From time to time, the role of philosophy in education is discussed, at least in Hego Euskal Herria. Less frequently, the place and function of the social sciences are discussed, although both topics are closely related. In general, the tendency of recent years is to decrease the space of subjects and contents related to philosophy and thought, in favor of competencies that seem to be valued more in society. Thus, the subject of philosophy has lost its place or even relegated to reform, while at the same time social knowledge and critical approaches in general are questioned. Far from being a debate associated with specific areas of matter and knowledge, these trends adhere to the question of what is education in our society for? What do you have to do?

Along with this tendency to underestimation, I would say that the areas considered as sciences without adjectives live the opposite: STEAM, often converted into “hard” science euphemisms, is praised, as it is often denounced that “good” students turn to high school science, etc. In all these trends, I would highlight three keys.

On the one hand, what is understood as science, as scientific culture, because it seems to me that a narrow view of science prevails, which considers only some areas. Secondly, the clear androcentric taste of all this. In fact, as is well known, in the areas of knowledge – in both secondary and university, research, etc. – there is still a clear distribution by gender, in which the knowledge dominant by women is the ones who lose out. In view of this, I believe that the only solution cannot be for girls to turn to other non-social sciences, and that the assessment of human sciences is also a priority task. And thirdly, the clear ideological component of all this cannot be overlooked: those proclaimed are functional issues to the prevailing global conception in society.

The sociology of education and critical knowledge in general, as has been demonstrated for some time, the themes, areas, dynamics that prevail in education are closely linked to social structures. What is done in education, if I may say so, is at the service of all the machinery of society, and that is why knowledge is regarded as valid and others as a mere passage of time. Paradoxically, education is also a space to generate criticism, but the limits I have said before can never be forgotten.
So, going back to the beginning, we have to claim that philosophy is fundamental in education, and to add to this demand the support of social knowledge. The social sciences show us that the origin of the problems is structural, although at first glance they may seem like individual problems. Someone can say that that does a good social science, or a good philosophy, and I agree with that statement. But that's another debate: if human and social sciences continue to lose spaces in education, there will be no room for differentiation between good and bad social science.

Therefore, when there is more and more in society an orientation towards the prevalence of individual explanations and solutions, it seems essential to also demand the contribution of the social sciences in education as a condition to understand the structural character of the situations that affect our lives.