Introduction. The transformation of modern education sharply raises the issue of pedagogical design. To create a pedagogy of the future, it is necessary to clarify the principles and directions of design. Therefore, a comparative analysis of any pedagogical systems makes it possible to clarify the criteria for comparison as strategic directions for designing. Particularly productive is the analysis of pedagogical systems created in the context of deep social and cultural transformations. Methodology. The purpose of the study is to identify the differences between the philosophical and pedagogical concepts of J. Locke and J.-J. Rousseau. To determine the grounds for comparison, the authors reveal different approaches in the works of Russian and foreign researchers. As criteria for comparing philosophical and pedagogical concepts, the authors use structural elements of the educational process (goal, method, content of education, the role of the teacher), pedagogical axioms (the axiom of human nature, the axiom of the educational ideal, the axiom of the social ideal), evaluative characteristics (advantages and disadvantages), and educational vectors as directions of efforts in certain characteristics of the educational process expressed in categorical pairs, as well as particular characteristics of the process. Discussion. The latter approach seems the most interesting and promising, as within its framework there are studies comparing the pedagogical concepts of the most prominent representatives of the Enlightenment, J. Locke and J.-J. Rousseau. The studies analyze the differences in the categorical pairs “external - internal” (as a key factor in the formation of a person), “activity - passivity”, and “freedom - dependence”. Earlier, the authors carried out a comparative analysis of the pedagogical systems of J. Locke and J.-J. Rousseau on the basis of categorical pairs “reason - sense”, “natural - social (artificial)” (human nature - environment). Conclusion. The article proposes categorical pairs that reveal additional differences in the pedagogical views of the two philosophers: “creation (filling)” - “manifestation (detection and development of the existing)”, and “present - future”. In the authors’ opinion, it is these pairs that are important not only for the analysis of pedagogical concepts of the past, but also for modern pedagogical design.