112 Chapter 2 The central goals are connectedness with the self, the other and the world. All this makes WCD applicable to the fragmentation thesis, as presented in the previous chapter, and the resulting need for stratified subjectification. WCD has a clear affinity and overlap with holistic education, especially as it, over time, has come to identify with and attend more explicitly to the spiritual dimension of the student. A distinction can still be drawn between a more explicit holistic approach with clear attention to the mind, body and soul complexity (e.g. Waldorf education, religious-based education) and a more stringent wholistic approach, such as that of Reform pedagogue Dewey and educational philosopher Noddings, in accordance with Rousseau, which seems to avoid the spiritual part of the whole. In fact, WCD tries to combine both approaches, involving the spiritual and indicating explicit preoccupation with spiritual wellbeing. Thus, it can be understood as a clear reaction to the analytical focus in Western education, which strives for synthesis and attention concerning the complex interrelatedness of things, leading to a focus on the child as a complex connected person who cannot be reduced to his or her cognitive function. Approached from the fragmentation thesis as built carefully in the previous chapter, however, it must be observed that WCD nevertheless falls short in its bold attempt to incorporate holism and wholism and give a clear place to the influences of the spiritual domain. WCD does address reductionism as part of fragmentation on the micro-level of the person (the child), and also to some extent on the meso-level of society, but not the lack of an overarching framework on the macro-level of the world. Although it mentions the world, it pays hardly any attention to the nature and quality of the connectedness of—especially—the human interior to the whole of the world. Philosophically, it misses the attention for its destiny (telos) that both MacIntyre and Taylor wished for (Chapter 1.1.1). Theologically, notions like personhood as communion (intersubjectivity) and an overarching moral (heavenly) politeuma, as mentioned in Chapter 1.3, have therefore no place in WCD. This might explain why there has apparently been a reluctance or at least hesitation among Christian scholars and teachers to make their own contributions to WCD or to integrate WCD in their own vision and intentions, as noted above. The following chapter aims to fill this gap and evaluate WCD from the perspective of Christian anthropology, including its theology and pedagogy.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw