The End Of Education: Ch 1 and Part of 2: Quadrinity
Quotes followed by my ramblings take a shape: Quadrinity
“Without narrative, life has no meaning. Without meaning, learning has no
purpose. Without purpose, schools are
houses of detention, not attention.” Loc
135
Camus says that we get into the habit of living before we
learn to questions it. I think that is
mostly true. Yet, he was talking about
suicide and why we don’t kill our selves.
When it comes to education, we simply try to make it as easy as possible
and look at it as some sort of purgatory that we have to survive so we can do
something meaningful (or at least pleasurable) after. People are in the habit of following a
certain god and not questioning it. For
adults who have jobs, routines, families, bills, etc… The running on the treadmill of life is a
habit and they can’t think about the narrative in a critical way; they are
caught up in it and they just live it. (Here
I want to drop in a Foucault quote: "Thought does exist, both beyond and
before systems and edifices of discourse. It is something that is often hidden
but always drives our everyday behaviors.... Criticism consists in uncovering
that thought and trying to change it: showing that things are not as obvious as
people believe, making it so that what is taken for granted is no longer taken
for granted. To do criticism is to make harder those acts which are now too
easy.") Narratives give meaning and
those narratives have to be engaging enough to capture the belief, hopes and
imagination of the youth. They can’t
just be a narrative that someone is caught in and has no time or energy to find
their way out of. We need to have gods that kids will buy into... Let's see how Postman does when he proposes new gods.
“Where as the science-god speaks to us of both understanding
and power, the technology-god speaks only of power.” Loc. 164
I think he is wrong in this assessment and his assessment
of the four major gods he talks about in this part of the book. A saying I thought I coined and started
throwing around several years ago (and then found a Rorty quote that is essentially
the same) fits here: “Science is the handmaiden to technology.” This of course echoes the saying from the
Middle Ages: “Philosophy is the handmaiden to theology.” I think the
science-god speaks to us only of understanding, of knowledge. It serves the technology-god who speaks of manipulation. The difference is that this makes them much more
dependent on each other than Postman makes them. Just as few people would have studied
metaphysics in the Middle Ages unless they had an interest in theology, very
few people today get into science for science’s sake. Some research scientists do research just for
the sake of knowledge and some science teachers teach just for the love of knowledge. But I think these are few and far
between. Most people in the sciences
have practical (meaning technological) goals: medicine, computers, etc. And most research is funded by people that
have practical/technological goals. Without
technology, I think science is relegated to a position similar to alchemy or
mysticism.
This brings me to the other two gods that Postman talks
about in the early stages of the book: economic utility and consumerism. I think he is right in pointing them out as
major influences in our society, and that he is more than less right in his assessment
of their lure and short comings. I think
these are as intertwined with each other as deeply as I think the gods of science
and technology are. In fact, I think
these four make up the holy quadrinity that our contemporary American Society
is based on. But first about consumerism
and economic utility.
Economic utility is the idea that we need only learn or
do what is of economic use to us. (I
really think that this is the “Father” of the quardrenity, the most powerful
and originary of them.) We need only
learn or do what will help us later to make money. What that means for many students is that
they need to get good grades and learn practical things. They will cram for a test to get a good grade
(or simply cheat) and then forget the information if it is not seen as being of
any use to them. The aim of education
and of their daily life is to make money.
But this on its own doesn't seem very convincing or inspiring. (Postman
does a better job of pointing out the connection that I see here than he did
with the other two heads of the quadrinity.)
Why do we need to make money?
Well that is where the lure of the god of economic utility needs the god
of consumerism. We need money to buy
things! (This I think is the Holy Spirit
of the quadrinity. It inspired and
sustains us.)
The god of consumerism also is tied in closely with the god
of technology because it is technology that provides the means by which the
consumer products are manufactured and then made obsolete so they have to be
thrown out and replaced with the newest and latest. (The god of technology is the Son of the quadrinity,
who brings us the good news and saves us, shows us the way to heaven. The god of science could be seen as the Mary,
Mother-of-God, in the quadrinity. She is
the one that has given technology to the world.)
In the end, I think we need to take note of how closely
intertwined these four gods are, this four part god-head. If we change or challenge one, we will affect
the others. This is not a call to leave
things as they are but a warning to tread carefully; most importantly to make
sure that the weakening of one of these gods doesn’t result merely in the strengthening
of another of them. The point should be
to take all three of these gods and demote them to demigods that serve the new
ones.
posted by Zophorian at 3:47 AM
2 Comments:
Zozo:
This is major rambling...
I largely agree with your post. Regarding the first observation about the general import of myth, which we chatted about in our last video conference, I think I now see fully the power of such narratives. I might use this quotation with my ninth grade students: "Our genius lies in our capacity to make meaning through the creation of narratives that give point to our labors, exalt our history, elucidate the present, and give direction to the future...Does it provide people with a sense of personal identity, a sense of community life, a basis for moral conduct, explanations of that which cannot be known?" (p. 7). One other interesting aspect of narratives is their ability to give "people a measure of control in their lives" (p. 9). I know that most mythological systems aim to render familiar the unfamiliar and, hence, frightening realities of life in the universe.
To my knowledge, very few schools, certainly none that I've worked at, advance a purposive narrative. Schools have mission statements, but these are bland, matter-of-fact statements of commitments. I think IB World Schools and UWCs come close to this level of narrative. However, the language of their narrative is written for adults, not children.
In the absence of such narratives, students impose their own on the schoolhouse. Where do these come from? Families, institutions of religion, and pop culture are the most common in the United States. Unfortunately, very rarely do I encounter the kind of narrative that Postman would approve of. Too often families emphasize the gods of Economic Utility (good grades = good college = lucrative profession); they equate the good life with the aggregation of wealth. (I don't think this mis-prioritization is intentional, and I imagine most of our families have a different understanding of the good life--when queried. Yet parents do not spend enough time talking directly with their children about what counts, and so children learn by examining the choices their parents make, which tend to be about EU.) I cannot speak to religion's narrative in my classes. Pop culture, though, is the god of consumerism. Never before in human history (of first world nations) have children and young adults been such a dominant demographic. The lives of young people in the US are inundated with ads. And since students are not "producers" or contributors to society, one of the only ways they can distinguish themselves is by their belongings...
I take your critique of Postman's distinction between science and technology. I guess it depends how we define "understanding" and "manipulation." I would need to hear more about the relationship between science and technology as you see it. Recently, I have been taking an online course in instructional design--what Postman would call "engineering." The central premise is that education should be geared toward understanding (not knowledge). Embedded in this notion of understanding is application, a skillful performance. Understanding is not only a psychic state of judgment, discernment, etc. But understanding requires operation, an activity, a doing or experience.
The Quadrinity! I dig it.
What he says about narrative is wonderful all around I think; the importance of a framework that gives meaning cannot be overestimated in my opinion. What he is talking about I see as being like myth and necessary-lies that Nietzsche talks about in various writings. I also see this project as connected with the Nietzschean idea that god is dead and we need to fashion a new one. Nietzsche’s trans-valuation of values and the possibility of the superman being an artist who creates new myth are things that I can’t help but see in the background (or as the foundation) of what Postman says.
Schools don’t seem to create their own myths but borrow them from society or art. I think we need to make sure that they are drawn from art more than society in general. The gods that are failing our schools are from general society, and I think the fact that they are is part of their weakness. Again, I long to hear him speak of the place of art, literature and poetry. I think this is a good place to use the idea of the artist as Nietzsche’s superman. (Heidegger talks about poetry in this way, and I love it.) In the end I think the school system can really only stipulate that the narrative be one that unites people (creates a society, or civil humans) and then teachers (or board of an individual school) have to find their own narratives to weave into what they teach. It is important for an adult somewhere to be presenting an narrative. In the absence of something ‘handed-to’ or ‘handed-down-to’ them, the students do find their own. And I think that is dangerous because they tend to be short sighted and superficial.
What you are covering in your ‘engineering’ class as understanding is what I see as a combination of understanding and manipulation. For me what bridges understanding and manipulation is the ability to use your understanding to predict what will happen. What we find out as being statistically the case from science, we can use that law or theory to predict what will happen. As we understand more and more variables we can manipulate; that ability to manipulate becomes technology. (Also,-- to put it very shortly-- I see understanding as more akin to wisdom and knowledge more something you memorize but can’t use or don’t deeply understand. In reality I should use information instead of knowledge for that.)
Post a Comment
<< Home