Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Liberal education reconsidered: cultivating humanity in the knowledge society

  • Published:
Asia Pacific Education Review Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In the knowledge society, there is a conflict between “education for profit” and “education for humanity.” Education for profit is needed for students’ economic survival and success in the knowledge economy. Education for humanity is needed for their existential lives worthy of human beings. This paper deals with the question of whether it is possible to educate for humanity in the knowledge society. First, I suggested a complemented concept of “education for profit in the broad sense,” transforming the knowledge society for a better one. Second, I discussed Biesta’s criticism of “cultivation of humanity,” defending using this term as a general and honorific sense. Finally, I explained how an expanded concept of education for profit in the broad sense is compatible with the cultivation of humanity. Education for profit in the broad sense, considering the disadvantaged in the social and political sense, is to teach virtues such as caring, compassion, justice, etc. Teaching various values in addition to economic value also contributes to the cultivation of humanity by enriching human life. Teaching various learning skills for continuous learning, “social capital” as well as intellectual knowledge, global citizenship, communal relationship, is to cultivate one’s self-learning capacity. I concluded the paper by reconsidering directions of liberal education in the knowledge society.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Peters (1966) distinguishes the growth model of education from the molding model of education. The growth model in Peters’ distinction represents the child-centered education, which metaphorically emphasizes children’s growing like plants. Peters’ growth model is more like the Nussbaum’s developmental paradigm. Thus, we should not confuse the ambiguous meaning of ‘growth.’

  2. Bruce Kimball, for example, analyses two traditions of liberal education: the tradition of philosophers and that of orators (Kimball 1986, p. 2). “Liberal education” is a contestable and complicated term, which is sometimes distorted in various ways (Refer to Hong 2004).

References

  • Arendt, H. (1958). The human condition. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell, D. (1973). The coming of post-industrial society. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biesta, G. J. J. (2012). Cultivating humanity or educating the human? On horticulture, exposure and the world. In Cultivating humanity and transforming the knowledge society: For a vision of future education. The unpublished booklet for The 13 th International Conference on Education Research (pp. 19–30). Seoul: Education Research Institute of Seoul National University.

  • Drucker, P. (1969). The age of discontinuity: Guidelines to our changing society. New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drucker, P. (1993). Post-capitalist society. New York: HarperCollins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hargreaves, A. (2003). Teaching in the knowledge society: Education in the age of insecurity. New York: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirst, P. H. (1974). Knowledge and curriculum. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirst, P. H. (1993). Education, knowledge and practices. In R. Barrow & P. White (Eds.), Beyond liberal education: Essays in honour of P. H. Hirst (pp. 184–199). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hong, E. (2004). A historical examination of liberal education traditions: An exploration of a new direction of liberal education. The Journal of Curriculum Studies, 22(4), 1–25. (in Korean).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kimball, B. A. (1986). Orators and philosophers: A history of the idea of liberal education. New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muir, J. R. (1998). The history of educational ideas and the credibility of philosophy of education. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 30(1), 7–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nussbaum, M. C. (1997). Cultivating humanity: A classical defense of reform in liberal education. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nussbaum, M. C. (2010). Not for profit: Why democracy needs the humanities. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.

  • OECD. (2000). Knowledge management in the learning society. Paris: OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peters, R. S. (1966). Ethics and education. London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sandel, M. J. (2012a). What money can’t buy: The moral limits of markets. New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sandel, M. J. (2012b). What money can’t buy. The Asan Institute for Policy Studies: Asan Special Lecture.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shorris, E. (2000). Riches for the poor: The clemente course in the humanities. New York: W. W. Norton & Company Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Soros, G. (2002). George soros on globalization. New York: Perseus.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walzer, M. (1983). Spheres of justice. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Eunsook Hong.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hong, E. Liberal education reconsidered: cultivating humanity in the knowledge society. Asia Pacific Educ. Rev. 15, 5–12 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-013-9291-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-013-9291-8

Keywords

Navigation