Advertisement

Heidegger’s Challenge to Education

  • Steven HodgeEmail author
Chapter
  • 706 Downloads
Part of the SpringerBriefs in Education book series (BRIEFSEDUCAT)

Abstract

This chapter summarises the implications of Heidegger’s philosophy for education. His critical insights problematize education in several ways. The very idea of education is thrown into question by Heidegger’s critiques of humanism and instrumental thinking. He characterises humanism as a coupling of standard conceptions of human being, with the intent of shaping humans in accordance with those conceptions. If, as Heidegger claims, the conceptions promoted by different forms of humanism are flawed, then associated educational programs become vehicles for deforming learners. The contemporary instrumental mindset of enframing analysed by Heidegger appears to have become the goal and rationale of much modern education. This mindset seeks to reduce everything to resources, including human beings, and threatens to block off alternative possibilities of Being. Existing learning theories, approaches to teaching and curriculum models are also challenged by Heidegger’s critiques. But his philosophy suggests ways to overcome these threats. An ontological curriculum is possible that promotes openness to Being. Authentic teaching can demonstrate radical openness, fostering authentic learning. Learning itself may be theorised as the process of disentanglement from deadening traditions and superficial forms of life. Education can become an ontological education to nurture a thinking attuned to the disclosure of Being.

Keywords

Humanism Technology Learning theory Teaching Pedagogy 

References

  1. Anderson, J. R. (1990). Cognitive psychology and its implications. New York: Henry Holt & Co.Google Scholar
  2. Arendt, H. (1978). Martin Heidegger at eighty. In M. Murray (Ed.), Heidegger & modern philosophy. New Haven, CN: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Bonnett, M. (2002). Education as a form of the poetic: A Heideggerian approach to learning and the teacher—pupil relationship. In M. A. Peters (Ed.), Heidegger, education, and modernity. Oxford, UK: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  4. Doll, W. E. (2002). Ghosts of the curriculum. In W. E. Doll & N. Gough (Eds.), Curriculum visions. New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  5. Gadamer, H.-G. (1985). Philosophical apprenticeships. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  6. Greene, M. (1974). Teacher as stranger: Educational philosophy for the modern age. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing.Google Scholar
  7. Heidegger, M. (1968). What is called thinking? New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
  8. Heidegger, M. (1998). Pathmarks. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Heidegger, M. (2002). Heidegger on the art of teaching (trans. & ed. Allen & Axiotis). In M. A. Peters (Ed.), Heidegger, education, and modernity. Oxford, UK: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  10. Heidegger, M. (2010). Being and time (trans. Stambaugh, rev. Schmidt). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  11. Huebner, D. (1967). Curriculum as concern for Man’s temporality. Theory into Practice, 6(4), 172–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Knowles, M. S. (1981). The adult learner: A neglected species (3rd ed.). Houston, TX: Gulf Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  13. Lambier, B. (2002). Comfortably numb in the digital era: Man’s being as standing-reserve or dwelling silently. In M. A. Peters (Ed.), Heidegger, education, and modernity. Oxford, UK: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  14. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions of adult learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  16. Peters, M. A. (Ed.). (2002). Heidegger, education, and modernity. Oxford, UK: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers Inc.Google Scholar
  17. Pinar, W. (1975). Currere: Toward reconceptualisation. In W. Pinar (Ed.), Curriculum theorizing. The reconceptualists. Berkeley, CA: McCutchan Publishing.Google Scholar
  18. Rogers, C. R. (1969). Freedom to learning: A view of what education might become. Columbus, OH: C.E. Merrill Pub. Co.Google Scholar
  19. Roth, W.-M. (1997). Being-in-the-world and the horizons of learning: Heidegger. Wittgenstein, and Cognition, Interchange, 28(2–3), 145–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Schubert, W. H. (1985). Curriculum: Perspective, paradigm, and possibility. London: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  21. Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Skinner, B. F. (2011), About Behaviourism. New York: Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group.Google Scholar
  23. Spanos, W. (1993). The End of Education: Toward Posthumanism. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  24. Thomson, I. D. (2005). Heidegger on Ontotheology. Technology and the Politics of Education. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Tyler, R. (1949). Basic Principles of Curriculum and Instruction. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Griffith UniversityBrisbaneAustralia

Personalised recommendations