ETHICS AND EDUCATION FORTY YEARS LATER Bryan R. Warnick School of Educational Policy and Leadership The Ohio State University ABSTRACT. R.S. Peters’s 1966 book Ethics and Education is one of the most significant works in twentieth-century philosophy of education. At least in the United States, however, it is now rarely read or discussed. In this essay, Bryan Warnick looks at the virtues and vices of Ethics and Education, examin- ing some major criticisms of the book in light of key developments in philosophy and educational theory that have occurred since it was first published. He finds that some of the criticisms seem unjustified and overstated, while others can be met with a reading of the text that places its language analysis within a framework of communitarian ethics, a move made possible by rejecting Peters’s fact/value dichotomy. This way of reading Ethics and Education reveals an interesting conception of what philosophy of educa- tion can be: namely, a sort of normative analytic anthropology. It also shows the value of engaging more with the recent history of philosophy of education. If we were to construct a list of the most influential books in philosophy of education in the twentieth century, several titles would almost certainly be in- cluded. John Dewey’s Democracy and Education would be on the list, to be sure, as would Paulo Freire’s Pedagogy of the Oppressed. 1 Those who are familiar with the recent history of philosophy of education would probably also include Richard Peters’s book, Ethics and Education, even though it is less familiar to con- temporary students. Published forty years ago in 1966, Ethics and Education was one of the high-water marks of mid-twentieth-century analytic philosophy of edu- cation. Building on the work of philosophers such as Israel Scheffler, R.M. Hare, and Gilbert Ryle, Peters synthesized the leading thinkers of the analytic tradition — along with an eclectic mix of other historically significant philosophers and psychologists — into a unified treatise that addresses both the ends and means of educational practice. 2 Although I have been fascinated with the book since I first encountered it, it has clearly fallen out of favor over the past few decades. While Democracy and Education and Pedagogy of the Oppressed have continued to live and speak to contemporary students, Ethics and Education is now considered antiquated, irrele- vant, and somewhat naı ¨ve. Rather than being a dead historical curiosity, however, for me Ethics and Education remains full of vigor and life. Although its achieve- ments are probably more modest than the best work of Dewey or Freire, in my experience it has proven an excellent book to think with. Part of me would echo the general sentiment of David Carr, when he expressed in 1994 that Ethics and Education remained ‘‘unsurpassed as required reading in the field.’’ 3 1. See John Dewey, Democracy and Education (1916; repr. New York: Free Press, 1966); and Paulo Freire, Pedagogy of the Oppressed (New York: Continuum, 1970). 2. R.S. Peters, Ethics and Education (London: George Allen and Unwin, 1966). This work will be cited as EE in the text for all subsequent references. 3. David Carr, ‘‘Recent Work on the Philosophy of Education,’’ Philosophical Books 35, no. 1 (1994): 3. EDUCATIONAL THEORY j Volume 57 j Number 1 j 2007 Ó 2007 Board of Trustees j University of Illinois 53