Manoj sdb
Sunday, 26 July 2020
Tuesday, 4 April 2017
Lateral Thinking
LATERAL THINKING
~Manoj sdb
Lateral thinking
(henceforth LT) basically means thinking differently, newly, creatively and
thinking ‘out of the box.’ Edward de Bono (the author of Lateral Thinking) says that logical or conventional way of thinking
is not effective in solving the problems. In fact, the step-by-step approach
restricts people to think in one line. So he exhorts us to take another
approach to problem solving: LT. The term ‘lateral thinking’ was coined by him
in 1970. It refers to a set of
approaches and techniques designed to find radically new approaches to
problemsrather than proceeding by logical steps. PaulSloane cites an
interesting example of LT in his book,The
Leader’s Guide to Lateral Thinking Skills. In the first part of the 20th
century, the assistants of the shops served the customers who prescribed the
things they needed. Whereas, in 1920, a man called Michael Cullen took a
different view. He asked the question, ‘what would happen if we turned the shop
around and let the customers help themselves to the goods they wanted and then
they paid at the end? Though many were against such a view, Cullen persisted
and created the world’s first supermarket in New Jersey.
Sloane also lists out some important
characteristics of the conventional and lateral leaders.
|
Conventional
Thinkers
|
Lateral
Thinkers
|
|
Lead
from the front.
|
Lead
from alongside.
|
|
Treat
staff as subordinates
|
Treat
staff as colleagues
|
|
Use
conventional methods
|
Develop
new methods and change the rules
|
|
Think
they know best.
|
Bind
the abilities of others.
|
|
Give
directions and orders
|
Ask
questions, solicit suggestions, delegate.
|
|
Hire
based on experience and qualifications.
|
Hire
based on talent, potential and creativity.
|
|
is
focused on results
|
is
focused on better ways of doing things
|
|
Cherish
results first, People second
|
Cherish
ideas, innovation and people first
|
|
Reward
performance & results
|
Reward
creativity & risk taking
|
|
Look
for ideas from their own experience
|
Look
for ideas from anywhere
|
|
Directs
his team
|
Inspireshis
team
|
|
Uses
logical thinking
|
Uses
divergent thinking
|
One cannot dig a
hole in a different place by digging the same hole deeper. Similarly, a conventional
thinker can think one thing deeply but is unable to think different things.
Having praised
LT highly, at the same time, Sloane holds that we can’t simply throw away
conventional thinking completely. The successful leaders combine the qualities
of both the conventional and the lateral thinkers. They know when to think
conventionally and when to think laterally. Please check the level of your
lateral thinking by answering the following questions.
1.
A large city in the United States had a problem with
thefts of light bulbs from its subway system. Thieves would unscrew the light
bulbs, leading to cost and security issues. The engineer who was given this
challenge could not alter the location of the light bulbs, and he had very
little budget to work with, but he came up with a very lateral solution. What
was it?
The
engineer changed the bulbs to have left-hand or anti-clock-wise threads instead
of the conventional right-hand or clockwise threads. This meant that as thieves
assumed they were trying to unscrew the bulbs, they were actually tightening
them instead.
2.
A man buys coconuts at $5 a dozen and sells them at
$3 a dozen. Because of this he becomes a millionaire. How?
The
man is philanthropist who buys great quantities of coconuts to sell to poor
people at prices they can afford. He started out as a billionaire but lost so
much money in his good works that he became a millionaire. If you assumed that
the only way to become a millionaire is by working you way up to that level of
wealth, you made an assumption which prevented you from solving the problem! Or
He needed only three dollars to become a millionaire.
3.
The marketing department of a major bank prepared a
direct mail campaign to launch a new product. They printed over 2 million
brochures but were horrified to find a mistake in the brochure – it had a wrong
digit in the telephone number. Callers would get a dead line instead of the
call centre. What should they do first – fire the marketing manager or reprint
the brochures?
The
marketing manager called the telephone company that issued numbers and bought
the wrong number. The line was redirected to the call centre and the mailing
was sent out.
4.
What can you dry your hair with, cut the grass with
and lift a car with?
The
answer is a hairdryer, a lawnmower and a jack. Why did you assume it was one
thing?
5.
A shop in New York is called the Seven Bells, yet it
has eight bells hanging outside. Why?
It
was originally a mistake but the shop owner found that so many people came into
the shop to point out the error that it increased business.
6.
This question has been used as an aptitude test at
interviews. You are driving in your sports car on a cold wet evening. You pass
a bus stop where you see three people waiting for the bus. One is your best
friend from school days who you have not seen for 20 years. One is the man or
woman of your dreams - the person you always wanted to meet. The third is a
sick old lady who needs to be taken to hospital. Knowing that there is room for
only one passenger in your car, what would you do?
You
give the car keys to your old friend and ask him to drive the sick old lady to
hospital, while you wait at the bus stop with the woman of your dreams.
Education
is complete only when it enables the students to pass from naïve thinking to
critical thinking, from critical thinking to creative thinking and from
creative thinking to innovative and LT. Today students’ knowledge sometimes surpasses
teacher’s knowledge. So teachers need to constantly update themselves with
current instructional methods in order to sound relevant to students. The
insistence and the implementation of LT require a lot of commitment from the
part of the teachers. The teachers pose problems to the students and invite
them to come up with the solutions. They can offer them some LT puzzles to find
out the answers. It is the duty of the teachers to take personal responsibility
to make the learning active rather than passive. If the teachers are ready to
take such painful risks to enable the students grow critically, creatively,
innovatively and to think laterally, the students will surely bear the expected
fruits. It is not enough to be teachers but creators, creators of creative
people. Every innovative student is a pride of the teacher.Tuesday, 17 December 2013
Hegel's Philosophy of History
HEGEL’S
PHILOSOPHY OF HISTORY- A SUMMARY
1.
Introduction
History plays a
crucial role in our life for we are all the products of history. Every aspect
of our life is very much affected by the past. So, to have a comprehensive
knowledge of our being in the present, we need to know our past. As like
history, so does philosophy play an important role in our life, for we are all
the products of rationality, which critically analyzes the life events of the
present and the past rather than accepting them blindly. So both, philosophy
and history would be incomplete without the other. Therefore, this little
article presents Hegel’s philosophy of History.
2.
Hegel’s
Philosophy of Spirit
In order to
understand Hegel’s philosophy of history, we require an understanding of his philosophy
of Spirit. For Hegel, history is ultimately is the history of the Spirit. He
speaks of Spirit in a dialectical process in which subjective spirit is the
thesis, objective spirit is the antithesis, and the Absolute Spirit is the
synthesis. Subjective spirit refers to the inner workings of the individuals
like thinking and willing.[1] Objective spirit is the objectification or
the material form of the subjective spirit/individual. It is the common spirit
of a society, an institution, custom or law manifesting the character and the
consciousness of the individuals of the group. The Absolute Spirit/the World
Spirit is the unity of the subjective and the objective spirit. It is this
Spirit that manifests in History and that governs the rise and fall of the
nations.[2]
3.
Hegel’s
Philosophy of History
Hegel was the
first one to put history on the map of philosophy, and thus he becomes the
first great philosopher of history.[3]
For Hegel, history is a history of Reason or Spirit as it unfolds itself and develops
in time and space, passing through different ways.[4]
History of the world is not meaningless without any hope but meaningful, for
there is a development of the consciousness of freedom found in history.
Therefore, history is a history with a purpose destined to Self-consciousness.[5]
3.1
Hegel’s Historical Outlook
Hegel’s lectures
on history manifests his historical outlooks: 1) The individuals are subordinate
to the Absolute Spirit which develops in history through them. 2) A
comprehensive understanding of the present requires our knowledge of the past.
3) One can’t know by knowing history alone but we need to also know how
rationality develops in history. 4) The way people of the past thought and
acted is radically different form the present but at the same time they are
co-related through a dialectical process.[6]
3.2
Types of History
Hegel’s
distinction of history is very instructive. He distinguishes three forms of
History: original history, reflective history and philosophical history. 1) Original
history is the history of events, the deeds of people, and the condition of
the society, written by the chronicler of ‘that’ time. 2) Reflective history
attempts to record the event of the past with interpretation and reflection
over it. Reflective history in turn can be divided into four types: A) Universal
history is the whole history of a people, a nation or the world, on the
basis of the original histories. B) Pragmatic history tries to
learn from the past for the betterment of the present. C) Critical history critically analyzes
the validity of the past historical accounts. It is a ‘history of history’. D) Specialized
history presents the history of any particular field like art, right,
religion, philosophy, etc. 3) Philosophical history presents how the
Spirit unfolds itself in time and how the World Spirit is developed through the
rational growth of the individual spirits.[7]
3.3
The World Historical Individuals
By ‘world
historical individuals’ Hegel means some great historical figures in history
like Alexander the great, Napoleon, Julius Caesar, Cicero, Socrates, etc. who
have influenced the history in a radical manner.[8] Such historical figures, in the pursuit of
their own private goals, also fulfilled the will of the World Spirit.[9]
They emerge as the instruments or the executives of the world spirit, and lift
the nations to a higher level of progress and perfection.[10]
Though they were unconscious of the general idea they were unfolding, yet they
were very practical and political. They were the heroes of the time, whose
deeds and words were the best of that time.[11]
They might have been immoral in certain matters but they should be hardly
judged in terms of morality that belonged to the epoch out of which a nation
was led.[12]
3.4
Consciousness of Freedom as the End of History
As gravity is
the essence of Matter, so also freedom is the essence of Spirit.[13]
Freedom, for Hegel, is not the absence of restrictions to do anything one wants
or to do that which pleases one.[14]
Freedom has to be realized within the limits of the moral duty, the laws of the
state.[15] And an individual becomes self-conscious only
when sees himself not just an individual will but as a part of the Universal
Will or the State which is the embodiment of the rational freedom.[16] This Spirit, throughout the history, aims at
the final cause, which we call as ‘Consciousness’ of its own freedom.[17]
3.5
Developmental Stages of Freedom in History
Hegel speaks of
Universal History as manifested in different stages and places. In the Oriental
stage, the Eastern nations like China, India and ancient Persia, though had
rich resources, believed that only One – the king or the ruler- is free. All
others are not totally free; they are just subordinate to the will of that
particular Emperor. Since they lacked in
the consciousness of true freedom, Hegel does not consider their histories in
his World history. In other words, they are outside history.[18] It is with Greco-Roman stage that the
history begins, for the consciousness of freedom began to develop in those
people. Greeks and Romans had the concept of citizenship and believed that only
some are free and others are slaves. It
is Germanic Stage that consciousness of freedom attained a culmination.
German people under the influence of Christianity believed that all men are
free. The consciousness of freedom, which is the final cause of the Spirit,
occurs here.[19]
3.6
The End of History
Though Hegel
seems to have said that in the Germanic world, the progress of the idea of
freedom reached its consummation. This is not indeed a climatic ending. His
description of Germanic stage is Germany of his own time, for he believed his
own country, in his own time, to have achieved the status of a rationally
organized society. Then what could be the end of History? The true ending of
history will blossom when the individuals start to govern themselves rationally
organized. Such is the situation where there is a perfect harmony between
individual wills and the laws of the State. There is no more restriction of
freedom, for individuals always choose to do that which is
rational/objective/universal.[20]
Conclusion
Though Hegel’s
philosophy of Spirit is so abstract, his philosophy of history and of right is
practical. Hegel sees history as a progress and explains it in a remarkable
way. But we can criticize Hegel first of all for universalizing the history of
only some nations as the World History ignoring all other nations, and secondly
for speaking of history as One History, for we know that there are different
histories of different people, different times and of different places, and
each of them is so unique that we can’t exclude them. This is the major mistake
Hegel makes. He also speaks of history as history of only great and
extraordinary people not of simple and ordinary people. He is also indifferent
to individuals that they are dissolved in his universal aspects.
BIBLIOGRAPHIES
Burns, Robert M.
and Hugh Rayment – Pickard (eds.) Philosophies
of History: From Enlightenment to Postmodernity. oxford: Blackwell
Publishers Ltd., 2000.
Caputo, John D. Philosophy
and Theology. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2006.
Inwood, Michael.
A
Hegel Dictionary. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Ltd, 1992.
Singer, Peter. Hegel. Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 1983.
Stumpf, Samuel
Enoch. Socrates to Sartre: A History of
Philosophy. 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1975.
[1]
Samuel Enoch Stumpf, Socrates to
Sartre: A History of Philosophy, 2nd ed. (New York: McGraw-Hill
Book Company, 1975) 333.
[2]
Michael Inwood, A Hegel Dictionary
(Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Ltd, 1992) 275.
[3]
John D. Caputo, Philosophy and
Theology (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2006) 38.
[4]
Caputo, Philosophy and Theology,
39.
[5]
Peter Singer, Hegel (Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 1983) 11.
[6]
Inwood, A Hegel Dictionary,
120.
[7]
Inwood, A Hegel Dictionary, 119-120.
[8]
Robert M. Burns and Hugh Rayment – Pickard (eds.), Philosophies of History: From Enlightenment to Postmodernity
(oxford: Blackwell Publishers Ltd., 2000) 88.
[9]
Burns, Philosophies of History:
From Enlightenment to Postmodernity, 87.
[10]
Stumpf, Socrates to Sartre: A
History of Philosophy, 338.
[11]
Burns, Philosophies of History:
From Enlightenment to Postmodernity, 87.
[12]
Stumpf, Socrates to Sartre: A
History of Philosophy, 338.
[13]
Burns, Philosophies of History:
From Enlightenment to Postmodernity, 86.
[14]
Singer, Hegel, 27.
[15]
Stumpf, Socrates to Sartre: A
History of Philosophy, 335.
[16]
Stumpf, Socrates to Sartre: A
History of Philosophy, 336.
[17]
Burns, Philosophies of History:
From Enlightenment to Postmodernity, 86.
[18]
Singer, Hegel, 11.
[19]
Stumpf, Socrates to Sartre: A
History of Philosophy, 338.
[20]
Singer, Hegel, 22.
Wednesday, 6 November 2013
Gandhian Economics
GANDHI AND THE FUTURE OF ECONOMICS - BOOK REVIEW
Howard Richards
and Joanna Swanger, Gandhi and the Future
of Economics: Dialogues with some Indian Intellectuals. Ed. Fr. Ivo Coelho,
SDB. Lake Oswego: World Dignity University Press, 2013. ISBN 978-1-937570-29-3. Pp. 304.
Economics and morality are two important fields in
world today. Both can affect each other: as economy grows, morality is simplified
in the modern world. Seemingly every nation is judged by its economy rather
than morality. Some even strongly feel that modern economy has nothing to do with
morality. But year ago Gandhi held that
modern civilization would self destruct and economical progress without moral
progress is useless and adharma. Gandhi was even thought to be irrational for
his view. But two people, who have realized of Gandhi’s prediction coming true,
are Howard Richards and Joanna Swanger. Thus this book becomes the fruit of
their positive approach to Gandhian economics which emphasizes much on morality.
This work is divided into eight main chapters excluding
the introduction (7), and the first one specifically on Gandhian economical
thinking and other seven chapters are on seven Indian renowned intellectuals
namely Jawaharlal Nehru, Jayaprakash Narayan, Tariq Ali, Vandana Shiva,
Arundhati Roy, Amartya Sen, and Monmohan Singh whom the authors encountered,
discussed Gandhian thought and gained comparison and contrasts (17). As the editor
Ivo Coelho would say this book is not meant to be a research work but to shed
more light on the known thought of Gandhi (10). The purpose of this book is to
prove the realized truth of Gandhi’s prediction that the modern civilization is
unsustainable and that he wisely identified reasons for its unsustainability (14).
The 1st chapter on ‘Gandhi
and the Future of Economics’ holds that Gandhi’s ideal Indian Village was not
completely imaginary but practical too (21).
Despite the authors’ acknowledgement of five reasons why this book’s
view can be wrong, this chapter also discusses two main aspects of Gandhian
thought i.e. caste and Hind Swaraj. Firstly the authors claim that Gandhi’s
Varnashram makes sense in the context of the ideal Indian Village (29), which
accords equal respect regardless of caste or calling (30). The authors raise
the question why Gandhi conceived caste as a positive contribution to his ideal
village rather than some wise realization of western ideas (32), and try to
answer by holding that it was more practical for Gandhi to reform caste (to
which people were accustomed) towards the better result than starting from the
scratch (39). Secondly the main thrust
of Hind Swaraj was “that the ‘modern so called civilization’ was adharma” (46)
and that material progress without moral progress does not create better
society (48).
The 2nd chapter presents
Nehru’s critiques to Gandhi’s economical views (60), his enormous failure in
bringing an end to India’s poverty (87), their misunderstanding of each other
(61), and authors’ proof that Gandhi was more scientific and rational than
Nehru (84). Nehru thought Gandhi was on the side of the rich though embraced
poverty publically (70). While Nehru was worried about just economical progress,
Gandhi concentrated on the moral progress, and economics was just one of the
items of his constructive program (69). Besides that, Nehru also held that the
destruction of traditional village, co-operative system and services and
function by British people brought an enormous declaim in Indian economics
(56-57). The following view of Gandhi is much explained is this chapter: “Humanity does not search for low prices in
a spirit of bargain. The humane in people even in purchases seeks opportunities
for service, and therefore wants to know first not the price of the article of
purchase but the condition of its producers, and makes purchases in a manner
that serves the most needy and the most deserving.”(81).
The 3rd
chapter mainly discusses the cause and consequence of overproduction in views
of Jeyaprakash Narayan for whom it was lack of purchasing power of the workers
and exploitation. This view of Narayan is criticized by the authors from John
Maynard Keynes, Marx and Gandhian viewpoints (93-94). But over the years, Narayan, who started as a
socialist, firmly believed in Soviet Union (97), began to agree with Gandhi
towards the end of his life and echoed him (111). For Gandhi, the primary task
of work is not money but spirit of service to the community (112). Narayan’s
proposed socialist Gandhian grassroots communities, where there would be very
little overproduction (114). His famous slogan was “Total Revolution” which
meant a constructive process improving upon every aspects of life not only
economy (115) and “which proposed a communitarian nonviolent transformation of
civil society” (206).
The 4th
chapter compares Tariq Ali’s (who is a contemporary intellectual born in India
though his native later became a part of Pakistan) views of revolutionary
socialism to Gandhian thinking (128), and presents two ways achieving a
classless society through a class divided-society (129,133). Ali is a firm
proponent of the first way which proposes two-class-society of upper and lower
class (working class) as regarded by Marx (138). Ali argues that religious Gandhi
made irreligious Nehru the president of the Congress because; Gandhi could have
a “control over him and thus prevent him from leading revolutionary mass action”
(141). The authors also depict Gandhi’s attempt to put into practice Tolstoy’s
principal of Truth and Non-violence (145), and present the failures of the
various other proposed theories and therefore, propose Gandhi’s untested
feasibility of change of the society through ethical action (150).
The 5rd
chapter presents Vandana Shiva’s view that solution for the problem of exercise
bureaucracy is not capitalism but a decentralized, ecological and ethical
economy in Gandhian lines (157). It also pictures her condemnations of certain policies
(158), and her alternative proposals for food security in line with Gandhi (159).
There are four main characteristics of an authentic community, one of which is
that the community cares for its members (166). This chapter gives an
explanation of the failure of Gandhi’s projects due to incompatibility of
cotton spinning and the other schemes (169). The inability of Khadi to compete
in the market with mill cloth was due to consumer’s search for low prices of
mill clothes rather than looking at the condition of the producers and make
purchases in a manner that helps the needy (174). According to Gandhi, all
lands belong to God (‘state’ in secular sense) and we are all trustees (185).
He also gives different answers to the question: How should a community respond
when these trustees put ‘self’ above the ‘service’. Firstly we need to
patiently wait for nonviolent conversion of thief (trustee). Secondly they will
be legally compelled to do their duty by laws. And “as a last resort their
property should be taken over by the state” (186).
The 6th
chapter makes some points regarding the measurement of welfare, the causes of
famine and a comparison of Amertya Sen’s “concept of Public action to increase
welfare with Gandhi’s nonviolent constructive program” (191). The cause of
famine is not the lack of availability but lack of legal entitlement to food
(190). The authors criticize the ‘regularly accepted rights of ownership and
exchange’ (204), and Sen criticizes Arrow’s use of ‘preference’ as an
explanatory category in economics (205). The
dynamic principal of Gandhian ideal village was the spirit of ‘service’
(219), and one way to carry out such spirit is the use of Sen’s public action
to transform the global economy which prerequisites the use of markets only as
tools to serve humanity, and the constructive revision of the regularly
accepted right of ownership and exchange (220).
The 7th
chapter makes it clear “what is going on when Arundhati Roy talks of economic
cause”, which would help the reader to understand “some relationship between
the way she thinks and the way Gandhi thinks” (227). Roy proves that Gandhi’s
nonviolence was real and not a political theatre (224). Roy is convinced that
Gandhi’s ‘Khadi’ and ‘Salt march’ were powerful nonviolent weapons to chase
British out of India (225). The author
proves Roy’s claim that militarism is a structural feature of the U.S. social
and economic order (234, 237). Law of love is much emphasized in economical
progress (242). The “adharma premises of modernity are unworkable, modernity
unsustainable, destined to self-destruct”. Gandhi’s radical ideas can be
reconsidered (250).
The 8th
chapter ‘’Manmohan Singh’ is, as Ivo Coelho would say in the ‘Foreword’, the
crowning piece of the book for it answers the questions whether the advice
currently being given to developing nations by neoliberals is a good advice or
not, by holding “No”. Neoliberals’ views “that full employment will obtain when
there is no ‘bias against employment’ is neither theoretically valid” nor
empirical evident (290). But India is
compelled to follow their advice “as by la force des choses” (29-300). The
authors also answer the question whether it is desirable to change the basic
structures of the modern world, by holding ‘Yes’ (291). Because the ideas of
Gandhi can become a rich path for progressive social transformation in this
dark age where there is no any other possibility for progressive change. If
Manmohan Singh had realized in 1962, when he was doing his doctoral theses,
that the result of following a path which would make India very soon dependent
on foreign markets for its basic necessities and which would make India
subservient to the imperatives of markets, he might have concluded that
Gandhi’s path of self-reliance had been the right path to be followed (301).
Some
information about the authors can also help us for better understanding of the
book. “Howard Richards is philosopher of social science” and “emeritus Research
Professor of Philosophy” with thirty years of teaching experience at Earlham
College, USA. At present, he lives in Chile teaching in the doctoral program in
management sciences at the University of Santiago and has published many books
and articles with social issues (302). “Joanna Swanger is an historian and
Director of Peace and Global Studies Program and Assistant Professor of Peace
and Global Studies” and “has produced so many articles and essays about the
borderlands”. Ivo Coelho, SDB, the editor, is the present “Rector of the
Studium Theologicum Salesianum in Jerusalem”, who “earned his PhD in philosophy
at the Gregorian university, Rome, for his work on “the Development of the
Notion of the Universal Viewpoint in Bernard Lonergan: From Insight to Method
in Theology” (1994)”. He is a professor of philosophy with ____ years of
teaching experience in Divyadaan: Salesian Institute of Philosophy, and has
published many works as both writer and editor.
This book is
an interesting and important work and guide in the field of economy which comes
out with an enriching research of Gandhian economical view to be very practical
and rich resource for progressive social transformation. All the nine chapters including ‘Introduction’ have earlier
been published in the successive issues of Divyadaan: Journal of Philosophy and
Education from 2009 to 2012 (304).
Thursday, 24 October 2013
What does it mean to educate..
WHAT DOES IT
MEAN TO EDUCATE…..
-Bro.
Manoj, sdb
“When planning for a year, sow corn. When planning
for a decade, plant trees. And when planning for life, educate a child.”
What
do we mean by education? Is it filling up the mind of a child with humpty
number of information? Is it just learning languages and subjects? Is it just
memorizing the data and parroting the lessons? What is the goal of education?
Is it to become a professional figure in the society? Is it a means to earn
money and wealth? These are the
questions to be asked and understood. Recently I made a survey on education in
St. Philomena Convent High School, Nasik. The teachers’ and the students’
understanding of education is really interesting. There is a goal and there are means or ways through which we
achieve the goal. They see Overall
development as goal of human being, and education as a powerful weapon to
achieve this great goal. Education is not restricted just to the intellectual
growth alone but be extended to all physical, intellectual, moral, spiritual,
social and human development of human person. Education helps one to behave
humanly and responsibly, and think powerfully. It teaches one to solve
problems, and to face the difficulties courageously in a right manner. Learning
does not mean learning just the subjects like science, mathematic and language
only but learning from everything and everybody. It is an unending process.
Education also becomes a means of successful future and growth in one’s
professions. More over education is a
process of learning rather than a means of earning.
In
15th century AD there was well known educationist namely Gargantuan. The way he was
educated, and the type of educational system which he insisted on really is
shocking. Gargantuan, as a boy, was compelled to study. He was to get up in early
morning at 4 a.m., to read the scripture, while brushing he was to study the
stars and compare them with what he had seen the previous night. While dressing,
he had to recall the lessons learnt on the previous day. Then he had to study
for three hours and played some games during which he had to discuss his
lessons with his companion. He had breakfast at ten o’clock during which a book
will be read to him and he had discuss
about what was being read and make comments on the bread or butter or
wine and other articles on the table. Then for another three hours he went over
his morning lesson through the hearing of the book read to him and practiced
writing. He had to learn arithmetic, geometry, astronomy, music, etc. In the
afternoon when he went to school for some physical exercises and on the way
back he was observe the trees, birds, mountains, animals, plants and recall
what was written about them. On the rainy days he was made to learn carpentry,
sculpture and other occupations. While waiting for the supper he had to recall
that day’s lesson and while supper too a book will be read to him. And finally,
before going to bed, he was taken to study the sky, and then made to
recapitulate everything learned in the course of day. That is how he learnt. He in turn wrote
letter to his son Pantagruel: “You should learn Latin, Greek, Hebrew and Arabic
perfectly. There should not be any tree, bird, mountain, sea, country, forest
or flower about which you don’t know”. While reading of such funny part of his
life we realize that this gigantic way of education is not meant for the
ordinary persons like you and me. His education was entirely based on gathering
information rather than teaching the students to live joyfully, peacefully,
lovingly and socially. Is it what we mean by education?
On the other hand, Michel De Montaigne (1533-1592) is
another great personality of the next century who became disgusted with this type
of education and found no meaning in it. Therefore, he came up with another
educational theory completely contradicting to that. He lacked scientific
interest and was critical to the old method of learning. For him human joy,
love and peace are more important than knowledge. Therefore education is not
about knowledge which just collects information and does not solve human
problems but all about wisdom which
will lead us to love the humanity. Language is useless if it does not have
concern for humanity. Knowledge is not acquired but a natural possession and a
habit. We should teach children not just through words but by our very example
and deeds for, action speaks louder than words. Education should aim at not just
knowledge but wisdom, the over all development of the human person. He also
said: 1. there is no just one method of teaching. According to each student’s
capacity we should use different methods. 2. Teachers should never handle
punishments, for punishments will ruin the interest of the children in
studying. 3. The best method to teach the boy is not teaching him what has been
already told but to help him to think independently and creatively. 4. The
proper beginning of education should be made through intercourse with one’s
fellowmen. Therefore, the students must be exposed to other cultures, languages
and countries too so that they don’t become narrow minded. It also frees him
from being self centered.
Montaigne’s view on education reminds me of another
great personality for whom education was to aim at wisdom and love and not just
pure knowledge, who wrote to the teacher of his son saying, “Educate my
child such that he gladly accepts victory and defeat equally in life. He should
understand that a dollar earned by hard work is more than five pounds. Tell him
to be ashamed of the tears that fall on beings unsuccessful. Also tell him to
have a strong faith in himself even if the whole world is against him. He
should not become just another man in the crowd. If possible teach him how to
laugh at the time of misery and rise above the feelings of happiness and
sorrow. Give him courage to be patient and teach him patient for bravery. Teach
him the lesson of taking pride in his own deeds; then only he will be able to
believe in the greatness of humility.” These are the words of Abraham
Lincoln. And that is what a true
education is all about.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
