The theme of this study, "In Quest of the Science of Education", can be characterized as a nonconformist exploration of pedagogical science with a systemic and futuristic frame of thought. Since the study is openly nonconformist (or 'unorthodox'), it is difficult to root it within any existing tradition of pedagogical science. My intent is not, however, to belittle the high endeavours of scholars in the field of education, nor to undermine their valuable work. Rather, I intend to address openly the problematique of the current paradigm of pedagogical science: its theory and research appear, today, to focus compulsively on educational particulars -- on specific issues of applied education with no holistic frame of reference. The field is not focussed on searching into the whole phenomenon of education. Consequently, educational theory resembles an incoherent body of tenets that form no overall platform for thought. This narrows the scope and distorts the focus of scholarly exploration, and is unproductive of theoretical coherence.

Given the rapid change of our world, the globalizing paradigm of the human society, and the innate need of each citizen of this planet to live a meaningful life -- and, simultaneously, given the present inability of humankind to cope with such challenges the -- potential significance of education cannot be overestimated. There is, thus, a growing need for education to become an agent of social change, a strategic tool for a serious reach towards goals and models relevant to the future prospects of humansociety. Therefore, those involved with education are entrusted with a solemn responsibility towards the future of humankind. This sentiment is voiced even by the protagonists of world affairs. For instance, Agenda 21 -- the United Nations programme of action adopted in 1992 by the U.N. Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED or the 'Earth Summit') in Rio de Janeiro -- states:

"Education ... should be recognized as a process by which human beings and societies can reach their fullest potential. Education is critical for promoting sustainable development and improving the capacity of the people to address environment and development issues. ... Both formal and non-formal education are indispensable to changing people's attitudes so that they have the capacity to assess and address their sustainable development concerns. It is also critical for achieving environmental and ethical awareness, values and attitudes, skills and behaviour consistent with sustainable development and for effective public participation in decision-making. To be effective, environment and development education should deal with the dynamics of both the physical/biological and socio-economic environment and human (which may include spiritual) development, should be integrated in all disciplines, and should employ formal and non-formal methods and effective means of communication." (United Nations, Agenda 21, Chapter 36.3.)

This commitment to genuine betterment is a feature that educational science shares with futures studies: both are similar to the science of medicine in that they seek to produce effective practice for real-life improvements and they need to be backed up by proper and credible theoretical thought -- they are future-oriented in that they are meant to be proactive (not merely reactive). In other words, they are not theoretical sciences, as such, but rather they are forms of prospective practice that need a coherent science to support them and a sincere commitment to betterment. The problem is that, while the science of medicine has little problem in identifying relatively objective criteria for physical healing (i.e. the betterment of the biological aspect of human reality), the science of education is lost in its search of relatively objective criteria for good education (i.e. the betterment of the social, intellectual, emotional and spiritual aspects of human reality). Moreover, a science must axiomatize itself in order to define its purpose and its field of interest.

As it is, any attempt toward a more coherent mode of education would, eventually, confront the existing ambiguity of educational theory, its lack of universality and coherence -- especially when it comes to core educational concepts (such as the ontological perspective on human reality). Reducing this ambiguity and attaining to some level of universal coherence is a necessity, if education and educational science are to evolve up to their calling. The scholars of the field understandably have given up serious attempts of finding a consensus on such broad and deep questions. The controversies in the history of human and social sciences have discouraged and silenced the protagonists of such attempts. Consequently, most scholars continue their specific and narrow lines of work, without realizing the need, or risking the challenge, or simply bothering to ask questions like: What is the human conception at the core of my research? What sort of humanity am I promoting by my assumptions? Such questions are privately considered by many scholars, but if presented within the frame of professional work, they may evoke apprehensions about professional credibility.

The ethical responsibility of a scientist must have a firm foundation; it cannot be based merely on ideological claims or personal preferences. Philosophical schism must, therefore, recede in favour of sound theory which, in turn, must be based on a credible ontological view of human reality -- on a vision that would have some universal appeal to the human mind. Generating such a vision of course cannot be the task of educationalists and scientists alone. It entails decades of ongoing search and interchange of ideas by a multitude of participants representing diverse cultural mentalities and world-views, longstanding synergic interaction between concerned elements of society -- including governmental agencies and scholarly institutions, and especially, organizations of the civic society and the rank-and-file of world population. My purpose, and my sincere hope, is that this study could make a humble opening for a process of interactive search for this fundamental element of vision. Only after a long process of ongoing dialogue in pursuit of coherent educational thinking and theory, anything conclusive could be claimed. The work at hand can, therefore, serve only as a start for this discourse -- not a conclusive end but a coherent beginning.