This paper was published in: Volume 4, Issues 14-15 (Consecutive Issue 14), Khordad 1377 (June 1998) in the following journal: The Scientific-Research Quarterly “Methodology of Human Sciences”, the first specialized journal in the field of philosophy and methodology of social/human sciences in Iran, published by the Department of Philosophy of Human Sciences at the Research Institute of Hawza and University.¹

The paper was written by Ali-Mohammad Kardan (March 21, 1927 – December 27, 2007) who was an Iranian educator and psychologist and a prominent figure in educational sciences. He was a permanent member of the Academy of Sciences of Iran and was recognized as one of Iran’s “Everlasting Figures” in psychology and educational sciences in 2003. Kardan held several key academic positions, including Dean of the Faculty of Educational Sciences and Director of the Institute of Psychology at the University of Tehran.

Born in Yazd, Iran, Kardan completed his primary and secondary education before enrolling at the Preliminary Teacher Training College in Yazd, where his top-ranking performance earned him a government scholarship to study at Daneshsaraye Ali (Higher Teacher Training College) in Tehran.

He studied Persian literature under Mohammad Mo’in, Parviz Khanlari, and Badi’ al-Zaman Forouzanfar, and Arabic with Mehdi Elahi Qomshe’i. His education in traditional philosophy was guided by Mohammad Hossein Fazel-Touni, and he was a contemporary of Yahya Mahdavi, Rezazadeh Shafagh, and Gholam-Hossein Seddiqi.

In 1949, Kardan pursued further studies in France and later Switzerland, where he earned his doctorate in psychology. He studied philosophy under Charles Werner and psychology under Jean Piaget. Additionally, he attended psychology courses with Ali-Akbar Siassi and studied educational sciences with Mohammad-Baqer Houshyar, Isa Sadiq, and Asadollah Bijan, along with physiology under Abdollah Shibani.

Kardan returned to Iran in 1957 and began teaching at the University of Tehran in 1958. In 1961, he was appointed Director-General of Education at the university, and from 1969 to 1977, he served as Dean of the Faculty of Educational Sciences. In 1974, he was awarded the Service Medal by the Supreme Council of Culture.

Following the 1979 Iranian Revolution, he continued teaching at the University of Tehran and, in 1984, became Director of the Institute of Psychology within the Faculty of Literature, holding the position until 1997.

Throughout his career, Kardan remained actively involved in academic and educational reforms. In 2001, he was honoured by the then-President of Iran, and in 2003, he was formally recognized as an “Everlasting Figure” in psychology and educational sciences.

From the inception of the Academy of Sciences of Iran, Kardan was one of its permanent members. In the same year, the Iranian Society for Cultural Works and Luminaries acknowledged him as one of Iran’s distinguished intellectual figures. Ali-Mohammad Kardan passed away on December 27, 2007, and was laid to rest in Behesht Zahra Cemetery.

---

The State of Education and Related Sciences at the End of the 20th Century

Education in the 20th century, like in previous centuries—particularly the 18th and 19th centuries—was influenced by economic, political, social, and cultural developments. At the same time, it also played a significant role in shaping various institutions within society.

The rapid and significant economic and political transformations in the West, such as the victory of the bourgeoisie over feudalism and the political revolutions in America and France in the 18th century, as well as the Industrial Revolution and unprecedented advancements in science and technology in the 19th century, led to the emergence of a new culture and way of thinking in Europe and North America.

Subsequently, due to the colonial policies adopted by the governments of these two continents—especially European nations—and the expansionist ambitions of industrialized countries, conditions were created for the spread of Western culture and modes of thinking across various continents.

The conflict over the division of colonies as sources of raw materials and markets for goods, on the one hand, and political confrontations among industrialized nations, on the other, ultimately led to two world wars. These wars resulted in the deaths of millions of people and caused unprecedented destruction.

World War II divided the world into two ideological camps: capitalism and socialism, each with its own economic, political, and intellectual system. This division led to an intense and relentless competition in scientific, industrial, and military fields between the two opposing blocs, culminating in what came to be known as the Cold War. This situation persisted until the late 1980s, with the collapse of the Soviet Union marking its conclusion.

During the 20th century, the world witnessed rapid advancements in science, including both material sciences and humanities, along with the invention of new communication technologies. Among these were mass media tools such as television and computers, which connected different regions of the world and brought human societies closer together.

In reality, the scientific and technological advancements achieved in this century equalled—or in some aspects even surpassed—the progress made over several millennia of human civilization. The humanities and social sciences, despite their relatively slow development, emerged one after another and made significant strides.

These advancements heightened human awareness of both individual and societal capabilities. Alongside economic, political, and cultural progress, transformations also occurred in the structure and functions of education systems worldwide, particularly in the industrialized nations of the West.

In this article, we will attempt to outline and explain some of these transformations.

The characteristics and transformations mentioned can be categorized into two types, both quantitatively and qualitatively.

The first category includes characteristics that have emerged in each society due to its specific political, social, and cultural transformations, giving its education system a distinct identity. These characteristics can be identified by studying the internal changes of the system and classifying them into different periods.

For example, in our society, where the 20th century began with the Constitutional Revolution (1324 AH / 1906 CE), the evolution of the education system over more than 90 years can be divided into four key periods, each marked by major political and social upheavals:

1. The Constitutional Era to the Coup of 1299 AH (1920 CE)
2. The First Pahlavi Era (until 1320 AH / 1941 CE)
3. The Second Pahlavi Era (until 1357 AH / 1979 CE)
4. The Islamic Revolution Era (until 1380 AH / 2000 CE)

Within each of these periods, smaller sub-periods can also be identified, each with distinct institutional and philosophical characteristics in education.

For instance, a key positive feature of the Constitutional Era was the codification of educational laws, the government’s assumption of responsibility for education, and the expansion of primary education. Meanwhile, the First Pahlavi Era was marked by the expansion of secondary education and the establishment of the first university. The Second Pahlavi Era saw the growth of higher education and the launch of literacy campaigns.

These characteristics, along with the challenges accompanying them, not only distinguish Iran’s education system during this period but also help clarify its current state.

The second category of characteristics pertains to global trends observed in 20th-century education. These features also exhibit distinct periods, one of the most common classifications being the division of the century into two eras: before and after World War II.

Identifying these periods, however, is not as straightforward as in the previous two centuries. In fact, many books and articles on this topic present differing perspectives, making it challenging to establish a universally agreed-upon framework. A comprehensive and multidimensional examination of these global characteristics would require extensive sources, comparative studies, and collaborative efforts among scholars to analyze educational developments simultaneously across different countries.

Given the limitations of available resources, we do not claim to provide an exhaustive analysis in this brief discussion. Instead, we will present insights based on the materials at our disposal. The common features that can be observed in 20th-century education at this level are as follows:

1. The Tendency Toward Uniformity or at Least Similarity

One of the most prominent trends observed towards the end of the 20th century is the increasing inclination of educational systems worldwide to adopt Western models. This phenomenon, which initially emerged due to the colonial policies of industrialized Western nations in the previous century, expanded significantly in the 20th century due to several global factors.

The impact of two World Wars, the establishment of the United Nations and its Scientific, Educational, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), as well as the regular formation of international academic forums and cross-cultural, scientific, and technological exchanges among various societies, have all contributed to this trend. As a result, education systems across different regions of the world have grown increasingly similar in structure.

These similarities have facilitated the adoption of educational models from one country to another, allowing for greater cross-national influence in educational development.

2. The Expansion of Educational Scope

In the previous century, the term Education in major Western languages—and its equivalent in other languages—was primarily associated with formal education during childhood and adolescence. However, in the 20th century, the concept of education broadened significantly.

According to Gaston Mialaret, a renowned French scholar, this expansion has taken place in four key directions, which we will now elaborate on:

A) The Extension of the Educational Period: Due to research by psychologists (especially psychoanalysts) and sociologists, the duration of formal education has been extended both at the beginning and the end. In most countries, education now starts earlier, often at ages 4 or 5, or even earlier. Additionally, in developed countries, formal education continues up to the age of 18.

Furthermore, the rapid advancement of science, technology, and information has rendered traditional schooling insufficient for meeting professional and scientific needs. As a result, retraining programs, in-service education, and what has recently been termed “lifelong learning” have become necessary.

Moreover, the reduction of working hours in industrialized countries and other factors have given rise to a “leisure culture,” encouraging individuals to engage in reading and acquiring new knowledge. This has, in effect, facilitated the realization of the saying, “Seek knowledge from the cradle to the grave.”

The emergence of open universities and third-age universities—dedicated to elderly and retired individuals—further reflects the continuity and expansion of lifelong education throughout a person’s life in this century.

B) The Diversification of Educational Institutions: Today, education is no longer confined to traditional schools. Instead, other institutions play a role alongside or even after formal schooling.

The most important of these institutions are mass media (or mass communication tools), including newspapers, radio, television, and more recently, the internet. However, the impact of these educational institutions does not always complement traditional schooling—at times, it even contradicts or neutralizes its effects.

C) Holistic Education and the Shift in Teaching Focus: In the past, education primarily focused on one specific aspect of a student’s abilities, such as intelligence or memory, often neglecting other dimensions of personality. However, in the 20th century, thanks to psychological research and the emergence of new schools of thought (such as Gestalt psychology and personality-focused approaches), education has increasingly aimed for holistic personality development.

Instead of emphasizing just one or two cognitive abilities, modern education seeks to develop the learner as a whole, integrating cognitive, emotional, and social elements.

Although not all educational systems have fully realized this goal, it has become the ideal aspiration in education worldwide.

D) The Expansion of Educational Processes: Another significant transformation in the concept of education has been the broadening of “educational processes.” This means that education is no longer viewed as a simple interaction between a teacher and a student, nor even as a professor instructing a group of learners.

Instead, various individuals and groups, each with their unique methods, now contribute to the educational process, making it a more dynamic and multifaceted experience.

3. The Democratization of Education

Another significant characteristic of 20th-century education is its universalization (democratization). In this century, nations worldwide have aimed to eliminate inequalities in education, including racial, ethnic, economic, and political disparities, ensuring that all children and adolescents have equal educational rights.

This shift is undoubtedly a result of the new global awareness regarding the importance of education and its critical role in economic and social development. It is widely recognized that such development is impossible without:

1. Cultivating intelligence and character in individuals.
2. Teaching people how to learn continuously throughout their lives.

However, the mass expansion of education in many countries has often led to a decline in educational quality. As a response, from the mid-20th century onward, various efforts have been made to compensate for this issue, the most significant of which include:

• Improving teaching methods.
• Utilizing new educational technologies, such as:
  • Radio and television.
  • Audiovisual aids.
  • Programmed instruction and similar innovations.

These efforts, in turn, have led to an expansion of scientific research in the field of education.

For instance, during the 1960s and 1970s, educational research flourished in developed industrial nations, particularly in the United States. The psychological studies of Jean Piaget attracted widespread attention among educators, giving rise to a movement that can be described as “rationalizing and scientifically structuring education.”

Additionally, increasing emphasis on educational evaluation, educational planning, and the economics of education has emerged as a direct response to the challenges posed by the universalization of education.

4. The Increasing Connection Between Education and Society

Another significant characteristic of 20th-century education is its ever-growing connection with other social institutions and its responsiveness to their economic and social needs.

This transformation is reflected in various developments, such as:

• The introduction and expansion of academic and career counseling programs in schools.
• The increasing importance of vocational and technical education at both the secondary and higher education levels.
• The structural evolution of curricula and educational programs, making them more diverse and specialized to meet societal needs.

Today, educational planning and development are fundamentally linked to adapting the educational system to the constantly changing and multifaceted demands of society.

According to Jean Piaget, this shift in education has introduced three major concerns:

1. The unification of culture or the establishment of a common educational foundation.
2. Educational mobility, meaning the ability of students to transition between different fields of study.
3. The creation of effective guidance methods to help direct students toward appropriate educational and career paths.

Throughout the 20th century, these methods have become more scientific and refined, leading to the establishment of an important applied discipline: academic and career counselling.

These transformations have, in turn, led to further developments in education, the most notable being:

• The relatively systematic restructuring of educational systems, curricula, and teaching methods in most countries.
• The increasing frequency of educational reforms, driven by:
  • New and evolving economic, political, and cultural needs.
  • Advancements in educational sciences.
• The shortening time intervals between educational reforms, often implemented as long-term strategic plans or urgent overhauls during and after major global events, such as World War II.

For instance, in England, the Education Act brought about significant changes, while in Iran, two major educational system reconstructions took place:

1. A reform introduced a few years before the Islamic Revolution.
2. A new reform implemented after the revolution, with the most notable change being the restructuring of secondary education.

Despite these efforts, the continuous necessity for partial or complete educational reforms worldwide has created complex challenges for many nations—including developed countries. The two most pressing issues are budget shortages and the lack of a qualified teaching workforce. Even in the most developed countries, educational equity remains an unmet goal. There is still a significant gap in ensuring that children and adolescents from underprivileged and low-income backgrounds have full access to secondary and higher education.

5. The Expansion of Educational Research

Another significant feature of 20th-century education is the growth of scientific research in various fields of education and the application of research findings in decision-making and the development of new educational programs.

As mentioned earlier, this surge in research has been driven by multiple factors, the most important of which include:

1. The need to improve the quality of education in response to its quantitative expansion.
2. The growing interest of specialists and researchers from related scientific fields—such as biology, psychology, and social sciences—in educational issues.

Over time, the field of pedagogy, which was originally more theoretical, evolved into experimental pedagogy and eventually became an applied science known as educational sciences.

Previously, educational studies were often closely tied to philosophy and were taught in a limited number of disciplines. Research methods in these fields were largely restricted to philosophical reflection on educational issues and unstructured experience. However, as educational research gained importance, it became more institutionalized, leading to the establishment of specialized research institutes.

Eventually, these research initiatives resulted in the formation of faculties and colleges dedicated to educational sciences, psychology, and teacher training.

One of the most significant developments of the 20th century has been the rise of educational sciences and the progress of field-based and experimental research on education in developed countries.

While this progress has numerous advantages—many of which were previously mentioned—it has also produced some negative consequences, including:

• The fragmentation of perspectives due to the multiplicity of competing educational theories.
• An excessive reliance on experimental methods and quantitative research, often at the expense of philosophical and value-based aspects of education.

In recent years, toward the end of the 20th century, this overemphasis on empirical, experimental, and quantitative research has been widely criticized. These critiques have paved the way for new perspectives and theories, which will be explored in the second part of this discussion.

Part Two: The State of Educational Sciences and the Philosophy of Education

As mentioned earlier, one of the significant features of 20th-century education, particularly in its second half, has been the unprecedented advancement of empirical and experimental research in various aspects of teaching and learning.

In the first two decades of this century, pedagogy, or the science of education, was largely understood as an educational theory or, as Émile Durkheim described it, a “practical theory” (8). It primarily consisted of the daily experiences of educators and teachers, along with traditional perspectives and methods drawn from history, educational principles, and educational psychology (9).

However, in the second half of the 20th century, due to the research efforts of experts in related fields, new subfields emerged, including:

• Sociology of education
• Economics of education
• Educational management and administration
• Curriculum planning and instructional design

These disciplines, most of which are interdisciplinary in nature, were added to the field of educational sciences. Today, when accounting for philosophy of education, which remains a theoretical discipline, the total number of educational sciences has reached sixteen.

This advancement first took place in American universities before expanding to European institutions and other parts of the world, establishing educational sciences as an independent discipline within the humanities, with its own distinct subjects and methods.

As a result of these developments, from the 1970s onward, most universities worldwide, including in Iran, established faculties of education or transformed research institutes into faculties. These institutions introduced bachelor’s, master’s, and doctoral programs in various branches of educational sciences.

Additionally, in some cases, important research centers for studying educational issues were established either within or outside universities, often involving researchers from outside academia as well.

These transformations led to two major consequences:

1. The specialization of research and teaching in educational sciences, which resulted in the emergence of new theories in areas such as curriculum development, teaching methods, and assessment.
2. The increasing specialization of studies, which, while advancing technical expertise, reduced the focus on theoretical and holistic reflections on educational phenomena. As a result, explaining fundamental educational questions and providing comprehensive answers to critical issues in education became increasingly difficult.

Even today, despite the expansion of comparative education and the availability of information exchange between universities and other scientific institutions, an imbalanced situation has emerged. The most significant issue in this regard is excessive scientism, which has led to neglecting fundamental educational questions, particularly those related to goals and ideals—without which the formation of a well-rounded human being and an enlightened citizen in any society would be impossible.

In reality, one of the most complex and pressing issues facing humanity at the end of this century is the overemphasis on minor details, the extreme focus on specialization, and the prevalence of narrow perspectives. These trends have diverted researchers away from addressing fundamental educational questions, such as “Why do we learn?” and “What should we learn?”, and have instead confined their inquiries to “How can we learn more efficiently?”.

As a result, the number of scholars capable of resolving educational contradictions and bridging the current intellectual fragmentation is steadily decreasing. This situation has escalated to the point where some leading universities have removed courses on educational theories and the philosophy of education from their curricula, considering empirical and quantitative research in education to be sufficient.

Even in institutions where philosophy of education has not yet been completely disregarded or marginalized, there is still no comprehensive philosophical framework that can, while taking into account:

1. The psychological, ethical, and spiritual dimensions of the individual, and
2. The cultural and social needs of human societies, effectively address contemporary social challenges, such as:

• Economic and social inequalities
• Racial and ethnic prejudices
• Intergroup and intragroup conflicts

This is happening at a time when the humanities and social sciences have revealed new insights into the individual, social, and cultural dimensions of human existence. Yet, each discipline—either independently or in collaboration with others—claims to hold the solutions to the world’s current problems, without achieving a truly unified approach to addressing them.

A comprehensive review and critique of the achievements of educational sciences, understood as empirical and experimental sciences, is beyond the scope of this brief discussion. Each of these disciplines would need to be examined separately, and their current ability to address the fundamental questions of education worldwide should be evaluated.

Nevertheless, if the essential questions of education—as they have often been posed—are:

• Who is the human being?
• What is their nature and potential?
• What are their inclinations and capacities?
• How should these capacities and inclinations be developed, or how should the individual direct them?

Then, it can be said that human sciences and some branches of educational sciences today are partially capable of answering the first question.

However, these answers, derived from specialized research, are often one-sided and sometimes contradictory. They fail to provide a comprehensive understanding of human nature and essence.

More importantly, these sciences are inherently incapable of defining the destiny of humanity or determining the direction in which an individual’s physical, psychological, and social potential should be guided. Addressing such concerns requires another form of knowledge, which may be called philosophy or wisdom.

Of course, philosophers and thinkers should be aware of the findings of human and social sciences, and in their reflections on the future of education, they can benefit from the insights gained through empirical educational sciences. However, they also have a more difficult and critical responsibility—one that extends beyond descriptive sciences (“what is”) into the realm of values and social concerns.

Their role is to articulate the goals of education and define what kind of human being should be cultivated within the context of a particular time and society, at least in the foreseeable future.

This group of scholars can maintain a philosophical perspective while also possessing a scientific outlook—in fact, it is preferable that they have gone through this stage. They may also be directly involved in education, or, like Rousseau, lean more towards philosophical contemplation than direct practice.

In the 20th century, figures such as Georg Kerschensteiner, Édouard Claparède, Émile Durkheim, John Dewey, and Jean Piaget not only engaged in education in various ways but also conducted research and wrote extensively in fields related to human sciences.

They possessed strong expertise in empirical sciences and deep knowledge of research methodologies, but at the same time, they were able to go beyond science in its empirical and objective sense.

By adopting a philosophical stance, they reflected on what kind of human being “should” be cultivated rather than merely describing the human being as they currently are.

Thus, they played the role of “guides” in the field of education, bridging the gap between scientific research and educational philosophy. Of course, most human sciences and empirical educational scholars, especially in the second half of the 20th century, have limited themselves to describing aspects of educational “phenomena” or “processes.”

Similarly, there are philosophers who have never engaged in practical education or taken a serious step into the field, yet their philosophical reflections on human existence and destiny, or their perspectives on the hierarchy of values, can be interpreted in ways that contribute to a form of educational philosophy.

However, what remains uncertain is whether these philosophers, had they themselves directly entered the discussion of educational matters, would have actually agreed with the interpretations that we extract from their ideas today.

This is the case with many existentialist philosophers, as well as proponents of analytical philosophy and postmodernism, who have critiqued contemporary philosophical theories without necessarily addressing education in direct terms.

Researchers who have attempted to study and compare the educational views of philosophers and educational theorists, as understood at the end of the 20th century, and to outline a philosophical vision for education in this era, are few in number.

Nevertheless, those who have succeeded in this effort, up until the 1970s, have generally classified the major philosophical perspectives in education into two broad categories, based on accepted classifications in philosophy:

1. Classical (Traditional) Schools
2. Modern Educational Theories (as described by scholars like Kneller), which are considered “educational theories” rather than fully developed “schools of thought.”

The traditional schools of philosophy in education have been summarized into six major movements:

• Idealism (Primacy of Meaning and Concept)
• Realism (Primacy of Reality)
• Naturalism (Primacy of Nature)
• Pragmatism (Primacy of Action)
• Existentialism (Primacy of Existence)
• Logical Positivism (Neo-Positivism) (A more specialized modern analytical school)

In recent years, as previously mentioned, new critical perspectives have emerged under the umbrella of postmodernism, further expanding these classifications. A detailed explanation of these philosophical schools and newer educational theories can be found in books written mainly by Western scholars, most of whom are American academics. Some of these works have been translated, while others have been widely referenced and adapted in Persian-language educational literature.

However, a major flaw in the above-mentioned classification and the works based on it is its abstract and even artificial nature. In other words, the authors first constructed certain conceptual frameworks—based on historical philosophical traditions—and then labeled them as schools of educational philosophy.

After doing so, they attempted to fit the educational ideas of major thinkers into these predefined categories.

Furthermore, there is often an assumption that there is always a logical and necessary connection between philosophical schools and educational theories. However, this is not always the case. As M.A. Naqibzadeh has pointed out in his critique of such interpretations:

“…Not all philosophers have attempted to construct philosophical systems, and many have even rejected this idea. Furthermore, it is not necessarily the case that all the thoughts of a philosopher can be neatly placed into a single system.

Another key point is that the philosophy of education often deals with questions unique to itself, questions that do not always emerge directly from general metaphysical or ontological speculations.”

Therefore, a more appropriate approach to understanding the philosophy of education—particularly in the second half of the 20th century—would be to focus on the specific educational questions that have been raised and examine the direct and relevant responses given to them.

As far as available research indicates, few studies have taken this approach. However, one scholar who has attempted to reclassify contemporary educational theories in light of current trends in philosophical research is Yves Bertrand, a professor at Université TÉLUQ in Canada.

In his book, “Contemporary Theories of Education”, after reviewing both classical and modern educational theories, he classifies them into seven main categories:

1. Spiritualist Theories
2. Person-Centered Theories
3. Psychological-Cognitive Theories
4. Technological Theories
5. Social-Cognitive Theories
6. Social Theories
7. Scientific (Academic) Theories

According to Yves Bertrand, various educational theories can be categorized into different philosophical traditions. For example:

• Perennialism, an American educational philosophy, falls under spiritualist theories.
• Romantic humanism aligns with person-centered theories.
• Behaviorism is classified under technological theories.
• Pragmatism belongs to social-cognitive theories.
• Progressivism is included among academic theories.

From the 1980s onward, evidence suggests that many scholars, disillusioned with existing scientific and philosophical theories in education, have increasingly gravitated toward spiritual perspectives—whether religious or mystical.

Even in the works of psychologists like Abraham Maslow, who is often labelled a humanist, this shift toward spirituality can be observed. Maslow initially advocated humanism, emphasizing self-actualization as the highest human motivation. However, as seen in his later writings, he eventually sought to move beyond a psychology overly focused on personality toward what he called “Theory C,” which leaned toward a mystical vision of human experience.

Maslow’s intellectual journey can be traced through three phases:

1. Behaviorism
2. Humanism
3. A form of mysticism.

He believed that:

“Education is, in essence, the recognition of the self within its connection and belonging to the world. The goal is for students to discover who they are, listen to their inner voice, and find meaning in their lives.”

Maslow referred to this as “subjective biology” and linked it to higher human needs.

In the West, other thinkers such as Herman and Ferguson have followed a similar path.

• Herman argues that the ultimate goal of education is the pursuit of the absolute.
• He suggests methods and techniques that transform personality, facilitate this quest, and develop multiple dimensions of consciousness and self-awareness.
• In his view, educational activities should be seen as techniques for personality transformation, aligning with Existential Transcendentalism.
• For him, the central focus of education is, undoubtedly, the individual learner.

Thus, Herman can be classified as a spiritual existentialist philosopher. His educational philosophy leads to the union of the self with the world and the dissolution of the separation between the individual and society, and between society and the cosmos. Similarly, Ferguson advocates for transpersonal education, viewing it as a key to spiritual renewal. He criticizes modern schooling for presenting a distorted view of reality. According to him:

• Current education limits human knowledge to material science, breaking wholeness into fragmented parts.
• Schools prevent individuals from understanding the interconnectedness and continuity of existence.

In contrast, he argues that education must focus on the totality of existence and spirituality, making it a holistic and spiritual process.

Only such comprehensive, continuous, and spiritual education can lead to the formation of a spiritual community (communauté spirituelle) and true unity. Moreover, only a fully developed human being is capable of receiving such an education.

In summary, the dominant trend among contemporary educational theories in the final decades of the 20th century is a shift toward spirituality and unity within diversity. Many of these new theories view the necessary condition for complete education as:

1. Transcending the purely rational human perspective and the physical world.
2. Overcoming self-centeredness (subjectivity).

In other words, education must be spiritual, and spiritual education is, by nature, a transcendent process. Transcendent education, according to these perspectives, involves liberating oneself from dualities such as:

• The perceiver (subject) and the perceived (object).
• The individual (person) and the cosmos (universe).

It ultimately seeks unity within diversity and, in its highest form, closeness to the One from whom all existence originates. Such an education requires:

• Deep listening
• Acceptance
• Inner vision
• Love and self-sacrifice
• Spiritual harmony

At its highest level, it manifests as a love for understanding truths and the pursuit of the ultimate joy of learning. A detailed exposition of this educational philosophy and its comparison with other theories discussed earlier would require a broader discussion.

However, based on current reflections and demands in education, one possible conclusion is that as the 20th century comes to a close and the 21st century begins, an education devoid of spirituality no longer satisfies humanity—worn out by the consequences of science and technology.

In the future, only those educational theories will be accepted that bring human beings closer to a higher form of fulfillment—one beyond the materialistic worldview of today. This idea may, in essence, be a restatement of what the renowned French writer André Malraux once predicted:

“The 21st century will be a religious century, or it will not be at all.”

1. Source