I found this book gave an excellent and amazingly evenhanded overview of the history and contemporary state of PhiMath. Since any discussion of the Philosphy of Science usually takes only 5 minutes before getting into PhiMath, this book will also interest PhiSci-ers as well. The presentation was clear without being simplistic and without any waste. As an electrical engineer with a strong interest in PhiSci this book was the best general intro to the subject I've come across. I especially liked the large coffee stain on the author's tie on the front cover.

This is the best introduction to the philosophy of mathematics I've come across. The concepts presented are clear, up to date, and presented with a minimum of formulas and symbols. The author has an easy going style that will just pull you into this fascinating topic.

The title of my review doesn't imply that it's bad for a philosopher, but I'm mostly a student of math (so I can't speak for philosophers). Anyway, this book does seem mostly designed for people who know a bit about set theory and logic. I would also think that in any discussion of the philosophy of math, one also needs to have some understanding of mathematics as a whole (i.e. to be able to hold a semi-intelligent conversation on mathematical topics). If you have this background, then this book seems to cover (what I presume to be) the basics of the philosophy of mathematics in such a way that little background in philosophy is required. I highly recommend it.

Stewart Shapiro's The Place of Confluent Education in the Human Potential Movement truly does live up to its promotional flyer in that it "covers the historical, cultural, and philosophical identity of confluent education, providing a complete account of its essence and origins." By so carefully tracing the origins, evolution, and legacy of Confluent Education, Shapiro expresses clearly his view of its place in the Human Potential Movement, itself a nebulous idiom he nicely defines for readers. The book is a model of scholarship, both in terms of the conduct of empirical and documentary research and in the eloquent reporting thereof, from the lists of tables and abbreviations to the footnotes, references, and index. Especially illuminating are the careful definitions of terms (e.g., "coercive framing," "paradigm," "legacy," "humanism"}. One is left only to wonder what a powerful force Shapiro's explicit and well-grounded brand of "confluent education" might have become if it had been the one to prevail at UCSB, as it has across the nation.

The story of the UCSB brand of "confluent education" began back in the mid-60s when the obviously talented and apparently charismatic George Isaac Brown received some (Ford-Esalen) grants and established an ambitious Gestalt-oriented program at UCSB. "Unfortunately," according to Shapiro, "much of the 'here and now' bias of the working chair in Gestalt was mindlessly transferred to the ideology of the Confluent Program" (p. xvii).

In his illuminating early work, Stewart Shapiro had pulled together a committee of scholars to perform a rigorous "ordinary language analysis" of the term "confluent education," as I have described elsewhere (Hackbarth, 1996; 1997a,b). It was Shapiro who first clarified the role of substantive knowledge in "confluent education," distinguishing it from mere affective education and psychotherapy. His team of language analysts concluded that "confluent education" is "a deliberate, purposive evocation by responsible, identifiable agents of knowledge, skills, attitudes, and feelings which flow together to produce wholeness in the person and society" (1975, p. 119).

Shapiro makes a cogent explanation of reasons for negative reactions to the UCSB program. He speculates that Confluent Education might have had a more lasting impact if it had evolved outside of academia, and if it had been applied to contexts other than schools. He provides a sympathetic analysis, one that pays tribute to the strong and loving bonds among participants, yet reveals flaws that inevitably led to the demise of that particular program, but surely not of continuing efforts by teachers everywhere to engage students authentically in the spirited quest for personally and socially significant knowledge (integrating cognitive and affective dimensions of learning).

References

Hackbarth, S. (1996). Confluent education: An analysis from the perspective of Merleau-Ponty's philosophy. In J. H. Brown (Ed.). Advances in confluent education: Integrating consciousness for human change (pp. 17-42). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

Hackbarth, S. (1997a). Reflections on confluent education as discipline-based inquiry. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago (available from ERIC, ED409322).

Hackbarth, S. (1997b). The role of discipline-based inquiry in Web-based learning. Tech Trends, 42(4), 43-46.

Shapiro, S. B. (1975). Developing models by "unpacking" confluent education. In G. I. Brown (Ed.). The live classroom: Innovation through confluent education and gestalt (pp. 109-120). New York: Viking Press.