To determine the nature of teaching, one must determine the nature of the student; to determine the nature of the student, one must determine the nature of reality. The understanding of these things determines a person’s philosophy of education- that is, one must think about the truth behind education before thinking on how to practice education. So, we shall start with truths, work down to their implications, and then incarnate these truths in practices.
Philosophy of Education
In philosophy, there are three primary branches: Metaphysics, Epistemology, and Axiology (I will be using George R. Knight for a brief summary of these branches). Metaphysics, studies the nature of reality. Of Metaphysics, Knight states that, “It essentially represents the speculative and synthesizing activities of philosophy, and it provides the theoretical framework that allows scientists and other scholars to create worldviews and develop hypotheses that can be tested according to their basic assumptions.”[1] Questions in metaphysics are related to cosmology (the origin, nature, and development of the universe), theology (conceptions of and about God), anthropology (the nature of man), and ontology (the nature of being).
Epistemology, studies the nature of knowledge. More specifically it deals with the nature, sources, and validity of knowledge. The nature of knowledge investigates whether truth is relative or absolute, subjective or objective, and whether it exists independent of human experience. Sources of knowledge include the five senses, revelation, authority, reason, and intuition. Validity of knowledge has to do with whether a truth claim is valid. There are typically three theories which one may adhere to as a way to test truth: the correspondence theory (truth is faithful to objective reality), coherence theory (internal consistency based on previously accepted truths), and pragmatic theory (truth is that which works).[2]
Axiology, studies the nature of values. The two categories of values are ethics (dealing with how one ought to live) and aesthetics (dealing with the principles of beauty). Axiological systems are built upon one’s understanding of metaphysics and epistemology. In summary, metaphysics asks “What is ultimate reality?”, epistemology asks “What is reality and how do we know?”, and having come to a particular view of reality and how it is known, axiology asks, “What are the implications and how do they shape my daily living/value system?”[3]
With the desire to cultivate a biblically grounded, single, complex, harmonious mental model of the universe[4], the Christian educator ought to affirm the following philosophical commitments: 1) There is one absolute reality which consists of the metaphysical (immaterial) and the material. The metaphysical is ordered according to the unchanging nature of God. Because the metaphysical preceded and created the material world, the material is ordered teleologically. Truth is that which conforms to reality, it reveals reality to the human mind. Truth exists eternally and absolutely, finding its purest form in God. 2) Truth about the material world can be known because the Creator so designed man with the capabilities of discovering it. The metaphysical and the material are knowable as the Creator reveals them through general and special revelation. Due to the current fallen nature of man, absolute knowledge is not possible, yet it is generally reliable. 3) The teleology of the material can be confidently known and can reveal the metaphysical. Values are absolute and flow from the nature of God. What is ethical and beautiful is that which participates in its teleological purpose and conforms to reality. Apparent or experiential subjectivity is due to man being finite and God/Beauty being infinite. These three philosophical commitments provide the conditions in which a biblical application to education may flourish.
Applying Philosophy to Education
The educator must examine his philosophical commitments in order to be sure that his practices are in harmony with his fundamental convictions. One’s convictions are tied to how he understands the nature of man and therefore how he understands the role of the teacher and the learner, which will then permit a certain range of appropriate curricula and methods of instruction. In short, one’s philosophy has direct implications for everyday life in the classroom.
Concerning the nature of man, Scripture describes man as uniquely created beings made in the image of God, male and female, with a commission to exercise dominion over the created order (Gen. 1:1, 26-31). Due to sin, the image of God has been distorted and his work made more difficult, yet the image and the commission remain (Gen. 5:1; 9:6). Because God the Son revealed to man the exact imprint of God’s image through His incarnation and has brought redemption, His people are able to conform to His image by the power of the Spirit through sanctification (2 Cor. 3:18). For the educator to teach his students humanely then, he must understand the teleology of man as a created image-bearer of God.
Anthony Hoekema refers to the image-bearer as a “psychosomatic unity,” having a physical side and a mental or spiritual side, while remaining a unitary being.[5] Hoekema does not want to view the mind and spirit separately, he demonstrates that words such as mind, heart, soul, and spirit can refer to ones’ whole being.[6] This is to be affirmed whole heartedly, intellect and spirit cannot be separated, they both make up the immaterial part of man. However, Hoekema does note that there are different emphases with different words, the Bible does speak of man at different times with different emphases regarding the mind, body, or spirit (Matt. 22:37), and it should also be noted that except for a period between death and resurrection, the body must be considered intricately united to the soul. In today’s culture which often views man as mind and body to the exclusion of a spirit, it may be helpful to describe children as intrinsically intellectual, physical, and spiritual beings. This affirms scripture and enables educators to be very transparent with their intentions in child formation.
In light of the three philosophic commitments and with an understanding of the nature of man in general, the roles of the learner and the teacher may now be considered. The nature of the learner and teacher: man is an intellectual, physical, and spiritual being created in the image of God, impacted by the fall, formed through daily practices, and called to fight against the effects of the fall in order to exercise dominion over creation to the glory of God. The learner’s role is to pursue academic and moral excellence while coming to know more about the Creator and His creation. The learner is to respect the authority of his parents, his teacher, and the tradition under which he sits. The role of the teacher is to participate in God’s mission to reconcile all things to Himself. The teacher is an authority and a guide (more authority with younger/immature students and more of a guide with older/mature students); a mental, physical, and spiritual disciplinarian who teaches with humble authority and guides the student to discover the truth; and one who must never cease being a student himself.
Notes:
[1] George R. Knight, Philosophy and Education: An Introduction in Christian Perspective (Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press, 2006), 16-17.
[2] Ibid.
[3] Ibid.
[4] C.S. Lewis, The Discarded Image (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2018), 11.
[5] Anthony A. Hoekema, Created in God’s Image (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1994), 216-17.
[6] Ibid., 210-216.
The Classical Christian Tradition 