Abstract
A number of distinguished philosophers of education have suggested that flourishing might serve as a central, foundational or overarching aim of education. I think they are mistaken. Two important objections to flourishing as an educational aim – the missing argument and vacuity objections – have recently been advanced by Harvey Siegel and David Carr. Here I develop and defend a third objection: flourishing cannot serve as an aim of education because it is unlearnable. I argue that the necessary conditions of flourishing include a battery of genetic, environmental, social and political goods that are not the sorts of thing a person can acquire by learning. And I try to show that the force of this objection cannot be evaded by stretching either the concept of education or the concept of aims.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Title of host publication | The Future of Education |
| Subtitle of host publication | Reimagining Its Aims and Responsibilities |
| Editors | Jonathan Beale, Christina Easton |
| Place of Publication | Oxford |
| Publisher | Oxford University Press |
| Chapter | 7 |
| ISBN (Print) | 9780197669730, 9780197669723 |
| Publication status | Accepted/In press - 14 Jan 2023 |