This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Muir, J. R. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Is our history of educational philosophy mostly wrong?

The case of Isocrates

University of Winnipeg, Winnipeg, Canada, j.muir{at}uwinnipeg.ca

There are two very different accounts of the history of educational philosophy and ideas presently available. One account is the work of historical scholars and classicists, and is based on thorough historical research. The other account is the work of educationists and philosophers, and is generally based on little or no historical research in the history of educational thought. Consequently, the prevailing accounts of the history of educational philosophy produced by educationists and philosophers over the past 50 years are remarkably inaccurate. The inaccuracies are of two kinds: (1) the unequalled influence of the educational ideas and practices of Isocrates, Plato’s rival, is almost wholly unrecognised, and (2) knowledge of the tradition of autonomous educational thought has been lost. Contemporary educational philosophy has much to gain, both in new methods and ideas and in the recovery of some of the academic credibility it still lacks, by recovering the legacy of Isocrates and the tradition of autonomous educational thought.

Key Words: Isocrates • history of educational thought • John Dewey • Paul Hirst

Theory and Research in Education, Vol. 3, No. 2, 165-195 (2005)
DOI: 10.1177/1477878505053300


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?