On "Methodolatry" and Music Teaching as Critical and Reflective Praxis

theory ofno relevance or consequence for praxis. Nothing could be further from the tmth because, in fact, no teacher can avoid having a (his or her) philosophy. There is always, for example, more that can be taught than there is time or resources to teach. Thus, deciding on what is most worth teaching (that is, curriculum design) involves questions ofvalue that are inherently philosophical. The problem is, however, that teachers are typically unaware oftheir philosophy because, having no background in their teacher preparation, their philosophical beliefs have not been made explicit and subjected to critical analysis. As a result, the implicit teaching and curricular philosophies typically held by teachers are taken for granted, and the tangible results of such philosophy-especially negative outcomes-go as unnoted as do the frequently harmful results of taken-for-granted beliefs a lot ofparents have about parenting. A related problem is the need to make a functional distinction between philosophy in the 'weak' and 'strong' sense.9 In the 'weak' sense, having a philosophy refers to taken-for-granted, uncritical, unexamined, or unchallenged belief, opinion, or faith. Teachers everywhere operate on all sorts of uncritical beliefs about students, learning, and the value of schooling. For example, many music teachers believe uncritically that the purpose ofmusic education is to promote and 104 Philosophy ofMusic Education Review advance something called "aesthetic experience." They also simply take on faith that, when listening, composing, or performing, students are-in some automatic and necessary form-"having aesthetic experiences," that aesthetic responses are the content and value ofmusic experience, and that sheer musical involvement is sufficient evidence ofaesthetic benefits. Suchmusic teachers are typically critically unaware of the many important limitations of traditional aesthetic philosophy10 as a basis for music education.11 They are also, therefore, unaware of the many difficulties and objections to it.12 And worse, although citing aesthetic benefits in advocating and defending the value ofmusic in the schools, countless among them teach in a manner that is directly contrary to the premises of aesthetic philosophy. Philosophy in the ' strong' sense, in contrast, requires familiaritywith the discipline ofphilosophy-that body ofknowledge and literature resulting from the critical, logical, and reasoned examination of fundamental philosophical issues over history. It requires, further, aproperlyphilosophical application of this knowledge in the service of a critical or analytical attitude towards current issues-particularly the kinds of unexamined beliefs and uncritical opinions that constitute the 'weak' sense of philosophy! In the absence of such a critical attitude, many of the most cherished beliefs and convictions ofmusic educators go unchallenged and not philosophically clarified despite the fact that so many issues facing music teachers are muchmore complex, richly textured, and multi-faceted than their common sense or 'weak' philosophy can accommodate. Admittedly, a traditional part of the discipline ofphilosophy has been the study ofaesthetics.13 However, traditional aestheticphilosophy is widely considered by contemporary philosophers to be a weak sub-discipline. For example, Michael Proudfoot writes in his comprehensive survey of aesthetics, "Claims that the subject is dreary, irrelevant, muddled and misunderstood have been a persistent theme, not only of recent, that is to say, post-war, writers, but from the very start of the subject. Alas, these claims have all too frequently been justified."14 Part of the problem, asWittgenstein pointed out in his Philosophical Investigations, is that the effort to pronounce any common 'essence' shared by all art, such as Beauty, Feeling, or aesthetic experience, is doomed by the sheer variability of what is called "art." And in his Lectures on Aesthetics15 he demonstrated the confusions of focusing on the word "aesthetic" or on aesthetic adjectives rather than being concerned with the praxial occasions, activities, and situations in which the arts are put to use in living. Such problems of aesthetic philosophy alone provide reason for music teachers to be at least cautious and curious about important differences between an aesthetic education and music education! As a consequence of their 'weak' and uncritical philosophy, music teachers typically remainunaware ofand unconcernedwithmuchof the important philosophical and thus practical consequence in their everyday teaching. One such factor is that professional praxis proceeds according to an ethos of commitment: professionals are ethically obliged to seek results that meet the needs of those served. Clarity concerning "right results" and the resulting ethic should be philosophical matters in the 'strong' sense. Aristotle called the ethical disposition for "right results" phronesis—the need to observe standards ofcare. The craft-like technique needed to make a useful artifact such as a pot, the Greeks called techne. However, people are not pots. Thus, practical knowledge for helping people is calledpraxw and involves the ethical criterion of phronesis. The care-fullness of phronesis, among other conditions, distinguishes professional praxis frommere techne. Thus praxis importantly requires critical reflection on resultsTM governed by the ethical commitment to benefit those served in terms of their needs! Even today, then, acting care-fully and rightly inbehalfofthose served is a determining factor of successful praxis in all the helping professions and is one reasonwhyprofessions and their practitioners are valued and respected in society.