The economic and epistemic division of labour: on Philip Kitcher’s The Main Enterprise of the World

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

    23 Downloads (Pure)

    Abstract

    In The Main Enterprise of the World, Philip Kitcher identifies an over-specialized and over-loaded curriculum as a particular affliction of education in our time. Kitcher criticizes a narrow view of education on which it is conceived as being no more than job training and proposes a more humane set of educational goals to be pursued in school. For Kitcher, the problem of the narrowness of the economic aims of education and the problem of the over-loaded curriculum are connected and, in Chapter 2 of the book, he presents a thoroughgoing critique of educational specialization as a distinguishing feature of education today. He holds that the economic value of education cannot capture education's full value and that true education should build children and young people's capacities for meaningful life and work. In this paper, I discuss Kitcher's critique of educational specialization. I note that Kitcher draws most of his inspiration from considerations about what makes a human life go well and therefore situates his thinking about education in the realm of ethics, rather than in his home discipline of the philosophy of science. Defending educational specialization, I turn to some of Kitcher's earlier work in the philosophy of science to show that the epistemic division of labour calls for a considerable degree of specialization in educational curricula on epistemic, rather than on economic, grounds.
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)400-408
    JournalJournal of Philosophy of Education
    Volume57
    Issue number2
    Early online date3 May 2023
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 24 Jul 2023

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'The economic and epistemic division of labour: on Philip Kitcher’s The Main Enterprise of the World'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this