Menu
A creative discussion and critique of modern academic epistemology. The Trial of Prometheus: Concepts of professionalism characterised as cultural metaphor. Introduction A story that survives for over two-thousand years does so for a reason. While many varying versions spread across the cultures of the earth, the theft of fire is recurrent from Africa to Polynesia. The name of the thief may be Maui, Mātariśvan, or Prometheus and the manner in which they stole it may be by fennel, brand or bird. Yet, in all cases the same underlying truth emerges: those who are in power, through benevolence or fear, suppress the acquisition of knowledge and those heroic agent provocateurs place its power in the hands of the people. It may be overly simplified to draw a synonymous relationship between fire and knowledge, but without a doubt the two are contiguous in symbolism and have been for generations. Fire was the spark of innovation and the source of countless developments from metals to machines, so it is understandable it symbolically resonates with human advancement. The ‘trial of Prometheus’ is a reflection of professionalism, expressed in the form of epimethean monologues. Epimetheus, brother of Prometheus, whose name may be translated as ‘afterthought’ or ‘hindsight’, appears contemporaneously as the embodiment of the reflective practitioner. However, it is to Prometheus that we attribute wisdom and Epimetheus, folly. Epimetheus’ mistake was that he gave too freely of positive traits so that when last left with mankind he had no more gifts to bestow. Just as today the reflective practitioner may expend all their energies in trying to please bureaucracy and tick boxes until there is little left of the spark of enthusiasm and innovation to give students. The problem of the reflective practitioner is one picked up by Stuart Parker who worries that the very mindset Donald Schon was trying to avoid by creating reflective practises has led, once again, to the technical-rationalism of governmentality (Parker, S. 1997). This is not the only criticism one may have of the current state of teaching within institutions bombarded by endless volleys of documentation, policies, and statistics. One may also question the focus of the government as creating persons of employment while maintaining superficial lip-service to greater goals of inclusivity and self-actualisation. The following work draws parallels between Prometheus’ crime and the ways government policy, standardisation, and systemic managerialism, are suppressing the freedoms of the practitioner and also prohibiting the creation of a generation of fulfilled individuals. Here, in Epimetheus’ reflections, does one encounter the conceptual arguments that surround professionalism and liberty; experimentation and the status quo; foresight and reflection. The goal is not in seeking to justify anarchy nor to embolden the ever-growing state of censorship but to sow in the reader questions that challenge and inspire reflection through narrative: a medium in which truth is never fully quantifiable, but, in practise, elicits the reader to draw what conclusions touch upon their intuitions or introspections and set them upon the path to find personal convictions in an age of pathological neurosis. Epimetheus’ manuscriptFor the most part, dear reader, people generally call me by many names of foolishness. There goes the God of excuses, of afterthought and hindsight, or belittle my dear Pandora for her curiosity. Little does anyone consider that humanity was better off without the beak of a bird or the fins of a fish. By now humans see the process of evolution, and yet take their bodies for granted. Some would say that god works in mysterious ways, perhaps now in hindsight the same may be said of myself. There goes Epimetheus, the one wise enough to see the body is only the beginning rather than the end; a process in a constant state of development and improvement. Then among those accusing me of simple mindedness they may be inclined to reflect, to view their perspectives in hindsight, to see how experience and mistakes are the most valuable commodity of continuous development. From then on, dear reader, consider not poor Epimetheus the God of excuses, but as the God of experience and reflection, for these are the qualities I shall display unto you now. The task at hand is to consider the wisdom of my brother as we stand to call him wise. There were standards and practises which all gods observed to be necessary and correct, but it was only Prometheus who sought to challenge these perceptions. When the Gods decreed man should be without warmth, be without the knowledge to craft more than the simplest of stone and wood, they did so seeing only what was imperative to themselves. The life of a God was simple, they required no more than to enjoy themselves with ambrosia and nectar while maintaining the offerings delivered unto them by the people of the land. The state of affairs or struggles of the individual were far from the panoptical eye of those in charge, they saw only that their glasses were empty or their pride was insulted. One may indulge themselves the vision of their own pantheon, or parliaments, filled with those who tentatively embody concepts such as education, commerce or war. The gods of my time were, and still are, very much a self-absorbed ostentation who ruffled their finery in grand gestures to one another high above the realms they governed. Their endeavour was to plot the destinies of humanity, a helping hand here or a hindrance there all leading to a continuation of what they perceived as a productive future. Though, as with Desponia’s cult, only those initiated are privy in full to the mysteries of these enterprises. Man below was just as divided, whether this was innate or down to their subservience to one God or another, I could never tell. They had an odd habit of being connected by roads and rivers, yet somehow, inexplicably, saw one another as distant in souls, senses, and status. As we stand now, the world remains in a similar state, torn or tearing itself apart on intersectional lines in the sand, shifting and fragile. For me this is a great relief, my brother was much dismayed when I had left his creation with no positive traits to inherit. No claws, nor wings. In my defense, Socrates, who was named the most wise of all greeks, knew the source of his wisdom was that he knew nothing. Again, let me say, in my defense, that it is the very lack of feathers or scales; shells or trunks, that has allowed man, with nothing, to become the wisest of all the animals. Be aware, dear reader, that I, Epimetheus, in hindsight, recognise that it was my great gift to make all humanity equal. Tabula Rasa. Yet I am not here to earn my title as God of excuses, though in truth I am a Titan. I am here to give my brother the trial he was never afforded by Zeus, and to let you descendants of fire give reckonings to your plight, progress, and potentials - so that in your time you may consider the role you play in shaping destinies. When I consider the ‘crime’ of which my brother was charged; the quality of his foresight is questionable. To give man such a powerful means of destruction has spread devastation for generations. Was it wisdom, or was Zeus’ (whom some may know as Jupiter) trepidation warranted? Prometheus’ great crime was to believe in the deregulation of fire’s power unleashing innovation in equal measure with ruination. As recorded in Prometheus Bound written by Aeschyllus, my brother confessed as such “I searched out and stole the source of fire concealed in fennel stalks, and that taught men the use of all the arts and gave them ways to make amazing things” (Ln. 147-150). Zeus was all too aware of the dangers of giving man the tools to follow their own innovations; what if they did not work in the ways he wished them to? What if this knowledge made them doubt the benevolent rule of the Gods and the hierarchies of creation? It was a time in which new legislations were being crafted after a shift in power from one regime to another and underneath these powers struggled humanity. Let us consider at the time, man had no knowledge of fire and Prometheus sought to give them such a creation against the wishes of the ruling class. In his reckonings, the quality of life would be much improved if man were capable of harnessing their own ingenuities, of learning crafts and developing tools needed for them. After millenia of rumination, we can see man has largely considered this a wise and beneficial gift - hence my brother’s elevated status. Few are those who swear against my brother the folly of sharing fire, little are those who count by tens, thousands and millions, the deaths such an action begat. People, my good reader, have weighed their own progress against the ills that were perceived by Zeus and found themselves the better for it. This form of anti-establishment thinking priorities autonomy, Prometheus’ crime was to give men the freedom to shape their worlds as they wished. To lead lives that followed their divine vocation with little regard to consequence. And who are we reader, to judge the worth of a man’s pleasure? Are we all to be mules carrying upon our shoulders, like brother Atlas, the machinery that keeps the world in motion? Is all the sands of our hourglass no more worth than weights upon a scale of gold? Prometheus’ foresight was seeing the possibility for men to shape their own destinies. If his accusers shed any more crime upon him and with malediction soak his name with the broiling blood of those burned by fire, then ask to whom the fire was beholden? It was the manner of their societies and cultures that led them to take a torch to one another’s houses. It was most certainly not by the small stalk of fennel that humanity turned their cities to ash. Ask then, reader, should we withhold freedom from the many to constrain the few? In keeping with this thought of liberty, ask then, what of Prometheus’ actions were unjust that were not the actions of men? Prometheus’ desire was to spread learning, what men made of that knowledge was their own doing. Perhaps one may consider in this frame, the justification of Zeus’ policy - the fears of the proverbial house of cards falling. Every man or woman in the same sandals as Prometheus must consider within themselves if they are hiereus or heretic. And in this contemplation, call upon the spirit of I, Epimetheus, to conduct yourselves in reflection. But do not, dear reader, stand and exclaim after the fact; “it was not I that have done this, but that some god has led me to this.” Do not risk your pride on the back of excuses, but with Prometheus’ conviction say to those who reprimand you your innovation “I have done this for humanity, not just for those in power!” And should it be that you have erred and those who govern you lambast your failures and take the very food from your mouth, consider if it was worth it. Consider if humanity deserves the freedom that Prometheus gave them and the price he paid for that freedom. Ask them, as I ask you now dear reader, if they would be so gloriously positioned if they had never left the cold darkness of the caves; if they would still hold themselves pontifical in countenance if they were tearing with blood stained teeth the raw meat of their hunt. Ask them and ask yourself, again and again, dear reader, is it a crime to cause in the minds of people turmoils so mighty that Scylla and Charybdis seemed gentle streams by comparison. Are we to suggest these streams, which we may call the very nature of self and existence, be dammed and directed by the fears of those in charge? Weigh upon your own conscious the question of whether Prometheus has committed a crime against humanity, or if his crime is solely to be in possession of the will to defy unwarranted legislations. Hermes makes clear his consideration “Look around you and reflect. And never think self-will is preferable to prudent thought” (Ln.1280-1281), ask yourself on that occasion how you would conduct the annexation of your duties with no freedom. If instilling such mindless obedience is preferable to the wanton expressions free-will may create? Once you have that thought firmly embedded in the sediment of your reasoning. Then, child of fire, call to mind the many wonders of your world that have come from the defiance of dogma. What I’ll offer you by way of contemplation is a question of culpability. You’ve no doubt heard of my loving wife, Pandora. Pandora, like me, was marred in our time. Her folly was opening up the world to the horrors of Zeus’ gift (although, there are those who attribute this to myself). But ask yourself, what form of ailment is curiosity? We may hear all too often the idea of thinking ‘out of the box’ and attribute to it the qualities of fire’s innovation and ingenuity. The course of one’s life, or curriculum vitae as you may call it, amounts in great part to the ability to work oneself entirely within the metaphoric box. Just as my dear Pandora was punished, so in modern day are those punished whose curiosities cannot be defined by the standard fare of boxes. Boxes which must be of a standard dimension ill-fitting to hold any objects of reason that do not so easily take the shape of convention. While there may be great factories of production in which the box must take its uniform shape, are these boxes then to be the measurement of humanity? Ordered and tracked so they may be easily transported from birth to death upon the great conveyance of society’s machinery. The state of the world in which you find yourself reader, is one most unreasonably obsessed with the maintenance of the tools you have created - mayhaps this techno-slavery is the crime for which Prometheus should be judged? After all even Prometheus would say “artistic skill has far less strength than sheer necessity” (ln.635-636). Oh how the Chorus of ocean nymphs were themselves fates upon a gilded chariot when they said “What can such creatures of a day provide? Do you not see how weak they are, the impotent and dream-like state, in which the sightless human race is bound, with chains around their feet?” (ln.671-676). The chains of which they speak may now be seen in your world, convention corporealised and condensed into shackles of compliance; the dream-like state more indicative of nihilism and escapism than created inspirations of the muses. Where has gone the fire Prometheus delivered into your chests? The flames of enthusiasm and excitement that once drove people to develop their minds for the betterment of themselves for none other than themselves. Now the shades of your classrooms are stained with the overcast thunderclouds of misery, almost as if a millenia on Zeus still bemoans the human race their capacity to learn. This insipid daily grind, a metaphor of the eagle’s punishment of Prometheus, is one of regurgitation, endless exam-based regurgitation, and students screaming like so many fledgling chicks with no world beyond their nest learn nothing of flight through their undeveloped eyes. Great institutions of men and women spread across the machinations of culture with weights and measures which rather than record the shapes of innovation demarcate the areas in which innovation has exceeded its definable, or desirable, parameters. To then take with scissors and swords to the rough edges of innovation and cull them into compliance, hueing the very uniqueness each soul inspires. What is rewarded are the percentages of packages that can be neatly stacked atop one another in the form of a society of squares, static and thus easily governable. The artisans of this most reprehensible sculpting are the denizens chained to the wall of a cave as all manner of innovation walks by. They see only the barest shapes traced upon their walls and think they know the full measure of existence. Try, dear reader, until your breath has gone to the four winds and your words rasp in desperation and you will still not convince these prisoners of their cage. Remember though, you artisans of squares, that even your own processes must be scrutinised as well. You may take your eyeglasses and optics to the shape of the shadows and proclaim boldly you have seen the world a new, in greater detail unknown to your predecessors! But do not be surprised, cultivators of conformity, when it is discovered you are just as blind as your ancestors. That your great and mighty works are but ruins in the desert of creativity, statues slowly shawn by waves of sand until they crumble into the very dirt from which they are crafted. Who are you, keepers of convention, to direct the winds which stoke the flames of innovation? Yet, it is no wonder many like my brother arise to challenge your divine rule. Just as Zeus did, you men and women who audit take it upon yourselves in times to bear no brokerage of dissent. Your own policies strike down those who struggle beneath your gaze with no recourse for rebuttal. It is fortunate that you are afforded the leniency of an appeal upon the minds of more compassionate adjudicators of reason than that of my brother. Reflect upon this, dear reader, in all of the animal kingdom, for which I bestowed traits; hierarchies run rampant. The lions feast upon the gazelles, the birds upon the insects, the strong upon the weak. Now, I did not give such a division to man, I did not create inequity, it was you, dear reader, men and women of this world, who created your own inequity! Where can I find my reason in your new foundling ideologies? My ‘mistake’ made all humanity equal. Yet, their very similarity may now be considered a suppression of diversity. Cosmopolitanism inevitably runs foul of cultural appropriation; be diverse, be similar; be individuals, be community; respect these beliefs, disregard those; censor that speech, protect those words. It was not my handiwork that divided people, it was that of my brother, your much favoured Prometheus. He and he alone took the flame and with it brought the catalyst for conflict and the cauterisation of humanity’s cultures. Do not judge too quickly this division of culture. Remember, it was in seeing misery, my brother, wise Prometheus, thought of giving man, who in such a sorry state was no better than beasts, the gift of fire. His thoughts were of liberation, self-reliance and the enrichment of man to more than the little he already possessed. In later years, once the knowledge of flame had been spread, man, in control of such a means of destruction, made such formations that mirrored the God’s pantheon. These parliaments as you call them pass judgement on the worth of knowledge and innovation, it reminds me of the republic of Plato at times. The folly of Socrates’ kallipolis lies in its resolve to remove the expression of arts from education and yet as a principle of reason, it is most profound. However, on what grounds do we find fault with the censorship of unjust literature - on the thought that freedoms are virtuous? Most notably, freedom is a great source of malediction and any person granted even the slightest of foresight or hindsight would be in agreement. In forgetting the inalterable weave of fate’s thread, humanity rejoices in that which most logically is reprehensible - freedom. So, it may be said in this way I have condemned my brother for freedom is most clearly a source of great detriment to society where purpose may be ordained and culture so designed as to be for the security and benefit of all. Ah, but again, dear reader, do I talk in a circular fashion. For if security and purpose are the desires of a well-ordered society, then the freedom to find one’s purpose must be of parity to one’s performance of behaviours. Though we would all starve in a world of artists. It is a tricky thought, reader, to weigh one’s own thinking against the ways the world was in the past - Remember though, “time grows old and teaches everything” (Ln.1222-1223). I have seen a cultural movement towards the rewriting of history, where in reflection the views of the time are considered problematic or unwelcome. Yet, as a being predisposed to reflection, it is my view that such movements are fundamentally misguided in their aims. One would assume the decision to be inclusive by altering media to represent in great significance those whom the historians neglect to discuss in much detail, I for one can understand such an ambition. Yet, we must also reconcile that without an awareness of how our ancestors viewed the world, how are we to improve our own reckonings of it? Look now at the world before you, those tragedies built this world and built you, dear reader. You and I may stand upon the precipice of the future and ridicule the injustices of the past, but if we forget them then surely we are, as they say, doomed to repeat them. This is why, in the time of ancient Greece, of the pantheons and people of my time, Prometheus was to be considered in high esteem. He drove an unquenchable fire in to the hearts of humanity and like the fires of Rome it spread under the sounds fluted by authority - look to those figures for your justice. To look back, not in seeking out forgiveness, but in seeking out knowledge, that is why we should respect the past as it is handed down to us imperfections and all. Yes, in my time, it was Prometheus who was regarded with esteem, but now in your time it is I who must take the mantle of wisdom. While Prometheus came and taught you the art of crafts and of knowledge, so too do I come and ask you, and your people, what of his instruction did you find wise? Do you consider now, as Zeus did, that Prometheus was a fool to have given such power to humanity, or in reflection, as I may hazard to think you do, are you captivated by the emancipation that your technologically produced liberty affords you? As the age of Olympians grew into myth, the words of Oceanus remain a necessary consideration of how one’s actions may be judged differently by different governances - “You have to understand your character and adopt new habits. For even gods have a new ruler now. (ln.383-385). Perhaps, I am not the right author to be considering these questions of my brother’s culpability to a crime that seemed only to begin an age of progress that has never ceased. Perhaps, it is not Zeus who must from on high decide whether this crime was worthy of punishment. Perhaps, it is only you, dear reader, who can look upon yourself and the person you are, the world as it is and the world as you would have wished it to be, and through considering oneself and the world dichotomously, in juxtaposition, and in every eventuality of perception your wisdom allows you to adopt, perhaps then, and only then, would we have a member of a jury fit to judge my brother. Before a person may pass judgement on Prometheus, let them first judge themselves in his place. Consider the choice of my brother, as I have said, it was not his intention to bring war like Ares, nor was it his decision to turn your cities to ash. Yet some would have him persecuted for giving the tools to make such processes operate at a level of efficiency that was before unheard of. In summary, reader, let me clarify the points I have covered in succinct and direct speech so that none may confuse my intent;
References; Aeschyllus. (2012). PROMETHEUS BOUND. Trans. Johnston, I. Nanaimo: Vancouver Island University [online] Available from: https://edisciplinas.usp.br/pluginfile.php/2596054/mod_resource/content/1/PROMETHEUS%20BOUND%20BY%20AESCHYLLUS.pdf Barnett, R. (1994). The Limits of Competence: Knowledge, Higher Education and Society. Buckingham: SRHE and Oxford University Press Department for Education. (2013). Teachers’ Standards Guidance for school leaders, school staff and governing bodies. [online] available from: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/teachers-standards Freeman, R, (1993). Quality Assurance in Training and Education. London: Kogan Page Limited Gardner, J. (1977). ‘Education as a sorting out process’ in: The curriculum: context, design & development. (e.d) Hooper, R. Edinburgh: Oliver & Boyd Michelon, K and Hughes, L. (2017). Durand Academy vs Ofsted - the implications. [online] Available from: https://www.brownejacobson.com/education/training-and-resources/legal-updates/2017/09/durand-academy-vs-ofsted-the-implications Michelon, K.(2019). Ofsted vs Durand Academy - outcome of the appeal. [online] Available from: https://www.brownejacobson.com/education/training-and-resources/legal-updates/2019/01/ofsted-v-durand-outcome-of-the-appeal Murray Thomas, R. (1983). ‘The Symbiotic linking of politics and education’ in: Politics & education: Cases from eleven nations. (e.d) Murray Thomas, R. Oxford: Pergamon press Parker, J. (1999). ‘Schools policies and practices: the teacher’s role’ in: Professional issues for teachers and student teachers. (e.d) Cole, M. London: David Fulton Publishers Parker, S. (1997). Reflective teaching in the postmodern world: A manifesto for education in postmodernity. Buckingham: Open University Press Petty, G. (2009). Teaching today: A practical guide. (4th ed.). Cheltenham: Nelson Thornes Ltd Westervelt, W.D.(1910). Legends of Maui – a Demigod of Polynesia, and of His Mother Hina. Honolulu, Winch, C. and Gingel, J. (1999). Key concepts in The philosophy of education. London Routledge
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Archives
November 2019
Categories
|