This paper investigates the manner in which philosophers of education can and should write and speak towards the future after 3.11, the most serious catastrophe in Japan since the Second World War. After the biggest earthquake, tsunami, and nuclear power plant disaster on March 11th 2011, it has become extremely difficult for us to write and speak without referring to one’s own experience of the catastrophe. This paper reflects on the question: how can each philosopher of education - while standing on his or her individual experience and involved in a critical situation - open his or her words to other people and write and speak towards the future? This paper focuses on the theory of human life and education developed by Otto Friedrich Bollnow (1903-1991). His theory was developed mainly in the critical situation after the Second World War. It includes some contradictions that bring readers into a spiral of questions about the essence of the world and human being. In this spiral of questions, the ambiguity of the world and human being is prevented from being simplified in naive representation, and is opened and sensed. Some works of Martin Heidegger (1889-1976) also include some contradictions, and help us to understand the role of contradictions. In conclusion, the responsibility to the ambiguity of the world and human being demands that philosophers of education today should be involved in the spiral of the essential questions caused by the critical situation and write and speak in the way that brings readers and audiences into the spiral.

View full abstract

The purpose of this paper is to clarify the hierarchical structure of the argument justifying the responsibility towards future generations. As a preliminary, the author considers the concept and structure of responsibility and the difficulties in the concept of future generations, investigating the two cases: one is the UNESCO “Declaration on the Responsibilities of the Present Generations Towards Future Generations” and the other is Hans Jonas’ book Das Prinzip Verantwortung. The main points are as follows. (1) While the UNESCO “Declaration” employs the fairness theory approach, Jonas employs the ontological approach. (2) The reason for this difference comes from the different conceptualizations of the ground of responsibility. The UNESCO “Declaration”’, on the one hand, claims that the present generations have the responsibility to safeguard the needs and interests of future generations and to transmit in a fair manner to them the survival conditions which are not irreversibly damaged by human activities. On the other hand, Jonas insists that the responsibility towards future generations is to ensure not only the survival conditions of future generations, but also the very existence of future generations, that is to say, the permanence of “the idea of human beings’. (3) It is necessary to distinguish and justify respectively these two hierarchical levels of the responsibility towards future generations. The hierarchical structure of the responsibility makes clear that the ground of responsibility depends on the norm of responsibility. The responsibility for the survival conditions is based on the existing modern understanding of the world. In contrast, the responsibility for the existence of future generations demands a fundamental change of the very understanding of it.

View full abstract

Cosmopolitanism is the idea that all human beings belong to one slobal community regardless of racial, ethnic, or national belonging. In this paper, I propose that cosmopolitan education has to be realized. My proposal is not that each nation should establish a curriculum in which knowledge about the globalizing world and cosmopolitan ethics or citizenship are taught, but that cosmopolitan schools should be established and managed by a cosmopolitan government or international organization such as the United Nations which is independent from national education systems. First, I define what cosmopolitan education is. Cosmopolitan education is the education which provides knowledge about a globalizing world order and its problems and facilitates cosmopolitan citizenship. Second, I state three reasons why cosmopolitan education in the above sense is necessary: 1) globalization requires new education; 2) people need to change their self-recognition in the globalizing world; 3) a cosmopolitan government or international organization can more adequately respond to children’s right to learn than a national or local government. Finally, I respond to the objections to cosmopolitan education from a communitarian standpoint as well as from a standpoint of liberal citizenship education. Concerning the first objection which stresses the importance of local patriotism, I maintain with Bergson that love for one’s family and love for one’s country are completely different from love of mankind. It is not through the process of expanding the self that we pass from the closed morality of patriotism to the open morality of cosmopolitanism. Concerning the second objection which argues that cosmopolitan education lacks an institutional basis, I suggest that cosmopolitan democratic sovereignty and its institutions are necessary for cosmopolitan education.

View full abstract

« Kyôiku (éducation) » est un terme ancien qui remonte au penseur chinois Mencius et signifiait au Japon, jusqu’au commencement de l'époque moderne, l’enseignement aux enfants des connaissances pratiques nécessaires pour vivre dans le monde, comme la lecture, l'écriture, l’'arithmétique et la discipline. Avec la venue de la civilisation européenne au milieu du 19ème siècle, on a commencé à employer ce même terme kyoiku pour désigner le concept européen de l'éducation (education, Erziehung). En Europe comme au Japon l'éducation visait, pendant longtemps, principalement un but identique, même s1 Platon avait déjà proposé dans la Grèce ancienne une éducation idéale qui consistait à la recherche de la vérité éternelle. Lorsque le Japon ouvrit sa porte au monde entier, 1l y avait au moins deux tendances éducatives en Europe: l’une, un courant principal basé sur la pratique de la vie et l’autre, celle d’éduquer l'enfant pour façonner un homme idéal dont le métier était seulement d’être Homme. J.-J. Rousseau disait : « En sortant de mes mains 1l ne sera (...) ni magistrat, ni soldat, n1 prêtre : 1l sera premièrement homme » (l'Émile). Les leaders de l’époque de Meiji ont voulu introduire, entre autres, ce côté idéal de l'éducation en utilisant le même terme kyôtku. Depuis lors, le même mot kyoiku a commencé à signifier tantôt l'éducation traditionnelle japonaise, tantôt l'éducation moderne et idéale qui venait de l’Europe. D'autre part au cours du processus de modernisation du pays, le gouvernement a complètement détruit l’ancien système de l'éducation pratique pour le remplacer par les systèmes éducatifs de l'Europe du 19ème siècle. Cependant la réalité ne suivait pas l’attente politique. Même aujourd'hui les deux tendances coexistent dans la société japonaise. Elles ne se complètent pas. Comment doit-on faire dans ces circonstances ? L'auteur propose un moyen pour résoudre les difficultés causées par cette dualité du terme ky6iku en analysant le système de la langue japonaise. Car l’une des clefs du problème tient aux ambigüités du langage et que lorsque les Japonais parlent de l'éducation, ils en parlent en Japonais.

View full abstract

The great narrative of history 1s said to have declined with the demise of socialism and the dawn of the postmodern epistemological turn. Still, narrative is indispensable in education. The prospect of a great narrative (that is, philosophy of history) has become an ever pressing issue since the tragic earthquake and nuclear meltdown in Fukushima 2011. First, this paper appraises the methodology of postmodern philosophy, which alleges to have proven that philosophy of history is a futile enterprise. Second, I examine Kojin Karatani’s philosophy of world history, which is based on the scheme of four modes of exchange fundamental to socio-economics. Third, both existentialism and Philosophy of Life (Lebensphilosophie), such as Nietzsche’s and Dewey’s, are structurally incompatible with philosophy of history. In making a comparison with them, this paper examines Yusuke Maki’s anti-nihilist Jikann no Hikaku Shakaigaku (Comparative Sociology of Time). Fourth, the author discusses the possibility of a promising philosophy of history that satisfies the two objectives: one is a social system compatible with a natural-ecosysytem, and the other is an existential quest into the inner life of individuals. In discussing this possibility, this paper utilizes the evolutionary biology and philosophy of Shigeo Miki, who argues for a resonance between the human body and the universe, that is, between microcosm and macrocosm (or ecosystem). This study suggests two practical challenges for education. One is to raise awareness of ourselves as dependent entities,especially in respect of food and energy. Such awareness is based on awe and reverence of Nature. The other challenge is to promote media literacy that is necessary to combat commercialism.

View full abstract

In educational philosophy during the 21“ century, one of the notable controversies is about the logic of bio-capitalism and neo-liberalism. Today’s biotechnology and neurosciences are in a sense contiguous to the field of education, and have a great interest in the enhancement of abilities and the investment in the capitalization of human potentiality. Educational theory and practice cannot escape the trend of bio-capitalism that is changing human potentiality into measurable, profitable and marketable resources. The educational theory dealing with human potentiality is facing a crisis in terms of both its concepts and images. In this study, I will try to reinterpret the concept of potentiality and its related concepts. These concepts have been the foundation of educational thought. They have their roots in Aristotle. According to G. Agamben, there are two kinds of potentiality in Aristotle: generic and affective. As is generally known, the logic of education is based on the ontology of generic potentiality. In contrast, Agamben focuses on the concept of affective potentiality and points out the hidden relationship between potentiality and impotentiality. The new concept “impotentiality” has a possibility to suspend the logic of bio-capitalism and its educational policy.

View full abstract