An Education In Diversity?

Christina Easton asks if a liberal education can be forced on non-liberal communities.

- Christina Easton

The great liberal philosopher John Stuart Mill (1806- 1873) declared it “almost a self-evident axiom” that all children must be educated. Modern liberals tend to agree that education should be compulsory for minors in some form. However, here the agreement stops and some seemingly intractable problems arise. Education is seen as a means to liberty in later life; but what, for instance, should we say or do when imposing education conflicts with someone’s present liberties? And how can the liberal be consistent in valuing a diversity of views while advocating compulsory education, since the moment we state which education must be compulsory, we bring in a controversial vision of ‘the good education’, which may not be agreed upon by all who are forced into it?

These issues came to a head in the famous court case of Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972). A number of Amish parents, represented by Yoder, objected to the Wisconsin state law that requires school attendance until age sixteen. The Amish did not object to schooling up until fourteen, as this could take place in local Amish schools. But the further two years entailed attending non-Amish High School, exposing the children to an ethos in conflict with Amish values. Instead of High School, Amish teenagers continued their education informally within the community in agricultural work for men and domestic work for women. The court ruled in favour of Yoder, arguing that the Wisconsin law violated the parents’ right to freedom of religion by preventing them bringing up their children in the separation and simplicity essential to Amish life.

Liberal Differences Of Opinion