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

Philosophy of Education as Clinical and Critical Action
Mika OKABE
Osaka University
Abstract
The aim of this paper is to explore a future possibility for the philosophy of education, drawing upon
the achievements of existing educational sciences, including the philosophy of education, and using
the history and research trends of the Philosophy of Education Society of Japan as a case study. In
Japan, philosophers of education have created and refined concepts and frameworks of thought for
students, teachers, and researchers of various other educational sciences to re-examine education in
ways previously unexplored, thereby enriching present and future education and educational sciences
as components of modern enlightenment projects. However, the current philosophy of education, as
evidenced by the current research trends seen in the Encyclopaedia of Philosophy of Education editedby the Philosophy of Education Society of Japan and published in July 2023, tends to be confinedwithin the bounds of Western modernity. From a postmodern and postcolonial perspective, it isnecessary to cautiously acknowledge that the actions and practices of contemporary philosophy ofeducation in Japan are somewhat lacking in terms of self-reflection and self-critique. Consequently,
this paper highlights the potential of a clinical philosophy of education, building upon thecomprehensive self-reflection practices found in cultural anthropology.
Key words: Thorough (self-) reflection, (Cultural) Anthropology, Clinical philosophy of education,
Encyclopaedia of Philosophy of Education, (Avoiding) the modern enlightenment hubris

Achievements of Educational Sciences in the Modern Age
Our world teems with myriad activities involving countless individuals, numerous
non-human organisms, and inanimate objects. Thus, the world is in a perpetual state offlux that is both unpredictable and beyond our control; as a result, the world may becomeincongruous with our understanding, or we may find ourselves disconnected andalienated from it. Consequently, institutionalised habits and customs that ought to guide
Correspondence:
Mika OKABE, Osaka University. Email: mioka@hus.osaka-u.ac.jp

Philosophy of Education as Clinical and Critical Action71

us through life may no longer be dependable and robust.1 As we navigate through thepassivity imposed by our constant involvement in the vicissitudes of the world we cannot
wholly comprehend or even be conscious of, we are compelled to initiate our own actions
and practices, including inaction, despite lacking a comprehensive understanding of theworld.
The logos of the enlightenment (Aufklärung/lumières) have endeavoured totransform the inherent passivity and struggle of human existence into activeness as a
subject. The educational sciences generate and accumulate knowledge, techniques, andtechnologies that enable individuals’ participation in education as a modern Westernenlightenment project.

Achievements of the Philosophy of Education
A shift from passivity to activeness has assisted educators, students, andeducational researchers in avoiding nihilism, providing hope and motivation for theactions and practices within education and educational sciences. Nevertheless, this shift
might entice individuals into the ‘hubris’ trap, wherein they seek to control what lies
beyond the realm of human knowledge and capability, which ought to be consideredsacrosanct even if technically accessible. Consequently, the aspiration for actions andpractices is subconsciously supplanted by an expectation that one’s desires can, or indeed
must, be fulfilled in the future, and the impetus for actions and practices is replaced by anurge to achieve predetermined objectives.
Although we cannot entirely extricate ourselves from this system of ‘expectation’and ‘urge’ for the future—given our perpetual involvement in education and educational
sciences as part of the modern enlightenment project—we ought to initiate actions andpractices as free agents to sidestep the ‘hubris’ pitfall of the modern enlightenment
projects. I argue that the philosophy of education generates and refines concepts andtheoretical frameworks, enabling those engaged in education and educational sciences to(re)consider, conceive, and discuss ideas anew, thereby averting the ‘hubris’ trap.
The Encyclopaedia of Philosophy of Education2, edited by the Philosophy ofSuch instances are abundant, ranging from mundane issues, such as our understanding of ourselves and others
and the interpersonal relationships, to global matters, such as generative artificial intelligence, pandemics, andclimate change.
2
The Philosophy of Education Society of Japan, ed. (2023), Encyclopaedia of Philosophy of Education, Tokyo,
Maruzen Publishing.
1

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

72

M. Okabe

Education Society of Japan, published in July 2023 (hereinafter referred to as theEncyclopaedia) encompasses numerous entries and phrases elucidating how thephilosophy of education clarifies and critiques the principles underpinning the actions
and practices of conventional modern education and educational sciences. Furthermore,
it depicts how the philosophy of education has endeavoured to introduce alternative
concepts and theoretical frameworks for considering, conceiving, and discussing actions
and practices of education and educational sciences in a manner distinct from the past. In
essence, the philosophy of education aims to challenge and generate
difference―‘différance’ in the terminology of J. Derrida—, and to incorporate this into
the actual actions and practices of education and educational sciences, whereconventional principles persist irrespective of their efficacy.
Furthermore, the Encyclopaedia elucidates how the Philosophy of Education
Society of Japan has critically revised and updated its ‘political positionality’, enhancing
the depth and precision of reflection on the principles that function both overtly andcovertly within the Society’s discussions and research. According to Takuo Nishimura(the Encyclopaedia, pp. 568–571), upon the Society’s establishment in 1957, politics
were viewed as an external obstacle to education. This notion, accepted as a self-evident
truth, dictated that researchers in the philosophy of education should lead educators andresearchers in other fields of educational sciences by offering ‘universal and objective’
guidelines rooted in the ‘genuine’ logic of education in its ideal state, whilst distancing
themselves from ‘external political’ influences on education and from other sectors ofeducational sciences engaged with politics.
However, the emergence of postmodernism and postcolonialism, which critiquedconventional Western and modern ideas—an approach widely adopted by Japanese
educational philosophers in their studies—began to gain public recognition in Japan in
the 1990s. These movements instigated a complete reversal in the political stance ofJapanese educational philosophy. Educators, students, and researchers in the philosophyof education and other fields of educational sciences are now perceived to be inherently
engaged in modern Western enlightenment project initiatives. Consequently, politicalissues, such as the dynamics of power and the central-peripheral structures, are also
regarded as inherently embedded within education and educational sciences, functioning
both overtly and covertly, rather than as external elements. Following this postmodern
and postcolonial realisation, Nishimura articulated that the raison d’être of educational
philosophers in Japan could be discerned solely through the rigour of self-reflection on
their narrative and construction of reality via language (the Encyclopaedia, p. 570). This
insight, along with the influence of the linguistic turn in the humanities and social sciences
Thematic Research: How to Envision 'Education': Based on the Publication of the Encyclopedia of Philosophy of
Education

Philosophy of Education as Clinical and Critical Action

73

at large, became a ‘common understanding’ within the Philosophy of Education Societyof Japan.
How can one reasonably reflect on the validity and thoroughness of one’s
reflections? In other words, how can one inquire about the political operation andinfluence of one’s positionality that guides their reflections? If the philosophy ofeducation is an academic discipline pursued by human beings capable of committing the‘banality of evil’ (H. Arendt), and the raison d’être of educational philosophers lies invalid and thorough reflections on their narrations and constructions of the reality ofeducation and educational sciences, then the fundamental responsibility of educational
philosophers should be to maintain the self-awareness and self-reflection regarding their
linguistic actions and practices, and the mechanisms that motivate them. This isparticularly imperative for any researcher who has lived after and through the historicalexperience of the modern barbarism of reason and enlightenment.

Achievements of Cultural Anthropology
The subsequent section investigates the mechanisms that facilitate the actions andpractices of reflection within the philosophy of education, taking Japan as a case study.
However, initially, this section delves into the mechanisms of the actions and practices ofreflection in cultural anthropology. The philosophy of education shares two significant
points with cultural anthropology.3 The first is the politics of their origins, establishedand evolved as disciplines for assimilating, dominating, and controlling ‘savages’ orchildren to convert them into ‘human beings’ fashioned after Western adults. The second
is the gradual revision and enhancement of the initial politics by researchers, particularly
the operations of power within the centre-periphery structure of academic perspectives,
through rigorous self-reflection on their research approach amidst the critique of post20th-century modernity and the West.4
Cultural anthropology has been significantly influenced by the linguistic turn,Yujiro Nakamura (1984), ‘Kodomo: Shinso-teki Nin’gen, Chi’isai Otona, to Ibunka’ (Children: Deep Level of
Human Beings, Little Adults, and Different Cultures), Yujiro Nakamura, Jutsugo-syu: Kininaru Kotoba (Glossary:Words of Interest), Tokyo, Iwanami Shinsho, pp. 76-80 [in Japanese].
4
Okabe (2021) discusses the process of reflection on academic perspectives in cultural anthropology andprimatology (ecological anthropology). Mika Okabe (2021), ‘Mou wo Hiraku Pathos, Mou ni Hiraku Pathos’(Pathos to Enlighten the Ignorant, and Pathos for Opening to the Ignorant), Mika Okabe and Fumio Ono, eds.,
Kyouikugaku no Pathos-ron-teki Tenkai (The Pathological Turn in Education), Tokyo, University of Tokyo Press,
pp. 218-224 [in Japanese].
3

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

74

M. Okaberesulting in the development of notable theories, such as the structuralist anthropology of
Lévi-Strauss and the interpretive anthropology of Geertz. In recent years, a number ofradical reflective theories have critiqued anthropocentrism and logocentrism, entrenchedin human thought and behaviour. These include Latour’s actor-network theory and thetheories of ontological anthropology by Strathern and Cohn. These theories have exerted
a wide influence across the humanities and social sciences, beyond cultural anthropology
alone.
This profound reflection in cultural anthropology is facilitated not only by the deepeducational and cultural experiences of individual researchers in the humanities andsocial sciences but also by the academic methodologies employed by researchers
conducting fieldwork in cultures that are extraordinary to them and that help define themas a ‘minority’. During fieldwork, cultural anthropologists reside alone or in small groups
among the local people in diverse cultures for extended periods, such as one or two years,
undertaking participant observations and interviews in the local language. ‘Minority’ inthis context refers to individuals regardless of their number, whose thoughts, words, andactions are likely to be perceived as ‘strange’, ‘exceptional’, or ‘abnormal’, despite being
natural and self-evident to themselves, leading them to adopt a position of articulating‘excuses’ for their ‘unique’ thoughts and actions to those in the majority. Cultural
anthropologists introduce a ‘strong parallax’ into their own thoughts and actions, acquired
over time in their native region, by living long-term in other distinct cultures andexperiencing the positionality of ‘minority’. Cultural anthropologists strive to become
more receptive to opportunities to challenge the creation of differences and incorporate
them into their familiar, often Western and/or modern thoughts and actions. Moreover,they seize opportunities to regard their own thoughts and actions as ‘strange’,‘exceptional’, and ‘abnormal’ and to scrutinise their positionality as the ‘majority’, which
they have considered ‘standard’, ‘typical’, and ‘normal’. Thus, cultural anthropologists
aim to avoid adopting a stable position as part of the ‘majority’ with a safe and secure
attitude. Instead, they aspire to assume a ‘minority’ stance, questioning the self-evidence
and certainty of their thoughts and actions. This position enables them to thoroughlyreflect on their actions and practices when engaging with other cultures and facing
incommensurable situations. Furthermore, conducting interviews in the local language,
with translations that do not rely on the stable foundation of their mother tongue,
empowers cultural anthropologists to become acutely self-aware and reflective on their‘minority’ premise.
Consequently, we are led to pose the following fundamental question: do Japanese
educational philosophers have the same mechanism for profound self-reflection as
Thematic Research: How to Envision 'Education': Based on the Publication of the Encyclopedia of Philosophy of
Education

Philosophy of Education as Clinical and Critical Action75

cultural anthropologists?

Challenges revealed by the Encyclopaedia
The methodologies employed in the philosophy of education can broadly be
categorised into philosophical and intellectual-historical approaches. Philosophers ofeducation refine their methodologies through the critique of other people’s thoughts.
In the Encyclopaedia, entries on ancient and medieval thought (both Eastern andWestern) include few members from the Philosophy of Education Society of Japan.
Furthermore, the majority of entries in the Encyclopaedia focus on Japan and the West.
In the discipline of philosophy and cultural anthropology, theories of postmodernism andpostcolonialism, which deeply reflect on modern and Western thoughts, are often
developed through the critical study of ancient and/or medieval thought and fieldwork in‘peripheral’ regions of the world—such as Asia, Africa, Latin America, and the islands of
the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans. In contrast, the philosophy of education in Japan, heavily
influenced by Western and modern thought, finds the range of texts for study that provide
clues for researchers to actively distance themselves from thoughts and behaviours
deemed self-evidently ‘standard’ or ‘normal’ to be limited, both in terms of periods andregions, despite such clues being crucial for the proper and thorough conduct of reflective
actions and practices.
Research in the philosophy of education in Japan has undeniably focused onmodern criticism, particularly since the 1990s, but only within a Westernised andmodernised context. The geopolitical position of Japan as the ‘East’ or ‘Far East’ country,
which may have served to avoid the pitfalls of colonialism and orientalism in the past,requires careful reflection among contemporary philosophers of education in Japan. Most
modern philosophers of education inhabit a world that favours global standardisation andpredominantly engage with Western modern thought rather than Japanese classicalthought.
However, even within the contexts of modernity and the West, many researchers
have reflected—due to their ‘minority’ positions—on their political positionality andchampioned postmodern and postcolonial ideas that challenge conventional academia.
The crux is that the intensity and accuracy of researchers’ self-reflections must bepreserved. Cultural anthropology underscores the necessity for researchers to create
opportunities for encounters with diverse people and incommensurable situations as a‘minority.’ I advocate that practising a clinical philosophy of education in public spheres
E-Journal of Philosophy of Education: International Yearbook of the Philosophy of Education Society of Japan, Vol. 9, 2024

76

M. Okabealongside diverse individuals can facilitate the creation of such opportunities forphilosophers of education.
Philosophical educational research employing the methodologies of philosophy
or intellectual history can indeed be clinical. These methodologies engage with theoriginal linguistic situation and the original multifaceted contexts of concepts andtheoretical frameworks through one’s linguistic abilities and critical interpretation of texts
from their own perspective and positionality. This clinical approach sheds light on
historical problematic situations, linking them with the present. It might be considered tocreate a virtual reconstruction of past situations and contexts as another culture throughlinguistic and academic imaginative skills, as opposed to cultural anthropologists’ direct
and physical experience of these situations and contexts.
Researchers ought not to adopt concepts or theoretical frameworks from differing
periods, regions, and contexts by unconsciously applying their own modes of thought,
linguistic usage, or perspectives. Nonetheless, the current state of philosophy of educationin Japan, as depicted in the Encyclopaedia, indicates numerous challenges in avoiding
such appropriation.
Given this scenario, could adopting a ‘minority’ stance and engaging in discursive
actions and practices in a pluralistic public sphere with others committed to different
principles help maintain or enhance the intensity and precision of our reflective actions
and practices? Indeed, such actions and practices have been explored through various
means by several members of the Philosophy of Education Society of Japan. Could theirinsights and bricolage5 abilities be recognised as public knowledge, benefitting not only
the Society but also the global field of educational philosophy?
Japanese philosopher Megumi Sakabe posits that the actions and practices ofclinical reflection should be ‘philosophical practice’. 6 According to Sakabe,philosophical scholars should avoid placing themselves in a ‘privileged’ position, whichis ‘exceedingly inaccessible to non-specialists’. The language of philosophy extends fromeveryday natural language rather than being distinct from it. The engagement in clinicalphilosophy of education within the public realms of daily life, alongside individuals ofdiverse backgrounds, necessitates a return to this essential understanding of language use
According to de Certeau, actions and practices of/as a ‘minority’ are an alternative type of creative activities,
referred to as the poetics of everyday practice. They also differ from production activities and language production
by the elite. The creative activity exercised in such contexts is called ‘bricolage’ and can secretly form another webof anti-discipline that cannot be controlled by the ‘majority’, such as the elite. (Michel de Certeau (1980), ART DE
FAIRE, Paris, Union Générale d’Editions.)
6
Megumi Sakabe (2007), Sakabe Megumi Shu 4: ‘Shirushi’, ‘Katari’, ‘Furumai’ (Collected Works of Megumi
Sakabe 4: ‘Symbols’, ‘Narratives’, ‘Practice’), Tokyo, Iwanami Shoten, pp.359-368.
5

Thematic Research: How to Envision 'Education': Based on the Publication of the Encyclopedia of Philosophy of
Education

Philosophy of Education as Clinical and Critical Action

77

in philosophy and the pursuit of comprehensive and appropriate reflection.
Sakabe further suggests that ‘the role of philosophy is to prepare dictionaries andgrammar for ordinary people’s thought’.7
Publishing the Encyclopaedia could be seen as fulfilling one of the roles of thephilosophy of education. The Encyclopaedia ought not to serve as a means for readers toaccumulate and flaunt knowledge to secure a privileged status and bolster existing
theories within their own culture. Instead, it should enable them to seek, explore, andrefine their use of language to initiate in-depth reflection on their actions and practices
regarding education and educational research.
This positionality aids philosophers of education in developing alternative terms
and frameworks, enhancing the efficacy of their research approaches within education,
educational sciences, and philosophy of education. Philosophers are encouraged toembrace the continuous intervention of anti-foundational translation in their interactions
and engagements with others and the incommensurable. Moreover, philosophers ofeducation may discover that the same terms and frameworks can lead to vastly different,
and occasionally conflicting, principles compared to conventional education, educational
sciences, and, particularly, conventional philosophy of education. In public spheres,philosophers of education have the opportunity to contemplate and refine their use ofterms and frameworks while undertaking research actions and engagements with others
and the incommensurable. This could promote profound self-reflection on
anthropocentrism, orientalism, logocentrism, and ethnocentrism, which may have
inadvertently infiltrated their actions and practices.
Despite such extensive self-reflection, mistakes are inevitable. Complete immunityfrom errors and biases is unattainable, given the world’s perpetual state ofunpredictability and uncontrollability, and the constant evolution and transformation ofhuman beings. Hannah Arendt underscores the importance of ‘forgiveness’ (verzeihen)and ‘promise’ (versprechen) in safeguarding discursive actions and practices fromsuccumbing to modern enlightenment hubris or the banality of evil.8 Building on this, I
would like to aim to explore which issues the philosophy of education should address andrespond to, through rigour and thorough reflection in future research.
Ibid.: p.369
Hannah Arendt (1967), VITA ACTIVA, oder Vom tätigen Leben Piper Verlag GmbH, München. Chapter 5
discusses ‘Forgive’ (Verzeihen) and ‘Promise’ (Versprechen). Zeihen means to blame or condemn someone for a sin,whereas sprechen means to speak, talk, or tell a story either intentionally or involuntarily. It is prefixed by ver-, whichmeans substitution, exceeding temporal limits, and various changes (such as closure, prevention, elimination,
removal, consumption, distortion, reversal, and coercion). The original terms in German have nuances not present
in Japanese or English.
7
8

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