Studies in Philosophy and Education

, Volume 21, Issue 1, pp 1–15 | Cite as

John Dewey and the Role of Scientific Method in Aesthetic Experience

  • James Scott Johnston
Article

Abstract

In this paper I examine a controversy ongoingwithin current Deweyan philosophy of educationscholarship regarding the proper role and scopeof science in Dewey's concept of inquiry. Theside I take is nuanced. It is one that issensitive to the importance that Dewey attachesto science as the best method of solvingproblems, while also sensitive to thosestatements in Dewey that counter a wholesalereductivism of inquiry to scientific method. Iutilize Dewey's statements regarding the placeaccorded to inquiry in aesthetic experiences ascharacteristic of his method, as bestconceived.

aesthetics art Dewey experience inquiry method science 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

REFERENCES

  1. Boisvert, R. (1998). John Dewey: Rethinking our time. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  2. Dewey, J. (1984). Democracy and education. In J. Boydston (Ed), The middle works 1899–1924 (Vol. 9, 1916). Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Dewey, J. (1988). Experience and nature. In J. Boydston (Ed), The later works 1925–1953 (Vol. 1, 1925). Carbondale, IL:: Southern Illinois University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Dewey, J. (1988). Qualitative thought. In J. Boydston (Ed), The later works 1925–1953 (Vol. 5, 1929–1930) (pp. 243-263). Carbondale, IL:: Southern Illinois University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Dewey, J. (1990). Art as experience. In J. Boydston (Ed), The later works 1925–1953 (Vol. 10, 1934). Carbondale, IL:: Southern Illinois University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Dewey, J. (1991). Logic: The theory of inquiry. In J. Boydston (Ed), The later works 1925–1953 (Vol. 12, 1938). Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Dewey, J. (1991). The philosophy of the arts. In J. Boydston (Ed), The later works, 1924–1953 (Vol. 13, 1938–1939) (pp. 357-368). Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Dewey, J. (1992). Philosophy's future in our scientific age. In J. Boydston (Ed), The later works 1925–1953 (Vol. 16, 1945–1949). Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Diggins, J.P. (1998). Pragmatism and its limits. In M. Dickstein (Ed), The revival of pragmatism: New essays on social thought, law, and culture (pp. 207-231). Durham, North Carolina: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Garrison, J. (1997). Dewey and eros: Wisdom and desire in the art of teaching. New York: Teacher's College Press.Google Scholar
  11. Hickman, L. (1992). John Dewey's pragmatic technology. Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Jackson, P. (1998). John Dewey and the lessons of art. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  13. McCarthy, C. (1999). Dewey's ethics: Philosophy or science? Educational Theory, 49(3), 339-359.Google Scholar
  14. Mounce, H.O. (1997). The two pragmatisms: From Peirce to Rorty. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  15. Reichenbach, H. (1950). The verifiability theory of meaning. In H. Feigl and M. Brodbeck (Eds), In readings in the philosophy of science (pp. 93-102). New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
  16. Shlick, M. (1946). Positivism and realism. In A.J. Ayer (Ed), Logical positivism (pp. 83-107). New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  17. Waks, L. (1998). Experimentalism and the flow of experience. Educational Theory, 1(47), 1-19.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • James Scott Johnston
    • 1
  1. 1.Educational Policy StudiesUniversity of Illinois at Urbana – ChampaignChampaignUSA

Personalised recommendations