Nettime mailing list archives

<nettime> RE: discontents and such
Ryan Griffis on Fri, 10 Oct 2003 12:13:20 +0200 (CEST)

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

<nettime> RE: discontents and such

someone wrote
"Now that I look back at my teachers I realise at best
they were links and linkers. And that is the most a
teacher as far as I am concerned should strive for -
to offer many and various links to information, to 
offer many and various possible interpretations of
information, and tools for interpretation, and
questions, and doubts, and a place (classroom) where
all that and more can be tested and confronted. The
teacher should, IMO, in a way, maybe, be just an older
student, who has spent more time on a project and so
can help along someone who is only starting."

i have to say that i like this... as a teacher (and,
not long ago, former student) this is the comment i
can relate to the most. it doesn't shirk the
responsibility of teaching, but makes learning more of
a relationship - which it is.
at any rate, Nato's response naming "leftist
intellectuals" and Kermit's response to that, i think,
make some headway (maybe). the "leftist" portion is
important, because it is political, even if the naming
can be abused. what if "intellectual" was replaced
with "autonomous citizen"? are we talking about
educating "autonomous citizens" with specific
political tendencies (previously termed
"intellectual")? if so, that's great - it forces us to
think of how our actions are inherently political (by
which i mean have an impact on the material lives of
others - a relationship). but it also brings up an old
dilemma - political censorship. but if the arguments
can be made explicitly political (i.e. how does this
or that policy effect someone's autonomy/well being),
at least the politics could be out in the open, as
opposed to talking about the (educational) market as
an autonomous entity, or "collateral damage" for that
matter, which only hides the dominant political
as for the anti/intellectualism of the US, has it not
always been run by "intellectuals behind the stage?"
Are not Edward Bernays and Michael Huntington
considered intellectuals (and liberals at that), with
their "the problem with democracy is an excess of
democracy" rhetoric? again, the term "intellectual
seems meaningless - it's the politics that count.
in terms of new media, and providing the service of
learning to those that have to "compete" in the market
- there are obviously inequities in the US
"meritocracy" that have to be addressed, the "digital
divide" may be highly flawed way of thinking about
this, but these are (in)visible borders that exist in
education, which if dealt with politically could
change the nature of education (and the "market") in
an interesting way.
and what about Fromm's universal minimum income...


#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net