The ISME conference theme, “Unity in Music Education: Building Bridges for All,” invites our philosophical reflection. In a world of multiple musics and cultures, what is meant by unity in music education and how should it be practiced? Among the important questions this theme raises are: Is it utopian to imagine unity among music educators? How far should we go towards unity in music education? What are the promises and treacheries in overcoming disunity? Is disunity something we must accept and agonize over? How might music educators employ an ambiguous construct of unity towards freedom? How do our values impact the metaphors for unity towards the practice of a humane music education? Our panel of published philosophers of music education will address these questions in turn.In examining whether a utopian approach to unity is possible, the first presenter applies sociological and philosophical concepts of unity and community from a utopian perspective to develop future scenarios for international music education. These illustrate how our understanding of unity and community shapes the development of our field.Unity seems to have persisted as a prominent goal for many people throughout history, but it does not mean that every entity should become the same. In the contrary, there is rich evidence to show that “variety in the unity” is more highly valued than just being the same. The second presenter explores transcendental principles that are applicable to all aspects of life, including music education, such as deep harmony, balance, Daoist approaches, and the unification of heaven and human through music.Disunity implies that there are significant differences between ideas, commitments, values, visions, or people, but there are approaches to reducing or disabling these differences to create or restore unity. Each of these steps--and here, this presenter will look briefly at tolerance, compromise, compliance, and capitulation—however, carries within it both promise and treachery. To be effective, their application will require some level of sacrifice or choices will have to be made to accept disunity as the preferred status.There are various ways of relating practically to a concept such as unity within the international field of music education. For example, how does this concept relate to ideas about the diversity of pluralism? How do we deal with disagreements and conflicts? This presenter will discuss an agonistic approach as a way of relating to different ideas confronting each other, which implies respect and concern for the other.What would it mean to understand unity not as agreement or convergence, but as a form of ambiguity? For existentialist philosophers such as Simone de Beauvoir, what unites us is not sameness but the shared recognition that each of us is uniquely working toward an uncertain future. Framed through an ethic of humility, this presenter questions how music education practitioners, scholars, and policymakers might embrace their shared responsibility to construct freedom within and beyond the profession.The spectrum of views of unity in this panel suggest a variety of views concerning the bridges for all that could or should exist in music education. Drawing on the values of inclusion and exclusion, the final presenter embraces disunity to suggest that humane music education bridges those with the freedom to provide and receive them. This metaphor cannot encompass the breadth of the values that should underly music education. Other pictures such as the village and community, the garden and growth, the therapist and healing, the court and rule, among others, will be required to capture the richness of the notion of music educational unity this panel has suggested.