The Epistemology of Pedagogy: A Critical Distinction between the ‘Educated’ and the ‘Learned’

Sheriff Olasunkanmi Ibiyemi
{"title":"The Epistemology of Pedagogy: A Critical Distinction between the ‘Educated’ and the ‘Learned’","authors":"Sheriff Olasunkanmi Ibiyemi","doi":"10.31874/2520-6702-2021-12-2-211-220","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In a continent where indices concerning literacy continue to plummet and technological advancement continues to be a mirage, it is urgent to examine the distinction between the qualities and state of being educated, on the one hand and the state of being learned on the other hand. This move is important owing to the level of literacy and education that has yielded almost no tangible result in 21st century Africa. On the first showing, the terms seem to be synonyms. Upon a critical reflection however, it soon becomes clear that this cannot be. This conviction is discernable once the method of analysis is applied to each of these terms with Africa in mind. The foremost purpose of this research, therefore, is to argue that these terms are not synonymous, much as they hold so similar implications for Africa and Africans concerning their epistemic leaning toward human and educational development. As a result, the principal motivation of the present disquisition is to employ an epistemic basis to foreground the parallels and departures between these two concepts that have usually been taken for granted as synonymous or interchangeable. The motivation to explore the epistemic alternative is motivated by the urgency to provide an impartial umpire in epistemology to mediate the places of similitude and radical departures between the ‘educated’ and the ‘learned.’ As a consequence, this study infers that much as the two concepts are intertwined there are places of deep divergence which allows the ‘educated’ to be much more sophisticated compared to the ‘learned.’ For its purpose, this study forays into various discourses that seems to underscore the distinction between the ‘learned’ and the ‘educated’ from an epistemic perspective. This is due to the pertinence for justifying the arguments marshaled and in line with the method of philosophical analysis, which is being deployed in this study.","PeriodicalId":150572,"journal":{"name":"International Scientific Journal of Universities and Leadership","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Scientific Journal of Universities and Leadership","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31874/2520-6702-2021-12-2-211-220","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In a continent where indices concerning literacy continue to plummet and technological advancement continues to be a mirage, it is urgent to examine the distinction between the qualities and state of being educated, on the one hand and the state of being learned on the other hand. This move is important owing to the level of literacy and education that has yielded almost no tangible result in 21st century Africa. On the first showing, the terms seem to be synonyms. Upon a critical reflection however, it soon becomes clear that this cannot be. This conviction is discernable once the method of analysis is applied to each of these terms with Africa in mind. The foremost purpose of this research, therefore, is to argue that these terms are not synonymous, much as they hold so similar implications for Africa and Africans concerning their epistemic leaning toward human and educational development. As a result, the principal motivation of the present disquisition is to employ an epistemic basis to foreground the parallels and departures between these two concepts that have usually been taken for granted as synonymous or interchangeable. The motivation to explore the epistemic alternative is motivated by the urgency to provide an impartial umpire in epistemology to mediate the places of similitude and radical departures between the ‘educated’ and the ‘learned.’ As a consequence, this study infers that much as the two concepts are intertwined there are places of deep divergence which allows the ‘educated’ to be much more sophisticated compared to the ‘learned.’ For its purpose, this study forays into various discourses that seems to underscore the distinction between the ‘learned’ and the ‘educated’ from an epistemic perspective. This is due to the pertinence for justifying the arguments marshaled and in line with the method of philosophical analysis, which is being deployed in this study.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
教育学的认识论:“受教育者”与“学者”的关键区别
在一个有关识字率的指数继续急剧下降,技术进步仍然是海市蜃楼的大陆上,迫切需要研究受教育的质量和状态与受教育的状态之间的区别。这一举措很重要,因为在21世纪的非洲,扫盲和教育水平几乎没有产生任何实际成果。乍一看,这两个词似乎是同义词。然而,经过批判性的反思,很快就会发现这是不可能的。一旦把分析方法应用于每一个术语并考虑到非洲,就可以看出这种信念。因此,本研究的首要目的是论证这些术语并不是同义词,因为它们对非洲和非洲人在人类和教育发展方面的认知倾向有着如此相似的含义。因此,本研究的主要动机是利用认识论基础来突出这两个概念之间的相似之处和差异,这两个概念通常被认为是同义词或可互换的。探索认识论替代方案的动机是迫切需要在认识论中提供一个公正的裁判,以调解“受过教育的”和“有学问的”之间的相似和激进偏离的地方。因此,这项研究推断,尽管这两个概念交织在一起,但也存在着深刻的分歧,这使得“受过教育的人”比“有学问的人”要复杂得多。为了达到这个目的,本研究尝试了各种各样的话语,这些话语似乎从认识论的角度强调了“有学问的”和“受过教育的”之间的区别。这是由于证明所整理的论点的相关性,并符合本研究中正在部署的哲学分析方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
World Experience in the Implementation of Social Responsibility of Universities The Use of Artificial Intelligence in Higher Education Designing and creating MOOCs: the experience of the University of Bayreuth Benchmarking of the European and Ukrainian Practice of Applying a Personalised Approach to Learning Problem Issues and Models of Professional Qualifications Assignment by Higher Education Institutions
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1