Challenges my stereotype that Indian material and critical understandings are largely lacking on the web. Thank you, Pathshala for showing me that it wasn't that material was unavailable, it's just that I was not looking hard enough or it was not accessible as easily.
this last section where criticism of illich are given i find a bit lacking. the idea that the HAS to be institutions is repeated tautologically and is not substantiated. why does it HAVE to be so? just because networks have the potential to become institutions again does not mean we shouldn't de-instituionalize social functions just because institutions reappearing is hypothetically possible. are we to just accept the problems of institutional structures? the argument works the same in reverse. if institutions have the potential to become horizontal educational networks again then we shouldn't bother with institutions, especially given their pernicious aspects and repeated failures. illich is not against technology but rather against technologies that are not convivial. illich clearly sees potentials for conviviality in certain technologies, one pertinent example is his idea that instead of installing televisions in latin america and giving power of centralized propaganda to media corporations and big business that the same resources could instead be dedicated to giving millions of latin americans tape recorders that could be used to share and diffuse information from person to person in an egalitarian manner rather than from a position of authority to a subordinate or capitalist to consumer. this type of technology is now disseminated worldwide in the form of cellphones which also have aspects of the former technology he opposed in television but the fact still stands from things like the arab spring to online youtube tutorials that convivial technology is an excellent alternative to centralized and controlled technology. In my field of digital media, people almost invariably learn more and better from things like online tutorials and horizontal communication than they do from their degree programs. the only reason they are in the schools are to network and to obtain a certification to put on their resume. networking can be done convivially and certification is a problematic for all the reasons illich describes. the solutions of illich are mischaracterized and dismissed based on the mischaracterization. i'm tired of sociologists and philosophers other than marx (who i do value) being rejected swiftly simply for not being sufficiently marxist, (rather than on the value of their ideas interpreted immanently and honestly) especially when their critiques are more radical than those of marx who was more or less an enlightenment modernist
I am honestly surprised how well presented this is.
Realy how good he explained the system .
And now we are facing same pblm in india .
Great sir
Thank u for this lady as well .
I'm surprised...hw clearly n how nicely d mam had explained the deschooling concept...🤗
Challenges my stereotype that Indian material and critical understandings are largely lacking on the web. Thank you, Pathshala for showing me that it wasn't that material was unavailable, it's just that I was not looking hard enough or it was not accessible as easily.
Great job! Clearest audio I've seen on this subject so far.
Concerned Geek this is #gold
Funny how the least "popular vids" happen to be the most lucid
thank u mam..
Thanks from America!
this last section where criticism of illich are given i find a bit lacking. the idea that the HAS to be institutions is repeated tautologically and is not substantiated. why does it HAVE to be so? just because networks have the potential to become institutions again does not mean we shouldn't de-instituionalize social functions just because institutions reappearing is hypothetically possible. are we to just accept the problems of institutional structures? the argument works the same in reverse. if institutions have the potential to become horizontal educational networks again then we shouldn't bother with institutions, especially given their pernicious aspects and repeated failures. illich is not against technology but rather against technologies that are not convivial. illich clearly sees potentials for conviviality in certain technologies, one pertinent example is his idea that instead of installing televisions in latin america and giving power of centralized propaganda to media corporations and big business that the same resources could instead be dedicated to giving millions of latin americans tape recorders that could be used to share and diffuse information from person to person in an egalitarian manner rather than from a position of authority to a subordinate or capitalist to consumer. this type of technology is now disseminated worldwide in the form of cellphones which also have aspects of the former technology he opposed in television but the fact still stands from things like the arab spring to online youtube tutorials that convivial technology is an excellent alternative to centralized and controlled technology. In my field of digital media, people almost invariably learn more and better from things like online tutorials and horizontal communication than they do from their degree programs. the only reason they are in the schools are to network and to obtain a certification to put on their resume. networking can be done convivially and certification is a problematic for all the reasons illich describes.
the solutions of illich are mischaracterized and dismissed based on the mischaracterization. i'm tired of sociologists and philosophers other than marx (who i do value) being rejected swiftly simply for not being sufficiently marxist, (rather than on the value of their ideas interpreted immanently and honestly) especially when their critiques are more radical than those of marx who was more or less an enlightenment modernist
well explained]
Trying to write a seminar on this book pulling an all nighter haven't read it yet I wanna die