Abstract :
[en] Prior to becoming a dynamic factor in civilisation, education appears first of all as a result of it. In order to understand an educational situation - which one must, before undertaking a comparison, - it is necessary to study its origin and growth. By maintaining that education is only the reflection of society, and more especially of its economy, Durkheim is directly propounding the modern anthropological theory. The secondary role of education is examined from 4 angles - in time (recurring influences) in space, at the same point in time and space, the disparity between educational theory and practice. Cultural anthropology endows a study of comparative education with a certain spirit and method. These are characterised by two words: relativism and globalism. The two ways of absorbing culture are then dealt with, i.e., the technical (learning of the thought technique) and the normative (learning of the normative ways of behaviour) processes of learning. It is regrettable that too many comparative educationalists neglect the normative aspect since this exercises a determining influence. This explains the artificial "bloodless" character of so many studies. The last part of the article is devoted to a study of the three vast normaLive factors of the culture-education complex. 1. The human order, which is both spatial (horizontal and vertical) and temporal. 2. The process of development. Amidst the phenomena brought to light, the idea of intercontinental acculturation processes is particularly outstanding. The procedure of cultural crises is also pointed out. The author finally underlines the importance of the notion of modal personality. 3. The ideals. Regardless of axiological differences among cultures, the average man's conceptions of beauty, good and truth are formed less by himself than by the civilisation in which he lives. All the same, it would be merely a convenient simplification to maintain that a simple culture adopts a clearly defined, fixed order of values. In conclusion, the need for co-operation between anthropologists and educators becomes increasingly evident. It is true that comparative education is bound up with other disciplines, but anthropology occupies a privileged position because, without its contribution, comparative education will remain for ever at a descriptive, even enumerative, level and for this reason will never be classed as one of the humanistic sciences.
[fr] Conclusion : Tels sont, je crois les enseignements importants que l'anthropologie culturelle apporte aux comparatistes de l'éducation. Les limites de temps imposées par un congrès comme celui-ci m'ont naturellement obligé à schématiser là où de longs développements s'imposeraient. Mais la qualité de cet auditoire autorise les raccourcis audacieux. D'ailleurs, aucune des idées soulevées ici n'est vraiment neuve. Ce qui l'est peut-être plus, c'est la nécessité qui apparaît de plus en plus nettement de constituer des équipes permanentes où anthropologistes et éducateurs œuvreront en étroite collaboration. Certes, l'éducation comparée est tributaire d'autres disciplines aussi, mais l'anthropologie occupe une place absolument privilégiée parce que, sans ses apports, l'éducation comparée restera à un niveau descriptif, voire énumératif et, pour cette raison, ne méritera pas le titre de science humaine.
