What should be the aim of education?

This is a report of the philosophy cafe session on 17 December 2008.

We have two newcomers, so I open with a preamble:

"Welcome to philosophy cafe. This is an event where participants engage in the rational and rigorous pursuit of truth and right. This is unlike ordinary discussions, where people jump to the first answer they can think of; and unlike academic philosophy discussions, where people refuse to come to any answer at all. Our discussions are aimed at arriving at answers, and we achieve rationality and rigour by adhering to a simple algorithm that I've created -- and call Automated Thought Machine."

A popular vote decides the evening's topic: "What should be the aim of education?"

Three answers are proposed:
1. To liberally open the individual's mind.
2. To prepare people for society (a simulation for actual life).
3. To subjugate the masses into one world order.

We activate Automated Thought Machine.

Ask question.
What should be the aim of education?

State position.
To liberally open the individual's mind.

Provide reasons.
Liberal mindedness is a good (thing).

Do reasons imply conclusion (position)?
Yes.

Are reasons true?
It is a good (thing) for the individual, but not always good for society.

We decide to narrow the reason to: Liberal mindedness is a good (thing) for the individual.

Provide reasons.
Liberal mindedness is a good (thing) for the individual.

Do reasons imply conclusion?
Yes.

Are reasons true?
We decide we cannot answer this unless we define "good". We define "good" as "maximum happiness". So, our reason becomes: Liberal mindedness is a maximum happiness for the individual.

Provide reasons.
Liberal mindedness is a maximum happiness for the individual.

Do reasons imply conclusion?
Yes.

Are reasons true?
A counterexample is offered. Introduction of endorphins into the body (eg. via consuming dark chocolate) can cause a greater happiness than that caused by liberal mindedness. So, the answer to this question is "no".

We try to save the argument by confining the term "happiness" to Aristotelian eudaimonia -- a uniquely human happiness achieved through the exercise of reason. This obviates endorphins as a counterexample, since it is incapable of causing eudaimonia.

The reason now is: Liberal mindedness is a maximum eudaimonia for the individual.

Provide reasons.
Liberal mindedness is a maximum eudaimonia for the individual.

Do reasons imply conclusion?
Yes.

Are reasons true?
Yes.

Accept position.

The argument has passed both tests of a good argument. We accept the argument.

The aim of education should be to liberally open the individual's mind, because liberal mindedness is a maximum eudaimonia for the individual.

We have an answer (it is not impossible for education to have several aims) to the evening's question.

We have no time to consider the other two proposed answers. Discussion ends. It has been a good session.


Readers interested to engage in philosophical discussions are cordially invited to attend Singapore's first and only philosophy cafe, which I host every third Wednesday of the month at Gone Fishing Cafe, 15 Chu Lin Road, from 8-10pm. Admission is free, and all are welcome (prior knowledge of philosophy is not required). The next philosophy cafe session is on 21 January 2009. [If Gone Fishing Cafe happens to be closed, look for the bearded Chinese guy at the nearby Al Ameen Restaurant.]