Blog

Published 2019.

Stein makes it look like he has something so "new" and "miraculous" and he is going to inspire "hope" (an often repeated word in his lexicon and that of his book endorsers). Btw, I as a critical integralist philosopher of education gave up on hope long ago for a much better concept of "fearlessness" (for 21st century meta-theorizing and thinking)....In conclusion, "the book is radical but not radical enough."

Book Review (Commentary)  

As many reviewers here [on Amazon.com books] or those following Zak Stein's work comment--it is obvious his bright IQ and sincere passion shines through. This book is his first systematic compilation of those traits he has honed. He is the kind of progressive futurists polymath philosopher of education the world needs.

Dr. Michael Schwartz (book endorsement) is right on saying that planetary thinkers are required in all fields today but especially in Education so as to grow "the critical-integral imagination" for what Stein calls, "Human identities [that] will need to be world-centric" for a new and better humanity (p. 2). That’s a high-bar demand.

Stein from the beginning in his Preface: “Integral Paideia” tells us his book is going to be "radical" in approach, with a rarified vision for a sane future for Education. He says we will need "educational activism and innovation as a political instantiation of emancipatory philosophy" and a "meta-ethics" for "the global meta-crisis" (p. 7). So, by this time with all these big concepts you get the sense this is a pretty heady treatise by a heady guy, who got his Ph.D. at Harvard University. Nothing wrong with that, and he doesn't apologize for "a long and complex book" (p. 5). I found this Preface to the book made up of his several pre-published essays, 'big sounding' very clever and intriguing--but it is nothing new--nor all that radical, from my perspective as a radical educator for 50 years. Many have treaded the waters and shaken mountains in progressive and alternative and "integral" education philosophizing and activism before Zak Stein. Stein can offer all the "social miracles" he offers to the field of Education (and the world) in his Chapter 4, and those are wonderful aims for a futures thinking about education overall. Fine. They again, are not just all that new or radical. Stein makes out in the Preface of his book and often in his writing that he is the 'savior' foraging ahead down the path with his radical sword of words, concepts, and high level consciousness (integral-speak). Yes, he is a brilliant leader to watch for. I just find it more than annoying that his work in this book is compared to John Dewey, or William Irwin Thompson (as 2 book endorsers do)--that's just silly.

Stein is a newbie to the field of Education and yes, his gifts are welcome. However, let's be clear, beyond the fancy marketing title of the book "Education in a Time Between Worlds" and all his big meta-speak, that several critical (and integral) educators have forged before him and I wished he would have given them much more due in his Preface, or to even have written a respectful nod to his predecessors in an “Introduction” chapter to his essays therein would have satisfied me that he is a scholar who has done his homework on "Integral Education."

That's right, the real working through of this book is in the sub-field of alternative education and specifically "Integral Education" --which, I and Stein would likely rather call "Critical Integral Education"--which honours via the "critical" insertion that we are after an even more radical and (r)evolutionary integral thinking than most in the Integral Community. He wrote, "I use integral theory" (highly influenced by philosopher Ken Wilber) to critique existing systems and to explore the need for and possibility of a radically different social world" (p. 4). Long before Zak Stein, I was doing the same thing and were other educators but Stein mostly ignores citing our work or engaging the sub-field of Integral Education. His essays are not meant to do that, which is fine; yet, he could have written an Introduction to so give due to predecessors of his "new" approach to Education.

The book isn't radical enough from a critical integral philosopher's perspective, like mine, or other philosophers of education I work with--and, it ignores the Indigenous worldview critique of all Euro-centric thinking about education as Four Arrows does. And Stein ignores (for e.g.) the potent critiques of counter-education by the late Ilan Gur-Ze'ev, who's thinking in both these examples, is brilliant and original in terms of (r)evolutionary philosophy for education and societal transformation. But, no use getting picky here what Stein left out, I'm merely saying he ought to have seen Wilber's theory (at least) is a new branch of Critical Theory (a point made by Dr. Jack Crittenden (1997, p. x) in the Foreword to Wilber's book "Eye to Eye." Yes, Zak Stein is saying about integral theory what others have already said about its critical capacity for aligning (in part) with the Critical Theory schools of cultural-political criticism and particularly all those critical theorists and pedagogues who have worked so hard for a hundred years more or less to revolutionize the way Education ought to take a leading role in forging and shaping societies rather than the current backseat regime of education in N.A. today. Again, Stein offers in the book little to no connection with his predecessors here and the linking of integral (meta-theory) with critical theory and educational emancipatory traditions.

Stein makes it look like he has something so "new" and "miraculous" and he is going to inspire "hope" (an often repeated word in his lexicon and that of his book endorsers). Btw, I as a critical integralist philosopher of education gave up on hope long ago for a much better concept of "fearlessness" (for 21st century meta-theorizing and thinking) --but that’s another topic and one I wish "integralists" were more up-to-date on; but again, Stein hasn't read or cited my work to engage it and I have offered him many opportunities to do so. In that regard, also there is virtually nothing I can see in scanning the book about the "Affective Turn" in philosophy and education and its crucial role in any future (r)evolutionary movement (integral or otherwise). This is because Stein is so "cognitive" heavy, like many of his teachers he admires so much (e.g., Wilber, Marc Gafni). Oh, and btw, even if Stein says in the book "I am no Wilberian" (p. 3) to try to distance himself from any of the negative associations that might bring to his career and leadership in the future, sorry to say: Stein is indeed a Wilberian and Gafnian, by any standard. Though, I think he just needs to use a more discerning language that (and I agree) he is critical of such big thinkers, independent too in his thought and practices but being a Wilberian is not near as enclosing as being a Wilberite (acolyte of Ken Wilber). I myself am a Wilberian going back as far as 1982 and Stein only came to Wilber's work in the 21st century in grad school.

Finally, the book is a bit of a travesty on the level of quality of production, as I see it. It lacks some basic scholarly and just common sense components--re: design. If Stein wants more quality in the field and embrace of Education for a better world, he better ensure quality in his book productions. My copy of the book deteriorated in my hands with just a few hours of reading, pages falling out of binding which is of cheapest grade; as well when I used a yellow highlight on the paper the paper buckles because it is so thin and low grade. For a futurist book and guide in times of tumult ahead, you'd  think a quality book so brilliant (and published by Brilliant Alliance) would be consistent with the contexts it is produced in.

And, then, most annoying is the lack of attention and effort made by the author and publisher to create an Index for the book. Really! I find it astounding that was not included in a thick and complex scholarly book like this. Now, if the book was readily online to be searched in digital, I could forgive this error--but the book is not searchable on line that I could find. This really limits researchers like myself being able to access what is in the book and what is left out and where biases lie on the author's part. An Index allows one to assess much of that within minutes. So, now I have to read every page to find things I am searching for.

In conclusion, the book is radical but not radical enough, and that would take a long essay to argue but I have at least made a few indicators to point to where Stein is not really fully thoughtful enough about "schools" and their future, but also neglectful about Critical Integral Education. Fundamentally, his book is about this topic of Integral Education and he could have been really radical—really real—and, addressed those pioneer predecessors and contemporaries in the sub-field of Integral Education and all the hard work they are doing in philosophy, theory and on the ground in the experiments in education overall. I mean it doesn't speak well for me, on first blush, that Stein ignores (for e.g.) the higher education experiments going on around the globe in Integral Education (for e.g., at the University of Calgary, my old alma mater, where a Masters in Education program has existed for like 10+ years now as teachers or school administrators wanting an MEd degree can study Integral Theory as their specialist stream). And, all this is missed in Stein's integral education book--and vision(?)

 -R. Michael Fisher (Oct. 4/24)

Amazon.com book review [they did not publish and gave no reason why]

****

 Note: for those interested in my further support and critique of Zak Stein's work go to my essay some years ago: 

https://prism.ucalgary.ca/items/75fdaa1c-d49b-48b2-a47e-13d88901f6e8

Published in 2024, by Information Age Publishing, I highly recommend this book, some of my best writing on fear(lessness) and education. Here's a mere excerpt from the Table of Contents, to excite your neurons:

A volume in the series: Studies in the Philosophy of Education. Editor(s): John E. Petrovic, The University of Alabama.

In Press 2023 and for sale: Information Age Publishing

The author, with over three decades of focused research on fear and fearlessness and 45 years as an emancipatory educator, argues that philosophy and philosophy of education have missed several great opportunities to help bring about theoretical and meta-perspectival clarity, wisdom, compassion, and practical ways to the sphere of fear management/education (FME) throughout history. FME is not simple, nor a luxury, it is complex. It’s foundational to good curriculum but it requires careful philosophical critique. This book embarks on a unique transdisciplinary understanding of The Fear Problematique and how it can be integrated as a pivotal contextual reference for assessing the ‘best’ way to go in Education today and tomorrow. Educational philosophy is examined and shown to have largely ‘missed the boat’ in terms of responding critically and ethically to the insidious demand of having to truly educate ourselves when we are so scared stiff. Such a state of growing chronic fear, of morphing types of fear, and a culture of fear, ought to be central in shaping a philosophy of fear(ism) for education. The book challenges all leaders, but especially philosophers and educators, to upgrade their own fear imaginary and fear education for the 21st century, a century of terror likely to grow in the cascading global crises.

 CONTENTS

Preface. 

CHAPTER 1: Introduction.

CHAPTER 2: Philosophy and a Fearturn.

CHAPTER 3: Education Philosophy 'Misses the Boat.'

CHAPTER 4: Fear(ism) as Philosophy: A Transformative Paradigm.

CHAPTER 5: Fear Management/Education for the 21st Century.

CHAPTER 6: Fearlessness as Educational Philosophy.

CHAPTER 7: Recommendations.

Glossary. References. Index.

Professor Arie Kizel, Ph.D., Vice-Dean for Teaching, Head, Pedagogical Development of Educational Systems MA Program
Dept. of Learning and Instructional Sciences, University of Haifa, Israel and 
Co-founder and President, Mediterranean Association for Philosophy with Children; current Editor, Studies in Education: J. of Study and Research in Education [Hebrew] and he serves on the Board of Reviewers of International Journal of Fear Studies. 

Dr. Kizel and I have been connecting for the last few years around the importance of teaching about the nature and role of fear in education generally, philosophy of education, and more recently in teacher education specifically.

He and I have both utilized the concept of "pedagogy of fear" in which we use the term as a negative form of pedagogy that is not liberational. I wanted to introduce him and his work to the FM ning community because it is rare in my experience to find any professional educator (especially, in a mainstream university) who has taught about the pedagogy of fear and the difficulties in changing it. Kizel, is rare in the field, in having written three+ articles on "fear" directly and being committed to advancing the profile of this problem and approach to education. I so appreciate that effort. Recently, we have decided to co-author a book on this topic (in progress). 

I am also excited to work with him because of his past 15 years or so researching and publishing on important topics in the field of Education, as he has developed expertise in the history of Israeli education (e.g., textbook analysis and revision), and he studies problems of totalitarianism, the Holocaust, monologizm and how to bring about pluralistic humanizing narratives back into education; he has become a world-recognized leader in dialogical pedagogy and ethical issues regarding philosophy and children; he explores how to better respect children (e.g., critiquing adult fear-projection of shadow conflicts and overall pathologizing of children) and their rights--and, how to teach philosophy with children, alternative education and mainstream education borders of exchanges, philosophical inquiry generally, Jewish-Arab affairs from an educational (historical, political) perspective and how to make education more inclusive, including those with special needs. I am most interested in his work to build a healthy sense of meaning and concomitant responsibility in teachers and learners across the board.

I appreciate his engagement at times with "counter-education" philosophies as in with his colleague Ilan Gur-Ze'ev and others. These have been issues that have long interested me as a critical, creative and caring educator going back into the late 1970s onward. As being someone who teaches teachers how to think better, it is inspiring to know he is out there and influencing teachers who will go out into the school systems and beyond schools, influencing democratic and civic society. Kizel is an eclectic educator to watch in the future and learn from and I am curious how his views of "fear" (and fearlessness) will grow over the years. 

For those interested go to his blog for a listing of all his publications: https://ariekizel.blogspot.com/

References re: explicit Pedagogy of Fear topic by Arie Kizel 

__2015. Pedagogy of fear as paralyzing men's questions. In Yesiayahu Tadmor and Amir Frayman (eds.), Education--Men's Questions (pp. 214-23). Tel Aviv: Mofet [Hebrew]

__2016. Pedagogy out of fear of philosophy as a way of pathologizing children. J. of Unschooling and Alternative Learning, 10(20), 28-47.

__2021. Philosophy w/ children as a way of overcoming the 'shadow adults cast over childhood' and the 'pedagogy of fear.' International Journal of Fear Studies, 3(2), 13-24.

__(Ed.) 2023. Philosophy with children and teacher education: Global perspectives on critical, creative and caring thinking. Routledge. [see specifically his "Pedagogy of Fear" (pp. xii-xxv) and "The Fear at the Heart of the Pedagogy of Fear" (pp. xxvi-xxix) in Editor Introduction.] 

***

Bertrand Russell, the great UK philosopher, wrote a 1926 book "On Education" with implications for especially early childhood rearing, socialization and education (e.g., schooling). Interestingly, I am just reading this for the first time, and I see some really good signs that this will be a useful book in the history of Fear Studies, and especially the history of fear in educational philosophy. 

Russell has evoked me several times to quote him (from this book), especially his line around wisdom and fear, and around fearless mothers and fearless children as well. For purposes of this blog, I want to focus on why he thought love and fear were so crucial to child rearing and society's health in general. He ends his book with "A thousand ancient fears obstruct the road to happiness and freedom." (p. 206) During the book he makes a distinction that irrational fears are the biggest problem, rational fears are important--albeit, a big problem can come when a child, for example, has not the adequate rational fears online and operative and that puts the child at risk to dangers it normally would rationally be afraid of. He talks about his wife and him trying out many of these things about fear management with their own two children in the earliest years 1-4 yr olds. 

Again, on the final paragraph of the book he wrote, "But love can conquer fear, and if we love our children nothing can make us withold the great gift which is is in our power to bestow." (p. 206). One has to realize that Russell was a secularist-humanist philosopher, yet, here he is articulating what all the great spiritual/religious teachings also argue as a basic premise/theory about love and fear. That's a whole topic for study itself. Is this true, that love can conquer fear? What does conquer mean? On p. 71 he describes how an irrational fear in children (or anyone) ought to not be left alone to just disappear or skirt around too much. Russell says it "should be gradually overcome" as an important aspect of healthy developmental growth and learning. "Overcome" as a behavioral and emotional aspect, seems to be what Russell means by "conquer" in other parts of his text. 

In helping his own children to overcome fear(s), Russell tells us at one point, controversial I am sure it will be: "A grown-up [e.g., parent, teacher] person in charge of a child should never feel fear" --meaning, express it it in front of a child and when trying to teach a child to have mild rational fear of a potential danger the child needs to learn about (e.g., like a sharp knife edge, or cliff edge). Now, if an adult around a child is to be fully responsible for the best interests and growth and learning for a child, and to make them feel loved and not afraid of the world around them too much, then Russell argues it is best to "never feel" or express fear in your teaching children lessons or warnings. I tend to agree with this because of the unpredictable (if not traumatic) ways a child may take in the concrete message from the adult but also the affect-tracing lingerings of the adult into their emotional (if not soul level) aspects of their being. Adults have that kind of powerful impact potential on children's psyche/soul, is my claim, and many others but here we see Russell the philosopher (and father) saying the same thing. His cautionary goes on to say: " That is one reason why courage should be cultivated in women just as much as in men." (p. 72). There's a few arguments he makes later in the book about the sexes and the dynamics of fear and timidity, etc. He wants both sexes to be hardy and courageous --and even fearless. Again, he focuses at times on women's major role here in child development of fearlessness: 

"One generation of fearless women could transform the world...by bringing into it a generation of fearless children".... and "Education is the key" to this accomplishment. On my part, that is true and is exactly why I offer an upgraded theory and praxis called critical Fear Management/Education or simply Fear Education for the 21st century. Russell's philosophy of education, it turns out, is very supportive of my initiative. 

Anyone have some thoughts about all this?

Reference

Russell, B. (1926/2003). On education. Routledge.