Philosophy of Education

Paper Summary:

The paper discusses whether universities should endeavor to produce well-rounded graduates with experience in a broad range of disciplines and subjects, or if they should work to produce exacting specialists in specific fields. The author quotes Pascal who argued that the purpose of education as an institution should be to promote a universality of knowledge. This is in contrast to Hegel who believed that society as a whole would be bettered through a complex interdependency of specialization. The author posits that this dependency makes for a weaker society that is more susceptible to sudden change and collapse. Therefore, the paper argues for the liberal education as opposed to the specialized one.

From the Paper:

"In this, I have some esteemed company, though too an equally esteemed opponent. On the one side of this debate--my side--sites Pascal. He argued that the purpose education as an institution should be to promote a universality of knowledge, to produce citizens and gentlemen capable of capably understanding and acting within a variety of intellectual and practical disciplines. Of course, ther e are problems with this approach. The old adage, jack of all trades master of none, leaps to mind. In fact, the more one diversifies his or her education, the less that will be known about any one subject."

Sample of Sources Used:

• Great Books of the Western World. Ed. by Mortimer J. Adler, Clifton Fadiman, Philip W. Goetz. 2nd ed. Chicago: Encyclopaedia Britannica, 1990. (c) 1990

More papers on Philosophy of Education:

• Term Paper # 97933 : "Philosophy of Education"
• Term Paper # 92659 : "The Philosophy of Education"
• Argumentative Essay # 9372 : "My Personal Philosophy of Education"
• Term Paper # 133058 : "My Philosophy of Education"

APA Citation:

MLA Citation: