Is it possible to strike a balance between social and individual aims,? 

This question will make you think about what I am going to discuss today. I would like to draw your attention to this issue which is always raised in the education system, that education should focus to train good individuals or good citizens. 

We know that this question is not so easy to answer the way it seems because this question has already been widely considered and debated, but the final assessment is that any kind of growth in individuality indicates the path to attaining social aims. 

Any type of school always focuses on the free development process of the individual and usually enables all the learners to become efficient in achieving the highest degree of individual growth and development and the whole procedure of development makes the learners capable enough to understand the life of society.  

We all are well aware of that why we set targets in life. They provide directions to our activities, which could make them lead us on the path to victory.  Ideals of life keep changing So the aims are also formulated based on needs, they can be modified based on situations and desires.

 Individual goals are set for the progress of individuality where the social aims for the development of the society.  But when we look deep into the topic we find that the progress and growth of individuals get their meaning in the advancement of the social environment.

Individual Aims of Education -: certain points and views  regarding individual aims of education :

The Ideal of Individuality: 

A British educationist Sir  Percy  Nunn observes “Individuality is the ideal of life, a scheme of education is ultimately to be valued by its success in fostering the highest degree of individual excellence.”  His ideology regarding this aim is entirely based upon the fact that an individual is an architect of his fate and responsible for his fate as well. So education must be provided for the complete development of an individual. 

Social-political Philosophy-:  The family, the school, and the state are part of society the existence of these institutions is for believing and improving the lives of the individual. It strengthens this belief in social-political philosophy. 

All these institutions have some or another way to develop the process of individuality. So the environment offered by these institutions becomes enough to encourage proper growth and the progress of the individual. 

The Naturalistic view of Rousseau-:  The Naturalist Rousseau believes “ Everything is good as It comes from the hands of the Author of Nature, but everything gets devastated in the hands of man. God makes the things good but man meddles with  them and they become evil.”  He believes that man and citizens can not be trained simultaneously as we have to make our choice between them.

Modern Belief- Psychologists are of the view that education is an individual process. So they hold views in favour of this whole process.

On the following points, the individual aim of education has been criticized according to Dr Dewey “ Every individual a social being he is a citizen,  growing and thinking in a vast complex of interactions and relations". So those activities which don't serve social ends, consequently fail to provide any benefit to the individual.

The critics believe that if the individual, is left to himself he is no more than an animal,  selfish and indisciplined.

Rusk opines that inindividualsust are made fit as a part of society  “ The aim of education is not the development of personality it should enrichment of personality.”

Social Aim of Education -: a few points in favour of this are,

Those who believe in the social aim of education opine, that society is real and the individual is only the means so work should be done for the welfare and progress of society. The supporters hold the view that individuals should be educated for the good of society. Those who believe in the social aim of education don’t have faith in an individual living and growing in isolation from society.

It is considered that society is reality while the individual is only " "throb in the social pulse .” They believe that apart from the social environment individuality and personality becomes meaningless and of no value. Social happenings add value to the personality. The social aim is to work consistently for the welfare of the state and it also encourages the welfare of the individual. The state has the right to mould and shape the individual accordingly.

Those who believe in imparting education through social control want to run the procedure based on strict discipline and obedience. It entirely depends on the will of the state what shall be taught and how it shall be.

Conclusion-:  Above description of two types of aims provides a glimpse that may be opposed to each other if emphasized in their extreme form. We all know the excess of everything is bad and if we don’t take care of it on time it might be worse the same if individuality is emphasized much, ignoring the importance of social aims then you will become the victim of egoism, and if the social aims stressed too much it will create suppressed personalities, Thus both the situations should be avoided to happen. 

Man is a social animal so the development process can not be made in a vacuum. The personality can not be stressed by ignoring the facts regarding general human ideals. Both times need ideal conditions to go with, the school should try to develop the individuality of each learner through social contacts and control without seizing the maximum freedom of each individual. 

Equal importance should be given to both the individual and the society because neither of the two can work independently of the other. They are functionally very well joined to each other.