Talk:Democracy and Education

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles

Philosophy: Literature / Social and political / Contemporary Start‑class Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

Start

This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Philosophical literature
	Social and political philosophy
	Contemporary philosophy

refactored[edit]

This article has been created by copying and pasting a large segment from the John Dewey article. It therefore requires major editing by an editor well-versed in the subject to make it a meaningful stand-alone article. Thanks. --Technopat (talk) 22:17, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is most pitiful page that I have seen on wikipedia. I don't have the time or energy to fix this now but somebody, please help it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.247.40.55 (talk) 03:15, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. I heard about this book and came here to find out about it, but this article is awful. I'd correct the article, but I still don't know anything about this book. Expert needed? --68.149.127.157 (talk) 06:36, 6 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This article looks like it was written by the Koch Brothers. Rather than a synopsis of the work, it is instead a hit-piece on progressive education. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:644:8103:7D10:FD02:85BD:3B2D:3B9A (talk) 15:06, 26 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Legacy POV-section[edit]

Most of the legacy section is filled with the writer's personal bias about Dewey's writing style without citing any reviews to support their position. Shakakhankhan (talk) 08:24, 29 December 2015 (UTC) I don't agree that this is only a personal opinion. Compare Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: "First, although Dewey seems to write in an almost folksy style, his philosophical prose is often difficult and dense." ^[1] Anonymous: The folksiness mixed with complexity is what makes Dewey difficult to read. This citation is outdated, probably because the claim was too opinionated for the SEP too.[reply]

References

^ http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/dewey-aesthetics/

[1] ttp://plato.stanford.edu/entries/dewey-aesthetics/

[1]