Sunday, August 2, 2009
Milena Velba Oil Wrestling
Citizenship and modern discourses in Peru
Citizenship and education in modern discourses in peru (1) José Ignacio López Soria
Introduction The concepts and practices of citizenship and education are not given in the abstract but within the encompassing discourses that provide meaning and try to organize the whole of reality. It is necessary therefore to refer to the dominant discourses in modern Peru to understand the scope of the concepts and practices of citizenship and education, analyze its limitations and think about new forms of citizenship and values \u200b\u200beducation in accordance with the multiculturalism that we which enriches us.
shall proceed, therefore, to present modern discourses emphasizing the forms of citizenship and education that they promote, for then refer to the limitations and, finally, think about citizenship and education from the values \u200b\u200bof multiculturalism.
I have to say from the outset that, in my opinion, all education is education in values, ie there is no education axiologically untied. What there are conceptions and educational practices that are not aware of the values \u200b\u200bthat are based or whose ownership contribute. What he wants the current "values \u200b\u200beducation" can not be anything but, first, raise awareness about the values \u200b\u200bunderlying the education provided and, secondly, to promote more value conscious incorporation chords with dignity, the need for early recognition and coexistence of diversities.
The reflections I present here are the result of my own investigations into the dominant discourse in Peru and the appropriation of not a few approaches gleaned from authors who in one way or another, involved in the current international debate on modernity .
dominant discourses in Peru
Students of the ideas in Peru have been reported since ancient character of the same doctrine, understood as the fact that these ideas are not the result of a theoretical effort to subdue the concept reality but rather the attempt to introduce and legitimize a social order in the image and likeness of the Western model of society.
My research on the dominant discourse in Peru have led me to distinguish two types of discourse: the liberties and welfare. Recent articles have realized the categorial structure of speeches, so I will refer here only those aspects that have to do with our subject.
's speech freedoms
With the thought of the Enlightenment who gather around the Mercurio Peruano (1791-1795) was inaugurated in Peru version of the modern project of emancipation, ie speech freedoms in the official version .
This discourse, in its best expressions, it is proposed to create conditions for the full development of justice and freedom, ie build a society of free and equal before the law which seeks the full deployment of human possibility.
The criterion perceptual and symbolic chairs axiological discourse of freedom is the ontological assumption of human nature, understood as autonomy and rationality as a substrate for the rights and duties of man and citizen. The individual is not granted another identity that derives from its membership of the human species. From this criterion, taken over from classical liberalism, established as an ethical principle and legal recognition rights and duties of individuals abstractly considered, is challenged and made into subjects by legislation and state, in principle, culturally neutral and geographically unrelated. The speech was intended engloblante, challenges the whole man, but really focuses its theoretical interest in the sphere of legitimacy, ignoring the realm of objectivity and not properly preparing the area of \u200b\u200bsymbolic representation. As for the practical interest, it focuses on the political-administrative subsystem and school subsystem, thus offering a legal and a dynamic teaching and learning in both cases are tributaries of the basic principle of the alleged cultural neutrality and territorial disengagement.
The order of this discourse is rhetorical and argumentative because it aims to persuade by appealing to autonomy and rationality of individuals, which is culturally neutral. It is not necessary to insist that such neutrality is only nominal because we know that speech is rooted in a culture that has been attributed to itself the universal condition. For the Peruvian case, that culture is not even Western culture as a whole, but the Latin version, since the Peruvian speech freedoms reference is paradigmatic, as a model and inspiration, Latin Europe. This speech is prepared and spread mainly in legal and political means, and informs the school system, from school to college. The move by the school system makes the individual participant, neutralizing their belongings beforehand. The experts become better utilized and provide an "aristocracy of the robe" Armed with privileges.
From these structural elements, the discourse of freedom develops and publishes an overview of Peru whose most significant features are the consideration of the individual as subject of rights and duties, and the postulation of a democratic order that is institutionalized in nation-state form. Against aristocratic society and privilege, institutionalized in the structure called "English Republic", "republic of Indians" and "caste", Peru's speech freedoms are composed, ideally, individuals whose dignity is the source of their status as beings humans, regardless of their conditions of existence and the differences of gender, race, religion and culture.
In the minds of the carriers of speech freedoms, the predominance of the Castilian language, the Western system of images and symbols, Christian beliefs and the legal system supposedly rational outcome of the confrontation between citizens, are the binding elements for excellence in building a society that knows fragmented and therefore need to make explicit their connecting factors. Already in the nineteenth century, Benito Laso, a convinced liberal in the early decades of the republican era, proposed the "patriotism of the law" as essential for linking the Peruvians, anticipating more than a century "patriotism of the constitution "Habermas proposed today for the Germans.
welfare discourse.
With the arrival of the first engineers in the mid-nineteenth century and the development of engineering education from the last third of this century, began to acclimate and grow in Peru another speech, which I call the welfare discourse, which is representative of a rationality that is oriented to promote national development by way of exploration and exploitation of natural resources and its incorporation into the international circuit of the merchandise. The second speech will soon discuss the discourse of social freedoms, its primacy. If the discourse of freedom was expressed predominantly on legal and literary terms, the well-being will do in terms of science and technology and business development.
rationality speech carried by the welfare is the elevation of categories and conceptual relationships, axiological and symbolic of a practice of appropriation and effective and efficient processing of the material conditions of existence to not only meet but also to develop human needs in a context of integration. In his
welfare are three different levels but articulated: principles (concepts, values \u200b\u200band symbols), media (technical-scientific praxis and business) and end (satisfaction and development needs). The center is occupied by the practice because it is the supposed inexhaustible source of wealth theoretical, axiological and symbolic and that since she met and needs evolve. On the other hand, is a rationalization of both the principles and the means and ends.
regard to its structural characteristics, we note, first, that this speech is proposed as a fundamental objective to build a welfare society not only meet but to develop human needs, assuming as a basic utility. The individual is understood as homo faber and, therefore, defined from their participation in the processes and procedures for the transformation of nature. Aim, therefore, the speech to institutionalize the rights and duties of the individual as worker and entrepreneur. To It focuses its theoretical interest in the area of \u200b\u200bobjectivity, and practical interest, first in the production and service subsystem for processing, according to the canons of industrialism, the environment and adapt to human needs and, second, creating a school subsystem capable of providing the homo faber of the skills required to intervene to achieve success in a natural environment transformation point to progress on the western model.
The order of this discourse is argumentative in that it also appeals to reason, but his pragmatic is explanatory and descriptive adequacy defining truth as to what is supposed to reality and resorting to success as a criterion of verification. As a reference paradigm, the discourse of being placed in the Anglo-Saxon western societal model and inspiration. The speech can not penetrate the school system as a whole, being reduced their presence to the technical and engineering schools, schools of economics and business administration, and institutions of technical professionals. The move by these schools to become involved in technical professionals and entrepreneurs eventually.
The most significant features of the Vision of Peru that is expressed in the discourse of welfare are, without doubt, the incorporation the territory as a fundamental variable of human life, the articulation of it in an integrated area, and the transformation of the natural conditions of social existence.
Other features no less characteristic of Peru postulated from the discourse of welfare are the sectoral and intersectoral coordination, complementarity of town and country, which sets in motion the formation of domestic and revitalizes, rephrasing, the process of urbanization, incorporation of Peru to the international circuit of the goods, the introduction in Peru of knowledge, technologies and modern ways of producing and organizing production and services, the prospect opposition of civilization / barbarism, civilization understood as sign of Western modernity and barbarism, Anglo and Hispanic and native tradition.
welfare discourse, as it did from before the freedoms, it is also intended encompassing: hopes to organize all of life by proposing a world in which it is possible not only to meet current needs but to develop new needs. The carriers of this discourse are seen as demiurge, makers of an intelligible world is the product of man's rational, that is the result of rational action-oriented development and transformation of nature.
The sphere of objectivity is cultural field in which the discourse of welfare feel like a fish in water. No stranger, however, the area of \u200b\u200bthe legitimacy or the symbolic representation. Interested in providing legitimacy to their transformative action and the subject-worker, entrepreneur, engineer, architect, who performs it, but the source of legitimacy is no longer the word to the wise but useful work that satisfies human needs and develops. As the world of representation, introduce new coded language from looking at the reality in terms of quantity, quality, distance, volume, weight, etc.
As for the sub-rational action regarding goals, preferences welfare discourse focus on the subsystems of production and exchange, but it is also important to create an educational sub-experts to train technicians, engineers, architects, businessmen, able to skilfully develop and manage their own codes of this discourse. Citizenship and education
modern discourses in Peru upheld as we have seen, the incorporation of individuals deprived of their cultural property and its labor traditions, political participation and the world of work in modern conditions, making citizens and workers with rights and duties recognized by the legal and political rules and legal employment.
To achieve this goal are designed and mounted, since the lifetimes of modern discourses and as a mechanism for ownership, on the one hand, systems integration to political participation based on the recognition of citizenship derived from membership of individuals to the human species in the context of a nation-state in pregnancy and, second, preferably oriented educational systems to the formation of citizenship or the provision of job skills. This is, as you know, over a slow and complex historical process is not without conflict and that, from the modern perspective, is not complete yet. From these perspectives are still putting in full generalization of this type of citizenship education and the basis for the fulfillment of the promise of Peruvian life, a promise that remains thought, when thought seriously, as the realization of the ideals of freedom individual procedural justice and welfare.
Without denying the existence of political and educational alternatives that do not fit properly in the project of modernity, we must recognize that the validity of modern discourses and institutional objectification has become, for most Peruvians, "meaning common "and horizon of expectations and, therefore, a guide for action formulation of policy and individual and social demands.
These regulations do without regard for the cultural property of those individuals and their traditional knowledge and experiences from working. The original cultural property would be replaced by the appropriation of a "national culture" in training which would act as a binding for all Peruvians. Traditional knowledge and work experience should be forgotten to make way for the appropriation of skills-cognitive, procedural and attitudinal-own work in modern environments.
limitations of these discourses
The two speeches of Western modernity in Peru agree in pointing to the constitution of the nation state as a privileged form of rational organization of society and therefore as the best organizational structure for the macro management and fulfillment of the promise of Peruvian life . But they do separately, proposing an implementation of the ideals of justice and freedom, and the other the completion of the well-being. This divorce between the speeches is derived from the defective character, both in its statement as in the making, societal project that each carries. It is not uncommon, therefore, that each of them conceptually reworked reality from a perspective not given to thinking about the modern project in all its complexity and richness
This initial deficiency, which share both speeches, add others that are specific to each one of them.
's speech freedoms as fundamental limitation presents its cultural dissociation. The man, who is the subject of law, it should be understood abstractly, ie stripped of their cultural heritage. It is, therefore, a clean sweep of the rich cultural diversity that characterizes the Peru and, consequently, requires individuals to be citizens, to shed their cultural identity and to assume an identity that results from the questioning of modern discourse and institutional objectification. To facilitate this process has produced a historical narrative that puts the fulfillment of the promise of Peruvian life in the realization of a nation-state populated by people free and equal before the law. School and, in general, training systems and information are responsible not only to spread this vision but to the individuals taking ownership. Having taken as their own, this vision becomes a virtually insurmountable obstacle for both the valorization of cultural diversity to peer Peruvian and without prejudice to the forms of coexistence that are making the processes of globalization.
Seen from the problem that here we concerned, a fundamental limitation of the discourse of welfare is at the very notions of welfare and territory, derived both from the ideological framework of classical liberalism. I will not delve here into this limitation, but I want to noted that, for example, reducing the notion of territory to exchange-value it has on the international market oriented human actions and ownership of the exploration and exploitation their potential in one direction, with no knowledge of the territory as human habitat, yet what this means, from lifestyle and wealth of experience and knowledge to the relationship with the environment to world views and systems symbolic. The consequence is obvious: the inclusion of the individual workplace that fosters the welfare-to address what could be called labor-demand citizenship renunciation of wealth of experience and knowledge accumulated over centuries of work. This incorporation is necessarily a teaching-learning process which aims to provide individuals of cognitive skills, procedures and attitudes that the model requires a task that is responsible for education and especially scientific and technical education.
In conclusion
is self-evident that the speeches to which I referred are the background from which defines the identity and citizenship of the Peruvian educational models and even the status of worker.
From these speeches does not seem easy exit to other forms of citizenship, to education by the principles of multiculturalism. So I argue that not enough fragmented patches and remedies. It is necessary to surmount these speeches to state a promise of collective life that is based in reconciliation with cultural diversity and reconciliation with the environment.
is no longer possible, as desired by the discourse of freedom, constitute a culturally disconnected state and governed by laws which appeal equally to all individuals. The differences are speaking and demanding not only be respected but recognized as such. They are therefore launched the "right to difference" and the "right to cultural membership, two rights that are consistent with the character hardly egalitarian and culturally disconnected from the modern project. The ideals of justice and freedom are set and not from a supposed abstract humanity but from the cultural contexts in which daily life unfolds the various human groups.
Nor is already possible, as claimed by the speech well, think well-being as a result of exploration of nature in the framework of nation-states and relations between nation-states. On the one hand, the exploitation of nature has already met its limits and is developing a sense of responsibility towards the environment that is alien to the model of unlimited progress of the modern project and close to the ancestral experience of work; the other, the institutional dimensions of modernity have outgrown the nation-state, and has begun not only in the system of production and exchange, a process of globalization that brings us all more and more, to have the world as required frame of reference for all human action. We are aware that globalization is given the strong trends towards homogenization, but should be able to see it the possibility of affirmation of diversity, which lead us to think of globalization as a result of enriching encounter between different forms of life and welfare models that populate the world.
what to do in the domains of citizenship and education from the constraints of modern discourses in Peru? I am afraid it is not enough to mend because the case, as indeed it is, discourses encompassing, it is likely that the patch ends up being functional to the primary objectives of these discourses. I have for me would have to think about saying goodbye to them and dare to state a promise to incorporate various forms of citizenship and multiculturalism as rib assume not only the educational system but of all human relationships. Although how do I stay in the pipeline, I think only way to get that Peruvian society is finally reconciled with itself, with its rich diversity of world views and ways of life, with its multiplicity of stories and his natural environment.
I want to make clear, finally, that when I speak of a restatement of the promise I'm not thinking of a new discourse encompassing the claim to be valid for all, but rather from a spirit encompassing post speeches, in a game mutually respectful of speeches in which the various communities that populate this territory taken by themselves, the word, define their identities, with arguments proposed and discussed their ideas of good life, we all have their own history and decide to build together a society in which all feel appropriately recognized.
Notes (1) Contribution PUCP Philosophy Congress in January 2004. In: www.oeiperu.org / documents and materials
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
0 comments:
Post a Comment