In the last years of the nineteenth century, educational psychologists created what they called a "science of education." Their aim was to make education a professional field, thereby freeing teachers and school administrators from political interference, and they believed they could do this by concentrating on studies that might illuminate particular classroom techniques. These researchers claimed that the studies of particular teaching methods would accumulate in ways that offered an objective view of education. Unfortunately, this was not the case. This article discusses the ways that Harris and Dewey treated four points that illustrate the ways that philosophy could build bridges among concerns with curriculum, teaching, and social progress. Although the ideas of Harris differed from those of Dewey, they treated conceptions of the subject matter, views about manual training, the need for social organization, and the value of examinations in similar ways. This article explains each in turn in order to show how philosophy can reinforce notions of community and democracy. The report concludes with the author's argument that it does not seem to him that a science of education, as conceived by educational researchers, will enhance democracy as much as it will advance the status of researchers.