The Store of Human Knowledge
British sociologist Frank Furedi (University of Kent; see his new book Wasted: Why Education Isn’t Educating) argues that liberal education is supposed to teach children about the “cultural and intellectual achievements of humanity.” That’s controversial.
“The idea that we live in a qualitatively different world serves as a premise for the claim that the knowledge and insights of the past have only minor historical significance. In education it is claimed that old ways of teaching are outdated precisely because they are old. Knowledge itself is called into question because in a world of constant flux it must be continually overtaken by events. Policy has become so focused on keeping up with change that it has become distracted from the task of giving meaning to education.
The fetishisation of change is symptomatic of a mood of intellectual malaise, where notions of truth, knowledge and meaning have acquired a provisional character. Perversely, the transformation of change into a metaphysical force haunting humanity actually desensitises society from distinguishing between a passing novelty and qualitative change. That is why lessons learned through the experience of the past are so important for helping society face the future. When change is objectified, it turns into spectacle that distracts society from valuing the truths and insights it has acquired throughout the best moments of human history. Yet these are truths that have emerged through attempts to find answers to the deepest and most durable questions facing us, and the more the world changes the more we need to draw on our cultural and intellectual inheritance.
If the legacy of past achievements has ceased to have relevance for the schooling of young people, what can education mean? Thinkers from across the left-right divide have always realised that education represents a transaction between the generations. Antonio Gramsci, the Italian Marxist thinker, wrote ‘in reality each generation educates the new generation’. Writing from a conservative perspective, English philosopher Michael Oakeshott concluded ‘education in its most general significance may be recognised as a specific transaction which may go on between the generations of human beings in which newcomers to the scene are initiated into the world they inhabit’. Liberal political philosopher Hannah Arendt said education provided an opportunity for society to preserve and to renew its intellectual inheritance through an intergenerational conversation.”
Look again: a transaction between generations about what’s worth knowing. Not a transaction between schools and big business about how to save money training new employees.
December 1st, 2009 at 1:00 pm
“The fetishisation of change is symptomatic of a mood of intellectual malaise, where notions of truth, knowledge and meaning have acquired a provisional character.”
This is not intellectual malaise, it is called the scientific method and it has been the most successful intellectual and academic philosophy in the history of the world. Truths are provisional – show me the evidence, explain it with a model and think about what reason or evidence would contradict this claim.
As a scientist, that is how I was trained to think, but more importantly, as a human being I have realized that many problems in society are made solvable through an application of this type of rational analysis.
If your argument is that traditional knowledge is inherently valuable, you are obviously wrong. Traditional knowledge about astronomy – the earth is the center of the universe – of geology – the earth is a few thousand years old – of sociology – people native to equatorial regions are lazy and stupid – are clearly not true. They are false not because they are traditional or new ideas, but because they are claims that are falsified through a reasonable evaluation of the evidence.
An ancient truth like the Pythagorean Theorem or a new discovery like a solution to Fermat’s Last Theorem are equally true. The origin in time is irrelevant, all that should matter is the truth value. The only content that is relevant is content that is true, or at least that which is useful if the truth is not clear. Not all content is true, for example it is an opinion that Shakespeare was the greatest writer in the English language. There is a roll for opinion when the truth is not known, but to present history or literature as true fact when it is as much opinion as anything else, is as much of a disservice to students and society as teaching them that the earth is the center of the universe. Present opinion and discuss the reasons for and against the opinion, but if you cannot distinguish between truth and opinion you have no credibility when you attack other people for disagreeing with your beliefs – if it is all merely opinion, then you are not right and they are not wrong.
Truth is provisional, as is utility, and if you wish to claim that some idea is important and worth being part of a curriculum, it is up to you to show how it is true and/or more useful than a similar idea. Where and when an idea originates, how long or fervently the idea has been held is completely irrelevant.
December 2nd, 2009 at 9:11 pm
Reginald’s view sounds like peevish scientism to me. Shall we cast out the whole lot of Great Books (Western, Chinese, Indian, etc.) until each book’s claims has peer-reviewed research to back them up? Does tradition deserve NO respect? Isn’t it reasonable to suppose that traditions become traditions because they might harbor some genuine human value, and, dare I say it, truth?
December 3rd, 2009 at 10:23 am
The scientific method promotes progress, not change for change sake.
The outlook is bleak for Peevish Scientismists for Change–unless they can stake out their niche in the 21st Century Skills movement.
December 4th, 2009 at 3:21 pm
[...] Unintended Negative Consequences Common Core A new GAO report on Student Achievement concludes that standards-based accountability “influence[s] instructional practices in both positive and negative ways” and counts curriculum narrowing among the “unintended negative consequences.” [...]