There is fierce opposition to the philosophy of education put forward by Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860). The opposition goes beyond little details. It’s essential, fundamental, ferocious, and relentless.
Schopenhauer created his own antagonists from the moment that he diverged from the doctrines of Plato (429-347 BC). You can find those doctrines in Plato’s book “The Republic.”
Plato employed grandiloquent terms for describing his ideas about education. He spoke about a “just, harmonious society,” but in practice, he was proposing a totalitarian, oppressive and tyrannical education system.
According to Plato, the purpose of education is to construct a society ruled by philosophers like himself, who impose their views on everyone else by means of hired warriors.
Schopenhauer’s philosophy of education compared to Plato’s
What gives philosophers the right to rule? Plato affirms that they have access to secret knowledge (“the world of forms”). It is abstract knowledge that nobody else can access or grasp.
Schopenhauer opposed Plato’s educational theory from start to finish. Instead of promoting a frozen, totalitarian education, Schopenhauer wanted to teach students to think for themselves and develop their self-awareness.
Plato devoted extensive efforts to describing the curriculum, in which he included reading, mathematics, music and sports. I find Plato’s curriculum solid enough, but the problem is not the curriculum. The problem is the purpose of education.
Schopenhauer understood perfectly that you cannot define a process by its components. A process is first defined by its goal and the expected benefits.
You can teach reading, mathematics, music, history or other subjects in many different ways. The goal of teaching makes a crucial difference in the outcome. Do you aim at building self-reliance, awareness and critical thinking? Schopenhauer would have given a positive answer.
When Plato wrote about “cultivating civic responsibility” in education, he did not mean self-reliance, awareness and critical thinking. Actually, his objectives were exactly the opposite of Schopenhauer’s. Plato employed the term “civil responsibility” as a synonym of a totalitarian, oppressive education.
Schopenhauer’s philosophy of education compared to Aristotle’s
Schopenhauer had not invented his philosophy of education from scratch. To a large extent, he had drawn ideas from the works of Aristotle (384-322 BC), in particular from the epistle titled “Nicomachean Ethics.”
In Aristotle’s writings, we can trace the view that education should aim at teaching students practical wisdom; the goal is to teach students to think from themselves, so that they can make good decisions. That’s why Aristotle stressed the importance of mastering logic together with mathematics and natural science.
Schopenhauer regarded happiness and averting suffering as a primary goal in education. We can also trace this principle to the writings of Aristotle. The “Nicomachean Ethics” encourage readers to pursue eudaimonia (happiness) by developing their skills and leading a productive life.
Schopenhauer’s philosophy of education compared to Pestalozzi’s
With Johann Heinrich Pestalozzi (1746-1827), we see for a little while the development of educational ideas similar to the ones advocated by Schopenhauer.
Pestalozzi wrote two books to present his educational ideas: “Evening hours of a hermit” and “How Gertrude educates her children.” The former was published in 1780 and the latter in 1801. Both books call for individualized instruction primary by learning by doing as a complement to memorization.
The problem with Pestalozzi is that his moral disquisitions remained rather vague. He calls for educating for perseverance and social harmony, together with honesty and compassion but you can interpret those concepts anyway you want.
Schopenhauer had given much more thought to the purpose of education than Pestalozzi ever did, and that’s why the actual implementation of Pestalozzi’s grand ideas has remained rather disappointing.
Schopenhauer’s philosophy of education compared to Montessori’s
Maria Montessori (1870-1952) is to blame for errors similar to those made by Pestalozzi. She made bold statements about the potential of every child to learn and thrive, but in practice, her method results in rather chaotic classrooms.
The truth is that few children are able of independent, self-directed learning. Montessori didn’t want to impose knowledge from above, but how are children supposed to learn difficult, complex subjects?
Schopenhauer would not have endorsed the vague definition of purpose in the Montessori philosophy. He regarded critical thinking, self-awareness and self-reliance difficult to develop.
Crucial skills should not be left to chance. They should be actively taught and encouraged instead of waiting for students to randomly discover them.
Schopenhauer’s philosophy of education compared to John Dewey’s
John Dewey (1859-1952) initiated an educational trend that frontally contradicts Schopenhauer’s philosophy. In books such as “Experience and nature” (1925), “The quest for certainty” (1929), and “Experience and education” (1938), he advocates for integrating theory and practice so that students can develop their own understanding of the world.
The problem with Dewey’s theory is the emphasis on social responsibility, which is reminiscent of Plato’s educational ideas and world conception. Dewey employs terms such as “social progress” and “empowering individuals” which also remind us of Plato’s “just, harmonious society.”
I have not found in Dewey’s works the emphasis on critical thinking, self-awareness and self-reliance that play the central role in Schopenhauer’s educational philosophy.
Dewey aimed at prompting students to participate in society actively more than developing individual intellectual skills. He had a vision of the world dissimilar from Schopenhauer’s and Aristotle’s. Whether you endorse Dewey or Schopenhauer, the outcome is going to be very different.
If you are interested in applying rational ideas to assessing problems and looking for solutions, I recommend you my book “The 10 principles of rational living.”
Related articles
Analysis of Schopenhauer’s views on solitude
Schopenhauer’s views on the self
Schopenhauer and the philosophy of education