E-Journal of Philosophy of Education:
International Yearbook of the Philosophy of Education Society of Japan, Vol. 9, 2024

Intelligence toward Truthfulness:
A Perspective Based on Ranciére’s Educational Theory
Satoshi TANAKAThe University of Tokyo
Abstract
What Jacques Rancière requires teachers to do is to hold an attitude of "ignorance.'' This is aroundabout way of stimulating the "intelligence'' of the students themselves. This intelligence means
the ability to understand the "truth," and it is assumed to be the same for all people. However, incontemporary Japanese society, education is expected to lean heavily toward "competence
formation''(qualification and socialization), and is far from the intelligence that seeks the "truth."Though, if we value properly our natural sensibilities in a proper way, we can stimulate our own
intelligence. The "truth" here means "truthfulness without truth.'' It is one’s own destination ("telos'')
where the "inner other'' is heading toward. The activity toward one’s own telos is limited to what one
testifies = expressing oneself. In sum, the education proposed here is to position one’s own intelligence
toward truthfulness as the indispensable foundation of education. Therefore, it can be said that
education is a new type of human formation.
Key words: competence formation, human formation, ignorance, Jacques Rancière, intelligence,
sensibility, telos, testify, truth, truthfulness.

1 Envisioning education
In order to envision ''education'' as a new type of human formation, I would like to use
the French philosopher Jacques Rancière's conception of teachers' activity as a foundationof this discussion(JR, MI). What Rancière demands of teachers in his educational theory
is, above all else, to be ''ignorant.'' Of course, this ''ignorant'' does not mean in a literal
sense, but rather refers to the behavior that teachers act like ''as if'' he/she does not havemuch knowledge. It is the prerequisite for teachers to carry out the act of ''teaching.'' In
Correspondence:
Satoshi TANAKA, The University of Tokyo. Email: sgf-liberalitas@nifty.com

Intelligence toward Truthfulness: A Perspective Based on Ranciére’s Educational Theory

79

short, it is the basic attitude. The teaching act based on this premise is ''teaching without
explication.'' In other words, ''teaching'' is equal to ''stimulating the intelligence'' ofstudents.
At first glance, Rancière's theory of teachers seems to emphasize students' ''selflearning'' rather than teachers' ''teaching''(GB, RT). However, if we remand Rancière'sconcept of intelligence to the history of European thought, as Rancière himself suggests,
the excitation (activation) of intelligence may be caused by not only a concrete otherperson, but also by someone who can be called ''inner other.'' For example, the inner otheris what Augustine called the ''inner person'' (homo interior)(AA, C: 10. 6. 9; DVR: 39.
72). If we think of Rancière's theory of teachers in this way, even though at first glance it
may seem like ''learning by him/himself,'' it actually means ''being taught by the innerother. ''However, what is considered here is not whether education means teachingcentered or learning-centered, but education is becoming increasingly tilted tocompetence formation (qualification and socialization) and moving away from the ''will
to truth.'' This ''truth'' includes not only the truth of natural science, but also the telos thata person desires. Moreover, that ''will'' is not only inherent in oneself, but also derives
from one’s ''inner other'' (deep ''self''). To put it simply, the basics of the education
proposed here are that competence formation should be carried out based on the ''will totruth'' that is unique to oneself and responding singularly to the ''inner other.''

2 Will of Intelligence, Equality of Intelligence
1 Intelligence penetrated by the will to gain truthfulness
Let us summarize the two characteristics of Rancière's concept of intelligence. The firstis that Rancière's intelligence is not so-called intelligence, such as ''academic knowledge''or ''educatedness,'' but rather ''power to understand oneself[puissance de se fairecomprendre] through the verification of others[vérification de l'autre]''(JR, MI: 123). In
other words, Rancière's intelligence is ''the ability to think'' that is permeated by''will''(volonté) toward the ''truthfulness''(vérité) of oneself and others(the difference of''truth'' and ''truthfulness'' will be mentioned later). Basically, Rancière says that a person
is a ''will'' subjugated to an intelligence''(JR, MI: 88).
Let us elaborate a little. Rancière, relying on the 18th century French poet Jean
François de Saint-Lambert(1716–1803), writes: ''It[=Will] is the divine intelligence,
already written as the norms gifted to human beings by Divinity, as the very acts of
E-Journal of Philosophy of Education: International Yearbook of the Philosophy of Education Society of Japan, Vol. 9, 2024

80

S. TANAKA

language. It is not original [human] nature or human skill, but a gift of Divinity'' (JR, MI:89). In other words, a person's ''will'' does not belong to him/her, but to God, and is a
dynamic movement towards God.
The second is the assumption that intelligence is equally endowed to all persons.
Looking back at the history of European thought, Rancière's intelligence is, for example,
the ''intellectus'' or ''spiritus'' as ''humanitas'' talked about in ancient era by Aurelius
Augustine(354-430) and in the medieval era by Thomas Aquinas(1225-74). Rancière
himself writes ''intelligence'' as ''esprit'' (JR, MI: 85). Intelligence, which has been talked
about in Christian thought since at least the ancient era, is a gift from God to all persons,and is another name for the ''inner other''(''inner person'') mentioned earlier.
Let us elaborate on this. In the case of Thomas, the activity of the ''anima'' that
overflows in human hearts can be divided into two abilities called ''potentia intellectivae''and ''potentia appetivae'' (TA, ST: I, q. 78, pr.). ''Potentia intellectivae'' is the intellectual
activity of ''understanding'' God (intellegere), which is accompanied by the ''will''(voluntas) that originates from God and returns to God(TA, ST: I, q. 79). The ''potentia
appetivae'' is ''the ability to seek sensual comfort and escape from what is harmful.'' Theability to seek sensual comfort is called ''concupiscibilis,'' and the ability to escape fromwhat is harmful is called ''irascibilis''(TA, ST: I, q. 81, ad. 2, co).

2 Sincerity toward truthfulness
Now, the ''truthfulness'' to which Rancière's ''will'' directs is sharply distinguished fromthe language to describe things. That is, the ''will'' is not something that can be described.
The truthfulness becomes envisagemental and felt. Rancière said, ''Truthfulness does not
speak of itself. Truthfulness is one thing(une), language activity is scattered. Truthfulness
is necessary, and language is arbitrary'' (JR, MI: 102). In other words, ''significations'' thatpeople make are manifestations of will [which are diverse but come from one divinity] ''(JR, MI: 95).
However, the truthfulness that Rancière refers to is not the metaphysical''substance'' talked about in medieval theology, but rather the destination that each person
uniquely heads towards with ''sincerity''(véracité). For Rancière, ''truthful- ness is not to
be found in models that are represented by or transformed to [concrete] shapes''(JR,CM: 26). In other words, what is described(defined) as such-and-such is not truthfulness.
''Thinking does not describe [something] as truthfulness(vérité); it is [naturally] expressed
as sincerity(véracité)''(JR, MI: 106). ''Truthfulness exists by itself. It exists and is not
something that can be told [by human consciousness or intention] '' (JR, MI: 99).
''Nothing has any bearing on truthfulness, it is in [someone's] unique [thinking]
Thematic Research: How to Envision 'Education': Based on the Publication of the Encyclopedia of Philosophy of
Education

Intelligence toward Truthfulness: A Perspective Based on Ranciére’s Educational Theory81

trajectory.'' ''Truthfulness is only a friend of one's own thinking''(JR, MI: 101-2).
The reason why I translate Rancière's word ''vérité'' as ''truthfulness'' is because I
use the word ''truth'' to describe(= to predicate) something that is not known. Also, thereason why I use the word ''truthfulness'' is because I wanted to express(= to appear by
itself) something that is intelligible(intelligibilis). The word ''verité'' which Rancière uses
positively means truthfulness. It is shown by the fact that the ''will'' he refers to is theintention that proposes the method of conjecture(JR, MI: 106). ''Sincerity'' is “eachperson's privileged way of thinking of the truthfulness'' (JR, MI: 98), and this sincerity iscalled ''fictional truth'' («vérité» de la fiction)(JR, CM: 105).

3 Intelligence as subject
If we strengthen our imagination to some extent, this kind of intelligence toward
truthfulness can also be found in ''factuality'' (Martin Heidegger(1889-1976)) and''activity'' (Johann Wolfgang von Goethe(1749-1832) and Friedrich Nietzsche (18441900)) in the sense of the thinking power that is naturally generated. Rancière said, ''The
intelligence is attention and inquiry, which precedes the combination of ideas; and thewill [of intelligence] is the force that moves oneself, acting by peculiar movement(propre
mouvement), preceding [the ego's] choice'' (JR, MI: 92). This ''choice'' is probably
indicating ''free will'' (liberum arbitrium) that does not exclude human arbitrariness andself-righteousness.
In Rancière’s claim, ''will'' is described as ''rational force''(pouvoir rationnel),''rational being''(être raisonnable), and, simply, ''self''' (soi-même)(JR, MI: 92-3, 97). The''self'' that Rancière refers to is the ''self to which I return'' (retour sur lui-même), so to
speak, the inner other(JR, MI: 97). This ''self'' is the universal immanence that was often
talked about in the history of European thoughts, and can be found, for example, in
Goethe and Nietzsche, as well as in Augustine and Thomas.
For Rancière, the ''root of evil''(le principe du mal) is equal to ''unfaithfulness tooneself''(infidélité à soi)(JR, MI: 98). In brief, this indicates the a lack of sincerity.
Rancière said, ''Evil is wandering around, straying from the path [ that the ''self'' leads to],paying no attention to what those [who follow one's ''self''] say(qu'on dit), forgetting what
it is to be a person(qu'on est)[who is fighting toward ons’s own ''self'']. Therefore, [you]must go your own way(Va donc ton chemin) ''. Being true to one's ''self'' is being''sincere''(véracité) and ''being a person'' in one's own way'' (JR, MI: 98 bold is by quotor).
That is, to be human is to continue to face the telos of one's own ''self'' with sincerity.
Rancière says, ''People think, because they exist''(l'homme pense parce qu'il existe)(JR,
MI: 105).
E-Journal of Philosophy of Education: International Yearbook of the Philosophy of Education Society of Japan, Vol. 9, 2024

82

S. TANAKA

3 (Lost) intelligence toward truthfulness
1 Being Explicated and Understanding
As mentioned earlier, Rancière's intelligence does not require ''explication'' by teachers.
For Rancière, ''teaching'' does not mean explicating something to students. This isbecause explications put students' intelligence into doze mode. Teachers who stimulate
students' intelligence are ''ignorant teachers.'' In Rancière’s theory, teaching is to teachwhat teachers do not know (JR, MI: 100). It is about encouraging students to use theirown intelligence and to move toward their own unique and singular ''understanding. ''Each student's unique and singular ''understanding'' is something that teachers cannot
grasp. In Rancière, ''explication is a myth of pedagogy'' (JR, MI: 15). The explication is
not really ''teaching''. This is because explications can create ''accepting it as it is'' and''impression''(worship) of the person who is giving the explication.
For Rancière, the ''driving force'' of education is the human desire to ''understand''(comprendre). Indeed, it can be recognized that the desire to understand, that is, to''want to understand what we do not understand'' is universally found among all humanbeings. However, if a teacher tries to make his/her students understand in the same way
as he/she understands (isomorphically), that is to make their understanding foolish.
Keeping in mind the uniqueness(otherness) of each person's thinking, Rancière describes
this desire as the “power of translation''(puissance de traduction)(JR, MI: 108), and hemakes ''improvisation,'' produced by this desire, the center of his educational method(JR,MI: 109). It is a unique idea, trial, and invention that occurs together with the ''other'', even
if they are modest or small. And if we infer from Rancière's expression ''the silent
dialogue of the soul''(le dialoque muet de l'âme)(JR, MI: 116), the ''other'' shall beconsidered to include the “inner person''(=''self'') .

2 Truthfulness without Truth
Elaborating Rancière's thought in my own way, Rancière's intelligence toward
truthfulness has an inclination toward European theology and metaphysics, so, even if itwere introduced into modern Japanese pedagogy, it would not take root and would
disappear. Although this is just an impressionistic outlook, the background of thisinference is the social spread of utilitarianism and ICT in contemporary Japanese society.
In addition, the social tendency to prioritize the pleasure principle in decision-making
Thematic Research: How to Envision 'Education': Based on the Publication of the Encyclopedia of Philosophy of
Education

Intelligence toward Truthfulness: A Perspective Based on Ranciére’s Educational Theory83

may also be mentioned, as the background. Among these factors, the utilitarianorientation is most conspicuous.
I also think that, in this social trend of utilitarianism or prioritizing the principle ofpleasure, the emotion as the irreplaceability of a singular life would be lost. The emotion
comes from the ephemerality of a life’s transience that once was expressed in the word''Schein''(appearances) by Goethe and Friedrich von Schiller(1759-1805). This is because''Schein'' is the opposite of ''Wahrheit'' (truth), the eternal and universal ''Life'' (because alife is an ''appearance''(Schein) of ''Life''). Incidentally, Nietzsche said, ''we have also lost
the world of appearances[scheinbare], along with the world of truth [wahren Welt]''(KS6, GD: 81). The ''will to power'' (Der Wille zur Macht) that Nietzsche sought beyond thedistinction and association between truth and appearance was something that Nietzsche
earnestly sought ''without faith.'' It can also be described as ''truthfulness. ''Anyway, if we lose interest in the truth, as a result of this, we will also lose interestin the truthfulness, and the intelligence that Rancière refers to will be lost too. In otherwords, intelligence, although somehow assumed, will be virtually forgotten. Intelligence
will become, so to speak, just a ''margin'' (marge), and the world of education will
overflow with ordered and justified knowledge and skills that can be taught throughaccurate explications. As a result, teachers (as instructors) will set up ''individually
optimized'' student learning.
What governs school education, in which ordered and justified knowledge andskills are taught effectively and efficiently, would be ''competence'' in which the content
is defined by the main social trend(for example, OECD's ''agency''). The competence iscertainly important, it can be thought of as ''truth'' (meaning justified knowledge andskills). However, the competence formation would make difficult to hope for some kindof ''invention'' while moving toward truthfulness. Simply put, some kind of ''chaos'' isnecessary for the emergence or arrival of truthfulness. For example, as Nietzsche said inThus Spoke Zarathustra, ''In order to produce dancing brilliance, a person must havechaos within himself''(KS 4, ASZ: 19).

4 Intelligence that testifies to oneself
Even if intelligence toward truthfulness is forgotten socially, it would be rememberedempirically in each individual. ''Empirical'' here refers to sensitive and perceptive original
experience(''primary experience'') of external things that gives rise to inner ''reality.'' It isa raw ''thing that is the sensible''(le sensible) before being incorporated into Rancière's
E-Journal of Philosophy of Education: International Yearbook of the Philosophy of Education Society of Japan, Vol. 9, 2024

84

S. TANAKA''regime of sensibility'' as ''the sharing of the sensible''(partage du sensible), and ''theaesthetic experience''(expérience esthétique)(JR, PS; JR, ME).
If we think of our experience in this way, what philosophy of education should tell
us is that each person is intelligent in their own way. It is not something that can be told
to others or verified as an objective fact, but something that each person says to oneself.
It is the imagination of aesthetic reality, and it enriches one's own mind. To be intelligent,
as it were, means to bear witness to one's autopoiesis (self-creation) of truthfulness. It canbe said that each person is uniquely and singularly ''being a person''(existence). This''existence'' is likened to a skillful physical technique. A skillful physical technique
embodies a fleeting and unsatisfactory endeavor, but it also constantly creates a self witha unique and singular purpose. Just as a person who continues to make extraordinary
efforts is simply beautiful, the functionality of a physical technique which has beenenhanced to the utmost is beautiful. In any case, as mentioned earlier, what is proposed
here as a new conception of education is to place ''intelligence toward truthfulness, ''as thefoundation of competence formation.
However, this kind of support for intelligence(or existence) toward truthfulness is
not a universal(meaning ''all the same'' or ''uniform'') school lesson being enacted in our
national educational policy, but rather the foundation of each individual's thinking. It is
to reserve for each one’s each intelligence that is permeated by each one’s own will totruthfulness. Perhaps the will to truthfulness helps each person's unique and singularstruggle in the real world. Some persons with a sincere self will struggle with their own
foolish ego, and we can imagine that some beautiful wonders will shine faintly in thegloomy real world. In sum, the task of philosophy of education that I propose is not to
extrapolate some plausible and specious educational policy (for example: “individually
optimized learning'') but rather to bring about a ''thinking environment” that encourages
each individual's intelligence to be stimulated by him/herself.'' he goal is to secure aunique and singular realm of thought in educational practice, and to support the struggleof the ''self'' against the real world; the ''self, '' behind the ''ego,'' which is one and only one.

References
Aquinas, Thomas 2006- Thomas Aquinas, Ecclesiae Doctores, Migne, J. P., De Ecclesiae
Patribus Doctoribusque, Documenta Catholica Omnia. Cooperatorum Veritatis
Societas.
[//www.documentacatholicaomnia.eu] [ab: TA]
Thematic Research: How to Envision 'Education': Based on the Publication of the Encyclopedia of Philosophy of
Education

Intelligence toward Truthfulness: A Perspective Based on Ranciére’s Educational Theory

85

ST=Summa Theologiae.[q=quaestio, a=articulus, ad=ad, arg=argumentum,
co=responde, Pr.=prooemium]Augustinus, Aurelius 2006- Augustinus-Opera Omnia, Documenta Catholica Omnia.
Cooperatorum Veritatis Societas.
[//www.documentacatholicaomnia.eu][ab: AA]
C = Confessionum, PL 32.
DVR = De Vera Religione, PL 34.
Nietzsche, Friedrich
1988
Friedrich Nietzsche Samtliche Werke: kritischeStudienausgabe, 15 Bden, Hrsg. von Giorgio Colli und Mazzino Montinari.
Berlin/New York: Walter de Gruyter. [ab: KS]
ASZ = Also sprach Zarathustra, 1883-35, KS, Bd. 4.
GD = Götzen-Dämmerung, 1889, KS, Bd. 6.
Rancière, Jacques 1987 Le maître ignorant. Paris: Librairie Arthème Fayard. [ab: JR,MI]
Rancière, Jacques 1995 La mésentente: politique et philosophie. Paris: Éditions
Galilée. [ab: JR, M]
Rancière, Jacques 1998 La chair des mots: politique de l'écriture. Paris: Éditions
Galilée. [ab: JR, CM]
Rancière, Jacques 2000 Le partage du sensible: esthétique et politique. Paris: La
Fabrique Éditions. [ab: JR, PS]
Rancière, Jacques 2004 Malaise dans l'esthétique. Paris: Éditions Galilée. [ab: JR,ME]

E-Journal of Philosophy of Education: International Yearbook of the Philosophy of Education Society of Japan, Vol. 9, 2024