 |
|
 WHAT IS?
As Camps points in his book "Public virtues", the education consists of two fundamental functions: the socialization and the moral formation of the person. When we complain that our society lacks values, we mean that the only motivation that exists is individual. It seems that becoming rich and to live well is the target of our young people, and probably they have learned it of the biggest. But the well-being obtains also across the health, the company, the love, the intelligence, the social support, the safety, the illusions... and the education is the one that it has to provide with sense to all this.
VALUES OF THE CURRENT EDUCATION
The values of the current education, democratic call, there are the pluralism, the autonomy and the tolerance. Nevertheless a few open and lay values as these have both defects and virtues for the psychological development of the child. On not having shut any dogmatism up, they do not say what must be done, it is a free education of contents, in which the child is required to decide and to be right in it, as if he was an adult. It is an error to confuse tolerance with norms absence. To minimize the value of the discipline is to ignore what the Greeks already knew and were accepting: that the virtue is a habit, custom repetition of acts, discipline. A "weak" education as this one produces disorientated and unprotected beings. There is not any more that to name the fashion of American children who saying to suffer stress in the school to cause for example of his obesity, begin to receive his classes in the solitude of his room by means of an audio-visual method, of course with hamburger restaurant menu in the table and a blanket they are no going to have cold.
CAUSES
This evolution in the education has two prime movers, one is the wrong conception of what means to be a progressive, and on the other hand, the absence of sense of the responsibility in the education. The adults have the responsibility of introducing the child in his world, and to do it must exercise his authority. Hanna Arendt affirms, that the education has to be a progressive, but not in the innovation sense nietzscheana like "transmutation of the values", but there are old values that must be preserved. Neither the obedience nor the discipline are unacceptable. The children need clear points of view, although it is only to transgress them and to criticize them later. An education is better with contents, although they are wrong. They will deal already educated of correcting the received errors. Innovating cannot be to destroy but to discern that there is in the learned that is worth being preserved.
The education has to be authoritarian, and not in the sense of imposing ideas, but in of making to cost the superiority of experience of knowledge, of errors, of years... that the adult has on the child. Not to confuse the levels, since this does not lead to a few more satisfactory relations, but it disorients everybody, educational and polite. Educating is to transmit a life style. The children observe and copy, erect models that perhaps further on they will want to revoke. To have authority is finally to realize that to our sorrow, we are the point of reference of the new generations.
THE GOOD EDUCATION
There is good the education that teaches good things, what we think that he is worth while knowing and learning. The today young people appreciates the hard work as way to prosper, values the serviceability and avoids the defeat, feels less rebellious and unincluded, he is not in the hurry to escape from the familiar retreat. The success attracts them and they are interested little by the politics. None of these values is despicable, because they are real in our society. But to remain in the satisfaction of the material, basic or superfluous needs, although it is the essential thing, represents a cultural impoverishment.
To resist this tendency to the material well-being and to take the procedures of the market as a model, is the basic task of the good education. The distant but definitive target of a good education would be the happiness of each one, since the collective one is beyond his scopes. It would be so, to teach to live well:
- To be able to live well with one himself: it consists of that so aristotélico of learning the measurement that has to have every thing, not even the work is a pure game, I nor come up to obtain money and reputation, but an average. To teach to work but also to amuse itself would be the correct thing.
- To be able to live with the others: the relations have to depart from two values, the value of the forms or good ways (what definitely is understood by good education) and the solidarity, since the society is unjust.
The end of the education is not to do good and virtuous beings, but to socialize and to perpetuate a certain social order. The ethical benefits that the education produces will be collateral effects of a procedure that if the same it is good because it calls to the collaboration and to the unit. There will be the by-product of a practice that inculcates habits, which it reveals attitudes and ways of doing and of living. The education should consist of something so simple as to show to the neophytes in the life the proper way of living.
WHAT DOCTOR CAN TREAT ME?
|
|
|
DEFINITION 
