Read the following passage and attempt the 3 questions that follow:
In modern times, the list of educationists continues to include formidable intellects—William
James, for example, who’s ‘Talks to Teachers’, is among the best books on education ever
written. Two of the greatest philosophers in this century, Ludwig Wittgenstein and Karl Popper,
were elementary-school teachers who of necessity would have thought deeply about educational
issues. Wittgenstein’s professor at Cambridge, Bertrand Russell, founded a school, and Russell’s
colleague, Alfred North Whitehead, wrote the impeccable Aims of Education. And, of course,
America’s greatest homegrown systematic philosopher, John Dewey, was an educationist par
excellence. In other words, the history of Western philosophy is so bound up with the subject of
education that the two can hardly be separated. One might even say that just as it is natural for a
physicist upon reaching his deepest understandings to be drawn toward religion, so it is natural
for a mature philosopher to turn toward the problems of education. Why, then, this persistent
prejudice against the subject and those who make a profession of its study? Definitive Answers
await a rich and extensive research project to which sociologists, psychologists, historians,
perhaps even anthropologists must contribute their perspectives. I mention anthropology because
I suspect the intensity of the prejudice varies from culture to culture. There are places—China,
for example—where the prejudice may not exist at all. But if we confine ourselves to the West,
we are almost sure to find that it is in the United States that the prejudice is maintained in its
most active state. There are great universities in America—Yale, for example—where a student
cannot major in the subject. There are even universities where the subject is held in such low
esteem that it is possible for a student to major in, of all things, Business Administration but not
Education. Of course, Business Administration alumni are usually better positioned to give large
gifts to a university than are Education alumni, but this fact by itself cannot explain the
pervasiveness of the prejudice. After all, in many universities where the subject of education is
considered a side issue, if considered at all, students may major in such subjects as Social Work
and nursing, neither of which promises its graduates the wherewithal to bestow large gifts on
Alma Mater. No, I do not think the economics of universities will tell us very much. My own
attempts to look into the matter have led in another direction, and by following that path, I
believe I have found a way of reversing the prejudice entirely. Even better, I believe my inquiries
point toward a solution to a more formidable problem; namely, how to increase our own selfrespect.
The usual reason given by standard-brand academics for their distaste for the subject of
education is that it is trivial. This they say without much forethought, as if by rote, as if they
neither expected nor could resist a rebuttal. When rebuttal comes in the form of a few wellchosen
questions of the type “Is it trivial to examine what is meant by learning, and what
relation, if any, teaching has to learning?” their attack shifts to a different ground. “It is not the
triviality of the subject”, they say.
Q 4.Which is the best book of Modern times that is written on Education?
OptionA
America’s greatest homegrown
B Business Administration alumni
C
Talks to Teachers
D Aims of Education
Q 5.Name the philosophers of Modern times who worked more on Education.
OptionA Alfred North Whitehead and William James
B
Ludwig Wittgenstein and Karl Popper
C Bertrand Russell and John Dewy
D None of the above