Alfred North Whitehead’s Informal Philosophy of

Education

RONALD F. BLASIUS

Professor, Community College of Denver, Denver, Colorado, U.S.A.

ABSTRACT: The objective of this article is to show that Whitehead had a very important philoso-
phy of education both on the formal and informal level. The consistency found is well worth noting.
I researched many of Whitehead’s major works for his formal views and Lucian Price’s Dialogues of
Alfred North Whitehead. In my opinion Price’s book is the best available for the purpose of getting
Whitehead’s candid informal view of education. The paper is divided into sections according to the
particular subject matter. Since Whitehead describes education as the study of “life and all of its
manifestations”. It is appropriate to cover some of these areas: the purpose of education, the role of
science and speculation, education and civilization, and both the process of education and process
education are reviewed. Whitehead’s philosophy of education is sweeping in scope. In his philoso-
phy we find the importance of experience, imagination, speculation, generalization, factual knowl-
edge, specialization, relevance, intuition, novelty, curiosity, theory, practice, pleasure, harmony,
freedom, discipline, technical and liberal education and unification. He, in fact, unifies all these
seemingly different areas into a coherent philosophy of education.

PART I: INTRODUCTION

Alfred North Whitehead is best known for his mathematical logic and process phi-
losophy. His best works are the Principia Mathematica and Process and Reality.
Even veteran mathematicians, logicians, and philosophers approach these major
words with some intrepidation. In fact both Bertrand Russell and John Dewey
openly express difficulty in understanding much of Whitehead’s abstract thinking.
It must be admitted that much of Whitehead’s philosophy is complicated and is
in fact quite difficult, we must also admit that much of Whitehead’s philosophy is
understandable and this is especially so of Whitehead’s philosophy of education.
He is lucid and most expressive in most aspects of educational theory and prac-
tice. I believe that Whitehead’s ideas of education deserve careful study and
attention. Like all the disciplines in which he was involved he was detailed and
very comprehensive. He always strove for completeness, as much completeness
as possible, and he was demanding as far as his own performance was concerned.
Whitehead did a great deal of self-examination and introspection. He was crit-
ical of his own ideas as well as the ideas of others; he stated: “I find myself as
essentially a unity of emotions, enjoyments, hopes, fears, regrets, valuation of
alternatives, decisions – all of them subjective reactions to the environment as
active in my nature. The individual enjoyment is what I am in my role of natural
activity, as I shape the activities of the environment into a new creation which is
myself at this moment, and yet, as being myself it is a continuation of the
antecedent world.”1 This statement gives us an idea of the role of his subjective
side and his feeling of “process philosophy” and in influencing his thinking. We

Studies in Philosophy and Education 16: 303 – 315, 1997.

© 1997 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands.

issue: 01504 mssnr: SPED 47 pipsnr: 113816

304 R O N A L D F. B L A S I U S

have a great scientist, mathematician, and philosopher thinking about his subjec-
tive reactions “in time”. This will be a significance as we examine his philoso-
phy of education.
It is generally thought that Whitehead’s philosophy of education is found in
his fine book Aims of Education. This is simply not true. His views on education
can be found in many of his words as well as in the fine book by Lucian Price,
Dialogues of Alfred North Whitehead. It is in Price’s book where we find his
informal views of education.
We do find a chapter or so in various books on education by a variety of
writers that do include Whitehead as a representative philosopher to express his
ideas on education. But Whitehead had more to say about education than most
textbook authors seem to realize. Professor Whitehead has a great deal to say
about the subject that he called “Trained intelligence” or education.
Whitehead’s famous quote, “Education is the art of utilization of knowledge,”2
sounds simple enough, but it is just the point of an enormous sword. Whitehead
as a comprehensive philosohy of education but we will not find it in only one of
his works.
It will be noted that Whitehead made no attempts to hide the influence of
Plato in his writing and in his conversation. Plato wanted education to make “the
well-rounded man”, and so does Professor Whitehead. Like Plato, Whitehead
was interested in many areas of thought including history, psychology, religion,
politics, physics, and naturally mathematics and philosophy. Whitehead was not
an ivory tower thinker, he was a professor of mathematics of Cambridge
University and the University of London as well as an able administrator at the
University of London (Dean of the Faculty of Science, Chairman of the
Academic Counselor). Most of his publishing on the subject of mathematics was
done while in England, but his major publications in philo-sophy were done
while at Harvard University in the United States. He was invited to Harvard in
1924. His books include The Principles of Relativity; Science and the Modern
World; Adventures of Ideas; A Treatise on Universal Algebra; Aims of
Education; and the great Principia Mathematica (with Bertrand Russell).
When he received his appointment to Harvard in 1924 and was asked by his
wife what he thought of the appointment he replied, “I would rather do that than
anything else in the world”.3 He was sixty-three when he made this statement
and he started his new career at Harvard. For the first time he would not only be
a professor of mathematics but also a professor of philosophy.
It is apparent from reading the writings of Whitehead that he truly loved phi-
losophy and the teaching of it. The role of education in his philosophy was obvi-
ously very important.

PART II: THE PURPOSE OF EDUCATION

Whitehead had strong ideas about the value of every human being and he
attached great importance to the individual. Education must address itself to the

issue: 01504 mssnr: SPED 47 pipsnr: 113816

 ALFRED NORTH W HI TEH E A D ’ S I N F O R MA L P H I L O S O P H Y 305

individual as well as society. Education must provide people with intellectual

tools in order to deal with the present environment as well as the future. “The
educated man will be able to distinguish between what is relatively certain and
what is only probable.”4
Whitehead’s views on the purpose of education were not at all narrow, and
were not in the least “culture bound”. He believed in the tremendous importance
of education for general value, practical value, and vocational value. You will
often see ideas expressed that are similar to those of John Dewey. He felt that edu-
cation must be technical and academic. The technical need not be taught at the
expense of important intellectual visions. Both are important and both should be
taught and taught well. He thought that the “antithesis” between a technical and
liberal education was fallacious. “There can be no technical education which is
not liberal and no liberal education which is not technical; there is no education
which does not impart both technical and intellectual vision.”5 This was not the
general feeling of that day and we can readily see that although he saw great value
in both the technical and the liberal aspects of education he was not willing to dis-
pense with either and in fact states that we cannot have one without the other.
Whitehead firmly believes in the importance of general knowledge and also
special knowledge (specialization). He could see what we must specialize, but
not at the expense of general knowledge. Here again we see Whitehead
“wanting his cake and eating it too”, and being able to do so with relative ease.
So for him the technical and liberal education are not antithetical and neither are
the notions of general knowledge and specialization.
With Whitehead concerned with education as a method of obtaining progress
by actively and properly utilizing knowledge both general and specific, what did
he believe would be done with the classical education that was a method in
England during his time? The classical education did have value for Whitehead,
since it was a method of continuing tradition, culture and also of history. But he
did not agree that the classical education was adequate to cope with the chang-
ing times. Using words that seemed reminiscent of William James, “In the past,
classics reigned throughout the whole sphere of higher education, all this is
gone, and gone forever, Humpty Dumpthy was a good egg so long as he was on
top of the wall, but you can never set him up again.”6 He is not as emphatic as
John Dewey here, because he does have a life long interest in the classics and
was in fact a true scholar of them, especially in the Greek classics. It seems
almost paradoxical that we have a great classical scholar comparing the classics
to “Humpty Dumpty”, but I think the analogy here is clear and graphic. We will
note later that he will not wish to end the teaching of the classics, but to limit
their teaching.
As was mentioned, education is a most important area of Whitehead’s general
philosophy, perhaps a most neglected area among contemporary philosophers of
education. Almost all evidence that we have about the personality of Whitehead
is that he was a kind man with a very benign personality, almost imperturbable.
When doing research on Whitehead I found only one exception to his seemingly
imperturbability and this had to do with the lack of importance that some gov-

issue: 01504 mssnr: SPED 47 pipsnr: 113816

306 R O N A L D F. B L A S I U S

ernments seem to place on trained intelligence. For example, “When one consid-
ers its length and its breadth the importance of this questions of the education of
the nation’s young, the broken lives, the defeated hopes, the national failures,
which result from the frivolous inertia with which it is treated, it is difficult to
restrain within one’s self the savage rage. In the conditions of modern life the
rule is absolute, the race which does not value trained intelligence is doomed.
Not all your heroism, not all you social charm, not all your wit, not all you vic-
tories on land and sea, can move back the finger of fate.”7 There are two interest-
ing aspects to this statement. We can see anything but a calm, imperturbable
philosopher, especially when he says “savage rage”. If we had any doubt about
the feelings he had about governmental ambivalence regarding education they
should now fade. Being an Englishman in America it appears that in this state-
ment there exists an indictment of sorts agains the English upper class character.
For example, when he comments on the “Social charm, wit, heroism, and
national victories on land or at sea.” The English character, at least the English
upper class character, comes to my mind. We must remember that Whitehead
was quite candid about English education of that time and we must also remem-
ber that Aims of Education was published in 1929.

PART III: THE EDUCATION PROCESS

The question at hand is how do we go about achieving this difficult process we

called trained intelligence or education? What are the methods to be employed
that will have as an end result an “educated person”, and what sort of person is
the individual with trained intelligence? Whitehead wanted the educational
process of even education in general to provide a person with the opportunity to
develop the potentialities that may be latent within him. These individuals
should progress to a degree of capability that will enable them do deal with the
changing environment in an efficient manner, always with the highest ideals of
human achievement in mind.
We can see shades of both Dewey and Plato and this is not inconsistent in the
philosophy of Whitehead. Plato the idealist and John Dewey having concepts of
knowledge of evolution and change.
The education of Whitehead seeks to develop creative curiosity, imagination,
stability of character, good and balanced judgement, and even creative distur-
bance. Whitehead uses the term “style”, and this means superiority of perfor-
mance. The thought process and action process work together harmoniously, or
should work harmoniously. “It has in view of progress toward harmony, but the
harmony is forever active and alive.”8 The person who is truly educated has
precise knowledge of some area of human endeavor, but also possesses a flexi-
bility and versatility in other areas of thought. This educated man has comfort in
this world with interest in the future and interest in the vastness of his universe.
The question that will allow for comfort, precise and general knowledge? How
can we have “creative harmony” and “creative disturbance” at the same time?

issue: 01504 mssnr: SPED 47 pipsnr: 113816

 ALFRED NORTH W HI TEH E A D ’ S I N F O R MA L P H I L O S O P H Y 307

We must note that “creative disturbance” simply means the desire to know more,
the pleasant frustration of simply “wanting to know”.
A major theme in the philosophy of education by Whitehead was that educa-
tion and civilization must be coherent, trustworthy and powerful. Learning is a
continuous process and there is nothing discontinuous about the process of edu-
cation. Whitehead does not consider the “well informed man” as a “cultured
man”, in fact he feels quite the contrary. He seems to have disdain for someone
who merely is “well informed”. Here is an example, again from his Aims of
Education, “Culture is activity of thought, and receptives have nothing to do
with it. What we should aim at is producing men who possess both culture and
expert knowledge in some specific direction.”9
This statement reinforces earlier statements with regard to general knowledge
and specific knowledge. Two important new terms have been added, however:
aesthetic and humaneness. Appreciation of beauty and human feelings also have
an important role in the education process and, therefore, culture. The cultured
man, much like the cultured man of ancient Greece (Plato), was a “well rounded
man”, but also had an area of specialized knowledge and competence. Once
more we see the importance of a special skill coupled with generality and appre-
ciation for beauty and humanity. For culture to survive not only is specialization
necessary for superior performance, but also proper judgement and this involves
a broad background of general knowledge.

PART IV: “PROCESS” IN EDUCATION

Whitehead is known as a process philosopher, and he does use the terms time,
duration, and antecedent events, etc. But this section will not deal with his
process philosophy as such, since in reality his process philosophy followed his
writings in the philosophy of education. This paper is essentially involved with
his earlier writings although it does cover some of his later writings.
According to Whitehead there are three mainstages of one’s life. The stage of
romance, the stage of precision, and the stage of generalization. Just as the stage
is described, the stage of romance is the exciting time that the joy of discovery is
at its peak. The time span here is from birth to the end of primary school. The
stage of precision is the time when passion gains some awareness though
thought structure. More intelligent discipline is needed here and organization is
most important. The development of accuracy and efficiency both intellectually
and practically are developed or should be developed during the secondary
school years. Finally the state of generalization. This is a high point of
Whitehead’s philosophy of education, because here we find a rebirth of excite-
ment which resembles the enthusiasm of the stage of romance. It is hoped that
our maturity will calm the impetuousness of youth. At this stage we emerge as it
were, from merely precision to general principles. The question of general prin-
ciples is most important because it is here that we go beyond routine drilling that
we receive in school at the earlier levels of intellectual development.

issue: 01504 mssnr: SPED 47 pipsnr: 113816

308 R O N A L D F. B L A S I U S

Whitehead does not suggest that there are clear distinct stages, and that the
distinction between stages is absolute. He will never admit to absolutes in any
area of his philosophy, and this naturally includes education. Within any cycle of
education, we always have the romance, precision, and age of generalization
stages.
Thorough experience is not given the attention it deserves in Whitehead’s phi-
losophy of education in my opinion. Experience seems to really be the key in
educational theory. John Dewey of course expresses the importance of experi-
ence and in fact quotes from Whitehead’s Adventures of Ideas, when making a
point relating to every variety of occasion. “Nothing can be omitted. Experience
drunk, experience sober, experience sleeping, experience walking, experience
drowsy, and experience wide-awake, experience self conscious, experience self-
forgetful, experience intellectual, and experience physical, experience religious,
and experience skeptical, experience anxious and experience retrospective,
experience happy and experience unhappy and experience grieving and experi-
ence dominated by emotion and experience into self-restraint, experience domi-
nated by emotion and experience into self-restraint, experience in the light and
experience in the dark, experience normal and experience abnormal.”10
Whitehead was similar to Dewey in his attitude towards change and the
importance of the students’ ability to experience change and to adjust to constant
change. Both John Dewey and Alfred North Whitehead agree that changes are
occurring at a very rapid pace, and we cannot be sure that any one set of ideas,
and skills, can be provided for any student that will last him through his lifetime.
It is difficult to disagree with either of these two thinkers on his point. It also can
be realized that the individual must not be “locked in” by “old ideas”, and that
the student must be prepared for the future as well as the present. Students,
therefore, must receive skills and facts and also realize that their situation is a
transient one, lest they get caught unprepared in a rapidly changing world. This
student must be urged to adjust to the changes, develop the ability to adapt to
change, and actually adapt. The habits of precise observation (experience), the
power of recognizing the positive and the general are most important. The gen-
eralization, illustrated in particular experience which can help in our attempt to
predict future events.
It does appear at this point that Whitehead is driving one more nail in the
“classical education coffin”. This simply is not so. The study of Greek and Latin
classics has a special place in Whitehead’s secondary education for most stu-
dents. Once again we find Whitehead seeing both the limits and value of particu-
lar areas of study, in this case the classics. “Humpty Dumpty” may have fallen
off the wall, but is of value in spite of his tragic event. In the education process,
as mentioned earlier, the values of a literary, technical and scientific aspects of
education are important. It was noted that all were of value and not any at the
expense of the others. The classics of course are included in the literary educa-
tion of Whitehead. He had a great appreciation for art and the value of art in
education. “Attention must be called to Whitehead’s contention that art can
evoke vision, inspiration, insight, refreshment and discipline. For that reason,

issue: 01504 mssnr: SPED 47 pipsnr: 113816

 ALFRED NORTH W HI TEH E A D ’ S I N F O R MA L P H I L O S O P H Y 309

works of art should have a prominent place in the educational program of sec-
ondary schools.”11 Whitehead does not have a “art for art’s sake” philosophy, it
has a real purpose.
The importance of imagination is also stresses by Whitehead. It is a most
significant aspect of the learning process or a learning experience. I cannot think
of any other philosopher of education for whom this is more articulate regarding
the role of imagination in the education process.
With the possible exception of William James, I do not know of any other
philosopher who would classify imagination with “a contagious disease” and
make an important point. “Imagination is a contagious disease. It cannot be mea-
sured by the yard, or weighed by the pound, and then delivered to the students
by members themselves where they are learning with imagination.”12 The
college must impart information, but is must also do it while stimulating the
imagination of the students.
According to Whitehead, the university that does not stimulate the imagina-
tion of students is not performing the function that it is supposed to do for
society. So in fact, the university that does not stimulate the imagination does
not have a reason for existing. He stresses the role of the university and the
importance of imagination when he states, “This atmosphere of excitement,
arising from imaginative consideration, transforms knowledge. A fact is no
longer a bare fact: It is invested with all its possibilities. It is no longer a burden
of a memory: It is energizing as a poet of dreams, as the architect of our pur-
poses.”13 This atmosphere of excitement that Whitehead mentions is one of
many passages where we can see Whitehead’s poetic flair. It is not difficult to
see the affinity Whitehead had for Plato’s writing and philosophy. It is seldom
noted by writers that Whitehead did have a poetic flair, but when reading
Whitehead in some detail it occurs rather often. One basic difference, and there
are many others, is that Whitehead did not find fault with other poets in general,
and we know that Plato did.
Whitehead is a critic of education, especially English education, from elemen-
tary education to the university. He wrote from experience, since he was both a
teacher and an administrator, and so derived his commentaries from his own
experience and work at universities. I think the next quote from Aims of
Education should be a reminder not only to all professors of philosophy but also
to all professors of all disciplines: “In my own work at universities I have been
much struck by the paralysis of thought induced in pupils by the aimless accu-
mulation of precise knowledge, inert and unutilized. It should be the chief aim
of a university professor to exhibit himself in his own true character – that is, as
an ignorant man thinking, actively utilizing his small share of knowledge.”14
Whitehead comments often note a sincere humility in his writing. In fact, when
he was in his early eighties he was asked at what point did he master the disci-
pline of philosophy, and he responded by saying, “I have never mastered philos-
ophy.” In my opinion this was not an exhibition of false modesty, but a true
expression of a deep personal humility regarding his professional competence.
The university has a social obligation to impart knowledge, and to stimulate the

issue: 01504 mssnr: SPED 47 pipsnr: 113816

310 R O N A L D F. B L A S I U S

student intellectually and imaginatively. The university also has the obligation to
instill curiosity combined with novelty and this is an enormous job. A job that
Whitehead contended was not always done well.
Process of education is complex, and Whitehead does not attempt to oversim-
plify. Love, imagination, excitement and novelty all have a vital role in the edu-
cation process and must come, to a great degree, from the institutions of learning
and the faculty members. Whitehead also allows for humor and states that it is
necessary not to take ideas so seriously that we fail to see the incongruities in
some of them.
So in his process of education, we note once more the importance of experi-
ence, novelty, facts and imagination as being necessary items in this essential
process.

PART V: SCIENCE AND SPECULATION

When some philosophers talk about science and speculate thought it appears that
we have a contradiction of terms. Speculation has a special place in Whitehead’s
general philosophy and especially his philosophy of education. “Abstract specu-
lation has been the salvation of the world – speculations have made systems and
then transcended them, speculations have made systems and then transcended
them, speculations which ventured to the furthest limits of abstraction. To set
limits to speculation is treason to the future.”15 He is clear and forthright as usual
with regard to “abstract speculation”. This statement suggests a possible fear on
Whitehead’s part that some educators, philosophers and scientists do not appre-
ciate or see the incredible importance of abstract speculation. Certainly, caution
must be exercised when metaphysical speculation is involved. The following
quotation is form section eleven of Whitehead’s Adventures of Ideas; “The
concept of civilization, as developed to this stage, remains inherently incom-
plete. No logical argument can demonstrate this gap. Such arguments are merely
subsidiary helps of conscious realization of metaphysical institutions, – non in
dialectica complaciut Deo salvum facere populum suum. This saying, quoted by
Cardinal Newman should be the motto of every metaphysician. He is seeking,
amid the dim recesses of his apelike consciousness and beyond the reach of dic-
tionary language, for the premises implicite in all reasoning. The speculative
methods of all metaphysics are dangerous, easily prevented. So is all adventures
in record by adventure belongs to the essence of civilization.”16 Here again the
term adventure is emphasized and the fact that adventure involves risk, we must
take speculative risks. The risks are well worth it, according to Whitehead, and
the risks make the education process more exciting. Whitehead’s declaration that
“exactness is a fake”, and his notion of “misplaced concreteness”, establish his
speculative theory as a must.
Whitehead was of course a philosopher, logician, and also a scientist. He nat-
urally viewed science and scientific method very highly. Whitehead, the scien-
tists who valued science highly also viewed it critically but will never be

issue: 01504 mssnr: SPED 47 pipsnr: 113816

 ALFRED NORTH W HI TEH E A D ’ S I N F O R MA L P H I L O S O P H Y 311

continually searching for further elaboration of a theory or “scientific law.” He

openly expressed this point in Science and the Modern World: “When Darwin or
Einstein proclaim theories which modify our ideas, it is a triumph for science.
We do not go about saying that here is another defeat for science, because its
old ideas have been abandoned. We know that another step of scientific investi-
gation has been gained.”17 Being very candid it is obvious why Whitehead exer-
cised caution concerning science. A prime example is a quote taken from Price’s
book, “By 1900 the Newtonian physics were done for, demolished! Still speak-
ing personally, it has a profound effect on me; I have been fooled once, and I’ll
be damned if I’ll be fooled again! Einstein is supposed to have made epochal
discovery. I am respectful and interested, but also skeptical. There is not more
reason to suppose that Einstein’s relativity is any more final than Newton’s prin-
cipia. The danger is dogmatic fact; it plays the devil with religion, and science is
not immune from it.”18 This is a very human response, if not a philosophical
one. It seems to be one of the events of his life that reinforced his attitude
against “certainty – exactness” and is a continual attack on any kind of absolutist
theory, even in the area of mathematics. He readily recognized that science and
mathematics can become dogmatic and that the foundations of theoretical
science were changing and should be taught in such a manner in the educational
system. He suggested that time, space, matter, structure, and function all require
new reinterpretations. “If science is not to degenerate into a medley of ad hoc
hypotheses, it must become philosophical and must enter upon a thorough criti-
cism of its own foundations.”19
In Whitehead’s philosophy of education it is quite apparent that speculation
and science are both critical to progress. Again we see that retaining of two key
concepts, speculation and science.

PART VI: EDUCATION, CIVILIZATION AND AMERICA

Civilization cannot flourish without wisdom, and wisdom cannot be obtained

without the training of the intellect which we call education. Wisdom in the real
sense is not a narrow intellectualism but the utilization of facts, values, and general
ideas. It is Whitehead’s contention that a vast array of subjects must be studied and
the knowledge gained utilized effectively. The “wiseman” in the Teutonic tradition
is “creatively disturbed” or “discontented” realizing how little he knows. The civi-
lized man should be, in Whitehead’s opinion, such an individual.
Whitehead viewed America as a remarkable civilization and a distinguished
country. He loved the American east and its universities but was especially fond
of the American midwest. He also had a high regard for the American educa-
tional system. Although he never became an American citizen, the fact that he
never returned to England after his appointment to Harvard gives us some indi-
cation of his devotion to the United States.
I do not think it is common knowledge that Whitehead had this great affection
for America, quite different form Bertrand Russell, co-author of the Principia

issue: 01504 mssnr: SPED 47 pipsnr: 113816

312 R O N A L D F. B L A S I U S

Mathematica. Whitehead considered America as a “kind nation,” and a country

that could educate the masses with the well being of the people as the major
concern. Here again Lucian Price’s great book gives us insight that we might not
otherwise have: “I will tell you one thing here, kindness. The presumption is that
all people will treat one another kindly. I have never been in a place where kind-
ness was so general, and I do not know of any society, ancient or modern, where
a single state of things existed. I would not hesitate to say that the United States
is the finest society on a grand scale that the world has thus far produced.”20 It
appears that Whitehead had a deep if not profound feeling for Americans and
America as a civilization. We get this impression often from the book Dialogues
of Alfred North Whitehead. Besides being kind, America had the ability to
educate the masses effectively. With this particular point of respect in mind
Whitehead declared “Diffusion of literacy and average comfort and well being
among the masses, in my opinion, is one of the major achievements in human
history, in previous lands and times, even under the best condition, the diffusion
of culture was only a small stratum at the top, never more than twenty percent at
the most. I think this extending to the multitude of at least a standard living is an
enormous contribution to civilization.”21 I cannot help but feel that this is one of
the most important evaluations of America as a civilization and the American
educational system. This was said to Price on April 5, 1935, and I would like
to think that his evaluation would be the same if Whitehead were alive and
speaking today.
Perhaps Whitehead did see America in a somewhat romantic light, but gener-
ally I think his feelings do express a genuine love and affection for this country.
Although he does exhibit some criticism of American society as manifest in
Price’s book, most of the criticism is constructive and generally ends up being
complimentary. He often mentions that America was meaningful as a civiliza-
tion because of its heterogenous population; the adventurous immigrants that
were willing to risk everything in order to found a new land, to find indepen-
dence, and to secure the right to own property. It is the distinctive character of
these immigrants that substantiates America as a country and a civilization. We
should keep his point of view towards America as a country of education in
mind when ascertaining the worth of Whitehead’s philosophy of education.

PART VII: CONCLUSION

Some critics of Whitehead point out that he never related to “the common
student”, but to the select student bodies at Cambridge and London and at
Harvard. This is not entirely accurate. His experience at the University of
London gave him fourteen years of active participation with students from every
societal level. “The experience of the problems of London, extending fourteen
years (1910–1924) transformed my views as to the problems of higher education
in a modern industrial civilization. It was in the fashion – not yet extinct – to
take a narrow view of the function of universities. There were the Oxford and

issue: 01504 mssnr: SPED 47 pipsnr: 113816

 ALFRED NORTH W HI TEH E A D ’ S I N F O R MA L P H I L O S O P H Y 313

Cambridge type, and the German type – the seething mass of artisans seeking
intellectual enlightenment, of young people of every social grade craving for
adequate knowledge, the variety of problems thus introduced – all this was a
new factor in civilization. But the learned world is immersed in the past.”22
He often comments on the fact that “servitude was gone”, his attack on what he
called inert ideas and dogma was constant and unrelenting. The idea of “fallacy of
dogmatic finality”, is mentioned several times. He expresses this well in the fol-
lowing statement, “The universe is vast. Nothing is more curious than the self-
satisfied dogmatism with which mankind at each period of its history cherishes
the delusion of the finality of its existing molds of knowledge. Skeptics and
believers are all alike. At his moment scientists and skeptics are the leading dog-
matists. Advance in detail is admitted; fundamental novelty is barred. This dog-
matic common sense is the death of philosophical adventure. The universe is
vast.”23 It was here that he used the term “the fallacy of dogmatic finality”, and
needless to say it was one of the least popular of his doctrines. The clarity in
which Whitehead presents his position in this regard is most interesting.
The one thing most evident is the sweeping scope of Whitehead’s philosophy.
In his philosophy we find the importance of experience, imagination, specula-
tion, generalization, specialization, factual knowledge, humor, harmony,
freedom, discipline, technical and liberal education, and unification. He did not
envision any conflicts between, for example, specialization and generalization,
factual knowledge and theory, science and speculation, intuition and sensation,
relevance and novelty, and freedom and discipline. Clearly, it is not a philosophy
that only includes certain concepts with the exclusion of others. In my opinion,
this is the reason why it is so because it does not fit into a framework which can
be easily categorized and labeled. It is indeed most interesting that this eminent
mathematician – logician – philosopher is, to such an evident degree, extremely
capable of utilizing numerous concepts, in a comfortable manner, so frequently.
It is obvious that Alfred North Whitehead was a great intellectual and a math-
ematician of great reputation, but he still had a passion for the liberal arts and of
art itself. In a time when, at least in the United States, the teaching of music and
art is being dramatically cut back or eliminated. Whitehead was a great man of
science, philosophy, history, but also of art. I think the next quote shows this,
“The ultimate motive power, alike in science, in morality, and in Religion, is a
sense of value, a sense of importance. It takes the various forms of wonder, of
curiosity, of reverence, or of worship, of tumultuous desire for merging person-
ality with something beyond itself. This sense of value imposes on life incredi-
ble labours, and apart from that life sinks back into its passivity of its lower
type. The most penetrating exhibition of this force is a sense of beauty, the aes-
thetic sense of realized perfection. This thought leads me to ask, whether in our
modern education we exercise sufficiently the function of art.”24
Whitehead had great appreciation for philosophy and most philosophers, but
it is his continuous reference and reverence to Plato that’s most obvious in his
Informal Philosophy of Education. I would like to give my favorite quote in this
regard. “The safest general characterization of the European Philosophical

issue: 01504 mssnr: SPED 47 pipsnr: 113816

314 R O N A L D F. B L A S I U S

Tradition is that it consists of a series of footnotes to Plato. I do not mean a sys-

tematic scheme of thought which scholars have doubtfully extracted from his
writings. I allude to the wealth of general ideas scattered through them. His per-
sonal endowments is why opportunities for experience had a great period of civ-
ilization, his inheritance of an intellectual tradition not yet stiffened by excessive
systemization have made his writings an exhaustible mine of suggestion. Thus in
one sentence by stating my belief that the train of thought in these lectures is
platonic, I’m doing no more than expressing the hope that it falls within the
European tradition.”25
Whitehead believed that education was the study of “life in all of its manifes-
tations”, and in his philosophy of education this is made abundantly clear.

NOTES

1
Whitehead, Alfred North, Modes of Thought (McMillan Co., New York, 1939) page 228.
2
Whitehead, Alfred North, Aims of Education (McMillan Co., New York, 1929), page 6.
3
Price, Lucian, Dialogues with Alfred North Whitehead, (Atlantic Monthly Pressbook, Little Brown
Co., 1954), page 10.
4
Johnson, A.H., Whitehead’s Philosophy of Civilization, (Dover Publications, New York, 1962),
page 114.
5
Whitehead, A.N., Aims of Education, page 74.
6
Whitehead, A.N., Aims of Education, pp 93–94.
7
Whitehead, A.N., Aims of Education, page 22.
8
The Philosophy of Alfred North Whitehead (The Library of Living Philosophers, Vol. 3, 1941),
chapter on Whitehead’s views on education by Harry W. Holmes, page 62.
9
Whitehead, A.N., Aims of Education, page 1.
10
Philosophy of Alfred North Whitehead, (Library of Living Philosophers, Vol. 3), “The Philosophy
of Whitehead.” by John Dewey, page 646.
11
Johnson, A.H., Whitehead’s Philosophy of Civilization, page 124.
12
Whitehead, A.N., Aims of Education, page 145.
13
Whitehead, A.N., Whitehead’s Philosophy of Civilization, page 124.
14
Whitehead, A.N., Aims of Education, page 58.
15
Whitehead, A.N., The Function of Reason, (Princeton University Press, 1929) page 60.
16
Whitehead, A.N., Adventures of Ideas, (The Free Press, McMillan Co., copyright 1933) page 295.
17
Whitehead, A.N., Science and the Modern World (McMillan Co., 1929) page 61.
18
Price, Lucian Dialogues of Alfred North Whitehead, pp. 346–348.
19 Whitehead, A.N., Science and the Modern World, pp. 14–25.
20 Price, Lucian, Dialogues of Alfred North Whitehead, page 157.
21 Price, Lucian, Dialogues of Alfred North Whitehead, page 55.
22 Price, Lucian, Dialogues of Alfred North Whitehead, page 9.
23 Price, Lucian, Dialogues of Alfred North Whitehead, page 7.
24 Whitehead, Alfred North, Aims of Education, McMillan Co., New York, 1929, page 40.
25 Whitehead, Alfred North, Process and Reality, McMillan Co., New York, 1929, page 39.

REFERENCES

Johnson, A.H.: 1947, The Wit and Wisdom of Alfred North Whitehead, Beacon Press.
Johnson, A.H.: 1962, Whitehead’s Philosophy of Civilization, Dover Publishing Co.

issue: 01504 mssnr: SPED 47 pipsnr: 113816

 ALFRED NORTH W HI TEH E A D ’ S I N F O R MA L P H I L O S O P H Y 315

Johnson, A.H.: 1962, Whitehead’s Theory of Reality, Dover Publishing Co.

Price, Lucien: 1954, Dialogues of Alfred North Whitehead, The Atlantic Monthly Press Book, Little
Brown & Co.
Schulpp, Paul Arthur: 1951, The Philosophy of Alfred North Whitehead, Open Court Publication.
Whitehead, Alfred North: 1925, Science and the Modern World, McMillan.
Whitehead, Alfred North: 1927, Symbolism, McMillan.
Whitehead, Alfred North: 1929, The Aims of Education and Others Essays, McMillan Co.
Whitehead, Alfred North: 1933, Adventures of Ideas, McMillan.
Whitehead, Alfred North: 1938, Modes of Thought, McMillan Co.
Whitehead, Alfred North: 1978, Process and Reality, (Corrected edition), The Free Press.

issue: 01504 mssnr: SPED 47 pipsnr: 113816