The passage discusses the development and critique of the *Taxonomy of Educational Objectives* by David R. Krathwohl, Benjamin S. Bloom, and Bertram B. Masia. The authors aim to create a comprehensive system for classifying educational goals, divided into cognitive, affective, and psychomotor domains. The affective domain, in particular, is analyzed in detail, focusing on its taxonomy and the concept of "internalization." The reviewer, Richard W. Morshead, critiques the use of internalization as a central concept, arguing that it introduces a mind-body dualism and contradicts the authors' claims of a purely analytic abstraction. Morshead also notes the logical independence of the first and second parts of the book, questioning the need for metaphysical support in the affective domain. The review concludes with a personal selection and review of philosophical literature related to education, emphasizing the importance of diversity in educational philosophy.The passage discusses the development and critique of the *Taxonomy of Educational Objectives* by David R. Krathwohl, Benjamin S. Bloom, and Bertram B. Masia. The authors aim to create a comprehensive system for classifying educational goals, divided into cognitive, affective, and psychomotor domains. The affective domain, in particular, is analyzed in detail, focusing on its taxonomy and the concept of "internalization." The reviewer, Richard W. Morshead, critiques the use of internalization as a central concept, arguing that it introduces a mind-body dualism and contradicts the authors' claims of a purely analytic abstraction. Morshead also notes the logical independence of the first and second parts of the book, questioning the need for metaphysical support in the affective domain. The review concludes with a personal selection and review of philosophical literature related to education, emphasizing the importance of diversity in educational philosophy.