After some time spent reflecting on Experience and Education, it occurred to me that the feminist quality I sensed was Dewey's disavowal of what he calls traditional education in favor of a more progressive approach. Traditional education as Dewey describes it is, in nearly every sense, patriarchal. Dewey lists three characteristics of the traditional school:
- "The subject-matter of education consists of bodies of information and of skills that have been worked out in the past; therefore, the chief business of the school is to transmit them to the new generation" (17).
- "...there have also been developed standards and rules of conduct; moral training consists in forming habits of action in conformity with these rules and standards" (17).
- "...the general pattern of school organization (by which I mean the relations of pupils to one another and to the teachers) constitutes the school a kind of institution sharply marked off from other social institutions" (18).
Likewise, the conception of education as an interaction in which knowledge is simply transmitted from learned person to unlearned person and the expectation that the unlearned person should and will passively accept that knowledge is largely based on dominance and what the dominant group deems important. The dominant group in this case was, obviously, white males. This sort of dominance over what types of knowledge are deemed valid is an exclusionary practice--not feminist.
Additionally, the development of "standards and rules of conduct" or "moral training" as mentioned above, is an 'othering' technique that is, again, exclusionary.
While we know that Dewey was a product of a society that relegated women to the home, the fact that Dewey denies the validity of traditional education seems to me to point to some feminist undertones in his work, at least in the form of a few shared principles.
My Internet search led me to a few resources that corroborated my feeling that Dewey's book possessed a feminist element. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy published an article on its website by Judy Whipps (2010) in which she writes, "Pluralism is a central value for pragmatists, who understand that knowledge is shaped by multiple experiential viewpoints. As such, women's experiences are are an essential part of a truly pragmatist philosophy." Dewey, a pragmatist philosopher himself, seemed aware of this being that he valued the influence of a number of women such as Jane Addams, Ella Flagg Young, and Lucy Sprague Mitchell. Most importantly, perhaps, Dewey's work "provided a philosophic framework for future feminist work" (Whipps, 2005, p. 215).
As I stated in class, I'm looked forward to seeing extensions of Dewey's educational philosophy. I have a feeling it supports many a feminist educational work--a few of which I think we'll be reading very soon!
References
Dewey, John. (1938). Experience and Education. New York, NY: Free Press.
Whipps, Judy. (2005). Feminist Interpretations of John Dewey (review). A Quarterly Journal in American Philosophy, 41(1), 215-220.
Whipps, Judy. (2010). Pragmatist Feminism. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved from http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/femapproach-pragmatism/
That is definitely an interesting take on Dewey. I think it makes sense that Dewey certainly opened the door for mush of the thinking that fueled a revolution in education, but also set the stage for some of the social movements that developed later within educational institutions. These lead to some big social changes and it is interesting to wonder if the Beat moment of the 50's, or the civil rights movement, or anti-war movement of the late 60's would have happened at all if our education system hadn't shifted at some point from traditional to experiential learning.
ReplyDeleteI wonder what Dewey would say about being called a feminist or, at least, a proto-feminist. Some on the internet seem to argue that he was influenced by his wife Alice Chipman Dewey. While this is probably undeniable and he likely secured established a loose framework for future philosophers and thinkers to operate in, can we truly call this capital F feminism is any way?
I think Dewey from what we read in "Experience and Education" (1938) and some of the things I have pursued on the twisty turny internet, all support the idea that Dewey is a pragmatist (Stanford Encyclopedia on Philosophy Online, Aug 22, 2004; ed. Siegfried, 2001; & Peabody, 2010) and that this pragmatism can have feminist implications. Calling Dewey a feminist may still be a stretch, especially if we approach it pragmatically. It was never Dewey's intent to liberate women or make progress for women in any way. He was focused on the education system in the world as he knew it, which was for boys who would grow to be men with families that needed to be cared for. Without the intent of feminism, or any body of work in support of feminism, I think Dewey would wonder how anyone could call him a feminist.
I think your analysis was brilliant. And it is interesting to think of Dewey as being of the pragmatic-femenist school. However, I then think of this man http://www.utm.edu/research/iep-wp/wp-content/media/dewey.jpg
at a march on Washington for reproductive rights...and it kinda makes me chuckle.
Anna, this was a cool interpretation. It made me think of the argument that veganism is an essential aspect of feminism. I'm pretty sure you're familiar, but to briefly summarize, the argument is that feminism is an active attempt to liberate individuals without a voice or agency from the systematic bonds that do so. This logic, when cross-applied, suggests that animals are denied this agency in the same way that marginalized peoples are. There are definitely questionable aspects of both arguments, but your analysis was most definitely successful considering the fact that it incited a conversation about Dewey and feminist thought that would not have occurred otherwise. DOPE.
ReplyDelete