Page 155 - Šolsko polje, XXXI, 2020, 3-4: Convention on the Rights of the Child: Educational Opportunities and Social Justice, eds. Zdenko Kodelja and Urška Štremfel
P. 155
teršek ■ public universities in post-socialist states could become ‘un-academic’ ...
do. I even worked out a special programme, with the help of my colleagues,
you included, who also took part in this reading tour, only a little harder
to read: Aristotle, Marx, Heidegger, Hannah Arendt… they went through
this torture. We have formed a team that teaches, at this point, let us say,
we read the first supporting text of management theories. But beware, at
university level, in the programme of every faculty, you will not find the
opportunity to teach Scientific Management to someone like that. Many
years ago, 20, 25 years ago, I taught at the Faculty of Social Sciences, to
read the text ‘The concept of the political of Carl Schmitt’. From end to
end. But please take this seriously – there is no other way. However, just
as the teachers pretend to know things, they are semi-skilled. The teachers
of today are semi-educated intellectuals in the categories of 30 years ago.
As a result, there is an even less educated, semi-educated student popula-
tion who only imagines that they are students and that they understand.
So, this is a time, an age that we would describe as...?
We are living in an age of lies, imagination, images and deception.
This is what we are dealing with. In short, the matter is infinitely more se-
rious. Brutally more serious than it seems. From here, there is the need to
be beautiful, to have your nails cut, from here it is very important wheth-
er it stinks in your armpit or not; that whether you read books does not
count. That you understand does not count. The only thing that counts is
the phenomenon. Just look at the commercials and you will see an enor-
mous number of beautiful faces. These faces are semi-literate. These are
very serious things. For us it’s something new, for America it’s something
ordinary. It’s something new here that we can look at as a problem. Not
for America. In that sense, it seems infinitely more serious. I have not giv-
en up. Speeding at 100 kilometres an hour, I am afraid. Unfortunately,
simply by learning how to read.
And then we come to the point where natural scientists decide the aca-
demic fate of social scientists and humanists. However, only a conver-
gent language and a binary decision-making process are used. Is there a
problem? An interesting paradox?
That is right, but I do not have that feeling. It’s very easy to settle
the matter by saying that the natural scientists are to blame, leave us so-
cial scientists alone. I think the opposite. I am nominally a social scien-
tist and a humanist but, if you ask me for my opinion, I must emphasise
the question of who resigned. Let us say, in cases such as those that oc-
curred in Slovenia about a quarter of a century ago. What is going on here
is not something that happened here in the 1970s, it is not something
153
do. I even worked out a special programme, with the help of my colleagues,
you included, who also took part in this reading tour, only a little harder
to read: Aristotle, Marx, Heidegger, Hannah Arendt… they went through
this torture. We have formed a team that teaches, at this point, let us say,
we read the first supporting text of management theories. But beware, at
university level, in the programme of every faculty, you will not find the
opportunity to teach Scientific Management to someone like that. Many
years ago, 20, 25 years ago, I taught at the Faculty of Social Sciences, to
read the text ‘The concept of the political of Carl Schmitt’. From end to
end. But please take this seriously – there is no other way. However, just
as the teachers pretend to know things, they are semi-skilled. The teachers
of today are semi-educated intellectuals in the categories of 30 years ago.
As a result, there is an even less educated, semi-educated student popula-
tion who only imagines that they are students and that they understand.
So, this is a time, an age that we would describe as...?
We are living in an age of lies, imagination, images and deception.
This is what we are dealing with. In short, the matter is infinitely more se-
rious. Brutally more serious than it seems. From here, there is the need to
be beautiful, to have your nails cut, from here it is very important wheth-
er it stinks in your armpit or not; that whether you read books does not
count. That you understand does not count. The only thing that counts is
the phenomenon. Just look at the commercials and you will see an enor-
mous number of beautiful faces. These faces are semi-literate. These are
very serious things. For us it’s something new, for America it’s something
ordinary. It’s something new here that we can look at as a problem. Not
for America. In that sense, it seems infinitely more serious. I have not giv-
en up. Speeding at 100 kilometres an hour, I am afraid. Unfortunately,
simply by learning how to read.
And then we come to the point where natural scientists decide the aca-
demic fate of social scientists and humanists. However, only a conver-
gent language and a binary decision-making process are used. Is there a
problem? An interesting paradox?
That is right, but I do not have that feeling. It’s very easy to settle
the matter by saying that the natural scientists are to blame, leave us so-
cial scientists alone. I think the opposite. I am nominally a social scien-
tist and a humanist but, if you ask me for my opinion, I must emphasise
the question of who resigned. Let us say, in cases such as those that oc-
curred in Slovenia about a quarter of a century ago. What is going on here
is not something that happened here in the 1970s, it is not something
153
