Abstract
This chapter begins by noting the importance of debates in science education that hinge upon support for or rejection of the Enlightenment project. It then distinguishes the historic eighteenth-century Enlightenment from its articulation and working out in the Enlightenment project; details Mario Bunge’s and others’ summation of the core principles of the Enlightenment; and fleshes out the educational project of the Enlightenment by reference to the works of John Locke, Joseph Priestley, Ernst Mach, Philipp Frank and Herbert Feigl. It indicates commonalities between the Enlightenment education project and that of the liberal education movement, and for both projects it points to the need to appreciate history and philosophy of science.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
For his explicit endorsement of the Enlightenment project see Bunge (1994, reproduced in 1999, chap. 7).
- 2.
For the titles of the 15 chapters of this 99-page book, see Appendix.
- 3.
- 4.
- 5.
Arguments for this harsh appraisal can be found in Matthews (2015, chap. 8).
- 6.
- 7.
- 8.
- 9.
Individual chapters in Porter and Teich (1981) are devoted to the Enlightenment in England, Scotland, France, Netherlands, Switzerland, Italy, Germany (Catholic and Protestant), Austria, Bohemia, Sweden, Russia and America. These chapters can be consulted in conjunction with the following national references.
- 10.
See Porter (2000).
- 11.
See Herman (2001).
- 12.
- 13.
See Venturi (1972).
- 14.
See Clark (1999).
- 15.
- 16.
- 17.
See contributions to Church (1974).
- 18.
Kant’s 1784 essay, and the essay ‘What is Enlightenment?’ by Moses Mendelssohn to which Kant was responding, are contained in the Schmidt anthology (Schmidt 1996). Also included are 20+ eighteenth century contributions to the ‘What is Enlightenment?’ debate, and a dozen twentieth-century studies of the issue. Kant’s essay, and its reception over the past two centuries, is well treated in Fleischacker (2013).
- 19.
Jonathan Israel (Israel 2006, p. 867) identifies and discusses 70 individual contributors to the formation of Enlightenment thought. Choosing who, 250 years later, might be included in the Enlightenment canon has its own problems.
- 20.
- 21.
- 22.
- 23.
- 24.
- 25.
At the time, ‘moral subjects and philosophy included present-day history, social sciences, politics, economics and ethics.
- 26.
- 27.
For instance, the German Christian Erhard, wrote in 1789: ‘Damned be the Enlightenment which exchanges blind trust in itself for blind trust in others’ (Knudsen 1996, p. 270). This charge of blind trust, self-deception, if not arrogance, has been echoed in the following centuries by countless critics.
- 28.
- 29.
- 30.
- 31.
Priestley (1765/1965; 1791).
- 32.
- 33.
Helvétius (1772/1810).
- 34.
Kant (1803/1899).
- 35.
See Parry (2008).
- 36.
The book is of 200-odd pages, covering 215 sections. In English there were 40 printings of it as a separate book between 1693 and 1964. In French there were 23 translations and printings between 1695 and 1966. And there were American, German, Dutch, Spanish, Italian, Polish, Rumanian and Swedish printings. (Axtell 1968, pp. 98–104).
- 37.
Testifying to the slowness of educational reform, women were not granted full and equal rights at Cambridge until 1948.
- 38.
The educational writings and assembly reports of La Chalotais, Turgot, Diderot, and Condorcet are translated and published in English in de la Fontainerie (1932).
- 39.
- 40.
Condorcet’s education writings are discussed in Schapiro (1963, chap. 11).
- 41.
See Kandel (1930, chap. VI).
- 42.
Thomas Huxley’s ‘A Liberal Education; and Where to Find It’, an address given at the 1868 opening of the South London Working Men’s College, shows the overlap between nineteenth-century Enlightenment education and liberal education (Huxley 1868/1964). The alliance between Philipp Frank and James Conant in the 1950s and 1960s in the USA is an instructive twentieth-century example (Reisch 2017). Liberal education values the appreciation and transmission of knowledge; so also Enlightenment education.
- 43.
See Lövlie and Standish (2002).
- 44.
Joseph Priestley and fellow Dissenters wanted state support but absolutely opposed state control of education. The reconciliation of support with denial of control is a recurring question in the Enlightenment education tradition.
- 45.
Two definitive studies of Priestley are by Robert Schofield (1997, 2004). The latter contains a full bibliographic listing of his many books, pamphlets and articles. See also contributions to Anderson and Lawrence (1987), Birch and Lee (2007), Rivers and Wykes (2008), and Schwartz and McEvoy (1990).
- 46.
On the tradition of historical-investigative teaching of science, see Heering and Höttecke (2014).
- 47.
For the next 150 years this was the only English-language history of Optics.
- 48.
This authoritative work led to productive correspondence with Franklin, Volta and many others; it was instrumental in the birth of electrical science.
- 49.
- 50.
- 51.
- 52.
John Bradley, the English chemist and educator, organized his chemistry instruction on Machian principles (Bradley 1963–1968), and he wrote a useful book on Mach’s philosophy of science (Bradley 1971). Mach the educator is discussed in Matthews (1990, 2015 pp. 33–37). The most comprehensive and best documented discussion of the subject is Siemsen (2014).
- 53.
An excellent documentary source of Mach’s bountiful influence in science, philosophy and beyond is Blackmore et al. (2001).
- 54.
This last paper has recently, for the first time, been translated and published in English (Mach 1890/2018). Hayo Siemsen was translator and editor, who sadly died prematurely in 2018.
- 55.
Wallis Suchting provides a rewarding discussion of the cultural significance of science (Suchting 1994).
- 56.
The argument is developed, and literature canvassed, throughout Matthews (2015).
References
Agazzi, E. (Ed.). (2017). Varieties of scientific realism: Objectivity and truth in science. Dordrecht: Springer.
Aikenhead, G. S. (1997). Towards a first nations cross-cultural science and technology curriculum. Science Education, 81(2), 217–238.
Anchor, R. (1967). The enlightenment tradition. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Andersen, K. (2017). Fantasyland: How America went haywire, a 500-year history. London: Penguin.
Anderson, R. G. W., & Lawrence, C. (Eds.). (1987). Science, medicine and dissent: Joseph Priestley (1733–1804). London: Wellcome Trust.
Arons, A. B. (1988). Historical and philosophical perspectives attainable in introductory physics courses. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 20(2), 13–23.
Artz, F. B. (1968). The enlightenment in France. Oberlin: Kent State University Press.
Axtell, J. L. (Ed.). (1968). The educational writings of John Locke. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Becker, C. (1932/1960). The Heavenly City of the eighteenth-century philosophers. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Berlin, I. (Ed.). (1956). The age of enlightenment: The eighteenth-century philosophers. New York: Mentor Books.
Berlin, I. (1980). The counter-enlightenment. In H. Hardy (Ed.), Against the current (pp. 1–24). New York: Viking.
Birch, J. S., & Lee, J. (Eds.). (2007). Joseph Priestley. A celebration of his life and legacy. Lancaster: Scotforth Books.
Blackmore, J. T. (1972). Ernst Mach: His work, life and influence. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Blackmore, J. T., Itagaki, R., & Tanaka, S. (2001). Alois Höfler: Polymath. In Ernst Mach’s Vienna 1895–1930. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Blom, P. (2010). A wicked company: The forgotten radicalism of the European enlightenment. New York: Basic Books.
Bolton, H.C. 1892, Scientific correspondence of Joseph Priestley. New York.
Bradley, J. (1963–1968). A scheme for the teaching of Chemistry by the historical method. School Science Review 44: 549–553; 45, 364–368; 46, 126–133; 47, 65–71, 702–710; 48, 467–474; 49, 142–150; 454–460.
Bradley, J. (1971). Mach’s philosophy of science. London.
Brickhouse, N. W. (2001). Embodying science: A feminist perspective on learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(3), 282–295.
Brooke, J. H. (1987). Joseph Priestley (1733–1804) and William Whewell (1794–1866): Apologists and historians of science. A tale of two stereotypes. In R. G. W. Anderson & C. Lawrence (Eds.), Science, medicine, and dissent: Joseph Priestley (1733–1804) (pp. 11–27). London: Wellcome Trust & Science Museum.
Brooke, J. H. (1991). Science and religion: Some historical perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Brown, J. R. (2001). Who rules in science: An opinionated guide to the science wars. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Bunge, M. (1943). Temas de educación popular. Buenos Aires: El Ateneo.
Bunge, M. (1994). Counter-enlightenment in contemporary social studies. In P. Kurtz & T. J. Madigan (Eds.), Challenges to the enlightenment: In defense of reason and science (pp. 25–42). Buffalo: Prometheus Books.
Bunge, M. (1999). The sociology-philosophy connection. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.
Bunge, M. (2000). Social science under debate: A philosophical perspective. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Butts, R. E., & Davis, J. W. (Eds.). (1970). The methodological heritage of Newton. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Cassara, E. (1988). The enlightenment in America. Lanham: University Press of America.
Charles, S., & Smith, P. J. (Eds.). (2013). Scepticism in the eighteenth century: Enlightenment, Lumières, Aufklärung. Dordrecht: Springer.
Church, W. F. (Ed.). (1974). The influence of the enlightenment on the French revolution (2nd ed.). Lexington: D.C. Heath & Co..
Clark, W. (1999). The death of metaphysics in enlightened Prussia. In W. Clark, J. Golinksi, & S. Schaffer (Eds.), The sciences in enlightened Europe (pp. 423–473). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Cohen, I. B. (1980). The Newtonian revolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cohen, R. S. (Ed.). (1981). Inquiries and provocations: Selected writings of Herbert Feigl 1929–1974. Dordrecht: Reidel.
Cohen, R. S., Hilpinen, R., & Renzong, Q. (Eds.). (1996). Realism and anti-realism in the philosophy of science: Beijing international conference, 1992. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Commager, H. S. (1977). The empire of reason: How Europe imagined and America realized the enlightenment. New York: Doubleday.
Condorcet, N. (1795/1955). Sketch for a historical picture of the progress of the human mind (J. Barraclough, Trans.), New York: Noonday Press.
Condorcet, N. (1976). In K. M. Baker (Ed.), Selected writings. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill.
D’Elia, D. J. (1990). Joseph Priestley and his American contemporaries. In A. R. Schwartz & J. G. McEvoy (Eds.), Motion towards perfection: The acheivements of Joseph Priestley (pp. 237–250). Boston: Skinner House Books.
Davenport, D. A. (1990). Joseph Priestley in America: 1794–1804. In A. R. Schwartz & J. G. McEvoy (Eds.), Motion towards perfection: The acheivements of Joseph Priestley (pp. 219–236). Boston: Skinner House Books.
de la Fontainerie, F. (Ed.). (1932). French liberalism and education in the eighteenth century. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Desmond, A. (1994). Huxley: From Devil’s disciple to evolution’s high priest. New York: Basic Books.
Duhem, P. (1906/1954). The aim and structure of physical theory. (P. P. Wiener, Trans.). Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Dunthorne, H. (2007). The Dutch Republic: “That mother nation of liberty”. In M. Fitzpatrick, P. Jones, C. Knellwolf, & I. McCalman (Eds.), The enlightenment world (pp. 87–103). London: Routledge.
Eliot, S., & Stern, B. (Eds.). (1979). The age of enlightenment: An anthology of eighteenth century texts. East Grinsted: Ward Lock Educational.
Feigl, H. (1955). Aims of education for our age of science: Reflections of a logical empiricist. In N. B. Henry (Ed.), Modern philosophies and education: The fifty-fourth yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education (pp. 304–341). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Reprinted in Science & Education 13(1–2), 2004.
Ferguson, R. A. (1997). The American enlightenment, 1750–1820. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Ferrone, V. (2015). The enlightenment. History of an idea. Princeton: Princeton University Press (orig Italian, 2010).
Fitzpatrick, M. (2007). The age of Louis XIV and early enlightenment in France. In M. Fitzpatrick, P. Jones, C. Knellwolf, & I. McCalman (Eds.), The enlightenment world (pp. 134–155). London: Routledge.
Fitzpatrick, M., Jones, P., Knellwolf, C., & McCalman, I. (Eds.). (2007). The enlightenment world. London: Routledge.
Fleischacker, S. (2013). What is enlightenment? New York: Routledge.
Frank, P. (1907/1949). Experience and the law of causality. In his Between physics and philosophy (pp. 53–60). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Frank, P. (1947/1950). The place of philosophy of science in the curriculum of the physics student. In his Modern science and philosophy (pp. 228–259). Harvard: Harvard University Press.
Frank, P. (1950a). Modern science and its philosophy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Frank, P. (1950b), Science teaching and the humanities. In his Modern science and its philosophy (pp. 260–285). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Garrard, G. (2006). Counter-enlightenment: From the eighteenth century to the present. London: Routledge.
Garrett, A. (2007). Enquiry, scepticism and enlightenment. In M. Fitzpatrick, P. Jones, C. Knellwolf, & I. McCalman (Eds.), The enlightenment world (pp. 57–64). London: Routledge.
Gay, P. (1966). The enlightenment: An interpretation (2-Vols.). New York.
Gay, P. (Ed.). (1973). The enlightenment: A comprehensive anthology. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Goubert, P. (1972). Louis XIV and the twenty million Frenchmen. New York: Vintage Books.
Graham, J. (2008). Joseph Priestley in America. In I. Rivers & D. L. Wykes (Eds.), Joseph Priestley: Scientist, philosopher, and theologian (pp. 203–230). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Gross, P. R., Levitt, N., & Lewis, M. W. (Eds.). (1996). The flight from science and reason. New York: New York Academy of Sciences (distributed by Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore).
Hankins, T. L. (1985). Science and the enlightenment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Harper, W. L. (2011). Isaac Newton’s scientific method: Turning data into evidence about gravity and cosmology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Heering, P., & Höttecke, D. (2014). Historical-investigative approaches in science teaching. In M. R. Matthews (Ed.), International handbook of research in history, Philosophy and Science Teaching (pp. 1473–1502). Dordrecht: Springer.
Helvétius, C. A. (1772/1810). A treatise on man; His intellectual faculties and his education (trans: Hooper, W.). London: Venor, Hood & Sharpe. Original De l’homme, de ses facultés intellectuelles et de son education (1772).
Herman, A. (2001). The Scottish enlightenment: The Scot’s invention of the modern world. London: Harper.
Hiebert, E. N. (1976). Introduction. In E. Mach (Ed.), Knowledge and error. Dordrecht: Reidel.
Himmelfarb, G. (2004). The roads to modernity. The British, French, and American enlightenments. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
Höfler, A. (1916). Obituary for Mach. Zeitschrift für den Physikalischen und Chemischen Unterricht, 29 (57, March).
Holton, G. (1978). On the educational philosophy of the project physics course. In his The scientific imagination: Case studies (pp. 284–298). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Horkheimer, M., & Adorno, T.W. (1944/1972). Dialectic of enlightenment. New York: Herder and Herder.
Hume, D. (1739/1888). A treatise of human nature: Being an attempt to introduce the experimental method of reasoning into moral subjects. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Hume, D. (1754–1762/1879). The history of England: From the invasion of Julius Caesar to the revolution in 1688 (6 volumes). New York: Harper & Brothers.
Huxley, T. H. (1868/1964). A liberal education; and where to find it. In his Science & education (pp. 72–100). New York: Appleton 1897 (orig. 1885). Reprinted with Introduction by C. Winick, Citadel Press, New York, 1964.
Huxley, T. H. (1874/1964). ‘Joseph Priestley’. In his Science & education. New York: Appleton, 1897 (orig. 1885). Reprinted with Introduction by C. Winick, Citadel Press, New York, 1964, pp. 9–39.
Hyland, P., Gomez, O., & Greensides, F. (Eds.). (2003). The enlightenment: A source book and reader. New York: Routledge.
Israel, J. I. (2001). Radical enlightenment: Philosophy and the making of modernity 1650–1750. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Israel, J. I. (2006). Enlightenment contested: Philosophy, modernity, and the emancipation of man 1670–1752. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Israel, J. I. (2011). Democratic enlightenment: Philosophy, revolution, and human rights, 1750–1790. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Jensen, J. V. (1991). Thomas Henry Huxley: Communicating for science. Newark: University of Delaware Press.
Joad, C. E. M. (1935). The book of joad: A belligerent autobiography. London: Faber & Faber.
Kandel, I. L. (1930). History of secondary education: A study in the development of Liberal education. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
Kant, I. (1784/1995). An answer to the question: What is enlightenment? In Kramnick, I. (ed.) The portable enlightenment reader (pp. 1–7). London: Penguin.
Kant, I. (1787/1933). Critique of pure reason, 2nd edit. (trans: Smith, N.K.). London: Macmillan (First edition, 1781).
Kant, I. (1803/1899). Kant on education (trans: Annette, C.). London: Kegan Paul.
Knudsen, J. B. (1996). On enlightenment for the common man. In J. Schmidt (Ed.), What is enlightenment? Eighteenth-century answers and twentieth-century questions (pp. 270–290). Berkeley: University of California Press.
Koch, A. (1961). Power, morals, and the founding fathers: Essays in the interpretation of the American enlightenment. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Koch, A. (Ed.). (1965). The American enlightenment: The shaping of the American experiment and a free society. New York: George Braziller.
Koertge, N. (Ed.). (1998). A house built on sand: Exposing postmodern myths about science. New York: Oxford University Press.
Kramnick, I. (Ed.). (1995). The portable Enlightment reader. New York: Penguin Books.
Leplin, J. (Ed.). (1984). Scientific Realism. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Lindberg, D. C., & Westman, R. S. (Eds.). (1990). Reappraisals of the scientific revolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lindsay, J. (1970). Introduction. In Autobiography of Joseph Priestley (pp. 11–66). Bath: Adams & Dart.
Locke, J. (1693/1968). Some thoughts concerning education. In Axtell, J.L. (ed.) The educational writings of John Locke (pp. 114–325). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lövlie, L., & Standish, P. (2002). Bildung and the idea of a liberal education. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 36, 317–340.
Mach, E. (1863). Compendium de Physik für Mediciner. Vienna: Braumüller.
Mach, E. (1886/1986). On instruction in the classics and the sciences. In his Popular scientific lectures (pp. 338–374). La Salle: Open Court Publishing Company.
Mach, E. (1890/2018). Über das psychologische und logische Moment im naturawissenschaftlichen unterricht. Zeitschrift für den physikalischen und chemischen Unterricht 4, 1–5. ‘About the Psychological and Logical Moment in Natural Science Teaching’ Hayo Siemsen (trans.). In Matthews, M.R. (ed) History, philosophy and science teaching: New perspectives (pp. 195–200). Dordrecht: Springer.
Matthews, M. R. (Ed.). (1989). The scientific background to modern philosophy. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company.
Matthews, M. R. (1990). Ernst Mach and contemporary science education reforms. International Journal of Science Education, 12(3), 317–325.
Matthews, M. R. (Ed.). (1998). Constructivism and science education: A philosophical examination. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Matthews, M. R. (2015). Science teaching: The contribution of history and philosophy of science: 20th anniversary revised and enlarged edition. New York: Routledge.
May, H. F. (1976). The enlightenment in America. New York: Oxford University Press.
McCarthy, C. L. (2018). Cultural studies of science education: An appraisal. In M. R. Matthews (Ed.), History, philosophy and science teaching: New perspectives (pp. 99–136). Dordrecht: Springer.
McIntyre, A. (1981). After virtue: A study in moral theory. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.
McIntyre, A. (1988). Whose justice? Which rationality? London: Duckworth.
McMahon, D. M. (2001). Enemies of the enlightenment: The French counter-enlightenment and the making of modernity. New York: Oxford University Press.
Merton, R. K. (1938/1970). Science, technology and society in seventeenth century England. New York: Harper & Row.
Mukherjee, A. P. (2009). B.R. Ambedkar, John Dewey, and the meaning of democracy. New Literary History, 40(2), 345–370.
Newton, I. (1730/1979). Opticks or a treatise of the reflections, refractions, inflections & colours of light. New York: Dover Publications.
O’Hara, K. (2010). The enlightenment: A Beginner’s guide. Oxford: Oneworldpublications.
Osler, M. J. (Ed.). (2000). Rethinking the scientific revolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. S500/510.
Pagden, A. (2013). The enlightenment and why it still matters. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Parry, G. (2007). Education and the reproduction of the enlightenment. In M. Fitzpatrick, P. Jones, C. Knellwolf, & I. McCalman (Eds.), The enlightenment world (pp. 217–233). London: Routledge.
Passmore, J. A. (Ed.). (1965). Priestley’s writings on philosophy, science and politics. London: Collier Macmillan.
Pinker, S. (2018). Enlightenment now: The case for reason, science, humanism, and progress. New York: Viking.
Porter, R. (2000). The enlightenment: Britain and the creation of the modern world. London: Penguin Books.
Porter, R., & Teich, M. (Eds.). (1981). The enlightenment in National Context. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Priestley, J. (1765/1965). An essay on a course of liberal education for civil and active life. In J.A. Passmore (ed.) Priestley’s writings on philosophy, science and politics (pp. 285–304). London: Collier Macmillan.
Priestley, J. (1767/1775). The history and present state of electricity, with original experiments, second edition, J. Dodsley, J. Johnson & T. Cadell, London; 3rd edit., 1775 reprinted Johnson Reprint Corporation, New York, 1966, with Introduction by Robert E. Schofield.
Priestley, J. (1772). The history and present state of the discoveries relating to vision, light, and colours. 2 vols., London.
Priestley, J. (1775). The discovery of oxygen. Part 1. Experiments by Joseph Priestley. In Alembic Club Reprints No. 7. (1992). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Priestley, J. (1775–1777). Experiments and observations on different kinds of air (2nd ed., 3 Vols.) J. Johnson, London. Sections of the work have been published by the Alembic Club with the title The Discovery of Oxygen (Edinburgh, 1961).
Priestley, J. (1785). The importance and extent of free inquiry in matters of religion, to which is added The Present State of Free Inquiry in this Country, J. Johnson, Birmingham. In Rutt Collected Works, Vol. 18.
Priestley, J. (1788). Lectures on history and general policy to which is prefixed, an Essasy on the course of Liberal Educatioin for civil and active life. Dublin: P. Byrne.
Priestley. (1790). Experiments and observations on different kinds of air, and other branches of natural philosophy, connected with the Subject. Being the former six volumes abridged and methodized (Vol. 3). Birmingham: J. Johnson.
Priestley, J. (1791). The proper objects of education. In J.T. Rutt (ed.) The theological and miscellaneous works of Joseph Priestley Vol.15, pp. 420–440.
Puolimatka, T. (2001). Spinoza’s theory of teaching and indoctrination. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 33(3–4), 397–410.
Pyenson, L. (1983). Neohumanism and the persistence of pure mathematics in Wilhelmian Germany. Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society.
Reisch, G. A. (2017). Pragmatic engagements: Philipp Frank and James Bryant Conant on science, education and democracy. Studies in East European Thought, 69(3), 227–244.
Reisner, E. H. (1930). The evolution of the common school. New York: Macmillan.
Rivers, I., & Wykes, D. L. (Eds.). (2008). Joseph Priestley: Scientist, philosopher, and theologian. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Rose, N. F. (2007). Science education in the 18th century. In J. S. Birch & J. Lee (Eds.), Joseph Priestley: A celebration of his life and work (pp. 234–238). Lancaster: Scotchforth Books.
Roth, M.-W. (1999). Authentic school science: Intellectual traditions. In R. McCormick & C. Paechter (Eds.), Learning and knowledge (pp. 6–20). London: Sage Publications.
Rousseau, J. J. (1762/1991). Emile, or on education, (B. Allan, Trans.). Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Schama, S. (1981). The enlightenment in the Netherlands. In R. S. Porter & M. Teich (Eds.), The enlightenment in national context (pp. 54–71). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Schapiro, J. S. (1963). Condorcet and the rise of liberalism. New York: Octagon Books.
Schmidt, J. (Ed.). (1996). What is enlightenment? Eighteenth-century answers and twentieth-century questions. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Schofield, R. E. (1997). The enlightenment of Joseph Priestley: A study of his life and work from 1733 to 1773. University Park: Penn State Press.
Schofield, R. E. (2004). The enlightened Joseph Priestley: A study of his life and work from 1773 to 1804. University Park: Penn State Press.
Schouls, P. A. (1992). Reasoned freedom: John Locke and enlightenment. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Schulz, R. M. (2007). Lyotard, postmodernism and science education: A rejoinder to Zembylas. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 39(6), 633–656.
Schwartz, A. T., & McEvoy, J. G. (Eds.). (1990). Motion toward perfection: The achievement of Joseph Priestley. Boston: Skinner House Books.
Shimony, A. (1997). ‘Presidential address: Some historical and philosophical reflections on science and enlightenment’. In L. Darden (ed.) Proceedings of the 1996 PSA Meeting. S1–14.
Siemsen, H. (2014). Ernst Mach: A genetic introduction to his educational theory and pedagogy. In M. R. Matthews (Ed.), International handbook of research in history, philosophy and science teaching (pp. 2329–2357). Dordrecht: Springer.
Smith, J. W. A. (1954). The birth of modern education. The contribution of the dissenting academies 1660–1800. Chicago: Independent Press Ltd. Alec, Allenson.
Spence, J. D. (1982). The gate of heavenly peace: The Chinese and their revolution, 1895–1980. London: Penguin.
Spinoza, B. (1677/1910). Ethics & de intellectus emendatione. London: J.M. Dent & Sons.
Steinberg, S. R., & Kincheloe, J. (2012). ‘Employing the bricolage as critical research in science education’. In B. Fraser, K. Tobin & C. McRobbie (eds), International handbook of science education (pp. 1485–1500) 2nd Edition, Springer.
Sternhell, Z. (2010). The anti-enlightenment tradition. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Suchting, W. A. (1994). Notes on the cultural significance of the sciences. Science & Education, 3(1), 1–56.
Tang, Y. (2015). The enlightenment and its difficult journey in China. In Y. Tang (Ed.), Confucianism, Buddhism, Daoism, Christianity and Chinese Culture (pp. 279–284). Dordrecht: Springer.
Tarcov, N. (1989). Locke’s education for liberty. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Tobin, K. (2015). Connecting science education to a world in crisis. Asia-Pacific Science Education, 1, 2. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41029-015-0003-z.
Trachtenberg, Z. (1993). Making citizens: Rousseau’s political theory of culture. London: Routledge.
Van Bunge, W. (Ed.). (2003). The early enlightenment in the Dutch Republic, 1650–1750. Leiden: Brill.
van Eijck, M., & Roth, W.-M. (2007). Keeping the local local: Recalibrating the status of science and traditional ecological knowledge (TEK) in education. Science Education, 91, 926–947.
Venturi, F. (1972). Italy and the enlightenment: Studies in a cosmopolitan century. (trans: Susan, C.). New York: New York University Press.
Wootton, D. (2015). The invention of science: A new history of the scientific revolution. London: Penguin Random House.
Wykes, D. L. (1996). The contribution of the dissenting academy to the emergence of rational dissent. In K. Haakonssen (Ed.), Enlightenment and religion: Rational dissent in eighteenth-century Britain (pp. 99–139). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Appendix
Appendix
Mario Bunge , Temas de Educación Popular , Buenos Aires: El Ateneo, 1943, 99 pages, Contents
-
A Social problems
-
1.
Technological education in Argentina
-
2.
What kind of technologists should the popular universities train?
-
3.
Women’s technological education
-
4.
Professional re-education
-
5.
Patriotic action of the popular universities
-
1.
-
B Didactic problems
-
6.
Teaching the studying technique
-
7.
Warning to the new technology teacher
-
8.
Emulation and rivalry in the classroom
-
9.
Commercial education in the popular universities
-
10.
On the teaching of mathematics in technical schools
-
6.
-
C Organization problems
-
11.
Conditions the administration of a popular university ought to meet
-
12.
Selection of the professoriat
-
13.
Intervention of students and graduates in popular universities
-
14.
Finances of the popular universities
-
15.
Diplomas awarded by the popular universities
-
11.
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Matthews, M.R. (2019). Mario Bunge and the Enlightenment Project in Science Education. In: Matthews, M.R. (eds) Mario Bunge: A Centenary Festschrift. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-16673-1_36
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-16673-1_36
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-16672-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-16673-1
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)