[MD] 42

[Andre]

Arlo to Dan:

Finally, as DMB mentioned, Granger's ideas are exemplary here, and I'm not trying to skip over citing his work. In fact, I think Dewey brings a strong voice into what I personally feel is deep in the roots of the our educational dilemma; and that is we lack a coherent answer to the question "why do we educate?". What is the purpose of public education? What is the purpose of college? Interestingly, vocational and trade schools (in what I hope is taken in a Pirsigian sense, I'd include schools like the Julliard School in this category) often have the most articulate answer to this question.

Andre:
Hi Arlo, Dan, dmb and All:
Educational questions are pertinent questions about purpose. I think that is well put Arlo. Through my own wanderings and wonderings around some parts of the globe I have been fortunate to have been exposed to a taste of four educational systems and their environments: the Dutch (pre-,primary,lower theoretical/technical)to Australian (high...theoretical/practical), Chinese (middle...as a teacher where I taught at a teachers college)and Dutch again (higher...theoretical/practical).

The conversation has been interesting thus far and I am not sure whether I can add anything to its significance or pave a way for answering some of your questions...especially regarding purpose.

I have two things in mind: a very general question of why are we here on earth? What is our purpose here?

The second thing that mingles with this is Pirsig's variant on the Buddhist poem on page 406 of LILA:
"While sustaining biological and social patterns
Kill all intellectual patterns...and then follow Dynamic Quality and morality will be served"

It appears to me that these lines refer to a non-dual perspective...the fusing of what Paul, in his paper terms an epistemological and an ontological context.
Presently the vast majority of the purpose of education seems to lie not even close to either the epistemological nor the ontological context: it is presented as driven by the given: driven by economics, industry, private and public business corporations...their values incorporated and reinforced through ('personal') exposure to and internalization of values serving their vested interests (this is the ground stuff of mainstream education including parental) plus a vast network of public service type values to keep the system going...the political economy...the giant as Pirsig refers to it in LILA.

I see this as an emphasis on static patterns of value. My own experience (as a beginning teacher) left very little room for reflection let alone talking about purpose (apart from satisfying the needs of the giant...which is 'the given'...the economic garbage). A strict adherence to policy was called for and the (politically determined) guidelines were changed every 1 or 2 years (depending on which party swung the scepter). There was no room for professional innovation, autonomy or adjustment. So very soon, realizing that certain prescribed methods simply did not work, one was told to simply follow policy...and to lower standards of academic achievement if it was seen that most students failed to pas exams. This of course in the context of a fair amount of money being available for the educational institution for every student who graduated.

Currently there appears to be too much emphasis on this nowhere land (flatland). It is the 'sustaining (and incessantly improving) of biological and social patterns'...with variations/innovations occurring on the same old themes...and stamping these as 'creative'. The driving force of which, for sure, is DQ but received, guided, maintained and projected into the future by a commonly shared consciousness that is egocentric and narcissistic...just what the giant wants and feeds on (fooling everyone of course because the only winner is the giant and there really is no heaven above!).

This is the sq side of the equation.

As I hinted there appears very little to no time (or energy) to address the other side of the equation...the DQ side. Times to reflect, ask question about purpose, about arete (and not just in an economic or social status sense). But not only reflect on static patterns. I mean it the way Pirsig argues...rta, dharma and karma (evolutionary garbage and the dumping of this garbage).

Those moments when it is painfully obvious (and we see this every day on the TV news and hear it on the radio and other social media) what the results are in the clinging to the static patterns of the world and the role that current educational policy and practices play in the perpetuation of this state of affairs (plus of course the consequences when you don't).

Moments to detach oneself from these static patterns (LILA p407). Perhaps ways should be found to build that right into the education system and not have it relegated to one's 'personal/private' meditation room, one's whim ...or whenever time and energy is found.

What needs to be challenged and seen through is the ego driven, self-centered purpose of the giant in which we are all brought up and subjected to accept as God given. This (self)destructive, violent and aggressive consciousness needs to be replaced.

Love, kindness, compassion and a respect for silence are seen as weaklings in this chain. What a pity.

I do not have the answers Arlo, Dan, dmb. It's a complex issue with many interested parties clashing over fundamentals and outcomes. I suppose to summarize I'd go for DQ/sq with a healthy and stimulating balance of the two. Stability on the one hand and freedom on the other. By joining hands we should be able to work things out. But that is a tough task as not everyone wants to join in.

Anyway, for what it's worth.