Theory & PractiseThanks for you articulate comments Brian. I have lent out Egan's book, so I'm going from memory here. The point that I remember was how the three premises have historically competed for primacy in the education system. When one dominates, then the others get less attention. We see this in initiatives like "no child left behind" or the demise of music and physical education in the Canadian public school systems. My main concern is that there is no clear idea of what our education systems are trying to achieve, and we constantly go through "flavour of the year" initiatives.
If we could at least say something like "the primary role of public education is to focus on an individual search for the truth" then we would have a first principle from which to make decisions on funding and resources. It may also allow other organisations, like clubs or associations, to take up the slack for socialisation activities or the quest for individual potential. When I lived in Germany I was intrigued by the system where children went to class from 7:30 to around noon. In the afternoon they spent time with sports clubs or music lessons, etc. Many of these clubs used the schools' facilities. This was an education partnership. The school focused on academics and the community at large was involved in socialisation and physical fitness.
One of the lessons that I take away from Egan's book is that schools cannot do everything. I also feel that learning is "an open acceptance that life is a mystery full of unknowns and uncertainty" but I am a pragmatist who sees his children spending 12 years and 6 hours a day sitting in a classroom. Since we're stuck with this public education system (for now), I would like it to at least to do one thing well. An expressed first principle may help to start that conversation.
Thanks again for your insight.