TREAT
The education system that predominates in a social science curriculum,
say economics, reduces its efficacy to that of past performance. By this is
meant the idea that social sciences by their epistemological nature are
necessarily grounded in the past. As far as past performance, this is the key
element of scientific analysis. In the aforementioned curriculum, economics,
models and theories are based upon past performance, with modification as time
displays its irrational impact upon the models and theories. A truly circular
paradox that predominates in the social science curriculum. Models and theorem
are rationally deduced with a certain degree of probability which serve for
their justification.
This truth can be understood in the area of history. What would appear as a
straight-forward presentation of the facts of our collective past, becomes more
vague as time changes the integration of thoughts and facts. As any history
student will attest unto, the fascination and passion of history revolves in the
ever changing interpretation of the past. This of course is the paradox of the
term "history." History is the collective life history of either the individual
or community, however large. History confronts the uncertainty of the future by
trying to understand the systems or linear progression of certain cultures and
their interaction. Of course, by the epistemological nature of history, this
understanding is rooted in the past.
Thus the educational system that predominates in a social science curriculum
will by its nature be solely engaged in the systemization of the past. The
problem that arises is how does a curriculum that is based on the past, develop
a potential for innovation. In its most simplistic expression, "Will this
ëstuff’ help me to survive 10 years from now." Perhaps it is peculiar to the
United States, but this pragmatism has everything to do with social liberty and
freedom. The ability to grant unto me the assurance that one is not wasting
one’s time either learning or producing some product of labor. The paradox of
the social science curriculum is that it just enlarges the understanding and
complexity of communal activity, while shattering those beliefs that affect one
both economically or personally.
In the essay that follows, I hope to
illustrate in more specific terms the importance of the interaction between
history and economics and its expression in the educational
setting. This will not be an assault on the
public and private system of education The writer recognizes as a most
fundamental truth of life, education occurs in every situation. One should hope
such a foundational statement cannot be denied. This being the case, education
encompasses a much larger spectrum than traditionally defined. Without this
basic understanding, one would never venture to express thoughts or attempt
innovation, however defined.
In Part 1, I will attempt to integrate some basic thoughts about history,
economics and education. While history and economics have been recognized as
having integrated interests, education is usually subsumed under the teaching of
history or economics. The writer seeks to make education as a dependent factor
in the economic and historical look at the past. By this is meant that education
plays an important part in how economic policy and historical ideas are
interpreted by actors in any social system.
In Part 2, I will attempt to move beyond the
contradictions of Part 1 and ask questions that seem relevant to the discussion.
What possible outcomes are possible once the contradictions are put aside?
History: a recorded narrative of past
events of either a nation, group, individual or other entity.
1. This rather simplistic definition of
history usually encourages the view that the "study of history" involves a
simple recantation of known facts with regard to a given subject. While
logically true, known facts are recanted, the interpretation of these facts are
anything but logically true. Inherent in any thought process are the influences
and "life beliefs" that affect the perspective of the one rehashing facts from
history. Thus, the facts can be re-interpreted with new information on the part
of the one doing the analysis. At the same time, some historical data is
non-disputable due to either the wide-spread evidence and experience of the
collective knowledge or the derived mathematical sum of some measurement. The
later is, more often than not, used to justify expectations about the future or
the correctness of ones position. In its most simplistic expression, it is said
that to neglect the past is to open the way to repeat its "mistakes." Thus
history looks at past events and activities to understand the causes of events,
the ideas that were present in effecting events, so that uncertainty or
expectations of the future may justified.
2. This perspective of history has a perspective that looks both backward and
forward in time. Specifically, with regard to the future, uncertainty is a
given. Based on past experience, an individual will have necessary uncertainty
to the future. In interpreting the past in this uncertainty, the subject
logically looks for patterns or linear progressions of the systems they operate
within. A kind of logical order to life’s experiences. Yet within this backward
looking at time, uncertainty exists. It is true that no subject is perfectly
omniscient. Thus even when one is confident of some past event and its causes as
a basis of "learning" outcomes of particular activities and ideas, this
confidence is never total. At best, the "majority" will express a degree of
confidence in some position or perspective.
3. With regard to history, this uncertainty appears to manifest itself in the
ever proliferating production of national statistics and opinion polls. The
collective knowledge is supported by either a statistical proof or by the
dominant accepted ideology. Facts from the past are analyzed within these
paradigms. The correctness of these paradigms are not questioned until some new
information causes disquietude of the previous rehashing of history. For the
most part, "new information" is dissimulated very slowly into the historical
recordings and viewpoints. This becomes important when one understands how
education, the experiences learned from living, is dependent upon and at the
same time, independent of the study of history. There are usually enough stories
or statistical fact to justify ones faith in the facts. For others, the facts
from history, however reliable as interpreted, seem to contradict the "learned"
experiences of the individual.
4. The implications for a system of education are
clear. It is immediately acknowledged that education in the past, and perhaps
even today, has viewed history as a vital connection to understanding economic
growth or the progressive nature of a growing society. The student is advised to
follow the patterns of those in a different time and circumstance. The rehashing
of history in its most elementary form has supported the aspirations and
ideology of those who support its dissemination. The goal of historical teaching
is to inform of past events, the recantation of what is truth....facts you might
say. The goal of such recantation is to remind the subject of the patterns and
ideologies that have met with success. This "success" is usually describe in
terms of the net worth of an individual or a group or country. Thus the
educational system is designed in some part to impart the methods and ideologies
that lead to this "success" It is alleged that anything less would lead to
learning that is disconnected to the present reality. Thus recent attempts at
educational reform seem to aim at narrowing the spectrum of learning in its
institutions of learning so that the student may become "successful." This in
spite of the fact that such learning may contradict the everyday learning
experiences that exert a powerful influence.
5. Many times, the facts from the past provide no predictive help in
confronting the future. "What was" provides no answer to the problems facing the
subject. This is the paradox of history. Unless one adds the element of
religious fervor, history can cause more uncertainty within the individual,
group, nation, etc.. Perhaps this is the reason that so many find the subject
boring. This backward look at history, with its uncertainty of interpretation,
only demonstrates that education by its nature should be freed from a
methodological basis on "certainty" and should be based on a premise of an
uncertain future, and perhaps, an unknown quality of the past. The past
collective "known" facts can be distorted or even untrue. The change to
education based on uncertainty can have an effect of stimulating innovation.
This study of past facts can reveal the obvious flaws of past ideology, and
ideally, present ideology. Yet this is only true when history is not viewed as
some "a priori" of existence.
6. This is where education (the development of natural powers by repetitive
instruction in the ideas that dominate) fails as a social institution. I will
grant that past experience has a powerful affect on assumptions about the
future. But how does the education system free itself from a methodology based
on certainty to one based on uncertainty? How does education move beyond the
rehashing of facts as some sort of ticket to success to one in which facts
become interactively explored? This very idea of "success" means that some
economic criteria exists for the word. Equally important is the question of
innovation. What affect does the simple rehashing of historical facts have on
innovation, particularly with regards to new technology and solving serious
social problems?
7. Given these facts, the product of education
with regards to history, is an assimilation of those facts that are deemed
historically beneficial. Without a doubt, this "benefit" is associated with some
type of wealth criteria. In present day economic activity, this criteria centers
around the concept of wealth and the accumulation of net wealth. Thus those
facts which contribute to a replication of this economic activity are truly the
facts from history that education will impart. Not only does it accomplish the
security of maintaining ones’ net worth, it modals a justification for the
historical facts that are deemed as being most important to education, however
experienced.
8. Thus, as stated in the introduction, education is not an independent
factor, to be subsumed under the areas of history and economics, when analyzing
the historical and economic data. Education has much to do with a change from
uncertainty to a more positive view of the future. In the short-term, these
expectations will usually confirm themselves. A search for a fairly stable and
long term linear progression of events provides a glimpse of the foreseeable
future. These expectations, however, can be rapidly disturbed by some new
information or event that shakes confidences in ones historical and economic
look. Thus education can encompass the real day to day events that represent as
much a part of education, if not more, as that traditionally defined as
education, mainly classroom study. This education is interrelated to the
historical and social experiences of the individual. It cannot be contained
within a textbook of ideas, and more importantly, is often the "eyes" of
interpretation with regard to a textbook of ideas.
9. It might be appropriate to also speak about the ideology of history. In
simpler terms, the ideas that precede historical events. For most, this
represents the traditional chicken and egg question. Which comes first, the idea
or the event that caused the idea. I guess this would depend on the depth and
scope of ones analysis. For the purposes of this analysis, the scope consists of
relating how education, historical fact and economic activity interrelate in
human affairs. Thus at this level of analysis, it is accepted without dispute
that ideas are clearly motivators to activity, thus events. Plus that events
have a tendency to produce changes in ideas. Thus the ideology of history, the
ideas that prevailed in the decisions of the populace as a whole, are the
subject of this analysis. These ideas can be seen as evolving or becoming more
integrated into a formal understanding of the world. Until a new idea or event
challenges the basis of this understanding, it provides the individual with a
degree of certainty to future outcomes.
10. From a historical point of view, when rehashing the events of the past,
several key questions must be answered. How is it that certain ideas do provide
a "reliable" indicator of what was successful and what was not, yet their
relevance to an uncertain future is ambiguous at best? As stated in the
beginning, history looks both backward and forward at the same time. For
education, how does the ideas that are expounded and measured as to the efficacy
of the retention in the students, provide for innovation for future investment
of labour? In simpler words, how can this education free the student to build on
historical fact is such a way, that innovation, or investment, is a natural
outcome? Thus, success.
11. At this point it seems we have arrived at the
contradiction that I was referring to earlier. For success to occur, the obvious
and logical answer is that those ideas which have retained a long-term capital
gain, one might say, is logically the historical fact that must be learned by
labour. One might call it loosely what has been termed path dependence. It works
so why fix it!. From this it follows, that the ideas that have predominated
during this temporary, yet long-term activity, have proven their efficacy and
justification for continuance. When speaking of "long-term," this time period
will obviously vary depending on the institutions, habits, motivations, beliefs,
etc., that are particular to a scope of knowledge. Within this scope of
knowledge, innovation refers to improvements upon this basic knowledge, not
necessarily a complete overturning of this knowledge, although I would grant
that such a possibility does exist. Yet the contradiction of life experiences
and learning often tend to view innovation as benefiting some entity or group
more than the participants who are actively affected by innovation. This
contradiction in life experiences is directly related to the patterns of power
which can never be divorced from historical fact. Thus in a most fundamental
way, learning and formal education must demonstrate the ability to overcome the
powers of conformity that seek to control innovation to the advantage of some
entity or group. Indeed this will raise the level of uncertainty about the
future, but the basis for learning should be able to tap into the psychological
discomfort of historical uncertainty and release the productive capacity that
can be achieved when new possibilities or new "successes" can be articulated.
12. Until then, the methodology of historical articulation will be at odds
with the goals of that methodology.
Economics: The study of production and the
distribution of wealth.
13. This very simplistic definition of
economics usually suffices for an individual or group that tries to understand
the basic functions of its economic system. Economics and its study is aimed at
understanding the economic reality that confronts subsistence and how to somehow
control its impact in ones favor, or the greater benefit of the commonwealth. A
curious look at present academic discussions in economics reveals that models
and predictions based upon some mathematical formula will often suffice for an
accurate description of economic reality. In reality, it is curious that the
degree of certainty with which any of these mathematical modals adheres to
reality can only be based on past results or historical fact. New "shocks" or
variables among the participants in economic activity can reduce complex modals
to entries in an academic mausoleum in the basement of some building. When these
modals are analyzed within the scope of some "shock," a certain disquietude will
be expressed. The modals do not correctly estimate the importance of some
economic policy factor, thus uncertainty. Uncertainty in economics is evidenced
by economic panic.
13. It has been said that the end of economic
activity is consumption. In other words, economic endeavors are driven for
subsistence, as well as, a standard of living that is most often referred to as
"successful." Thus, economics as a discipline of study seeks to understand how
the various participants in a economic system acquire wealth or success using
the existing institutions. For a capitalist community, understanding the
principle of supply and demand is a most basic analysis. Modals and theories are
produced that seek to express the complex interaction of producers and
consumers. Most economists and producers view the idea of a "laissez faire"
society in which the markets function without interference from government or
other entities as the ideal society for the provisioning of the needs of
subsistence. Certainty to the outcomes of this society are usually only
questioned when threats of war or some other common physical disaster affects
the participants.
14. Unfortunately, the certainty of these outcomes are primarily based on the
certainty of past outcomes. In this sense, confidence toward the future is
rooted in the stylized facts from economic history that seem to justify a
certain course of action. The problems of poverty, under and un-employment,
environmental destruction and economic inequality, among many others, are
justified by the realized gains or traditions of the economic system. While
philanthropic activities acknowledge the problems inherent within a given
economic system, the main thrust of economic study, the MBA’s one might say, is
to secure a greater portion or increase the national dividend or income. The
problems of economic activity become the byproducts, also known as the
"externalities," of the system. 15. It is curious that this backward look with all its dogmatic presumptuous
ideas has not been challenged more thoroughly by economic study. It is widely
evident that the results of past economic policy and thought have led to great
economic problems for the future. Rather than building confidence, economic
policies seem to only amplify the uncertainty toward the future. Indeed,
environmental "externalities" may prove to change the entire nature of life as
man knows it presently. Not only in the sense of the bio-sphere being degraded,
but also on the productive capacities of any economic system. This is
particularly true with regards to the basic need for adequate nutrition or food.
16. With regards to education and learning, the individual’s experience the
"externalities" of economic activity. These are not factors that can be subsumed
or explained away from the economic dilemma facing the individual. While the
modals may present stylized learning from which a person can understand the
basic ideas of supply and demand, rarely do they address the problems of
economics in a coherent or forward looking position. In fact, formal education
tends to perpetuate the ideas of past economic policy and provide justification
for their continuance. Thus economics becomes not an innovative study in how to
address serious economic problems, but a rehashment of theories of management
and modals of economic behavior that perpetuate the existing maladies.
17. Innovation is limited in its use to
technological advancement. Innovation is viewed as "investment" that increases
the capacity to produce in order that more consumption may occur. Innovation in
the way that economics perceives its subject is reserved for the "cranks" or
concerned elements of society groping with the present "externalities" of the
system. Past experiments, one might say, with tampering with the "lassez faire"
nature of economic activity have proved the validity of the present state of
affairs. Thus formal education must seek to impart those elements of
understanding that will perpetuate the validity of present economic activity,
despite the contradictions and problems. With the collapse of central control of
economic activity, such as in former communist states, an even greater degree of
justification is given for capitalism as being the only possible economic modal.
18. From this formalization of economic facts, students in formal education
are taught the rewards of "playing the game," so to speak. Success is measured
and viewed from a position of economic gain and/or growth. That gaps in wealth
have steadily increased in the last fifteen years, does not enter into the rote
rehashing of economic theory. Formal education becomes the means to the end with
success measured in terms of the possession of money or its equivalent.
Innovation in economic policy is reduced to the wishful thinking of "bleeding
heart liberals," whatever that defines. Innovation becomes a new way of
producing better things cheaper. The rewards of education are the "stuff" that
an individual can command control over, whether money or otherwise.
19. At this point, the articulation of economic policy presents its
contradictions in full. Once one understands the basic assumptions of economic
activity, one equally senses its disconnectivity to the learning of life’s
experiences. The elusive "success" that is promised by economic policy only
tends to diminish the certainty under which many economic modals operate. Those
who seem to be profiting the most, or the most successful, seem to be those who
adhere to the basic economic tenets and articulate them most forcefully. That
the "externalities" that are produced by those who are successful is somehow
justified, confronts the individual with a degree of pessimism and uncertainty
that is not eased with philanthropic activities. The reality of maintaining any
kind of subsistence level overwhelms constructive criticism and innovative
thought. Economics continues to articulate those facts from the past that
somehow justify the state of affairs.
20. Again a word must be spoken on the power of economic politics. These
modals and theories do not exist within a vacuum. They are associated with the
economic policies and aims of those in power. That formal economic education
should articulate these policies is a given. The ability to be innovative in
economic policy is diminished by the degree of uncertainty that would arise from
such innovative thought. What might be described as path dependency becomes a
natural law to which no individual group or entity should strive to negate.
Manipulation of economic policy becomes geared to the perpetuation of existing
conditions, despite its deficiencies and inequalities. This is not to say that
the individual does not see the contradiction of this state of affairs. The
problem once again becomes how can innovation be achieved in this state of
affairs. Not just innovation of the means of production, but also innovation in
economic policy that benefits the whole.
21. Thus once again we are faced with the fact
that the methodology of economics is at odds with the goals of that methodology.
Education: The systematic development of
natural powers through instruction.
22. This simplistic definition of education
usually characterizes the will of most parents who send their children to any
school of education. Afterall, each individual comes to the task of education
with many possibilities and abilities. Parents entrust that the knowledge and
experiences of education will help mode and promote those talents, or natural
powers, that are evidenced in their expectations of their child. Of course, this
education or development, perhaps training, does provide some basic life skills
that enable productive work within the larger system. It is geared toward the
monetary reward of successfully mastering some corner of knowledge or privilege.
Not a bad goal in itself, but when attached to "fiat" currency, it stifles
innovation.
23. As stated in the opening of these arguments, education thus becomes the
impartation of the dominant goals that have proved successful by some criterion.
This criterion is associated with a prevailing "schedule" of awards, most
usually referred to as GPA. That a grading system is necessary is most likely
justified, perhaps correctly, by the need to discourage obviously talentless
individuals from pursuing a "dead end" so to speak. The consequences of this
discouragement are justified by the natural results of such "weeding" out the
untalented. Of course a word must be said that this is not an attack upon the
education of individuals. This "weeding" out has primarily reference to those
individuals who opt out of lifetime learning due to financial restraints, time
constrictions due to subsistence, and other similar casualties. That education
occurs on a daily basis is a given.
24. That education is important has never been the issue. The question that
arises is how education can be spoken, in the past, as being successful in
developing natural talents. In recent years, the demand for more
"accountability" has increased steadily the importance of national standards as
set and measured in "nationalized tests." This homogeneous view of the outcomes
of education is viewed upon as the key to future growth and prosperity. Perhaps
the irony of this position is that growth and prosperity is based not upon the
past solutions, economic or otherwise, but upon innovation in the educational
process. Education is designed to expand the talents, perhaps solutions, that
will represent true progress. Afterall, confronted with an uncertain future,
education can provide a positive path to productive living well beyond the
subsistence level. As long as that education, however derived, includes
intrinsic desires to investigate and master an area of interest. Whether this
type of education can be "homogeneously" measured is the contradiction of
education.
25. The historical view of education has been subsumed to the impartation of
those facts that are deemed most necessary as life skills. The goals of history
are to impart those obvious facts that are deemed most necessary. Economics is
ultimately tied to this history by the successful, or shall we say, growth in
income of particular groups, institutions, etc.. This rehashing of history, as
stated above, is to impart those historical facts that lend this methodology
justification. Afterall, education could easily be substituted by the word
methodology. However, once again, the methodology must exclude those
"externalalities" that seem irrelevant to the goals at hand. Methodology is
measured in terms of numbers and probabilities. Something remotely foreign to
the true education of the individual. Conformity becomes a stifling experience
in the face of innovation.
26. Of course this stifling of innovation within
the individual is directly tied to the "game" of subsistence. Regardless of ones
position, there does exist a certain or identifiable level of income, in which
an individual or family can subsist without stifling innovation and risk-taking.
Using the present utopian trend toward investing (usually aka mutual funds),
there obviously is a definitive income that allows this speculative behavior.
Economics seeks to impart the way to play this game. As one economist called it,
the casino of the world. Economics can thus treat education as the impartation
of the risks and rewards. The weeding out of those who refuse to play is simply
an externalality of the system. Unfortunately, the educational system is plagued
by those who refuse to understand, or who are externalalities to the goal of
economic education.
27. Thus one encounters the contradiction of the educational system. This
supposed simplistic goal of developing the natural talents of the individual
through instruction. A educational system that basis its methodological goals
upon "fiat money" acquisition has retarded the intrinsic value of innovation.
Natural talent is instructed to strive toward the "shiny face," "A star on the
board," "tokens," "candy," possessions, obsessions, anything to set yourself
ahead in the game... The joy of innovation is encouraged, only as some objective
monetary value is attached. And yet, one must wonder, what is education for but
to develop and train the natural talents that have historically arisen to deal
with present problems through innovation and critical analysis? Perhaps,
historical and economic ideas as transmitted within the structured educational
format have created a sort of path dependence with regards to future
possibilities.
28. But once again it is clear that education, history and economics have a
bias toward the systemization of the past. In fact this focus is necessary due
to the epistemological nature of the inquiry. Given the volume of information,
certain predictable, or statistically relevant, modals of prediction are given
articulation. To what degree this articulation has relevance to the subsistence
of the individual, is weighted by the real educational experiences of life. A
system that grows more remote from the real life experiences is subject to be
exchanged for a more quicker or available option for success. One can only sense
the idea of crime in this option. That this breakdown has taken radical and
deadly avenues, only perpetuates the distance between the politics of economics,
history and education, and the experiences of the individual or family.
29. Once again we see that the methodology of education is at odds with goals
of that
methodology.
In part, this is just a modeling efficiency
that relegates these externalities to a position subordinate to the task at
hand. The certainty of past results neglects a forward look that fails to
account for the evolving nature of social systems and the fact that past
economic activities have not produced "success" for a large part of the populace
and environment.
© CopyRight 2002 Scott R. Simpson