Advertisement

Rudolf Steiner pp 113-124 | Cite as

The Social and Political Aspects of Education

Chapter
Part of the SpringerBriefs in Education book series (BRIEFSEDUCAT)

Abstract

Steiner considered the free unfoldment of individuality to be the essential task of education. This requires more freedom from state rules and regulations than is the case for schools in most modern societies. Its creative nature makes education part of cultural life; it does not belong to the state or government organisation. Government organisation and cultural life are, or should be, two relatively independent realms of society; the third realm is economy. These three social realms should be based on the three social values we have inherited from the French revolution: equality in the state, freedom in culture and solidarity in economy. This is the basic view of Steiner’s so-called social threefoldness. Steiner saw cultural life in general, and education in particular, as disempowered by the penetration of state and economy. Parallels to this view can be found in present-day social and political philosophy, such as that of Habermas and Cohen & Arato, where the cultural lifeworld and civil society are understood as illegitimately colonised by state and economic power, and in need of greater autonomy in order to liberate human creative forces. However, international agencies like the OECD have further increased the political influence of the state on education, eroding the professional knowledge base of teachers and turning them more into bureaucrats than creative artists.

Keywords

Social threefoldness Cultural lifeworld Civil society Individualism School organisation 

References

  1. Alexander, J. C. (2001). The past, present, and future prospects of civil society. In A. Bron & M. Schemmann (Eds.), Civil society, citizenship and learning (pp. 15–25). Hamburg: LIT Verlag.Google Scholar
  2. Appiah, K. A. (2008). Education for global citizenship. In D. L. Coulter & J. R. Wiens (Eds.), Why do we educate? Renewing the conversation (pp. 83–99). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
  3. Ball, S. J. (2003). The teacher’s soul and the terrors of performativity. Journal of Education Policy, 18(2), 215–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Blekastad, M. (1977). Menneskenes sak. Om den tjeckiske tenkeren Comenius [The thing of human beings. About the Czech thinker Comenius]. Oslo: Gyldendal Norsk Forlag.Google Scholar
  5. Breithaupt, F. (2016). Ein Lehrer für mich allein. Die Zeit, Nr5/2016.Google Scholar
  6. Burrow, J. D. (1993). Editor’s Introduction. In W. V. Humboldt (Ed.), The limits of state action (pp. xvii–lviii). Indianapolis: Liberty Fund.Google Scholar
  7. Cassirer, E. (1961). The myth of the state. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Cohen, J. L., & Arato, A. (1992). Civil society and political theory. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  9. Dahlin, B. (2006). Education, history, and be(com)ing human. Two essays in philosophy and education. Research Report 2006:11. Karlstad: Karlstad University Studies.Google Scholar
  10. Dewey, J. (1981). The philosophy of John Dewey. London: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  11. Habermas, J. (1990 [1962]). Strukturwandel der Öffentlichkeit. Untersuchungen zu einer Kategorie der bürgerlichen Gesellschaft [Structural changes of public life. Studies of a category of bourgeois society]. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp Verlag.Google Scholar
  12. Habermas, J. (1992). Citizenship and national identity: Some reflections on the future of Europe. Praxis International, 12(1), 1–19.Google Scholar
  13. Hayek, F. A. V. (1973). Law, legislation and liberty: a new statement of the liberal principles of justice and political economy (Vol. 1). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  14. Humboldt, W. V. (1993). The limits of state action. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund.Google Scholar
  15. Kaldor, M. (2003). Global civil society. An answer to war. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  16. Kühn, H. (1978). Dreigliederungs-Zeit: Rudolf Steiners Kampf für die Gesellschaftsordnung der Zukunft [Time for three-foldness: Rudolf Steiner’s fight for the future social order]. Dornach: Verlag am Goetheanum.Google Scholar
  17. Lejon, H. (1997). Historien om den antroposofiska humanismen: den antroposofiska bildningsidén i idéhistoriskt perpsektiv 1880–1980 [The history of anthroposophical humanism: the anthroposophical idea of Bildung in the history of ideas 1880–1980]. [Diss.]. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell International.Google Scholar
  18. Lindenberg, C. (1997). Rudolf Steiner: eine Biographie. Bd 2. Stuttgart: Verlag Freies Geistesleben.Google Scholar
  19. Monbiot, G. (2001). Captive state. The corporate takeover of Britain. London: Pan Macmillan.Google Scholar
  20. Perlas, N., & Strawe, C. (2003). Importance of social three-folding in the age of the Empire Matrix. Retrieved 24 March, 2017, from http://www.globenet3.org.
  21. Rizvi, F., & Lingard, B. (2006). Globalisation and the changing nature of OECD’s educational work. In H. Lauder, P. Brown, J.-A. Dillabough, & A. H. Halsey (Eds.), Education, globalisation and social change (pp. 247–260). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Scott, P. (1998). Decline or transformation? The future of the university in a knowledge economy and a post-modern age. In P. Baggen, A. Tellings, & W. van Haaften (Eds.), The university and the knowledge society (pp. 13–30). Bemmel: Concorde Publishing House.Google Scholar
  23. Stehlik, T. (2002). Each parent carries the flame. Waldorf schools as sites for promoting lifelong learning, creating community and educating for social renewal. Flaxton, QLD: Post Pressed.Google Scholar
  24. Stehlik, I. (2014a). Governance and leadership in Steiner schools: new directions. In L. Burrows & T. Stehlik (Eds.), Teaching with spirit. New perspectives on Steiner education in Australia (pp. 189–196). Murwillumbah, AU: Immortal Books.Google Scholar
  25. Stehlik, T. (2014b). A school for the community or a community for the school? Twenty-first century challenges for Waldorf schools. In L. Burrows & T. Stehlik (Eds.), Teaching with spirit. New perspectives on Steiner education in Australia (pp. 205–212). Murwillumbah, AU: Immortal Books.Google Scholar
  26. Steiner, R. (1976). Die Kernpunkte der sozialen Frage in den Lebensnotwendigkeiten der Gegenwart und Zukunft [The key issues of the social question in the life necessities of the present and the future]. (GA 23). Dornach: Rudolf Steiner Verlag.Google Scholar
  27. Steiner, R. (1983). Von Seelenrätseln [On riddles of the soul]. (GA 21). Dornach: Rudolf Steiner Verlag.Google Scholar
  28. Steiner, R. (1986). Gegenwärtiges Geistesleben und Erziehung [Contemporary spiritual life and education]. (GA 307). Dornach: Rudolf Steiner Verlag.Google Scholar
  29. Steiner, R. (1989a). Methodische Grundlagen der Anthroposophie 1884–1901. Aufsätze zur Philosophie, Naturwissenschaft, Ästhetik und Seelenkunde [Methodical foundations of anthroposophy 1884–1901. Essays on philosophy, science, aesthetics, and psychology]. (GA 30). Dornach: Rudolf Steiner Verlag.Google Scholar
  30. Steiner, R. (1989b). Education and modern spiritual life. (GA 307). Blauvelt, NY: Steiner Books.Google Scholar
  31. Steiner, R. (1992). Geistige und soziale Wandlungen in der Menschheitsentwickelung [Spiritual and social transformations in the development of humanity]. (GA 196). Dornach: Rudolf Steiner Verlag.Google Scholar
  32. Steiner, R. (1994). Dokumente zur “Philosophie der Freiheit” [Documents on “The philosophy of freedom”]. (GA 4a). Dornach: Rudolf Steiner Verlag.Google Scholar
  33. Steiner, R. (1997). Education as a force for social change. Lectures. New York: Anthroposophic Press.Google Scholar
  34. Van Parijs, P. (2001). A basic income for all. In J. Cohen & J. Rogers (Eds.), What’s wrong with a free lunch? (pp. 3–24). Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
  35. Walter, C. E., & Howie, F. J. T. (2012). Red capitalism: the fragile financial foundation of China’s extraordinary rise. Singapore: Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Whitty, G. (1997). School autonomy and parental choice. Consumer rights versus citizen rights in education policy in Britain. In D. Bridges (Ed.), Education, autonomy and democratic citizenship. Philosophy in a changing world (pp. 87–98). London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Karlstad UniversityKarlstadSweden

Personalised recommendations