason for bloodshed and human wretchedness. The strategies of
"preventive medicine" practiced by humanistic educators should be adjusted
to concrete "maladies." In the spirit of the liberal-democratic ethos, the first
thing that should be done is the separation of religion and politics, and of
religious indoctrination from the education system. From a humanistic
viewpoint, religion has constructive value as one of the ways people fill their
lives with spiritual content and enrich their existence with meaning and
value. On the other hand, as a source of superstition, feelings of superiority
and claims of special privileges, religion is a negative and destructive force
that motivates whole sections of the population to impair the life and rights
of others. We should make clear to our students that religions, like languages
and ideologies, are many and varied, and there is no rational and objective
way to choose between them - hence the logic of liberal democracies and the
profound importance of pluralism and tolerance.
This awareness brings us to the second principle: every reasonable
solution (for both parties) must be based on the principle of mutuality of the
equal value of Man and (in the spirit of Hillel) of refraining from doing unto
others that which we would not want others to do to us. From the humanistic
standpoint, we are first and foremost human beings and should act
accordingly, and only later are we Jews or Moslems, Israelis or Palestinians.
In other words, a fair solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is possible
only when it is based on overall human moral principles and not on
particular Jewish or Moslem Law. Only on the basis of this awareness can a
just peace be established and accepted by all, a peace in the framework of
which there is a commitment that everyone will be given a fair opportunity
to realize their natural rights as human beings and as citizens. (By the very
Psalms,34:14.
186
Chapter IV
nature of things it is obvious that neither side will be able to fully actualize
all its desires).
Thus, we stress the importance of practical reason, as the third principle
of education towards peace. Next to education towards the equality of the
value of Man, pluralism, tolerance and mutuality and education towards
peace are required to free students of fatalistic positions and messianic
delusions, and in their place nurture a rational and critical approach: forming
positions based on the best available knowledge and tools, reinforcing
intellectual honesty to face reality, reaching the inevitable conclusions
(instead of burying one's head in the sand), striving to apply moral principles
to a problematic reality, and imposing logic on drives and justice on
aggression.
The fourth principle is an experiential and simulatory experience insightful and emotional - of the evil and absurdity of war. We dealt with
this subject in the second and third chapters through Henry David Thoreau
and George Bernard Shaw - when we saw that narve and decent people
cooperate with injustice and even regard it their duty to fight and kill other
narve and decent peoples. Thus it is important in the study of history and
literature that teachers challenge their students and encourage them to
critically put themselves into the shoes of the Crusaders and Christian
inquisitors (for example), North American slave owners and the liquidators
of the Indians in South America, members of the Gestapo who murdered
children, the Khmer Rouge youths who murdered adults, and just "ordinary
men who rape women." At the same time it is no less important to
experience empathy with the victims of the Holocaust, murder, oppression
and rape, and the (universal) refugee who "finds herself one day on a road
with her house in ruins, and her boy dead in her arms.?" The main point is to
make you cringe inside, a shudder to pass over your skin, and the "pennies"
to drop into the thinking slot. Everything will coalesce into a living
consciousness that will know, at the right time and the right place, how to
read "the writing on the wall," see the "warning flags" and the "red lines,"
and be on guard so that "ploughshares will not become swords" nor the
"pruning hooks spears."
To be more concrete, from the viewpoint of humanistic educational
ethics, Israeli educators cannot accept perpetuation of military rule over the
Palestinian population in Judea, Samaria and the Gaza Strip. Whether a
person belongs to the occupying ruler or the oppressed ruled, the fact is that
the reality of occupation is always one of bloodshed and loss of the human
dignity by both parties. Thus, every humanist, not only humanist educators,
must do everything in his or her power to advance a solution of peace in
9
Sartre, The Reprieve, p.89.
187
which everyone is guaranteed the conditions for a secure and dignified

human existence (this is an in-principle humanistic position and not a localpolitical one). Humanistic educators cannot remain indifferent to the killing,
oppression, moral degradation and loss of human dignity that is part and
parcel of the reality of the military occupation by Israel over the Palestinians
in the past decade. It is a reality in which we have experienced hundreds of
dead, including numerous children, in Palestinians terrorist attacks and
Israeli repression of demonstrations, torture and abuse until death both by
the Israeli Defense Forces and by the Palestinian forces; bombing homes,
mass deportation, imprisonment of tens of thousand of Palestinians,
including thousands of administrative detentions, depriving people of their
basic human rights and closing down schools and universities for long
periods.
This is a reality of bloodshed, injustice and suffering under occupation.
No one with any self-respect will agree to relinquish their yearning for a full
human life of freedom and sovereignty for any length of time. Even if an
enlightened and peaceful occupation were possible, the humanist educator
could not regard it as the suitable solution. I will explain this by what I said
after the horrors of the Intifada at a convention of the Teacher's Association
in May 1989:
Let us assume for a moment, in a kind of make-believe world, that there
is no Intifada and I don't have to shoot demonstrators, blow up houses
and deport inciters. The wish of numerous Israelis has come true and the
Palestinians in the occupied territories have accepted, as an act of fate,
their lives as citizens deprived of their rights next to us and under our
rule. This hypothetical situation, which is perceived by numerous Israelis
as ideal - is a nightmare for anyone who cherishes justice and morality.
In war, the battle is for your life; in morality, the battle is for your human
image; victory is in life that respects human beings; failure - is
contemptible life. Let our point of departure be that I don't want to rule
over another people who are deprived of their civil rights in the
framework of a country where first class and second-class citizens live,
because it is unfair and morally evil. I don't want to swim in a pool built
by a Palestinian worker who will never swim in it. I don't want to dine in
a restaurant where Palestinians clean the bathrooms and polish the
mirrors, but will never sit down to dine in it. I don't want to live in a
neighborhood that Palestinians built but in which they will never be
allowed to live. I don't want to pick up Palestinian workers at the "slave
markets" in the Jewish cities. I don't want a Knesset that legislates for all
the country's inhabitants but where only some are represented in it. I
don't want, simply, to be superior to the Palestinians, because their
188
Chapter IV
inferiority degrades and demeans me [too]...even if there were no

Intifada, [the reality of occupation] is a moral curse which we must free
ourselves from."
As long as peace has not been achieved (and it is never fully and
permanently achieved), educators should be a serving social elite that
demands that the political establishment adhere to a policy of peace; it acts
towards the assimilation of the vision of peace among young people and the
development of the sensitivity and thinking required for safeguarding their
human image even in the "inhuman" endeavor of war and occupation. The
fulfillment of this educational mission, which has both school-specific and
public-political aspects, can be achieved by employing many and varied
approaches.
Next to the principles I have mentioned - the neutralization of religious
and national fanaticism, application of the principles of equality and
mutuality, the nurturing of a rational and critical approach, and simulatory
experiencing of evil and wretchedness of war - it is also extremely important
to nurture non-violent ways of coping with conflicts, empathic knowledge of
the world of the enemy (against trends of demonization and
dehumanization), overcoming drives, and diminishing the negative emotions
of aggression, hatred and resentment. Be the ways of education what they
may, supreme importance should be attached to internalizing Albert Camus'
demand of each of us, a demand presented in his book Neither Executioners
nor Victims, that "in the murderous reality of our world," we should not
neglect to mark daily the "terrible dividing line" between those who "accept
the consequences of being murderers themselves or the accomplices of
murderers, and those who refuse to do so with all their force and being."!'
In this spirit, I would like to present the following passage. Particularly
because it was written in Israel, it contains a great potential for educating
towards "an awareness of peace" and maintaining the human image in "nonpeace" situations. It is an important text, because it was taken from the
verdict in the regional court of the Southern Command in the trial of the
Givati brigade soldiers - who beat el-Shami Hanni Ben Deib to death. It was
a case in which "color blindness" to the "red lines" of morality and the
"warning flags of stark illegality" led young, perfectly normal Israelis to
perform inhuman acts:
It appears to us that this result, and the way in which it came about,
should shock any civilized person, and anyone in whom the feeling of
10 Aloni, "On the Obligation of the Educational Battle against the Occupation," Hetz,
vol.2, p.25.
11 Camus, Neither Victims nor Executioners, p.61.
189
morality and justice throbs, for whom human life - anyone's human lifeis the ultimate value in human society's scale of values. During the trial
we were shocked to hear some of the witnesses expressing hate and
contempt for the value of the life of another human being, one who
belongs to the population governed by the military forces. We were
shaken when we heard witnesses who are soldiers, who watched the
degrading acts of beating helpless, handcuffed prisoners within the
military camp, who were indifferent to what their eyes saw, blocking
their ears to the cries of the beaten, only because those people were
suspected of violating order, belonged to a hostile population, and whose
blood can be spilled without compunction.
A difficult question which caused us to wonder from the beginning of
the trial and which only intensified during its continuation after we
became familiar with the figures in this case, was how such a situation
could have come into being, in which soldiers of an elite unit, who in our
opinion received a good education, could have behaved so abominably
and who abandoned all the ethical baggage that their parents and
educators internalized in them, undergoing a psychological
metamorphosis, and were willing and able to beat "senseless" in the
words of the pathologist Dr. Levy, an older person, who from the point of
view of age could have been their father, and threaten his life, if not
causing his actual death ... we believe that the behavior of the guilty
parties cannot be explained against the background of their deviant
personality. Their failure is the "stinking fruit" of not safeguarding the
norms, which were given legitimacy and even the support of their
commanders, and regretfully, that of their senior commanders as well.
We had no doubt that an order given to soldiers to use force and beat
anyone suspected of disrupting order, even after he is caught by our
soldiers and does not resist arrest, is a prima facie illegal order. 12
If peace has always been a yearning and an educational ideal (at least
among individuals and groups in society), democracy is a kind of younger
sister in the family of social and educational ideals; an idea that was sown
and flourished (for a short period) in classical Athens, was developed and
improved in the 18th and 19th centuries, and achieved the status of an
12 Similar wording appeared in the Supreme Court decision 425/89 in the trial of the
soldiers accused of breaking the bones of villagers from Hawwara: "Can we speak at all
of a lack of clarity and obscureness when the matter under discussion is an order to take
people from their homes, manacle and gag them, and beat them with truncheons in order
to break their arms and legs? What possible lack of clarity could there be in a clearly
illegal order of this kind, which in the words of the IDF Judge Advocate, "A warning
flag was flying over it" and disobeying it was mandatory? Acts of this kind are repellent
to any civilized person."
190
Chapter IV
inalienable asset in numerous countries throughout the world in the 20th

century. Despite the vast popularity of democracy in our times, and like our
attitude towards peace, its continuation should not be taken for granted.
Democracy is an achievement rich in blessings for Man, but if it is not
closely safeguarded, it can easily be shattered, giving way to dictatorship, or
dissolved and become an ochlocracy (in Greek), mobocracy (in English).
"Democracy," in the words of Israeli Chief Justice Barak, "does not
safeguard itself, [and] if we don't safeguard it, it will not safeguard US.,,13
Contrary to the dictator (in an autocratic regime) and the nobility (in an
aristocratic regime), who do all in their power to preserve their rule,
democracy has no special interest groups that will safeguard its integrity and
character. In a democracy, as the rule of a people or the rule of all citizens,
the sovereign is "us," each and every one of us, and there is no one to protect
it except us. However, democracy does have unique nurturers and guards:
intellectuals and lawyers, the free press and the "the collective 'us' ," of
whom we are speaking here - educators and teachers.
Since there is an abundance of scholarly books and educational programs
on democracy, I have no pretensions of being innovative here or adding
anything to what already exists. I will only try and touch upon a number of
issues that appear to me more problematic - the misunderstandings and false
perceptions that emerge again and again as the main impediments to the
understanding and internalization of the democratic idea. The most prevalent
mistake among the public in general and teachers in particular is identifying
democracy with majority rule. This identification is not only erroneous but
also dangerous. Just as democracy is not the rule of the "blue bloods"
(monarchs and the nobility), nor of a superior race or chosen nation, nor of
high priests who act by virtue of the imperatives of a superior entity, nor the
rule of philosophers who attribute to themselves knowledge of absolute
truths, nor the rule of the wealthy nor that of those who excel in physical
strength; so should democracy not be identified with majority rule.
"Democracy is the rule of the basic values of justice, freedom, equality and
human rights, [and] a regime in which the majority deprives the minority of
their basic rights is a regime of majority rule, and is not a democratic
regime.t''" If an absolute majority (even in a free and valid referendum)
decides to deny the freedom of expression, the freedom of occupation or the
freedom of religious worship from any minority group, it will be a
dictatorship of a majority which runs counter to the basic principle of
democracy relating to human and civil equality for all. The same is true of a
majority party that decides to waive holding periodic and free elections 13 "Democracy
14 "Democracy
does not safeguard itself," Ha 'aretz, 20.8.1988.

does not safeguard itself," Ha 'aretz, 20.8.1988.
191
which runs counter to the basic principle of democracy pertaining to the

right of a people to elect its government and change its leaders.
It is important to reemphasize that in a democracy the sovereign is the
people (all adult citizens of the state) and it establishes its regime; or in the
words of Abraham Lincoln, it is "the rule of the people, by the people, and
for the people." In a more contemporary spirit - after eliminating those
patent manifestations of inequality practiced in Pericles' Athenian
democracy and those prevalent during Lincoln's times - its appears to me
that it would be right to define democracy as a "regime that derives its
authority from all the individuals who are citizens of the state. It represents
everyone, and is directed towards guaranteeing their existence, the
development of their skills and well-being, without compromising the
individual's basic rights and the basic values of justice, freedom and
equality."is In conclusion, democracy is a social order in which free citizens
with equal rights shape together - in a pluralistic, fair and tolerant manners
- the character and customs ofthe society.
Now we will clarify and expand on the various aspects mentioned above:
in a democracy (liberal and pluralistic) all citizens may equally enjoy
individual freedoms, human and civil basic rights, as well as educational,
health, and occupational opportunities - all this regardless of gender, race,
nationality, religion, ideology, ethnicity, and social status. At the basis of
these principles lies a humanistic approach committed to attribute to all
people unconditional and equal self-value as autonomous and sovereign
creatures who are entitled to shape their image, seek their happiness, form
their positions and actualize their decisions - as long as they do not deny the
rights of others. Moreover, it is important to add here that not every liberal
democracy is necessarily humanistic. As we indicated in Chapter Two, when
dealing with the principles of a humanistic perspective, it is not enough to
strictly adhere to the formal equality of civil rights to maintain a humanistic
democracy. In order to exist, it is necessary to append the principles of
solidarity and social justice to the principle of equal rights; ignoring it leaves
broad populations open to cultural deprivation and political impotence.
Humanistic democracy, as we pointed out when dealing with both Adler the
conservative and Giroux the radical (see Chapter One), is obliged to put at
the disposal of all its members the necessary conditions for personal
development at a level that will allow them active, well-considered and
critical involvement, both in leading their private lives and in politically
shaping the image of society and its mores.
In a democracy the people's representatives and leaders are elected in
free and periodic elections, while accepting the following basic principles:
IS
Eilam, "Who Would Gourd the Guardians?" Ha'aretz, 20.9.1998.
192
Chapter IV
(1) everyone has an equal right to vote and to be elected; (2) those elected
receive, upon their election, a temporary mandate from the public to lead in
matters of state; (3) the overall policy in directing social issues will be
determined by a majority decision of the people's elected representatives; (4)
the majority, even if absolute, does not have the authority to impair the most
essential principles of democracy that deal with the individual's freedoms,
equality of human and civic rights, separation of authorities (legislative,
judiciary, executive and the free press) and the public's right to elect its
leaders in a free and periodic process.
In this context the question of obeying the majority's decisions is often
raised - or to put it negatively - the question of the right of civil
disobedience and conscientious objection. Without delving deeply into this
issue, it seems that humanistic ethical philosophy places the following three
principles as guidelines:
1. In a democracy more than any other kind of regime, the individual is
obliged to observe the rules of state and accept the majority's decision.
Contrary to tyrannical regimes in which the regime's authority derives from
its power and therefore one may free oneself from it by virtue of power, in a
democracy the state's rules and mores manifest both the individual's free
will and consideration of his or her basic rights.
2. A democratic and humanist society recognizes the value and
importance of individual conscience as a guiding and restorative mechanism,
and in cases of adherence to clear-cut moral principles grants individual
conscience legitimacy as a basis for special consideration.
3. In a humanistic democracy, distinct moral consideration is attributed
to individual conscience, only if at the core of its motivation and
consideration lies a refusal to harm the lives, natural rights and human image
of others. In other words, human beings' imperative of conscience does not
express a desire to advance the individual's personal benefit or that of his or
her affiliation group, but the internal imperative to accept the duties and
constraints that will prevent doing injustice to others, and harming his or her
humanity.
An additional salient feature of a humanistic democratic society is a

commitment to the rational word (logos) over the power-abusive truncheon,
and a commitment to mutual and in-principle fairness over opportunistic and
egotistical domination. In democratic societies, applying logical arguments
is regarded as the proper means for persuading and achieving influence
("parliament" is a derivation of the verb "to speak," to discuss and
converse), and a morality based on equality and mutuality is considered the
normative and proper basis for settling social issues and resolving conflicts.
These characteristics are not self-evident and numerous efforts were required
193
and a great deal of blood was shed for their achievement. They manifest
departure from the power-abusive jungle of "might is right," and a liberation
from false perceptions - religious and ideological - that enable the
annihilation, subjugation, and unhappiness of human beings as a result of
their racial, religious, national, sexual, ethnic and status groups. One should
regard the open, rational and fair debate as a level of achievement or
development that should be protected daily from anti-democratic elements.
In democratic Athens, Perlices' words show us the daring and
decisiveness required to "properly debate" controversial public issues and
maintain an open and critical discussion, as the basis for decision and action,
in light of the temptation to conceal the truth from the public and lead it as
an obedient herd to the destination set by the rulers. 16 As we know, there are
many ways, both prominent and hidden, to silence open public debate and
put an end to critical reason: by the direct and blatant force of coercion,
oppression and censorship; by nationalistic or fascistic rhetoric that
denounces any doubt and criticism as "an anti-patriotic act and stabbing the
nation in the back"; by degrading and intentionally weakening the
legislative, judicial authorities and free media, so they will not intervene in
the executive authority's freedom of action; by imposing a technocratic and
bureaucratic perception that presents intellectual and ethical alternatives as
irrelevant; through stupefying the masses with "bread and circuses,"
(entertainment, sports, soap operas, the tabloids and consumption products);
through emotional and aggressive rituals that glorify the greatness of the
nation or religion (and scorn inquisitive, exacting and sound reason); and
also by a personality cult that inflates leaders to proportions whereby the
(little) individual prefers to obliterate his or her or own reasoning and arrest
his or her independent thinking.
In light of all this, the good citizens of democracy should be nurtured so
that they will be involved in the community in a caring and responsible way,
so they will be able to intelligently and critically participate in public
discourse and never relinquish their sovereignty as a consequence of selfdepreciation, hedonistic individualism, degenerate conformity or a leader
cult. In education towards democracy, reason and imagination are involved
no less than emotion, willpower and attributes of character; methodical
teaching is required for inculcating formal knowledge and developing
thinking patterns. At the same time there is a need for a personal example
and the active involvement of students in choosing the ever-expanding
aspects of their lives.
16 Pericles in Thucydides, The Peloponnesian War, p.l47; also Peters, "The Values of
Democracy and the Aims of Education."
194
Chapter IV
There is a plethora of literature and numerous and good educational

programs on each of these subjects. Despite this, sufficient attention has not
been devoted to one essential aspect: nurturing the awareness that no human
being - whether a pope, rabbi, kadi, emperor, king, president, prime
minister, general, sports star or the current top entertainer - is more a human
being than another, therefore we do not deserve to belittle our personality
before him, subjugate our freedom and mortgage our independent thinking
and personal conscience. It seems that only when human beings deeply feel
that "his royal highness" and his personal servant, Hbig movie stars" and
common "movie goers, " posses more or less the same human "materials" in
drives, passions, feelings, and thoughts - only then will an end come to nondemocratic rituals that on the one hand worship the elite (as semi-gods) and
dehumanize common people (as only semi-humans). In the words of Hamlet:
Your fat king and your lean beggar is but variable service, - two
dishes, but to one table: that's the end....A man may fish with the worm
that hath eat of a king, and eat of the fish that hath fed on that
worm ... Nothing but to show you how a king may go a progress through
the guts of a beggar....
Alexander died, Alexander was buried, Alexander returns into dust;
the dust is earth; of earth we make loam; and who of that loam whereto
he was converted might they not stop a beer barrel? Imperious Caesar,
dead and tum'd to clay, Might stop a hole to keep the wind away; 0, that
that earth which kept the world in should patch a wall to expel the
winter's flaw.?"
3. EDUCATION TOWARD CULTURE OR SUBMISSION

TO THE CULTURE OF RATINGS
I will begin our discussion with a personal story. During a stint of army
reserve service on the top of Mount Avital on the Golan Heights, we, several
fathers, had a "parents' talk." One of us, a man in his forties, described with
equanimity how he cannot talk with his children, not to mention understand
them. "They have their own minds" he said, "and I no longer try to
understand them." He went on to say that in their free time they are
engrossed in television and video and computer games. He admitted that he
did not know what they got out of it, but that he and his wife had found
something good in it. Their children are connected to appliances and no
longer require babysitters or their parents' special attention. As a good father
17 Shakespeare,
Hamlet, pp.147, 187.
195
who wants to make his children happy he took them to Disneyland. He told
us how thrilled he was - with both happiness and fear - at the adventures
that the amusement park offered him. His children, on the other hand, were
singularly unimpressed. They moved from one facility to the next, aspiring
to reach the most dangerous and exciting one. But their faces remained
blank. They hardly displayed any excitement, satisfaction or gratitude. "It
was okay" the children said, and thus summarized their visit to Disneyland.
At the conclusion of his story I asked him whether he thought that this
detachment and alienation between him and his children was not the
inevitable result of his choice to leave them to the world of television and
video and computer games. "Forget it," he answered, "these are today's
times, you have to go along with them and that's it."
His reply cannot be accepted by humanistic parents and educators.
Inertial or herd-like being carried away with the spirit of the times is
incompatible with the humanistic idea of sovereign Man, who seeks to be
free vis-a-vis reality, familiar with its alternatives, to examine the validity
and relative value of things, and to choose rationally, autonomously and
authentically what appears to him to be the best way. The new reality to
which our children are connected numerous hours a day - to electronic
communication devices that are always available, experiential by nature and
with a hypnotic lure - has resulted in an academic, cultural and educational
discourse that seeks to examine its diverse implications on the image of man
and society.
From the plethora of subjects related to this discourse I wish to focus on
one central issue: the relation between educating towards culture and "the
culture of ratings." As we have seen in the previous chapters, one of the
basic commitments of humanistic education is the acculturation of students:
developing in them a relationship of love, knowledge and commitment
towards the best in human creation - in philosophy, science, morality, art,
law, technology, and so on and so forth. Moreover, we have seen that
humanistic education worthy of the name seeks to nurture in students
rational thinking and the skills for discerning and judging, moral and
esthetical sensitivity, a critical and creative approach to life, and an
autonomous and authentic attitude towards reality.
Education towards culture demands development and improvement
through a challenging coping with content and values regarded as worthy.
"Ratings" (the degree of popularity in mass culture), which has become a
dominant consideration and mentality in society, contains in its definition a
trend contrary of culture (in its normative meaning). Its goal is to achieve
sweeping popularity through a tempting and obsequious appeal to the widest
common denominator; and since it is not restricted by "inhibitions of
quality," it is not loath to descend to the lowest common denominator. The
196
Chapter IV
one and only logic of the "rating mentality" is quantitative, and its success is
measured by the economic or political strength it gives to businessmen and
politicians, regardless of the implications this rating manipulation has on
society and of the cultural and educational toll it exacts from its citizens.
The implications and price are not theoretical but practical and
immediate. In recent years our children have been growing up in a reality of
communicational brouhaha that has become more superficial from the
intellectual point of view, yellower in its gossip, bluer in its sexual blatancy,
and redder in its murderousness and violence. Television talk-shows are
more like gladiatorial arenas and freak-shows than serious and thoughtful
discussions on public issues. Politicians render the gimmick into a system,
and they have erased the well-organized platform and complete thought from
the map; intense excitement that lacks intellectual and ethical context has
become the most dominant aspiration of the younger generation. (In this
context, it is worthwhile remembering the words of Nietzsche, that one of
the signs of human decadence is embodied in the need of ever-intensifying
external stimuli in order to overcome boredom and desolation that human
beings find in their inner selves). The key to higher ratings is sensual
excitation or "one night stands," never striving to achieve intellectual or
emotional profundity, for fear that spectators might awaken from their
bewilderment and move (zap) to a competing channel. There is a preference
for the more intense, arousing, exciting and stimulating, and yesterday's
climax is today's point of departure. (Our children can devour five
"Clockwork Oranges" for breakfast, the kind that we, only a few years ago,
could only digest one, due to its violence and repulsion). Against the
backdrop of this trend it is not easy to excite today's children, and even
harder to shock them. After they have watched every possible atrocity, their
critical sensitivity to evil, monstrosities and vulgarity has become so dulled
that they know how to watch the most brutal, despicable and coarse with desensitized equanimity and moral and esthetic neutrality.
The simple and immediate question that should be asked is "Why?". Why
accept a systematic campaign for stupefying and devastating the public in
general and young people in particular when it is clear to us that the
motivating force behind "garbage media" is economic greed and political
domination. Some harbor reservations about this criticism and claim that all
this is "no more than harmless entertainment." This would be true had vulgar
communications served as part of what was marginal entertainment, next to
leisure activity that respects Man's humanity. But in reality, this is not the
case: we live in a period in which addictive and undiscerning devotion to
television has become the main element that shapes children's existence. In
this medium, vulgarity prevails and quality is rare. In communicational
ecology, if we can compare it to the natural environment, the balance is
197
exceedingly negative: inciting drives (instead of sublimating them),

pornography (instead of erotica), temptation for immediate satisfaction
(instead of patience and self-restraint), a joy in violence and destruction
(instead of their moral negation), image gimmicks (instead of profundity and
thoroughness), systematic declarations (instead of well-founded statements),
blunting sensitivities (instead of sharpening them), a sexist and stereotypical
approach (instead of a distinct and humane one), emphasizing the sick and
distorted (while ignoring the sane and normal), and idolizing money and
power as the ultimate goal (which nullifies almost all other alternative
purposes and reasons).
We are not speaking here of random exposure to life's ugliness or
marginal entertainment derived from murderous and destructive ritual. The
media is an engaging totality; it draws the spectator's consciousness, thrills it
by sophisticated manipulation, dictates its rhythm and shapes its desires and
expectations as well as its thinking patterns and sensitivities (is there any
need to repeat Marshall McLuhan's aphorism that the media is the
massage?). In this new reality marketing people have a formative influence
far greater than that of both parents and teachers. Our children "will start
watching television at 18 months ...they will watch 16,000 hours of
television by the time they graduate from high school; by the age of twenty,
they will have watched 700,000 commercials and thus advertising will
become the definitive source of young people's socialization....They are on
the way to becoming consumers, not citizens.?'" If we remember in this
context Aristotle's words in the Ethics, that intellectual and moral
dispositions are formed through participation in the various modes of
experience and practice (intellectual, moral, political and aesthetic), and "it
makes no small difference, then, whether we form habits of one kind or of
another from our very youth.?" we must conclude that we are behaving
towards our children, who are dearest to us of all, with a measure of
irresponsibility bordering on moral anomie and spiritual anarchy.
It is not simply a theoretical matter of preferring the tangibility of the
golden calf to a more spiritual and refined culture (in terms of Judaism) or
nurturing the instinctual desire and not rational self-scrutiny (in Platonian
terms). It is an acceptance ofa perpetual "bombardment" of young people by
interest-driven and manipulative messages which blunt sensitivity, render
thinking superficial, distort reality, crumble any yardstick of value and
importance, and relegate classical sublimity and the refined to the periphery.
Without good ratings, nothing has the right to exist. And worst of all, due to
its pervasive character, extending to both content and form, addiction to this
18 Klein,
"The School for Rubbish," Ha'aretz, 23.8.1996.

Ethics, p. 29.
19Aristotle,
198
Chapter IV
kind of communicational culture deprives young people of the infrastructure

of knowledge and norms which are required for intelligent and critical
coping with life, and the distinctions between truth and falsehood, justice
and injustice, and authentic and fake. In light of the bloodshed, oppression,
discrimination, suffering and misery that have inundated the 20th century and
the fraudulent and distorting systems that enabled them to exist, abandoning
young people to "market forces" without the appropriate equipment for
discerning and criticizing is more than just educational negligence. At least
from the humanistic viewpoint, we are speaking here of a cynical and
abusive sacrifice of both the human development of young people and the
quality of society's moral and cultural life on the altar of greed. "Ratings" is
the sacrificial knife.
The fact that the majority of the public calmly accepts the reality of a
systematic campaign for the stupefaction of the spectators, mandates an
examination of the forces working towards the shaping of this order. It
seems to me that the success of this campaign should be attributed to the
cooperation (bizarre in itself) of three different factors that have now joined
forces to topple education from culture: profit-seekers who make their living
via the superficiality of human beings; a type of modernists, whose
positivistic skepticism negates the reality of human values only because they
do not respond to precise measuring; and the post-modernists whose nihilism
renounces any striving towards truth, justice, enlightenment and progress
that have universal humanistic attributes. The nature of the first fact is
simple and I need not expand on it; the second two are more complex and
are directly related to the educational and academic world. I will, therefore,
relate to them here, albeit briefly.
As with at the beginning of this chapter, employing the example of the
"parents' talk," I will begin with an example taken from real life. On
"Cultural Journal", a TV program, which dealt with the topic of
communications in the age of ratings, the participants were a modernist
lecturer on communications, a post-modernist lecturer on literature, and a
journalist known for her social activism. The question posed by the mediator
in this discussion focused on the legitimacy of using "tricks" for increasing
ratings - for example, creating sensational news, candid camera programs
and lotteries - which often deceive spectators. The modernist-positivist,
characterized by ethical skepticism and a pretension of professionalism,
stated emphatically that television by its "nature" and "essence" is a
recreational tool from which high cultural standards should not be expected
(and furthermore, in his opinion there is no real distinction between more or
less cultural). His colleague in this discussion, negated by postmodern logic
any distinction between reality and fiction, between essence and image,
between objective and subjective, between unbiased and biased - so that
199
from his point of view anything goes, and there is no significant difference
between news documentation and its "fabrication," between reliable
reporting and illusionary or propaganda-driven production.
Their scholarly and cynical skepticism peeved the third participant in this
discussion. The radical and feminist journalist put their argument to the test:
is she expected to broadcast any item about a murderous terrorist attack, a
brutal rape, or juicy gossip without first checking its veracity? Is there no
real difference between the murder and rape victims of Bosnia, for example,
and a film or propaganda-oriented production of this sort of tragedy? One
must further ask: let the modem positivist and the postmodem nihilist
imagine themselves as victims of oppression, rape, pillage or simple
defamation - would they not cry out and demand reliable.reporting and the
remedy ofjustice on the basis of truth and morality (objective, of course)?
The critical journalist in this discussion indicated the source of the
problem, but did not call it by its name: cooperation between the ratingscraving profit-seekers, modern positivists and postmodem nihilists who have
joined forces to ensure the alienation of Man from any qualitative and
normative perception of culture (and thus also education). In the current
"opinion environment," it is not politically correct to speak of culture as an
assemblage of human achievement in philosophy, science, morality, art,
governance and law; nor is it common nowadays to refer to culture as the
development of human beings capacities for rational thinking, moral
sensitivity and the refinement of taste. The "morally ought to be" is dead,
long live "what is." Today it is "politically correct" to speak about culture
only in the sociological-descriptive sense and woe is he who dares to
differentiate between the cultural and the barbaric, the refined and the
vulgar, the high and the low, the noble and the common. Moreover, very
often scorn is heaped on those who attempt to preserve a high cultural level:
nerds, bleeding-hearts, heavies, "intellectuals" - not to mention the geeks. At
the same time, laudatory expressions for human attributes that respect human
beings and their values - such as wisdom, integrity, modesty, moderation,
nobility and gentility - have lost their vitality, and no longer serve as cultural
ideals by which young people should be educated.
As I argued earlier, without a normative conception of culture there is no
way to justify normative distinctions between good and evil and worthy and
faulty in the spheres of education, morality, creativity and politics. Let us
begin at home, in the family. The collapse of ideologies and the community
on the one hand, and reinforcement of technological and individualistic
trends on the other, have caused numerous parents to lose their belief that
there are valuable human qualities in human maturity and cultural heritage
which should be instilled in young people. We are witnesses to a tremendous
devaluation of the ideal of the rationally mature and cultured person so that
200
Chapter IV
those qualities most characteristic of him or her - life experience,

seriousness, moderation, social responsibility, self-restraint and the like - are
no longer in demand in the contemporary "stock-exchange of life." Under
these conditions, like the father mentioned earlier in our discussion, the
majority of parents give up; they relinquish the education of their children
towards wisdom and virtues, and abandon them to flow with the stream of
market trends: to seek cheap excitement, to satisfy fashionable desires here
and now, consume the ever-growing and indiscriminate "joys of life" that
are marketed in advertisements, and all this without taking others, values and
cultural norms into account.
The schools hardly deal any more with education and culture. Economic
logic, aggressive ,competition, and image marketing are gradually replacing
pedagogical logic. In numerous projects, organizational consultants have
replaced educators. From kindergarten through higher education, many
institutions adopt the commercial model of supplier and client: children,
parents and students are becoming a source of power and authority, and
educational institutions pursue them in an unstinting effort to meet their
tastes and satisfy their desires. "Education should be taken out of the
classroom," says Dr. Ronnie Aviram, "the classroom should be freed from
the commitment to inculcate comprehensive education to all.,,20 The new
goal is to meet the given and immediate interests of students, and not, God
forbid, shape and direct them. As a result of this, trend almost nothing is left
of the original humanistic claim to excel first and foremost as a human
being; it is an ideal that has been dwarfed to performance-achievementoriented success. And thus, an ever-growing number of teachers are afraid of
their students' criticism and prefer to teach worthless topics and subjects
because they are easy to digest. They are simply afraid to pose demanding
challenges and to be left with fine ideals but low ratings and no students.
Today, a teacher who insists on trying to be an educator for his or her
students - to challenge them so that they enrich their lives with the truth,
justice, beauty and meaning - is usually confronted with a gaping yawn and
a cynical look: "Come on, get real." He or she must cope today with a
double protest: one is the logic of modem positivists, for whom any talk of
knowledge in the humanistic art of life is a false pretense (since it is
impossible to measure it with empirical tools); and the second is the logic of
the postmodemists who define any attempt towards cultural and ethical
education as a condescending, power-abusing and oppressive activity.
On a concrete level, in the spirit of Alan Bloom's claim in The Closing of
the American Mind, the younger generation prefers to concentrate on the
external, the image, the superficial, the materialistic and the expedient, and
20 Aviram,
"Education should be taken out of the classroom."
Education in the Test
ofCurrent Events
201
avoid dealing with the essential, pure, profound, spiritual and intimate. An
example of this can be found in the ever-growing trend of young people to
have individual or school parties in the spirit of Hollywood-type TV, while
adorning themselves with all the symbols of exclusivity and successful
status-seeking accessories. We should not forget the philosopher Herbert
Marcuse's words on the uni-dimensionality of capitalistic society in the postindustrial era which is turning into a reality: even youth culture, which could
advance an idealistic, critical and alternative view to social reality, as it has
done in the past, is disappearing these days into a slick conformity to a
success-oriented and functional adult world, thus enabling the cloning of a
uni-dimensional reality.
Are these trends irreversible? I am not sure. It seems that critical
awareness has recently been heightened and with it recognition of the price
we pay for abandoning the commitment to qualitative culture. In an article
titled "Suicidal Culture," Yair Sheleg expresses discontent at the treason of
the cultural elite - writers, educators, academics and people who work in
communications - who with their silence enable the domination of
"entertainment inferiority" over television broadcasting, and even worse,
relegate real, spiritual, social, and general culture, so essential to the quality
of our life here, to the periphery." On the same topic, albeit from a different
angle, Dr. Gadi Yatziv expresses concern about the domination of ratings
over society, and a particular concern that reality will be represented by the
"invertebrates," whose striving towards ratings is devoid of inhibition and
any commitment to non-communicational cultural norms. 22
From another viewpoint, that of an expert in mass communication who is
inspired by moral and educational responsibility, Professor Gabi Weiman
proposes a diagnosis of the disease as well as preventive medicine which
will reduce its damage:
Children are not only enthusiastic television viewers but also naive
ones, devoid of all the defenses that provide barriers for cynical
distancing, a sober view, and the ability to differentiate between reality
and its reflections in the media...they are not yet equipped with the
immunization that provides doses of acquired suspicion, with the caution
acquired during maturity and life experience ... and this naivete no doubt
contains some worrisome aspects. It is a magnet for manipulations,
distortion of reality perception, and the continuing failure in television
reading comprehension ....In light of the plethora of "heavy-duty
spectators" among young people [the meaning] is adopting a perception
of reality that is violent, dangerous and alienated ...the broader danger is
21
22
Sheleg, "Suicidal Culture," Ha 'aretz, 5.3.1995.

Yatsiv, "Invertebrates," Ha 'aretz, 12.5.1995.
202
Chapter IV
not in actual imitation - adopting the behavior itself - but bringing up the
idea and possibility of arranging the young spectator's reasoning... [and]
this phenomenon, which researchers call ideation [acquiring the idea] has
implications on numerous and different spheres, such as relationships
between the sexes, parent-children relationships, sexual violence, etc...
The solution is embodied in modification of the spectators'
perception... parents who will, at times, understand the heavy toll of the
electronic babysitter will be able, under appropriate guidance, to channel
their children's viewing, to assist them by viewing together with them
which can help in teaching the skills of correct and sober deciphering of
the media's content... and the education system has an important task too:
as it has somewhat slowly learned how to adjust to the age of computers,
it will have to learn how to cope with the children of the channels. In this
coping, teachers will have to operate teaching programs for critical
viewing, as compulsory lessons in the curriculum, from pre-school age. 23
It appears that a certain amount of encouragement can also be drawn
from the diminishing of the destructive forces of the postmodern spirit. Its
attraction has been impaired as a result of the exposure of its groundless and
meaningless statements (a touch of deconstruction and it becomes clear that
the king is naked) and the growing understanding of its destructive
implications on education and culture, due mainly to its longings for the
theoretical and esthetic and its indifference towards the moral and political.
In a brilliant article in Studio magazine, Dr. Landau writes of
postmodemism's ambiguous and (intentional) unfounded rhetoric:
You read, understand the words, follow the connections, but somehow
are always left at the end with a feeling of missing out: you haven't
penetrated the core of the text, haven't grasped the full meaning. You
lose something on the way, you manage to grasp one word and two more
slip between your fingers. You persist, reread; it's like chasing your
tail ....The reader is led by his nose through the entangled field of
analogies and agrees only because he is signaled that understanding
awaits at the end of the tunnel of a complicated matter that needs
clarification. But whenever the text is required to interpret the analogy,
the transition from x to y, it elegantly circumvents the problem, and urges
you to go on, not to dwell upon trivial minutiae such as reading
comprehension. The path of understanding becomes the path of
abstruseness.
One way or another, the postmodernist writers fortify themselves
behind impenetrable walls of roundabout academic jargon, always regard
23
Weiman, "Heavy Viewers," Ha'aretz supplement, 15.5.1994.
203
themselves as exempt from semantic accountability for the torrents of

words with which they inundate their readers, carrying the banner of
"discourse" and "criticism" that prevents any attempt at real discourse,
thus immunizing themselves against criticism.i"
In his demystification of postmodemism, Landau shifts from criticism of
theoretical failures to identification of the social threats. In the spirit of the
humanistic approach, he later concentrates on the postmodemist position's
dangerous implications on morality and politics. On the one hand, numerous
postmodernists are proud of their sensitivity for the "other," protecting
minority rights and their desire to empower the disadvantaged groups whose
culture has been annihilated and their "voice" relegated to the periphery; but
on the other, in their very attack on the universal and objective status of
rationality and morality, they deny "others, the rejected and deprived," the
only alternative open for them to posit meaningful and well-grounded
arguments vis-a-vis the deprivation and injustice they have suffered
themselves. This is "politics that blabbers about reform but does nothing (in
the best case) or undermines the possibility of reform (in the worst case).,,25
In the concrete context of our discussion, even if the intentions of
postmodern discourse are good, in its irresponsible approach it cooperates
with power-abusing and opportunist politicians and greedy capitalists who
lack any inhibitions towards the destruction of the foundations of education,
culture and liberal democracy. How absurd it is that all the "idols of
enlightenment" have been shattered by postmodemism's critical linguistic
sophistications - ratings remain the only "ruler."
In concluding this topic, I would like to add one closing note to prevent
any confusion between a humanistic approach that criticizes the culture of
ratings, drawing on a commitment to advancing Man's development and
dignity, and a conservative dogmatic one that seeks to sanctify a specific
cultural canon and protect it from innovative trends and approaches. The
culture of ratings, as I have presented it so far, is not just an extension of
popular entertainment - it is a mentality and a way of life. Contrary to the
culture of pop and light entertainment that create and act side by side with
serious and qualitative culture as two sectors with tangential points and
overlapping areas, the culture of ratings has a total and imperialistic nature:
it rejects qualitative and moral distinctions grounded in the spheres of
knowledge and cultural heritages, and posits quantities of consumption,
popularity or ratings as the one and only measure.
If what I have presented above is true, about the social forces and the
maladies of culture resulting from the domination of the culture of ratings, a
24 Landau,
2S
"Shallow Talk Games," p.21.

Ibid. p.28.
204
Chapter IV
determined and aggressive reaction is required on the part of those for whom
serious culture and qualitative education is important - in the school
curriculum and public discourse. However, as I clarified earlier in the
discussion on education towards culture (in Chapter Two) and in the
discussion of cultural literacy (Chapter Three), the humanistic approach has
no pretensions to a monopoly over "culture." It does insist on a rational and
responsible approach towards its preservation and development; to
guarantee, for example, the objective and universal status of certain
standards of rationality and morality. For without such stnadards there will
be no way of justifying the desirability of democracy over dictatorship, the
importance of freedom of research, expression and creation, and the demand
for equality in human and civil rights, and in adhering to the dignity of all
people qua people.
The humanistic approach does not seek cultural monolithism but
pluralism and diversity. This, however, not at the price of throwing out the
baby with the bathwater. The educational battle against the culture of ratings
is not a result of a pretension of possessing undeniable and infallible
knowledge of the good, just and beautiful. Its motivating logic is protection
of the very striving towards the good, just and beautiful from interestmotivated political and economic forces which present humanistic ideals as
irrelevant, meaningless and purposeless.
4. THE NEW LITERACIES AND THEIR

POSSIBLE CONTRIBUTION TO
HUMANISTIC EDUCATION
Literacy is like the latest snack. You cannot but be attracted to its charm,
and the potential it embodies. It is a stylized term that comprises many
meanings: the comprehensive perception of linguistic skills, the combination
of "content knowledge" and "skillful knowledge," and the perfect tang of
education, culture and competent functioning. In the face of this plethora of
possibilities the "pedagogical eros" of intellectuals and educators cannot
remain indifferent, and they engage in the endeavor of literacy. But this is a
mixed blessing as one cannot see the woods for the trees, and the snack is
indigestible. One is dizzied by the overabundance of meanings and
interpretations, the countless clarifications darken the skies of our thoughts,
and worst of all: we find ourselves involved in a discourse that is not only
illiterate, but is also lacking in basic communication. If frustration and
confusion are the lot of our colleagues in research and teaching, think about
the torture undergone by students and novice teachers, whom we promise to
Education in the Test of Current Events
205
remain indifferent, and they engage in the endeavor of literacy. But this is a
mixed blessing as one cannot see the woods for the trees, and the snack is
indigestible. One is dizzied by the overabundance of meanings and
interpretations, the countless clarifications darken the skies of our thoughts,
and worst of all: we find ourselves involved in a discourse that is not only
illiterate, but is also lacking in basic communication. If frustration and
confusion are the lot of our colleagues in research and teaching, think about
the torture undergone by students and novice teachers, whom we promise to
endow with literacy as a "spotlight" that will serve them in paving their way
securely - a "flood light" which has turned into a "spot-darkness" that hides
the old and familiar paths on which they have walked securely up to now.
No, I do not want us to raise our hands in submission. My very
participation in an academic community that delights in the sufferings of
literacy and causing others to suffer, testifies to my view that we have a
genuine treasure in our hands. But this treasure is raw material and we must
establish and shape it in a language suitable for all. We have to make literacy
more user-friendly, more familiar and more understandable, or else it will be
rejected as yet another academic invention whose agonies are greater than its
advantages. I now wish to deal with the challenge of making literacy
friendlier by clarifying its meanings in diverse contexts.
This relationship between linguistic skills in written and spoken
language, and being an educated or cultured person is not accidental. Man is
first and foremost a "speaking animal," who not only "speaks" like other
developed animals in the sense of interpersonal communication, but also
uses words arranged according to logic and imagination in order to study
nature and establish the sciences, and in order to go beyond the natural world
and establish a moral, political and artistic culture. As human beings we
think, ask questions, study, interpret, evaluate, discuss, decide and act in a
world through words. Through them, the human world is established, and
with their disappearance it too disappears. This idea is as old as classical
Athens and served as the rationale for the education of young Athenians and
Romans in light of the ideal of the orator: an exemplary and influential
public figure, whose words were wise and stylized, always preserving the
good of the public and the state. Through language, according to the Greek
educator Isocrates, we distinguish between truth and falsity, justice and
injustice. Through it, we learn about one another and enrich our world with
meaning and beauty. Through it, we become free people who have the power
to imagine alternative realities to those that exist, choose between them and
act towards its actualization.
Through the affinity of these combined elements of "language and
knowledge," and on the foundations of a new knowledge created by
linguistics, psychology and philosophy, several focal points of research and
206
Chapter IV
acquisition, expansion and presentation of knowledge according to criteria

accepted by the higher education institutions.
We can learn about the various implications of the unity of language and
knowledge in the field of literacy from the following talk presented at an
inter-disciplinary symposium on literacy." that took place at Beit Berl
College: as a result of her interest in the development of language skills in
pre-school children, Dr. Tsvia Valdan sought to identify literacy with
"orientation ability and reading between the lines, together with the correct
usage of this skill in the various contexts of life." In her opinion, even when
teaching pre-school children, emphasis should be placed on nurturing the
"buds of literacy" - "as children's behaviors which show abilities and
tendencies in the field of language and knowledge ... which precede the
acquisition of reading and writing skills," in order to enable "successful
acquisition of a variety of literacies required by the adult." She believes that
the opposite of literacy is not ignorance or illiteracy but "ignorancy," "a
condition in which people are exposed to an education system and
acquisition of reading and writing, but do not develop their ability to acquire
knowledge, examine it critically, expand and use it or produce it
satisfactorily. "
From the perspective of a philologist who deals with inculcating
language, Dr. Emmanuel Alon compared the literacy-holistic-procedural
approach to the classical-formal-normative one, and sought to focus it on the
nurturing of "linguistic knowledge that promotes successful acquisition and
communication of intellectual messages, expressional units, and the different
kinds of knowledge." He believes that "identifying language studies with
their grammatical aspects is not only ineffective but also harmful." The
emphasis should be placed on broad expressional units - like a letter,
academic paper, talk, lecture, symposium and literary text - while
developing conversancy in the various strata of language and sensitivity to
the diverse contexts which are appropriate to use.
And from a different perspective, that of the informational scientist,
Amikam Marbach seeks to identify literacy not only with linguistic skills but
mainly with the ways of exemplary learning: with the high and diversified
ability for reading comprehension, the rational and critical approach, analytic
and synthetic thinking, and the application of all these to learning research. It
consists of a structured and systematic procedure that begins with the
identification of meaningful issues and a clear articulation of the research
question, continuing with identification of relevant knowledge and its critical
26 The citations from lectures delivered by Tsvia Valdan, Emmanuel Alon and Amikam
Marbach are taken from the symposium "What (the hell) is literacy and what can be done
with it in teacher-training colleges," The State ofAffairs, vo1.2.
207
and fruitful processing, ending with its presentation and communication in

an effective form compatible with criteria accepted in the given medium. He
believes that literacy is first and foremost the ability to acquire and use
knowledge, and to present and communicate it for the fulfillment of
theoretical and practical purposes.
Together with these research and nurturing paths, an additional trend
developed which used the term "literacy" in the sense of a sphere of
knowledge, cultural discourse and/or social practice, whose common
characteristic is the combination of contextual-educational knowledge and
skills-functional knowledge. In this context, we have recently found a
reference to a "multi literacy" and "literacy network,,,27 as all-embracing
terms for linguistic, numerical, scientific, technological, computer, moral,
esthetic, legal, functional, communications literacy, etc. In this sense we are
speaking of literacy as the framework of knowledge and skills that enables
people to understand in an intelligent and critical, albeit basic way, the
discourse that characterizes a specific sphere ofknowledge, and to function
in its framework on a satisfactory level, (or, in short, a proper level of
understanding and functioning in a defined sphere ofcultural activity). The
advantage of the term "literacy" in comparison with terms like "knowledge
and culture," as many believe, derives from the fact that the new term has a
connotation of more active and skillful knowledge than the traditional ones
which had a more conservative and passive connotation - one of "museumlike warehouse of knowledge."
Literacy, 10 and behold, also lies at the center of a passionate ideological
argument between supporters of the neo-classical-conservative stream in
education and the neo-Marxist-radical ones. The discussion deals with the
question: which of the two literacies should be placed at the center of
educational endeavor - cultural literacy or critical literacy? Supporters of
cultural literacy extol the importance of instilling a common cultural
infrastructure - educational, moral and skillful - which will allow all
members of a community to intelligently and skillfully participate in public
discourse, economy and cultural endeavor.
Here, one should add, supporters of cultural literacy are also divided into
two groups. The first emphasizes philosophical, humanistic and neo-classical
literacy and engages in cultural literacy as a means for nurturing human
spirit: in instilling the sublime and transcendent in human creativity in the
younger generations, through guided encounters with the masterpieces of
science, philosophy, ethics and art. For them (Robert Hutchins, Mortimer
27 See,
for example, Givon, "The Literacy Network: An Outline of Multi-Literacies"; and

also The New London Group, "A Pedagogy of Multi-Literacies: Designing Social
Futures."
208
Chapter IV
Adler, Alan Bloom, Russell Kirk, S. I. Hayakawa) literacy is the means for
rendering man more truly human. The second group has a sociological and
functionalistic approach, and regards cultural literacy as a means "to achieve
not only greater economic prosperity but also greater social justice and more
effective democracy .... It is the network of information that ... enables to take
up a newspaper and read it with an adequate level of comprehension, getting
the point, grasping the implications, relating what they read to the unstated
context which alone gives meaning to what they read.,,28 Contrary to the
philosophical-classical approach that deals centrally with Man's humanity
and a perfectionist striving towards excellence in the art of human life, the
functionalistic approach always refers to a given social context. It places
sharing defined cultural contents - intellectual, ethical, educational and
technological - as a dam both against cultural deprivation and isolationist,
rift-creating and multi-cultural trends which threaten to destroy social fabric,
block off communication channels and cooperation, and eventually
emasculate society's vitality and paralyze its functioning.
In contrast to this trend, supporters of critical literacy argue that
presenting a specific world-picture (intellectual, ethical and esthetic) as
representative of exemplary culture - usually identified with the cultural
world of the "white European male" - is in fact a manipulative way of
perpetuating the superiority of a specific cultural group, establishing its
hegemony, and ensuring its dominant status among cultures, nations and
other groups. Particularly in light of our new awareness that "knowledge is
power" and that manipulation has become the most dominant
communicational mode in an age of progressing capitalism, we must
conclude that the most important literacy is not characterized by effective
functioning in the mechanisms of the existing system, but in critical
awareness and moral sensitivity that examine the existing in light of what is
desirable and possible. In other words, the supporters of this approach
maintain that the educator should not emphasize the optimization of
socialization and acculturation but rather the empowerment of the critical
abilities ofyoung people for deciphering the reality of their lives, correctly
identifying the interest-seeking factors of power that shape society,
differentiating between knowledge and prejudice, reading the writing on the
wall before it goes beyond the wall and takes its toll ofits victims, examining
value scales, shaping a worldview for themselves, acting in their
environment as creatures who are aware, sensitive and socially accountable.
Let us return to basic (net) literacy that we sought to render available and
friendly, and briefly summarize where we stand. Literacy, I suggest, is a
basic intellectual ability, which enables people to intelligently and critically
28 Hirsch, Cultural
Literacy, p. 2.
209
participate in the central discourses and practices that constitute the

cultural life of a society; an education in content and skills by virtue of
which individuals can derive meaning from their experiences, broaden their
minds, express clearly, and use effectively for actualizing theoretical and
practical goals. It is also important to add that (1) like other abilities, such as
physical or artistic ones, we cannot speak of the complete existence of
literacy or its total absence, but it is always on a continuum that enables
perpetual development and improvement. And (2) literacy is in part innateorganic and in part acquired-cultural; part of it is based on knowledge of
content and part on knowledge of skills; at its core are overall intellectual,
thinking and linguistic qualities which branch off into specific qualities,
required for successful activity in the various fields of knowledge and
cultural cycles.
Literacy in the basic and general sense of the term presented in the above
definition is directly relevant to an education system's curriculum, as it
relates to a level of basic education (content and skills) that should
characterize all graduates of the education system. The attempt to delve
deeply and specify the content and skills that are part and parcel of this kind
of literacy lands us in the "arena" of the Iiteracies of spheres or functions (as
the proper level of understanding and functioning in a defined sphere of
cultural activity). In this context the recent attempt of Yehoshafat Givon is
notable in presenting a perception of a "multi literacy" as a guiding
perception for structuring the curriculum." Givon believes that multi literacy
should be regarded as a literacy network that provides the educational basis
required for successful functioning in modern society. He believes that when
choosing the specific literacies and their characteristics, one should take into
account the social and cultural conditions, required academic standard, and
general-educational elements in contrast with the particular-vocational ones,
and the mutual affinities between various literacies.
In light of this conception and the literacy trends we discussed earlier, it
seems totally plausible to me that in the near future educational goals will be
formulated in literacy terminology. Instead of speaking of conversancy in
corpuses of knowledge of the study subjects and proper functioning in
societal and culturalcircles, it may well be that we will soon witness a shift
to a pedagogical discourse that centers on structuring a literacy-oriented
curriculum. Based on the above, I find it extremely likely that the
combination of the humanistic approach to education and the multi-faceted
perception of literacy will give birth to a curriculum that strives to nurture
the following ten literacies: linguistic, numerical, historical-cultural,
scientific-technological, philosophical-critical, moral, esthetic-artistic, civil
29 See
note 27.
210
Chapter IV
(legal-political), health and social-communicational. (It goes without saying

that this division should be accorded public and academic debate and the
empirical test of educational endeavor).
In conclusion, I would like to add a few words on two literacies that do
not appear in the list above and which are extremely important in advancing
the quality of the education system. The first is academic literacy, which we
defined earlier as the assemblage of the thinking, linguistic, cultural and
communicational skills which enable the acquisition of knowledge, its
expansion and presentation according to the criteria accepted by the higher
education institutions. In the education system, from kindergarten through
high school, the academic literacy of teachers has central importance since
its content and patterns are supposed to serve as an exemplary model for
students' imitation and internalization. It is obvious that in these frameworks
less emphasis should be placed on the formal-technical facets of academic
writing, and more on the academic spirit and patterns: intellectual
inquisitiveness and striving towards the truth; an enlightened approach that
is characterized by open-mindedness, broadmindedness, and a reflective,
autonomous and critical approach; rational-scientific thinking that seeks an
objective perception of reality, while relying heavily on valid knowledge and
reliable tools that have accumulated in common human experience;
application of knowledge to quotidian reality through the skills of analysis,
judgment and deliberation; the ability for independent learning, expanding
knowledge, evaluating and processing it; and the ability of clearly presenting
ideas and standpoints, in a matter-of-fact, orderly and well-reason manner both written and oral.
Two central difficulties hinder the teacher who attempts to "reflect"
academic literacy: (1) the lack of adequate cultural and academic
foundations on the part of those who apply for teacher-training programs,
and (2) the prevalent disciplinary-didactic orientation in the majority of the
departments of education in universities and colleges, which deprives
intellectual-academic development of teachers in training. In my opinion, in
order to rectify this situation, a detailed and multi-staged program should be
prepared for the academic nurturing of teachers in training - from the
moment they enter college (in a week or two-week intensive workshop in
which they will be exposed to the central characteristics of academic
culture), through nurturing academic skills in all frameworks of study (in all
the subjects taught and in designated centers such as the library, center for
academic writing and center for computer applications in education),
through guidance in preparation of research papers in the framework of
advanced classes and seminars. The ultimate goal of this kind of training
program is to produce a teacher whose academic literacy constitutes an
educational factor - direct and indirect - in overall humanistic education. In
211
order to actualize this goal the teacher-training system must nurture the
following eight characteristics in teachers of the future:
1. A love of truth that is manifested in intellectual inquisitiveness, a
passion for knowledge, a rational and reflective approach, intellectual
integrity and commitment to the study of truth (in spheres of knowledge and
social relationships.
2. A basis of cultural literacy striving towards quality, veneration of
excellence, general education and a rich and diverse world of associations;
as well as of critical literacy - an intelligent and autonomous examination of
things in order to determine their validity and value, going beyond first
impressions and not being carried away by conformity to social conventions.
3. Awareness of the differences between information (as an inventory
of data and facts), knowledge (as a combination of information and skills in
the field of a specific activity, which enables one to understand and explain
phenomena and effectively and successfully cope with reality), and wisdom
(enabling one to correctly interpret human situations, and use the various
kinds of knowledge for the benefit of Man and society).
4. Understanding the unique logic of different spheres of knowledge
and intelligent use of the ways and criteria that serve in all spheres for
meaningful statements, proving and disproving arguments (proving the great
advantage of the sun's size over that of the moon is not like proving the
advantage of the quality of Shakespearian drama in comparison with a soap
opera, and disproving the argument about the earth being flat is not like
disproving the argument of democratic and peace-loving political leaders).
5. The awareness and sensitivity to distinguish between the different
status of statements: theoretical, empirical, practical, and normative (Hitler,
for example, was in fact one of the designers and educators of Nazi society",
yet we judge him as the most anti-educative element in German culture).
6. Awareness of the differences between absolute statements (above
and beyond all discussion or criticism) and arguments related to objective
truths (explained and reasoned through research methods and evidence
acceptable by the public as reliable and unbiased), and subjective statements
(that express personal preference based on an individual's personalemotional world).
7. Adhering to qualitative standards and "minute details" in thinking
and research, while maintaining openness and sensitivity to philosophical
and ethical aspects, and creative and non-routine elements.
8. Skills in attention and critical analysis of things (written and oral)
and the ability of expression in correct, clear, logical, rich language in
content and style.
>-
212
Chapter IV
The second literacy that was not included in the "literacy network" and
which should be nurtured is pedagogical literacy. In this sphere, it is
extremely difficult to present definitions and characteristics because we are
speaking of a kind of art and wisdom that by their very nature is not given to
clear conceptualization. In the spirit of Aristotle, who said that the wise deed
is the one done by the wise person, we may say that our pedagogical
conception derives from our vivid image of an exemplary pedagogue. On the
other hand, without conceptual categories that would bring us closer to an
image of pedagogical literacy, we are unable, when necessary, to identify the
exemplary pedagogue. I have mentioned all this in order to present the idea
that excellence in pedagogical literacy is the art of reasoning and use of
knowledge for the maximal advancement of students' personality and
character in the concrete context of their lives; it is the wisdom to identify
the relative importance or priorities of ideals, values and goals, from the
point of view of the advantage they may bring to the proper development of
Man, combined with the choice of the most appropriate and effective means
oftheir actualization.
The key to understanding pedagogical literacy is based on the insight that
here we are speaking about the knowledge of the whole person, that is not
wholly given to categorical conceptualization nor to technical imitation.
Before us is a well-developed sense of orientation, which comprises
sensitive measures of scales to the specific weight (positive or negative) of
all components of the whole, incisive awareness of the connections between
the various parts, and keen perception for identifying the overall-pedagogical
elements in a personal-concrete reality. Perhaps a sense of proportion is the
key word: similar to identifying a well-tuned note, elegant movement,
appropriate statement, apt reaction, good idea, wise thought and proper
behavior, so is the educating deed - that enriches students' souls and benefits
their personality, because it is performed at the right time and the right place,
in the right way and for the right person.
In practical terms, we have already dealt (in Chapter Two) with an
important and central component of pedagogical literacy that is the wellbalanced combination of education into culture, education into autonomous
and critical thinking, and education of an authentic personality. In the
previous chapter, which dealt with education in humanistic morality, we also
emphasized, on the one hand, the importance of a parallel and
complementary development of rationality, perfectionism and strong
personality, and, on the other, good-heartedness, tenderness and empathetic
sensitivity. Now, in our discussion of literacy, we underscored the
importance of stressing details and minutiae, facts and reliable research
methods; we also emphasized the importance of the ability to go beyond the
standard and "normal" to the non-routine and the creative. The challenge, in
213
the spirit of the philosopher Pascal, is not to decide between two poles and
be totally in favor of one, but to be at both poles at the same time and
incorporate everything that is between them.
Moreover, when thinking about promoting students' self-fulfillment, the
educator should not make a decision between the ideals of freedom, quality
and happiness - but activate them together, as gravitational forces or
complementary spurring elements. Nor should the educator choose between
nurturing neutral and objective academic speech (which is at times tediously
alienating and spontaneous and authentic personal expression (which is often
worthless jabbering). Rather, she should help them and demand that they
know how to do the best both at the same time, and often, at best, combine
them into a wondrous statement in which the personal expresses a general
human truth or alternatively, that the overall and synoptic view touches upon
the most intimate fibers of individual existence.
Pedagogical modes of communication have a unique holistic fabric. They
combine the individual and the general, the narrative and the scientific, the
emotional and the rational, the factual and the imaginary, the well-known
heritage, innovative creativity, the biographical and bibliographical. This
mode of communication, as Jacques Shlanger points out, is the distinctive
feature shared by philosopher-pedagogues - such as Plato, Montaigne,
Rousseau and Nietzsche - who by virtue of their writings left a deep
impression on human culture and changed our perspective of Man's
education." Their writing excels in a rare inner unity; content serves form
and form expresses content (the Platonic idea of dialectics is inherent in the
Socratic dialogues and the Nietzscheian idea of perspectivism is manifested
in his aphoristic writing); an epistemological-content aspect of the text
challenges the reader's rationality while the emotional-expressional aspect
captivates his soul and dominates it; in presenting the problematic nature of
the discussion the cultural-objective and the personal-subjective mingle and
merge; in readers' experiences the distinctions between the cognitive and
esthetic are erased and become a rare experience of the truth of beauty and
the beauty of truth. These philosophical-educational texts "appeal directly to
the reader and do not suffer from the alienating effect of cognitive and
theoretical distancing. They invite the reader into a dialogue with their
meanings and messages, and at same time they equally initiate an encounter
and dialogue with oneself. These texts also make the reader discover things
about oneself, which he or she was unable to conceive and formulate with
one's own resources.?" They speak directly to personal authentic experience
and "inspire readers to explore new perspectives and passions, and
30
31
Shlanger, Ways ofPhilosophers, ch. 5.

Ibid., p. 92.
214
Chapter IV
simultaneously urge them to cultivate and exercise their courage and

openness as well as their critical and creative powers for making such
explorations truly fruitful.,,32
In this kind of writing the basic components of pedagogical excellency
become clear, and perhaps also the pedagogical paradigm; but it cannot be a
substitute for the living - flesh and blood - educator who mentors his or her
students in the art of life within the concrete reality of their lives.
Philosopher-educators, of the kind we have mentioned, by virtue of their
genius inspire and challenge their readers towards the most sublime human
existence. With regard to great educators, it is the power of their personality
that makes every encounter with them an enriching, elevating, and
empowering experience. In the case of teachers who are also educators, who
know how to provide their students with learning experiences that also
nurture their personality and character - in this case, we can say that their
educational endeavor is by virtue of their pedagogical literacy.
32 Aloni,
Beyond Nihilism: Nietzsche's Healing and Edifying Philosophy, p.40.
EPILOGUE
Nothing in my mind better represents the end of humanistic education
than the combination of the individualistic ideal of the eudaimonic person
with the political ideal of a liberal, enlightened, and humane democracy. The
first, as introduced by Aristotle and later interpreted by Alasdair MacIntyre
and Martha Nussbaum, is' an ideal of human flourishing that comprises
"doing well in being well," self-actualization and well-rounded personality,
excellence in the most distinctively human activities (intellectual, moral, and
aesthetic) as well as personal contentment, amiability, and fullness of
existence. 1 In light of more recent eudaimonic ethical theories.i I argued in
the various chapters that we would benefit from enriching this classical ideal
so that it includes the modern forms of self-overcoming and self-creation
that characterize Nietzsche's "overman", as well as the forms of human
flourishing and self-actualization by which Maslow characterizes those who
achieve "full humanity." With regard to the second ideal, the political, I
started with Pericles's classical ideal of enlightened and civilized
democracy, continued with the Enlightenment's vision of liberal and
pluralistic democracy, and concluded with modern and postmodern notions
of egalitarian, humane, and multicultural democracy - adding social and
cultural rights to the more fundamental or natural ones of life, equality,
freedom, and property.
These attempts on my part to construct holistic and integrative
educational ideals are naturally not without problem. What is to me a healthy
tension between competing visions and interpretations, which ultimately
balance and complement one the other, may seem to others - whose
approaches were presented in the various chapters - as contradicting
relations between views that are totally incompatible. With MacIntyre, for
example, with respect to eudaimonic theories, it is either Aristotle or
Nietzsche - never both. In the area of moral education, the debate is often
presented in terms of either a Kohlberian cognitivist approach or a Deweyian
fostering of moral habits and dispositions. Within the framework of
intellectual education, there is the neo-humanist camp of the "great books
tradition" and that of those who hold the cultivation of critical thinking or
critical reflectiveness as the cure for all educational and social ills. From the
vantage point of radical and critical theorists, the hope for change lies in the
MacIntyre's After Virtue and Nussbaum's TheFragility ofGoodness.
See, for example, in Norton's PersonalDestinies.
1 See
215
216
Epilogue
development of critical pedagogy toward emancipation from the enslaving

conditions of Capitalism. Some voices in the educational discourse consider
the postmodem celebration of cultural relativism and multiculturalism as the
only road for true equality in educational opportunities. Others, in contrast,
believe in the importance of a shared and challenging cultural literacy and
consider the postmodem trends as forms of intellectual corruption on the part
of "tenured radicals." For some educationists the required change consists in
the shift in emphasis from cognitive intelligences to emotional ones; for still
others, it lies in the shift from the "male's type morality of principles" to the
"female's type morality of caring."
The difference between the holistic and integrative approach to
humanistic education and the "either/or" excluding one can be best
understood in the framework of Rorty's distinction between edifying and
foundational discourses.' The point I make throughout the book is that
wisdom in general and pedagogical wisdom in particular are incompatible
with foundational, let alone, reductionist approaches. From the vantage point
of pragmatic humanism - be it the version of Nietzsche, Dewey or Rorty - it
is inspiration, nourishment, orientation, wisdom, enhancement, growth, and
ultimately edification that we seek to achieve from "the conversation of
mankind" rather than theoretical doctrines concerning the ultimate nature of
reality and morality. Ideas, said Nietszsche, should never become our
inhibiting prisons but rather stepping stones for continuous self-overcoming
and self-creation; the wisest persons are those who have sensitive antennae
to all types of people and forms of human expression; and the desirable
product of education should consist not in a "one stringed" individual, who
is locked in the boundaries of one perspective, but the "multi-stringed"
person who is capable of integrating the vast diversity of perspectives and
master the rare art of "giving style to one's character.'?" We should aspire, in
other words, that "artistic energies and the practical wisdom of life will join
with scientific thinking to form a higher organic system in relation to which
scholars, physicians, artists, and legislators - as we know them at present would have to look like paltry relics of ancient items."
Towards the end of Chapter One, I contrasted the integrative and
pragmatic yet responsible approach - as represented for example by
Whitehead, Gadamer, and Habermass - with both the foundationaldoctrinarian and the nihilistic-postmodem approaches. In the framework of
Rorty, Philosophy and"the Mirror ofNature.
On these points see Nietzsche's Will to Power, sec. 259 as well as sees, 881, 883 and
1051; HumanAll Too Human, sec. 281, The Gay Science, sec. 290.
5 Nietzsche, The Gay Science, sec. 113.
Epilogue
217
educational theory, Paulo Freire, Maxine Greene, and Martha Nussbaum set
excellent examples of such pragmatic humanism. For Friere, the notion of
humanization draws on the traditional ideals of the enlightenment - progress
through the cultivation of critical reason, equality, freedom, and solidarity as well as on the basic tenets of Marxism and Existentialism. In the case of
Greene, her vantage point is never restricted to one argument, perspective,
voice or discipline, but always enriches and challenges her readers with an
intellectual symphony [polyphony]: "releasing the imagination," developing
"moral wide-awakeness," cultivating critical reason and political
engagement, showing respect for both high culture and personal authenticity.
In Cultivating Humanity, Nussbaum frees herself from the traditional
dichotomies of Left and Right, Radicals and Conservatives, Modems and
Postmoderns, and sets forth a program for reform in liberal education that is
committed to universal humanism, moral cosmopolitanism, Socratic reason,
empathetic imagination, democratic. rule, and multicultural curriculum.
It is with reference to this tradition of pragmatic humanism that I aimed
in this book to integrate the Classical, Romantic, Existential, and Critical
approaches to humanistic education into one "grand theory." In the spirit of
Nietzsche's pragmatic humanism, which viewed Man as experimenting with
ever-new modes and possibilities of being human, my goal in this endeavor
can be viewed as a search for "new and untrodden ways" for the elevation
and enhancement of humanity - for a "higher, more profound, prouder, more
beautiful humanity. ,,6 From the vantage point of Dewey's pragmatic
humanism, the quest for an integrative model of humanistic education fulfills
the "cultural function of philosophy to restore the flow when experience has
been arrested by epochal change... [It should] bring a kind of 'big picture'
wholeness to the junction of old and new so that a people's life's energies
may be reintegrated and liberated in present action.... Philosophies as
working theories of life, as general schemes of living and measures of
values."?
In light of Sydney Hook's suggestions in "The Snare of Definitions," it is
my hope that the theory of humanistic education offered here is rich and
flexible enough to contain diverse and even conflicting views of humanism
and humanistic education, yet provide good understanding and specific
criteria for guarding us against ideas and practices that inhibit human
flourishing and create dehumanizing conditions for individuals and
communities.
6 Nietzsche's Beyond Good and Evil, sees. 212 as well as sees. 203 and 211; Mann,
"Nietzsche's Philosophy in the Light of Contemporary Events," p.366.
7 Waks, "Experimentalism and the Flow of Experience," p. 3.
218
Epilogue
As pragmatic humanist I am fully aware that the ultimate test of the

model of humanistic education presented here will be in the real life of
educational practice. The pedagogical challenge, in other words, is to find
adequate and efficient ways to translate the philosophical and pedagogical
insights into humanistic pedagogical practices: to empower and guide
individuals to lead a vital and sound life of wide-awakeness, thoughtful
deliberation, moral conduct, political involvement, and discriminating
appreciation of beauty in both nature and art. It should further seek to
achieve in students the right integration as well as the right tension between
a commitment to high cultural standards and a strong sense of individuality
in both the forms of autonomy and authenticity. Finally, to achieve all this,
truly humanistic teachers would have to take the responsibility to set a
personal example in the art of living as well as to create at their schools a
pedagogical atmosphere of care, trust, support, dialogue, respect, fairness,
tolerance, inquiry, freedom, commitment, responsibility and reciprocity.
Without these last elements, even the most beautifully woven theory of
humanistic education would fail to become a lived reality for its teachers and
students.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Adler, Mortimer. The Paideia Proposal: An Educational Manifesto. New York: Macmillan,
1982.
Alexander, H. A. "Rationality and Redemption: Ideology, Indoctrination, and Learning
Communities." Philosophy ofEducation, PES Yearbook, 1996.
Aloni, Nimrod. Beyond Nihilism: Nietzsche's Healing and Edifying Philosophy. Lanham:
University Press of America, 1991.
_ _ _ _. "A Redefinition of Liberal and Humanistic Education". International Review of
Education, Vol. 43, No.1, 1997.
_ _ _ _. "The Three Pedagogical Dimensions of Nietzsche's Philosophy". Educational
Theory, Vol. 39, No.4, Fall 1989.
_ _ _ _. "On the Obligation to the Educational Battle Against the Occupation,"(Hebrew)
Hetz, Vo1.2, p.25
American Humanist Association. Humanist Manifesto II. New York: AHA 1973.
Apple, Michael W. Ideology and Curriculum. 2nd ed. New York: Routledge, 1990.
Arendt, Hanna The Human Condition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1958.
Aries, Philippe. Centuries ofChildhood. New York: Random House, 1962.
Aristotle. The Politics. Translated by T. A. Sincalair. New York: Penguin, 1962.
_ _ _ _. The Nicomachean Ethics. Translated by David Ross. New York: Oxford
University Press, 1980.
Arnold, Matthew. Culture and Anarchy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1960.
Aron, Raymond. Main Currents in Sociological Thought II. New York: Doubleday, Anchor
Books, 1960.
Aviram, Aharon. "Adopting a Comprehensive Look at Education" (Hebrew). Hed Hachinuch,
January, 1994.
_ _ _ _. "Education Should be Taken out of the Classroom" (Hebrew). Sdemot, Feburary
1994.
Aronowitz, Stanley and Giroux, Henry. Education Under Siege: The Conservative, Liberal,
and Radical Debate Over Schooling. New York: Bergin & Garvey, 1985.
Babbitt, Irving. Literature and the American College: Essays in Defense of the Humanities.
Clifton: Augustus M. Kelley Publishers, 1972.
Bailey, Charles. Beyond the Present and the Particular: A Theory of Liberal Education.
London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1984.
Baldacchino, Joseph (ed.). Educating for Virtue. Washington, D.C.: National Humanities
Institute, 1988.
Banks, J. A. and McGee-Banks, C. A. (eds.). Multicultural Education. Boston: Allyn and
Bacon, 1993.
Barrett, William. Irrational Man: A Study in Existential Philosophy. Garden City, New York:
Doubleday, Anchor Books, 1962.
_ _ _ _. Time of Need: Forms of Imagination in the Twentieth Century. New York:
Harper and Row, 1973.
Barth, Roland S. Open Education and the American School. New York: Agathon Press, 1972.
Brameld, Theodore. Philosophies of Education in Cultural Perspective. New York: Henry
Holt and Company, 1955
Barzun, Jacques. Teacher in America. Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1945.
_ _ _ _. The Use and Abuse ofArt. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1974.
219
220
Bibliography
Ben Shlomo, Yosef. The Philosophy ofSpinoza (Hebrew). Tel Aviv: Broadcasting University,
1985.
Bengtsson, J. O. "Left and Right Eclecticism: Roger Kimball's Cultural Criticism."
Humanitas,2001.
Berlin, Isaiah. "Two Concepts of Liberty." In Four Essays on Liberty. Oxford: Oxford
Bernstein, Richard J. Beyond Objectivism and Relativism. Philadelphia: University of
Pennsylvania Press, 1985.
_ _ _ _. The New Constellation: The Ethical-Political Horizons of Modernity postmodernity. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1992.
_ _ _ _. "From Hermeneutics to Praxis." The Review ofMetaphysics XXXV: 823-845.
_ _ _ _. "Philosophy in the Conversation of Mankind" The Review of Metaphysics
XXXIII: 745-775.
Bloom, Allan. The Closing ofthe American Mind. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1987.
Blumenberg, Hans. The Legitimation of the Modern Age. Edited by Tom McCarthy.
Translated by Robert M. Wallace. Boston: MIT Press, 1985.
Booth, Wayne (ed.). The Knowledge Most Worth Having. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press, 1967.
_ _ _ _. The Company We Keep: An Ethics ofFiction. Berkeley: University of Califomia
Press, 1988.
Bourdeiu, Pierre. "Systems of Education and Systems of Thought". International Social
Science Journal, Vol. 19, No.3, 1967.
Bowers, C. A. "The Dialectic of Nihilism and the State: Implications of an Emancipatory
Education." Educational Theory, Vol 36, No.3, Summer 1986.
_ _ _ _. "Culture Against Itself: Nihilism as an Element in Recent Educational
Thought." American Journal ofEducation, Vol. 93, No.4, August 1985.
Boyd, William and King, Edmond. The History of Western Education. New Jersey: Barnes
and Noble, 1980.
Bradbury, Malcolm and McFarlane, James (eds.). Modernism. Harmondsworth, Middlesex:
Penguin, 1981.
British Humanist Association. "Humanism Explained." http://www.humanism.org.uk.
Bronowski, J. Science and Human Values. New York: Harper & Row, 1965.
Brubacher, John S. A History of the Problems of Education (2nd edition). New York:
McGraw-Hili, 1966.
Buber, Martin. Between Man and Man. New York: Macmillan, 1965.
_ _ _ _. "The Education of Character." In J. P. Strain (editor), Modern Philosophies of
Education. New York: Random House, 1971.
Burbules, Nicholas and Rice, Suzanne. "Dialogue Across Differences: Continuing the
Conversation." Harvard Educational Review,VoI. 61, No.1, February 1991.
Burbules, Nicholas. "Cultivating Humanity: A Classical Defense of Reform in Liberal
Education" (Book Review). Harvard Educational Review, Winter 1999.
Burnet, John (ed.). Aristotle on Education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1903.
Camus, Albert. Neither Victims nor Executioners. New York: Continuum: 1980.
_ _ _ _. "Letters to a German Friend." In Resistance, Rebellion, and Death. New York:
Vintage Books, 1974.
_ _ _ _. The Myth of Sisyphus. Translated by Justin O'Brien. New York: Random
House, 1955.
_ _ _ _. The Rebel. Translated by A. Bower. New York: Random House, 1956.
Carmi, T. Poems and Images under Duress (Hebrew). Hadarim, Summer 1994.
Bibliography
221
Carr, David. "After Kohlberg: Some Implications of an Ethics of Virtue for the Theory of
Moral Education and Development". Studies in Philosophy and Education, Vol. 15,
No.4, October 1996.
Cassirer, Ernest. An Essay on Man. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1975.
_ _ _ _. The Question of Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Bloomington: Indiana University
Press, 1963.
Chomski, N. Language and Freedom (Hebrew). Jerusalem: Mifras, 1979.
Chasan, Barry I. and Soltis, Jonas F. (eds.). Moral Education. New York: Teachers College
Press, 1973.
Cohen, Arthur A Humanistic Education and Western Civilization: Essays for Robert M
Hutchins. New York: Holt Rinehart and Winston, 1964.
Cohen, Adir. "Education for Youth According to Your Way or Lessons in Castration"
(Hebrew). Hetz 1, 1989.
Combs, A. W. The Professional Education ofTeachers. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1965.
Commission on the Humanities. The Humanities in American Life. Berkeley: University of
California Press, 1980.
Cooper, David E. Authenticity and Learning: Nietzsche's Educational Philosophy. London:
Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1983..
Cornwell, G. H. and Stoddard, E. W. "The Future of Liberal Education and the Hegemony of
Market Value: Privilege, Practicality, and Citizenship." Liberal Education, Summer
2001.
Council for Secular Humanism. "A Secular Humanist Declaration." http://www.
secularhumanism.org.
Cremin, Laurence. The Transformation ofthe School. New York: Alfred Knopf, 1961.
Darom, Dov. Climatefor Growth (Hebrew). Tel Aviv: Poalim, 1990.
Davis, Gregory H. Technology - Humanism or Nihilism: A critical Study ofthe Philosophical
Basis and Practice of Modern Technology. Washington D. C.: University Press of
America, 1981.
Deardan, R. F., Hirst, P. H. and Peters, R. S. (eds.) Education and Reason. London:
Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1975,.
Dennison, George. The Lives ofChildren. New York: Vintage Books, 1969.
Denton, David (ed.). Existentialism and Phenomenology in Education: Collected Essays. New
York: Teachers College Press, 1974.
Dewey, John. Human Nature and Conduct. New York Modem Library, 1935.
_ _ _ _. Democracy and Education. New York: Macmillan Co., 1966.
_ _ _ _. The Public and its Problems. Athens, Ohio: Swallow Press, 1957.
_ _ _ _. "My Pedagogical Creed." In Dewey on Education. Edited by M. S. Dworkin.
New York, Teachers College Press, 1959.
Dilthey, Withem. The Essence of Philosophy. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina,
1954.
Doyle, James F. (ed.). Educational Judgments. London: Routledge & Keagan Paul, 1973.
Dreyfus, Hubert L. "Knowledge and Human Values: A Genealogy of Nihilism. Teachers
College Record, Vol. 82, No.2, Spring 1981.
D'Souza, Dinesh. Illiberal Education: The Politics ofRace and Sex on Campus. New York:
Free Press, 1992.
Eliot, T. S. "What a is Classic?" In Models of Man. Edited by Paul Nash .. New York: John
Wiley & Sons, 1968.
Ellul, Jacques. The Technological Society. 'New York: Random House, Vintage Books, 1964.
Entwistle, Harold. "Knowledge of Most Worth for Citizens." In Beyond Communi/arianism:
Citizenship, Politics, and Education. Edited by J. Demaine and H. Entwistle. New
York: St. Martin Press, 1996.
J1
222
Bibliography
Ewing A. L. Ethics. New York: Macmillan Co., Free Press, 1965.

Feinberg, Walter. "Foundationalism and Recent Critiques of Education". Educational Theory,
Vol. 39, No.2, Spring 1989.
Feuer, Lewis S. (ed.), Marx and Engels. New York: Doubleday, 1959.
Finley, M. I. The Ancient Greeks: An Introduction to Their Life and Thought. New York:
Viking Press, 1964.
Finn, C. E., Ravitch, Diane, Fancher, R. T. Against Mediocrity: The Humanities in America's
High Schools. New York: Holms & Meier, 1984.
Foot, Philippa. "Morality and Art." In Philosophy as It is. Edited by Ted Honderich and
Myles Bamyeat. New York: Pelican Books, 1979.
Frankena, William K. Three Historical Philosophies ofEducation. Glenview, Illinois: Scott,
Foresman and Company, 1965.
_ _ _ _"Ethics. 2d ed. Englewood, N. J.: Prentice Hall, 1973.
_ _ _ _" "Toward a Normative Definition of Education." In Educational Judgements.
Edited by J. F. Doyle. London: Routledge & Keagan Paul, 1973.
_ _ _ _" "Toward a Philosophy of Moral Education". In Modern Philosophies of
Education. Edited by J. P. Strain. New York: Random House, 1971.
Freire, P. and Giroux, H. "Preface." In Popular Culture, Schooling and Everyday Life. Edited
by H. Giroux and R. Simon. New York: Bergin & Garvey, 1989.
Freire, Paulo. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. Translated by Myra Bergman Ramos. New York:
Seabury Press, 1970.
_ _ _ _"A Pedagogy for Liberation: Dialogues on Transforming Education. New York:
Bergin and Garvey, 1987.
Friedman, Marilyn. "Educating for World Citizenship" (Book Review). Ethiks, April 2000.
From, Erich and Xirau, Ramon (eds.). The Nature ofMan. New York: Macmillan, 1979.
Gadamer, H. G. Truth and Method. New York: Crossroad, 1975.
_ _ _ _"Philosophical Hermeneutics. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1976.
Goethe, Faust. Translation by George Madison Priest. HTML (c) 1999 Holtof'Donne.
Giroux, Henry A. Teachers as Intellectuals: Toward a Critical Pedagogy of Learning. New
York: Bergin & Garvey, 1988.
_ _ _ _" "Literacy and the Pedagogy of Voice and Political Empowerment." Educational
Theory, Vol. 38, No.1, Winter 1988.
_ _ _ _. "Educational Reform and Teacher Empowerment." In Education and the
American Dream.' Conservatives, Liberals, and Radicals Debate the Future of
Education. Edited by Harvey Holtz et al. Massachusetts: Bergin & Garvey, 1989.
Giroux, Henry. "Education of Border and the Politics of Modernism-Postmodemism,"
(Hebrew). In I. Gur-Zeev (Editor). Education in Postmodern Discourse. Jerusalem:
Magnes, 1966.
Giroux, Henry A. and Simon, Roger. Popular Culture, Schooling, and Everyday Live (eds.).
New York: Bergin & Garvey, 1989.
Givon, Y. "The Literacy Network: An Outline of Multi-Literacies" (Hebrew). In Education
and the Challenge ofTime. Edited by E. Paldi. Tel Aviv: Ramot, 1997.
Golomb, Jacob. "Nietzsche's Early Educational Thought." Journal of Philosophy of
Education Vol. 19, No.1, 1985.
Goodman, Paul. Growing Up Absurd. New York: Vintage Books, 1960.
Gordon, Haim. "Nietzsche's Zarathustra as Educator." Journal ofPhilosophy ofEducation,
Vol. 14, No.2, 1980.
Graftan, Anthony and Jardine, Lisa. From Humanism to the Humanities. Cambridge,
Massachusetts: Cambridge University Press, 1986.
Greene, Maxine. Landscapes ofLearning. New York: Teachers College Press, 1978.
Bibliography
223
_ _ _ _. Teacher as Stranger: Educational Philosophy for the Modern Age. Belmont,

California: Wadsworth Publishing Company, 1973.
_ _ _ _. The Dialectic ofFreedom. New York: Teachers College Press, 1988.
_ _ _ _. Releasing the Imagination. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1995.
"Literature, Existentialism, and Education". In Existentialism and
Phenomenology in Education: Collected Essays (edited by David Denton). New
_ _ _ _. "The Passions of Pluralism: Multiculturalism and the Expanding Community."
Educational Researcher, Vol. 22, No.1, 1993, pp. 13-18.
_ _ _ _. "Aesthetic Literacy in General Education." In Philosophy and Education:
Eightieth Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education. Part 1.
Edited by Jonas Soltis. Chicago: lJniversity of Chicago Press, 1981
_ _ _ _. "Contexts, Connections, and Consequences: The Matter of Philosophical and
Psychological Foundations". Journal ofTeacher Education, July-August 1981.
Greene, T. M. (ed.). The Meaning of the Humanities. Princeton: Princeton University Press,
1940.
Gregory, M. W. "A Radical Criticism of the Platonic Foundation of Liberal Education."
Liberal Education, Vo1.69, No.1, 1983.
Griffin, Robert S. and Nash, Robert J. "Individualism, Community, and Education: An
Exchange of views." Educational Theory Vol. 69, No.1, 1983.
Gur-Zeev, Han (Editor). Education in Postmodern Discourse (Hebrew). Jerusalem: Magnes,
1966.
_ _ _ _ (Editor). Modernity, Postmodernity and Education (Hebrew). Tel Aviv: Ramot,
1999.
Gutek, Gerald L. A History of the Western Educational Experience. New York: Random
House, 1972.
Guthrie, W. K. C. The Greek Philosophers. New York: Harper & Row, 1960.
Habermas, Jurgen. Knowledge and Human Interests. Boston: Beacon Press, 1971.
Hare, R. M. The Language ofMorals. Oxford University Press, 1975.
Haroutinian, Sophie "Some Issues in the Critical Thinking Debate." Educational Theory, Vol.
48, No.3, Summer 98, pp. 411-425.
Hayakawa, S. I. Language in Thought and Action. New York: Harcourt Brace and Janovich,
1972.
Hegel, G. W. F. Phenomenology of Spirit. Translated by A. V. Miller. Oxford: Oxford
Heidegger, Martin. Basic Writings. Edited by D. F. Krell. New York: Harper & Row, 1976.
Held, David. Introduction to Critical Theory: Horkheimer to Habermas. Berkeley: University
of California Press, 1980.
Hill, Brian V. Education and the Endangered Individual. New York: Teachers College Press,
1973.
Hirsch, E. D. Cultural Literacy: What Every American Needs to Know. Boston: Houghton
Mimin, 1987.
_ _ _ _. "Cultural Literacy." The American Scholar, Spring 1983.
Hirst, Paul H. "Liberal Education and the Nature of Knowledge". In Education and Reason.
Edited by R. F. Deardan., P. H. Hirst, and R. S. Peters. London: Routledge and
Kegan Paul, 1975.
Holtz, Harvey et al. Education and the American Dream: Conservatives, Liberals, and
Radicals Debate the Future ofEducation. Massachusetts: Bergin & Garvey, 1989.
Hook, Sidney. "The Snare of Definitions." In The Humanist Alternative. Edited by P. Kurtz.
New York: Pemberton, 1973.
224
Bibliography
_ _ _ _ _. "John Dewey: Philosopher of Growth." In Dewey and his Critics. Edited by

Sidney Morgenbesser. New York: Journal of Philosophy Inc., 1977.
Huitt, W. "Humanism and Open Education." June 2000, http://chiron.valdosta.edu.whuitt/col/
affsys/humed.html
Hutchings, Robert M. Great Books: The Foundation of a Liberal Education. New York:
Simon and Schuster, 1954.
Idan, A. "From Integration to Pluralism" (Hebrew). Megamot 32, 1990.
Jaeger, Werner. Paideia: The Ideals of Greek Culture. New York: Oxford University Press,
1973.
Jaspers, Karl. Man in the Modern Age. Garden City, New York: Doubleday, Anchor Books,
1957.
Johnston, Bernard. Issues in Education: An Anthology of Controversy. Boston: Houghton
Mitllin, 1964.
Jubran Khalil Jubran. The Prophet. Internet Edition
Kant, Immanuel. Critique ofPure Reason. Translated By Norman Kemp Smith. New York:
St. Martin's Press, 1965.
_ _ _ _. Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals. Translated by H. J. Paton. New
York: Harper & Row, Harper Torchbooks, 1974.
_ _ _ _. "What is Enlightenment". In The Enlightenment: A Comprehensive Anthology.
Edited by Peter Gay. New York: 1973
Education. Translated by Annette Churton. Ann Arbor: University of
Michigan, 1966.
Kaplan, Laura Duhan. "Teaching Intellectual Autonomy: The Failure of the Critical Thinking
Movement". Educational Theory, Vol. 41, No.4, 1991.
Kaufmann, Walter. The Future ofthe Humanities. New York: Readers Digest Press, 1977.
_ _ _ _ (ed.), Existentialism: From Dostoevsky to Sartre. New York: New American
Library, 1975.
Kierkegard, Soren Concluding Unscientific Postscript. Translated by David F. Swenson and
Walter Lowrie. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1968.
_ _ _ _. Either/Or. Translated by David F. Swenson and Lillian Marvin Swenson.
Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1971.
Kilpatrick, William H. "The Project Method." Teachers College Record. Vol XIX, No.4,
Sept. 1918.
Kimball, Bruce A. Orators & Philosophers: A History ofthe Idea ofLiberal Education. New
_ _ _ _ _. "The Liberal Education Debate and Its Historical Appeal: Toward a Sorting
Out and Appraisal." Liberal Education, Vol. 69, No 4, 1983.
Kimball, Roger. Tenured Radicals: How Politics Has Corrupted our Higher Education. New
York: Harper and Row, 1990.
Kirk, Russel. "The Ethical Purpose of Literary Studies." In Educating for Virtue. Edited by
Joseph Baldacchino. Washington, D. C.: National Humanities Institute, 1988.
Kitto H. D. F. The Greeks. Baltimore: Penguin Books, 1957.
Kneller, G. F. Existentialism and Education. New York: Philosophical Library, 1958.
Kozol, Jonathan. Savage Inequalities. New York: Crown, 1991.
Kurtz, Paul. The Humanist Alternative. New York: Prometheus, 1982.
_ _ _ _. Forbidden Fruit: The Ethics ofHumanism. New York: Prometheus, 1988.
_ _ _ _. Living Without Religion. New York: Prometheus, 1994.
Lamm, Zvi. War and Education (Hebrew). Tel Aviv: Am Oved, 1976.
Landau, Idan. "Shallow Talk Games" (Hebrew). Studio 83,1997,
Lankshear, Colin. "Meaning of Literacy in Contemporary Educational Reform Proposals."
Educational Theory, Vol. 48, No.3, Summer 98, pp. 351..372.
Bibliography
225
Lather, Patti. "Critical Pedagogy and its Complicities: A Praxis of Stuck Places."
Educational Theory, Vol. 48, No.4, Autumn 1998, pp. 487-497.
Livingstone, Richard. "Education for a world Adrift." In On Education. New York:
Macmillan, 1945.
Lovejoy, Arthur O. The Great Chain ofBeing. Cambridge, Mass. Harvard University Press,
1964.
Lowith, Karl. From Hegel to Nietzsche. Translated by David E. Green. Garden City, New
York: Holt, Rinnehart, and Winston, 1964.
Lyotard, Jean-Francois. The Postmodern Condition. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota
Press, 1984.
MacIntyre, Alasdair. After Virtue: A Study 1" Moral Theory. Notre Dame, Indiana: University
of Notre Dame Press, 1981.
_ _ _ _. A Short History ofEthics. New York: Macmillian, 1966.
_ _ _ _. "Traditions and Conflicts." Liberal Education Vol. 73, No.5, 1987.
Magen, Zipors. Exploring Adolescent: Commitment, Purpose and Fulfillment. London: Sage
Publications, 1998.
Mann, Thomas. "Nietzsche's Philosophy in the Light of Contemporary Events." In Nietzsche:
A Collection of Critical Essays. Edited by R. C. Solomon. Notre Dame, Indiana:
University of Notre Dame Press, 1980.
Manning, Duane. Toward a Humanistic Curriculum. New York: Harper & Row, 1971.
Marcuse, Herbert. One Dimensional Man. Boston: Beacon Press, 1966.
_ _ _ _. "Freedom and Freud's Theory of Instincts." In Five Lectures: Psychoanalysis,
Politics and Utopia. Boston: Beacon Press, 1970.
Maritain, Jacques. Education at the Crossroads. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1943.
_ _ _ _. True Humanism. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1954.
Martin, Jane Roland (ed.). Readings in the Philosophy of Education: A Study of the
Curriculum. Boston: Allyn & Bacon, 1970.
_ _ _ _. "Needed: A Paradigm for Liberal Education." In Philosophy and Education:
Eightieth Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education. Part 1.
Edited by Jonas Soltis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1981
_ _ _ _. "The Idea of the Educated Person". Educational Theory, Vol. 30, No.2, Spring
1981.
Maslow, Abraham H. Motivation and Personality. New York: Harper and Row, 1970.
_ _ _ _ _.. The Farther Reaches ofHuman Nature. New York: Viking, 1971.
_ _ _ _. Toward a Psychology ofBeing. New York: D. Van Nostrand, 1968.
McCarthy, Christine. "Why be Critical? (or Rational, or Moral?): On the Justification of
Critical Thinking." Philosophy ofEducation, PES Yearbook, 1992.
McClintock, Robert. Man and His Circumstances: Ortega as Educator. New York: Teachers
College Press, 1971.
Mill, J.S. Utilitarianism and Other Writings. Edited by Mary Warnock. New York: New
American Library, 1962.
Mirandola, Giovanni Pico della, Oration on the Dignity ofMan. Translated from the Latin by
Richard Hooker (Internet Edition).
Montaigne, Michel de. Essays. Translated by J. M. Cohen. New York: Penguin, 1976.
Mordouch, I. The Sovereignty ofthe Good. London: Routlege and Kegan Paul, 1970.
Morgenbesser, Sidney. "Approaches to Ethical Objectivity". In Moral Education. Edited by
Barry Chasan and Jonas Soltis. New York: Teachers College Press, 1973.
Moris, V. C. Existentialism in Education. New York: Harper and Row, 1966.
Nash, Paul. Models of Man: Explorations in the Western Educational Tradition. New York:
John Wiley & Sons, 1968.
226
Bibliography
Nash, Robert. "The Revival of Virtue in Educational Thinking: A Postliberal Approach".

Educational Theory, Vol. 38, No.1, Winter 1988.
Naveh, Eyal and Yogev, Esther. Histories: Towards a Dialogue with the Israeli Past
(Hebrew). Tel Aviv: Babel, 2002.
Nemiroff, G. H. Reconsidering Education: Toward a Pedagogy of Critical Humanism. New
York: Bergin & Garvey, 1992.
Newman, John Henry. Discourses on the Scope and Nature of University Education. London:
Dent, 1915.
Neumann, Yosseph. The Preeminence ofMan (Hebrew). Tel Aviv: University Press, 1991.
Nietzsche, Friedrich. Thus Spoke Zarathusta and Twilight of the Idols. In The Portable
Nietzsche. Translated and edited by Walter Kaufmann. New York: Viking Press,
1968.
_ _ _ _. Beyond Good and Evil. Translated by Walter Kaufmann. New York: Vintage
Books, 1966.
_ _ _ _. The Will to Power. Translated by Walter Kaufmann and R. J. Hollingdale. New
York: Random House, 1968.
_ _ _ _. On the Genealogy ofMorals and Ecce Homo. Translated by Walter Kaufmann.
New York: Vintage Books, 1969.
_ _ _ _. Philosophy in the Tragic Age of the Greeks. Translated by Marianne Cowan.
Chicago: Regency-Gateway, 1962.
_ _ _ _. On the Advantage and Disadvantage of History to Life. Translated by Peter
Preuss. Indianapolis: Hackett, 1981.
_ _ _ _. The Gay Science. Translated by Walter Kaufmann. New York: Vintage Books,
1974.
_ _ _ _. Schopenhauer as Educator. Translated by J. W. Hillesheim and Malcolm
Simon. Chicago: Regency-Gateway, 1965.
Noddings, Nel. Caring: A Feminine Approach to Ethics and Moral Education. Berkeley:
University ofCalifomai Press, 1984.
Norton, David L. Personal Destinies: A Philosophy ofEthical Individualism. Princeton, New
Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1976.
Nussbaum, Martha C. The Fragility of Goodness: Luck and Ethics in Greek Tragedy and
Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986.
_ _ _ _. Cultivating Humanity: a Classical Defense of Reform in Liberal Education.
Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1998.
Oakeshott, Michael. The Voice ofLiberal Learning: Michael Oakeshott on Education. Edited
by Thimothy Fuller. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989.
_ _ _. "The Study of Politics in University: An Essay in Appropriateness." In Readings in
Philosophy of Education: A Study of Curriculum. Edited by Jane Roland Martin.
Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1970.
Ophir, Adi. Speaking Evil: Towards and Ontology ofMorals (Hebrew). Tel Aviv: Am Oved,
2000.
Ortega Y Gasset, Jose. Mission ofthe University. New York: Norton, 1966.
_ _ _ _. The Revolt ofthe Masses. New York: Norton, 1957.
Palmer, Richard E. Hermeneutics. Evanstone: Northwestern University Press, 1969.
Panofsky, Erwin. "The History of Art as a Humanistic Discipline." In The Meaning of
Humanism. Edited by T. M. Greene. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1940.
Patterson, C. H. Humanistic Education. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1973.
Perry, R. B. "A Definition of the Humanities." In The Meaning ofHumanism. Edited by T.
M. Greene. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1940.
Peters, R. S. Ethics and Education. London: George Allen & Unwin, 1970.
_ _ _ _ (ed.). The Concept ofEducation. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1973.
Bibliography
227
Plato. The Republic, Aplology, Crito .and Meno. In Great Dialogues ofPlato. Translated by
E. H. Rouse. New York: New American Library, 1962.
_ _ _ _. The Symposium. Translated by S. Gorden. Boston: University of Massachusetts
Press, 1970.
_ _ _ _. .Protagoras and Meno. Translated by W. K. Guthrie. New York: Penguin, 1956.
Plutarch. Lives ofNoble Grecians and Romans. Translated by John Dryden (Internet Edition).
Polanyi, Michael. "The Eclipse of Thought." In Meaning. Chicago: Chicago University Press,
1975.
Postman, Neil and Weingartner, Charles. Teaching as a Subversive Activity. New York: Dell,
1969.
Postman, Niel. "The End of Education." In Education and the Challenge of Time (Hebrew).
Edited by E. Paldi. Tel Aviv: Ramot, 1997.
_ _ _ _" "Education is in Need of a Vision not Technology" (Hebrew). Bed Hachinuch,
Feburary 1992.
Ravitzki, Aviezer. "Peace." In Contemporary Jewish Religious Thought (Hebrew). Edited by
A. Cohen and P. Mendes-Fllohr. Tel Aviv: Am Oved, 1986.
Rawls, John. A Theory ofJustice. Cambridge, Mass. : Harvard University Press, 1971.
Read, Donald A. and Simon, Sidney B. Humanistic Education Sourcebook. Elnglewood
Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1975.
Richmond, Kenneth. Culture and General Education. London: Mathuen, 1964.
Ricoeur, Paul. Hermeneutics and the Human Sciences. Edited and Translated by John B.
Thompson. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1981.
Ritter, Paul. Educreation and Feedback: Education for Creation, Growth, and Change.
Oxford: Pergamon Press, 1979.
Robinson, B. A. "Humanism and the Humanist Manifestos." Ontario Consultations on
Religious Tolerance, 1996, http://religioustolerance.org.
Rogers, Carl :R. On Becoming a Person. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1961.
_ _ _ _ _. Freedom to Learn (third edition). New York: Merill, 1994.
Rorty, Richard. Philosophy and the Mirror ofNature. Princeton: Princeton University Press,
1979.
Rosen, Stanley. Nihilism.' A Philosophical Essay. New Heaven: Yale University Press, 1969.
Rosenow, Eliyau. "Nietzsche's Educational Dynamite." Educational Theory, Vol. 39, No.4,
Fall 1989.
_ _ _ _" "Nietzsche's Concept of Education." In Nietzsche as Affirmative Thinker.
Edited by Y. Yovel. Boston: Martinus Nijhoff 1986.
Roth, H. Y. Education and Human Values (Hebrew). Tel Aviv: Dvir, 1950.
Russell, Bertrand Education and the Good life. New York: Avon, 1926.
_ _ _ _"Autobiography. London: George Allen and Unwin, 1967.
Rousseau, Jean Jacques. Emil or On Education. Translated by Allan Bloom. New York: Basic
Books, 1979.
_ _ _ _" "The Social Contract" and "Discourse on the Origin of Inequality." In The
Essential Rousseau. Translated by Lowell Bair. New York: The American Library,
1974.
Shakespeare, William. King Lear, Hamlet and Macbeth. In The Complete Works of William
Shakespeare. New York: Garden City Books, 1936.
Sartre, Jean Paul. Essays in Existentialism. Edited by Wade Baskin. Secaucus, New Jersey:
Citadel Press, 1979.
_ _ _ _. The Reprieve. Translated by Eric Sutton. London: Penguin, 1963.
_ _ _ _. "Portrait of the Antisemite". In Existentialism.' From Dostoevski to Sartre
(edited by Walter Kafmann). New York: New American Library, 1975.
Scheffler, Israel. The Language ofEducation. Springfield, Ill.: Charles C. Thomas, 1960.
228
Bibliography
_ _ _ _. "Moral Education and the Democratic Ideal". In Reason and Teaching. New
York: Bobbs and Merill Company, 1973.
_ _ _ _. "Conditions of Knowledge." In J. P. Strain (editor), Modern Philosophies of
Education. New York: Random House, 1971
Schlanger, Jacques. Ways ofPhilosophers (Hebrew). Jerusalem: Magnes, 1997.
Searl, John. "The Storm Over the University." New York Review ofBooks, 6 December 1990.
Seneca. Lettersfrom a Stoic. Translated by Robin Campbell. London: Penguin, 1969.
Shaw, Bernard. Man and Superman. Harmondsworth Middlessex: Penguin, 1951.
Simon, A. E. "On Educational Influence (Hebrew)." In The Right to Educate - The Duty to
Educate. Tel Aviv: Poalim, 1983.
Simpson, E. L. Humanistic Education: An Interpretation. Cambridge, Massachusetts:
Bullinger, 1976.
Simpson, H. P. and Magee, J. (eds.). Dimensions ofMan. New York: Harper & Raw, 1973.
Sloan, Douglas. "Knowledge, Education, and Human Values: Toward the Recovery of
Wholeness." A special issue of Teachers College Record, Vol. 82, No.3, Spring
1981.
Sockett, Hugh. The Moral Base for Teacher Professionalism. New York: Teachers College
Press, 1993.
Solomon, Robert C. Continental Philosophy Since 1750: The Rise and Fall of the Self. New
York: Oxford University Press, 1988.
- - - -. From
Rationalism to Existentialism: The Existentialists and Their NineteenCentury Backgrounds. New York: Harper & Row, 1970.
Soltis, Jonas. "The Intersubjective World and Education: A Response to C. A. Bowers."

American Journal ofEducation, Vol. 93, No.4, August 1985.
_ _ _ _. "Education and the Concept of Knowledge." In Philosophy and Education:
Eightieth Yearbook of the National Society for the Study ofEducation. Part 1. Ed.
Jonas Soltis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1981.
Soltis, Jonas F. and Strike, Kenneth. The Ethics of Teaching. New York: Teachers College
Press, 1985.
Soltis, Jonas F. and Fenstermacher, Gary D. Approaches to Teaching. New York: Teachers
College Press, 1986.
Spinoza, Benetict. The Ethics. In The Rationalists. New York: Doubleday, 1974.
_ _ _ _. A Theological-Political Treatise. Traslated by R. H. M. Elwes. New York:
Dover, 1951.
Strain, J. P. Modern Philosophies ofEducation. New York: Random House, 1971.
Strike, K. A. and Egan, Kieran (eds.). Ethics and Educational Policy. London: Routledge and
Kegan Paul, 1978.
Stromber, Roland M. European Intellectual History Since 1789 (2nd edition). Englewood
Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1975.
Stuart Hughes, H. Consciousness and Society: The Reorientation ofEuropean Social Thought
1890 - 1930. New York: Random House, Vintage Books, 1952.
Taylor, Charles. Sources of the Self: The Making of the Modern Identity. Cambridge,
Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1989.
_ _ _ _. The Malaise ofModernity. Concord, Ontario: Anasi Press, 1991.
The New London Group. "A Pedagogy of Multiliteracies: Designing Social Futures".
Harvard Educational Review, Vol. 6, No.1, Spring 1996.
Tillich, Paul. The Courage To Be. New Heaven: Yale University Press, 1952
Thoreau, D. H. On the Duty of Civil Disobedience and Walden. New York: collier Books,
1962.
Trilling, Lionel. Sincerity and Authenticity. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press,
1982.
Bibliography
229
Thucydides. The Peloponnesian War. Translated by Max Warner. New York: Penguin Books,
1954.
UNESCO. Our Creative Diversity: Report of the World Commission on Culture and
Development. Paris: UNSCO Publishing, 1996.
Valett, Rober E. Humanistic Education: Developing the Total Person. Saint Louis: C. V.
Mosby Company, 1977.
Vandenberg, Donald. Education as a Human Right. New York: Teachers College Press, 1990.
Van Doren, Mark. Liberal Education. Boston: Beacon Press, 1959.
Van Praag, J. P. Foundations ofHumanism. New York: Prometheus, 1982.
Walzer, Michael, Spheres ofJustice. New York: Basic Books, 1983.
Waks, L. J. "Experimentalism and the Flow of Experience." Educational Theory, Vo1.48, No
1, Winter 98, pp. 1-19.
Weinberg, Carl (ed.). Humanistic Foundations ofEducation. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey:
Prentice-Hall, 1972.
Whitehead, A. N. The Aims ofEducation and Other Essays. New York: Free Press, 1967.
Williams, Bernard. Morality: An Introduction to Ethics. New York: Harper & Row, 1972.
Woody, Thomas. Liberal Education for Free Man. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania
Press, 1951.
Yas'ur, Avraham. "Will the Sword Devour Forever?" In Hashalom: Dor Dor Dorshav and
Dorsav (Hebrew). Edited by A. Yas'ur. Tel Aviv: Poalim, 1986.
Yona, Yossi. "Cultural Pluralism Versus Cultural Integration and Their implications in the
Practice of Education" (Hebrew). Megamot 34,1991.
Yovel, Irmiyahou. Spinoza and other Heretics (Hebrew). Tel Aviv: Poalim, 1988.
Zemach, Adi. "Personal Identity as a Work of Art" (Hebrew). In The Meaning ofLife. Edited
by JI\. Kasher. Tel Aviv: Hakibutz Hameuhad, 1999.
Zuckerman, Moshe. "On Postmodemism and Education" (Hebrew). In I. Gur-Zeev (Editor).
Education in Postmodern Discourse. Jerusalem: Magnes, 1966.
Philosophy and Education

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
C.J.B. Macmillan and J.W. Garrison: A Logical Theory of Teaching. Erotetics and
Intentionality. 1988
ISBN 90-277-2813-5
J. Watt: Individualism and Educational Theory. 1989
ISBN 0-7923-0446-2
W. Brezinka: Philosophy of Educational Knowledge. An Introduction to the Foundations of Science of Education, Philosophy of Education and Practical Pedagogics.
1992
ISBN 0-7923-1522-7
J.H. Chambers: Empiricist Research on Teaching. A Philosophical and Practical
Critique of its Scientific Pretensions. 1992
ISBN 0-7923-1848-X
I. Scheffler: Teachers ofMy Youth. An American Jewish Experience. 1995
ISBN 0-7923-3232-6; (Pb) 0-7923-3236-9
P. Smeyers and J.D. Marshall (eds.): Philosophy and Education: Accepting Wittgenstein's Challenge. 1995
ISBN 0-7923-3715-8
J.D. Marshall: Michel Foucault: Personal Autonomy and Education. 1996
ISBN 0-7923-4016-7
W. van Haaften, M. Korthals and T. Wren (eds.): Philosophy ofDevelopment. Reconstructing the Foundations of Human Development and Education. 1997
ISBN 0-7923-4319-0
N. Aloni: Enhancing Humanity. The Philosophical Foundations of Humanistic Educatioo.2002
ISBN 1-4020-0961-5
KLUWER ACADEMIC PUBLISHERS - DORDRECHT / BOSTON / LONDON

Phileducation Humanist

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Phileducation Humanist

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Phileducation Humanist

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ENHANCING HUMANITY

Philosophy and Education

SCOPE OF THE SERIES

Printed on acid-free paper

All Rights Reserved

This page intentionally left blank

Contradictory Encounters with Humanistic

Between the Classical and Post-modern:

1. The Initial Question: How to be a Human Being

An Integrative and Normative Model for

4. The Ways of Humanistic Education

Education Towards Humanistic Morality

(a) Personal Example and the Inculcation of Habit

Humanistic Education in the Test of

This page intentionally left blank

We can only hope that under the deceiving brightness of an oversimplified

This page intentionally left blank

1. THE INITIAL QUESTION: HOW TO BE A

Between the Classical and Postmodern

and customs and rapidly become an integral part of it - a product that

ofthe Fathers, 3:19.

This possible basic experience of human beings in their relationship to

2. THE CULTURAL-CLASSICAL APPROACH AND THE

Between the Classical and Postmodern

Between the Classical and Postmodern

We can find a concise expression of this cultural educational ideal and

in geometry, arithmetic, astronomy, rhetoric and dialectics or philosophy

Between the Classical and Postmodern

6. The beginning of all knowledge is human beings' self-awareness of

TheRepublic, book VII.

Between the Classical and Postmodern

children's friends (some of whom have a positive influence, others, a

The Symposium, 181.

Socrates contributes to the discussion, is presented towards the end of the

Between the Classical and Postmodern

See particularly the Ethics, Book II.

See, for example, in the Politics, Book I, ch. 2.

Between the Classical and Postmodern

Between the Classical and Postmodern

Panofsky, "History of Art as a Humanistic Discipline," p.92.

Between the Classical and Postmodern

Pico della Mirandola's, Oration on the Dignity ofMan.

Great Books: The Foundation ofa Liberal Education, pp. 3-7.

Between the Classical and Postmodem

Kant's words in his book On Education are a fine example of the

Between the Classical and Postmodern

Van Praag, Foundations ofHumanism, pp. 15-17.

Maritain, T.S.Eliot, Richard Livingston, Robert Hutchins, Mortimer Adler,

Between the Classical and Postmodern

Adler, ThePaideiaProposal: An Educational Manifesto.

Between the Classical and Postmodern

emancipatory process that promotes humanism (like uprooting weeds in

image. In short, Livingston says that in our perception of education we

Between the Classical and Postmodern

Athenian period up to the present. The objective of education is defined in

3. THE NATURALISTIC-ROMANTIC APPROACH AND

Kirk, ''The Ethical Purpose of Literary Studies," pp. 35-36.

Between the Classical and Postmodern

constitution is all that we can do for his well-being.'?" Moreover, he

the "big society.?" To the optimism of progressive education - which placed