Vasyl Sukhomlynskyi’s Philosophy of Education: Human-Centred Dimension




philosophy of education, anthropology, human-centrism, values, learning, cognition, thinking


Purpose. The basis of the presented study is a methodological and human-centred analysis of the philosophy of education of the outstanding Ukrainian educator Vasyl Sukhomlynskyi as a relevant anthropological-intellectual strategy for understanding and comprehending the educational process in the context of civilisation challenges. This implies a sequential solution to the following tasks: 1) to review the conceptual content and human-centred load of Vasyl Sukhomlynskyi’s pedagogical position in the discourses of philosophical anthropology and social philosophy; 2) to analyse the theoretical knowledge of the anthropo-existential concept of the outstanding teacher in the context of the transformation of Ukrainian education; 3) to determine the main parameters of the cognitive field of Sukhomlynskyi’s philosophy of education in the development of values of patriotic education of young people. Theoretical basis. The dynamic process of Ukraine’s unfolding struggle for the preservation of its nation and territorial integrity brings Sukhomlynskyi’s philosophy of education to a new level of understanding of human life and society. The human-centred dimension in interaction with the philosophy of education allows us to define Sukhomlynskyi’s pedagogical concept in the fullness of its metaphilosophical, existential and axiological content. The relevance of the problem under study is due to the crisis of values in the situation of civilizational transformations, which, as a result of information and digital technologies, have a cumulative impact on all spheres of people’s life and their attitude to the world. In the process of implementing the educational ideas of the Ukrainian teacher, the development and transformation of the individual’s self-awareness takes place in accordance with the intellectual challenges of the modern socio-cultural environment. Originality. It is substantiated that the philosophy of education of Vasyl Sukhomlynskyi largely determines the strategy for the transformation of Ukrainian education both in the context of digitalisation of the educational space and in the situation of a full-scale war against Russian aggression, which opens up new prospects for the implementation of identity dimensions in interaction with a qualitatively different level of national subjectivity. Conclusions. The approval of the conceptual provisions of Sukhomlynskyi’s philosophy of education gives rise to a new type and method of paradigm of thinking and cognition in the implementation of strategies for the transformation of modern education, which determine the qualitative theory of the educational process in the context of human-centrism. It is characterized by the level of modern philosophical reflections, which allows preserving and at the same time changing the system of education and upbringing of the young generation in the context of universal values. On this basis, the philosophy of education of the prominent Ukrainian educator appears as a way of renewing all aspects of human life, which deconstructs itself in the situation of a human-centric dimension.


Bekh, I. (2018, May-June). Pryntsyp odukhotvorennia u vykhovnii systemi Vasylia Sukhomlynskoho. Pedahohichna hazeta, 5. (in Ukrainian)

Fukuyama, F. (2020). Identity: The Demand for Dignity and the Politics of Resentment (T. Sakhno, Trans.). Kyiv: Nash format. (in Ukrainian)

Heidegger, M. (1977). Die Zeit des Weltbildes. In F.-W. von Herrmann (Ed.), Gesamtausgabe: Holzwege (Vol. 5, pp. 75-113). Frankfurt am Main: Vittorio Klostermann. (in German)

Holland, J. H. (1995). Hidden Order: How Adaptation Builds Complexity. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company. (in English)

Ilina, H. V. (2018). Heneza kultury myslennia: lohos, ratsio, vizio: Monohrafiia. Kyiv, Nizhyn: PP Lysenko M. M. (in Ukrainian)

Jameson, F. (2008). Postmodernism, or, the Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism. Kyiv: KURS. (in Ukrainian)

Kremen, V. (1998, October). Filosofiia osvity u spadshchyni velykoho pedahoha. Pedahohichna hazeta, 1. (in Ukrainian)

Kulyk, N., & Sukhomlynska, O. V. (2016, October 3). Slovo pro batka. Osvita Ukrainy, 12-13. Retrieved from (in Ukrainian)

Morin, E. (2002). Le complexus, ce qui est tissé ensemble. In R. Benkirane, La complexité, vertiges et promesses. Paris: Le Pommier. (in French)

Proleiev, S. V. (2021). Vlada i suspilstvo: postmoderna perspektyva: Monohrafiia. Kyiv: Dukh i Litera. (in Ukrainian)

Shalashenko, G. (2015). Phenomenon and discourse: the role of anthropological beliefs in the sciences of culture and society. Filosofski dialohy’2015. Filosofiia. Kultura. Suspilstvo, 9-10, 75-84. (in Ukrainian)

Skovoroda, H. (1995). Piznai v sobi liudynu. Lviv: Svit. (in Ukrainian)

Sukhomlynskyi, V. O. (2012). Sertse viddaiu ditiam. Kharkiv: Akta. (in Ukrainian)

Sukhomlynskyi, V. O. (2021). Ya rozpovim vam kazku… Filosofiia dlia ditei. Kharkiv: Shkola. (in Ukrainian)

Türcke, C. (2019). Digitale Gefolgschaft: Auf dem Weg in eine neue Stammesgesellschaft. München: C.H. Beck. (in German)




How to Cite

Kremen, V. H., & Ilin, V. V. (2024). Vasyl Sukhomlynskyi’s Philosophy of Education: Human-Centred Dimension. Anthropological Measurements of Philosophical Research, (25), 5–14.