Home – Home – Jornals – "Philosophy of Education" 2026 number 2

Introduction. The debate about the fairness of private education is one of the most intense in the field of educational policy. The fact that such a debate cannot be resolved solely by empirical methods determines the need to analyze the philosophical foundations of the debate. Methodology. When analyzing the texts that make up the corpus of the debate, we used the comparative method, as well as the method of contextual analysis (J. Skinner). When considering the practical consequences of theoretical constructs, the potential of post-analytical philosophy, including the method of thought experiment, was used. Discussion. It is demonstrated that the discussion is based on alternative principles of justice proposed by J. Rawls and R. Nozick. At the same time, Rawls’s principle of justice (“justice as fairness”) imposes restrictions on private education, while Nozick’s principle of justice leaves private education free from restrictions. Through an analysis of modern philosophical literature, it is demonstrated that in the 21st century this debate is transformed into a dispute between proponents of alternative principles in the distribution of educational resources: the “principle of equality” (G. Brighouse, A. Swift) and the “principle of adequacy” (E. Anderson, D. Satz). Both principles impose moral constraints on the distribution of resources. However, the “principle of equality” imposes more stringent restrictions that are incompatible with the practice of fee-based schooling and tutoring. The “principle of equality” is based on the concept of educational resources as “positional goods”, which is the basis for prohibiting their uneven distribution in society. Conclusion. Thus, the work demonstrates the philosophical foundations of public policy in the field of education, which should be based not only on measurable goals (the results of standardized examinations), but also on value foundations, in particular, the principles of justice. In conclusion, a conclusion is drawn about the gradual shift of the discussion from the search for an “ideal theory” to contextual relativism.