A philosopher is someone who practices philosophy, which involves rational inquiry into areas that are outside of either theological dogma or science. The term "philosopher" comes from the Ancient Greek φιλόσοφος (philosophos) meaning "lover of wisdom". Its origination has been ascribed to the Greek thinker Pythagoras.
Where as a researcher is someone who conducts research, i.e., an organized and systematic investigation into something. Scientists are often described as researchers.So
Who can be a good teacher among the Philosopher and Researcher?
It depends on area of study and subjects to be taught. However, a researcher can be a good teacher as researcher study lot of material in the area of study and teaching.
Dear Gaurav:
The only way any teacher can acquire knowledge to pass it forward to another in a classroom is by doing research. Without research, there would be nothing to teach. But it so happens that acquiring knowledge is easier that passing it forward in an orderly manner. That is why teachers must acquire knowledge AND learn teaching techniques that can be very complex. Passing on scientific knowledge is especially difficult: you have to teach to students method and contents, so there are practical, hands-on skills a student must develop to understand scientific knowledge, and there are complex manners of studying scientific content, and both hands-on skills and content are essential in the formation of scientists.
This is not so different from studying literature or philosophy (why do scientists believe philosophy is more important than literature or the arts???), except that the disciplines classified as "humanities" are much more free to speculate and create without the need to prove it's object of study is real, practical or reasonable. There is as much research in the humanities as in the hard sciences, but the end result in the humanities needs not be "useful". In the humanities, learning to think bearing in mind the complexity of the world is the essential thing in research, whereas scientific research always hopes to "touch" the real, whatever that is.
Most good full-time researchers I know are not so good teachers. Most good teachers I know do research for being better teachers.
Best regards, Lilliana
It's been a vice verse question. in some aspects one may give better answers and best choices that depends upon the topic, problem or subject which demands.
even the many factors that surrounded by us.
we can't judge this thing in one aspect or occasion.
This may give some idea on this.
i will give the answers to many questions with my functional experience i am not a senior reseracher just started my phD in E-commerce.
Thanks
p.phani
To be a good teacher, it does not matter whether he or she is a philosopher or a researcher. More important thing is that he or she has characteristics necessary for a great teacher. Such characteristics are mentioned in some Web sites. For example, nine characteristics of a great teacher are described at http://www.facultyfocus.com/articles/philosophy-of-teaching/nine-characteristics-of-a-great-teacher/ as follows:
1. A great teacher respects students.
2. A great teacher creates a sense of community and belonging in the classroom.
3. A great teacher is warm, accessible, enthusiastic and caring.
4. A great teacher sets high expectations for all students.
5. A great teacher has his own love of learning and inspires students with his passion for education and for the course material.
6. A great teacher is a skilled leader.
7. A great teacher can “shift-gears” and is flexible when a lesson isn’t working.
8. A great teacher collaborates with colleagues on an ongoing basis.
9. A great teacher maintains professionalism in all areas—from personal appearance to organizational skills and preparedness for each day.
In philosophical point of view ,Teacher have three critical building blocks: knowledge, critical thinking and curiosity. These building blocks have an enduring cyclical relationship; knowledge helps us to understand the world around us as well as ourselves, critical thinking gives us the ability to incorporate knowledge and apply it endlessly and curiosity which is the result of realizing the limitations of current knowledge, drives us to acquire additional knowledge. Although researchers are sometimes asked to think about how research can be integrated in the classroom, I’ve also found that efforts in the classroom can also ultimately result in better research. In fact, although many educators are not necessarily researchers, the converse is undeniable: It is no accident that some of the best researchers are also excellent teachers. And, while some strong researchers who are not good teachers do exist, I believe that purposeful teaching effort does in fact result in much better research. Although researchers are sometimes asked to think about how research can be integrated in the classroom, I’ve also found that efforts in the classroom can also ultimately result in better research. In fact, although many educators are not necessarily researchers, the converse is undeniable: It is no accident that some of the best researchers are also excellent teachers. And, while some strong researchers who are not good teachers do exist, I believe that purposeful teaching effort does in fact result in much better research.
Dear Kiran, I speak from experience. During my BA I studied chemistry and mathematics, and eventually I specialized in Literature and the Fine arts. My PhD is in medieval literature. I had to sit in a classroom with terrible science teachers who, during lab and research studies, were simply excellent. Most new tenured track professors recruited while I was there, spent much time in research, and their classes were practically unintelligible. We had to go and protest with the Dean because we were good students who had problems with teachers who could not convey meaning because they were simply researchers and the even resented to be obliged to teach. I had excellent lecturers on biology and chemistry and excellent professors of mathematics. Regardless of this, I had excellent grades throughout my undergraduate and graduate courses.
Once I jumped to the humanities, the best teachers were those who were very well read and into research and publishing because they were always enthusiastic about teaching about their findings so elective courses were simply excellent.
My guess is that people have different experiences in the class room. I finished my studies quite a while ago, and possibly the teaching of science has improved. But I personally have not witnessed that again as a student.
Best regards, Lilliana
Think about yore (Gurukulas or Ashrmas)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gurukula
https://www.quora.com/How-was-the-Gurukul-education-system-in-ancient-India
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashram
Those teachers or gurus were hardcore philosophers who extracted life in each and everything, attained knowledge later teach the students.
Do not classify Teacher as a philosopher or researcher. Teacher (Guru) is everything. Who ever gets the philosophical thinking they teach better. Teacher is a life long researcher who shape the students.
Eg. Dr. Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarvepalli_Radhakrishnan) 2nd President of India was a teacher.
When he became the President of India, some of his students and friends requested him to allow them to celebrate his birthday, 5 September.
He replied, "Instead of celebrating my birthday, it would be my proud privilege if 5 September is observed as Teachers' Day."
His birthday has since been celebrated as Teachers' Day in India.
Another Eg. Dr. APJ Kalam (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A._P._J._Abdul_Kalam http://www.abdulkalam.com/kalam/theme/jsp/guest/index.jsp) 11th President of India an aeronautical researcher/missile man of India who was preaching till his last breath of life.
Teachers' Day: Famous Indian teachers that shaped our country http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-teachers-day-famous-indian-teachers-that-shaped-our-country-2122115
Dear Kiran, philosophers of science are familiar with science, and philosophers of other things know about other things: ethics, logic, art, sociology, mathematics, history, language, politics, the mind.... That all philosophers prefer science or know about science is a male myth. Philosophy is also a specialized subject. I believe Bertrand Russell (nobody talks about Russell, I guess because he is extremely complex) was an all encompassing, fascinating intellectual. He was an extraordinary philosopher of mathematics and wrote the best essays on morals I have ever read, one on happiness and another one on boredom and idleness. These essays are pure gems.
There is intelligence in all cultural pursuits: art, literature, society, ethics, psychology, politics. I wonder why there is the idea that some subjects require less intelligence than others.
Best regards
As per my view a researcher is good teacher as he/ she is directly in depth study of any technical/ non technical with the practices and observation. So he/ she is an good teacher rather than another.
A teacher can be a good researcher but a vice a versa is not teacher. Over and above knowledge, critical thinking an additional quality is requied that is effective deliverance. In old days science was considered to be same as philosophy. But after growth of ecperimental sciences, philosophy is considred to be separate discipline.
Dear Gaurav, It highly depends on the subjects they teach. Sometimes, a researcher is good teacher, sometimes not. Teachers should have special characteristics to be good teachers, So, we definitely can not answer on this question.
- Badges
- Science method
- Similar topics
- Philosophy