I encountered a problem, one I hope a reader will be able to answer.
I live with people I like, but our apartment lacks a conservative voice. So when a question arose just before dinner we were left without an answer, only speculation. It is a question prompted by the following quote, a quote a friend shared on Facebook.
The question that arose after reading this quote was: "How would a conservative (either religious or political, or both) respond to a quote like this?" Or as a general statement, "How would anyone disagree with that?".
My roommate posed the question. None of us had an answer. So here I am, asking the internet...How do you respond to a quote like this? Especially if you disagree. How do you disagree? Why do you disagree?
My roommates and I mused that to disagree one would need to hold to an ideology where making money was central, or at least significant, and we were not sure how one would hold that together with Christianity. Maybe I am wrong in this assumption. I hope someone can enlighten me about how to disagree with this because I am disturbed by my inability to come up with an opposing argument. Being obstinate and disagreeable make up a large portion of my house's humor, therefore this new found cohesion is eery. Hopefully someone can help me out with this, even if it is just for argument's sake, so I can return my house to our proper equilibrium.
I would challenge you to think about what a full and happy life requires and whether a measurable level of education has any real bearing on whether or not a person lives a happy or productive life. I think the tyranny of the 'educated' is no different than the tyranny of the rich although they tend to vote in opposite directions.
ReplyDeleteAllow me to preface this with my general agreement with the above quote.
ReplyDeleteIf I were to disagree this is how I would go about it.
The discussion seems to centre on what is education about.
Position A: education is about training and 'success (monetary) - career
Position B: education is about learning to think critically and to challenge - mind
This is a binary and we should know better than to accept these. First, of all these are not the only two ways to think about education. Second, they are not mutually exclusive.
However, beneath the discussion of education is a discussion about society and culture.
Position A: the measure of a society is its compassion
Position B: the measure of society is its consumption
Again, binary. One is intellectually bullied into agreeing unequivocally with position A if one disagrees with position B, which is encouraged through rhetoric. These are not the only measures which one can or should evaluate society AND they are also not mutually exclusive.
Now lets go through this step by step.
Is education about training? yes.
Is education about monetary success? yes and no. Clearly, some people think exclusively in these terms. However, the number of people that graduate with Biblical Studies degrees, English degrees, psychology degrees, etc. clearly indicates that this is not a universal mindset. While some people go to school evaluating it on the basis of return on investment. It is my anecdotal opinion that most people go to school and get degrees based on either love and interest in subject matter or complete and utter cluelessness.
Is education about career? yes. lets not be ridiculous and try and say that education "should" be unrelated to career. Education whether in its purest academic sense or most capitalist is about life. Since for most people a job or career is required for life it is appropriate that education will be related to what one does even if only tangentially. Education, even the worst education is formational, either for good or ill, and therefore will impact who you are, what you do and how you do it whatever that is. So yes education is about career.
Is success defined monetarily? This one is interesting. If your goal is to make money then clearly success is measured monetarily. I think most people though in our culture would talk about happiness and possibly respect. Money is one way that many people think these goals can be achieved. But I think we are all fairly clear that money isn't the goal money is the percieved means to a different goal.
is success defined by the ability to think critically and challenge? This again I think is a very limited vision of success. In an education setting critical thinking and zeal may be goals that should be achieved, but I certainly feel that this seems very limited and also very negative. I would at minimum want to ad the word create or imagine, love would seem to be an important word.
Especially, the direction of the argument is toward compassion.
ReplyDeleteminds vs careers? the true purpose of education... This statement makes a hegemonic claim on the word education. As noted above these are not mutually exclusive. Furthermore, classical education is about virtue and character formation, not "mind." In my opinion the breaking apart of these ideas, mind, career, virtue is horribly problematic. And while Hedges may be starting to identify this he falls into the same or perhaps uses it for ideological warfare.
Morality and power: Does anyone else notice that he kinda leaps hear from nowhere? It sounds good maybe its right maybe its wrong, but its not related... not directly anyway not based on his actual words. I mean I could fill some stuff in for him and stuff but who doesn't think that morality and power are related? This is the spiderman generation, "with great power comes great responsibility." we all know that! at least intellectually, who is he attacking?
Management techniques vs wisdom: This sounds great but what does it mean? Is he arguing for us to fear the Lord? He uses two terms here for their rhetorical value only without defining either or actually saying anything. Perhaps, if one follows his thinking: Management techniques = money... and Wisdom = compassion... Is this a fair statement? And again all these things are not mutually exclusive. Money can be used wisely and compassionately. Furthermore, "wisdom" even in the Bible often gains wealth. Management techniques is a silly statement that is used effectively to say bad but effective management... but what is that? Lots of management stuff is just good relationships and books on good relationships. How can that be bad?
compassion? yes its good. Everyone agrees that its good. Is it the measure of society? can you run society on compassion? even using the word compassion wouldn't that relate to provision for the needs of members? so really its about provision and care. But for it to be good society it has to be sustainable. So all of these things must be evaluated for sustainability. But now we are onto very debatable territory... what must society provide? and how does it do so sustainably? and how does one provide opportunity? if the issue is just a job... forced labour works really well... So its complicated. Our societies, have healthcare, welfare, EI, and non taxable charitable donations. That seems pretty "compassionate"... so whats the problem are we trying to talk globally? Do we believe in a perfect system?
consumption and death: I feel like we wind up somewhere vastly different than where we begun. Another, more positive way to say consumption, might be... standard of living... which seems a relevant measure of the success or failure of a society to provide for its members... furthermore death is always the ultimate blackmail, playing upon fear, and therefore a very poor argument even if it is also very effective persuasion.
Education must be related to equipping you for life, which at minimum will in some fashion relate to a career. If you become an author and critic. Than success will obviously be defined by critical thinking and challenging. If you become a doctor than success is defined helping sick people (compassion). But our jobs are not the only thing we do. We also become friends, husbands, wives, parents. How do we succeed and how are we equipped in these areas?
Perhaps I have not disagreed enough...
But I think my main point is that hedges creates and defines/fails to define all the categories and I don't think they are all valid.
So the way to disagree is to not disagree about the statement but disagree over its applicability and therefore relevance.
I don't disagree with the statement but if I were I may argue that it is irresponsible for a young adult to ask the government for money so I don't don't have to work while I work on become enlighted. If education was solely for the purpose of enlightenment I do not need a formal education to do it I can do that on my own time, in a library I can write papers on my own. Why should the country give me money to lay in my room with my laptop and a Starbucks coffee if I am not going to they reap nothing from education? OF course this an argument for the idea of formal education and maybe not the idea of education.
ReplyDeleteI also would disagree with the statement that those aren't the only two options just like Duncan. Sometimes it neither sometimes people get an education for to fulfill a dream. For example I wanted to tell Teens about Jesus. I felt the best way for me to do that was to get an education in youth culture, and theology. I spent just over 50,000 on my degree and am 11,000 in debt for an education that no one outside church culture would care for and a pay grade that doesn't justify the time and money I spent for it as least for a monetary gain. I did to because it would help get to my dream not always because I wanted to learn. ( I did want to learn but overall I just wanted to get there)
But I do agree with the statement and this I the best place in Canada where this is manifested where it seems you needed a post secondary for the most mundane sorts of jobs that don't pay enough to cover the cost of the loan
I suppose you could also disagree with that statement by stating that being the most education for the purposes of enlightenment hasn't really made us a more enlightened / wise culture. We still deal with the same sociopath- economics issues that civilizations thousands of years ago struggled in ancient times. In a first world country with probably the highest % of common people with that have access to a a high level education we haven't really improvemed much. We've mastered physics but made nuns, Despite the abolitionism of the slave trade 16 year old girls are selling younger girls into slavery for sex. People still speed, and drive drunk despite the vast amounts of energy put into the schools to educate. In an age where information and access to knowledge are common a penny we have still dealing with the same issue we were before we were educated. Of course I think one could could also counter this by arguing there is a difference between education and the cognitive ability to retain facts or skills
ReplyDeleteIsuppose you could also disagree with that statement by stating that being the most education for the purposes of enlightenment hasn't really made us a more enlightened / wise culture. We still deal with the same socio economics issues that civilizations thousands of years ago struggled with. In a first world country with probably the highest % of common people with that have access to a a high level education we haven't really improvemed much. We've mastered physics but made nucs, Despite the abolition of the slave trade 16 year old girls are selling younger girls into slavery for sex. People still speed, and drive drunk despite the vast amounts of energy put into the schools to educate. In an age where information and access to knowledge are common as a penny we have still dealing with the same issue we were before we were educated. Of course I think one could could also counter this by arguing there is a difference between education and the cognitive ability to retain facts or skills
ReplyDeleteReply
I think that this is the point that the quote is trying to make. Society has reduced education to expert producing factories (Zizek) and information has become consumable rather than formational.
DeleteThere is a great Regent story about a student who complaint that Eugene Peterson talked too slowly in class and paused to long when answering questions. The classes are expensive and the student wanted more words per dollar...
Excellent, thanks for your responses.
ReplyDeleteA few things I am picking up through the responses:
Refuse the bullying of binary thinking, context is not given for the quote so it was a little unfair to quote and challenge without the context (where some of the terms may have been defined, we just don't know), one could say the law of diminishing returns applies to both Education and Money when reflecting on gained happiness.
But, the challenge Hedges makes is necessary, as has been evident by some of the responses, where "education" is currently a "ticket" to a job, in some respects, and maybe there is a way of education that is not forced to become producing people, but can think outside the current box. And the reflection on compassion as it relates to how our system works may not be fully thought through yet, maybe there are better alternatives. Can compassion be sustainable? What might that look like? it all has me wondering.
All good thoughts, thanks.