Table Of ContentJAMES D. SMART'S PARADOXICAL UNDERSTANDING OF
HUMAN NATURE AS A THEORETICAL BASIS FOR
A COMPREHENSIVE RELIGIOUS EDUCATION CURRICULUM
A Dissertation
Presented to
the Faculty of the
School of Theology at Claremont
In Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree
Doctor of Philosophy
by
Yuh Sung-Hoon
May 1996
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
This dissertation, written by
SUH suite - h o o u
under the direction of his Faculty Committee, and
approved by its members, has been presented to and
accepted by the Faculty of the School of Theology at
Claremont in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the
degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
Faculty Committee
n p o 1 •£T
~
Date.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
© 1996
Yuh Sung-Hoon
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Abstract
James D. Smart's Paradoxical Understanding of
Human Mature as a Theoretical Basis for
a Comprehensive Religious Education Curriculum
by Yuh Sung-Hoon
This dissertation is an interpretation of James D.
Smart's paradoxical understanding of human nature as a
theoretical basis for a comprehensive curriculum for religious
education. A presupposition of this discussion is that a
community's understanding of human nature is one of the most
influential elements in determining the design and components
of religious curriculum. Two pivotal issues involved in this
dissertation are the historical controversy regarding
religious education curriculum and the anthropology underlying
that controversy.
The methodological heart of this dissertation is the
comparative study of the conceptions of human nature in Smart
and in representatives of the more extreme positions of
conservative-evangelism and liberal-progressivism. Compared
with conservative-evangelistic and liberal-progressive
approaches to anthropology and education, Smart's paradoxical
understanding of human nature is superior in guiding a
comprehensive plan for religious education. His view of
paradox offers a synthetic mechanism which combines radically
different elements which are seen as mutually contradictory in
the other views.
This dissertation includes discussions of curriculum
theorists' efforts to reconceptualize curriculum toward more
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
comprehensiveness. The unique purpose of this dissertation is
to identify the functional relationship between a community's
understanding of human nature and its decisions regarding the
characteristics of religious education curriculum, and also to
confirm the effectiveness of Smart's paradoxical anthropology
in creating a comprehensive curriculum.
The pedagogical and anthropological discussions of this
dissertation are contextually grounded in Christian religious
communities in which very different educational-theological
traditions co-exist. Korean and Korean-American churches are
good examples, showing that contradicting traditions of
pedagogy and theology currently co-exist as ongoing influences
on religious practice. However, the scope of this
dissertation is not limited to the specific situation of the
Korean and Korean-American churches, for a comprehensive idea
of religious curriculum is needed more broadly in order to
overcome the theological-pedagogical conflicts within many
different communities.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter Page
1. Introduction .............................. 1
The Purpose ............................. 1
Methodology ............................. 8
2. The Historical Efforts for a
Comprehensive Curriculum ........ 15
Reconceptualizing Curriculum ........... 15
Controversy Regarding Curriculum
Resource Design ....................... 34
The Two Comparative Curriculum
Materials .................. 35
Controversies Regarding Content ...... 40
Controversies Regarding Age Grouping .. 48
Controversies Regarding Aims ......... 55
Controversies Regarding Teaching-
Learning Models ........... 57
A New Balancing Period in Curriculum
Design ................................ 62
3. Theological Anthropologies Underlying
Curriculum Plan ........................ 65
Evangelistic Understanding of Human
Nature ................................ 70
Liberal Understanding of Human Nature ... 82
Smart' s Understanding of Human Nature ... 90
Smart's Criticism of Modern Theological
Concepts of Human Nature .............. 97
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Smart's Criticism of a Moralistic
View of Humanity................... 98
Smart's Criticism of an Evangelistic
View of Humanity.................. 100
Smart's Criticism of a Liberal View
of Humanity ....................... 104
Paradox in Understanding Human Nature
and Designing Educational Program .... 107
4. Functional Relationship between
Understanding of Human Nature and
Curriculum Nature ...... Ill
Nature of Curriculum Content ......... 112
Age Grouping Principle of the
Curriculum.......................... 127
The Aims of the Curriculum............ 138
The Teaching-Learning Component of the
Curriculum.......................... 147
An Anthropological Balance in Curriculum
Plan ................................ 165
5. Conclusion: The Value of Smart's
Paradoxical Understanding of Human
Nature in a Comprehensive Curriculum
Plan ................................. 168
Bibliography .................................... 174
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
1
Chapter 1
Introduction
The Purpose
Dichotomy is an enemy of comprehensive thinking. A
dichotomy is a classification that divides realities into two
mutually exclusive groups.1 In understanding a reality, the
most critical problem of a dichotomous way of thinking is its
exclusive nature: namely, it tends to overemphasize one of the
many aspects of the reality, consciously ignoring or
unconsciously neglecting the others. Such exclusive thinking
in dichotomies easily leads into narrow understanding of a
reality, and leads to a distortion in theory and
ineffectiveness in practice.
The problems of dichotomous thinking have been also
deeply connected with theories of religious education.
Throughout the history of religious education, dichotomous
thinking is found in relation to many important issues,
including the content of education, the nature of learners,
the teaching-learning model, and components of religious
curriculum. Actually, these dichotomies have resulted in
critical antitheses, which are patterns of thinking that have
confused the issues of life for Christians and even shattered
the unity of the Church in the history of religious
1 "Dichotomy," in The Random House College Dictionary.
2nd ed.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
2
education.2 The confrontation between conservative-evangelism
and liberal-progressivism is a good example of the critical
conflicts of religious education in the United States.3
Dichotonomous tensions have been exemplified in various
debates, including debates regarding: Bible-oriented versus
life-oriented curriculum resources, historical tradition
versus contemporary experience, transmissive education versus
experience education, and development-oriented versus
conversion-oriented education.4 In terms of curriculum forms
and teaching-learning methods, the tensions have also been
raised between uniform versus graded lesson plans and between
indoctrination versus problem-solving methods.
In the early 1980s, Mary Elizabeth Moore, Professor of
Theology and Christian Education of the School of Theology at
Claremont and Professor of Religion at the Claremont Graduate
School, suggested a provocative way to transcend the dualistic
understandings of religious education, which are based on a
dichotonomous idea of tradition and transformation, or
continuity and change. She proposed education for continuity
2 James D. Smart, The Teaching Ministry of the Church
(Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1954), 57.
3 Smart, Teaching Ministry. 57-58.
4 Jack L. Seymour and Carol A. Wehrheim, "Faith Seeking
Understanding: Interpretation as a Task of Christian
Education," and Donald E. Miller, "The Developmental Approach
to Christian Education," in Contemporary Approaches to
Christian Education, eds. Jack L. Seymour and Donald E. Miller
(Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1982), 123-24, 99-100; Mary
Elizabeth Moore, Education for Continuity and Change
(Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1983), 27-55.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
and change. One of Moore's main concerns, expressed in her
book Education for Continuity and Chance, was how our
religious educators could overcome dualistic ways of thinking
in planning religious education. This could be done by
recognizing that deep continuity with the past can actually
maximize the possibility for significant change, and radical
change turns people back into their heritage for wisdom; thus,
past, present and future are integrated realities, not
antithetical ones. She recognized that dualistic thinking is
a stumbling block in pursuing a maximum of educational
effectiveness.5 Moore's concern was also to seek a more
effective religious education curriculum.5 This is because
dualistic thinking has been a hinderance in considering a
comprehensive religious curriculum.
Actually, the effort to overcome dichotomous thinking in
planning religious education is a long-standing task of
religious education theorists in the United States. However,
in most cases, their desires have not been successful in
transcending the dichotomous thinking because most of their
efforts have more or less tended to emphasize one aspect and
isolate others. For example, although George Albert Coe
wanted an inclusive framework in which a dichotomy between
tradition and creativity is resolved, Coe's work in the first
5 Moore, Education for Continuity and Chance. 14-55.
5 Moore, Education for Continuity and Chance. 167-88; and
"Rhythmic Curriculum: Guiding an Educative Journey," essay,
Oct. 1994, revision of a paper presented at Universite
Catholique de Lille, France, 1994.
>
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
