Since the curriculum is always
getting loaded down with purely inherited traditional matter and
with subjects which represent mainly the energy of some
influential person or group of persons in behalf of something
dear to them, it requires constant inspection, criticism, and
revision to make sure it is accomplishing its purpose. Then
there is always the probability that it represents the values of
adults rather than those of children and youth, or those of
pupils a generation ago rather than those of the present day.
Hence a further need for a critical outlook and survey. But
these considerations do not mean that for a subject to have
motivating value to a pupil (whether intrinsic or instrumental)
is the same thing as for him to be aware of the value, or to be
able to tell what the study is good for.
In the first place, as long as any topic makes an immediate
appeal, it is not necessary to ask what it is good for. This is
a question which can be asked only about instrumental values.
Some goods are not good for anything; they are just goods. Any
other notion leads to an absurdity. For we cannot stop asking
the question about an instrumental good, one whose value lies in
its being good for something, unless there is at some point
something intrinsically good, good for itself. To a hungry,
healthy child, food is a good of the situation; we do not have to
bring him to consciousness of the ends subserved by food in order
to supply a motive to eat.
Pages:
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391