Antinomies Of Contemporary Education

The words of the Danish physicist Niels Borh “the opposite of a small truth is always the false; instead the opposite of the great truths can also be perceived as true “show that on many occasions society is rich in” great truths “that contradict each other. This phenomenon is given the name of antinomies, which are pairs of truths in contradiction with each other. In this article we will talk about 3 contradictions or antinomies of education.

The analysis of these educational antinomies will help us to understand to a large extent the principles that govern this system and its inconsistencies. It will allow us to identify the conflict between what we believe to be true, what we would like to “be” true and what, instead, is true; the dissonance between these three states results in a series of contradictory statements to reconcile these discrepancies.

The antinomies of education

The three major antinomies of education are as follows: (a) Developmental Education Vs Cultural Education (b) Intrapsychic Learning Vs Situational Learning and (c) Local Knowledge Vs Social Knowledge. Below, we will analyze each of these antinomies in detail.

Education for development and cultural education

The first contradiction of education revolves around its objectives. If you are wondering what those goals are, you will find several answers that indicate that the main one is the personal development of the individual; this means reaching the maximum potential of personal development and consequently succeeding in achieving a global development of society.

Another objective of the education system is to immerse or favor the cultural integration of the individual in his / her home culture, and this is because the school is not based only on education, but also indicates possible growth and behavioral models.

Although initially it may seem that personal development and the transmission of culture are not conflicting objectives, in reality they have irreconcilable aspects. And the problem lies in the fact that when a culture is handed down, it is not only the culture itself that is handed down, but also some components associated with it, such as the political and economic aspects.

For example, a capitalist and industrialized society is based on a very efficient workforce and a large middle class. Consequently, it is normal for the education system in question to focus on training unskilled and skilled workers only partially. By passing on culture, a stable society is created, and an education based on personal development would make the culture unstable, since it could cause social upheaval.

This contradiction exists due to the fact that a large part of the population wants to develop and increase their intellectual potential; on the contrary, the established culture is nothing more than a kind of candy: it brings satisfaction, security and the feeling of having everything under control.

Both culture and development give us pleasure and satisfaction, so the antinomy arises from the attempt to have both. On the contrary, pursuing both goals transforms the education system into an ineffective and error-ridden system. This leads us to ask ourselves what is the goal we really want to achieve at an educational level.

Direct learning and situational learning

The antinomies of education also concern the way children learn and are evaluated. There is a strong tendency to classify children according to their performance (grades, class interventions, comparisons, etc.).

This favors the idea that it is the child, with his abilities, who must make the most of the resources that the school offers. In contrast to this, we tend to believe that learning is situational; consequently we think it will be easier for the child to make the most of school resources if the environment is stimulating in this sense.

In this case, the contradiction becomes more complex.

If we were based on direct learning, the most logical thing would be to give the child the resources by waiting for him to ask questions. These questions would depend on his abilities, but also on his motivation. Somehow the children would be directing their own learning. Conversely, if we were based on situational learning, the perspective would change and it would be the educational context that directs the learning.

Our educational system acts from both points of view, which results – as in the case of the previous antinomy – in inefficiency and inconsistencies. To lean towards one point of view or the other can be very harmful, partly for the political and economic context that revolves around education; here is the contradiction. Research and scientific study should direct the situation to find a balance.

Local knowledge vs social knowledge

The last of the antinomies of education is perhaps the least explicit in the educational debate. This concerns the yardstick of how one thinks, gives or gives a meaning and “experiences”. If we take a constructivist point of view, we encounter relativism, since reality is, in this case, filtered by an interpreter.

On the one hand, we have the “great truth” that local knowledge is legitimate. On the other hand, we defend the global point of view on the interpretation of reality. These two statements are clearly at odds: if our goal is global knowledge, maintaining local knowledge of small companies or groups would numb the former.

At this point the debate seems to be complicated, as each population or society has developed their local knowledge through the context and the time in which they exist, and this gives them a sense of security and control. On the contrary, global knowledge brings us a universal framework of action that can be very useful for us to progress in harmony and cooperation, even if it involves risks.

fundamental analysis and an in-depth study that tell us what is the best solution to resolve this and the previous contradictions.