Thursday, June 14, 2012

The Lost Individual

        Spencer (2007) introduced an intriguing aspect of John Dewey’s philosophy in his article in, The Pluralist.  It seems that Dewey believed that there was a problem in the relationship between the individual and the community.  His belief, contrary to other philosophers, who believed man’s behavior was shaped by habit, was that the process of change often produced conditions that could be explained.  The conditions that lead to change can also cause certain individuals to become detached.  He called this detached person a lost individual, and suggested that this detachment occurred because of the changing social conditions of industrialization. 
         Dewey did have a plan for saving this lost individual, which was in a form of public socialism.  Dewey’s public socialism was different from capitalistic socialism in that he was more concerned with individuals sharing in social profits rather than economic profits.
         It is ironic that Dewey called the individual self “lost” when the educational system of the 21st century seems to have lost its way, as well.  This could be due to the detachment of the learners that are sitting within the four walls of these public school systems.  Even though, Dewey was referring to industrialization as the force that caused the detachment in the early 20th century, we can connect this same detachment to the students of the 21st century.  These students have been changed by the technological forces of a global society, yet have been denied access of these forces as part of their community within today’s educational system.  It seems evident that today’s teachers need to create a learning environment that incorporates the totality of a student’s community in order to help students learn to be receptive and responsible citizens.  What better place than the community for assisting students in learning by reflecting on their own unique experiences.  


Spencer, A. (2007). Am I my brother’s keeper? Royce and Dewey on the community’s      responsibility for the lost individual.  The pluralist. 2(1), 71-80.  

No comments:

Post a Comment