The contemporaneous „return to the man" in bourgeois philosophy and pedagogy is provoked by deeper causes which rest in unsolvable discrepancies of the general crisis of the capitalist society. The essence of bourgeois anthropologism rests in a one-sided and uncritical cult of the abstract man and is ideologically based not only on the subjectivist philosophy and in irracionalism but also on the biologically conceived naturalism and essentialism of various objectively idealistic and religious approaches of the “unchanging” substance of man. The author conceived his essay accordingly. It is devoted to the criticism of the anthropologism of German spiritually refined pedagogy (W. Dilthey’s, of the pedagogy of culture and values of E. Spranger, H. Nohl and Th. Litt), of the anthropological conceptions of existentialism according to which the lived life demonstrates itself as a basic force of education (O. Kroh, O. P. Bollnow, and others), it criticizes the efforts to create a pedagogical anthropology, an anthropological pedagogy and a so-called “basal”, “integral anthropology” (A. Busemann, J. Derbolav, H. Loch, M. J. Langeveld), and traces the radical consequences of HusseH’s phenomenology and of some of the conceptions of structuralism (J. Piaget) for the reinforcement of the anthropocentrism of contemporary bourgeois pedagogy. In the last part of his article the author points to some aspects of the marxist-leninist conceptions of existing humanism and of man as the point wherefrom arises the criticism of the contemporary bourgeois theories of education.