It may develop genuine open-mindedness; it may bring about a spirit of
mutuality; it may intensify the hypothetical temper which has been the
foundation of our scientific advancement. However, science alone is not
enough: we need genuine morality and genuine spirituality. Only when we
use science for the betterment of man, when education, philosophy, and
religion unite, will a new age dawn for humanity.

The theme of this book is the development of creativity as a basic
concept in educational thought. Man's quest for education represents at the
same time his search for creativity. To be creative implies a capacity for
self-definition, the ability to discipline one's powers, the vision of new goals,
and the application of this vision to daily existence. Creative education
represents an affirmation of man; it symbolizes an unwavering faith in his
intellectual and moral capacities, so that the gulf between the realm of ideals
and actuality can be narrowed. Creative education is the process by which
man utilizes the greatness which he finds within himself.

When an educator discusses the history and theories of education, he
reveals much about his own value structure and his own world view. What
matters in education is not merely factual competence but valuational bold-
ness. A theorist performs only a minor function when he comments upon the
ideas of the past and when he strives for academic respectability. His main
function is to anticipate the horizons of the future. As Heidegger asserted, the
philosopher is the guardian of being because he, above all, lives for the
future and thus helps to define human destiny.

It is very difficult to acknowledge all those who have helped to make
this book possible. I am indebted to the numerous publishers who have
generously consented to the republication of selections for which they hold
copyrights. My profound thanks go to the following for reading all or part
of the book and offering many helpful criticisms and suggestions. Professors
William H. Kilpatrick, Teachers College, Columbia University; Merle L.
Borrowman, University of Wisconsin; Lester B. Sands, University of Cali-
fornia, Santa Barbara College; Everett J. Kircher and Bernard Mehl, Ohio
State University; and Emery Stoops, University of Southern California.
Finally, I am especially grateful to Niels Buessem and Robert Craven of
the Merrill Company whose editorial guidance and graphic skills have been
an indispensable aid.

Frederick Mayer

-viii-