WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:03.160 So today we're tackling a real giant of American 00:00:03.160 --> 00:00:06.559 thought, John Dewey. A giant is absolutely the 00:00:06.559 --> 00:00:08.140 right word. I mean, if you're preparing for a 00:00:08.140 --> 00:00:10.820 meeting or just trying to get a handle on intellectual 00:00:10.820 --> 00:00:14.000 history or, you know, just curious about how 00:00:14.000 --> 00:00:16.280 our modern world even functions. You run into 00:00:16.280 --> 00:00:19.399 his shadow. Exactly. How we learn, how we solve 00:00:19.399 --> 00:00:21.780 problems as a society, how democracy is supposed 00:00:21.780 --> 00:00:24.859 to actually work. His ideas are just everywhere. 00:00:25.120 --> 00:00:27.480 And think about the time he was alive. Born in 00:00:27.480 --> 00:00:32.310 1859, lives all the way to 1952. It's... Just 00:00:32.310 --> 00:00:33.990 an incredible span. You're talking about the 00:00:33.990 --> 00:00:36.590 aftermath of the Civil War through two world 00:00:36.590 --> 00:00:40.310 wars and right into the atomic age. He saw arguably 00:00:40.310 --> 00:00:42.909 the most intense transformation in American history. 00:00:43.090 --> 00:00:45.710 And he wasn't just a bystander. He was, without 00:00:45.710 --> 00:00:48.149 a doubt, the most prominent American scholar 00:00:48.149 --> 00:00:50.710 of the entire first half of the 20th century. 00:00:50.869 --> 00:00:53.770 Okay. And the sheer volume of his work is, well, 00:00:53.890 --> 00:00:56.070 it's intimidating. It's staggering. It really 00:00:56.070 --> 00:00:58.329 is. We're talking more than 700 articles and 00:00:58.329 --> 00:01:00.750 something like 140 different journals. And that's 00:01:00.750 --> 00:01:04.069 on top of... About 40 books. And the topics cover 00:01:04.069 --> 00:01:07.870 everything. Epistemology, metaphysics, aesthetics, 00:01:08.269 --> 00:01:12.450 ethics, social theory, journalism, you name it. 00:01:12.590 --> 00:01:15.290 So that brings us to our mission for you, the 00:01:15.290 --> 00:01:18.170 listener, in this deep dive. His body of work 00:01:18.170 --> 00:01:22.769 is immense, almost, you know, unwieldy. So our 00:01:22.769 --> 00:01:24.650 goal is to go in and pull out those absolutely 00:01:24.650 --> 00:01:27.450 crucial interconnected ideas that really defined 00:01:27.450 --> 00:01:30.069 his legacy. We're trying to give you a solid 00:01:30.069 --> 00:01:32.310 shortcut to understanding the philosopher. And 00:01:32.310 --> 00:01:34.430 to do that, we have to start with the one thing 00:01:34.430 --> 00:01:37.189 that ties it all together. The great overriding 00:01:37.189 --> 00:01:39.170 theme. Because without it, you're right, his 00:01:39.170 --> 00:01:41.510 work can feel really disparate. Like, what does 00:01:41.510 --> 00:01:43.530 a theory on psychology have to do with a classroom 00:01:43.530 --> 00:01:46.150 curriculum or the role of the press? But there 00:01:46.150 --> 00:01:49.329 is a thread, and that thread was his profound... 00:01:49.769 --> 00:01:52.650 I mean, truly lifelong dedication to democracy. 00:01:52.870 --> 00:01:54.670 But not just democracy in the sense of voting 00:01:54.670 --> 00:01:57.189 every few years. No, no, not at all. For him, 00:01:57.189 --> 00:01:59.989 it was so much more. He saw it as being synonymous 00:01:59.989 --> 00:02:02.030 with, and this is a quote, the one ultimate ethical 00:02:02.030 --> 00:02:04.370 ideal of humanity. That's a powerful statement. 00:02:04.609 --> 00:02:07.129 It's a mission statement. And he articulated 00:02:07.129 --> 00:02:10.219 it as early as 1888. When he was still a young 00:02:10.219 --> 00:02:12.500 professor at the University of Michigan, this 00:02:12.500 --> 00:02:15.300 was his North Star from the very beginning. So 00:02:15.300 --> 00:02:17.560 this wasn't just some political preference or 00:02:17.560 --> 00:02:21.159 a side interest. This idea, this ethical ideal 00:02:21.159 --> 00:02:24.020 of democracy, it informed everything. Everything. 00:02:24.099 --> 00:02:26.259 Whether he was writing about a child's psychology 00:02:26.259 --> 00:02:28.740 or the structure of civil society, it all came 00:02:28.740 --> 00:02:32.319 back to this one goal. How do we create the conditions 00:02:32.319 --> 00:02:35.490 for a fully functioning democracy? which for 00:02:35.490 --> 00:02:38.189 him meant encouraging what he called experimental 00:02:38.189 --> 00:02:41.030 intelligence and plurality. It sounds like society 00:02:41.030 --> 00:02:43.129 itself needed to be rebuilt from the ground up 00:02:43.129 --> 00:02:45.650 to support that ideal. Precisely. He argued that 00:02:45.650 --> 00:02:48.409 this reconstruction had to happen in two absolutely 00:02:48.409 --> 00:02:51.650 foundational places, our schools and our civil 00:02:51.650 --> 00:02:54.030 society. Because a complete democracy needs more 00:02:54.030 --> 00:02:56.210 than just the right to vote. It requires a fully 00:02:56.210 --> 00:02:59.550 formed, robust public opinion. And that, he said, 00:02:59.669 --> 00:03:01.969 could only be achieved through open, critical 00:03:01.969 --> 00:03:04.789 communication. Among everyone, citizens, experts, 00:03:05.009 --> 00:03:07.610 political leaders. So it puts a huge burden on 00:03:07.610 --> 00:03:09.770 the citizen. You can't just be a passive receiver 00:03:09.770 --> 00:03:13.009 of information. You have to be an active thinking 00:03:13.009 --> 00:03:15.909 participant in actually creating knowledge. Absolutely. 00:03:15.949 --> 00:03:19.270 That's the high bar he sets. His ideas are, you 00:03:19.270 --> 00:03:21.969 know, they're undeniably complex. The academic 00:03:21.969 --> 00:03:23.830 language can sometimes get in the way. Sure. 00:03:23.870 --> 00:03:26.930 But the driving force underneath it all is actually 00:03:26.930 --> 00:03:30.419 remarkably simple. How do we create a functioning, 00:03:30.520 --> 00:03:34.219 cooperative democracy through thoughtful, reflective 00:03:34.219 --> 00:03:37.759 and just ceaseless action? OK, let's unpack this 00:03:37.759 --> 00:03:39.939 then. That seems like the perfect place to start 00:03:39.939 --> 00:03:42.620 with the philosophical engine that powered this 00:03:42.620 --> 00:03:44.719 whole massive enterprise. We have to start with 00:03:44.719 --> 00:03:46.219 the schools of thought he's associated with. 00:03:46.319 --> 00:03:48.740 He's a central figure in American pragmatism, 00:03:48.740 --> 00:03:51.219 of course. Of course. But he had his own preferred 00:03:51.219 --> 00:03:53.439 terms, didn't he? He did. He was always very 00:03:53.439 --> 00:03:55.900 precise. While he was okay with the pragmatism 00:03:55.900 --> 00:03:58.560 label, he often preferred to call his own approach 00:03:58.560 --> 00:04:02.120 instrumentalism. And he also saw links to consequentialism. 00:04:02.319 --> 00:04:04.620 Yes. And these aren't just, you know, splitting 00:04:04.620 --> 00:04:07.560 academic hairs. These labels signal a really 00:04:07.560 --> 00:04:10.030 fundamental shift in philosophy. Away from this 00:04:10.030 --> 00:04:12.949 ancient search for some kind of eternal capital 00:04:12.949 --> 00:04:16.269 T truth. Right. And toward a system for validating 00:04:16.269 --> 00:04:19.470 ideas based on what they actually do in the real 00:04:19.470 --> 00:04:21.709 world. OK, so it's all about the results. Right. 00:04:21.889 --> 00:04:24.550 But that that sounds a little dangerous if it's 00:04:24.550 --> 00:04:26.870 just whatever works that could justify anything. 00:04:27.110 --> 00:04:29.589 We know Dewey was incredibly rigorous. So how 00:04:29.589 --> 00:04:32.649 did he stop his instrumentalism from just becoming. 00:04:33.779 --> 00:04:36.040 expediency that's the critical question and you've 00:04:36.040 --> 00:04:38.139 really hit on the core of his rigor he was very 00:04:38.139 --> 00:04:40.579 aware of that danger when he was trying to define 00:04:40.579 --> 00:04:43.480 the actual criterion of validity for all three 00:04:43.480 --> 00:04:46.959 of those schools pragmatism instrumentalism consequentialism 00:04:46.959 --> 00:04:49.720 he laid out this incredibly precise definition 00:04:49.720 --> 00:04:53.360 the one from his big book on logic logic The 00:04:53.360 --> 00:04:55.199 theory of inquiry. That's the one. It sounds 00:04:55.199 --> 00:04:57.779 incredibly dense at first, but every single word 00:04:57.779 --> 00:05:00.519 matters. Let's hear it. OK. He defined the criterion 00:05:00.519 --> 00:05:03.079 as the function of consequences as necessary 00:05:03.079 --> 00:05:06.100 tests of the validity of propositions. All right. 00:05:06.100 --> 00:05:09.060 So breaking that down, the validity of an idea 00:05:09.060 --> 00:05:13.279 proposition is tested by its results, its consequences. 00:05:13.319 --> 00:05:16.360 That part is clear. Right. But what makes those 00:05:16.360 --> 00:05:18.889 consequences a valid test? This is where the 00:05:18.889 --> 00:05:20.850 instrumental part comes in, I assume. Exactly. 00:05:20.850 --> 00:05:23.470 This is the fine print that separates it from 00:05:23.470 --> 00:05:27.170 a simple whatever works mentality. He adds a 00:05:27.170 --> 00:05:30.910 crucial condition. The consequences only count 00:05:30.910 --> 00:05:33.750 as a valid test provoded. Okay. Provided those 00:05:33.750 --> 00:05:36.709 consequences are operationally instituted and 00:05:36.709 --> 00:05:39.870 are such as to resolve the specific problem evoking 00:05:39.870 --> 00:05:42.709 the operations. Operationally instituted. That 00:05:42.709 --> 00:05:44.689 phrase feels like the engine of the whole thing. 00:05:44.769 --> 00:05:46.509 Let's really spend a minute on that. It is the 00:05:46.509 --> 00:05:48.389 engine. Think of it like a scientist running 00:05:48.389 --> 00:05:50.850 an experiment in a lab, but you're applying that 00:05:50.850 --> 00:05:53.769 same level of rigor to a belief or an ethical 00:05:53.769 --> 00:05:56.790 claim or social policy. So a proposition is like 00:05:56.790 --> 00:05:59.370 a hypothesis. Exactly. And you don't just sit 00:05:59.370 --> 00:06:01.569 in your armchair and ponder whether your hypothesis 00:06:01.569 --> 00:06:04.410 is true in some abstract sense. You have to actively 00:06:04.410 --> 00:06:06.850 test it. You have to put it into practice in 00:06:06.850 --> 00:06:09.250 the world. That's what operationally instituted 00:06:09.250 --> 00:06:12.490 means, carrying out observable, verifiable steps. 00:06:12.790 --> 00:06:15.209 OK, let's use a real world example, something 00:06:15.209 --> 00:06:18.209 that ties back to his interest in social problems. 00:06:18.949 --> 00:06:22.709 Let's say a city government has a belief, a proposition 00:06:22.709 --> 00:06:26.230 that installing new streetlights in a high crime 00:06:26.230 --> 00:06:29.290 neighborhood. will reduce burglaries. Perfect. 00:06:29.589 --> 00:06:32.370 Under Dewey's instrumentalism, you can't just 00:06:32.370 --> 00:06:34.550 validate that idea based on the good intention 00:06:34.550 --> 00:06:37.610 or the theory that light deters crime. You have 00:06:37.610 --> 00:06:40.189 to operationally institute it. So you have to 00:06:40.189 --> 00:06:42.449 actually fund the project, buy the lights, install 00:06:42.449 --> 00:06:44.649 them, make sure they're maintained. The active 00:06:44.649 --> 00:06:46.990 application. Yes. And then comes the second part 00:06:46.990 --> 00:06:49.149 of the criterion, which is just as vital. The 00:06:49.149 --> 00:06:51.689 consequences have to resolve the specific problem 00:06:51.689 --> 00:06:54.470 evoking the operations. So it's not enough that 00:06:54.470 --> 00:06:56.689 something good happens in a general sense. Maybe 00:06:56.689 --> 00:06:58.930 the new lights make people feel safer or property 00:06:58.930 --> 00:07:00.970 values go up. Right. Those might be nice side 00:07:00.970 --> 00:07:02.769 effects. But the test of validity is whether 00:07:02.769 --> 00:07:05.470 the lights specifically reduce the burglary rate. 00:07:05.629 --> 00:07:07.730 That was the specific problem that started the 00:07:07.730 --> 00:07:11.470 whole inquiry. So if burglaries go down. the 00:07:11.470 --> 00:07:13.769 proposition, the belief in streetlights as a 00:07:13.769 --> 00:07:17.649 solution is for now validated. It's instrumentally 00:07:17.649 --> 00:07:19.930 true in that context. Provisionally validated, 00:07:20.189 --> 00:07:23.389 yes. And if the burglary rate stays the same 00:07:23.389 --> 00:07:26.490 or even goes up, then the proposition is nullified. 00:07:26.810 --> 00:07:29.930 The idea failed the test and the process of inquiry 00:07:29.930 --> 00:07:32.449 has to start all over again with a new hypothesis. 00:07:33.259 --> 00:07:36.019 That's a fantastic way to ground it. It's basically 00:07:36.019 --> 00:07:38.339 the scientific method applied to all beliefs. 00:07:38.779 --> 00:07:41.740 Everything is a hypothesis and everything is 00:07:41.740 --> 00:07:44.360 subject to revision based on evidence. And he 00:07:44.360 --> 00:07:46.600 was very much in dialogue with his peers on this. 00:07:46.680 --> 00:07:48.579 He wasn't working in a vacuum. He had a lot of 00:07:48.579 --> 00:07:50.759 respect for the other great pragmatists. A great 00:07:50.759 --> 00:07:53.959 deal. In his essays in Experimental Logic, he 00:07:53.959 --> 00:07:55.839 gives a shout out to Charles Sanders Pierce, 00:07:56.120 --> 00:07:58.920 who, funnily enough, actually got the word pragmatic 00:07:58.920 --> 00:08:01.819 from Immanuel Kant, using it to mean something 00:08:01.819 --> 00:08:05.100 that has... empirical consequences. And then 00:08:05.100 --> 00:08:07.540 there's William James, who is probably the most 00:08:07.540 --> 00:08:10.279 famous of the group and gave pragmatism its most 00:08:10.279 --> 00:08:12.779 memorable slogan. Right. James's famous line 00:08:12.779 --> 00:08:15.379 that general notions must cash in. Great line. 00:08:15.560 --> 00:08:17.720 It's a great line. But Dewey, while respecting 00:08:17.720 --> 00:08:19.579 James, felt it needed a bit of clarification 00:08:19.579 --> 00:08:22.300 to avoid that. Whatever works fallacy we were 00:08:22.300 --> 00:08:24.740 just talking about. He pointed out that for James, 00:08:24.879 --> 00:08:28.100 cashing in didn't mean, is it profitable? It 00:08:28.100 --> 00:08:31.560 meant the ideas must be translatable into verifiable, 00:08:31.560 --> 00:08:33.799 specific things. So it always comes back to that 00:08:33.799 --> 00:08:36.700 verifiable, specific consequences that come from 00:08:36.700 --> 00:08:39.340 taking action. That's instrumentalism. That's 00:08:39.340 --> 00:08:41.320 the heart of it. OK, so we have to talk about 00:08:41.320 --> 00:08:43.720 one of his biggest attempts to put all this together 00:08:43.720 --> 00:08:48.250 into one grand statement. His 1925 book, Experience 00:08:48.250 --> 00:08:51.009 in Nature. It's often called his most metaphysical 00:08:51.009 --> 00:08:54.629 work. It is. But the sources say he was really 00:08:54.629 --> 00:08:56.970 unhappy with how it was first received. He was, 00:08:57.049 --> 00:08:59.710 yeah. The first edition just didn't land the 00:08:59.710 --> 00:09:02.370 way he wanted it to. Critics tried to sort of 00:09:02.370 --> 00:09:05.649 cram his ideas into the old philosophical boxes 00:09:05.649 --> 00:09:07.889 they were familiar with. So he rewrote it. He 00:09:07.889 --> 00:09:11.340 did. For the second edition in 1929, He rewrote 00:09:11.340 --> 00:09:13.940 the entire first chapter and added a new preface 00:09:13.940 --> 00:09:16.340 to make his intentions crystal clear. And in 00:09:16.340 --> 00:09:18.659 that rewrite, he basically said he wasn't trying 00:09:18.659 --> 00:09:20.940 to fit in with the old philosophies at all. Not 00:09:20.940 --> 00:09:22.720 at all. He came out and said he was presenting 00:09:22.720 --> 00:09:25.419 what we would now call a new Kuhnian paradigm, 00:09:25.700 --> 00:09:28.679 a whole new way of seeing things. He wasn't interested 00:09:28.679 --> 00:09:30.940 in continuity with the past. He was saying his 00:09:30.940 --> 00:09:33.799 ideas were. incommensurable with the old ways 00:09:33.799 --> 00:09:35.340 of thinking you couldn't even measure them by 00:09:35.340 --> 00:09:38.080 the old standards a total break yeah and to emphasize 00:09:38.080 --> 00:09:40.620 just how revolutionary this was he used this 00:09:40.620 --> 00:09:42.500 really striking quote about the book's title 00:09:42.500 --> 00:09:44.840 yes he knew people would stumble on the title 00:09:44.840 --> 00:09:48.740 itself experience and nature he wrote to many 00:09:48.740 --> 00:09:50.679 the associating of the two words will seem like 00:09:50.679 --> 00:09:53.370 talking of a round square Around square. I mean, 00:09:53.370 --> 00:09:55.690 that's a powerful way to put it. Why were those 00:09:55.690 --> 00:09:58.950 two concepts, experience and nature, seen as 00:09:58.950 --> 00:10:01.509 so mutually exclusive in traditional philosophy? 00:10:01.889 --> 00:10:03.870 Well, historically, philosophy loved to split 00:10:03.870 --> 00:10:06.789 reality in two. On one side, you had nature, 00:10:06.929 --> 00:10:09.330 the objective, external, real world governed 00:10:09.330 --> 00:10:12.149 by fixed laws that science could measure. And 00:10:12.149 --> 00:10:14.470 on the other side, you had experience. And experience 00:10:14.470 --> 00:10:17.990 was seen as subjective, internal, the messy world 00:10:17.990 --> 00:10:20.009 of consciousness, feelings, interpretations, 00:10:20.289 --> 00:10:23.629 and, you know. error so mind versus matter subject 00:10:23.629 --> 00:10:27.149 versus object precisely dewey was trying to tear 00:10:27.149 --> 00:10:29.669 down that wall He was arguing that experience 00:10:29.669 --> 00:10:31.870 isn't something that just happens inside our 00:10:31.870 --> 00:10:34.730 heads, separate from the world. Experience is 00:10:34.730 --> 00:10:37.769 a real event that is fully and inescapably part 00:10:37.769 --> 00:10:39.950 of nature itself. He was trying to heal that 00:10:39.950 --> 00:10:42.629 split. He was. And he knew you couldn't do it 00:10:42.629 --> 00:10:45.330 with just a simple argument. He said these old 00:10:45.330 --> 00:10:48.570 dualistic associations were too deeply ingrained 00:10:48.570 --> 00:10:51.129 in our language. So he hoped that by reading 00:10:51.129 --> 00:10:54.250 the whole book, the reader would insensibly produce, 00:10:54.409 --> 00:10:57.629 if one is fortunate, a change in the signification. 00:10:57.639 --> 00:11:01.799 So it's not about winning a debate. It's about 00:11:01.799 --> 00:11:05.159 slowly converting the reader to a whole new worldview. 00:11:05.399 --> 00:11:07.039 It's a vision of intellectual transformation, 00:11:07.399 --> 00:11:09.740 yeah. Built on this idea that your experience 00:11:09.740 --> 00:11:11.600 is a natural event, just like a thunderstorm 00:11:11.600 --> 00:11:14.000 or a chemical reaction. It's amazing how that 00:11:14.000 --> 00:11:16.360 same rigor he applied to logic and philosophy. 00:11:16.620 --> 00:11:18.779 It's the same functional approach he took to 00:11:18.779 --> 00:11:21.440 the human mind. And that leads us directly into 00:11:21.440 --> 00:11:23.159 his work as a founder of American psychology. 00:11:23.769 --> 00:11:25.769 It's a perfect transition. You can actually trace 00:11:25.769 --> 00:11:27.490 this path through his early career, which is, 00:11:27.509 --> 00:11:29.629 well, it's a bit surprising. He wasn't always 00:11:29.629 --> 00:11:32.070 a university philosopher. Not at all. He started 00:11:32.070 --> 00:11:34.269 out as a teacher. He taught high school for two 00:11:34.269 --> 00:11:37.110 years in Pennsylvania and elementary school for 00:11:37.110 --> 00:11:39.549 a year in Vermont. And he later said he was completely 00:11:39.549 --> 00:11:43.049 unsuited for it. He did, which is pretty ironic 00:11:43.049 --> 00:11:44.950 for the man who would go on to revolutionize 00:11:44.950 --> 00:11:47.470 education. But, you know, he moved on, got his 00:11:47.470 --> 00:11:50.570 Ph .D. from Johns Hopkins. And the real turning 00:11:50.570 --> 00:11:53.049 point was his arrival at the brand new university. 00:11:53.070 --> 00:11:55.909 University of Chicago in 1894. Right. This is 00:11:55.909 --> 00:11:58.370 where the famous Chicago group forms. This was 00:11:58.370 --> 00:12:01.230 a critical moment. He and his colleagues, James 00:12:01.230 --> 00:12:03.850 Hayden Tufts, George Herbert Mead, and one of 00:12:03.850 --> 00:12:06.350 his students, James Roland Angel, they started 00:12:06.350 --> 00:12:08.909 developing what became known as functional psychology. 00:12:09.269 --> 00:12:11.389 And this was a direct challenge to the dominant 00:12:11.389 --> 00:12:13.929 psychological school at the time. A very deliberate 00:12:13.929 --> 00:12:15.990 one. They were pushing back against the very 00:12:15.990 --> 00:12:19.610 rigid physiological psychology of Wilhelm Wundt 00:12:19.610 --> 00:12:22.450 in Germany and his American students. So what 00:12:22.450 --> 00:12:23.929 was the big difference? What was the Chicago 00:12:23.929 --> 00:12:27.250 group's emphasis? Well, Wundt's psychology was 00:12:27.250 --> 00:12:30.490 very structuralist. tried to break the mind down 00:12:30.490 --> 00:12:32.909 into its basic components, almost like chemistry. 00:12:33.899 --> 00:12:35.840 The Chicago group said that's the wrong approach 00:12:35.840 --> 00:12:38.580 entirely. OK. Their emphasis was on the influence 00:12:38.580 --> 00:12:40.899 of the social environment on the mind and on 00:12:40.899 --> 00:12:43.259 behavior. They wanted to understand the mind 00:12:43.259 --> 00:12:46.759 in action as an adaptive function in a real world 00:12:46.759 --> 00:12:49.419 context. The mind wasn't a collection of static 00:12:49.419 --> 00:12:52.179 parts. It was something that did things. And 00:12:52.179 --> 00:12:54.379 this new school of thought was really launched 00:12:54.379 --> 00:12:58.179 by one landmark paper in 1896. The reflex art 00:12:58.179 --> 00:13:00.580 concept in psychology. It's considered the first 00:13:00.580 --> 00:13:03.529 major statement of functional psychology. It's 00:13:03.529 --> 00:13:05.529 just a brilliant piece of work because it challenges 00:13:05.529 --> 00:13:07.929 a really fundamental assumption. The traditional 00:13:07.929 --> 00:13:11.350 model of the reflex arc. Exactly. The old model 00:13:11.350 --> 00:13:14.250 was the simple linear chain. You have a stimulus, 00:13:14.389 --> 00:13:17.509 like a pinprick, that causes a sensation, the 00:13:17.509 --> 00:13:19.870 feeling of pain, which then causes a response. 00:13:19.909 --> 00:13:22.970 You pull your hand away. ABC, like dominoes. 00:13:22.970 --> 00:13:25.429 Like dominoes, separate distinct links in a chain. 00:13:25.789 --> 00:13:27.549 Dewey argued against this. He said that's not 00:13:27.549 --> 00:13:29.960 how it works at all. So he wasn't denying that 00:13:29.960 --> 00:13:32.840 the stimulus or the response exist, but he rejected 00:13:32.840 --> 00:13:34.919 the idea that they were separate events. What 00:13:34.919 --> 00:13:38.139 was his alternative, this circular account? He 00:13:38.139 --> 00:13:40.720 defended what he called the unitary nature of 00:13:40.720 --> 00:13:43.159 the sensory motor circuit. The whole thing is 00:13:43.159 --> 00:13:46.000 one continuous geomantic process. It's a loop. 00:13:46.350 --> 00:13:48.769 How so? He argued that the stimulation is always 00:13:48.769 --> 00:13:51.230 being enriched by the results of previous experiences. 00:13:51.710 --> 00:13:54.309 The sensation isn't just raw data coming in. 00:13:54.409 --> 00:13:56.750 It's an active interpretation from the very start. 00:13:57.129 --> 00:13:59.889 And likewise, the response is constantly being 00:13:59.889 --> 00:14:02.570 modulated by sensorial experience as it happens. 00:14:02.750 --> 00:14:05.230 Okay, let's use an example. A child sees a candle 00:14:05.230 --> 00:14:07.169 flame for the first time. Right. The old model 00:14:07.169 --> 00:14:10.210 says flame, stimulus, causes pain, sensation, 00:14:10.450 --> 00:14:13.409 causes withdrawal response. Yeah. How does Dewey's 00:14:13.409 --> 00:14:15.590 model see it differently? Dewey would say, hold 00:14:15.590 --> 00:14:18.360 on. The act of seeing the flame and reaching 00:14:18.360 --> 00:14:21.279 for it is already a complex behavior, probably 00:14:21.279 --> 00:14:23.980 driven by curiosity based on prior experiences 00:14:23.980 --> 00:14:26.659 with interesting objects. The stimulus of the 00:14:26.659 --> 00:14:28.679 light isn't separate from the motor response 00:14:28.679 --> 00:14:31.340 of reaching. I see. And then the painful sensation 00:14:31.340 --> 00:14:34.139 immediately informs and reshapes the child's 00:14:34.139 --> 00:14:36.320 perception of flames in the future. It's not 00:14:36.320 --> 00:14:39.500 three separate events. It's one integrated dynamic 00:14:39.500 --> 00:14:42.580 loop where past knowledge shapes present perception, 00:14:42.899 --> 00:14:45.460 which in turn instantly shapes future action. 00:14:45.659 --> 00:14:48.409 That's a profound shift. From seeing the mind 00:14:48.409 --> 00:14:50.769 as a machine to seeing it as an adaptive functional 00:14:50.769 --> 00:14:53.990 system. It was huge. And it's why he was so recognized 00:14:53.990 --> 00:14:56.110 in the field. He was president of the American 00:14:56.110 --> 00:14:58.929 Psychological Association in 1899 and then the 00:14:58.929 --> 00:15:01.590 American Philosophical Association in 1905. And 00:15:01.590 --> 00:15:04.179 this functional view of the mind. feeds directly 00:15:04.179 --> 00:15:07.759 into his work on logic. He saw logic itself not 00:15:07.759 --> 00:15:10.240 as a set of abstract rules, but as an instrument 00:15:10.240 --> 00:15:12.500 for investigating the world. Absolutely. In his 00:15:12.500 --> 00:15:15.820 1938 book, Logic, the Theory of Inquiry, he points 00:15:15.820 --> 00:15:17.860 out this paradox he saw in the logical theory 00:15:17.860 --> 00:15:20.080 of his day. The split between what logicians 00:15:20.080 --> 00:15:22.100 could agree on and what they just argued about 00:15:22.100 --> 00:15:24.480 endlessly. Exactly. He said, you know, when it 00:15:24.480 --> 00:15:26.600 comes to the proximate subject matter, the actual 00:15:26.600 --> 00:15:29.110 techniques and methods of reasoning. Everyone 00:15:29.110 --> 00:15:31.809 basically agrees and we make progress. But when 00:15:31.809 --> 00:15:34.269 it comes to the ultimate subject matter, what 00:15:34.269 --> 00:15:38.029 is truth? What's validity? It's just constant, 00:15:38.230 --> 00:15:40.769 unresolvable controversy. So he challenged them. 00:15:40.870 --> 00:15:43.659 He did. He asked. Are these logical operators 00:15:43.659 --> 00:15:46.779 just pure extractions like in math? Or do they 00:15:46.779 --> 00:15:48.600 actually connect with the real world and help 00:15:48.600 --> 00:15:51.240 us alter it or understand it better? For him, 00:15:51.279 --> 00:15:54.519 logic had to be an engaged process, an instrument 00:15:54.519 --> 00:15:56.779 for solving real problems. And this goes back 00:15:56.779 --> 00:15:59.379 to his focus on precise language. He was engaging 00:15:59.379 --> 00:16:02.340 with logical positivism, but he had some critiques. 00:16:02.480 --> 00:16:05.500 He did. He welcomed their shift in focus. The 00:16:05.500 --> 00:16:07.919 positivists were moving away from abstract terms 00:16:07.919 --> 00:16:10.980 like propositions and terms and focusing on the 00:16:10.980 --> 00:16:13.789 concrete reality. reality of sentences and words. 00:16:14.029 --> 00:16:16.009 Which he liked. He liked it because it focused 00:16:16.009 --> 00:16:18.850 attention on the actual symbolic structures we 00:16:18.850 --> 00:16:21.929 use to communicate, but he also felt it narrows 00:16:21.929 --> 00:16:24.309 unduly the scope of what counts as a symbol. 00:16:24.429 --> 00:16:26.110 Because symbols aren't just words on a page. 00:16:26.309 --> 00:16:29.299 Of course not. What about a map? or an architect's 00:16:29.299 --> 00:16:32.659 blueprint, or a clenched fist. Those are all 00:16:32.659 --> 00:16:35.100 powerful symbols, but we don't usually call them 00:16:35.100 --> 00:16:38.419 a word or a sentence. He stressed that you can't 00:16:38.419 --> 00:16:40.340 understand the intent of a symbol in isolation. 00:16:40.759 --> 00:16:43.580 You can only judge it by its context. If you 00:16:43.580 --> 00:16:46.240 miss the context, you miss the meaning. This 00:16:46.240 --> 00:16:49.679 holistic contextual approach led him to try and 00:16:49.679 --> 00:16:53.000 solve the massive terminology problem in epistemology. 00:16:53.379 --> 00:16:56.080 This was in his final major work with Arthur 00:16:56.080 --> 00:16:59.080 Bentley, Knowing and the Known. Right. They argued 00:16:59.080 --> 00:17:01.440 that so much of the confusion came from philosophers 00:17:01.440 --> 00:17:05.039 clinging to outdated ways of thinking about how 00:17:05.039 --> 00:17:07.220 things are organized and how they interact. And 00:17:07.220 --> 00:17:09.400 they laid out three historical levels of this 00:17:09.400 --> 00:17:12.059 thinking. Yes. The oldest, most primitive way 00:17:12.059 --> 00:17:15.950 of thinking they called self -action. act because 00:17:15.950 --> 00:17:17.910 of some power they have inside them. The ocean 00:17:17.910 --> 00:17:20.109 is angry, so the ship sinks. That person is just 00:17:20.109 --> 00:17:21.849 evil. That's why they did a bad thing. Exactly. 00:17:22.029 --> 00:17:24.990 It achieves causation to some fixed internal 00:17:24.990 --> 00:17:27.950 essence, very pre -scientific. The next level, 00:17:27.990 --> 00:17:30.230 which really dominated modern science for centuries, 00:17:30.390 --> 00:17:33.750 was interaction. The Newtonian model. Billiard 00:17:33.750 --> 00:17:36.720 balls colliding. Perfect analogy. Here, things 00:17:36.720 --> 00:17:38.940 are balanced against each other in a system of 00:17:38.940 --> 00:17:41.859 equal and opposite reaction. It's systematic, 00:17:42.220 --> 00:17:45.039 it's measurable, but it still thinks in terms 00:17:45.039 --> 00:17:47.900 of separate, independent objects acting on each 00:17:47.900 --> 00:17:50.960 other, cause and effect between distinct entities. 00:17:51.339 --> 00:17:53.319 And then the third level, the one they were proposing 00:17:53.319 --> 00:17:56.579 to deal with modern complexity, was transaction. 00:17:56.940 --> 00:18:00.180 This is the big leap. In a transaction, you stop 00:18:00.180 --> 00:18:02.539 thinking about separate, pre -existing entities. 00:18:03.680 --> 00:18:05.900 Transactionalism deals with the multiple aspects 00:18:05.900 --> 00:18:08.779 and phases of a whole action without breaking 00:18:08.779 --> 00:18:11.319 it down into ultimate, final, or independent 00:18:11.319 --> 00:18:13.660 entities. Wait, I need a clearer distinction 00:18:13.660 --> 00:18:16.339 here. How is transaction really different from 00:18:16.339 --> 00:18:18.519 interaction? It sounds a bit like systems theory. 00:18:18.700 --> 00:18:20.599 It's a precursor to systems theory, for sure. 00:18:20.700 --> 00:18:22.599 The key difference is that interaction still 00:18:22.599 --> 00:18:24.380 assumes you have separate things that then act 00:18:24.380 --> 00:18:26.400 upon each other. A buyer and a seller, for example. 00:18:27.150 --> 00:18:29.049 Transactionalism says you can't even define the 00:18:29.049 --> 00:18:30.910 buyer without the seller or the seller without 00:18:30.910 --> 00:18:33.509 the buyer. They are mutually defining aspects 00:18:33.509 --> 00:18:37.789 of a single event, the purchase. You, the observer, 00:18:38.089 --> 00:18:40.289 the environment, the object being sold, it's 00:18:40.289 --> 00:18:42.369 all one complex situation. You can't pull them 00:18:42.369 --> 00:18:44.730 apart without destroying the meaning of the event. 00:18:45.289 --> 00:18:48.029 Let's use a more complex social issue, say a 00:18:48.029 --> 00:18:50.789 citywide protest. Great. From a self -action 00:18:50.789 --> 00:18:53.430 perspective, you'd say those protesters are inherently 00:18:53.430 --> 00:18:55.910 disruptive or the police are inherently oppressive. 00:18:55.970 --> 00:18:59.609 You assign the cause to a fixed internal nature. 00:18:59.809 --> 00:19:01.690 Got it. From an interaction perspective, you'd 00:19:01.690 --> 00:19:04.349 say the protesters marched, so the police responded 00:19:04.349 --> 00:19:07.690 with force. Action and reaction between two separate 00:19:07.690 --> 00:19:09.710 groups. A more balanced view, but still separate. 00:19:09.849 --> 00:19:12.490 Right. But the transactional approach demands 00:19:12.490 --> 00:19:15.230 you look at the entire system. You have to analyze 00:19:15.230 --> 00:19:17.390 the overlapping history of the community, the 00:19:17.390 --> 00:19:20.009 economic pressures, the media coverage, the political 00:19:20.009 --> 00:19:22.369 climate, the specific training of the officers, 00:19:22.589 --> 00:19:24.950 the motivations of the protesters, all of it 00:19:24.950 --> 00:19:28.150 as one indivisible event. You realize that the 00:19:28.150 --> 00:19:30.470 police and the protesters are being defined in 00:19:30.470 --> 00:19:33.430 and through that very situation. That is a much 00:19:33.430 --> 00:19:35.349 more intellectually demanding way to look at 00:19:35.349 --> 00:19:38.029 the world. And if the goal of logic and philosophy 00:19:38.029 --> 00:19:40.349 is to help us navigate these complex transactions, 00:19:40.769 --> 00:19:44.289 then... Individuals need the right mental tools. 00:19:44.490 --> 00:19:46.410 And that's where his definition of reflective 00:19:46.410 --> 00:19:49.849 thinking from his 1910 book, How We Think, becomes 00:19:49.849 --> 00:19:52.289 the absolute foundation for everything else. 00:19:52.529 --> 00:19:54.809 This is the blueprint for the intelligent citizen 00:19:54.809 --> 00:19:57.690 he wanted to create. It is. He defines reflective 00:19:57.690 --> 00:20:01.769 thinking as an active, persistent, and careful 00:20:01.769 --> 00:20:05.369 consideration of any belief in the light of the 00:20:05.369 --> 00:20:07.809 grounds that support it and the further conclusions 00:20:07.809 --> 00:20:10.440 to which it tends. And that word active is doing 00:20:10.440 --> 00:20:12.880 all the work there. All of it. Thinking is not 00:20:12.880 --> 00:20:15.119 passively soaping up information from a teacher 00:20:15.119 --> 00:20:18.160 or a news report. It's an active process of questioning, 00:20:18.380 --> 00:20:20.940 analyzing, testing beliefs against evidence, 00:20:21.180 --> 00:20:23.420 and then tracing those beliefs forward to see 00:20:23.420 --> 00:20:25.240 where they lead. What are their logical consequences? 00:20:25.660 --> 00:20:27.880 And he laid out what well -executed thinking 00:20:27.880 --> 00:20:30.740 looks like versus poorly executed thinking. He 00:20:30.740 --> 00:20:33.579 did. The difference is that reflective process. 00:20:34.440 --> 00:20:37.970 Poor thinking relies on habit, prejudice. or 00:20:37.970 --> 00:20:40.710 just accepting things without question. But well 00:20:40.710 --> 00:20:44.369 -executed thinking requires specific steps. Skepticism, 00:20:44.509 --> 00:20:47.170 followed by investigation, to find evidence that 00:20:47.170 --> 00:20:49.970 either supports or nullifies a belief. It's the 00:20:49.970 --> 00:20:51.829 instrumental method applied to your own mind. 00:20:51.970 --> 00:20:54.150 It's a systematic design for applying intelligence 00:20:54.150 --> 00:20:57.470 to life. And once he had that blueprint, it was 00:20:57.470 --> 00:21:00.029 obvious what the schools needed to do. This connects 00:21:00.029 --> 00:21:02.380 everything. If your whole political and social 00:21:02.380 --> 00:21:05.400 philosophy depends on citizens being transactional, 00:21:05.400 --> 00:21:08.000 reflective thinkers, then the number one job 00:21:08.000 --> 00:21:10.460 of the education system is to produce those citizens. 00:21:10.680 --> 00:21:12.519 And this is where he really becomes the major 00:21:12.519 --> 00:21:15.309 voice for progressive education. Dewey was never 00:21:15.309 --> 00:21:17.109 going to let these ideas just stay in a book. 00:21:17.170 --> 00:21:19.250 He needed a laboratory. The University of Chicago 00:21:19.250 --> 00:21:21.630 Laboratory Schools. Yeah. The Dewey School. Exactly. 00:21:21.849 --> 00:21:24.289 This was his chance to put his theories into 00:21:24.289 --> 00:21:26.869 practice, to test them, to refine them. It was 00:21:26.869 --> 00:21:30.109 action research on a massive scale. And his core 00:21:30.109 --> 00:21:33.589 beliefs, which he laid out in things like pedagogic 00:21:33.589 --> 00:21:36.390 creed and democracy and education, they just 00:21:36.390 --> 00:21:38.710 turned the existing model of schooling on its 00:21:38.710 --> 00:21:41.319 head. Completely. First, he said that education 00:21:41.319 --> 00:21:43.859 and learning are fundamentally social and interactive. 00:21:44.079 --> 00:21:46.700 You don't learn in a vacuum. And from that flows 00:21:46.700 --> 00:21:49.500 his most radical idea for the school itself. 00:21:49.819 --> 00:21:51.900 That the school is a social institution where 00:21:51.900 --> 00:21:55.059 social reform should and must take place. He 00:21:55.059 --> 00:21:57.819 saw the classroom as the primary engine for cultivating 00:21:57.819 --> 00:22:00.759 the habits of democracy. It's a micro democracy 00:22:00.759 --> 00:22:02.980 in training. Where the act of learning is supposed 00:22:02.980 --> 00:22:05.829 to mirror the act of civic engagement. in every 00:22:05.829 --> 00:22:08.289 way he believes students thrive when they're 00:22:08.289 --> 00:22:10.269 allowed to experience and interact with the curriculum 00:22:10.269 --> 00:22:14.109 this is the bedrock of what we now call experiential 00:22:14.109 --> 00:22:16.369 education so the whole purpose of education shifts 00:22:16.369 --> 00:22:19.210 it's not about cramming a predetermined set of 00:22:19.210 --> 00:22:22.210 facts into a student's head anymore no the purpose 00:22:22.210 --> 00:22:24.789 is to help each student realize their full potential 00:22:24.789 --> 00:22:27.210 and gain the ability to use their skills for 00:22:27.210 --> 00:22:30.559 the greater good His phrase was to give him command 00:22:30.559 --> 00:22:33.279 of himself so he would have the full and ready 00:22:33.279 --> 00:22:35.960 use of all his capacities. He really saw the 00:22:35.960 --> 00:22:38.819 school as the most instrumental institution for 00:22:38.819 --> 00:22:41.960 social change. Because it regulates, in his words, 00:22:42.099 --> 00:22:44.240 the process of coming to share in the social 00:22:44.240 --> 00:22:47.400 consciousness. And adjusting individual activity 00:22:47.400 --> 00:22:50.440 based on that shared consciousness is the only 00:22:50.440 --> 00:22:53.440 sure method of social reconstruction. But he 00:22:53.440 --> 00:22:55.920 was very careful not to fall into extremes here. 00:22:56.059 --> 00:22:59.400 He saw a big pedagogical dilemma emerging, one 00:22:59.400 --> 00:23:01.740 that, honestly, we still argue about today. He 00:23:01.740 --> 00:23:04.380 did. In The Child and the Curriculum, he laid 00:23:04.380 --> 00:23:06.799 out the two opposing camps. What were they? On 00:23:06.799 --> 00:23:09.599 one side, you had the old guard, the rigid, traditional, 00:23:09.680 --> 00:23:11.900 curriculum -centered approach. Where the subject 00:23:11.900 --> 00:23:14.099 matter is king? The subject matter is king, the 00:23:14.099 --> 00:23:16.940 facts are fixed, and the student's job is to 00:23:16.940 --> 00:23:19.720 just be a passive vessel and absorb it all. Dewey 00:23:19.720 --> 00:23:21.759 said the big flaw here is that it treats the 00:23:21.759 --> 00:23:24.579 child as this superficial being who is to be 00:23:24.579 --> 00:23:26.740 deepened by the all -knowing curriculum. And 00:23:26.740 --> 00:23:29.309 on the other extreme. The extreme child -centered 00:23:29.309 --> 00:23:31.549 approach, this was adopted by some of his more, 00:23:31.609 --> 00:23:34.569 let's say, enthusiastic followers. They placed 00:23:34.569 --> 00:23:37.250 so much emphasis on the child's immediate interests 00:23:37.250 --> 00:23:39.829 that they ended up minimizing the importance 00:23:39.829 --> 00:23:42.230 of structured content and the teacher's expertise. 00:23:42.670 --> 00:23:44.990 So he rejected both. He saw both as incomplete. 00:23:45.410 --> 00:23:48.650 And his synthesis is just beautiful. He wrote, 00:23:48.789 --> 00:23:51.369 the child and the curriculum are simply two limits 00:23:51.369 --> 00:23:53.990 which define a single process. They aren't in 00:23:53.990 --> 00:23:55.869 opposition. They're two poles of the same thing. 00:23:55.930 --> 00:23:59.049 Exactly. The teacher's job is to relate the facts 00:23:59.049 --> 00:24:01.470 and truths of the curriculum to the student's 00:24:01.470 --> 00:24:04.630 own prior experiences, to their life, to forge 00:24:04.630 --> 00:24:07.349 that vital connection that makes active inquiry 00:24:07.349 --> 00:24:10.049 possible. So the curriculum doesn't connect to 00:24:10.049 --> 00:24:12.690 the child's life. It's just meaningless rote 00:24:12.690 --> 00:24:15.109 memorization. Right. But if you only follow the 00:24:15.109 --> 00:24:17.930 child's whims, there's no structure, no intellectual 00:24:17.930 --> 00:24:20.509 discipline. The teacher has to be the skilled 00:24:20.509 --> 00:24:22.930 bridge between the two. That synthesis is the 00:24:22.930 --> 00:24:25.789 foundation of pretty much all modern effective 00:24:25.789 --> 00:24:28.470 teaching. Problem -based learning, project -based 00:24:28.470 --> 00:24:30.730 learning, hands -on science, it all comes from 00:24:30.730 --> 00:24:34.509 that idea. And this led him to completely rethink 00:24:34.509 --> 00:24:38.309 the role of the teacher. He was deeply critical 00:24:38.309 --> 00:24:41.809 of the purely vocational view of education. The 00:24:41.809 --> 00:24:44.150 idea that you're just training kids for a specific 00:24:44.150 --> 00:24:47.730 job in a factory or an office. Yeah, just imparting 00:24:47.730 --> 00:24:49.910 a limited set of skills that an employer needs. 00:24:50.130 --> 00:24:52.869 He found that view to be profoundly anti -democratic. 00:24:53.089 --> 00:24:55.410 Because if that's all schools do, they're basically 00:24:55.410 --> 00:24:58.690 preparing students for docile compliance with 00:24:58.690 --> 00:25:00.990 authoritarian work and political structures. 00:25:01.230 --> 00:25:03.450 You're limiting their ability to think for themselves. 00:25:03.690 --> 00:25:06.150 And so you're stifling their ability to participate 00:25:06.150 --> 00:25:08.769 in social reform. Which means the teacher, as 00:25:08.769 --> 00:25:11.390 a social service provider, has this much more 00:25:11.390 --> 00:25:14.670 profound democratic responsibility. The goal 00:25:14.670 --> 00:25:17.069 isn't to produce future. workers. It's to produce 00:25:17.069 --> 00:25:19.910 what he called psychological and social goods. 00:25:20.109 --> 00:25:22.690 Those goods being intelligence, skill, and character. 00:25:22.890 --> 00:25:24.750 Those are the big three. And the urgency here 00:25:24.750 --> 00:25:26.470 is that this had to be focused on the present 00:25:26.470 --> 00:25:28.950 life of the child, not some imaginary future. 00:25:29.109 --> 00:25:31.349 Because the future is unpredictable. He knew 00:25:31.349 --> 00:25:33.750 that. He wrote that because of the pace of change, 00:25:33.930 --> 00:25:36.670 it's impossible to foretell definitely just what 00:25:36.670 --> 00:25:39.430 civilization will be 20 years from now. So training 00:25:39.430 --> 00:25:41.869 for a specific job today is probably pointless. 00:25:42.880 --> 00:25:45.400 The teacher's real business is to cultivate the 00:25:45.400 --> 00:25:47.319 intelligence and character needed for the child 00:25:47.319 --> 00:25:50.400 to live an intelligent, moral, democratic life 00:25:50.400 --> 00:25:52.759 right now. Okay, let's go deeper on the specific 00:25:52.759 --> 00:25:55.599 attributes he saw in a successful teacher. He 00:25:55.599 --> 00:25:57.940 really separated the true professional from a 00:25:57.940 --> 00:26:00.690 mere technician. Let's start with... A teacher's 00:26:00.690 --> 00:26:02.609 knowledge. Right. And for him, this wasn't about 00:26:02.609 --> 00:26:05.170 being a walking encyclopedia. He stressed that 00:26:05.170 --> 00:26:07.289 a teacher doesn't have to be a high class scholar 00:26:07.289 --> 00:26:09.549 in every subject they teach. That's an impossible 00:26:09.549 --> 00:26:13.089 standard. Instead, they must have an unusual 00:26:13.089 --> 00:26:15.950 love and aptitude in some one subject. It could 00:26:15.950 --> 00:26:18.970 be history, math, science, art, whatever. And 00:26:18.970 --> 00:26:21.509 that passion for one area gives them a kind of 00:26:21.509 --> 00:26:24.089 intellectual compass for all the others. A general 00:26:24.089 --> 00:26:26.589 feel for what genuine information and real inquiry 00:26:26.589 --> 00:26:29.950 look like. Exactly. If you know what true discovery 00:26:29.950 --> 00:26:32.650 feels like in your own field, you can guide it 00:26:32.650 --> 00:26:35.470 in others. And this has to be a constant process, 00:26:35.730 --> 00:26:38.750 a lifelong study of the classroom, of children, 00:26:39.009 --> 00:26:41.670 of methods. And he also believed that learning 00:26:41.670 --> 00:26:44.970 is incomplete unless it is shared. A great teacher 00:26:44.970 --> 00:26:47.410 has this natural burning desire to communicate 00:26:47.410 --> 00:26:50.750 what they know. Okay, next up is a teacher's 00:26:50.750 --> 00:26:53.680 skill. This isn't about having neat handwriting 00:26:53.680 --> 00:26:56.259 on the board. No, it's much deeper. He said the 00:26:56.259 --> 00:26:58.400 best indicator of a quality teacher is their 00:26:58.400 --> 00:27:00.279 ability to watch and respond to the movement 00:27:00.279 --> 00:27:03.039 of the mind with keen awareness. So it's about 00:27:03.039 --> 00:27:05.240 observation and connection. It's about intellectual 00:27:05.240 --> 00:27:08.160 empathy. He said the best teachers, even those 00:27:08.160 --> 00:27:10.880 with no formal training, possess a quick, sure, 00:27:11.059 --> 00:27:13.000 and unflagging sympathy with their students. 00:27:13.180 --> 00:27:15.960 Their minds can move in harmony with the students' 00:27:16.079 --> 00:27:18.039 minds. They can anticipate the difficulties, 00:27:18.319 --> 00:27:21.160 feel the confusion, and celebrate the breakthroughs. 00:27:21.180 --> 00:27:24.140 Yes. They see learning not as delivering a lesson, 00:27:24.279 --> 00:27:27.680 but as navigating a complex, shared, transactional 00:27:27.680 --> 00:27:30.420 inquiry. And finally, the foundation for all 00:27:30.420 --> 00:27:33.730 of it, a teacher's disposition. This was paramount 00:27:33.730 --> 00:27:36.450 for him. He put teaching on the same social level 00:27:36.450 --> 00:27:39.710 as the ministry or parenting. He said no amount 00:27:39.710 --> 00:27:42.109 of knowledge or skill can make up for a deficiency 00:27:42.109 --> 00:27:44.630 in personal traits. You have to have an indispensable 00:27:44.630 --> 00:27:47.849 passion for the work. And the mental fortitude 00:27:47.849 --> 00:27:51.430 to handle the stress. The long hours, the low 00:27:51.430 --> 00:27:55.009 pay, the sheer difficulty of it. This goes back 00:27:55.009 --> 00:27:57.539 to his instrumentalism. If your internal state, 00:27:57.599 --> 00:28:00.859 your disposition is dysfunctional, you cannot 00:28:00.859 --> 00:28:03.460 perform your function effectively. And he had 00:28:03.460 --> 00:28:07.079 this vivid image of the consequences. The careworn 00:28:07.079 --> 00:28:10.099 teachers, with anxiety depicted on the lines 00:28:10.099 --> 00:28:12.539 of their faces, reflected in their strained, 00:28:12.539 --> 00:28:14.980 high -pitched voices and sharp manners. And that 00:28:14.980 --> 00:28:17.380 negative demeanor, he warned, actively prevents 00:28:17.380 --> 00:28:19.119 children from learning and makes them afraid 00:28:19.119 --> 00:28:21.619 to be curious. The teacher becomes a barrier 00:28:21.619 --> 00:28:24.440 to inquiry instead of a guide. All of which led 00:28:24.440 --> 00:28:26.440 him to have some pretty strong opinions on teacher 00:28:26.440 --> 00:28:28.720 education programs. He thought they were focusing 00:28:28.720 --> 00:28:31.180 on the wrong things. They shouldn't be obsessed 00:28:31.180 --> 00:28:33.339 with producing proficient practitioners of mechanical 00:28:33.339 --> 00:28:35.839 skills like lesson planning or discipline. technique. 00:28:35.980 --> 00:28:37.480 Because those are things you learn on the job. 00:28:37.680 --> 00:28:40.019 You can and you should learn them over time. 00:28:40.220 --> 00:28:43.500 He drew this brilliant long -term contrast. The 00:28:43.500 --> 00:28:46.119 teacher who only has the mechanical skills, they 00:28:46.119 --> 00:28:48.279 look great in their first year. Exactly. They 00:28:48.279 --> 00:28:50.319 have the basic operations down, so they appear 00:28:50.319 --> 00:28:54.019 superior. But that teacher, who just keeps perfecting 00:28:54.019 --> 00:28:56.420 the skills they already have, he wrote, may continue 00:28:56.420 --> 00:28:58.319 to improve in the mechanics of school management, 00:28:58.559 --> 00:29:01.339 but he cannot grow as a teacher and inspirer 00:29:01.339 --> 00:29:04.789 and director of soul life. Whereas the teacher 00:29:04.789 --> 00:29:07.089 who has the deeper intellectual grounding might 00:29:07.089 --> 00:29:09.650 struggle a bit at first, but has the potential 00:29:09.650 --> 00:29:12.309 for real growth. Because the goal of teacher 00:29:12.309 --> 00:29:15.630 education, for Dewey, must be to produce professional 00:29:15.630 --> 00:29:18.230 students of education. People who have a deep 00:29:18.230 --> 00:29:20.410 -seated propensity to inquire about everything. 00:29:20.650 --> 00:29:23.230 The subjects, the methods, the very activity 00:29:23.230 --> 00:29:25.990 of the mind. That spirit of perpetual inquiry 00:29:25.990 --> 00:29:29.099 is the true professional spirit. just like in 00:29:29.099 --> 00:29:32.220 law or medicine. That concept, cultivating active 00:29:32.220 --> 00:29:34.660 inquiry, it's the perfect bridge to his vision 00:29:34.660 --> 00:29:38.359 for the larger democratic sphere. The adult citizenry 00:29:38.359 --> 00:29:40.319 needed to practice the same habits of reflective 00:29:40.319 --> 00:29:42.980 thinking he wanted in the classroom. Yes, he 00:29:42.980 --> 00:29:45.539 argued that a complete democracy requires a fully 00:29:45.539 --> 00:29:48.140 formed public opinion, which can only be accomplished 00:29:48.140 --> 00:29:50.380 through communication. Which brings us to the 00:29:50.380 --> 00:29:53.400 big question. What did he think the media's role 00:29:53.400 --> 00:29:57.029 was in all this? His major work here is The Public 00:29:57.029 --> 00:30:00.529 and Its Problems from 1927. And it's really an 00:30:00.529 --> 00:30:03.970 exercise in applying his instrumental and transactional 00:30:03.970 --> 00:30:07.650 logic to politics. He starts, as always, by defining 00:30:07.650 --> 00:30:10.369 his terms. He had a very specific definition 00:30:10.369 --> 00:30:12.769 of a public. It's not a fixed group of people. 00:30:12.910 --> 00:30:15.589 No. A public is a spontaneous group that forms 00:30:15.589 --> 00:30:17.809 because they all share in the indirect effects 00:30:17.809 --> 00:30:20.470 of a particular action. So a factory pollutes 00:30:20.470 --> 00:30:23.150 a river. The people downstream who are affected 00:30:23.150 --> 00:30:24.930 by that pollution, whether they're fishermen 00:30:24.930 --> 00:30:27.410 or just homeowners, they now share a common problem. 00:30:27.529 --> 00:30:29.690 They become a public. Precisely. They have a 00:30:29.690 --> 00:30:31.369 shared interest in controlling those consequences. 00:30:31.769 --> 00:30:34.630 And because life is complex, publics are constantly 00:30:34.630 --> 00:30:37.210 forming, overlapping, and dissolving. They're 00:30:37.210 --> 00:30:40.009 dynamic. And this understanding formed the basis 00:30:40.009 --> 00:30:42.289 of his famous rebuttal of the journalist Walter 00:30:42.289 --> 00:30:44.410 Lippmann. Right. Lippmann had written The Phantom 00:30:44.410 --> 00:30:46.589 Public, which took a very dim view of the average 00:30:46.589 --> 00:30:50.160 citizen. Very pessimistic. Lippmann basically 00:30:50.160 --> 00:30:52.599 argued that political issues were too complex 00:30:52.599 --> 00:30:55.279 and the public was too distracted and uninformed 00:30:55.279 --> 00:30:57.599 to deal with them. So all the important thinking 00:30:57.599 --> 00:31:00.440 should be left to experts and elites. A tap down 00:31:00.440 --> 00:31:02.819 model. The media's job is to tell people what 00:31:02.819 --> 00:31:05.220 the experts think. And Dewey, of course, argued 00:31:05.220 --> 00:31:07.599 for the complete opposite. It reflects his deep 00:31:07.599 --> 00:31:09.779 faith in the common person as long as they're 00:31:09.779 --> 00:31:12.670 educated for inquiry. He believed politics is 00:31:12.670 --> 00:31:16.029 the duty of each individual. Yes. And the knowledge 00:31:16.029 --> 00:31:18.329 needed for that Dewey has to be generated by 00:31:18.329 --> 00:31:21.650 the interaction of everyone. Citizens, elites, 00:31:21.910 --> 00:31:26.440 experts, all mediated by journalism. In this 00:31:26.440 --> 00:31:28.180 model, it's not just the government that's held 00:31:28.180 --> 00:31:30.740 accountable. The citizens and the experts are 00:31:30.740 --> 00:31:33.240 also accountable to the process of inquiry itself. 00:31:33.559 --> 00:31:35.740 So journalism has to completely change its focus 00:31:35.740 --> 00:31:38.460 from spectacle to inquiry. It's a radical shift. 00:31:38.660 --> 00:31:40.680 He said journalism needs to move away from just 00:31:40.680 --> 00:31:43.200 covering actions or happenings. You know, who's 00:31:43.200 --> 00:31:44.859 winning the horse race? Who committed the crime? 00:31:45.099 --> 00:31:47.839 And move toward discussing alternatives, choices, 00:31:48.099 --> 00:31:50.740 consequences and conditions. So the news should 00:31:50.740 --> 00:31:52.779 function more like a tool for teaching reflective 00:31:52.779 --> 00:31:55.849 thinking. giving people the context they need 00:31:55.849 --> 00:31:58.390 to form an intelligent opinion. That's it exactly. 00:31:58.670 --> 00:32:01.349 It's the only way to foster a real conversation 00:32:01.349 --> 00:32:03.630 and improve the public's generation of knowledge. 00:32:03.910 --> 00:32:06.829 The goal is to replace the passive audience with 00:32:06.829 --> 00:32:09.150 active collaborators. And the ultimate prize, 00:32:09.450 --> 00:32:11.349 the societal payoff for this kind of communication. 00:32:11.980 --> 00:32:14.039 He believed that this kind of communication was 00:32:14.039 --> 00:32:16.240 the only thing that could convert what he called 00:32:16.240 --> 00:32:19.319 the great society, this massive disconnected 00:32:19.319 --> 00:32:22.740 populace driven by industrial forces into a great 00:32:22.740 --> 00:32:25.339 community. A community bound by shared interests 00:32:25.339 --> 00:32:28.259 and shared inquiry. Yes. He wrote, the clear 00:32:28.259 --> 00:32:30.619 consciousness of a communal life and all its 00:32:30.619 --> 00:32:33.180 implications constitutes the idea of democracy. 00:32:33.619 --> 00:32:37.259 And that can only happen with free and full intercommunication. 00:32:37.619 --> 00:32:40.019 That was the crucial role he saw for journalism 00:32:40.019 --> 00:32:42.420 and education. It's so clear that for him, this 00:32:42.420 --> 00:32:45.599 wasn't just theory. He was deeply engaged politically 00:32:45.599 --> 00:32:49.059 and socially his entire life. He really put his 00:32:49.059 --> 00:32:51.740 instrumentalism into practice. From very early 00:32:51.740 --> 00:32:54.400 on. And he was often quite radical for his time. 00:32:54.900 --> 00:32:58.240 Take the 1894 Pullman strike when he was at the 00:32:58.240 --> 00:33:01.119 University of Chicago. His private letters from 00:33:01.119 --> 00:33:05.180 that time show these incredibly strong. pro -labor 00:33:05.180 --> 00:33:08.200 anti -establishment views he was furious with 00:33:08.200 --> 00:33:10.940 the ruling class he was he wrote and this is 00:33:10.940 --> 00:33:13.539 an amazing quote the only wonder is that when 00:33:13.539 --> 00:33:15.740 the higher classes damn them take such views 00:33:15.740 --> 00:33:18.440 there aren't more downright socialists He was 00:33:18.440 --> 00:33:20.980 even worried that the university itself, funded 00:33:20.980 --> 00:33:23.700 by people like Rockefeller, was a capitalistic 00:33:23.700 --> 00:33:25.819 institution that was at odds with his democratic 00:33:25.819 --> 00:33:28.160 ideals. And his engagement wasn't just local. 00:33:28.279 --> 00:33:30.940 It was global. Oh, absolutely. His trip to China 00:33:30.940 --> 00:33:34.559 from 1919 to 1921 was hugely influential. He 00:33:34.559 --> 00:33:36.799 was invited by some of his former students, including 00:33:36.799 --> 00:33:39.059 Hu Shi, who was a leading intellectual. He ended 00:33:39.059 --> 00:33:40.880 up staying for two years and gave nearly 200 00:33:40.880 --> 00:33:42.619 lectures. And the people there called him the 00:33:42.619 --> 00:33:46.059 American Confucius. They did. And he was giving 00:33:46.059 --> 00:33:48.519 them this advice during an incredibly volatile 00:33:48.519 --> 00:33:52.200 time in China. His core message, his instrumental 00:33:52.200 --> 00:33:55.180 advice, was to base their transformation on education 00:33:55.180 --> 00:33:59.059 and social reform, that slow experimental process 00:33:59.059 --> 00:34:03.119 of democratic inquiry, not on a violent dogmatic 00:34:03.119 --> 00:34:05.460 revolution. It's fascinating that a young Mao 00:34:05.460 --> 00:34:07.799 Zedong was in the audience for one of those lectures. 00:34:08.059 --> 00:34:10.780 It is. Mao was a library assistant at Peking 00:34:10.780 --> 00:34:12.719 University at the time. He certainly went in 00:34:12.719 --> 00:34:15.059 a different direction. He also took his ideas 00:34:15.059 --> 00:34:18.460 to South Africa in 1934. He did. He was invited 00:34:18.460 --> 00:34:20.809 to speak on educational reform. And there his 00:34:20.809 --> 00:34:23.849 secular democratic ideas were just flat out rejected 00:34:23.849 --> 00:34:25.989 by the white only government, which included 00:34:25.989 --> 00:34:28.210 some of the future architects of apartheid. They 00:34:28.210 --> 00:34:30.090 weren't interested in an education system that 00:34:30.090 --> 00:34:31.949 fostered universal intelligence and equality. 00:34:32.170 --> 00:34:35.030 Not in the slightest. But the black population 00:34:35.030 --> 00:34:37.570 and their white allies were incredibly receptive. 00:34:37.809 --> 00:34:40.170 They saw the potential of his ideas as a path 00:34:40.170 --> 00:34:42.289 toward liberation. And back in the U .S., he 00:34:42.289 --> 00:34:44.630 was involved in some major civil rights and political 00:34:44.630 --> 00:34:48.079 fights. He was. He was a co -founder of the NAACP 00:34:48.079 --> 00:34:50.980 and sat on its early executive board. And then 00:34:50.980 --> 00:34:53.460 there was the famous Dewey Commission in 1937. 00:34:53.920 --> 00:34:56.300 The one that investigated the charges made against 00:34:56.300 --> 00:34:59.119 Leon Trotsky by Stalin during the Moscow trials. 00:34:59.340 --> 00:35:03.000 Yes. And that must have been an incredibly fraught. 00:35:03.320 --> 00:35:06.320 politically charged situation. How did his philosophy 00:35:06.320 --> 00:35:09.460 apply there? It was pure applied instrumentalism. 00:35:09.599 --> 00:35:12.000 Dewey wasn't a communist. He wasn't a Trotskyist. 00:35:12.019 --> 00:35:14.179 But he agreed to lead the commission because 00:35:14.179 --> 00:35:16.480 he was determined to apply the most rigorous 00:35:16.480 --> 00:35:18.780 standards of reflective thinking and objective 00:35:18.780 --> 00:35:21.460 inquiry to find the truth. And their conclusion. 00:35:21.929 --> 00:35:23.670 The commission concluded that the charges against 00:35:23.670 --> 00:35:26.710 Trotsky were a complete fabrication. He prioritized 00:35:26.710 --> 00:35:28.889 the process of open inquiry over any political 00:35:28.889 --> 00:35:31.250 allegiance. That's his democratic faith in its 00:35:31.250 --> 00:35:33.510 highest form. And he was consistent across the 00:35:33.510 --> 00:35:37.199 board. women's rights, economic justice. Absolutely. 00:35:37.260 --> 00:35:40.000 A staunch advocate for women's suffrage, arguing 00:35:40.000 --> 00:35:42.619 that a woman's place is determined by her environment 00:35:42.619 --> 00:35:46.179 and education, not by some fixed biology. A total 00:35:46.179 --> 00:35:48.159 rejection of that old self -action thinking. 00:35:48.500 --> 00:35:50.699 He was president of the League for Industrial 00:35:50.699 --> 00:35:53.360 Democracy and a big supporter of Henry George's 00:35:53.360 --> 00:35:56.539 ideas on land value tax. For him, intellectual 00:35:56.539 --> 00:35:58.739 engagement with these issues was just part of 00:35:58.739 --> 00:36:01.460 being an ethical citizen. So after all this, 00:36:01.599 --> 00:36:04.239 what does it all mean? We've traced this single 00:36:04.239 --> 00:36:06.659 thread from technical philosophy through psychology 00:36:06.659 --> 00:36:09.940 to a total reformation of education and a new 00:36:09.940 --> 00:36:11.940 vision for journalism and a political life. He 00:36:11.940 --> 00:36:14.019 was a true polymath. He was. And all of that 00:36:14.019 --> 00:36:16.320 massive output consistently converges on this 00:36:16.320 --> 00:36:19.219 one vital necessity, the active experimental 00:36:19.219 --> 00:36:21.900 democratic application of intelligence to solve 00:36:21.900 --> 00:36:24.139 human problems. He really provided the intellectual 00:36:24.139 --> 00:36:26.199 architecture for a democratic life that goes 00:36:26.199 --> 00:36:29.619 way beyond just the ballot box. And his influence 00:36:29.619 --> 00:36:34.090 is just, it's amazing. People like Carl Rogers 00:36:34.090 --> 00:36:37.449 in psychology, B .R. Ambedkar, who was the law 00:36:37.449 --> 00:36:39.889 and justice minister of India and helped frame 00:36:39.889 --> 00:36:42.230 their constitution. They were all drawing on 00:36:42.230 --> 00:36:45.150 Dewey's blueprint for how an intelligent, cooperative 00:36:45.150 --> 00:36:47.690 community should function. We should also note 00:36:47.690 --> 00:36:50.550 his personal journey on religion. He moved from 00:36:50.550 --> 00:36:53.469 a very evangelical upbringing to becoming an 00:36:53.469 --> 00:36:55.750 atheist and a secular humanist later in life. 00:36:55.829 --> 00:36:57.929 He did. He was one of the original signatories 00:36:57.929 --> 00:37:01.690 of the first humanist manifesto in 1933. And 00:37:01.690 --> 00:37:04.369 his view of humanism was that it was an expansion, 00:37:04.389 --> 00:37:07.449 not a contraction, of human life, where science 00:37:07.449 --> 00:37:11.110 is made the willing servant of human good. It's 00:37:11.110 --> 00:37:13.519 a perfect summary of his entire philosophy. using 00:37:13.519 --> 00:37:15.519 instrumental reason to serve human flourishing 00:37:15.519 --> 00:37:17.860 in a democratic context. It really is. But there 00:37:17.860 --> 00:37:19.860 was a common criticism of his work, which the 00:37:19.860 --> 00:37:22.300 sources note, that for all his sweeping ideals, 00:37:22.539 --> 00:37:24.440 he often didn't provide systematic, detailed 00:37:24.440 --> 00:37:26.800 strategies for how to achieve them, how to actually 00:37:26.800 --> 00:37:29.480 win women's suffrage or fix the massive economic 00:37:29.480 --> 00:37:32.360 problems of his day. He knew about entrenched 00:37:32.360 --> 00:37:34.300 power, but he wasn't tactical revolutionary. 00:37:34.760 --> 00:37:37.559 And that's the central tension, isn't it? But 00:37:37.559 --> 00:37:39.480 it's a tension that's built into his own philosophy. 00:37:40.740 --> 00:37:44.239 Instrumentalism explicitly rejects fixed, predetermined, 00:37:44.239 --> 00:37:47.539 dogmatic plans. It relies on experimental intelligence 00:37:47.539 --> 00:37:50.659 and constant revision. So if his core belief 00:37:50.659 --> 00:37:52.900 is that the responsibility for thinking has to 00:37:52.900 --> 00:37:55.320 be distributed to everyone, not concentrated 00:37:55.320 --> 00:37:57.840 in a few leaders, then asking him for the perfect 00:37:57.840 --> 00:38:00.239 10 -point plan would be asking him to violate 00:38:00.239 --> 00:38:03.199 his own deepest conviction. The whole point is 00:38:03.199 --> 00:38:05.639 that there is no perfect plan. We have to discover 00:38:05.639 --> 00:38:07.860 the path through the process of inquiry itself. 00:38:08.409 --> 00:38:10.349 So his philosophy is less about providing the 00:38:10.349 --> 00:38:12.750 final answer and more about providing the tools 00:38:12.750 --> 00:38:15.710 for a perpetual search. Exactly. The final plan 00:38:15.710 --> 00:38:18.210 for a perfect democracy is an impossibility because 00:38:18.210 --> 00:38:20.570 society is always changing, always creating new 00:38:20.570 --> 00:38:23.309 problems that need new inquiries. Which leaves 00:38:23.309 --> 00:38:25.550 a really important question for you, the listener, 00:38:25.730 --> 00:38:29.250 to think about. If Dewey's whole philosophy rests 00:38:29.250 --> 00:38:31.570 on this idea of experimental intelligence and 00:38:31.570 --> 00:38:34.210 constant revision, does the real test of his 00:38:34.210 --> 00:38:36.329 ideas lie not in the perfection of his theory, 00:38:36.449 --> 00:38:39.329 but in the perpetual, messy, imperfect struggle 00:38:39.329 --> 00:38:42.369 of its application? By all the countless citizens 00:38:42.369 --> 00:38:44.349 and journalists and teachers who came after him? 00:38:44.630 --> 00:38:47.250 And maybe, what is the limit of a theory like 00:38:47.250 --> 00:38:49.130 that when it comes up against entrenched power 00:38:49.130 --> 00:38:51.449 that simply refuses to engage in that kind of 00:38:51.449 --> 00:38:54.019 inquiry? That's John Dewey, a true giant whose 00:38:54.019 --> 00:38:56.480 influence on how we think, how we learn, and 00:38:56.480 --> 00:38:58.340 how we try to live together democratically is 00:38:58.340 --> 00:39:00.679 still unfolding right now. Something for you 00:39:00.679 --> 00:39:01.699 to mull over on your own.