Education. Intergenerational distance and the new counter-reformation

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15503/onis2022.9.14

Keywords:

education priorities, ideological war, fuddy-duddy, resistance, philosophy of science, Margaret Mead

Abstract

This article tackles the problem of generational differences in the approach to knowledge and science, and the influence of ideology on the corruption of these two dimensions of social life. The author puts forward the thesis that a diverse approach to science and education is systemic and largely conditioned by generation. The ideological influence of the older generation, who represented pastoral power, ideology and the teaching of reality at the same time, is contrasted with the up-and-coming generations, who are resistant to cynical lying. The new ideological counter-reformation is perceived as an attempt to return to the idea of a post-figurative traditional society with structured cultural patterns. The author is of the opinion that the prolongation of such a new counter-reformation will be associated only with multidimensional losses (moral, economic, cultural, civilizational, and image-related). Healing science and education through internationalization and depoliticization is the only right way to achieving this goal. And the up-and-coming generations are the right actors to do this, the only ones that can resist the lieds and introduce rationality in the prefigurative world.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Aleksander Kobylarek, University of Wrocław, Institute of Pedagogy, ul. Dawida 1/3

PhD in humanities, assistant professor at the University of Wrocław (Poland) in Departament of Pedagogy, manager of the University of the Third Age in the University of Wrocław up to 2016, author of more than 100 scientific publications, including articles, books, chapters, editor-in-chief of international scientific "Journal of Education Culture and Society" and "Ogrody Nauk i Sztuk (Gardens of Science and Arts).

References

Baron-Cohen, S. (2015). Teoria zła. Sopot: Smak Słowa.

Benda, J. (1928). The Treason of the Intellectuals. New Brunswick and London: Transaction Publishers.

Błaszczyński, K. (2014). Konsekwencje globalistycznego modelu nauki. Ogrody Nauk i Sztuk, 13-22.

Fukuyama, F. (1996). Koniec historii. Poznań: Zysk i S-ka.

Goćkowski, J. (1998). Grupy ethosowe świata ludzi nauki [Ethical groups in the world of academic staff]. In J. Baradziej, & J. Goćkowski, Rozważania o tradycji i ethosie [Reflections on tradition and ethics] (pp. 301-325). Kraków: Baran i Suszyński.

Kobylarek, A. (2020). The pedagogy of shame. Education in the face of the demokratur of ignoramuses. Journal of Education Culture and Society(1), pp. 5-12.

Mead, M. (1970). Culture and Commitment. New York: Garden City.

Melosik, Z. (2002). Uniwersytet i społeczeństwo. Dyskursy wolności, wiedzy i władzy [The university and society. Discourses on freedom. knowledge and power]. Poznań: Wolumin.

Pinker, S. (2021). Rationality: what it is, why it seems scarce, why it matters. Viking.

Stawiszyński, T. (2021). Co robić przed końcem świata? Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Agora.

Toffler, A. (1991). Powershift: Knowledge, Wealth, and Violence at the Edge of the 21st Century. New York: Bantam Books.

Published

2022-08-30

How to Cite

[1]
Kobylarek, A. 2022. Education. Intergenerational distance and the new counter-reformation. Gardens of Science and Arts. 12, 12 (Aug. 2022), 9–14. DOI:https://doi.org/10.15503/onis2022.9.14.