The debate between idealism and realism is a complex and often contentious area of philosophy and ethics. On the one hand idealism is related to a transcendental view of reality that places emphasis on mental ideas and on the motivation to attain high levels of perfection. On the other hand, realists question the validity and practicality of idealistic notions of ethics. In order to understand the foundations of this debate one has to take into account the long history of idealism in the West, from the beginning of the Platonic ideal Forms. One has also to take into consideration the rise of rationality, science and the secular society in the formation of a critical approach to idealism. This paper suggests that these two extremes can be more usefully integrated in an understanding of the positive aspects of both idealism and realism.
             The term idealism has many interpretations in philosophy and in ethical thought. On the one hand idealism is seen as the highest good that one can attain to. The term ideal refers to the notion of the "idea" or the concept of perfection in thought and action. On the other hand, idealism has been criticized in the modern context for being out of touch, as it were, with the facts and ethical demands of reality. This has implications as well for educational praxis. In a more traditional sense, the ideal and the real are considered to be one and the same thing. This refers to the concept of the ideal forms in Platonic philosophy, as will be discussed below.
             However, in a more contemporary context, idealism has also taken on the connotation of being in some senses ethically questionable. One of the common critiques of idealism is that it distorts reality and is therefore ethically suspect. This view is extended in the Nietzschean interrogation of idealism and the analysis of false and constructed realities or master narratives; as well as in postmodern deconstructions of idealistic ...