Is
conventional education really worthwhile? Let's put aside the traditional
normal of success, and the institutions that enforce it. Place yourself in seventh
century BC Nepal. We're not talking about the "get a job, make a good
life" success, but personal, individual enlightenment. Can education
really help us find a meaningful path?
It's clear that Siddhartha comes to reject the
hegemony of outside teaching:
I
will no longer try to escape from Siddhartha... I will no longer study
Yoga-Veda, Atharva-Veda, or asceticism, or any other teachings. I will learn
from myself, be my own pupil; I will learn from myself the secret of Siddhartha
(39).
Siddhartha’s main qualm with education
is that he thinks that teachers, no matter how skilled, cannot impart their
actual experience. Siddhartha thinks about only spiritual teaching. In his
time, education usually meant learning and interpreting the religious texts. Nowadays,
education teaches us about all kinds of topics. Most of the topics we learn in
school aren’t spiritual and don’t really tell us how to live our lives, and
that’s a key distinction. Siddhartha wants to find his own method to live,
while we want to gain knowledge. In his case, he has a valid point. No one else’s
philosophy can exactly match a unique, dynamic person.
Even so, there are big parallels. No
teacher can really make a student
care about a subject; that excitement and commitment has to come at least
partially from within the student. That said, teachers can certainly open the
door for a student’s interest. Since teachers have the power to disseminate
knowledge, they can greatly influence the identity of students. I know I wouldn’t
have become interested in mathematics if it weren’t for my pre-calculus
teacher, who allowed me to realize that math can be interesting. Likewise, my English
teacher can recommend me Siddhartha, but
my own experiences let me derive meaning out of it. (It really was a great book, and I’m
grateful it was on the list!)
No comments:
Post a Comment