First off, I really enjoyed this debate seeing that education is among one of my favorite topics to discuss. However, attending this debate further made me realize how useless it is to debate, and that it doesnât contribute to the general welfare of knowledge. What I saw was room full of people rooting for either Anya, or Siva. Personally, I thought both candidates were great and fairly concise in their judgment on education. The thing that shocked me in between the two is the fact that there own arguments possessed extreme amounts of similarity. For example, Anyaâs idea of âInformal Educationâ, is essentially the same as Sivaâs âAnarchistic Communitiesâ. From what I got, Anyaâs idea of âInformal Educationâ consisted of an education that is âCut out for the real worldâ, or a liberal education. Sivaâs âAnarchistic Communitiesâ shared the same idea accept he utilized the notion that it was âNot controlledâ. Essentially, they were just arguing over the fact that one was better than the other when they both were the same thing.
Something else interesting that Siva mentioned was a quote from Karl Marx that stuck in my head. âEverything is contingent, and everything is up to usâ. I really like this quote because I think that it is very relative to us. Although Karl Marx is considered radical for his ideas, he has a point here; Education is contingent upon us! This could seem a little arbitrary but itâs true!
Something else that stood out to me was when a questioner referred to Paulo Friere and spoke about Market Fundamentalism and educational Fundamentalism. It seems a little clear now, but I would still like someone to clarify this and how it relates to education.
In the end, something I observed was that the moderator said âLets have a Reflectionâ. I immediately thought about Jean Twenge because the moderator was trying to make the crowd feel good after that African American woman harshly sullied Siva. Lol =)