groundviews » Should Vice-Chancellors pledge support to the President?

Should Vice-Chancellors pledge support to the President?

February 2, 2010 at 12:44 pm · Categories: Colombo, Education | by Groundviews

[Groundviews was informed that this open letter was penned on 20 January 2010, before the presidential election. Tellingly, efforts to publish it in the traditional print media before the presidential election, we were told, had failed.]

The Official Government News Portal (www.news.lk) carried a news item, datelined 18 January 2010, that vice-chancellors of Sri Lankan universities pledged support to the President, with some of them asking the people of this land to vote him into a second term at the forthcoming elections – this letter is being written on 20 January 2010.

After a President is duly elected to office, the right and proper thing for all citizens to do is to pledge support to him, whatever their political affiliations. Most university academics, ourselves included, endorse this. What this means in practice is that, quite apart from our teaching and administration activities, we get involved in projects associated with national development, which are invariably fully consistent with the stated policies and priorities of the government. These range from poverty reduction & microenterprise development; through promotion of healthcare and information technology; to utilization of natural resources and engineering projects. Most of us focus our research interests on topics of national importance too. In our opinion, singing the praises of the President is not the most appropriate way for academics to pledge support.

Furthermore, the dateline for the news item is just 6 days before a presidential election – completely the wrong time for pledging support to an incumbent president – not because we should hedge our bets about the outcome of the election, but because we should maintain impartiality in our public pronouncements as a university community. If anyone were to pledge support either to the President or any other contender in one’s private capacity, that could perhaps be considered acceptable. However, the en masse promotion of the President by the top leadership of the Sri Lankan university system appears to us to be a betrayal of the very raison d’etre of a university.

In our opinion, a university is a place of unfettered inquiry, in the tradition of Socrates (if one wants secular roots) or that of the Buddha (if one wants religious roots) – this is why the most ancient seats of learning arose in Greece and India. The growth of knowledge has always been associated with challenging the status quo and questioning the dominant authorities (in the tradition of Galileo). As such, while most academics would prefer to be neutral vis a vis the political authorities, if it comes to a choice between endorsing and critiquing the state, we would generally advocate the latter. Even though our universities are funded by the state, we must strive vigorously to maintain their independence. This is our solemn responsibility by the people, to whom we are ultimately answerable since it is their money that funds us. Thus, what we should be doing before an election is to foster informed discussion of substantive issues, rather than to extend blanket support to any particular candidate.

Although this letter is critical of our vice-chancellors, we end by saying that we are appreciative of the leadership they provide in keeping our universities functioning within a highly politicized environment. We are especially proud of any vice-chancellors who did not participate in the press conference because they wanted to remain independent. We deplore any pressure or manipulation from any quarter directed towards any or all of them.

Priyan Dias, Ranil Abayasekara, Suresh de Mel, Shantha Fernando, Dileni Gunewardena, Rohini Hewamanna, Romaine Jayewardene, Rumala Morel, Dinesha Samararatne, Upul Sonnadara, Vasanthi Thevanesam, Shamala Tirimanne, Ruvan Weerasinghe, Carmen Wickramagamage

1,200 have read this this article so far. You may also find these articles interesting:

Pledges PLEDGE (plÄj) A solemn binding promise to do, give, or refrain from doing something… UN official says Sri Lanka pledges to improve security, access for aid workers President pledges full commitment to protect Human Rights Foreign donors pledge to uphold international standards in aid delivery The UNF Government led by Prime Minster Ranil Wickremesinghe wins Parliamentary elections on... sam, August 10, 2007
A response to “News websites caught red-handed doctoring video to make president look racist” A news item on Lakbima News titled News websites caught red-handed doctoring video to make president look racist has this to say of Groundviews. “Websites such as Groundviews exacerbated the situation by saying there was confusing reportage, not highlighting the obvious doctoring which was apparent to anybody listening to the video soundtrack and the clip. But... Groundviews, April 11, 2010

Permalink | Share this article on Facebook

Mr Minority said,

February 2, 2010 @ 12:57 pm

What else could you expect from half baked VC’s who are (ANYWAY) political appointees who needs to sing for their supper. What can you expect from the products they put out.

If I had my way, they should be taken to Galle Face [edited out] for destroying the academia.

punitham said,

February 2, 2010 @ 1:43 pm

Thank you, scholars: ”a university is a place of unfettered inquiry”

Vice-Chancellors, will you tell the President what Japan Times editorial has wirtten today:
”Mr. Rajapaksa must govern as a president for all Sri Lankans, not just for those of his own ethnicity. The rest of the world must support him by providing aid and investment while demanding that he distribute it equally among his citizens.”

We have read enough of ” More houses than were damaged by tsunami were built in the South and even after five years tsunami victims in the Northeast are withering away in tin huts put up temporarily five years ago”.

Siribiris said,

February 2, 2010 @ 1:46 pm

First, I salute the uncommon courage of the few academics who issued this statement under their own names. If only we had a few dozen more of their kind…

However, the question in this article’s heading is somewhat misplaced. In our university system, the President appoints both chancellors (ceremonial, unpaid position) and vice chancellors (paid position, equal to CEO) of all public universities, typically for three year terms. In the case of vice chancellor, the university senate may recommend up to three names, but the President can accept any one or reject all of them. It is a highly discretionary choice for the President, so all incumbent and aspiring VCs have to be in the good books of the incumbent president.

The more pertinent question is: what is this kind of academic subservience a symptom of? The answer may be found in this excellent analysis by Dr Rohan Samarajiva, appearing at http://www.thesundayleader.lk/2010/01/10/constitutionalism-or-feudalism/

To quote but one para: “Do university teachers rush to kiss the ring and vice chancellors prostrate themselves before presidents in modern societies? Can we have a modern economy, when the largest companies in the country obey patently illegal directions from regulators? Is it normal to name a government-owned, money-losing airline for the head of state and paint the tail of the leased aircraft with his campaign livery? These are symptoms of a transition from a Constitutional State to a feudal one.”

Justin said,

February 2, 2010 @ 3:21 pm

Most academics in Sri Lanka are educated with Sinhala ethnic base. They are worse tah the uneducated persons because the brains of the uneducated are not brain washed aand are open. They are experts in majoritarianism and not either in democracy or politics.

The “experts” in SL, by deliberately contradicting the video evidence had become “experts” using their expertise to cover up war crimes. By such an act they have become criminals themselves. So are the academics. Their intention was to protect the war criminals.

In Sri Lanka any expertise is subjugated to Sinhala Buddhist racism. Therefore, expertise is not really expertise. This happened in Nazi rule in Germany.

What we see is an evidence supporting that truth.

It is time for GOSL to accept the truth of war crimes evidenced by Channel 4 video clip, ask for apology from Tamils and bring the criminals to justice before they are warraanted and disgraced by an International Court.

Tamils Against Genocide(TAG), should pursue relentlessly to bring all the war criminals in Sri Lanka to justice.

niranjan said,

February 2, 2010 @ 3:55 pm

Most Sri Lankan academics were either educated in Sinhala or Tamil medium. Therefore their thinking is local as opposed to global through a lack of English.
The frog in the well mentality in the academic community can only be erased if English is made a medium of instruction in all schools in this country. For that we need to recruit and train the teachers starting right now. We cannot wait another 50 years.

citizen said,

February 2, 2010 @ 5:43 pm

As i salute the spirit of your statement, I too wish I had such courage. I do hope the noted academics will not be intimidated or sidelined by those who wield the authority – if they are so unashamed – to do so, but more that more citizens will be inspired to follow their example.

Dhiraj said,

February 2, 2010 @ 5:48 pm

“However, the en masse promotion of the President by the top leadership of the Sri Lankan university system appears to us to be a betrayal of the very raison d’etre of a university.”

How exactly is it a “betrayal”? If we’re living in a democracy then people have a right to express support for whomever they wish. If they want to do this in groups then that is also their perogative.

Saman said,

February 2, 2010 @ 5:50 pm

Well done colleagues in writing this carefully worded letter. We can be proud of VC’s of Moratuwa and Peradeniya (both engineers educated in Sri Lanka and Canada) who did not sign the document. At least some VCs have the confidence to be independent. I doubt that their private opinion is not supportive of MR, but they undertood that they would devalue their great institutions by joining those other VCs. How do they now turn around and ask their students to stay away from politics?

Saman

jayathilaka said,

February 2, 2010 @ 8:17 pm

some of those so called chancellores,vice chancikors,proffesors are real meniacs.they do not have backbone though they learnt something with the expenses of taspayers money under free education .jey just go on looking for perks instead what is expected from them in the interest of the country is not fulfilled by them but continue to worship politicians

Professor Kumar David said,

February 2, 2010 @ 8:34 pm

The position taken by these acdemics is entirely correct.

Those Vice Chancellors who took a partisan political stand in their official capacities are traitors to their high ethical responsibilities.

It is very sad, but not at all unexpected that Sri Lanka’s poodle press refused to publish this document.

Off the Cuff said,

February 3, 2010 @ 12:23 am

Dear Justine,

What a circuitous route to travel, from University to CH4 to War crimes.

LTTE propagandists will use any excuse to spread their venom.

This would have been a better thread to discuss CH4 http://www.groundviews.org/2009/08/29/a-video-of-shame-and-outrage-responses-positions-and-clarifications/

Sony said,

February 3, 2010 @ 2:56 am

For all those Eelamists who are still hanging on to channel 4 videos, war crimes etc., all I can say is, it is over. MR won the re-election. All these pre-planned activities of UNP (assuming the election is going to be close) will not amount to anything. Therefore, the best thing to do is to see if you can work with MR. At least TNA is trying to do that. Join them.

Ranaviru said,

February 3, 2010 @ 3:54 am

This is the death of academic freedom and the birth of the reign of arrogance and parrots (who will repeat what others say). I think we’ll have to somehow educate our children in overseas universities. Otherwise we’ll create a generation of idiots to take over the future of the country.

Belle said,

February 3, 2010 @ 5:07 am

When an ethical stand is made in a moment of crisis, it is even more admirable and courageous. Like “Citizen”, I hope these academics are given the respect they deserve, and not intimidated or sidelined instead.

magerata said,

February 3, 2010 @ 5:14 am

“this is why the most ancient seats of learning arose in Greece and India.” Hey Academics you don’t have to go that far? Have you ever read about Abhayagiriya? or do you think SrlLankans are not capable of such feats?
He is your president even if you did not vote for him, you should support him unless he plans invade Iraq or such thing. You are insulting the very same people who elected him by “if it comes to a choice between endorsing and critiquing the state, we would generally advocate the latter.” Endorse what is necessary and critique what you must.
Supporting president and singing praises are different things entirely. You support him and the country and we will do the singing. By the way let the Vice-Chancellors exercise their rights like you and I do.

“Although this letter is critical of our vice-chancellors, we end by saying that we are appreciative of the leadership they provide in keeping our universities functioning within a highly politicized environment.” Ok You do know how to kiss ass!

Lalith Perera said,

February 3, 2010 @ 5:26 am

This is a very truthful explanation of what is really happening in our country. It is going from bad to worse. Earlier it was only students that involved in politics at universities, yet they were indoctrinated by some professors and lectures mostly those who indulged in socialist politics. It was one of the reasons that Rohana Wijeweera was able to spread his revoutionary ideas into the minds of university students during late 1960s. One can easily imagine current day top people of universities are products of that era. They always think with socialism we can develop our country but do not tell the masses what sort of resources we ahve in the country. The truth is that we need foreign investment and buyers of our products as well. Elections can be won by exploiting nationalism and telling lies but it is not that easy to develop a country with earning foriegn exchange. Today most of our exchange come through the expatriates and those who work in middle east plus from garment industry. I can’t imagine what they are going to do if foriegners did not invest in our country if stupid idiots carry on espousing nationalism and if we are going to be divided according to our languages and religions.

Atheist said,

February 3, 2010 @ 7:23 am

Niranjan,

Here we go again. It’s time to shield ourselves from all that hot air and hoitytoityism! I think the self-proclaimed Colombo “elites” are so backward. Your ideas about the English are outdated and colonial. Do you know that people from the West have been learning and taking ideas from the non-English speaking world? I think it’s high time you ladies and gentlemen mingled with well educated people if you want to be taken seriously in the West today.

Your crude East/West division won’t fly in any respected academic setting anywhere in the world unless, of course, you like to hang with those cloistered tea party types.

Who is the frog in the well now? The world has moved on, so break free of the colonial mindset!

Aachcharya said,

February 3, 2010 @ 7:34 am

I have always wondered why appointments to the University Grants Commission and to the Vice Chancellorship still remain with the President whereas most other “commissions” (the Public Service Commission) and “offices” (example Auditor General) have been have been shifted to the Constitutional Council. (The CC not being functional is another problem).

SeeingPastTheSmoke said,

February 3, 2010 @ 8:03 am

Magerata,
You said:
“By the way let the Vice-Chancellors exercise their rights like you and I do.”

The Vice-Chancellors have the right as individuals to support whichever presidential contender they wish–just like everyone else. But they do not have voting rights as Vice-Chancellors. What they did was to use their office to exercise their individual rights. That’s corruption.

You also said:
” ‘this is why the most ancient seats of learning arose in Greece and India.’ Hey Academics you don’t have to go that far? Have you ever read about Abhayagiriya? or do you think SrlLankans are not capable of such feats?”

So the most ancient seats of learning were in Sri Lanka and not in Greece or India?

Disgusted Academic said,

February 3, 2010 @ 10:00 am

About 2 months before the Presidential election, the govt called for applications for a new layer of govt bureacracy named “Jana Sabha Lekam”. One appointment is to be made for each Grama Niladari Division in the country (total of around 14000) to unemployed graduates. Many of our graduates were busy with writing project proposals on how they would develop their own GN Division – this noteworthy task was part of the application process. BUT in addition to this they have also been required to provide free labour to the election campaign – such as organize busloads from their villages to election meetings etc. Some have even been cooking on behalf of the campaign workers!! In most cases, this work is not being done voluntarily – but because they have been told that they need to show “presence” in order to qualify for the job.

As a university teacher, I have always told my students that they need to approach the job market holding their heads high, with dignity and self-respect. And that they should not have to go kissing various parts of the anatomy of politicians.

Now I am disgusted and dumbstruck. When our vice chancellors do this same type of thing, what kind of example are they setting for the graduates that they are churning out????!!!!

And I am using a pseudonym because I don’t have the courage shown by these academics who signed off on this.

niranjan said,

February 3, 2010 @ 12:53 pm

Athiest,

The attitude you take is that English is not necessary for Sri Lankans and they can well manage with Sinhala and Tamil. I completely disagree with you on that.

I think it is best that you come down to Sri Lanka from abroad and have a look at the standards of English in this country. Low standards of spoken and written English have set this country back by decades. What we need is to improve our standards and to teach English to the vast majority of children who do not know it at all. We should not deny our children their right to learn English (or any language) and for that we need to train teachers.

English or French are world languages. A firm grasp of English is necessary to read and understand books in English. Books in English broadens ones mind. Books in Sinhala and Tamil do not have the same effect as English does.

Leaders across the world(including President Rajapakse) are keen that their countrymen learn English. So where does your colonial mentality come in? According to your logic therefore the leaders of countries have a colonial mentality when they encourage the learning of English?

You say that I have a colonial mentality when I encourage the learning of English? What nonsense are you talking. According to your logic encouraging the learning of English is colonial ?

I know the world has moved on with more people learning English now than during colonial times. It is easier for you to say that we Sri Lankans do not need English because you obviously live abroad and in an English speaking country.

But I live in Sri Lanka of the 21 century and know that we Sri Lankans need to improve our English standards both written and spoken.

SeeingPastTheSmoke said,

February 3, 2010 @ 2:16 pm

Atheist,
You seem rather stuck in the colonial era. English is now a world language, and it is post-colonial people that made it so. It is now the carrier of world cultures and world knowledges in a way that no other language comes close to being. So when Niranjan goes on about giving Sri Lankan children the opportunity to learn English, he is arguing for them to be given access to the world’s knowledges, and all the opportunities the world can afford the new generations.

Yes, the West is learning from the East. And it was translation of Eastern knowledges into English that made much of this cultural exchange possible.

Maybe when Sri Lanka becomes a superpower like America, it can start to dictate that knowledge production be carried out in Sinhalese. But until then, knowing only Sinhalese or Tamil gives you a far restricted access to knowledge—particularly to progressive knowledges. That’s why those in power restrict the masses from learning English–it’s one of the best methods available today in the postcolonial world to keep the masses where you want them.

What good has all the Sinhalese and Tamil learning done for Sri Lanka? Is Sri Lanka today the centre of Buddhist and Tamil learning that it used to be in the past?

You sound like someone from the 1950s and 1960s going on about colonialism. The Brits have been dead for some time now. Stop flogging a dead horse.

magerata said,

February 3, 2010 @ 2:38 pm

SeeingPastTheSmoke, thank you for responding to my comment and I would like to counter.
Who ever you are, vice chancellor or not, once you support one party, one is labeled Mahinda follower or fonseka **** sucker. You may see it wrong for vice chancellor to to vote for the president, but what if they were doing the part that authors mentioned ” we are appreciative of the leadership they provide in keeping our universities functioning within a highly politicized environment” May be they were doing just that.”

About the seats of learning, I see that you have learned from your seat. These academics were talking about Sri Lanka and I thought it would have been better to talk about one of the best seats of learning that existed right here in Sri Lanka..You can follow your Greek and Indian seats which is not wrong but I love and promote the seat described by the following;
“Founded in the second century B.C., it had grown into an international institution by the first century of this era, attracting scholars from all over the world and encompassing all shades of Buddhist philosophy. Its influence can be traced to other parts of the world, through branches established elsewhere.”
Since article mentions Socrates, “Sōkrátēs; c. 469 BC–399 BC[1]) was a Classical Greek philosopher. Credited as one of the founders of Western philosophy,”
How about them apples? hope you can count otherwise I guess you better change what ever you are smoking

SeeingPastTheSmoke said,

February 3, 2010 @ 6:49 pm

Magerata,
“Who ever you are, vice chancellor or not, once you support one party, one is labeled Mahinda follower or fonseka **** sucker. You may see it wrong for vice chancellor to to vote for the president, but what if they were doing the part that authors mentioned ” we are appreciative of the leadership they provide in keeping our universities functioning within a highly politicized environment” May be they were doing just that.”

I don’t see anything wrong with a vice-chancellor voting for the president as an individual citizen. But they have no right to make political choices for other individuals working in the university. The VC does not own the university. If they have to do something illegitimate like selling other people’s votes, and generally behaving like politicians rather than academics in order to keep “the universities functioning within a highly politicized envrionment”, then perhaps they should hand their job over to others with more intelligence and moral acumen.

So, how is your ancient seat of learning doing these days? I hear the ancient Indian seats are still going strong. Maybe it’s about staying power?

magerata said,

February 4, 2010 @ 12:36 am

@SeeingPastTheSmoke,
I think we both are right but slightly off the mark. If VC’s were voicing their opinion as individual and advocating to vote for one or the other candidate, I will buy it. I am not sure and (also I do not know, and the article the authors referred is not that clear) if VC’s were forcing others to vote (How?) to a certain candidate. If they did, then it is wrong.
You should see the university I am attached and what they do to get funds, grants etc.
The seats of learning that existed in Sri Lanka, India, and Greece are gone to the ruins but the west has juiced out the best and they continue to grow and even exporting back. Knowledge is never lost but fools like us can’t find it.
Food for your thoughts, look up Ibn Sīnā or “Avicenna” to see a good example of west Latinizing east.
Thank you for the conversation.

Atheist said,

February 4, 2010 @ 6:56 am

Niranjan:

I wonder what gave you the impression that I feel English is not a necessity for people in Sri Lanka. Can you please point out any comment I may have made to that effect.

For the record let me mention that my approach to English is purely utilitarian. Therefore, I disagree with your use of the English language as a status symbol with which to make judgements on Lankan society as a whole. I don’t buy your idea of equating “backwardness” with non-English speakers. Setting aside all class snobbery, I prefer to see non-English speakers as simply needing to be equipped with marketable language skills.

I am thankful to all the young people from abroad who devote their time to teaching English in remote villages in Sri-Lanka. Ironically, growing up in the West has done many of them some good after all, like not being enslaved by class barriers.

Yes, good English books do broaden one’s horizons. At the same time, have you read (at least in translation) Martin Wickremasinghe or Sangam poetry? Your denigration of Sinhala and Tamil literature has only confirmed my earlier hunch that you are definitely not a student of literature.

Young man, mind your manners even among villagers!

Atheist said,

February 4, 2010 @ 7:44 am

SeeingPastTheSmoke,

Let me get this straight, you still walk around cheering for the idea of “progressive knowledge” in a world that has long evolved from the concepts of “reason” and “progress”? Don’t try to retract your statement and fool us into thinking that what you really meant was the Foucauldian knowledge/power nexus. You see, it has been discovered that you are Christopher Columbus’s ghost out to increase your dwindling fan base.

Game over, pal!

SeeingPastTheSmoke said,

February 4, 2010 @ 4:52 pm

Atheist,
You shouldn’t believe everything you see in academic journals. The world has not evolved past concepts of reason and progress–they just have many more diverse notions of these. What concept do they use other than “reason” to evaluate paper submissions?

Why do you abuse both Niranjan and myself for our views? At the moment, it is the SL elite that monopolise the opportunities and benefits of getting an international education. We’re arguing that such opportunities and benefits be distributed among the poor. If that’s what it means to be Christopher Columbus’ ghost, then so be it.

Tell me, what was the purpose of your post? To let everyone know you have read Foucault? There are lots of other things in this world more important than that. Really.

Atheist said,

February 5, 2010 @ 7:46 am

SeeingPastTheSmoke,

First of all, I am not glued to academic journals. I am more intrigued by your anachronistic views on society. No journal can beat that!

Why are you so intimidated by Foucault when he has practically become a household name today? Don’t you know that in Sri-Lanka even people who speak only in either Sinhala or Tamil have some idea of Foucault?

Indeed, if we use “reason”, there wouldn’t be any world religions. I am okay with that, are you?

In your earlier post, you said: “You sound like someone from the 1950s and 1960s going on about colonialism. The Brits have been dead for some time now. Stop flogging a dead horse”.

Well, you youngster, you couldn’t possibly imagine the type of groundbreaking ideas some of us belonging to sixties generation were rooting for.

By the way, the Brits are not the only colonizers. Do you know what the Americans are up to?

English learning in Sri-Lanka for all: Yes!

Blind aping of the West: No!

niranjan said,

February 5, 2010 @ 10:36 am

Athiest,

The President of South Korea Lee Myung-bak is currently pushing for greater use of English according to the Newsweek of 8 February 2010. President Mahinda Rajapakse is trying to do the same in Sri Lanka right now by promoting English and IT. He is trying to educate the rural folk through English and IT. It is calle the e-village concept.
Can you enter the knowledge economy without English? If so please tell me how?

The above are examples of two world leaders who are trying hard to promote English in the countries they govern. That is because they have realised the importance of English in the world that we live in.

I do not believe in limiting English to a few people in Colombo. That is what SWRD did with his “Sinhala only.”
Sinhala and Tamil only is not going to get our country anywhere. I will put the question to you-has Sinhala and Tamil got us anywhere?

Good English has to go beyond class. If the son or daughter of a farmer wants to learn English lets give them the opportunity to learn the language. That is the point I am trying to make. Learning good English will lessen class barriers.

I think it is best that you come down to Sri Lanka and have a look at the standards of English in this country. I live in this country and I feel that the standards are far too low.

I would welcome any foreigner who comes to this country to teach English to our students be they urban or rural. But at the same time we need to draw on our own resources. India has done that succesfully.

To mix up English with class snobbery in this day and age is beyond “reason and progress.” You and I are using English to write comments on Groundviews. Do not forget that the vast majority of the people of this country do not know English to be able to write their comments on Groundviews or anywhere else for that matter. In my opinion we need to change that.
Perhaps you want to limit it to a small circle? Who knows.

I have read books by Martin Wickremasinghe and I have also seen his books made into films on TV. I am sure even he would have encouraged us to learn English. Did he ever say that we need Sinhala or Tamil only? He was not a frog in the well you know.

SeeingPastTheSmoke said,

February 5, 2010 @ 10:29 pm

Atheist,
“Blind aping of the West: No!”

I never suggested blind aping of the West. That was your assumption. I stressed the importance of having access to progressive knowledges because that precisely allows one to learn English with a critical perspective, i.e. without needing to ape the West.

“Why are you so intimidated by Foucault when he has practically become a household name today? Don’t you know that in Sri-Lanka even people who speak only in either Sinhala or Tamil have some idea of Foucault?”

I am not intimidated by Foucault–I teach his work. As for only Sinhala or Tamil speaking people having some idea of Foucault, that would be because some people who are effectively bilingual in one of these languages as well as in English or French had done some translation and thus given them access to Foucault. Just today, a Tamil Language academic was complaining that her and her colleagues’ lack of competence in English restricted their access to international developments in language teaching.

“Indeed, if we use “reason”, there wouldn’t be any world religions. I am okay with that, are you?”

There have always been world religions. Does that mean that the world has been ‘post-reason’ for centuries?

“By the way, the Brits are not the only colonizers. Do you know what the Americans are up to?”

Really, Americans are the new imperialists? Gee, what a novel idea! Guess I’m getting a real education from you, huh?

“Well, you youngster, you couldn’t possibly imagine the type of groundbreaking ideas some of us belonging to sixties generation were rooting for.”

I belong to the 60s generation. But, yes, I acknowledge some ambiguity in what I said that gave you the impression that I was younger. I should have said that you sounded like someone who was “stuck” in the 1950s and 1960s, going on about colonialism.

Groundtruth said,

February 5, 2010 @ 10:38 pm

Why this adulation? Aren’t the VCs grown up yet and what kind of state is it?

Atheist said,

February 6, 2010 @ 7:55 am

Niranjan,

What can I say? Go back and read my post very carefully.

Why are you talking to me about class barriers when it is you who talks down to non-English speakers. Can you recall labelling them “backward”, and “frogs in the well”? According to your logic, I suppose, everyone in English speaking circles is so enlightened and well informed. Ha! Ha!

No one needs your permission or mine to learn English. Don’t waste your pity on the non-English speakers; they are not going to thank you.

With all due respect, Groundsview is not the end all and be all! There is a life outside the cyber world, remember?

In case you didn’t hear me the first time – I am once again stressing that everyone in Sri-Lanka must have equal access to English classes. Youhoo…did you all hear me back there?

So, please, give that superiority complex of yours a rest. Thank you.

Atheist said,

February 6, 2010 @ 8:30 am

SeeingPastTheSmoke,

Howdy! So what do we have here? Let’s see, you’d like us to buy the glaring contradiction that you teach Foucault while arguing on behalf of “progressive knowledges”. Can one do this in the same life-time? This is quite pitiful even for a confused first year PhD student working as a TA. But, if you’d like us to believe that you are a professor, I think the students should demand their money back!

You belong to the sixties generation? Really? Well, then, as my best friend used to say: “there is one in every crowd”!

SeeingPastTheSmoke said,

February 6, 2010 @ 12:14 pm

Atheist,
So what were Foucault’s critical concepts and method based on? Unreason? He wrote a critical history of the discourse of medical science. Yet, when he was dying, he checked into a hospital for a medical examination. What do you make of that? He was critical of humanist (Enlightenment) discourses of progress, but he never denied the possibility of any other useful future concepts of ‘progress’, even if they may not be objectively ‘true’. For him social improvement lay along paths of establishing new, more egalitarian economies of power. His work on power has contributed to the development of notions of radical democracracy. For me, that’s ‘progressive’, and when I use that word, I mean it in the post-humanist sense of dismantling prevailing concentrations of power.

If Foucault meant what you think he meant, humanities departments would now be reduced to a deathly silence. Instead, critical knowledges are proliferating.

Atheist said,

February 7, 2010 @ 8:41 am

SeeingPastTheSmoke,

I was right. The students should demand their money back! Cashola, cashola, where is our cashola?

Nobody in their right mind will ever question ‘reason’ per se. We need ‘reason’ to function in society, to find some middle ground in the chaos of life. As for ‘progress’, yes, there are means, methods and ideas, which help improve conditions.

What I was referring to was the eighteenth century notion of ‘reason’ and ‘progress’ which perceived the world in terms of the ‘Self’ and ‘Other’. Western knowledge was privileged as ‘progressive’ and scientific while Asian and African knowledge systems were deemed superstitious and backward. Not everyone was brainwashed by colonial racism, but many of us still seem unable to break out of the shackles.

Foucault and other post-structural/post-modern thinkers saw reason’ and ‘progress’ as just one narrative among the various other narratives that form our subjectivity. You want democracy? Well there you have it!

Dear, professor, is the humanities department in which you are teaching still functioning? Your professors probably did not enlighten you beyond the eighteenth century.

Jayawewa to us Gamay Godayas!

SeeingPastTheSmoke said,

February 7, 2010 @ 4:32 pm

Atheist,
So now your position is “Nobody in their right mind will ever question ‘reason’ per se. We need ‘reason’ to function in society, to find some middle ground in the chaos of life. As for ‘progress’, yes, there are means, methods and ideas, which help improve conditions.”

Your earlier position was: “Let me get this straight, you still walk around cheering for the idea of “progressive knowledge” in a world that has long evolved from the concepts of “reason” and “progress”?

As I understand it, the above statement claimed that the world has long dropped concepts of reason and progress. But now it seems, we still use it.

Re:
“What I was referring to was the eighteenth century notion of ‘reason’ and ‘progress’ which perceived the world in terms of the ‘Self’ and ‘Other’.”

Please go back to my statement. I spoke of Foucault’s critique of humanism/Englightenment notions of ‘reason’ and ‘progress’. Anyone would know that it is a clear reference to 17th/18th European intellectual developments within the context of colonialism.

You also said:
“Foucault and other post-structural/post-modern thinkers saw reason’ and ‘progress’ as just one narrative among the various other narratives that form our subjectivity. You want democracy? Well there you have it!”

Whatever narratives form our subjectivity, they will be inevitably structured by notions of ‘reason’ and ‘progress’, either implicitly or explicity, although they may vary radically from earlier or dominant notions of these. Stories, including fantasy stories, are constructed from ‘reason’. Narrative is a form of reasoning, of shaping and ordering one’s understanding of reality. And narratives ‘progress’ from a start to a finish, even when these are presented in non-chronological order.

It’s not productive to engage in conversation with someone who changes their position as soon as it comes under attack and pretends s/he hasn’t, who tries to get out of a tight spot by mocking the other person. Your style of expression shows that you have a misplaced high regard for what you think is your “wit”. Some of us can see through the grey area between wit and deceit. I will leave you to your own mental masturbations. I hope it keeps your cash register ringing as my students keep mine going.

Atheist said,

February 8, 2010 @ 8:33 am

SeeingPastTheSmoke,

So the professor has decided to back pedal furiously like no one’s business, eh?
You have shot yourself in the foot once again, dear professor. Why is it that you are unable to differentiate between the literal and the conceptual when it comes to ‘reason’ and ‘progress’?

Foucault ,along with other post-structural/post-modern thinkers, has demystified the essentialist eighteenth-century notion of ‘reason’ and ‘progress’ which perceived everyone outside the white, male normative as defective goods (this includes you, me, animals, minerals, vegetables…etc). Get it?

It wasn’t just the cool guys like Foucault who had problems with this one-sided interpretation of things, but feminists, too, had major problems with the know it all dudes. Feminists argued that the mind/body dualism of the eighteenth century relegated women as bodily creatures incapable of ‘reason’. What is more, women were considered immoral because women were seen as lacking the capacity to distinguish ‘right’ from ‘wrong’.

As for ‘narratives’, whether in literature or philosophy, for Foucault et. al there is no grand narrative/omniscient narrator. There is no one reality, rather reality is provisional.

As for the “grey” area…life is all about grey, prof! Who wants it black and white?
FYI, I am not an academic, but I pick up on what’s going on by keeping an open mind!

I still think your students should get a reimbursement.

RSS feed for comments on this post · TrackBack URI