現代教育の最悪の欠点の一つは、現実への無関心である。私は、「現実」という言葉で,いかなる深遠なものも、形而上学的（哲学的）なものも意味しようとしていない。単に、ありのままの事実のことを言っているにすぎない。世界のあらゆる不愉快な側面から恐怖のあまり目をそむける習慣は危険であり、ある種の軽薄な弱さの現れにほかならない。
One of the worst defects of modern education is its indifference to reality. I do not mean by 'reality' anything profound or meta-physical ; I mean merely plain matters of fact. The habit of shying away in terror from every unpleasant feature of the world is a dangerous one and is the mark of a certain frivolous weakness.
Source: On Protecting Children from Reality, by Bertrand Russell
More info.: https://russell-j.com/CHILD-P.HTM
＜寸言＞
「本日のラッセルの言葉」から次のような感想を持ちました。
日本の公教育、特に小・中学校では、政治や社会の問題を授業で深く扱わない傾向があります。OECDの国際教員指導環境調査（TALIS?2018）によると、複雑な課題の解決手順を「生徒自身に決めさせる授業をしばしば行う」と答えた日本の中学校教員は25％にすぎず、OECD平均の45％を大きく下回っています。討論や主体的学習を奨励する場面が国際比較でも少ないことがうかがえます。討論する習慣の乏しさは、防災政策にも表れています。
たとえば、首都圏（１都３県）は日本の名目GDPの約３割を占めており、経済活動が極度に集中していますが、この集中リスクを緩和する首都機能分散や首都機能の二重拠点化は「検討課題」の域を出ていません。内閣府中央防災会議の想定では、首都直下地震が発生し都心機能が72時間停止すると、直接被害と経済活動低下を合わせた損失は約95兆円に上るとのことです。それにもかかわらず、抜本的な法整備や分散投資は遅れがちで、政府・与野党間では「緊急事態条項をめぐる対立」が繰り返されるだけという状況です。
原発政策にも同じ構図が見られます。太平洋沿岸への新増設は「被害を最小化できる」と説明されがちですが、日本海側に立地する近隣国の原発事故を例に取れば、風向き次第で被害の評価は大きく変わります。それでも比較検討の材料は十分に共有されず、賛否がレッテル貼りの応酬に終わることが少なくありません。
結局のところ、学校段階で「証拠を比較し合意形成を学ぶ」訓練が不足していることが、社会全体の政策討議も弱体化させている、と考えられます。討論型授業やエビデンスに基づく学習を制度的に支援し、批判的思考を育む環境を整えることが、災害対策やエネルギー政策といった国家的課題を前に進める前提条件になると思われます。
In Japan's public education, especially in elementary and junior high schools, there is a noticeable tendency to avoid dealing deeply with political and social issues in the classroom. According to the OECD's Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS 2018), only 25% of Japanese junior high school teachers reported that they frequently conduct lessons in which students decide on procedures for solving complex problems. This figure falls significantly below the OECD average of 45%, suggesting that opportunities for encouraging debate and active learning are relatively limited in international comparison.
This lack of discussion habits is also reflected in disaster prevention policy. For example, the Tokyo metropolitan area (Tokyo and the surrounding three prefectures) accounts for about 30% of Japan's nominal GDP, meaning that economic activity is highly concentrated. Nevertheless, plans for dispersing central government functions or establishing a dual-capital system remain stuck at the stage of "being under consideration." According to estimates by the Cabinet Office's Central Disaster Management Council, if a major earthquake were to directly strike the Tokyo area and shut down core functions of the capital for 72 hours, the combined damage --including direct destruction and economic slowdown-- could amount to approximately 95 trillion yen. Despite this, fundamental legal reforms and investment in decentralization remain slow, and political debate continues to revolve around disputes over emergency constitutional provisions between the ruling and opposition parties.
The same pattern can be seen in nuclear energy policy. While new reactor construction along the Pacific coast is often justified on the grounds that potential damage can be minimized, examples of nuclear power plants located on the Sea of Japan side in neighboring countries suggest that the extent of damage can vary significantly depending on wind direction. Even so, relevant evidence is not sufficiently shared or examined, and public debate often degenerates into an exchange of labels rather than a rational assessment of pros and cons.
Ultimately, the lack of training at the school level in comparing evidence and learning how to form consensus is likely contributing to the weakening of policy discussion in society as a whole. Institutional support for discussion-based lessons and evidence-driven learning, along with the development of environments that foster critical thinking, should be regarded as essential prerequisites for addressing national challenges such as disaster preparedness and energy policy.