Human nature as continuous or discontinuous with nature: A comparison and contrast of Dewey's and Freire's philosophies of human nature and education.

摘要

Dewey and Freire both have theories of human nature that inform their philosophies of education. The dissertation demonstrates that Dewey's view that human nature is continuous with the rest of nature, especially non-human animals, most clearly differentiates his philosophy of human nature from that of Freire. Dewey, by including the life process in his definition of human nature, develops an inclusive philosophy' that differentiates human nature in various ways. Freire's philosophy, by largely excluding the life process that human beings share with non-human animals, paints a very limited view of human nature. Thus, at the level of the subject, Freire, unlike Dewey, does not differentiate between children and adults at the level of the object, he largely excludes geography and mathematics from consideration. Although both consider human nature to be a risk that requires education to reduce the risk, their different conceptions of the nature of that risk leads them to different solutions. Dewey develops a more sophisticated view of the nature of scientific inquiry since the risk to human beings stems from their nature as living and social beings, with bias towards ends rather than means that is frequently intensified because of uncontrolled social relations. Scientific inquiry controls both aspects of human nature by focusing on the means as an end Freire, by contrast, conceives of scientific inquiry as merely an organized form of common-sense inquiry. On the other hand, Freire's view that human beings are particularly susceptible to dehumanization and oppression in the modern epoch because of the possible increasing domination of one-dimensional time and emotions on an expanded scale at the expense of reason leads him to develop solutions that address how oppressed people are to become aware of the problem of their oppression, an issue that Dewey does not address. However, Dewey's practice is much more consistent than that of Freire, who practically contradicts his own theory--as is especially, evident in Guinea-Bissau. Despite the inconsistency, a synthesis of both philosophies maybe useful. However, a richer synthesis, both philosophically and educationally, may be possible by incorporating insights of Marx, Dewey and Freire.