There are three basic philosophy of education which are Idealism, Realism and Pragmatic. Idealism is also known as rationalism whichPlato promotes of the way to acquire knowledge. For idealism, knowledge is innate and should just be remembered by thinking per se and experience is not necessary for learning that’s why idealist teachers encourage the student to think. Idealism learners can survive only with the presence of the brain. Empirical or objective ideas are enough to help us in learning for idealism. Idealistic has the idea of complete cooperation or utopia just like Immanuel Kant’s idea of International Community in the field of International Relations wherein states can cooperation with absolute gain not relative gain. Idealists think of ideas which do not exist in the present and without empirical evidences but evidences just came from pure reason just like Saint Thomas Aquinas’ five cosmological proofs to the existence of God. Another example of an idealistic statement is “Don’t judge the book by its cover” because it doesn’t consider the physical/empirical aspect of the book; it just considers what the essence of the book is. UST is an example of School using this Philosophy.
On the other hand, realism is a complete opposite of idealism. Realism or empiricism emphasizes that knowledge is gain from experience specifically with our five senses so that means, a blind person since birth can never learn what the eyes are seeing like the colors. For the realists, they are just interested for what is already present or existing and they are not going beyond it like what idealists do. The most important things for realist teachers are the objective ideas and no one can argue against what the teacher is saying because for them they are already proven by science and has already empirical evidences so therefore what they are saying is the absolute truth not relative. For realists, objective ideas can help a lot to improve our field of science and engineering and there are no other ways to learn other than what they conventionally believe in. For realist, one has no right to tell that knows a thing as long as s/he has empirical data about it or had experience what did s/he is telling about. For realist, one plus one is always two and there is no answer other than two. The University of the Philippines is the obvious example of using this Philosophy.
Last is the pragmatism which for me to be the safest and most agreeable way of gaining of knowledge. It said that knowledge is relative and no one knows what the absolute truth is or who knows the absolute truth because for pragmatics, everything is unsure and truth is always bound to change. Pragmatics also believe that students have different degree or classification of intelligence whether it is spatial, natural, body kinesthetic, musical, verbal, interpersonal, intrapersonal, or mathematical/logical and no one is superior than each other. Pragmatics teachers should be just the facilitators to unleash and develop each students own intelligence. There is no conventional way of learning in this philosophy and every person has their own way of learning. The College of St. Benilde uses this type of Philosophy.
But on my part, I think that the pragmatism is the most reliable of the three because it is very safe and has the least hindrance for us to learn because it gives freedom to everyone of what we want and how we choose. But, I think that there is more reliable way of learning than pragmatism and that’s the combination of realism and idealism because I believe that we already know that we know something when we know how rationally explain what is it and also experience that thing we know like what Immanuel Kant wrote in his book, The Critique on Pure Reason. For example, it is not enough that we had experienced falling down from a high place but also we should also explain why did it happened which is because gravity exist on earth. Another thing, it is not enough to prove or explain logically the existence of God just like Saint Thomas Aquinas does, but he should had also able to saw from his own eyes that God really exist. It is also the same for the atheists like Ludwig Andreas Feuerbach that said that Theology is just Anthropology and therefore, God does not exist; they should also have empirical evidences that God does not exist in order to prove their point or stand. In short, for me, rational explanations and empirical evidences have equal significance in our own lives.
You, what is your philosophy of Education?
On the other hand, realism is a complete opposite of idealism. Realism or empiricism emphasizes that knowledge is gain from experience specifically with our five senses so that means, a blind person since birth can never learn what the eyes are seeing like the colors. For the realists, they are just interested for what is already present or existing and they are not going beyond it like what idealists do. The most important things for realist teachers are the objective ideas and no one can argue against what the teacher is saying because for them they are already proven by science and has already empirical evidences so therefore what they are saying is the absolute truth not relative. For realists, objective ideas can help a lot to improve our field of science and engineering and there are no other ways to learn other than what they conventionally believe in. For realist, one has no right to tell that knows a thing as long as s/he has empirical data about it or had experience what did s/he is telling about. For realist, one plus one is always two and there is no answer other than two. The University of the Philippines is the obvious example of using this Philosophy.
Last is the pragmatism which for me to be the safest and most agreeable way of gaining of knowledge. It said that knowledge is relative and no one knows what the absolute truth is or who knows the absolute truth because for pragmatics, everything is unsure and truth is always bound to change. Pragmatics also believe that students have different degree or classification of intelligence whether it is spatial, natural, body kinesthetic, musical, verbal, interpersonal, intrapersonal, or mathematical/logical and no one is superior than each other. Pragmatics teachers should be just the facilitators to unleash and develop each students own intelligence. There is no conventional way of learning in this philosophy and every person has their own way of learning. The College of St. Benilde uses this type of Philosophy.
But on my part, I think that the pragmatism is the most reliable of the three because it is very safe and has the least hindrance for us to learn because it gives freedom to everyone of what we want and how we choose. But, I think that there is more reliable way of learning than pragmatism and that’s the combination of realism and idealism because I believe that we already know that we know something when we know how rationally explain what is it and also experience that thing we know like what Immanuel Kant wrote in his book, The Critique on Pure Reason. For example, it is not enough that we had experienced falling down from a high place but also we should also explain why did it happened which is because gravity exist on earth. Another thing, it is not enough to prove or explain logically the existence of God just like Saint Thomas Aquinas does, but he should had also able to saw from his own eyes that God really exist. It is also the same for the atheists like Ludwig Andreas Feuerbach that said that Theology is just Anthropology and therefore, God does not exist; they should also have empirical evidences that God does not exist in order to prove their point or stand. In short, for me, rational explanations and empirical evidences have equal significance in our own lives.
You, what is your philosophy of Education?
No comments:
Post a Comment