There is today a bias toward the individual. Whereas learning was once a process of diminishing the individual and his or her taste or preference or ideas in favor of that which is more established as fact, the reality is that those attending and those teaching tend to respect the individual "truth" of the student far more than institutions or other paths to education did in the past. Education in both the formal and more casual sense of the term has come not to revolve around established fact or truth but around the individual person and their perception, preference, and identity. Education has become a path more of self-discovery than of acquaintance with events, facts, and interpretations. In fact, the job of educational institutions is to respect the quirks of the individual and provide a safe space for that individualism to exist without the challenge of inconvenient truths or facts. The campuses of institutions once dedicated to challenging the opinions of the individual have now created spaces immune from such challenge when the student finds it all too threatening.
Along with the tilt toward the individual, there is also a corresponding loss of confidence in the facts that were once incontrovertible. History, for example, is no longer a set of events and explanations but has been turned on end. The modern values attached to diversity, inclusion, and equity have been read into the past and changed what we once knew with confidence to rewrite that history and to introduce question marks where periods once stood. We are less interested in what happened than postulating why, less concerned with facts than interpretation, and much more willing to judge and interpret the past through the lens of modern values. Columbus the heroic figure gave way to Columbus the interloper who began a history of atrocity and abuse of the now heroic indigenous tribes of the Americas. As some tore down his statues, others remade him into the first of a long history of slavery that has now marked American history. It is not that Columbus has been re-evaluated but that he has come under judgment by the court of modernity to be a heel rather than hero. Again, the point here is not to defend him as hero but to see how the man and his accomplishments have been laid against another standard and how those values can diminish what he did or who he was in his own time.
What passes for education today readily substitutes the untried things of the present for those which generations before have lauded as worthy and noble. Think here of literature. Thirty years ago I noticed that the summer reading lists for my own kids included modern books published within the past few years but none of the "classics" that I had read in school and my parents before me. In other words, the rejection of the past against the judgment of the present had rendered these works not only less significant but tainted and spoiled. The summer reading that was once dominated by what were universally considered "great authors" and their "great works" were replaced by books churned out to fit the then modern themes of feminism, sexual liberation, depression, and drugs. I read those books with my kids and found them painful to read, not only because the themes were so filled with despair and desperate people but because the writing was so poor. There was little appeal to morality, right or wrong, or virtue against evil but plenty of justification for feelings, desires, and views that called into question what other times had concluded. Most notably was a complete lack of religion. One book on how a family dealt with death was absent of any mention of religion as a way of understanding of it or healing from its pain. The penchant for the present has led to the unqualified rejection of what in the past had been the hallmarks of achievement. While this is certainly truth for literature, it is no less true for other subjects as well.
This all is true in the way science is treated as that which is most true of all -- except, of course, when it conflicts with other values. Science as a discipline has always questioned the conclusions and insisted that they must be repeatable in order to be established and provable even against changing standards of evaluation. Now science is spoken of as a conclusion and not a process of discovery that is adaptable to changing conclusions. Evolution is judged incontrovertible yet the science that conflicts with multiple genders or the idea that a person chooses that gender is dismissed. One science fits with the idea that life is random and spontaneous and the other science does not fit with the idea that gender is fluid. Science is left to be the bastard child of the acceptable values of the day and the phrase follow the science has become a joke.
So education has become a myth. It is not learning but indoctrination in a way far more perverse and dark than religion could ever have been accused of imparting. The campuses of higher education have nearly all succumbed to this delusion and many schools with a religious history are not far behind. Worse is that the high school has become infected and the federal purse strings have ensured that it remains so. Now we are seeing just how far and how fast the elementary schools can be swept up into the myth of what passes for education. The Church and her people would be wise to remember that it is better to be fools for Christ's sake than just fools.
2 comments:
I have often blamed the failure of the education system on the growth of secular humanism, relativism, and social activism in America and the West. Yet, it is not true that people can be entirely propagandized by the culture, and therefore we cannot use a broad brush to describe this phenomenon. For example, despite the best efforts of the woke culture to redefine values, rewrite history, and inculcate their ideological agenda into the minds of young and old, we see conservatism and critical thinking rooted in resistance to the propagandists. Why? Because the minds of many question what is being said and taught. Untruths and myths are exposed by logic and by searching for truth, uncovering hypocrisy, dismissing the false. This exists because Our Creator instills into us the power to think, and to His believing children, the Holy Spirit. Even Socrates, though not a Christian, said, “The unexamined life is not worth living.” In my personal observation of people, both early in my education and after the seeds of woke culture were planted across academia, that many people simply are too lazy about educating themselves. They do not read books, barely pay attention to trends, float along like flotsam in the ocean, reject critical thinking, and after a very basic education, prefer a life of ignorance. Others, those who love books, are naturally inquisitive, question what they are taught, enjoy reading, expand their knowledge. The world contains both types of people, seekers of education, and those who disregard the wealth of information available to them, preferring to remain unlearned. This does not mean readers are superior to non readers, nor does it shed any light on their spiritual condition before God, but it simply means they will never reach their full potential and that much of their brain capacity remains unused. As a child, I received a parochial school education. It was a good education. Some of my classmates and their parents blamed the teachers for their poor performance. These same ones barely read outside of school, didn’t do their homework, and still blamed everyone else for their poor grades. Education is a pro-active lifelong endeavor. Books are available everywhere. Libraries are abundant. Yet some prefer to just sit and receive a poor education, and never bother to pursue knowledge. God has given us brains and a mind to use. It is a sin to let it atrophy through neglect. Soli Deo Gloria
“Along with the tilt toward the individual, there is also a corresponding loss of confidence in the facts that were once incontrovertible.”
**Finnish Church rejects same-sex unions, two definitions of marriage**
From the article:
“The Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland will not adopt a proposed model that would have recognised both heterosexual and same-sex unions as parallel definitions of marriage.
In Thursday's Church Council vote, the measure received 62 votes in favour and 40 against —15 votes short of the required three-quarters majority.”
“Archbishop Tapio Luoma praised the Council for handling the issue calmly, telling Yle that he himself supported the proposal put forward by the Bishop's Conference.
**On Tuesday, Luoma said that he believes the proposal will return to the Church Assembly repeatedly until it passes, just as it has in other Nordic countries.**
"I am convinced that, in time, the church will allow the marriage of same-sex couples in Finland as well," he said.”
“Council member Suvi Routasalo from the Archdiocese of Turku, who supported the proposal, finds some consolation in the outcome, noting that priests can still choose to marry same-sex couples if they wish.
"Not all parishes conduct these marriages, but bishops have stated that there will be no consequences for priests who perform them," she said.
She hopes that the parallel marriage concept will be accepted in the next Church Council session.
"I believe it represents **the present and the future**," Routasalo said.””
https://yle.fi/a/74-20160784
Post a Comment