Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
DOI 10.1007/s11217-005-3842-3
Springer 2005
Garrison, Jim and Alven Neiman (2003). Pragmatism and Education. In: Blake,
N., Smeyers, P., Smith, R., and Standish, P. (eds.). The Blackwell Guide to the
Philosophy of Education (pp. 2137). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
168
COLAPIETRO ET AL.
Peirce suggests, the proper sphere of any science in a given stage of development of science is the study of such questions as one social group of men [and
women] can properly devote their lives to answering [CF. 1.236]; and it seems to me
that in the present state of our knowledge of signs, the whole doctrine of the classication of signs and of what is essential to a given kind of sign, must be studied by
one group of investigators. Therefore, I extend logic to embrace all the necessary
principles of semeiotic ... (CP 4.9). Logic, envisioned as a theory of inquiry,
embraces semeiotic, dened as a truly general theory of signs.
169
In what is most likely his most famous essay, How to Make Our Ideas Clear,
Peirce formulated his maxim in this fashion: Consider what eects, that might
conceivably have practical bearings, we conceive the object of our conception to
have. Then, our conception of these [experiential eects] is the whole of our conception of the object (CP 5.402).
170
COLAPIETRO ET AL.
171
172
COLAPIETRO ET AL.
4
See Peirces review of Clark University (Peirce, 1900/1958, pp. 331334), discussed in Strands Peirce on Education: Nurturing the First Rule of Reason.
173
174
COLAPIETRO ET AL.
ways of reading educative processes, meaning the conicting processes of learning and discovery.
The very rst article in this collection Jim Garrisons Curriculum, Critical Common-Sensism, Scholastiscism, and the Growth of
Democratic Character reveals the ways in which Peirces pragmaticism hosts a valuable notion of democratic Bildung. Reading
Peirces 1905 essay, Issues of Pragmaticism, Garrison identies
critical common-sensism and Scotistic realism as the two primary
products of Peirces pragmaticism. After an in-depth analysis and
discussion, Garrison concludes by arguing that rationality itself is but
the form and structure of poetic creation.
The next two articles illustrate the ways in which Peirces semeiotic
may serve as a useful framework for the reading of the educative
processes of learning and discovery. Mats Bergman, in C. S. Peirces
Dialogical Conception of Sign Processes, provides an excellent
study of Peirces semeiotic, while examining the contention that the
central concepts of Peirces semeiotic are inherently communicational. Bergman argues that a Peircean approach avoids the pitfalls of
objectivism and constructivism, as it neither pictures the sign-user as
a passive recipient nor as an omnipotent creator of meaning. Consequently, Bergman draws attention to Peirces semeiotic as a fruitful
perspective on learning processes.
Taking the Meno paradox, or the learning paradox, as a starting
point, Saami Paavola and Kai Hakkarainen argue in Three
Abductive Solutions to the Meno Paradox that Peirces notion of
abduction provides a way of dissecting the processes of learning and
discovery. To Peirce, abduction, as a way of creative inferences,
guessing, or free play with ideas, is the only form of inference that
generates new knowledge. Paavola and Hakkarainen present three
complementary perspectives on abduction: First, abduction as a sort
of guessing instinct or expert-like intuition, where unconscious clues
are important. Second, abduction as a form of inference, where a
strategic point of view is essential. Third, abduction as a part of
distributed cognition and mediated activity, where the interaction
with the material, social, and cultural environment is emphasized.
Drawing on, among others, Karl-Otto Apels reading of Peirces
normative logic of science, Torill Strand contends that Peirces
method of inquiry may be fruitful in sorting dogmatism from pragmatism. In Peirce on Educational Beliefs, she elaborates on educational beliefs as mediated, socially situated and future-oriented,
and points to Peirces method of inquiry as a scientic ethos. To
175
176
COLAPIETRO ET AL.
of reason. In the next essay, Thayer-Bacon, as a feminist, pragmatist, and cultural studies scholar, addresses Peirces denition of a
university. Thayer-Bacon embraces the ways in which Peirces
notions of fallibilism and critical common-sensism oer marginalized
and colonialized people a position of privilege, while regretting the
more senior Peirces redrawing of a split between theory and practice. In the third essay, Torjus Midtgarden reads Peirces 1900
review of Clark University in light of Peirces changing conceptions
of pragmatism, while arguing that Peirces late pragmatism denes a
locus for Bildung that moves the social, or political, aspects more to
the front.
In the very last article Cultivating the Arts of Inquiry, Interpretation, and Criticism: A Peircean Approach to Educational
Practices Vincent Colapietro holds that Peirces relevance to issues
of education is to be found in his modest, yet powerful characterizations of subjectivity and agency. While Jim Garrison in his article
concludes that rationality, to Peirce, is but the form and structure of
poetic creation, Vincent Colapietro aims at going one step farther by
exploring a Peircean approach to educational practices. Since our
capacities to learn from experience are at the heart of Peirces philosophy, a Peircean approach would be to assist the cultivation of
these capacities, when doing justice to Peirces profound appreciation
for the aesthetic and the imaginative. A Peircean education will thus
be aiming at the continuous enhancement of our innate ability to
transform our understanding, including our self-understanding.
Consequently, education is not a preparation for life, rather life an
opportunity to become educated. Or, as Peirce insists; surely the
purpose of education is not dierent from the purpose of life (Peirce,
1900/1958, p. 333).
REFERENCES
Apel, K.O. (1995). Charles S. Peirce. From Pragmatism to Pragmaticism. Amherst:
University of Massachusetts Press.
Colapietro, V. (1998). Transforming philosophy into a science. American Catholic
Philosophical Quarterly, LXXII(2), 245278.
Garrison, J. & Neiman, A. (2003). Pragmatism and education. In N. Blake,
P. Smeyers, R. Smith and P. Standish (Eds), The Blackwell guide to the philosophy
of Education (pp. 2137). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
Peirce, C.S. (1880/1958). Fourth of July address, Paris. In Philip P. Wiener (Ed),
Charles S. Peirce: Selected writings. Values in a universe of change (pp. 334335).
New York: Dover.
177
Peirce, C.S. (1882/1958). Logic and liberal education. In Philip P. Wiener (Ed),
Charles S. Peirce: Selected writings values in a universe of change (pp. 336337).
New York: Dover Publications.
Peirce, C.S. (1900/1958). Clark University, 18891899: Decennial celebration. In
Philip P. Wiener (Ed), Charles S. Peirce: Selected writings values in a universe of
change (pp. 331334). New York: Dover Publications.
Peirce, C.S. (19311958). Collected papers, 8 vols. In C. Hartsthorne & P. Weiss (Ed)
(Vols. 16) and A. Burks (Vols. 78). Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.
The volume and paragraph number, seprated by a point, follows CP references.
Peirce, C.S. (19921998). The essential Peirce: selected philosophical writings. 2 vols.
In N. Houser & C. Kloesel (Eds) (vol. 1), & The Peirce edition project (vol. 2).
Bloomington: Indiana University Press. The volume and page number follows EP
references .
Rosenthal, S. (1994). Charles Peirces pragmatic pluralism. Albany, NY: SUNY
Press.
Department of Philosophy
Pennsylvania State University
240 Sparks Building,
University Park, PA 16802
USA
E-mail: vxc5@psu.edu