On the Ontological Notion of Education

Jeremy Horne

Wikipedia on "Education" raises the process-product debate, epistemic versus skills aspects, and the role of experience. "Education" is often a "that" (object or process) or an "is", explicitly something inside of us. Philosophy is implicit in the ontological (study of existence, reality, or being) and teleological (study of purpose/goals) debate over education. For there to be a purpose, there must be some thing (existant, ontological) to give rise to it. Neither deontology nor intention generate goals, because an entity must produce the goal, or telos. That is, there must be the existence of an origin, a being, to generate the intent. C. W. Churchman’s 1962 The Design of Inquiring Systems (arguing that systems - including education, are teleological - purpose-driven) is insufficient, as ontology is also necessary. I explicate the notion of education with a dictionary-etymology sequence, then proceed to "educe", to draw out from (implying potential). Further word analysis introduces "knowledge" that is being imparted, or taught, the chain of words – educate-educe-knowledge- recognize – indicating that education is leading one to knowing, or recognizing him/herself, the essence, the self, who is the origin, for whom there is a purpose. Dialectically, the individual exists because of others (society) and conversely. Accordingly, we have the internationally-inclusive body, UNESCO's "Four Pillars of Learning": know, do, live, and be, all critical for identity development, hence, identity location and characterization. The Authentic Systems identity probe does precisely this by seeing one’s life as purposeful (praxeology – goal-directed, Churchman’s view of systems) but having an ontology. Perforce, philosophy undergirds Authentic Systems, this co-equal to education giving force to one’s identity.

Full Text