CRITICAL APPRECIATION of F VS A in Education PDF

CRITICAL APPRECIATION
FREEDOM VERSUS AUTHORITY IN EDUCATION

Freedom versus Authority in Education" is an essay written by Bertrand Russell,
a British philosopher and Nobel laureate. Published in 1928, the essay reflects on
the role of freedom and authority in education and their relationship to the
development of individuality and creativity in students.
The essay “Freedom or Authority in Education” by Bertrand Russell highlights an
interesting dichotomy that has been present in the philosophy of education for
the last many years. Russell rightly recognizes this issue as the key issue in the
philosophy of how to educate children. He says that freedom, in education as
in other things, must be a matter of degree. Some freedoms cannot be tolerated.
One who advocates freedom in education cannot mean that children should do
exactly as they please all day long. An element of discipline and authority must
exist; the question is as to the amount of it, and the way in which it is to be
exercised.
Russell's approach to the dilemma of freedom versus authority is perfectly
rational and sensible and nobody can disagree with it. Authority in education,
says Russell, must rest upon one or more of the following powers: the State, the
Church, the schoolmaster, and the parent. None of these can be trusted to care
adequately for the child's welfare because each has a different goal in mind. The
State would like to educate the child in such a way that the child, on growing up,
supports the existing government and thus contributes to national prestige. The
Church would like the child to be educated in such a way that, on growing up, he
serves to increase the power of priests. The schoolmaster wants the child to
bring glory to his own school. And the parent wants the child to bring glory to his
own family. In view of the fact that none of these authorities can be fully trusted.
Considering that no authority can be trusted, Russell opines that we must aim at
having the minimum possible authority and we must explore how children’s
natural desires and impulses can be utilized in education. The first two or
three years are those during which human beings learn most. These years must
not, therefore, be neglected. During these years, both opportunity and
encouragement should be provided to child to learn whatever is worth learning.
Russell has some very useful suggestions to make with regard to various aspects
of education. For instance, he points out the undesirability of combining in one
class the more intelligent and the less intelligent children, because the more
intelligent ones will find it tedious to have things explained which they clearly
understand, while the less intelligent ones will lag behind because they will not
keep up with the teacher's pace. Also, the subjects of teaching should be
adapted to the aptitudes and intelligence of the children. It is necessary, too,
to group subjects according to their natural affinities. A boy should not be free to
choose subjects which are totally unconnected with one another. Every pupil up
to the age of twelve should get some instruction in classics, mathematics, and
science. After two years more, the pupil's own tastes and inclinations will
become clear. Consequently, from the age of fourteen every boy and girl should be
allowed to specialize in subjects of their choice if they so desire.
Russell highlights in the essay by stating that the purpose of education is to

create individuals who can think for themselves, rather than to train them to be
obedient to authority. He argues that a balance between freedom and
authority is necessary to achieve this goal. On one hand, students must be given
the freedom to explore their own interests and develop their own ideas. On
the other hand, they must also be exposed to the authority of established
knowledge and the methods of reasoning that have been developed over time.
Russell notes that historically, education has tended to focus on the authority
side of the equation, with teachers and educational institutions enforcing a strict
curriculum and stifling the creativity and individuality of students. He argues
that this approach is fundamentally flawed, as it fails to foster critical thinking
and independent thought in students.
Russell emphasizes the need for freedom of opinion for both teachers and
pupils. He rightly calls it the most important kind of freedom. He is not in favour
of imposing any limits on freedom of opinion. The chief argument in support of
this freedom is that our beliefs are in the main doubtful as they are not based on
authentic evidence. Leaving aside scientific facts, there is no sufficient evidence
to justify the beliefs which we hold. The government generally teaches certain
doctrines to pupils because those doctrines suit the government's purpose and
not because there is any convincing evidence in favour of those doctrines. Thus,
teaching which is controlled by the government is never truthful. To seek
Truthfulness means forming our opinions based on be available evidence and
holding those opinions only based on such evidence. In other words, an attitude
of scepticism should be maintained in respect of opinions and beliefs. Here we
find Russell on his favourite ground.
Russell is opposed to the teaching of any orthodoxy in schools. A teacher may
find it contrary to his conscience to teach political doctrines which the
authorities expect him to teach. In the field of religion and orality, the teaching
of orthodoxy gives rise to hypocrisy. The teaching of orthodoxy is harmful as this
kind of teaching gives an impetus to wars and that regimentation or an effort
to bring about a uniformity of persecutions.
According to Russell, the key to achieving a balance between freedom and
authority in education is to approach teaching as a cooperative venture
between teachers and students. Teachers should act as guides, helping students
to navigate the complex terrain of knowledge and providing them with the tools
they need to think for themselves. Students, in turn, should be encouraged to
explore their own interests and ask questions, challenging both the authority
of the teacher and the established knowledge that they are being taught.
Russell's essay is notable for its emphasis on the importance of individuality and
creativity in education, as well as its call for a more cooperative approach to
teaching. It is a critique of the traditional authoritarian model of education,
which he sees as hindering rather than fostering the development of
independent thought.
Russell, quite rightly, sees the danger in both: freedom and authority. He says
that he does not agree with those who hold this belief that education should
have no positive purpose but should merely offer an environment suitable for
spontaneous development. This school seems to him too individualistic and
unduly indifferent to the importance of knowledge. Too much
authoritarianism in education, Russell notes, leads either to over-submissive
and timid children or to rebels who become so disillusioned with authority that
they “suppose that opposition to authority is essentially meritorious and that
unconventional opinions are bound to be correct”.
Overall, "Freedom versus Authority in Education" is a thought-provoking
essay that challenges us to think about the role of education in fostering
creativity and independent thought in students. It remains relevant today, as
educators continue to grapple with how to balance the need for authority with
the desire to foster creativity and individuality in their students.
Russell has adorned this essay by his usual lucid style and use of illustrations
and anecdotes. As in his other essays, Russell here shows himself to be a very
liberal-minded humanist. The welfare of mankind is dear to his heart. He
would like human beings to be brought up and nurtured in an atmosphere of
freedom with absolutely no restrictions on the holding of opinions though he
does recognize the need of a certain degree of authority as also the need of
discipline in all fields of life, and especially in the field of education.

CRITICAL APPRECIATION of F VS A in Education PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CRITICAL APPRECIATION of F VS A in Education PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

CRITICAL APPRECIATION of F VS A in Education PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CRITICAL APPRECIATION

FREEDOM VERSUS AUTHORITY IN EDUCATION

Russell highlights in the essay by stating that the purpose of education is to

You might also like

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.