It's not about Game of Thrones, apologies to disappoint you.
"'I don't know." That's a big deal to accept. When I was taking the coaching, many a time happened that students asked doubts just out of fun, not of curiosity. Teachers, on the other hand, most of the times find it hard to accept that they don't know the answer. Then they try to answer that thing as good as they can but might not be correct.
Well, it's not only that teacher but many teachers, or I should say most of the teachers, or most of the people or most of anything that answers something, be it cultures or religions or religious scriptures, find it hard to accept that they don't know. Though the sacred texts are said to contain everything we need, they don't actually. They don't have information about Newton's law. Albeit there is some vague knowledge of anything close to Newton's law. There is absolutely no information regarding the generation of electricity, complex mathematical expression, biology and a lot more things that we use in our daily life, either directly or indirectly.
Still, no religion accepts that they lack such information. They claim to have all that a human needs to survive on this sinful planet, after considering certain assumptions under certain conditions. The other reason is that people were not as curious centuries ago as they are today about almost anything out there. They used not to question things around them. We all know what happened to people who raised some questions, if not all of them, some of them are a bit famous to forgotten.
Society is a smaller section, which is easier to study. It has always trained people according to its need. We can see that we are raising kids with a system to give them a required set of skills and manners. We are brainwashing them to make them continuously contribute to the progress of society as per its need. "As according to the need of a society", which depends on whom we are talking about. We train kids to respect elders. Millennials find it hard to digest without logic. But if kids ain't raised in a certain way, there would ruckus all around. The hierarchical system would collapse, and we need an inviolable hierarchical system to manage large populations.
The most basic argument that comes against the hierarchy is that there are no rights. Oh! we can talk about that. We are progressing towards that. Freedom, that's what we want. But again, freedom can be limited and absolute. Absolute freedom gives people power and can destroy some of the better social beliefs that society has adapted throughout as it has evolved. Alternatively, relative freedom keeps most hierarchies intact and removes them if needed. I think absolute freedom eventually makes people radical, less tolerant and encourages them for abrupt change that is not good in most cases. Therefore it's good to have some regulations all the time.
Destruction of an existing system and then beginning to think about how the new system should be is not a good idea. We don't know how good the new system will be. We don't know whether that is practically possible or feasible. We are ignorant about it. Therefore it is necessary to admit that we don't know, especially about the things we don't know. At the same time, we need to talk about responsibilities that come along with the rights but ignored quite often.
"I/We don't know" is what made science well-liked. It's the same thing that made European people successful in science. Later they could rule over the largest empire that the world has ever seen and, I think, will ever see. But I don't know about the future. One big difference between science and religion is that science accepts it doesn't know. Scientists, without any hesitation, accept the fact that they don't know about certain things. They admit that whatever they believe true today, someone may prove them wrong tomorrow. It is not rigid. It is changing with time. That's what makes it flexible and adaptable. People are curious. Science doesn't believe in God because it doesn't know if there is any.
In the end, the question is how do we develop the habit of acceptance of "I don't know". The easiest way is through schools and universities. Imagine, a student asks a question to a Professor to mock him or out of curiosity, and Professor doesn't have a good answer. Then Professor tells him that it is a good question and he needs to think about it. Later, he asks the student to email that particular question so that he doesn't forget to find more relevant info about it and discuss it in the next class.
It is possible in colleges and universities today. But sadly the same was not possible in schools in our times. Because I remember we had an SST teacher in our school in 10th standard. Students were asked to find 500 questions from a 20-page chapter, from a page that was a little larger than a postcard ( 24*18cm I guess or a little more). Almost all the chapters had nearly 20-pages, more or less, and we had to make 500 questions from every chapter irrespective of the quality of questions. It looks illogical, to me at least.
Instead of teaching us, they asked us to read ourselves and form 500 questions, which might have turned out good for some students, but we learnt nothing. Nothing. All we were worried about how to make 500 questions. Students were using all kinds of tricks to complete homework, but none of them tried to understand the things they were studying, though there could be an exception of one or two. No one dared to ask the teacher how it was productive as no one wanted to be beaten the shit out of them for this by a 6ft tall man. So students before and after us were doing it without questioning it.
Schools and colleges are changing. Kids need to know why they are going there. They are not there merely to get a degree but also to be articulate. They should know that in any random group, someone might be rich, or beautiful, or strong, or better than them at things that are beyond their control, but they should not be stupid. Knowledge is what they should strive for because the world listens to such people. The world needs such people who know things. Otherwise, it is already full of people like John Snow who know nothing.
Comments
Post a Comment