Popper, Bloom, and Plato on Education and Student Life
This paper examines the educational philosophies of Karl Popper and Allan Bloom in relation to Plato's Socratic approach to teaching young people. It considers Bloom's argument that Western universities have eroded the tradition of free inquiry and the Socratic Method, and asks how relevant those claims remain today. Drawing on research into student empathy, social media use, and the psychology of social status, the paper evaluates why many contemporary college students appear self-absorbed and status-driven rather than intellectually engaged. Popper's concept of the Open Society and its demand for critical thinking is used as a counterpoint, ultimately suggesting that digital technology and competitive social environments — more than any philosophical neglect — have shaped the modern student's priorities.
- Introduction: The Unfurnished Student: Framing question on student preparedness and paper scope
- Allan Bloom's Critique of Universities and Democracy: Bloom on Western decline, Socratic erosion, and democracy
- Students Are Preoccupied with Themselves: Plato's two student types and self-absorption today
- Today's College Student: Self-Centered yet Competitive: Empathy decline, social media, and Generation Me
- The Psychology of Social Status: Popper's Open Society versus students' status-seeking behavior
- Conclusion: Popper, Rationality, and Student Autonomy: Synthesizing Popper, Bloom, and student autonomy
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- The paper productively triangulates three thinkers — Popper, Bloom, and Plato — rather than treating any one in isolation, giving the argument genuine philosophical breadth.
- It grounds abstract philosophical claims in concrete empirical evidence, such as the University of Michigan empathy study and the Scientific American survey on social status, preventing the discussion from becoming purely theoretical.
- The author demonstrates intellectual independence by critically pushing back on Bloom's conclusions, arguing that digital technology and competitive social environments are more persuasive explanations for student behavior than a decline in Socratic inquiry.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper models comparative philosophical analysis: it introduces a historical framework (Bloom's and Popper's educational theories), tests it against present-day evidence (empirical studies on empathy and status-seeking), and draws a nuanced conclusion that partially affirms and partially revises the original framework. This move — accept the premise, challenge the diagnosis — is a strong technique for undergraduate philosophical argument.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens with a framing question about why students are "unfurnished," then devotes a major section to Bloom's critique of universities and democracy. Two middle sections examine the empirical reality of today's self-centered, media-saturated student. A focused section on Popper's Open Society and the psychology of social status bridges philosophy to social science research. The conclusion synthesizes all three thinkers and answers the paper's guiding question about personal autonomy versus societal responsibility.
Introduction: The Unfurnished Student
Why would scholars, teachers, journalists, parents, and other close observers of society be surprised that many young people are, as Bloom says, given to go along "day by day … gratifying the desire" that occurs to them in serendipitous moments? The list of possible answers to the question of why many students are not "furnished persons" would be long and complex. Clearly there are a multitude of distractions and digital device addictions that today's young people are caught up in, and that is just one answer. This paper delves into the subjects raised by Karl Popper and Allan Bloom and examines how those messages relate to the way Plato approached teaching the young.
Allan Bloom's Critique of Universities and Democracy
Before examining Bloom's arguments about education and students, consider the first question this paper raises: should the government, teachers, or the broader culture take responsibility for guiding students to become "furnished" persons? An old-fashioned response would hold that families bear that responsibility — not the government, not teachers, not local church leaders or politicians. On the other hand, should government leaders simply sit idly by and let young people find their own way through the maze and mistakes of youth's formative years? If government spends taxpayer money on educational services of any kind, that should be considered a positive action — provided those services make common sense and reach the underserved as well as students from affluent families.
One of Bloom's most salient arguments is that there has been a decline in the "intellectual foundations of Western civilization" (Edington, 1990). According to Edington's scholarly critique of Bloom's The Closing of the American Mind, Bloom contends that this decline is not due to "simple neglect" nor to the "inevitable evolution of historical world cultures" (Edington, p. 2). Rather, the decline stems from philosophical causes: the Socratic tradition has been eroded. The Socratic Method involves the close examination of ethical and moral issues that may be challenged and discussed in serious tones; problems are broken down into a series of pertinent questions to be approached and answered.
What Bloom explains is both esoteric and somewhat mysterious. He claims the erosion of culture resulted from "… a deliberate attack upon the idea that the highest life consists in the pursuit of truth" (Edington, p. 2). Hence, Bloom asserts, universities are failing in their purpose, and though students are victims of universities' refusal to grant them the right of free inquiry, "We are all the ultimate victims" because universities are not guaranteeing "an atmosphere of free and vigorous inquiry," Bloom insists.
Given that Bloom died in 1992, how valid are his points about universities and students? He claimed in 1987 that liberal democracy is "in danger" in the United States, but were he alive today he would witness far more evidence of that danger. The Citizens United decision by the U.S. Supreme Court — which has allowed millions of dollars to be funneled into political campaigns with no accountability for where the money (aptly called "dark money") came from — seems a far more direct attack on democracy than Bloom's perceived concerns about universities.
Students Are Preoccupied with Themselves
Of course it is easy to take issue with boldly radical philosophical pronouncements made thirty years ago, especially when assertions like Bloom's seem nearly outrageous today. But there is truth to the argument that a sizable number of today's students — whether by the fault of universities or of families and society — are self-absorbed to the point of being out of touch with history and society.
Plato references Socrates' discussion of two different types of young people, and it is worth raising here. One student is brought up in total leisure and freedom and studies philosophy to enhance his character and his ability to see society and history as clearly as possible. However bright that first student might be, he cannot make a bed or speak with articulation. The other character in this Socratic picture can accomplish all the menial things — make a bed, get chores done competently — but has no idea how to "strike up a song in his turn like a free man, or how to tune the strings of common speech …" (Rozema, 1998).
Which of these two individuals could make the greatest contribution to society? The answer has two parts. In order to develop technologies that improve life — and even find cures for cancer and other diseases — the first person would appear to be the more valuable contributor. So what if he does not wear the best clothes, or cannot keep his car clean or well-maintained? If he has innovative talent, has excelled in relevant coursework at the university, and can roll up his sleeves after graduation and apply himself thoroughly, he has a greater chance to succeed and benefit society than the person whose talents lie in basic skills such as making a bed and cleaning a house.
Conclusion: Popper, Rationality, and Student Autonomy
Are students embracing any of Popper's beliefs and theories? When Popper explains that an Open Society is characterized by "… rational reflection, rational discussion, and rational decision-making," anyone familiar with the status-seeking student of today can objectively conclude that most students are not thinking rationally about the world and their place within society. That may sound harsh, but the surveys, research papers, and articles examining today's student attitudes consistently indicate that this is a generation that seeks status and thinks largely of itself.
The attitude Popper put forward was captured in this statement: "I may be wrong and you may be right, and by an effort, we may get nearer to the truth" (Lam, 848). This is not to say that all students are entirely self-absorbed, but they clearly believe that government and those in authority should allow them to live as they see fit. That, in essence, is one answer to the central question raised by this paper: the government should not intrude excessively into the lives of citizens, and although some laws exist for the good of society — seat belts, drivers' licenses, restrictions on who may purchase alcohol — students believe they should be allowed to make their own mistakes, however disastrous some of those mistakes may be. The philosophy of Bob Dylan captures it well: "You're right from your side, I'm right from mine; we're both just one too many mornings and a thousand miles behind."
Works Cited
Edington, Robert V. "Allan Bloom's Message to the Stale Universities." Perspective on Political Science, 19.3 (136–148) 1990.
HuffPost College. "Today's College Students Self-Centered, Competitive: Study." Retrieved April 26, 2016, from http://www.huffingtonpost.com. 2011.
Lam, Chi-Ming. "A Popperian Approach to Education for Open Society." Educational Philosophy and Theory, 45.8 (845–859): 2013.
Rozema, David. "Plato's Theaetetus: What to do with an Honours Student." Journal of Philosophy of Education, 13.2 (207–221) 1998.
Waytz, Adam. "The Psychology of Social Status." Scientific American. Retrieved April 26, 2016.
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.