|
|
|
| Current Issue |
|
|
| Resources |
|
|
|
Eurocentric Education: An Essay on 'The issue of Religion'
| Article
# : |
10452 |
|
|
Section : |
MODERN THOUGHT
|
| Issue
Date : |
2 / 1993 |
4,896 Words |
| Author
: |
Nicholas Piediscalzi
Nicholas Piediscalzi, professor emeritus, Wright State
University, is director of the State of California, Religious
Liberty Project and an adjunct professor at the University of
California, Santa Barbara. |
T.S. Eliot's views on the relationship of religion and education are derived in part from theories and practices institutionalized in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance. In his typology of education, the late Paul Tillich stated that medieval Europeans viewed education as a process of inducting individuals into "the 'corpus Christianum,'… which embraced religion, politics, and culture." This ideal of education pursued a goal that transcended social and national boundaries, namely, union with Christianity's transcendent God. At this level, medieval education was "initiation into the mystery of human existence."
The aim of Renaissance education was to bring to fulfillment "all human potentialities, individually and socially" in the technical, scientific, artistic, and religious realms. This concept of educational was based on the belief that each individual is a microcosm of the universe and God. "As a mirror of the universe and its divine ground, the individual is unique, incomparable, infinitely significant, able to develop in freedom his given endowment."
Eliot's dependence upon these concepts of education is seen clearly in his four aims for education and his claim that they are interdependent and in their interdependency demand religiophilosophical answers to the questions, "What are the nature, purpose, and goal of human existence?" and "What is the highest good in human life?"
The Least Unsatisfactory
Even though Eliot's concept of education demands a religious grounding, he knew that it is not possible for pluralistic democratic societies that are not religiously homogeneous to achieve agreement on an ideal purpose and goal for education. All that one can hope to accomplish in such communities is to reach compromises that are "least unsatisfactory" for their religious constituencies. Accepting this limitation, Eliot concluded that it is counterproductive to ask, "What is the place of religion in education?" The more significant question must be, "What is the place of education in religion?"
Before considering Eliot's response to this question, it is important to make two observations. First, in providing only a negative justification for excluding religious groups from direct involvement in education in pluralistic democratic societies--their inability to agree upon a common religious worldview--Eliot omitted an important positive reason: The protection of the religious freedom and rights of minority groups. Both Great Britain
...
Read Full Article
Look for this article in Ask.com
|
|
