Anson Guthrie distinguishes between schools that teach facts and how to think for yourself and those that teach a party line. (p. 25) There are facts, like the dates of the World Wars, but, beyond that, in subjects like history and sociology, neutral "facts" are hard to find. Nevertheless, as long as that is recognized, facts should be sought and thinking for yourself should be the main aim of education. (I once discussed whether Britain had a right to the Falklands with school pupils during the Falklands War.) I favor secular school education with religious instruction, if any, received in another building on another day of the week. However, it would be dictatorial to impose that. In practice, parents must decide whether to send children to denominational schools.
Guthrie denounces "environment" and "social justice" as "dreary dreck" and quotes Churchill on "equality of misery." (p. 23) If Churchill meant that some should remain in misery, then I disagree! No doubt the fictional Renewal can be shown to impose environmentalism and justice in a deadening and dictatorial way. Nevertheless, I submit that environmental concerns and the dictates of "natural justice" (a legal term) should be part of any social arrangements. Words are treacherous. If I wrote not "environmental concerns" but "environmentalism," then I might seem to be advocating a particular view of environmental issues.
(This might be the last post for this month, depending on what happens later.)
1 comment:
Kaor, lPaul!
While I would need to reread THE STARS ARE ALSO FIRE to be sure, I suspect I would agree with Anson Guthrie as regards schools. TOO MANY such schools in the US peddle a partisan left wing, "social justice/identity" line. And I think many "public schools" in the US sense of the phrase, are simply failing to teach even the most basic elements of literacy and numeracy in states and cities like CA, Chicago, Detroit, etc. And I continue to favor the Church and the churches to run their own schools (because they seem to be doing a better job than the public schools).
I have sometimes thought, and suggested, that a return to the Medieval system of the trivium and quadrivium would be good for education. The trivium would focus on grammar, rhetoric, and logic, the quadrivium on more advanced subjects. Naturally, some adjustments and modifications would be needed (a modernized trivium would include teaching basic arithmetic), but this two part system could be used as a core or framework.
I esp. like the stress on logic, in the trivium! In Medieval times that meant studying Aristotle's treatise on logic and learning how to think using syllogisms. I emphatically agree with Guthrie's demand for LOGICAL thinking!
Sean
Post a Comment