Abstract
This paper introduces Simone Weil’s notion of reading and some of its implications to education. Weil’s philosophy, in particular her notion of attention has caught interest of some education scholars; however, the existing studies are still underdeveloped. Introducing Weil’s notion of reading, which has not been studied almost at all by educationists but its significance is well-recognized by Weil scholars, I intend to set forth a more nuanced understanding of Weil’s attention that is necessary to further discuss Weil’s potential contribution to education research. Attention to other people, hence love of others, is reframed as “reading better.” We read better not simply by purifying our reading through detachment and self-negation, which is how the notion of attention is often understood and thus found problematic, but by incorporating multiple perspectives (readings) and finding balance among them. Learning to read better, then, is not merely inward effort of detachment done through introspection, but it also necessarily involves outward effort of working with other people and the world. It is through interacting with others, we may learn our own readings, recognize others’ readings, and seeking for just balance among them. This latter element which has been greatly dismissed is indispensable for any serious discussions of Weil’s philosophy in education.
Notes
Weil died in 1943 from tuberculosis and self-starvation refusing to eat more than the French soldiers in front line. Several biographies of Weil are available in English. For instance, see Pétrement (1976).
See Weil’s letter titled “Spiritual Autobiography” in Waiting for God. The text will be henceforth abbreviated as WG.
See, for instance, Weil’s essay “Reflection on the Right Use of School Studies” included in WG. In French, the verb “attendre” means to wait.
Simone Weil, Gravity and Grace. Citations are from the UNP edition, 45. The book will be henceforth referred as GG.
Simone Weil, “Essay on the Notion of Reading.” The essay was written in 1941, one of her late writings as she died 1943, and originally published in 1946 as “Essai sur la Notion de Lecture” in Les Études Philosophiques. This will henceforward be abbreviated as ER.
This resonates with Wittgenstein’s idea of language game and Heidegger’s thrown-ness of being in the world.
As Andic (1993) mentions, Wittgenstein’s account of reading in Philosophical Investigations, relating Weil’s notion of reading to Wittgenstein’s account, might be a useful way to situate it in the scholarship of philosophy. See Andic’s essay “Discernment and Imagination”.
Diogenes Allen summarizes: “We usually read from a perspective. The meanings we receive are not false. Given a perspective, what we read is indeed what ought to be read from that perspective” (1993, 99).
See the previous section for how Weil defines gravity more generally.
Weil in the essay on Iliad (1965) writes that force turns human beings into a thing.
This does not mean Weil always understands forgiveness in this sense. For instance, when she talks about forgiveness in her discussion of revenge, it means a usual sense of forgiveness. It seems that, for Weil, forgiveness has a broader sense just as love and justice do.
Simone Weil, The Notebooks of Simone Weil, 43. This will henceforward be abbreviated as N. See also GG, 188.
Simone Weil, “Reflections on the Right Use of School Studies with a View to the Love of God,” in WG.
Also see GG, 59. There, the passage continues, “Attachment is a manufacture of illusions and whoever wants reality ought to be detached” (GG, 59).
Also see N, 120. There she claims that true renunciation of the self requires achieving spiritual nakedness by renouncing spiritual goods as well as material goods.
See book two of Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics.
See also GG, 190.
Some may point that there is another level implicit: reading merely by sensation below the three levels. As I pointed earlier in this paper, however, reading is different from mere sensation.
Allen also takes up the example of the captain and discusses levels of reading (1993, 100).
It seems to me that modern physicists—being able to read on the second level—may not be able to accept what order (necessity) brings to them with this kind of stoic calm. In that sense, there may be sub-divisions within the second level of reading.
I took the word “incorrect” from Andic’s essay (1993, 126).
Again, she does not negate the value of lower levels of reading.
More comprehensive discussion of Weil’s justice is necessary for further clarification of what the balance of different readings means. It is beyond the scope of this paper, but it is worthy to note here that Weil thinks justice is manifest in the existence of others’ consent. And consent is available at the balancing point of our readings. See Weil’s essay “Are we Struggling for Justice” (1987) and Winch (1989).
This urge for the analysis of one’s own reading is equivalent to old Socratic teaching: know thyself.
See the subsection “Immediacy and Physicality” under the section “The Notion of Reading”.
Nussbaum’s use of the term fluctuates. Beside imagination, she uses narrative imagination, literary imagination, sympathetic imagination, compassionate imagination, etc.
We see again a meaningful coincidence between Greene and Weil. Greene refers to language or symbol systems that are usually the objects of what we read.
I owe the word choice “available” to Eric O. Springsted. He pointed out that Weil uses the French word “disponible” to explain the notion of attention and it is sometimes translated as “detachment” in English texts, but it literally means “available.”
Buchmann (1989) asserts, although teacher thinking is often understood as planning and decision making, that contemplation, a different sort of thinking, is crucial for teachers. She characterizes contemplation as careful attention setting aside ones wills and emotions and suspending thoughts and calculations of utility. She dispels the common belief that contemplation is not practical. Teachers need to pay careful attention to their subject matter and their students.
N, 43.
As cited in Standish (2003, 221).
Nussbaum expresses her concern about the prevalent economic view of education and argues for the need for humanities in a democratic society.
References
Allen, Diogenes. 1993. The concept of reading and the ‘book of nature’. In Simone Weil’s philosophy of culture: Readings toward a divine humanity, ed. Richard H. Bell, 93–115. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Andic, Martin. 1993. Discernment and the imagination. In Simone Weil’s philosophy of culture: Readings toward a divine humanity, ed. Richard H. Bell, 116–149. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Biesta, Gert J.J. 2010. Good education in an age of measurement: Ethics, politics, democracy. Boulder: Paradigm Publishers.
Buchmann, Margaret. 1989. The careful vision: How practical is contemplation in teaching? American Journal of Education 98 (1): 35–61.
Cohen, Patricia. 2009. In tough times, the humanities must justify their worth. The New York Times, February 25: B17–B18. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/25/books/25human.html.
du Plessix Gray, Francine. 2001. Simone Weil. New York: Viking Penguin.
Edgerton, Susan Huddleston. 2002. Learning to listen and listening to learn: The significance of listening to histories of trauma. In Philosophy of education yearbook, ed. Scott Fletcher, 413–415.
Gabriel, Trip. 2010. Under pressure, teachers tamper with tests. The New York Times, June 10: A1. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/11/education/11cheat.html.
Greene, M. 1984. The art of being present: Educating for aesthetic encounters. Journal of Education 166 (2): 123–135.
Hester, Joseph P. 2001. Character education through story K6 lessons to build character through multicultural literature. Chapel Hill, NC: Character Development Publishing.
Hilder, Monika B. 2005. Teaching literature as an ethics of care. Teaching Education 16 (1): 41–50.
Kilpatrick, W., G. Wolfe, and S. Wolfe. 1994. Books that build character: A guide to teaching your child moral values through stories. New York: Touchstone Books.
Kronman, Anthony. 2007. Education’s end: Why our colleges and universities have given up on the meaning of life. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Lewin, David. 2014. Behold: Silence and attention in education. Journal of Philosophy of Education 48 (3): 355–369.
Liston, Daniel P. 2008. Critical pedagogy and attentive love. Studies in Philosophy and Education 27: 387–392.
Minerip, Michael. 2011. Evaluating New York teachers, perhaps the numbers do lie. The New York Times, March 7: A15. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/07/education/07winerip.html.
Noddings, Nel. 2002. Educating moral people: A caring alternative to character education. New York: Teachers College Press.
Nussbaum, Martha C. 1997. Cultivating humanity: A classical defense of reform in liberal education. Cambridge and London: Harvard University Press.
Nussbaum, Martha C. 2010. Not for profit: Why democracy needs the humanities. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Pétrement, Simone. 1976. Simone Weil: A life. Translated by Raymond Rosenthal. New York: Pantheon.
Roberts, Peter. 2011. Attention, asceticism, and grace: Simone Weil and higher education. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education 10 (3): 315–328.
Rorty, Amélie Oksenberg. 1997. The ethics of reading: A traveler’s guide. Educational Theory 47 (1): 85–89.
Springsted, Eric O. 2015. Introduction: Simone Weil on philosophy. In Simone Weil late philosophical writings. Ed. Eric O. Springsted (trans: Springsted, Eric O. and Schmidt, Lawrence E.). Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.
Stainburn, Samantha. 2013. Following the money. The New York Times, August 2: ED6. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/04/education/edlife/calculating-the-net-worth-of-a-college-degree.html.
Standish, Paul. 2003. The nature and purposes of education. In A companion to the philosophy of education, ed. Randall Curren, 221–231. Malden: Blackwell Publishing.
Weil, Simone. 1951. Waiting for god. Translated by Emma Craufurd. New York: Putnam.
Weil, Simone. 1952. Gravity and grace. Translated by Arthur Wills. New York: Putnam. Reprinted with Introduction by Gustave Thibon. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1997.
Weil, Simone. 1965. The Iliad, or the poem of force. Translated by Mary McCarthy. The Chicago Review 18 (2): 5–30.
Weil, Simone. 1987. Are we struggling for justice? Translated by Marina Barabas. Philosophical Investigations 10 (1): 1–10.
Weil, Simone. 1990. Essay on the notion of reading. Translated by Rebecca Fine Rose and Timothy Tessin. Philosophical Investigations 13 (4): 297–303.
Weil, Simone. 2004. The notebooks of Simone Weil. Translated by Arthur Wills. London: Routledge.
Winch, Peter. 1989. Simone Weil: The just balance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This research is supported by The Uehiro Foundation on Ethics and Education.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Yoda, K. An Approach to Simone Weil’s Philosophy of Education Through the Notion of Reading. Stud Philos Educ 36, 663–682 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11217-017-9576-1
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11217-017-9576-1