[ the main topic page ] [ the main page ]

Lavrentios G. Dellassoudas - PhD,
Professor Emeritus, Special Secretary of Prof. Emeriti Corpus
Fr. Chair, Department of Philosophy, Pedagogy & Psychology, University of Athens, Greece

The evolution of man to a citizen with universal consciousness

It is apparent that the evolution of man from a citizen with a self-centered attitude and local action to a citizen with universal consciousness, namely with a hyper-personal and hyper-local orientation of actions, is by far considered the most important goal to be set and achieved by those responsible for the education, in the context of freedom of movement and meeting of ideas, goods and people.

Because the financially targeted globalization – not having highlighted ways of mitigating the impact of discrimination and difference, but rather having expanded them locally and chronically – results in making us understand the need of seeking values that promote the functioning of human society, without its consent. These values are supported by two messages of uttermost significance emitted by the myth of Protagoras: reverence and justice (“shame” and “justice”). These messages, however can be disseminated neither by theorists of Equality nor by practitioners of exploitation of man by man.

So if these views are – in principle – acceptable, then arises – subsequently – the following question, which I’m asked to respond to as a servant of Anthropagogiki and of Special Education in particular:

-   Which can be the role of Culture and of Education which is closely related to it, in the development of young man, who is able to act as a free, responsible and democratic personality, participating actively in society and is driven by the universal consciousness cultivated by the above messages?

However, in order to answer this question, we must first determine the kind of Culture and Education we refer to. To the one formerly applied, to that which is functioning today or to the… “unknown” of tomorrow? Because, until now teaching has been delivered by “systematic education”, namely School, while currently the same task is being carried out by other “structures” as well, which, in the context of social education, typically provide “occasional education”, essentially though brainwash, using all pedagogical, psychological, technical, etc. media (starting with the playful form of learning and reaching theories of games and practices of propaganda and, more generally, mind control). The Internet – which ensures unlimited ease of use – is included in these structures, aspiring to become, progressively, the most significant factor of culture and education, if not the only one.

Furthermore, we should not overlook the influence of distributed free press, so that eventually no one stays away from the “modern” information line.

Thus, instead of actually learning the truth, one is misinformed, while the traditional institution of School is “committed” to the commands of the economic principle for cost minimization and profit maximization, which the educational community has transformed into a minor effort philosophy, whereas the political perception into the unashamed legalization of lawlessness.

I do not know if the universal citizen can be born in such a climate. But we all know that there are proposals and counterproposals. For my part, I’m going to counterpropose, briefly of course, what I mention in my didactic and in my published work, as well as in every given opportunity, fully justified, as a scholar of School, Vocational and Social Integration of socially vulnerable groups, of Persons with Disabilities in particular.

I refer to the conceptual content which we – as I uphold – ought to attribute to two conditions since they are considered to be essential parameters for any effort, so that global School – as a place foreshadowing global society – can function with such an orientation. That is, to provide all possible assistance to the young man in order to be born – as soon as possible and in any generation – and the angel of this world, namely the global citizen. Then, the inscription over the entrance of the unknown School of tomorrow cannot be other than the following: School of social consensus.

So I turn to the two terms, the two conditions. The first relates to the environment and the second to equality.

As for the environment, I note that, to my understanding, whatever School and the newly minted brain washers teach children, aims at increasing the profit of the exploiters and destroyers of the natural capital, without the children ever learning that when we talk about the environment we have to reflect on and act accordingly, viewing it with the following broad and by category conceptual content in mind.

In the first category the human, natural and artificial environment is included.

In the second, the internal or personal/individual (composed of genetic and biological origins and spiritual needs and motivations) and external (human, natural and artificial), determined locally (near or wider) and modally (direct or indirect). These concepts are better understood through known terms, such as heredity, learning factors, learning environment, individual and hyper-individual attitudes and behavior etc. In the third category, which is an outcome of the first two, the timeless environment (human, natural and artificial) is included –either as past, present or future, proximal or chronically distant –, the effect of which may be direct or indirect.

Within this context of the interactive relationship between man and the environment two more basic categories can be traced. The first category represents relationships between the subject, the object, the predicate and, in general, the definitions that describe them. The second category relates to the interpretation of the impact of human behavior, manifested both in the natural environment – which man exploits, takes advantage of and transforms – and in the artificial environment – which he constructs and uses.

The complete approach concerning the environment as well as my… “heretical” perceptions of equality are also accessible via the Internet, so my reference to the term “equality” will be limited to just two words and with these words, I will end my speech.

Ladies and gentlemen, I am against equality. Because if – in the name of justice which dictates equality – the same size is added to the terms of an inequality, inequality is maintained. For this reason I am in favor of proportional complementarity with quality. Thus, equality is converted to unhindered claim for such goods as health, education and participation in society depending on the amount of each one’s obligation, on the one hand, and one’s capability on the other.

Following from the above, the question that is posed, in which everyone is invited to give a collective response, is formulated as follows:

-   Which can, ultimately, be the role of Education in shaping a “collaborative” relationship between man and the environment [as determined above] and what can contribute to reverse the current negative relationship?

I believe that this will be achieved: firstly, when we stop saying that weather conditions have changed or that man has changed them or stop blaming ourselves and begin to act wondering: What I do now and benefit from right now, hurts whom – including myself – here or somewhere else or can hurt tomorrow, and, secondly, when invoking Equality we function in favor of unhindered claim of such goods, as the above mentioned and under the above mentioned conditions?