the four philosophies

Before i talk about the four philosophies, let me first outline what the major components of each of the philosophies are. They are broken up into three major units that come together to form the whole of these philosophies. these are metaphysics, epistemology, and axiology. they are defined as such:

Metaphysics: Metaphysics is the investigation into reality. this is the part of the philosophy that questions what is reality. the metaphysical piece of the philosophy asks questions such as: "what is existence?", "how can you define human nature?", or "how do we perceive reality?" These questions are vague but essential to defining a philosophy of education.

Epistemology: This is investigation into the nature of knowledge. Epistemology wonders about the limits of knowledge, the source of knowledge, and the cognitive process. This area thinks about the ways of knowing and how that translates into a classroom

Axiology: The final branch of philosophies probes a basic human question, what is of value. Axiology seeks to answer questions about morals (ie. what is good, bad, right or wrong) and also to answer the nature of beauty.

now we are armed to begin discussing the philosophies.

Idealism: Idealists believe in the absolute. They believe that all things exist with a perfect form that can only be understood but can never truly be expressed in the physical limitations of our world. To them, only the concept of universal truth is real. let me give the example of a chair. To an idealist, a chair that we sit in is not the pinnacle of chair, but rather a physical expression of the ultimate truth that is "chair". Idealists search for truth believing that universal truth does exist and is the zenith of knowledge. because they believe in ultimate truths, they think that concepts such as beauty and morality are universal and can be realized for all rather than believing that these concepts are inherently in flux due to changes in social environment. Mostly, they value discussion and lecture since they believe that knowledge is absolute and does not need to be discussed once discovered. they value all students as capable of obtaining what is called the "Absolute Mind".

Realism: Realism is the polar opposite of Idealism. Realists believe that a chair is a chair rather than a manifestation of the concept of chair. To them, the tangible is more relevant than the idea. To a realist, the world around them relays knowledge and they believe that value is derived from nature. realists are more concrete than the vague idealists and believe that natural laws determine knowledge and morality. Realists favor the scientific method of investigation since they think knowledge can be gained by observing the real.

Pragmatism: To pragmatists, reality is determined by experience and interaction with ones environment. Reality is not absolute but a fluid perception of the world. In this school of philosophy, truth is not viewed as concrete. Truth is considered the version of truth that best fits a situation. This branch of philosophy focuses mostly on values rather than truth. The goal of the investigation of value is to determine what works for society. But to pragmatists, even these values cannot be determined universally. all things are in flux and the aim of pragmatism is to prepare individuals to navigate the changes and inconsistencies of truth.

Existentialism: Existentialists believe that meaning and purpose are not a part of the world in which we live. To the existentialist, the only meaning and purpose that surrounds a person is the one which we create. reality is a construct of the human and because they view all components of life as meaningless, existentialists hold as central to their belief that one should never stop questioning. The individual must decide what is reality for them. The individual must decide what is truth. The individual must decide what values to hold dear. To the existentialist, there is not ultimate means of deriving knowledge. logic, intuition, scientific method, it means nothing. what matters is questioning and introspectively creating a set of truths, values, and realities. this belief is unsettling since the individual is asked to derive meaning in an unstable environment that believes that there can never be a true "right" answer.

I find myself to be a little bit of a mix of pragmatism and existentialism. I do understand, to an extent the way in which concepts of truth are created by a social context but ultimately i find myself leaning to the belief that all human beings need to create for themselves their own sense of truth and beauty. reality i guess i look at differently. I think reality is concrete and can be understood by looking hard at a situation from an objective standpoint. I believe in universal truths that are different for all individuals. i know that nearly sounds like an oxymoron but allow me to attempt to explain. the central concept to my philosophy for life is balance. I find that i am happiest when i find myself centered, reflective, and peaceful. For me, this involves a combination of social involvement, personal reflectiveness (mostly through yoga and personal writing), and varying levels of devotion to all aspects of my life. That being said, i know that the balance that works for me is not the balance that would work for all individuals. i think everyone needs to find their own sense of balance. I think i have come to answer to this question over the course of writing about it and i think that answer is that i mostly align myself with existentialism