As far as we can discern, the sole purpose of human existence is to kindle a light in the darkness of mere being. Carl Jung
Knowledge
does not always prevail or even endure. When the Empire fell, the
Justinian Code was replaced by Canon Law. The augustness of knowledge
was transformed into heresy and mankind's curiosity was virtually
extinguished. The age became dark. In the 11th century, people began to
study rediscovered Greek and Roman texts. The darkness of the age had
begun to lift but the lifting took seven hundred years and was never
completed. Today, nothing ensures the light's endurance despite our
pious accolades to learning and science. But anti-intellectualism never
died; it continued to live in the dark alcoves of the religious
institutions of the Middle Ages. That darkness came to America when its
first universities were established. These universities were established
as fundamentalist vocational training institutions. They were not
established to further knowledge. They are madrassas, Sunday Schools,
one and all. Now even this conservative educational system is under
attack by ideological fundamentalists. Professors throughout the Western
world, stock up on lanterns. The darkness is returning!
During
the Golden Age of Greece, Athens was populated by enough curious people
to cause Aristotle to write, "all men by nature desire to know." He was
wrong, of course, but his compatriots certainly had an intellectual
bent. Athens experienced a period during which the Parthenon was built
and the city became the artistic, cultural, intellectual, and commercial
center of what was then known as the civilized world. Among its
inhabitants were Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Aeschylus, Aristophanes,
Euripides, Menander, Sophocles, the sculptor Praxiteles, the orator
Demosthenes, Herodotus, Thucydides, and others. A love of learning was
prevalent. The Socratic method, consisting of asking questions until the
essence of a subject is found by eliminating the hypotheses that lead
to contradictions, was developed, and mathematics was expanded by
Pythagoras, Euclid, Archimedes, and scholars such as Hipparchus,
Apollonius, and Ptolemy. Learning was august, but it was eventually
debased. War to further commerce was the enemy and it won. Knowledge
does not always prevail or even endure.
Rome,
by contrast, was never populated by enough curious people to earn it a
reputation for its intelligentsia. The Romans were a plundering people.
They took what they wanted by killing, if necessary. Rome had made Papal
Christianity the state religion and when the Empire fell, the Justinian
Code was replaced by Canon Law. The augustness of knowledge was
transformed into heresy and mankind's curiosity was virtually
extinguished. The age became dark.
In
the 11th century, individuals from across Europe began to study the
rediscovered Justinian Code. Soon, the study of Roman law and other
rediscovered subjects spread, and Papal Christianity came into conflict
with itself. The election of two claimants to the papacy created a
schism: The split led to the establishment of new centers of learning
and a decline in the authority of the Church. Learning began to reassert
its place and eventually both the Renaissance and the Enlightenment
emerged along with an interest in humanism. The darkness of the age had
begun to lift but the lifting took seven hundred years and was never
completed. Today, nothing ensures the light's endurance despite our
pious accolades to learning and science.
The
darkness that enveloped the Dark Ages in Europe emanated from the
monasteries, abbeys, and Scholastic universities of the Middle Ages. It
consisted of the ideology that was thought to be the divinely inspired
truth describing all things in the universe which itself was known as
Creation. It tolerated no dissent which brought about heresy trials,
executions, and the Holy Inquisition. Almost everything that would be
considered learned today was suppressed. And even when the Church's
influence declined and heresy trials and the Inquisition ceased to
exist, vestiges of the darkness were kept secure in other institutional
ways. The love of learning that emerged in Classical Greece never
regained its augustness. Anti-intellectualism never died; it continued
to live in the dark alcoves of the religious institutions of the Middle
Ages. That darkness came to America.
Two
hundred years before the Age of Reason, Massachusetts was a religiously
conservative Puritan colony that repeatedly deported, cast out, and
even executed people who disagreed with ideological Puritan doctrine.
Although never formally affiliated with a church, Harvard college was
established in 1636 by the Massachusetts legislature primarily to train
Congregationalist and Unitarian clergy. The Puritans and Harvard Collage
at that time can only be described as Christian fundamentalist. The
college offered a classic academic curriculum altered to be consistent
with Puritan ideology. This curriculum emulated that of Cambridge
University, which itself was founded as a papal university. In short,
Harvard was the Liberty University of the day, a Bible school, and its
function was distinctly religious. It was not established as a place of
universal learning. Harvard's curriculum and students did become secular
in the 18th and 19th centuries when it emerged as the central cultural
establishment among Bostonian elites. Following the Civil War, the
college and its affiliated professional schools were transformed into a
centralized research university, but its professional schools then as
now were vocationally oriented. The university's goal was and is to
teach people to operate in an ideologically biased market economy as is
shown by its history, influence, and wealth. It has the largest
financial endowment of any academic institution in the world, and eight
U.S. presidents have been graduates. Harvard is also the alma mater
of at least sixty billionaires. It is America's Cathedral of the
Moneyed Elite, and it promotes establishment ideologies rather than
universal learning. It began America's addiction to schools of business
administration, having founded the first one in 1908, twelve years
before it established its College of Education. Only in the late 19th
Century was the favored position of Christianity eliminated from the
curriculum by replacing it with another ideology—Transcendentalist
Unitarianism. Harvard is an institution where belief has always trumped
knowledge.
But it's not that way anymore, is it? Unfortunately it is. Consider this view of how economics is taught at Harvard:
students
at Harvard recently walked-out of Greg Mankiw's Ec 10 Principles class
because of alleged ideological bias in his presentation. . . . Steven
Margolis, also at Harvard, staged a "teach-in" about the Mankiw
walk-out. . . . Margolis . . . discussed his attempt to offer an
alternative Ec principles course at Harvard, which was rejected by the
economics faculty—then accepted only as an alternative studies course.
Students at Harvard, like students at many other schools, are not
allowed to learn about alternatives to the neoclassical model and get
credits toward the major!
This is Harvard, the brightest light in America's Educational Pantheon, often criticized by conservatives as too liberal!
But
it's not just Harvard. Yale was founded in 1701 to train ministers and
lay leaders for Connecticut. Ten Congregationalist ministers, all of
whom were alumni of Harvard, established the school. When a rift formed
at Harvard between Increase Mather and the rest of the Harvard clergy
whom Mather viewed as "increasingly liberal, ecclesiastically lax, and
overly broad in Church polity," he praised the success of Yale in the
hope that it would maintain the Puritan religious orthodoxy in a way
that Harvard had not. Just another Liberty university.
And
then, Leland Stanford, the founder of Stanford, visited Harvard's
president, Charles Eliot, and asked how much it would cost to duplicate
Harvard in California. Stanford became the Harvard of the West, just
another conservative, fundamentalist university.
Its founding came in 1885 in an endowing grant which made several specific stipulations:
"The Trustees ... shall have the power and it shall be their duty:
To
establish and maintain at such University an educational system, which
will, if followed, fit the graduate for some useful pursuit. . . .
To
prohibit sectarian instruction, but to have taught in the University
the immortality of the soul, the existence of an all-wise and benevolent
Creator, and that obedience to His laws is the highest duty of man. . .
.
When
Senator Stanford died in 1893, Jane Stanford took over. After Edward
Alsworth Ross became recognized as a founding father of American
sociology; she fired him for radicalism and racism. She also directed
that the students be taught that everyone born on earth has a soul, and
that on its development depends much in life here and everything in
"Life Eternal." And she forbade students from sketching nude models in
live drawing classes. So Stanford, too, embodied strong fundamentalist
characteristics.
These
universities were established as fundamentalist vocational training
institutions by ignorant people. They were not established to further
knowledge. They are madrassas, Sunday schools, one and all.
So
Liberty universities are as American as Johnny Appleseed, and they
apparently are self-reproducing. They exist throughout the United
States, some openly, and some, like Harvard, Yale, and Stanford,
covertly.
Vocational
training in the American educational scheme was furthered by the
founding after the Civil War of our land-grant colleges., and a number
of institutions have been founded, like the London School of Economics,
to openly promote market based Capitalism. For instance, Hillsdale
College, which was founded in 1844, two hundred years after Harvard,
describes itself as "grateful to God for the inestimable blessings
resulting from the prevalence of civil and religious liberty and
intelligent piety in the land, and believing that the diffusion of sound
learning is essential to the perpetuity of these blessings." "The
College considers itself a trustee of modern man's intellectual and
spiritual inheritance from the Judeo-Christian faith and Greco-Roman
culture, a heritage finding its clearest expression in the American
experiment of self-government under law." Hillsdale College is a major
player in the history and development of American conservatism.
Prominent conservative theorist Russell Kirk had a substantial career
there, and the college houses and displays the personal library of
Austrian economist Ludwig von Mises. Corporations have also donated huge
sums to colleges and universities to promote orthodox, classical
Capitalism: BB&T, for instance, the nation’s 10th largest financial
holding company, has pledged to give $1.5 million over 10 years to the
University of Georgia's Terry College of Business "to expand teaching
and research into the foundations of capitalism and free market
economics."
All
of this seems to be contradicted by America's addiction to "science and
technology." But America has no devotion to science and the proof is
obvious. Evolution is dismissed because it conflicts with Biblical
accounts of creation. Climate and environmental science are dismissed
because they conflict with free market Capitalism. Not only are the
sciences dismissed, the scientists engaged in them are reviled. What
Americans are devoted to is the catalog of consumer products that
engineers create out of scientific discoveries they had no hand in. The
President says we need to "train" more scientists and mathematicians,
but look at who the people are that Americans most admire—Bill Gates,
the late Steve Jobs, and Mark Zuckerberg! Neither is a mathematician,
nor a scientist, nor even a college graduate. Our respect for science is
as shallow as a dried up pond, and all we do is wallow in its mud. If
Americans had a genuine respect for science, they would have a respect
for scientific method which rejects ideas that can't be confirmed
empirically. Americans, on the other hand, insist on continually
implementing ideas that not only cannot be verified empirically, they
can be shown not to work at all. List all of the practices carried on by
Americans that do not work and have never worked. No culture with a
respect for science would function this way.
When
the President says we must "train" more scientists and mathematicians,
does he mean we should educate more architects, whose profession
requires knowing a lot of science and mathematics? I doubt it! What
about anthropologists? Well no. It has been reported that
Florida's Governor, Rick Scott, slammed anthropology majors as being
unprepared for productive careers. Not the kind of science the
establishment approves of! Well, how about astronomers or
paleontologists? What industry wants just "scientists"? And I doubt that
any corporation is seeking a batch of theoretical mathematicians.
I'm certain you get the point.
But as though all of this were not bad enough, even this conservative educational system is under attack by ideological fundamentalists:
After
three days of turbulent meetings, the Texas Board of Education . . .
approved a social studies curriculum that will put a conservative stamp
on history and economics textbooks, stressing the superiority of
American capitalism, questioning the Founding Fathers’ commitment to a
purely secular government and presenting Republican political
philosophies in a more positive light. The vote was 10 to 5 along party
lines, with all the Republicans on the board voting for it.
That
Texan politicians should do this is perhaps no surprise. But not a
single professor, not a single dean, not a single chancellor/president,
not a single professorial organization stood up and objected. Why were
all of the dedicated scholars in America's system of higher education
mute and invisible? What can one say about their commitment to
knowledge? Even worse, the authors of these textbooks were more than
willing to write them over to please these Texans. How's that for
intellectual integrity? Just how dark is the darkness in the academy?
There's more:
Gov.
Bobby Jindal recently signed a new law that sets up the largest voucher
program of any state in the country. It is part of a series of
“reforms” that Jindal says will expand school choice . . . and critics
say is the broadest state assault on public education in the country.
Again
America's professorial community and their administrations are nowhere
to be found. What are they thinking? Have they tried to imagine what
their classrooms will be like when their students have all been
indoctrinated with fundamentalist ideology? What will these professors
be able to teach? Which subjects that conflict with fundamentalist
ideology will be proscribed? What kind of speech will be considered
politically incorrect? In Europe, people can be imprisoned for denying
that the official Zionist account of the Holocaust is true. Will
teachers of evolution become criminals if they deny that the Biblical
account of Creation is true or if marriage doesn't consist of a union of
one man and one woman? Why not? Churchmen did it to Galileo. Ask
yourself how many German university professors bore the consequences of
Nazi ideology, those professors who couldn't support Arian superiority?
Think it won't happen here? It's happening already.
For
decades now, our public school teachers have been under attacks
disguised as attempts to render them accountable. The department of
education assumes that standardized test scores can reliably and validly
be used to determine teacher-quality. Most researchers say the tests
can’t. They say that using test scores in this way is a negative
consequence of the No Child Left Behind act. And for decades, the
college and university community has been silent as their graduates have
been vilified. But now,
The
Education Department just tried — and failed — to persuade a group of
negotiators to agree to regulations that would rate colleges of
education in large part on how K-12 students being taught by their
graduates perform on standardized tests. . . . When it became clear that
some of the negotiators weren’t going to go along with the basic
outlines of the department’s plan, department officials ended the
negotiations over a conference call.
But don’t think that is the end of the effort.
Now
we can expect Obama administration officials to issue regulations doing
what they want — without congressional approval, or, for that matter,
without having persuaded a group of negotiators they had selected
themselves that what they want to do makes educational sense.
Of
course, it was inevitable! If student scores on standardized tests can
be used to determine the ability of their teachers, why can't the scores
be used to determine the quality of their teacher's professors?
First
the professors in teacher's colleges, then the professors in business
colleges, then the professors in technical schools, and on and on.
Backwardness never turns its head. Professors throughout the Western
world, stock up on lanterns. The darkness is coming!
John Kozy is a retired professor of philosophy and logic who writes on social, political, and economic issues. After serving in the U.S. Army during the Korean War, he spent 20 years as a university professor and another 20 years working as a writer. He has published a textbook in formal logic commercially, in academic journals and a small number of commercial magazines, and has written a number of guest editorials for newspapers. His on-line pieces can be found on http://www.jkozy.com/ and he can be emailed from that site's homepage.
Global Research Articles by John Kozy
No comments:
Post a Comment