Good Education in the Age of Artificial Intelligence

— Five Reflections —

By Qing Xi (United Wei-yu Center)

Abstract: As GPT-5 and the early forms of AGI become daily tools, the essential questions of education are being asked anew: what makes education "good"? This essay responds through five progressive propositions—respect for individual differences, education embedded in life, gratitude and benevolence, language proficiency and deep reading, and the bearing of the junzi who is "harmonious yet not identical." In an age in which AI has entered the learning scene on a massive scale, "good" education is not a race against technology, but a return to safeguarding what it means to be human; its ultimate horizon, to borrow from the Doctrine of the Mean and from Mr. Pan Guangdan, is captured in the single phrase wei-yu (位育)—"finding one's proper place and being nurtured therein."

I. Teaching According to Each Nature: Helping Each Person Find Their Ground of Being

The Analects (Book XI) records a paradigmatic dialogue. Zilu and Ranyou ask Confucius the same question—"Should one act at once upon what one has heard?"—and receive opposite answers. To Ranyou, Confucius says "yes"; to Zilu, "while your father and elder brothers are alive, how could you?" When the puzzled Gongxihua asks for an explanation, Confucius replies: "Ranyou is retiring, so I urged him forward; Zilu is impetuous, so I held him back."[1] This is the locus classicus of yīncái shī jiào—"teaching according to material." Zhu Xi commented: "The sages taught each according to his material; the small achieved the small, the great the great—none was discarded."[2] The Liji·Xueji distills the principle further: "Learners have four faults; teachers must know them… Knowing the mind, one can remedy the fault. Teaching means cultivating the good and remedying the fault."[3] In these four words—cultivating the good and remedying the fault—lies the very physiognomy of "good" education: the teacher is not a mould but a gardener, not casting students into a single uniform type but following the differences of each nature, cultivating what is good and remedying what is amiss.

Mencius held that all humans share the "four sprouts" (compassion, shame, deference, right-and-wrong), yet stressed that "all who have these four sprouts in themselves must know to extend and fill them out"—the sprouts are universal, but the path of extension is individual.[4] Wang Yangming, in the Chuanxilu, taught that "in extending innate knowledge, each must follow his own measure."[5]

Western philosophy converges on the same insight. Rousseau opens Émile (1762) with: "Everything is good as it comes from the hands of the Author of Nature, but everything degenerates in the hands of man."[6] Maria Montessori, through decades of clinical observation, identified "sensitive periods"—windows in which the child is internally driven to master specific domains, and the educator's task is to "prepare the environment" rather than to dictate content.[7] Howard Gardner's Theory of Multiple Intelligences (1983) argued that human cognition comprises at least eight relatively autonomous intelligences—linguistic, logical-mathematical, spatial, musical, bodily-kinesthetic, interpersonal, intrapersonal, naturalistic—and that schooling's exclusive emphasis on the first two narrows the human spectrum.[8]

Contemporary evidence supports the ancient wisdom. A 2023 systematic review and meta-analysis in Teaching and Teacher Education, covering more than 12,000 students across 14 countries, found that differentiated instruction produced significant positive effects on achievement, motivation, and classroom belonging, with effect sizes (Cohen's d) in the 0.30–0.45 range.[9] Deci and Ryan's Self-Determination Theory provides the motivational mechanism: when learners' three basic psychological needs—autonomy, competence, and relatedness—are met, intrinsic motivation flourishes, and learning becomes self-sustaining.[10]

Today, AI can answer almost any standardized question instantaneously; an education that still aims at the mass production of standardized respondents will be the first thing technology renders obsolete. However mighty human memory and computation may be, they are no match for the machine. Education has long wandered in this misconception, and now, more than ever, demands clear-eyed self-reflection. "Good" education must do what Confucius modeled twenty-five centuries ago—help each person find the root in which he or she can stand, grow, and gladly contribute. The opening passage of the Doctrine of the Mean already names this root with classical economy: "When equilibrium and harmony are realized to the highest degree, Heaven and Earth find their proper places, and the myriad things are nourished."[43] The modern Chinese sociologist and educator Pan Guangdan, drawing from anthropology and sociology, condensed this insight into two characters—wei-yu (位育)—and enriched it to encompass the interplay of individual and group, humanity and nature, transmission and adaptation.[44] In a word: whether viewed as a value or as a process, wei-yu is the education that every person truly needs.

II. Education as a Social Activity: Learning Embedded in Life, Knowledge as Foundation, Not Totality

If the destination of education is wei-yu, then its implementation naturally requires a place of practice. Yet "school" is not "education"; to restrict education to what schools do is an industrial-era misunderstanding of historical proportions. Since Johann Amos Comenius first proposed the class-teaching system in his Didactica Magna (1632)[45], and through the successive waves of industrial-revolutionary specialization, the cultivation of human beings has come increasingly to resemble a factory assembly line. The efficiency is astonishing; the price is the homogenization of the human.

The Liji·Xueji notes: "Jade unpolished cannot be a vessel; a person unlearned cannot know the Way. Thus the ancient kings, in founding the state and ruling the people, placed teaching first."[3] But the "teaching" of this passage was never confined to the schoolhouse. The opening of the Daxue—self-cultivation, family regulation, state ordering, world pacification—weaves a continuous fabric in which schooling is only one thread. Traditional Chinese education may be debatable in its techniques, but in the articulation of educational value and ideal—that is, in the realm of the Dao—it shines undimmed across the ages. Scholars formed within this value framework—Yan Zhitui, Zhu Xi, Zhu Bolu, Zeng Guofan and the like—wove, through family precepts, household letters, and clan rules, an educational network of "family teaching," "village covenants," "ancestral halls," and "academies" far vaster than the school.

John Dewey, in Democracy and Education (1916), insisted: "Education is not preparation for life; education is life itself." He criticized schools for severing learning from living, and proposed the school as "a miniature community" in which knowledge arises through "learning by doing."[11] UNESCO's Faure Report (1972) introduced "lifelong learning" and the "learning society," declaring education "no longer the privilege of an elite at a certain age, but the lifetime affair of an entire society."[12] The Delors Report (1996) named four pillars: learning to know, to do, to live together, and to be—of which "learning to know" is only one.[13]

Developmental psychology corroborates this. Bronfenbrenner's Ecological Systems Theory maps child development across nested microsystems (family, school, peers), mesosystems, exosystems, macrosystems, and chronosystems—school is but one node.[14] Vygotsky's sociocultural theory locates higher mental functions in social interaction; the Zone of Proximal Development requires a more capable other, who may equally be a teacher, a parent, a peer, or a village artisan.[15]

To cite these voices is not to argue that the classical view has wholly outlived its time. Plato's allegory of the cave and Aristotle's claim that "moral virtue comes about as a result of habit"[16] frame education as a slow, life-embedded shaping of character. Alfred North Whitehead, in The Aims of Education (1929), warned sharply against "inert ideas—ideas that are merely received into the mind without being utilised, or tested, or thrown into fresh combinations"; such knowledge, he said, is "not only useless: it is, above all things, harmful."[17] Knowledge, he insisted, must be joined to "the adventure of wisdom"—otherwise it is mere dead knowledge.

It is worth noting, in passing, that OECD's PISA 2022 report found that over the past decade, OECD students' average mathematics scores fell by 15 points (about 0.4 years of schooling) and reading by 10 points—a decline that "began before, and exceeds, what the pandemic can explain."[18] Andreas Schleicher noted that schools spend too much time on what can be searched or generated by AI, and too little on questioning, judgment, and collaboration—precisely what the Xueji warned against millennia ago: "Mere recitation does not qualify one to be a teacher."[3] By the same token, mere recitation does not make one a truly educated person.

It cannot be denied that the acquisition of knowledge remains the foundation of education—on this point the classical view has not been superseded. But knowledge is not virtue, knowledge is not thought, and knowledge is still less wisdom. The purpose of acquiring knowledge is to enable one to read—texts, the world, others, oneself—and thereby to think, and ultimately to pose new questions. "The formulation of a problem is often more essential than its solution," as Einstein remarked[19]; in an age in which AI offers a hundred thousand answers, the capacity to pose one genuine question is the true mark of an educated mind. The foundation of questioning is thinking; the foundation of thinking certainly draws upon a body of basic knowledge, but more fundamentally upon the shaping of one's command of language. In the age of AI, natural language matters far more than artificial language—how to articulate one's views, express one's thoughts, and pose one's questions with precision, so that AI may participate in realizing one's ideas, is the foremost task confronting both teachers and students of language. In sum, to describe a question clearly, to state an opinion clearly, to elucidate a thought clearly—this is the real task wrapped beneath the outer garment of "knowledge."

III. Gratitude, Benevolence, and Positive Influence: The Moral Texture of the Educated Person

The Analects opens with: "Filial piety and fraternal respect—are they not the root of humaneness?"[1] Gratitude, in the Confucian tradition, is not decorative ritual but the root from which civic virtue grows. As Zengzi said, "When the dead are mourned and the distant remembered, the people's virtue returns to thickness."[1] Mencius identified the "heart of compassion" as the sprout of humaneness—the foremost of the four sprouts of the human person.[4] Zhang Zai, master of Neo-Confucian thought, declared in the Western Inscription: "All people are my siblings, all things my companions."[20] To regard all under Heaven as kin, and the myriad things as companions—this is the highest expression of positive moral influence.

Aristotle made philia (friendship) and megalopsychia (greatness of soul) central virtues of the polis citizen.[16] From Aquinas to Kant ("treat humanity as an end, never merely as a means") to Levinas's ethics of the Other, the Western tradition has likewise centered on responsibility for the other. The Japanese educator Mori Shinzo wrote that "the essence of education is one soul awakening another"[21]—and the soul capable of awakening must itself be warm, grateful, and morally radiant.

Modern positive psychology supplies empirical foundations. Martin Seligman's PERMA model identifies five pillars of human flourishing—Positive emotion, Engagement, Relationships, Meaning, Accomplishment—two of which (relationships and meaning) are inseparable from gratitude and benevolence.[22] In 2003, Emmons and McCullough's landmark study randomly assigned students to gratitude, hassles, or neutral journaling for ten weeks; the gratitude group reported significantly higher well-being, optimism, relationship quality, exercise frequency, and sleep quality.[23] Subsequent interventions with children and adolescents (Froh, Sefick & Emmons, 2008; Bono et al., 2019) show that brief gratitude practices—as little as five minutes a day of "counting blessings" over two weeks—durably raise school belonging, prosocial behavior, and academic engagement.[24]

The Yale Center for Emotional Intelligence's RULER program and CASEL's SEL framework treat gratitude, empathy, and benevolence as core teachable skills. CASEL's meta-analysis of 213 SEL programs involving over 270,000 students found an average 11-percentile-point gain in academic achievement alongside significant declines in problem behavior—evidence that benevolence is not a "soft" garnish but a structural pillar of learning.[25]

In the AI age, this proposition becomes urgent. When ChatGPT is nearly omnipotent in standardized tasks, the uniquely human shrinks to the moral domain—to gratitude, benevolence, and the capacity to influence others for good, which AI can never truly "learn." To abandon this task is to surrender humanity's last comparative advantage to the machine.

IV. Language, AI Dialogue, and Deep Reading: Liberating Time to Commune with the Ages

"Language" is not a mere instrument of communication; it is thought itself. Wittgenstein's Tractatus proclaims: "Die Grenzen meiner Sprache bedeuten die Grenzen meiner Welt"—the limits of my language mean the limits of my world.[26] Language is not a tool added after the world appears; language is the very mode in which the world appears to us. Confucius told his son, "Without studying the Odes, one cannot speak."[1] Liu Xie wrote that "the writer's feelings move and his words come forth; the reader opens the words to enter the feelings."[27] Qian Mu insisted that "warmth and reverence" toward one's native language and history are the root of cultural transmission.[28]

In the era of generative AI, this ancient claim becomes acutely contemporary. Natural language is the sole interface between humans and AI. Those who can express complex ideas in precise, layered mother tongue—and craft effective "prompts"—will mobilize AI's full power; those whose language is impoverished will receive impoverished responses. A 2024 study in Frontiers in Education calls "prompt engineering" the defining 21st-century literacy, defined essentially as "the ability to express complex intent in precise natural language."[29] UNESCO's 2024 Global Education Monitoring Report places "critical language competence" at the head of essential AI-era skills.[30]

Yet a deeper worry is that AI's convenience may be eroding the very depth of language it requires. Maryanne Wolf, in Reader, Come Home (2018), drew on neuroscience to show that digital skimming is reshaping the reading brain, making "deep reading"—the slow, immersive reading that enters another's mind, converses across millennia, and cultivates empathy and critical thought—an increasingly rare capacity.[31] In 2025, Nataliya Kosmyna and colleagues at MIT Media Lab published Your Brain on ChatGPT: 54 participants writing essays were divided into ChatGPT, search-engine, and brain-only groups; EEG and behavioral measures over four months showed the ChatGPT group with significantly lower neural connectivity, lower linguistic originality, and impaired memory transfer—what the authors call "accumulation of cognitive debt."[32] A January 2025 Microsoft Research survey of 319 knowledge workers reached a parallel conclusion: greater confidence in generative AI correlated with reduced use of critical thinking.[33]

This is the paradox: AI is supposed to liberate time, but may steal thought. The way forward lies in returning to the ancient chain—language, reading, thinking. As Yuval Noah Harari put it, "In a world deluged by irrelevant information, clarity is power."[34] He names the "four Cs"—critical thinking, creativity, collaboration, communication—as the future curriculum, three of them borne by language.

"Good" education should cultivate two linguistic capacities. First, the precise use of one's mother tongue to interact with AI as a co-thinker rather than a replacement—turning AI into "an amplifier of thought" rather than "a substitute for thought." Second, the use of time liberated by AI for deep reading—of the Analects, the Book of Songs, the Shiji, Shakespeare, Du Fu, Dostoevsky—so that the soul may commune with the great spirits of two thousand years. As Cheng Hao wrote, "All things in still contemplation are self-attained; the four seasons' joys are shared with humankind."[35] Time freed, the heart enriched.

V. Harmony in Diversity: The Junzi Bearing for a Pluralistic Age

The Analects (Book XIII) records: "The junzi is harmonious yet not identical; the petty person is identical yet not harmonious."[1] Zhu Xi glossed: "Harmony means a heart free of hostility; identity means a posture of obsequious agreement."[2] The junzi keeps independent judgment amid plural views (not identical), yet bears no rancor toward those who differ (harmonious); the petty person publicly conforms while privately faction-building. The Guoyu records Shi Bo's even earlier insight: "Harmony begets new things; identity cannot continue."[36] Harmony is the organic combination of differents, fertile; identity is the repetition of the same, sterile.

Western pluralism converges. John Stuart Mill, in On Liberty (1859), argued that silencing an opinion "is robbing the human race"—either of the chance to exchange error for truth, or of "the clearer perception and livelier impression of truth, produced by its collision with error."[37] Habermas's discourse ethics grounds modern legitimacy in "the unforced force of the better argument" exchanged across positions—a modern political-philosophical rendering of he er bu tong.[38]

Empirical social science confirms the power of harmonious difference. Scott Page, in The Difference (2007) and The Diversity Bonus (2017), shows mathematically and experimentally that on complex problems, cognitively diverse groups outperform homogeneous groups of "best individuals."[39] Amy Edmondson's research on "psychological safety," and Google's two-year Project Aristotle analyzing 180 teams, converge on the same conclusion: the leading predictor of team effectiveness is not talent density but a climate in which dissent can be safely expressed.[40]

AI recommendation algorithms, however, are systematically threatening this possibility. Eli Pariser (2011) warned of the "filter bubble"[41]; recent empirical work, including Levy's 2021 field experiment in the American Economic Review, demonstrates that social-media algorithms measurably amplify affective polarization and inter-group hostility.[42] When each listens only to what one already wished to hear, "identical yet not harmonious" becomes the disease of the age.

"Good" education forms the junzi who resists this current—who seeks dissent beyond the algorithmic echo chamber, holds independent judgment amid plural voices, and combines that judgment with goodwill toward those who differ. Three foundations sustain this bearing: deep reading, which grants historical depth and immunity to the tyranny of the present moment; logical training, which enables argument rather than invective; and gratitude and benevolence, which let one greet the other as an "illuminator" rather than a "threat." These three foundations echo the four prior sections—the harmonious-yet-different junzi is not a fifth parallel goal, but the personhood that naturally emerges when the previous four are fused.

Conclusion: Guarding the Root of Humanity in the Age of AI

When artificial intelligence can write poetry, code, paint, and diagnose, and when knowledge itself flows at marginal cost to every connected corner of the earth, education can no longer ground its value in the scarcity of knowledge. It must return to deeper roots—respect for the differences among persons, attention to the wholeness of life, cultivation of gratitude and benevolence, fidelity to language and deep reading, practice of harmony in difference. These five are not five separate goals but five roots of a single tree, together sustaining the upward growth of the human being in the age of AI; ultimately they converge in one ancient yet ever-renewed word—wei-yu.

Standing by a stream, Confucius said: "It flows on like this, day and night, never ceasing."[1] Technologies will succeed one another; AI will renew itself again and again; but education, whose essence has always been one soul awakening another, has not changed its fundamental logic since Confucius and Socrates, and will not change. The "good" education is the one that allows the human being to remain a human being amid the torrent of technology—this is our age's hardest, and most worthwhile, answer.

References

  1. The Analects (Lunyu), compiled by disciples of Confucius, Spring and Autumn period. Critical edition: Zhonghua Shuju, 2006; English translation by D. C. Lau, Penguin Classics, 1979. Books cited include Xianjin, Xue'er, Jishi, Zilu, Zihan, and Wei Linggong.
  2. Zhu Xi. Sishu Zhangju Jizhu [Collected Commentaries on the Four Books]. Beijing: Zhonghua Shuju, 1983.
  3. Liji·Xueji [Book of Rites, Chapter "Record on Education"]. See Sun Xidan, Liji Jijie, Zhonghua Shuju, 1989. English translation: James Legge, The Li Ki, in Sacred Books of the East, vols. 27–28, Oxford University Press, 1885.
  4. Mencius, Books "Gongsun Chou I" and "Gaozi I." Critical edition with commentary by Yang Bojun, Zhonghua Shuju, 1960. English translation: D. C. Lau, Mencius, Penguin, 1970.
  5. Wang Yangming. Chuanxilu [Instructions for Practical Living]. See Chen Rongjie, Wang Yangming Chuanxilu Xiangzhu Jiping, Taipei: Taiwan Student Bookstore, 1983. English: Wing-tsit Chan, Instructions for Practical Living and Other Neo-Confucian Writings by Wang Yang-ming, Columbia University Press, 1963.
  6. Rousseau, J.-J. (1762). Émile, ou De l'éducation. Paris. English translation by Allan Bloom, Basic Books, 1979.
  7. Montessori, M. (1949). The Absorbent Mind. Madras: Theosophical Publishing House. See also Lillard, A. S. (2017). Montessori: The Science Behind the Genius, 3rd ed. Oxford University Press.
  8. Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. New York: Basic Books. Revised in Gardner, H. (2011). Frames of Mind, 30th Anniversary Edition.
  9. Pozas, M., Letzel-Alt, V., & Schwab, S. (2023). The effects of differentiated instruction on teachers' stress and job satisfaction. Teaching and Teacher Education, 122, 103962. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0742051X23004523. See also Bondie, R. S., Dahnke, C., & Zusho, A. (2019). How does changing "one-size-fits-all" to differentiated instruction affect teaching? Review of Research in Education, 43(1), 336–362.
  10. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2017). Self-Determination Theory: Basic Psychological Needs in Motivation, Development, and Wellness. Guilford Press.
  11. Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and Education: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Education. New York: Macmillan. Full text.
  12. Faure, E., et al. (1972). Learning to Be: The World of Education Today and Tomorrow. Paris: UNESCO. https://www.uil.unesco.org/en/virtual-exhibition-1972-79-lifelong-education.
  13. Delors, J., et al. (1996). Learning: The Treasure Within. Report to UNESCO of the International Commission on Education for the Twenty-First Century. Paris: UNESCO.
  14. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The Ecology of Human Development: Experiments by Nature and Design. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Bronfenbrenner, U. (2005). Making Human Beings Human: Bioecological Perspectives on Human Development. Sage.
  15. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Eds. M. Cole et al. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  16. Plato, Republic, Book VII (the Allegory of the Cave); Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, Book II, Ch. 1.
  17. Whitehead, A. N. (1929). The Aims of Education and Other Essays. New York: Macmillan. Full PDF.
  18. OECD (2023). PISA 2022 Results (Volume I): The State of Learning and Equity in Education. Paris: OECD Publishing. PDF.
  19. Einstein, A., & Infeld, L. (1938). The Evolution of Physics. New York: Simon & Schuster, p. 92.
  20. Zhang Zai. Ximing [Western Inscription], in Zhang Zai Ji [Collected Works of Zhang Zai]. Beijing: Zhonghua Shuju, 1978. English: Wing-tsit Chan, A Source Book in Chinese Philosophy, Princeton University Press, 1963, pp. 497–500.
  21. Mori Shinzo. Shushin Kyojuroku [Lectures on Self-Cultivation]. Tokyo: Chichi Shuppansha, 1989.
  22. Seligman, M. E. P. (2011). Flourish: A Visionary New Understanding of Happiness and Well-Being. New York: Free Press. See also University of Pennsylvania Positive Psychology Center, https://ppc.sas.upenn.edu/learn-more/perma-theory-well-being-and-perma-workshops.
  23. Emmons, R. A., & McCullough, M. E. (2003). Counting blessings versus burdens: An experimental investigation of gratitude and subjective well-being in daily life. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(2), 377–389.
  24. Froh, J. J., Sefick, W. J., & Emmons, R. A. (2008). Counting blessings in early adolescents: An experimental study of gratitude and subjective well-being. Journal of School Psychology, 46(2), 213–233. Bono, G., Froh, J. J., et al. (2019). Gratitude's role in adolescent antisocial and prosocial behavior. Journal of Positive Psychology, 14(2), 230–243.
  25. Durlak, J. A., Weissberg, R. P., Dymnicki, A. B., Taylor, R. D., & Schellinger, K. B. (2011). The impact of enhancing students' social and emotional learning: A meta-analysis of school-based universal interventions. Child Development, 82(1), 405–432. CASEL (2023). What Does the Research Say? https://casel.org/fundamentals-of-sel/what-does-the-research-say/.
  26. Wittgenstein, L. (1922). Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus, §5.6. London: Kegan Paul.
  27. Liu Xie. Wenxin Diaolong [The Literary Mind and the Carving of Dragons], chapter "Zhiyin." See Fan Wenlan, Wenxin Diaolong Zhu, Beijing: People's Literature Publishing House, 1958.
  28. Qian Mu. Introduction to Guoshi Dagang [An Outline History of China]. Shanghai: Commercial Press, 1940; reprint 2010.
  29. Eager, B., & Brunton, R. (2024). Prompting higher education towards AI-augmented teaching and learning practice: Prompt engineering as a new 21st century skill. Frontiers in Education, 9, 1366434. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/education/articles/10.3389/feduc.2024.1366434/full.
  30. UNESCO (2024). Global Education Monitoring Report 2023/4: Technology in Education — A Tool on Whose Terms? Paris: UNESCO Publishing.
  31. Wolf, M. (2018). Reader, Come Home: The Reading Brain in a Digital World. New York: HarperCollins. See also Wolf, M. (2007). Proust and the Squid: The Story and Science of the Reading Brain.
  32. Kosmyna, N., Hauptmann, E., Yuan, Y. T., et al. (2025). Your Brain on ChatGPT: Accumulation of cognitive debt when using an AI assistant for essay writing task. MIT Media Lab Working Paper. https://www.media.mit.edu/publications/your-brain-on-chatgpt/.
  33. Lee, H.-P., Sarkar, A., et al. (2025). The impact of generative AI on critical thinking: Self-reported reductions in cognitive effort and confidence effects from a survey of knowledge workers. Proceedings of CHI 2025. Microsoft Research. PDF.
  34. Harari, Y. N. (2018). 21 Lessons for the 21st Century. London: Jonathan Cape.
  35. Cheng Hao. Qiuri Ouchéng [Autumn-Day Impromptu Verse]. See Er Cheng Ji [Collected Works of the Two Chengs]. Beijing: Zhonghua Shuju, 1981.
  36. Guoyu [Discourses of the States], chapter "Zhengyu." Critical edition: Shanghai Guji Chubanshe, 1988.
  37. Mill, J. S. (1859). On Liberty, Ch. II. London: John W. Parker and Son.
  38. Habermas, J. (1990). Moral Consciousness and Communicative Action. Trans. C. Lenhardt & S. W. Nicholsen. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  39. Page, S. E. (2007). The Difference: How the Power of Diversity Creates Better Groups, Firms, Schools, and Societies. Princeton University Press. Page, S. E. (2017). The Diversity Bonus: How Great Teams Pay Off in the Knowledge Economy. Princeton University Press.
  40. Edmondson, A. C. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350–383. Edmondson, A. C. (2018). The Fearless Organization. Wiley. Google re:Work, "Guide: Understand team effectiveness" (Project Aristotle).
  41. Pariser, E. (2011). The Filter Bubble: What the Internet Is Hiding from You. New York: Penguin Press.
  42. Levy, R. (2021). Social media, news consumption, and polarization: Evidence from a field experiment. American Economic Review, 111(3), 831–870.
  43. Liji·Zhongyong [Doctrine of the Mean]: "When equilibrium and harmony are realized to the highest degree, Heaven and Earth find their proper places, and the myriad things are nourished." See Zhu Xi, Sishu Zhangju Jizhu (Zhongyong), Beijing: Zhonghua Shuju, 1983; and ctext edition https://ctext.org/liji/zhong-yong/zh.
  44. Pan Guangdan. "Shuo 'Wei-yu'" [On Wei-yu], in Zhengxue Zuiyan (1948), collected in Pan Guangdan Wenji [Collected Works of Pan Guangdan], vol. 6, Peking University Press, 2000. See also Lü Wenhao, "Liberal Education as Wei-yu: Pan Guangdan's Localized Perspective," working paper of the Department of Sociology, Peking University, PDF; and "Zhonghe Weiyu: Pan Guangdan's New Humanist Thought," People's Tribune, September 2021, https://www.rmlt.com.cn/2021/0929/626670.shtml.
  45. Comenius, J. A. (1657 [c. 1632]). Didactica Magna (The Great Didactic). English translation by M. W. Keatinge, London: A. & C. Black, 1896. Comenius first proposed grouping children by age and level into classes, with one teacher delivering the same content to the whole class simultaneously—the class-teaching system that became the basic form of the modern school.