[MD] philosophy and education

[gav]

i think the dichotomy twixt philosophy and philsophology has been around for a while now. i think schopenhauer touched on it when he scheduled his classes at the same time as hegel; and nietzsche was exlplicit about it, which is maybe why he was in philology rather than academic philosophy.

 'philosophy' as a term has been bastardised to death....everyone who hangs on long enough at uni becomes a 'doctor of philosophy'. this brings about a sort of 'value-death' of the term....depreciated til it loses its original meaning.

a friend of mine, tess, an exceptionally gifted writer, once reacted in a lecture about the texts they were asked to read. they were being asked to read what she considered sacred and powerful things, things which when fully digested and incorporated are dramatically life-changing. but these tomes and excerpts were presented casually - no thought was given to this point; no measure available to help a true student integrate these initiatory experiences.

the manner in which these works are presented at uni belies the attitude towards them. for the academic these works are *intellectual amusement* (generally speaking, there are exceptions no doubt); they have not incorporated them; the enthusiasm and passion are lacking - they are not 'filled with god', overflowing naturally, a fountain from which his/her students can drink in intellectual and spiritual nourishment. the student responds to this attitude in kind, generally; there are always those few genuine seekers who spot this falsity, this cynicism, and react against it - like tess.

i do not blame the teachers. blame is a concept used to fill the gap between confusion and understanding. the problem is in systematic education, as pirsig pointed out. the teachers are a product of a system which sterilises knowledge and life...and of course it is not just education that suffers this treatment. but as dave said: got to go to the roots - no use holding on to something which is terminally ill.

and this is where i perhaps deviate from pirsig and dave (oh my god!), at least a little. i do think that change will occur at the academic level, but it will be slow. people like ant and dave are pioneers here. but this isn't the root; these are the topmost branches.

the root is primary and pre-primary education, in my opinion. if kids are allowed to develop naturally, nurtured rather than molded...they will be able to withstand the bullshit better later on.

i have seen this work, primarily with some home-schooled kids (depends on the parents of course); but i have also seen the gentle rise of 'community schools', which seem very promising to me. these schools still operate under the auspice of the education department but they are truly radical. they give choice to the student and they encourage art, music, the outdoors and sport. if kids are taught real skills - gardening, camping, languages, music, philosophical thought, early on, they will be, collectively, a powerful transformative force for the whole of society.

i am very optimistic. the baby boomer generation is dying out. i am not being callous. this generation is very static - they are old dogs by and large. the ones that are wise - 'new children' (a la nietzsche's camel, lion, child parable) - these elders, like bob, are the midwives of the new age.

and if u believe the wisdom traditions, many of the 'old dogs' will return as children in this new age...which is nice.

thanx for reading
gav




      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Access Yahoo!7 Mail on your mobile. Anytime. Anywhere.
Show me how: http://au.mobile.yahoo.com/mail