Undergraduate Honors Thesis

Introduction

There exists a serious problem in education today. The problem lies in the unfocused, underappreciated and sidelined student body. Without invested students there can be no efficient, legitimate, worthwhile educational system. There exists a lack of pride and interest in students themselves that needs to be critically addressed. The process of educating youngsters has become increasingly alienating and banal. We need to stop being comfortable with any commonly accepted view of school systems and start cultivating generations interested in their education and aware of its importance. Education gives potential for a better life. This may seem like an odd thought, but it is one that should become commonplace. We must understand and teach what a better life is, why it is worthwhile, and how students themselves can achieve and embody it. Enlivening the student body will lead to a more successful system because students will become aware of their situation, its potential, and its importance. This approach is explicitly not concerned with typical “outcomes,” but suggests that such outcomes will be reached by attending more closely to the process of education. By directing our attention to the process of learning, one achieves a greater awareness of themselves and the communities in which they live. The awareness comes through enlightenment as explained in Immanuel Kant’s “What is Enlightenment?” Enlightenment gives students the unique resource of their own reason. Awareness of their own reason frees them and allows them to act positively and rationally after and during their educational careers. We need not wait for them to put their learning’s to the test. Next the rational generation needs to be aware of the importance of some key Platonic ideas. It is good to be patient, assess every situation rationally and uniquely and listen and learn together with others. This concept of Socratic dialogue is one that should be understood and believed in. Platonic ideas are important towards the progress of culture as a whole; their usefulness should be realized and embodied in current practical affairs. The ideas should not be forced upon students that do not understand their usefulness. Also there is an obvious learning that can occur from the experience of teachers. Teachers know about concepts they teach because they have dealt with them for an extended period of time. They have experienced practical application of the concepts and have a clear understanding of them. Their understanding has had time to develop. This is what differs between students and teachers; the amount of time spent understanding material. Also teaching necessitates an ability to apply the understanding of a subject into terms that students can comprehend. This skill takes confidence in one’s knowledge of concepts as well as understanding of, and openness to, specific students’ abilities.

In a more recent example of this educational approach, Alfred North Whitehead’s ideas about culture become important when teaching in this fashion. His ideas established a vision of culture that allows for positive growth. Whitehead says, “Culture is activity of thought and receptiveness to beauty and humane feelings.” There are two important aspects to Whitehead’s conception of culture, both of which are lacking in our culture. One side is the active use of rational understanding. The second side involves the feelings we, as human subjects, share. There exist particular concepts surrounding these ideas that direct a unique way of teaching. Understanding these concepts and those previously mentioned allows for growth of an appropriately directed pursuit to teaching. In the end this sort of educational system will be more beneficial for the individual student and the future of society. This approach to pedagogy will yield a more successful education system and lead to a successful society. The enlightenment of the individual leads to a community of enlightened individuals and a rational competitive spirit that will yield positive growth in society.

The First Step

The first step in changing student’s attitudes towards schooling is enlightenment of the educators. Teaching is a difficult craft. It is unlike all other crafts in that it manufactures extremely unique products. So unique and valuable that we do not, and certainly should not, consider them products. Students are people. Each one is different in every way except for one: they need guidance. Giving guidance is the delicate art of the educator.

It too often happens that teaching is seen as an easy job – rather than a difficult art – a backup plan to a more colorful career. I have many times heard friends say, after complaining about a poor job market and their intended careers, “If that doesn’t work then I’ll just teach.” This makes me furious. Are these the kind of people you want teaching you? Absolutely not. We need enlightened educators. An enlightened person is aware of what they are doing and why they are doing it. If they do not enjoy what they are doing they do something else. This is the type of educator I want – and want to be. The model of the ideal teacher is one who educates because he or she sees purpose in it and take pride in their ability to do it. An enlightened individual does what they want for reasons of their own and has the freedom and drive to deviate from outmoded standards of teaching and learning. An enlightened teacher must, then, be passionate about their craft and take pride in bettering students’ lives. There is nothing better than a passionate, well-educated teacher, teacher. Passionate, well-educated, teachers elicit interest in students and an interested student is paramount to a successful education. It is important to note that passion is necessary, but not sufficient in this model of education. Whitehead, as we will see, agrees, stating that one needs to pursue culture (the stuff of true passion) and at the same time “expert knowledge,” the knowledge that allow students to master a particular task. This expert knowledge, or concentration on establishing expert knowledge must be present for the passionate teacher to be of some use to their students and society. Passion alone is not quite enough; a teacher also has to know and be able to impart mastery. That being said, our current educational system undervalues passion in teaching, and therefore my emphasis on passion in this analysis is meant to counteract this trend.

As ambitious educators we should be asking ourselves two questions: “what exactly is enlightenment” and “How do I obtain it”? These questions are fleshed out in Immanuel Kant’s An Answer to the Question “What is Enlightenment?”. In the essay Kant explains the importance of enlightenment and warns of barriers that keep us from obtaining it. In the first section I will analyze Kant’s essay and help the reader understand how to answer these questions.

Section One: Enlightenment Renewed and Its Impact on Education

The solution to the current problem in education begins with Immanuel Kant’s “An Answer to the Question: ‘What is Enlightenment?’”, written in 1784. Unfortunately, kant’s old answer still seems new and revolutionary in our own time. According to Kant, when enlightenment is found and exercised the educators in any system will be more aware of their purpose and its significance. This awareness can then be passed to the student. With free students and educators the system as a whole will be more free and aware of their potential. Kant defines enlightenment as the “removal of oneself from self-imposed immaturity.” Unfortunately, we still act like children in regard to our educational practices.

First, I will explain how this enlightenment, or removal from self-imposed immaturity is achieved. It is achieved through two actions. The first, gaining awareness of one’s situation and ability to reason and the second, one’s confident use of their own reason. Gaining enlightenment by enacting these two steps seems easy enough but we are often deterred. Influences of others and our own laziness lead us into habitual rather than controlled lifestyles. According to Kant, it is this “laziness and cowardice [that] are the reasons why so great a portion of mankind… remains under lifelong tutelage, and why it is so easy for others to set themselves up as their guardians.” It is easy to do what you are told. It gives one’s life immediate purpose and allows a subject to feel fulfilled when actions, as defined by others, are carried out correctly. This purposeful feeling is a false one. The influenced actor is not enlightened, and this person, despite feeling as though they have a purpose, does not have a personal purpose of their own.. Acting according to another’s influence is precisely what needs to be avoided for it strips one of the personal stake in the projects that one undertakes. Kant critically portrays the mood of the unenlightened man, “I need not think, if I can only pay”. This idea is truer today than it was when Kant wrote it. Paying to have a consciousness is not enlightening, yet time and time again we pay our way through our luxurious lives. We buy beauty products, clothes, schooling - everything. We are told that schooling itself should be set up with a business model! We buy stuff – including schooling - because others tell us how beneficial they will be to our lives. So what is Kant saying? Why should we not pay if “others will easily undertake the irksome work for [us]” by creating a product we can buy into? The answer to this question is found within our ability to reason. Our capacity to reason for ourselves is what separates us from animals and makes us human. Reason allows us to bring meaning into our life that is unique. This meaning is more complex than mere survival. It is unique to each and every one of us. It allows us to reflect on our lives and then act accordingly. It gives us control over our lives. Our ability to reason for ourselves what makes us fully human and allows us to form normative and epistemic judgements about the world in which we live. We all have it, reason that is, and so few use it to its vast potential. Those enlightened persons are who we look to for guidance and purpose. Or, at the very least, we should be looking to for inspiration and guidance. Instead, we merely look to those popular figures that distract us and entertain us. This is a point that will be developed at length in the coming section. We all have the ability to be enlightened. We all deserve to be enlightened. Becoming enlightened starts with the awareness that each and every one of us has the ability to use our own reason. This awareness is the beginning of enlightenment. The next step is using one’s reason. Kant urges us to do this stating, “Sapere aude! ‘Have courage to use your own reason!’ – that is the motto of enlightenment.

Most everyone has had a flash of enlightenment from time to time. We have at one point or another been very aware of our situation. IN more Kantian terms, there are rare and valuable occasions in which we come to know ourselves as thinking, autonomous individuals. It is similar to the feeling gained from truly understanding something for the first time. It is when you know something and, being aware of your knowledge of it, realize it’s worth in your life. Part of being enlightened is this awareness of your own knowledge. Realization that this awareness is a type of freedom gets one still closer to enlightenment. In the Socratic terms that will be used in later sections of this analysis, we become self-reflective, if only for a short time. Finally, exercising this freedom at all points in order to assess the meaning of one's actions is enlightenment. It is not easy to become enlightened. It takes a consistent effort, constant thought and constant assessment of influences we face in our otherwise habitual lives. The influences we face come in two forms: strict obedience and emotional chaos. Obedience and emotional chaos guide us away from enlightenment. They do this by giving us a sense of false purpose, instilling fear, and lending a false sense of fulfillment through our raw, physical desires. Unfortunately, obedience and emotional excess are precisely the two primary drivers of our current cultural setting.

Obedience’s influence affects us from the very first day we enter the world. Gender roles, among other things, immediately begin to influence our ability to reason. At a young age it could be argued that our ability to reason is underdeveloped or unavailable. This may be, and probably is, true. I will not argue this point here. Let us just assume that, at best, we have a limited capacity to reason at a young age. So it is during these years we are most susceptible to influence. Having an inability to reason for ourselves we get along by being dependent on other people, namely our guardians. These people show us what to obey and, worse, how to obey so we can successfully navigate our world. Our inability to reason strengthens our reliance on such guardians. This is not the fault of the unenlightened child. They become reliant on obedience without knowing it. This is not good. At a young age we are susceptible to obedience and begin our journey tethered to its cart. Kant explains,

After the guardians have first made their domestic cattle dumb and have made sure that these placid creatures will not dare take a single step without the harness of the cart to which they are tethered, the guardians then show them the danger which threatens if they try to go alone.

Even as they grow and come to a point where they are able to develop an ability to reason they are limited in doing so. After all they are so used to obeying that they have a difficult time realizing any other way of living. Obedience has become a habit for them. The first time the unenlightened person disobeys and fails at a task they are criticized for thinking for themselves and not pertaining to the structure of obedience. This scares the individual into acting outside the realm of obedience. Though obedience maintains order and structure it, at the same time, hinders development of a person. The free use of one’s own reason needs to be encouraged and there is no one better suited to encourage students than a teacher. A teacher is an authority figure who an obedient student will habitually obey. At this point a teacher must make the decision to enlighten rather than further oppress the obedient student. Obedience that debilitates the individual is bound to do the same for society. Teachers need to help obedient students realize that the fear they feel to exercise their reason is liberating and that with it they can succeed. The danger a student fears in exercising their reason is as Kant says, “not so great, for by falling a few times [the obedient person] would finally learn to walk alone.” It is within us all to use our own reason. We need to push those in the dark and encourage them to make the effort. Know that in our ability to reason for ourselves we are all free. Knowledge of this freedom, if nothing else, will help to overcome the influence of obedience.

Emotional chaos is the second influence needing assessment. This chaos can be described by complacency with the raw, physical desires we have due to our physical being. We eat when we are hungry, wrap ourselves in blankets when cold, use the bathroom when we are full, latch onto others when we feel lonely; basically we do anything that makes us feel good when we feel poorly. These reactions to our world do not define the life of a human. This reactionary lifestyle describes the life of an animal. Humans are more than animals; they have the ability to reason. Failure to exercise rational thought leads to an animalistic life influenced by emotional chaos. This life of emotional chaos is easy going. Our bodies tell us what to do as they react to the environment surrounding us. We simply meander down a well beaten path. The path is one-way and no thinking occurs. What a lackluster life. Considering the possibilities of rational thought much more is possible. The fulfillment of our raw, physical desires cannot be all fulfilling to the life of a human. So much more can be obtained. The emotionally chaotic subject lives in absence of rational thought and any true understanding of their life.

An ability to reflect, choose, and live a unique life is lost in emotional chaos. The negative consequences of this emotional excess is writ large in our current educational setting. Especially when the people stuck in this chaos both have potential to be, and are expected to be, something more than mere animals (we still talk as though human beings were more than mere animals). It is up to educators to see this potential met and potential is only as real as its ability to be tapped into. If students are not freed of the obedience and emotional chaos constantly pulling at them they cannot live up to what is, or ought to be, expected. Awareness of one’s own ability to think rationally and freely must be understood and taught to the student. The reality of freedom needs to be realized by every student. This realization needs continuous support because it is a foreign idea for such a grounded creature. With proper training it is possible to enlighten students and give them the freedom that they deserve.

Section 2: Plato and the Ancient Foundations of Education

The second step in changing the educational system is to concentrate on the character, purposes, and desires of our students. This is to say that we must turn our attention to, and attempt to reform the attitude of our student body. One way to accomplish this “attitude readjustment” is acquainting students with a few key Socratic concepts. Socrates’ ideas of the good and the true guide a moral, just life. They can still be embodied today to great effect. These ideas are underpinned by his message that “life without inquiry is not worth living for a man.” This statement helps to give a deeper purpose to enlightenment. Thinking about one’s life is paramount to living it well. Reflection allows for each and every one of us to have control over our life. This control is found in the freedom of thought explained in Kant’s section. It allows us to gain and maintain a real responsibility for our lives.

It is in this reflection that educators need to realize the importance and impact of their craft. As educators, we lay the foundation for a student’s life. We want their lives to be ethical, good and beautiful. Or at least we should want these things for our students, rather than simply hoping that they can get a job so that they can fulfill their material desires. If we adjust our angle of vision slightly, from one generation to the next, a vibrant culture might survive and thrive in a morally aware manner. The focus on an ethical life, by way of self-reflection, is rarely taught in the classroom. Similarly, this ability to think about oneself in a critical manner, to think about one's beliefs and the justification for those beliefs, is rarely cultivated in the current educational environment. Plato’s ideas, when applied to modern educational systems, help guide educators in their quest to morally train students. This section will reinstate Plato’s ideals, exploring the way in which they might be applied to current day education. Themes in Plato that will be emphasized include a willingness to question cultural norms, criticisms of material desires, and finally, ideas about how to reform culture through rational-philosophical inquiry.

Keep in mind the divide between obedience and emotional chaos described in my analysis of Kant. This divide is highlighted in Plato’s writings as well. Obedience is exposed in Socrates’ exploration of endoxa, the mores of ancient Athenian culture. Socrates’ questioning of the ways of his culture shows he himself is enlightened to the influence of obedience and is willing to combat it. In so doing he creates a concerned audience of fellow interlocutors. The ancient Athenian mores are derivative of the teachings of the rhapsodes, reciters of epic poetry. Plato sheds light on this rhapsodic educating that occurred through highly emotional lectures led by one of these rhapsodes. The abundance of emotion left little room for rational reasoning. This put into question the possibility of true educational benefits from such performances. Socrates questions this approach to teaching in Ion. In Apology Socrates criticizes material desires and explains the importance of acting for the sake of the act. This idea parallels the educational criticism seen in Ion. Throughout he is trying to instigate change through reflection of one’s situation. Kant’s divide and Socrates’ guidance around it helps to instigate unique change in our lives. This change goes beyond individual enlightenment encouraging society, as a whole, to question its ways and continually change to maintain a tendency toward what is good and beautiful. Plato’s ideas pertinent to cultural invigoration can be helpful when applied to educational systems today.

Plato’s Apology is an example of the benefits gained from a reflective life. In it Socrates’ ability to account for his actions and argue for their importance is something he suggests we all should be able to do at any point. The ability to “apologize” well takes more than enlightenment. Apologizing necessitates a reflection on one’s own actions such that their purpose is understood and can be judged along moral lines by a community of peers . Understanding the purpose allows for a logical, accurate account to be made that legitimizes one's actions and, at its best, suggests ways to go about living to others. As an educator the reflection of ones work ought to include the student in a big way. Students, after all, are paramount to any education system. An educator’s ability to reflect is extremely important. Through reflection one can understand how different ways of acting may or may not affect specific groups. This is extremely useful seeing as no two student groups are identical. In reflection educators have an advantage: they can set up and be responsible for an efficient classroom. It is at this point, when understanding and efficiency of one’s craft is near a peak, that a person can really relish responsibility. Responsibility, here, becomes envied rather than feared. This is because it is gained from an action that is the product of one’s own reason and that action is both good and beautiful. In Apology Socrates’ demonstrates the importance in understanding and being aware of our societal norms and, further, why teaching such awareness is good.

The Apology: Misunderstanding Obedience

In the Apology Socrates is being accused of being “a criminal and a busybody, prying into things under the earth and up in the heavens, and making the weaker argument the stronger, and teaching these same things to others”. Criticized for sophistry and blasphemy Socrates’ questioning of the Athenian cultural norms, as well as spreading his thoughts, was thought to be corrupting the youth. Since the youth are the next generation the current Athenian citizens took offence to Socrates’ teachings. This led to his trial. While on trial for the aforementioned charges Socrates is confronted with the task of giving an account, or apology, for his actions.

Socrates first insight in Apology brings light to the idea of obedience found in Kant. He performs this insight by first explaining to his audience that there are two accusations against him. The first involves prejudice against him. This prejudice has been engrained in his audience since they were young:

I have had many accusers complaining to you, and for a long time, for many years now, and with not a word of truth to say; these I fear, rather than [my current accusers]… are more dangerous, gentlemen, who got hold of most of you while you were boys, and persuaded you, and accused me falsely… These, gentlemen, who have broadcast this reputation, these are my dangerous accusers

Plato notes this accusation as more pressing than the new accusations because of the crowds, at this time, habitual bias towards Socrates’. In order to convince the crowd of his logic, Socrates suggests they all reflect on their own lives. Only in reflecting about the society and conditions they were brought up in will they be able to see its limitations. They will come to the conclusion that what is taken for truth in society actually has very little to do with the inner lives of Athenian citizens. It has very little to do with self-cultivation or intellectual growth. It has very little to do with the good and the true. Society limits its citizens’ pursuit of these ideals because it creates habitual attitudes instead of reflective ones. This limitation was found by Socrates in his own reflections. In giving an account of his life Socrates' explains how he gained this knowledge. He was told by an oracle that he was the wisest of all me. Reflecting on this he had difficulty believing it. In turn he traveled around Athens looking for “those who had the reputation of being wise.” His journey leads him to the best artisans in Athens. When he met one of these individuals he engaged in conversation and tried to figure out who was wiser. One such man whom he conversed with was an Athenian statesman the meeting went as such,

When I conversed with him, I thought this man seemed to be wise both to many others and especially to himself, but that he was not; and then I tried to show him that he thought he was wise, but was not. Because of that he disliked me and so did many others who were there, but I went away thinking to myself that I was wiser than this man

Socrates’ questioned the knowledge that the artisans of society claimed to have. In doing so he undermines society’s structure of objective truth and proves to himself that he is the wisest man. Specifically in his meeting with the statesman Socrates’ questioning resonates harshly with the norms of Athenian society. To say that such a high ranking man is unwise would, and did, cause many citizens to dislike Socrates. It is Socrates’ conclusion that makes him wiser than anyone else. His ability to think for himself frees him from obedience of the artisan’s knowledge. He realizes that the apparently omniscient artisan is, in fact, ignorant of one important piece of knowledge. As he puts it, “What I do not know I don’t think I do. “ This consciousness of his own ignorance is what separates Socrates’ from his peers. Where artisans believed they knew everything there was to know Socrates’ knew there was always more to know. His acceptance of this way of thinking is key to his use of its presence. Knowing and accepting it gives him a certain freedom unobtainable by those who think themselves omniscient. Socrates’ says,

I asked myself on behalf of the oracle, whether I should prefer to be as I am, not wise with their wisdom nor ignorant with their ignorance; or to have what they have, both. I answered myself and the oracle, that it was best for me to be as I am.

This encouragement towards acceptance of one’s ignorance helps give confidence to the independent thinker. It levels the playing field and allows growth for even the most well versed of teachers. In making these rhetorical moves Socrates’ attempts to legitimize his own actions and open the minds of his audience.

This attempt at awakening his audience is something that every school system should do for its student body. Questioning the prejudices that plague society, whether good or bad, is important. It is important for the social and political work that such relfection can accomplish, but it also, for Socrates, has a personally edifying effect on the thinkers who take up the task of self-reflection. Socrates’ attempt to overcome his first accusation criticizes society’s lack of awareness of its own mores. Critiquing this lack of awareness causes an immediate defensive stance by the jury. However, in eliciting this reaction and then enlightening his audience Socrates jostles listeners into thinking about their lives. He provokes feelings of responsibility in his audience. In this case responsibility for being uncritical and unresponsive to something everyone would want to admit having control over, namely their prejudices.

Now with a new crowd of unbiased citizens Socrates’ begins his second defense. This defense involves an exploration into his teaching of the youth. It is seen as corruptive by his accusers because of its content and because of Socrates’ reputation as a sophisticated speaker, “Socrates is a criminal, who corrupts the young and does not believe in the gods whom the state believes in, but other new spiritual things instead. “ This accusation, Socrates’ claims, is due to the prejudices learned in Meletos, his accusers, youth. Meletos himself is still very young compared to Socrates’. Socrates plan of action to undercut this accusation is to first show that Meletos is “pretending to be serious and to care for things [i.e. the education of the youth] which he has never cared about at all.” To accomplish this Socrates questions Meletos accusations themselves. As it is understood, Socrates’ intentions are to educate the youth and in doing so he corrupts them. This is not true, however, because, as Socrates states, “If I make of one my associates bad I shall risk getting some evil from him… either I do not corrupt, or if I do, I do so without meaning to do it.” In corrupting the future of his society he will hurt himself. Why would he knowingly do this? The point is - he would not. With this being the case, Socrates recalls for the crowd that, by law, someone who makes mistakes of the kind he is being accused of is not to be on trial for death. Instead, “one should take him apart privately and instruct and admonish him: for it is plain that, if I learn better, I shall stop what I do without intent.” This reasoning greatly undermines Meletoses and his accusations. The accusations are being carried out incorrectly according to law and Meletos does not care about the education system because he is both unwilling to use it and does not understand it. This greatly hampers Meletoses intentions of accusing Socrates. By undermining his accusers and creating an audience that is now thinking for themselves and questioning what is happening in the trial Socrates has done himself a great service. He now has a chance to prove his innocence by explaining the logic behind his teaching of the youth.

Socrates is now confident about his audience’s ability to reason. He has convinced them of the illegitimacy of the accusations brought against him. In turn he has, logically, won his trial. The conclusion of Apology consists of Socrates discussing why he has reflected so much on his life. He hypothesizes if he were to be let free:

We [the jury] let you go free, but on this condition, that you will no longer spend your time… in philosophy, and if you are caught doing this again, you shall die’ --- if you should let me go free on these terms which I have mentioned, I should answer you, ‘’ Many thanks indeed for your kindness, gentlemen, but I will obey the god rather than you, and as long as I have breath in me , and remain able to do it, I will never cease being a philosopher, and exhorting you, and showing what is in me to any one of you I may meet… My excellent friend, you are an Athenian, a citizen of this great city, so famous for wisdom and strength, and you take every care to be as well off as possible in money, reputation and place---then are you not ashamed not to take every care and thought for understanding, for truth, and for the soul, so that it may be perfect?

In this passage Socrates sheds light on the priorities of society – our society. Money and popularity are so very important that people forget to think, understand, and search for the truth. This desire for materials instead of knowledge has persuaded society to continue down a habitual path. It is this obedience and lack of awareness that brought about the accusations against Socrates. His ability to not only undermine the accusations against him but also give an account of why he did what he did is paramount. It his ability to reflect that has allowed him to overcome obedience. His explanation shows that he philosophized for the sake of understanding itself. He did not do it to fulfill some materialistic desire. He truly wants others, as well as himself, to understand the importance and help in the pursuit of knowing the truth. Teaching this to others involved enlightening them. However this enlightenment is more than just confident use of one’s own reason. There is another part to it. This reason has a common goal, namely understanding the truth. This Socratic reflection allows for each and every one using it to give an Apology and take a real responsibility for our life. Further it allows the reasons for ones actions to be rooted in the action themselves and not some distant, material desire. This is of the extreme importance. It is why the unreflective life is not worth living.

The Ion: Misunderstanding Emotional Chaos

In the Ion, Socrates extends his critique of the education system in Athens. As usual his questioning of a cultural norm elicits rational thought in the reader and an understanding of the norm’s problematic nature. Education in ancient Athens is not unlike education nowadays. It involved a keynote speaker and an audience of students. At these lectures, or performances, the speaker, or rhapsode, would captivate the audience through recitation of epic poetry. Attendance at these lessons was rarely low; the lectures were very entertaining, “the most successful held large audiences spellbound and moved them to amazement, laughter or tears. They also lectured or taught." It is here that Socrates finds a problem. The problem lies in the fact that the lectures are intended to teach and at the same time elicit such strong emotions. Here, Socrates anticipates Kant’s suspicion that education and emotional excess are necessarily antithetical. We must avoid emotional chaos, in order for us to obtain enlightenment (for Kant) or a just Republic (for Plato). Socrates’ exploration into the one of the rhapsode’s techniques shows how much this emotional chaos deceives us all in society. More specifically it shows us how habitual actions that tend to our raw, physical desires lead us astray when it comes to education. These supposed educators in society were, in fact, poorly teaching something about which they knew very little. This being said there presentations were received so well that both the rhapsodes and citizens accepted them as a form of legitimate education.

From the beginning, Socrates’ description of Ion paints a very familiar picture. It greatly parallels the dynamic seen in classrooms today. Ion has just told of his winning first prize at the feast of Asclepios and Socrates states “I have often envied you reciters that art of yours… you have to dress in all sorts of finery, and make yourselves as grand as you can, to live up to your art!” Socrates here is attending to the showmanship side of the rhapsodes. Like teachers they are expected to dress formally and impress their students through the showiness of words. The art he speaks of is the understanding of the epic poets with whose words the rhapsode captivates audiences. This is similar to the memorization of a lesson that a veteran teacher has taught many times over. This specific dialogue, occurring early on in Ion, foreshadows the argument Socrates eventually makes. He plans to show that behind the veil of formalness there often lays a lack of legitimacy. Socrates continues, “Yes, the reciter must be the interpreter of the poet’s mind to the audience’ and to do this, if he does not understand what the poet says, is impossible. So all that very properly makes one envy.” This is a direct parallel to current day rhapsodes: Musicians and actors and, unfortunately, teachers. Notice here that I have compared the Rhapsodes already to musicians, actors and teachers. Let me elucidate this before I go on. The rhapsodic lectures entertained audiences like current day performances of musicians and actors. This is problematic because the education system was based off of the rhapsodic lectures. In this fact the rhapsodes are like teachers because they deceive us into believing they are a legitimate ground for knowledge when in fact they are not. There is a certain envy accompanied with our acceptance and enjoyment of a musicians or actors performance; so too with the rhapsodes of ancient Athens. This envy of the art is where society begins to slip under what I will call the shroud of acceptance. The average citizen, in envying the rhapsode and their apparent knowledge, is envious of false knowledge. More particularly, they envy the accolades and fame that attends the showiness of false knowledge. Ion claims to be the best rhapsode in all of Greece, “I believe I can speak on Homer better than any other man alive… [no one] else who ever was born could utter so many fine thoughts on Homer as I can.”

After Socrates creates a common understanding of what it is that Ion does he begins to question its legitimacy using the framework he has set up: Rhapsodes being all about their appearance not the content they speak of. A rhapsode is like a beautifully painted car with a puny engine. Socrates begins arguing by questioning Ion’s knowledge of different poets, besides Homer whom he best recites. “Are you as good at Hesiod and Archilochos, or only Homer?” Ion rebuts “I think Homer’s quite enough.” This opens up Socrates’ next questions concerning when one poet is correct or not. After all, how can Ion know that Homer is the best choice when it comes to interpreting ideas that Homer, Hesiod, Archilochos and other poets disagree upon? Socrates asks about divination, something about which Homer and Hesiod disagree, “Could a good diviner explain better what these two poets say about divination, both when they say the same and when they don’t, or could you [as a reciter]?” Ion replies “A diviner could.” This is Ion’s first realization. Socrates’ then shows more examples eventually arriving at the conclusion that “the same person will always know who speaks well and who speaks badly”. This is a person, who like the diviner, is versed in the art which the speaker is speaking; a doctor or mathematician for example. These artists are the ones who know what is being spoken.

To further prove his point, Socrates, suggests to Ion that his wealth and recognition is not due to a true understanding of his craft. Contrarily he proposes that it is due to a loss of control of his reason. Socrates nicely explains that the great poets are not all knowing. Rather they are interpreters for god and divinely inspired; the inspiration coming from “divine dispensation” from the gods. As Socrates puts it a poet “cannot make poetry until he becomes inspired and goes out of his senses and no mind is left in him.” This directly attends to Socrates’ claim that true knowledge is often covered by a shroud that becomes acceptable to society; our shroud of acceptance. This distances society from the truth. This makes Ion, and other rhapsodes, simply “interpreters of interpreters.” The rhapsodes lack a true understanding of poets who themselves lacked a true understanding when they wrote. This absence of reason is further found in Ion’s description of his performances “Whenever I speak of sad and touching scenes, my eyes are full of tears; when it is something terrible or awful, my hair stands up straight with fear and my heart leaps!” Socrates suggests:

My dear Ion, could we say such a man is for the time being in his right senses who, decked out in gorgeous raiment and golden crown, bursts out crying at a sacrifice or festival, when he has lost none of these fine things? Or who is terrified, with more than twenty thousand friendly faces about him, when no one robs him or wrongs him?

This is indisputable evidence that the reciters are in fact in a type of daze when they have a profound performance. The wealth, recognition and accepted grandeur deceives both the audience and rhapsodes from their lack of understanding. The emotions felt from the performances deceive audience and lecturer alike. Any understanding gained from them is far from the truth. At the same time a true understanding of truth is: once removed from the poet, twice from the reciter, and thrice from the audience. All of the onlookers are deceived by an accepted truth that is consistently farther and farther from truth itself. This is a problem. Consider today’s society. Interpretation of interpreters is so easily accessed, often lazily and without thought. Internet websites are waiting to be found and believed. Each new one is farther from the truth.

Exactly where does the problem lie? Ion claims to be the best reciter in the ancient world. He feels that his ability to recite Homer’s poetry word by word and captivate an audience legitimizes his ability to pass knowledge of the world to others. The rhapsodes lectures were considered the education institution of ancient Athens. This is the first problem: The rhapsodes knowledge of the world did not accompany a true understanding but rather a memorized reiteration of lines of epic poetry. Rhapsode’s flaws were in their connection with the knowledge they so expertly spoke of. They were not doctors, mathematicians, scientists, sculptors or painters; they were lecturers. This problem translated into the second problem: society listened to the rhapsodes. Citizens took what rhapsodes spoke on an accepted, not gained, merit. This acceptance was due to the emotions they felt from the rhapsodes. Such entertainment made audiences want more and because of this they held the rhapsodes to high esteem. The problem with this is that the esteem of the rhapsodes legitimized there knowledge. Socrates would argue, rationally, that this is no basis of knowledge. Just because everyone agrees that the knowledge of the rhapsodes legitimate does not make it so. True merit of one’s knowledge necessitates that person having a full, true understanding of a concept. This merit is earned through the ability to teach that knowledge to others in a way so that they too could teach it. This is the merit all teachers should have. Accepted merit is merit which exists when agreed to exist by a big enough majority of society. It deceives us into believing all which the person with merit says. This logic is flawed big time and it corrupts society. The third, final, and most concerning part of Ion’s flaw lies in the fact that rhapsodes were educators. The education of the day consisted of attending lectures that captivated audiences. This enjoyable, emotional experience was considered educational. And it continues to be regarded as educational to this very day. To reiterate what was earlier said true understanding is: … thrice removed from the audience! This was a problem which Socrates questioned; today it is a problem we must attend to.

This problematic departure from the truth, once started, reproduces itself in educational institutions. As society begins to take on a certain shape its ideologies are taught in educational institutions in ways that often discourage the full use of our ability to reason. Like any biological structure if there is one, however small, problematic cell it can grow into a vicious cancer that consumes the entirety of the organism. We are with every generation distancing ourselves from the truth. The sooner this is realized and accepted as something that needs fixing the quicker it can be assessed and combatted. We must realize we are slipping under a thicker and thicker shroud of acceptance with each convenient, life-changing innovation we invent. Unfortunately, in creating these life-changing technologies, we often forget what sort of life is worth changing, or what this change is meant to effect.

A Brief Criticism of “Smart” Technology

Technology is creating a world full of truths legitimized by computers and the internet. Nowadays at any time an average citizen is able to flip out there cellular device and accomplish a plethora of tasks. As tools these are amazing devices, they connect us constantly in a multitude of different ways. However what is more attractive, and deceitful, is their ability to lure us with looks, games, and speed. As a culture our reliance on these devices has become so great as to be like the rhapsodes in ancient Athens. Their ability to fulfill our desires instantaneously and answer our questions is profounder with each passing day. Anyone who has bought a phone has experienced the feeling of watching it become obsolete in an asinine amount of time. Innovation is moving faster than education and this is a problem. Seeing the amazing advances of these cellular devices and knowing how easily they fulfill our desires makes us want them without considering why we do. This is precisely the emotional chaos Kant writes about in An Answer to the Questions: What is Enlightenment? and Plato alludes to it in Ion. So easily fulfilling our raw physical desires discourages us from thinking for ourselves. We want an answer we simply google it. Whether right or wrong we accept it as truth. This is absurd. Not only because the googler has not used there reason to find the truth but because looking at another website might yield a different answer. Now let us suppose that you have found two websites. Both with different answers, just as Ion knew Homer and Hesiod had different views about divination. What happens? Ion sided with what he believed to be true, Homer. The current day googler would simply google once again and find yet another website. This one speaking about the previous two sites and either agreeing with one or, what is most likely the case, coming to yet a third unique conclusion. Thinking about the size of the internet this re-googling effect could occur a multitude of times. By the end there is no way to tell what is the real truth. This problem is simpler than which website has the truth. As Socrates’ argues the truth is not found in a rhapsodes performance, or a website at all. It can be explored in ones reflection on ones own life. The reliance on technology is distancing us from the experience of being human and that is where the truth can be found. It distances us from individuality. This realization is the first step and only with it can we better society. Realizing necessitates an ability to reason that only humans possess; Ancient Athenians had it, American citizens have it. Simple realization is not enough, one must reason through their realizations. The next step is to question. Good questioning requires two or more people. Together realizations can turn into conversations and eventually into positive, progressive and appropriate actions.

Educational institutions are the beginning of this pursuit. It is where society must teach how to recognize and avoid the shroud of acceptance. It is where society must learn how to question and be okay with questioning what is good, just, and true instead of sticking to dogmatic biases we create or have grown up with. Education is where students and teachers, together, pursue the truth each one individually reasoning to its conclusion. Oppression of students into an even further removed true knowledge of the world is, besides immoral, detrimental to our society’s future. These educational institutions are where the future exists, where the present departs. Teachers cannot be bias, all knowing, and too emotionally attached to what they think might be true. Society has taught us much about our world and it has also taught us what to teach. This is the cyclical process: having an ideal, meeting it, increasing the ideals intensity, meeting it again and so on. It creates a stagnant society yearning for change but afraid to make it happen. It is a society that teaches future generations the same fear and limits their success because of it.

The cycle begins with a realization of an ideal and does not end unless it is questioned. Ideals ought to change just as time itself does. Questions ought to be asked and solutions tried for. It is not a selfish act insofar as it necessitates a common understanding of our world. The selfishness comes into play with each and everyone’s own perception; all are different, lending a different view of our world. In this difference lies the beauty of the truth. We all have the capacity to pursue it, each one of us in a unique way. Overcoming our emotional desires and using our rational capacities to pursue what is true is what must be done. No longer can we rely so heavily on our devices as panacea. We must exercise our ability to reflect, rationalize, and pursue the truth correctly.

Throughout his dialogues Plato’s form, method and context show, tell and suggest ways to implement philosophical ideas into one’s life. Implementation of Kantian and Platonic ideas into an education system will greatly benefit all parties involved. This implementation is the teachers job and it necessitates more than a lecture. Teachers need to constantly engage their students in this enlightened pursuit of the truth and encourage original thought. As liberating as teaching can be for both students and teachers it must also hold ideas in check. This check is not oppressive, it is guiding. Guidance towards what the teacher knows as true and towards what the students agree as truth through understanding. A good teacher knows what they are teaching and why it should be taught. A good teacher can then give both kinds of knowledge, the what and why, to their students. As a teacher one must realize that the shroud of acceptance influences students a great deal and causes them to believe anything you may say. Do not feel accomplished if your students agree with you. Feel accomplished when your students engage in dialogue with you. When this happens you know they have cognized their potential and are willing to pursue it confidently. Together, then, pursuit of the truth becomes much more interesting, fun, and efficient.

Section 3: Whitehead on Culture and the Aims of Education

The third step in understanding how to gain interest from student’s lies in understanding Alfred North Whitehead’s ideas on culture and its place in an ideal education. Whitehead’s “The Aims of Education” is an extremely insightful essay and helps ground both Kant’s and Plato’s philosophies in education. In it he writes about education and its problematic nature. The problems are a product of the lack of attention to detail in the classroom. With every new student, group and generation teaching needs to adapt. Educators need to help students understand not only concepts but where they come from. This will breed a student that truly has knowledge which they can apply to their lives.

It is not enough to simply give facts or formulas with which students can plug and chug their way through school regurgitating what they have been told to know. This style of educating is useless, plagued with what Whitehead calls “inert ideas… [which are] merely received into the mind without being utilized, or tested, or thrown into fresh combinations.” These ideas lack a purpose and necessitate no understanding. They are bits of information that must be presented at certain times, otherwise they are useless. Teaching inert ideas does not allow students to think for themselves. Students become robotic and can do little besides the rudimentary tasks they completed school. They are unable to apply what they have learned because it has not been understood. This problem is combatted through Whitehead’s ideas of connectivity and application.

Students are challenged by application of their knowledge due to the disconnectedness of subjects in schools. Whitehead says, “The result of teaching small parts of a large number of subjects is the passive reception of disconnected ideas.” This suggests that the teaching style often found in education fails to recognize the connectedness of its core academics. Psychology, mathematics, history, biology, art, chemistry, language arts, they are all connected, unique ways of understanding our world. This key fact is lost in the formal splitting of subjects. Students who do not comprehend this connection have a difficult time applying the concepts they thought they understood in real life. In turn society and culture is slow to progress.

It could be argued that once a student leaves school their education truly begins. This should not be the case. We ought not to wait. Training students to activity of thought is the first step in a good education and a pivotal part of creating a good culture.

Anti-Obedience: Whitehead’s Activity of Thought

Activity of thought is very similar to Kant’s idea of enlightenment. As educators showing students their ability to think will help them prosper. Whitehead writes, “From the very beginning of his education, the child should experience the joy of discovery. The discovery which he has to make is that general ideas give an understanding of that stream of events which pours through his life, which is his life.” Giving students an understanding of their knowledge is important to their development. Understanding yields more than just book smarts. It allows for not only reflection but an understood reflection of one’s life, reflection with a purpose. This type of comprehension necessitates a constant adaptation to the present which is understood through knowledge.

Educating is giving this ability to apply concepts to the student. Once a student can comprehend the connection of ideas and in turn apply them to the present we have accomplished education. The student is then capable of activity of thought and can, by themselves, integrate into a rich culture successfully. This is done through their ability to apply their knowledge. Whitehead informs,

Theoretical ideas should always find important applications within the pupil’s curriculum. This is not an easy doctrine to apply, but a very hard one. It contains within itself the problem of keeping knowledge alive, of preventing it from becoming inert, which is the central problem of all education.

This consistent activity of thought is essential to successful education. Similar to Kant, Whitehead wants us to be in constant control of our knowledge and application of that knowledge in our lives. Eliciting a strong activity of thought and humane feeling in every student is difficult. Plagued with inert ideas students often fall into a Kantian obedience losing their activity of thought. This must be watched for by the teacher.

Even the brightest of students sometime look for an easy way out of an assignment. If this is the case then the student has not been taught well enough. Activity of thought ought to lead to an interest in one's education. Scraping by should never be on a student’s agenda or a teachers. Educating is an art and like all art takes time, skill, effort, and passion. This same artistic notion should become alive within the activity of thought as the student learns.

Learning activity of thought is important to the invigoration of the student. With active thought the student will prosper, able to apply their knowledge confidently. With this newfound ability there is still a question to be answered. How will the student go about integrating their learning into their lives? This question can be answered by exploring what makes us at the same time unique and similar: our humane feelings.

Balanced Emotion: Whitehead’s Humane Feeling

With our activity of thought in high gear, similar to Kant’s enlightened man, we are charged with the task of how to act. We can logically reason our way through the world with our enlightened activity of thought. Then using Socratic philosophies we are able to gain responsibility for our actions and create a moral compass to gauge our actions upon. What then. How can I further realize how to utilize my knowledge? To Whitehead, “utilizing and idea, [is] relating it to that stream, compounded of sense perceptions, feelings, hopes, desires, and of mental activities adjusting thought to thought, which forms our life.” We must tend to our humane feelings for guidance about how to use our knowledge of our world. In so doing we create for ourselves a unique way of navigating our lives.

Understand that this tending to our humane feelings is in control. This humane feeling scrutinized at first, seeming to be the emotional chaos Kant warns us away from. It is not. This humane feeling is coupled with activity of thought in the individual and society. Humane feelings are the means by which we maintain our individuality and express our unique way of understanding our knowledge of the world. It is how we express our lives and make them our own.

“Education is the acquisition of the art of the utilization of knowledge.” Understanding how to use one’s knowledge does not necessitate logic as much as confident freedom. Giving a student confidence to use their knowledge is done by giving them a real understanding of a concept. This is activity of thought. Only in the application of concepts has a student truly learned them. This is where individual humane feelings arrive and are useful. Whitehead explains, “The pupils have got to be made to feel that they are studying something, and are not merely executing intellectual minuets.” Students need to be aware of the opportunity they gain with their knowledge. It is highly unique to each individual and yields a certain type of freedom. This freedom allows for an individualization of things that is beautiful, “modern work is done to exact measure… ancient work is varied according to the idiosyncrasy of the workman.” Specialization in a craft is not gained until a true understanding is gained. Only then does the expert have an opportunity to integrate their own unique style into their work.

Giving this opportunity to specialization is difficult but natural. Our systematic splitting of subjects gives equal weight to each of the core subjects. Splitting suggests to students that each are equally important because each is equally pertinent to standard tests. This should not be the case. “Mankind is naturally specialist.” We are by our human essence unique, interested in different things, and built for special tasks. It is in this specialization that we remain experts in our crafts and create our own style.

Style is “the most austere of all mental qualities… it is an aesthetic sense, based on admiration for the direct attainment of a foreseen end… [it is] the love of a subject in itself and for itself, where it is not the sleepy pleasure of pacing a mental quarter-deck, is the love of style as manifested in that study.

This is how one ought to use their education. First they must gain the knowledge necessary to truly develop their own unique style. Style is the love of work for the sake of the work. It is enjoying what one does every second they do it. As the final piece for the educated mind to acquire style is also the most useful. The educated person with style becomes obsessively efficient at their craft disliking anything that wastes time or energy. There is a strong sense of purpose in every action for a person who has found their own style. “Style is the ultimate morality of mind.” This person has perfected their craft, knows good work and has gained a moral compass because of their understanding. With style comes a sense of morality.

Before one gains style they must be educated. With education they can gain expertise and appreciation in their work. These are the makings of a mere amateur. To become expert and stylizes one must have a “foresight which comes from special knowledge.” With this foresight they can use their work in an entirely new way. This is all well and good but as educators we must be weary. There is a loss of interest that often accompanies great success in any field. This must not happen. We do not want tour experts to become those who Socrates travelled to on his journey. The expert must realize they do not know. As Whitehead explains, “the object of this address is to suggest how to produce the expert without loss of the essential virtues of the amateur.” Education needs to accomplish this difficult task. Not only must teachers free students and allow them to gain their own style. They must teach to the constant pursuit of knowledge. Even an expert has more to accomplish in their stylized view of the world. The culture of a society is always in flux. Whitehead’s ideas help to ground what we have learned in education. He suggests that through use of knowledge each individual can gain their own unique style. This attention to detail and love of ones craft for the sake of the craft itself is key to culture. It is the duty of education to allow this style to be gained and it is not easy.

Literature Cited

Kant, Immanuel. (1784). An Answer to the Questions: “What is Enlightenment?”. Retrieved February 2011 from ThoughtAudio.com. http://www.thoughtaudio.com/titlelist/TA0058-Enlightenment/KANT_ENLIGHTENMENT.pdf

Whitehead, Alfred N. (1916). The Aims of Education. Retrieved February 2011 from Anthonyflood.com. http://www.anthonyflood.com/whiteheadeducation.htm

Plato, Great Dialogues of Plato, ed. W.H.D. Rouse (New York: New American Library, 2008)