he debate over religion’s role in social change has been raging for centuries.

The interpretation and perception of even just a single social action is multi-layered, multi-faceted, complex, and sophisticated. It almost seems impossible to explain a social action entirely through any of our sciences; in fact, it seems unlikely that any science will be developed that fully encompasses all of humanity’s problems.

As human beings our needs, conscious or unconscious, stretch from a tiny atomic particle to nearly the whole universe. It sometimes seems that the whole universe and all that within it are not good enough to satisfy even the smallest need of our unlimited desire. Some have asserted that one day human beings are going to play the role of God. They do this because of their strong and persistent belief that we are merely the product of material existence and it is therefore the material realm that makes us who we are. As such, they believe we will eventually rule over the things that created us.

Others would undoubtedly take a whole different direction and argue that our nature is a complex, interwoven tapestry of the material and immaterial realms; it is imprecise to contend that it is only economic conditions or conditioning that beget all the other elements of our social and individual lives, which includes things such as literature, the fine arts, religion, and the like. Hence, I intend to examine the notions of two influential intellectuals of the recent past: Karl Marx and Max Weber, particularly their notions as to religion.

To begin with, the history of humanity has seen a lot of wars, but the intellectual war that we have experienced over the past two centuries, which split the entire world into two blocks of countries (until recently they were communist and capitalist), should be of the greatest interest to almost everyone; it has been a one-of-a-kind struggle.

Marx, a reductionist, framed his argument as such:

“…the history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggle. Freeman and slave, patrician and plebeian, lord and serf, guild-master and journeyman, in a single word, oppressor and oppressed, stood in constant opposition to one another, carried on uninterrupted, now hidden, now open fight, a fight that each time ended, either in revolutionary re-constitution of society at large, or in the common ruin of the contending classes.”

He wrote this about the sorry state of the working class, especially in the nineteenth century, when workers were treated almost like machines or animals. This was particularly true in Western Europe. Even from just these few lines, one could easily grasp the sympathy of Marx for the working class of his time, what he called the oppressed, and his animosity and utter disgust toward the elite class, what he called the oppressor. It is no surprise then to see him portray a system in which the rights of the oppressed to a happy life could not be realized as needing to be overthrown through a social upheaval or revolution against the oppressors. For Marx, everything was crystal clear: it was the economic system which made the elites oppress their workers (please see “Karl Marx: the Prophet of Materialism” article in this issue).

Marx frequently turned to the then recent revolutions occurring in Western Europe: the English Civil War of the 1600s and the French Revolution. These struggles cost many lives and were for him just a new chapter in the ever-repeating class struggle between the oppressor and the oppressed.

On the surface, the apparent causes of the infamous conflict could be identified as politics and religion, which were quite intertwined then. A thorough analysis of Marx’s society enabled him to discover the subtle connection between the social class divisions and the stages of economic development, and allowed him to postulate his version of human salvation: communism, in which the superstructure, with all its elements including religion, would perish eternally in the name of a utopian, classless society. He prophesied a future in which the communal life of people would be shaped by a new idealized economic system that negated all private ownership of property, monopolized the political structure, and left no room for religion in social and individual life. As a matter of fact, most of his writings reflect his reactive response to the perceived evils or fatal flaws of capitalism. For instance, while some people enjoyed luxurious lives because of the fact that they were born to a rich family, many others endured the severest conditions just to survive. Witnessing this, one cannot help but wonder, “Is the economic system to be blamed for this?” Or even, “Are the ill-perception, misuse, and exploitation of the system the culprit?” I am completely sure that every sensible human being would appreciate the diagnosis of the diseases of class struggle and the oppression of the poor, but I also think it is hasty to reflexively blame the system – capitalism – as being solely to blame for the wretched conditions of the oppressed. According to Marx, religion was the opiate fed by the oppressors to the oppressed to keep them in line. To realize the revolution that Marx felt was necessary, this opiate had to be eliminated.

His approach to religion was always contemptuous and very similar to the functional and reductionist theories of Freud and Durkheim. In his view, religion is nothing more than a pure illusion – in other words, an entity that has no real existence. Therefore, he did not heed what religious beliefs or holy books taught; rather, he emphasized the function that religion and its fundamental elements played in social life. Even though his portrayal of religion was reduced to a social function, he still maintained that we should discover why people insist on this illusion, arguably since the beginning of human life.

As depicted above, Marx left no room for religion in his imagined world after the envisaged revolution against the oppressor. He saw it as an effect, an expression or a symptom of a deeper reality: material facts of the class struggle and alienation. Religion was the culprit to be annihilated in the name of real human bliss.

On the other hand, almost a half century later, a young and bright social scientist would dare to hold a completely different account of religion and argue that though the economic conditions of an individual or a society could determine the tone of some religious beliefs or practices, history would bear witness otherwise. He stated:

“…the side of the problem which is generally most difficult to grasp: the influence of certain religious ideas on the development of an economic spirit, or the ethos of an economic system. In this case we are dealing with the connection of the spirit of the modern economic life with the rational ethics of ascetic Protestantism. Thus we treat here only one side of the causal chain.”

In “The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism,” Max Weber diligently outlined a delicate connection between an attitudinal and doctrinal change in the framework of a religious group of Protestantism and the economic development that followed. Throughout his scholarly treatise, he gave an exquisitely drawn picture of the early Protestants, particularly the pioneers of Protestantism: Martin Luther and John Calvin. In fact, he claimed that the self-constraining ethic of Protestantism that stemmed from the inner-worldly asceticism fostered with frugality, personal discipline, solemnity, thrift, self-denial, hard work, investment, and making the best use of one’s time and resources was the spirit of capitalism. There was, he explained, a sharp difference between the adherents of the then Catholic Church, which regarded the daily chores and business enterprises as petty issues compared to the religious works of monks, nuns, and priests (other-worldly asceticism), and the followers of early Protestantism, who praised any effort to please God, including daily chores and especially the acquisition of wealth (inner-world asceticism).

He aptly placed this sharp change of attitude in the disciples of Calvin towards the acquisition of wealth at the very center of the eventual rise of the capitalist economy and the birth of a new civilization. Some monumental maxims like, “A penny saved is a penny earned…”, “Time is money; sloth is sin…”; “Even the humblest tasks are solemn duties assigned by God Himself…”; “All work, not just religious work, was a calling from God; it should not be done but done well, as a faithful service carried out under the great Taskmaster’s eye…” reflect this spirit of capitalism in Protestant countries like the United States and England. For Weber, “an idea in the mind of one human agent (or shared by a group of agents) is as much a real cause of human action as the application of heat to water is the real cause of steam.” Therefore, the backbone of the current capitalism originates in the very change in the belief system of a group of religious people. Such a claim is a consistent proof for social scientists like Weber to argue against the extremely reductionist notions of religion like that of Marx.

The two contrasting views of religion are significantly worth studying. While Marx, with his infamous animosity towards religion, divorced it from his utopian communist society and sentenced it to death forever, he adamantly upheld the necessities of human nature and pointed out the fact that negligence of the material aspect of life would result in absurdities in the name of human salvation. Moreover, his emphasis that history had become an arena of social class struggle urged humans to find lasting resolutions in order to establish projections of heavenly bliss on earth. Humanity undoubtedly owes him a round of applause due to his incessant efforts to vocalize the rights of the oppressed to life, dignity, and freedom. However, it is truly heartbreaking to see that he could not apprehend the real core of religion, which is pure devotion, compassion, self-denial, and other humble traits. If only he had chosen a different path that appreciated the diverse nature of humanity, of which religion is a distinguished component. I have never understood why Marx negated the fact that as material conditions shape ideas, ideas also cause material beings to change. Hence, unlike Marx, Weber approved of the fact that the key cause of the capitalist revolution was not some material circumstance, but a new form of economic behavior that followed logically from a new religious idea: “the self-constraining ethic of Protestantism was the animating spirit of capitalism.”

Has the battle come to an end yet? Honestly, I would assert it is an ongoing process. As we progress in light of the more inspiring notions of contemporary social scientists, we come to realize how wrong it is to reduce a very deeply embedded part of human social and individual life -religion- to something superficial or hypothetical. It is rather to be understood as something “sui generis” and a multi-faceted reality – a reality in and of itself. It is unquestionably inspiring to see several people search for an answer to what religion is and at the same time quite overwhelming to know that a great number of things in religion need an unbiased, pure, and sophisticated mind supported with the sublime emotions or faculties of the (metaphorical) heart. Furthermore, it is absolutely necessary to devise a new, multicolored approach to religious studies that embrace not only the fine-tuned minds but also the purified hearts. It would be wise to heed Kant’s argument against pure reason: “The ultimate truth can never be known through the theoretical mind. Only then can it be perceived partially via the practical mind.” Finally, it wouldn’t be a mere exaggeration to assert that what religion is or what role it plays in social and individual lives is a question of life and death to a certain degree. Hence, is religion a cause, an effect – or both? While many would say it is just an effect, several others would sail to the shore of “a cause”; still others, like me, agree that religion is both, and that every thought or emotion should get the benefit of the doubt.

References

1. Anatomy of the Sacred, an introduction to religion, 5th Ed. by James C. Livingston
2. Introducing Religion, readings from the classic theorist, by Daniel L. Pals
3. Eight Theories of Religion, 2nd Ed., by Daniel L. Pals
4. Gale Encyclopedia of Religion, 2nd Ed.
5. Encyclopedia of Quran by Jane Dammen McAuliffe

You know education is always a hot topic. Everybody has a share and interest in education: Parents, educators, government officials, elected public representatives, nonprofit organizations, religious groups, and so on. Besides, there are many aspects of education, such as finance, law, administration, etc. However, do you also think that teachers have long been overlooked regarding their authority in their own classes? Haven’t they been overlooked regarding their professional development, even though they are the backbone of the education system and they need some assistance in their efforts more than ever? It is good if you also think like me. It is even better if you don’t. Thus, you can share your recommendations with me once you see this school where things are done differently than many other contemporary schools. These teachers at this school see themselves as a learning society. They criticized the status quo they were in some time ago, and renewed themselves collectively. I want you to see the product. Let’s start our journey, shall we?

Room 114

We enter through the big doors of the school. Physically, it is not the best school you would ever see, but it can definitely be said that vitality and cleanliness of the halls stand out. The atmosphere is very welcoming; something is different, but it is hard to tell what it is. I point to the very first door on the right hand side. With pride, I ask if you would like to see this classroom. The sound coming from room 114 is not different from the sound that bees make when they work. As we approach the door, I understand that this is Ms. Williams and her eighth-grade students studying math. She welcomes us and tells us, “please come on in; there are some empty chairs over there,” pointing to two empty chairs, and we make our way towards to the back of the class and have our seats. This is a math class, but I don’t see any numbers on the board or equations being discussed. Soon, we understand that they finished the chapter on expressing roots of cubic equations last week, and today they are discussing a person named Omar Khayyam (1044 – 1123 C.E.). Ms. Williams knew that Omar Khayyam was a philosopher, mathematician, astronomer, and poet. She had formed her students into four groups, and assigned each of his professions to a group, so that they could do some research and present their findings to the whole class. I understand what you mean from the way you look at me: you’re sure this is a math class? you seem to be saying. You’re right to ask. Don’t they need to finish a chapter and pass to the next one immediately, and stay focused on the possible topics that are asked at the end-of-year tests?

Let’s hold on to that question; we can ask this after the class is dismissed. The first three groups already talked about his contributions to philosophy, astronomy, and poetry. We feel very fortunate not to miss at least the last group, who talk about him as a mathematician. I can see brightness in students’ eyes, and their excitement to share everything they have learned with their classmates. The first student, Omar who coincidentally happens to share a name with Omar Khayyam, begins. Omar Khayyam was a scholar among many others of his time. He is best known today for his poetry, but his contribution to mathematics was great. He showed how to express roots of cubic equations by line segments obtained by intersecting conic sections… Another student, Margaret continues: his work on algebra was known throughout Europe in the Middle Ages, and he also contributed to calendar reform. The algebra (from Arabic al-jabr) of Khayyam is geometrical, solving linear and quadratic equations by methods appearing in Euclid’s Elements… April inserts that Khayyam also gave important results on ratios giving a new definition and extending Euclid’s work to include the multiplication of ratios.

They continue their discussion, asking how these scholars tried to seek knowledge and an answer to who they were; and the great contributions they made towards peace and understanding among people of different origins. However, I am currently very much impressed and I lose myself in the beauty of these students’ discussion that I have found myself holding my breath and forgot about your presence next to me. It was no different than waking up from a dream when the bell was ringing. Sure, I will introduce you to Ms. Williams. I understand that you want to learn more about the uncommon method she adopted for this class: Ms. Williams, do you have a minute, please?

Of course, she says: “I have some time. It’s break time now.” You ask her about the topic and the way she formed her teaching method: Why would you choose a person from old history to discuss? Why do you want your students to talk about poetry or astronomy or philosophy in a math class? Do you think they know enough math to solve the questions on the end-of-year test? Why did you choose a Muslim scholar? Is this an Islamic or a secular school? Would you… and you realize you have bombarded her with your questions. You halt and smile.

She smiles back and says: “Yes, this is a secular state school. We try to practice secularism in a true sense that we can talk about religion, and bring religious materials to school to study, but we never try to impose these ideas into our students’ minds. They actually study very different kinds of perspectives, and they enjoy it very much. We take each student as a whole. Since our topic was roots of cubic equations, and Omer Khayyam was the father of the idea, you happened to see this example.”

“But why would you touch on different areas of study in a math class?” You say without taking a second breath.

Ms. Williams smiles again. “This is very common in our school. I am sure Mr. Wraga next door will also get into some math in his literature class since he knows my course syllabus. We try to keep our teachings interdisciplinary as much as possible. I receive feedback that kids enjoy it greatly. I understand your concern about the tests. However, testing is the very last thing we think of. Most of our students do well at those tests anyway, and those who cannot do so well are seen to be still successful mostly as artists or musicians…”

There is a long pause and silence now, but hurricanes are happening in our minds. How is it possible? What kind of philosophy is this school following? Is it the principal who leads these teachers like a conductor leading an orchestra? As Ms. Williams answered our questions, more questions kept popping up in our minds. The bell rings again, and the break is over. We thank her for letting us sit in the class. We make our way back to the hall again, and I am already elated with the intelligence of these students. You look at my eyes without saying a word, and smile: Room 115?

All the home-cooked dishes were delicious. It was obvious that the secret ingredient of my Turkish hosts’ cooking was love, spiced with intriguing conversation. I had not known that Turkish cuisine was one of the best three cuisines of the world, along with Chinese and French. As the IID members we had a great time eating the meals, sharing experiences and world views, and indulging ourselves with delicious and sinfully sweet Turkish desserts. During this trip, I had an ample opportunity to learn about Turkish everyday life as our hosts showed us their entire houses and explained Turkish customs and manners. Unlike contemporary, always busy, American or Japanese households, eating meals together still constitutes the core of Turkish family life, and this practice binds each member to the family unit.

Since my 2007 trip, I have been involved with various social activities at the Little Rock Raindrop Turkish House, and chief among them is the cooking course. A friend and I took the course for a few years, and we are now able to cook some dishes with ease, thanks to the classes and also our Turkish friends who gave us private lessons in their kitchens.

The Raindrop Turkish House cooking classes are taught by Turkish women volunteers, most of who are in their late 20s and early 30s. Some are housewives with small children, and others are teachers, researchers, and graduate students at university. When some of these women’s mothers visit them from Turkey, the older ladies often volunteer to show us different dishes that require some special techniques—which I would describe as “tricks.” I learned that Turkish cuisine is characterized by regional differences from the visiting mothers, who come from different parts of Turkey.

Students taking the cooking classes are diverse; some are university professors, school teachers, secretaries, university and high school students, housewives, and retirees. Their ages range from the high teens to low 60s. The nationalities of the students vary, too; during any semester, there are students from the U.S., Japan (me!), Mexico, Columbia, Uzbekistan, Poland, and Turkmenistan, among other places. The classes are thus international, for over the years I took the classes, a number of different languages were spoken besides English and Turkish.

The religious affiliations of the participants differ, too. All the Turkish women are Muslim, and some of them wear the scarf called Esharp, while others do not. American students belong to Catholic or Protestant churches or Jewish synagogues. I practice Zen (meditation).

The classes are very informal and take place once a week during the evenings. When too many people want to enroll, the classes may be offered twice a week. Usually, the class size varies from 4 to 13 students and two to four Turkish teachers. Recipes are given at the beginning of the class, and students learn about the ingredients, cooking techniques, regional differences, and the significance of the meal as they chop or mix vegetables and meats, and talk about life experiences.

The reasons for taking Turkish cooking classes vary. Zelda, an American woman aged 50, who is married to an attorney, said, “I am interested in the development of food, its difference and similarities with different ethnicities and regions. Plus, I like exploring new cuisines and cooking techniques.” Zelda is a dedicated cook at home and always brings a set of sharp knives to the class. She taught her sons how to cook Turkish meals, too. My colleague recommended Amber, a 23-year-old student to take the class to learn about Turkish culture. It is part of her project for a linguistic anthropology class. Kim, 59, a Jewish homemaker, said “I love to cook and learn new traditions and recipes. I enjoy getting to know the other participants,” when I asked why she wanted to learn about Turkish cuisine. Lynne, 62, said, “The food we’ve learned to make is excellent, but my favorite part is learning from and spending time together with the young Turkish women who teach the class.” She went to the IID’s Houston headquarters for a cooking competition in February, 2011, and won an honorable mention award.

Food is often a symbol of national identity, and it helps define cultures. Food can influence and enrich cuisines of other cultures, too. Historically, food was part of cultural imperialism and colonialism as well. Food unites people and standardizes the world as well—as we can see from the spread of American fast food chains thriving all over the world. As a result of globalization, the boundaries between cultures based on tastes and availability of foods have become much more ambiguous, and certain cuisines have merged in recent years, resulting in the food fusion phenomenon.

For me, as a sociologist, food unites the women at Raindrop Turkish House for world peace. Utilizing the Durkheimian theory of religion, we can say that these cooking classes are an integrator of all the participants from different nations and cultures. The class experience is similar to religion.

The teachers and students gather weekly in search of good food in a cathedral called the kitchen. The cookbook is like the Bible or Qur’an that is used as guide to successful cooking. Chopping boards, knives, ladles, and spatulas are items necessary for the “rituals,” and are comparable to an incense burner, a Yad (a pointer for reading the Torah), candle sticks, a Kiddush cup (for the rabbi to bless the wine). The teachers preach the way of cooking and tell us the significance of the specific meal. Some of the Ten Commandments of Cooking include:

• Always cook with love
• Wash the grape leaves before you wrap them with filling
• For the syrupy dessert, the cake must be warm and the syrup must be cold
• Sauté chopped onions with olive oil before you add the tomato sauce
• Use only the freshest and best ingredients

We work in a close proximity and in unison with all the participants. We laugh together as we dice carrots, mix minced meat, roll sarmas, and make mantis in huge quantities, and we cry together as we chop onions. After the cooking comes the tasting of the food we cooked with love. We open bottles of water and soft drinks to quench our thirst and become our nectar of life. We eat the meal that will become our flesh, blood, and energy to keep us going. We talk about experiences in our countries, share stories, and bond. Georgiana, 63, a secretary, said, “I am taking the class for the fellowship of others—to learn about the Turkish culture, to expand my horizons by meeting people from other walks of life. I love the lessons and I love all the folks!”

The teachers and students in the cooking classes are mothers, university professors, and school teachers who are raising the next generation of Americans. The children, youth, and young adults will grow up to be less prejudiced, more open-minded, and have more knowledge and understanding of each other’s nations and cultures because of the socialization process of their mothers and teachers/professors. By talking casually as we cook and eat together about our experiences, nations, and cultures, the participants can relate better to each other in spite of their different backgrounds and world views. The cooking class companionship promotes international understanding, friendship, and appreciation. This is the first step toward peace.

The Latin origin of the word “companion” includes the words “com,” meaning “with” and “pan,” meaning “bread.” Thus, a companion is basically a person you eat bread with! In Japan, there is an idiom, “eat from the same rice pot.” Our cooking-class companionship makes us bond and become friends. At Raindrop Turkish House, we say “Delicious!” in different languages, appreciate the food, and discuss matters that are important to women everywhere in the world. As women, daughters, wives, mothers, and grandmothers, we do share feelings, emotions, and thoughts about certain things, and they are universal to humankind: feelings of love, understanding, empathy, and compassion.

One night, my friend said at the table, “You know, we eat together, share experiences, and try to understand each other’s countries and culture. We become friends, and we will never think about bombing each other’s country or harming each other’s people.”

I hope that a day will come when there are no more wars in the world, and people live together in peace. And we can begin our efforts right in the kitchen!

Dr. Kinko Ito, Professor of Sociology, Department of Sociology and Anthropology, University of Arkansas at Little Rock, U.S.A.

Today, the Western world is seen by many as the representative of freedom and democracy. How has freedom been understood and treated in the history of the West? To answer this question, we will go on a journey through history, in which we will restrict ourselves to continental Europe, focusing on different periods in terms of how freedom has been approached and used. Here, we basically define freedom as being free from suppression or obstacles which have deliberately been placed before an individual by others to impede said freedom.

In the Middle Ages, freedom was not relevant to the masses in Europe. Most people did not even dream of it, since inequalities in society were the norm. A person could not attain freedom, but some were born free. Freedom was a privilege inherited from the class that your family belonged to. Being born into the lower classes was a fate one had to accept. This limited concept of freedom based on social status was further acknowledged or legitimized by the dominant religious authorities, that is, the Christian clergymen. “Keep silent and obey the orders of the feudal lord; hope you will be rewarded in the next life” became the common prescription for the masses that kept them subjugated to and suppressed by the political authority. . In other words, if one was not of the upper-class, one could “freely” make a choice between the despotic order of the feudal lord and the in justice of the clergy, who were abusing the social role assigned to them as the unquestionable judges.

A breaking point in the stable intellectual line of the Middle Ages was certainly the Renaissance and the Reformation. Those who had the opportunity to study and read the works of the ancients directly, without the filtering of the Church, became aware of new directions for human thought. This current, propelled by these newly educated people, nurtured the idea of freedom of “thought” and “belief.”

The development of gunpowder and the cannon brought an end not only to the feudal-lords but also to the age. These changes reduced the importance of the skilled cavalry in warfare, which were supplied by the feudal lords to the kings, and in turn reduced the importance in the lords. Even well-fortified cities fell when faced by this immensely destructive force. Therefore, small feudalities had to unite, or else be erased. The strength of the state/king increased, while the lords’ sovereignty was reduced. Centralized authority became the dogma. Everything belonged to the monarch, including the authority to decide who had the freedom to do what.

Ironically, the concept of sovereign states was fortified through strong and able monarchies, which later produced the nation state. As the France of Louis XIV grew stronger, for instance, it started to dominate the surrounding territories. In its effort to support military campaigns, the powerful French state pushed forward the idea of a “French nation.” This new concept of nation superseded all local bases of identity, particularly, at the expense of religion.

Freedom under the shadow of capitalism

In the age of monarchy, everything was controlled and directed by a supreme state, the symbol of sovereignty. The idea of individuals with basic freedoms, such as freedom of thought or freedom of speech, was inconceivable as the state demanded complete obedience of its subjects. In other words, individual freedom would have been a threat to authority. Therefore, despite all the changes in the overall picture, the main component of society, the individual, was still overlooked.

While the feudal order became history with an alliance between the king and the rising bourgeoisie in towns and cities, in turn the bourgeoisie played a key role in introducing the concept of a state with limited powers. In the end, such limitations on the state meant greater freedom for the citizens.

With the new discoveries and inventions that led to industrialization, the bourgeoisie demanded more freedom. Its power was its wealth, which directed politics, its weapon was “reason,” which was used to challenge and abolish the monopoly of the Church on ideas, and its flag was “freedom for all.” For all? Could there really have been a chance of freedom for a person who could hardly make living? However, for the bourgeoisie, the answer was in the affirmative. To them, freedom was two-fold: freedom of thought and economic freedom, the core idea of a freely operating market. Both of these were held sacred and were considered to be closely intertwined. In this sense, the bourgeoisie, the primary agent of capitalism, was the first social agent to celebrate and pursue human liberty.

Demanding a market free of all kinds of controls was the fundamental idea of economic liberalism. In response to the concerns of justice, economic liberalism claimed that the invisible hand of the economy would balance out the inequalities in due time, provided that it was able to operate free of control. Although not everyone supported these notions of freedom, the poorer classes did ally with the bourgeoisie against one common enemy: the royalty. As the bourgeoisie’s power reached a critical stage they united with the lower class, overthrowing the king and holding a revolution. However, this was not a revolution for all of society. In fact, for some thinkers, all that the bourgeoisie had done was to present the old ideas in a new suit. The bourgeoisie set the bottom line of freedom at the possession of property. This was quite apparent in the constitution of France for example, where those who could pay a certain amount of tax were allowed to vote. In other words, freedom for all meant freedom for those who could afford it. One’s right was proportional to the tax one paid. If you did not have enough money, you had no right to be represented.

Freedom vs. justice

Certainly, the liberal understanding of freedom was far from pleasing to everyone. The lower class had no teacher at that time. They started slowly to become aware of Marx’s teachings, who claimed that the “evil capitalist system” was due to collapse. The new teacher of the lower class also preached to them that “history is the history of struggle between classes, and we are in the final round. We must win this battle, and begin a new life in a new world.” Thus, the socialist/communist notion of “social justice” grew stronger. The Marxist thinkers revealed the hidden realities of the society and gathered the working class around one goal, i.e., getting rid of the “evil capitalist system.”

This kind of interpretation of the new order was very attractive for some. It appealed to the angry masses and asked that they raise their voices in response. The Marxist theory dealt primarily with economic justice and the distribution of wealth. It spoke not of the “freedom of human beings,” but of the economic independence of the lower classes, for in Marxist thought human beings were “working animals.” As a solution, people’s future was closely tied to the dominance of the proletariat, who were seen to be the true owners of the wealth produced in a society. In this scheme of thought, individual freedoms were of secondary importance to the well-being of society.

Thus, one can say that the Marxist view of freedom was an abuse of freedom. In brief, what it said was this: Freedom is good as long as it gives us reasons to complain about the existing system and permits us to rebel against the bourgeoisie. After all, we are exercising our freedom to speak! But it is fundamentally problematic in that it erases the individuality of the person in favor of the group (the proletariat, the working class), whose existence is based only on abstract notions of materialism and historical determinism.

Multi-dimensional freedom for multi-dimensional individuals

After the age of ideologies, freedom today is understood more properly as a personal dimension of being human, a quality that is directly related to individuality. Despite many violations of justice, at least fundamental freedoms, such as freedom of thought, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, and freedom of travel, are protected by most democratic governments. The demands placed by political authority on people’s personal lives seem to be less controlling in democratic countries as compared to authoritarian ones. Can we then say that issues concerning freedom have been settled? Unfortunately not.

To resolve this matter, one has to think of humans as multi-dimensional beings. As we know, everything we experience in social life has a reflection in our internal life and vice versa. Laws and regulations address the social, political or economic aspects of life. What about our internal capacities that affect our decisions? Do we not have a strong attachment to our desires and impulses, which sometimes makes us act according to emotions instead of reason? If the aim of any theory is to guide us to true freedom, it must account for the inner dimensions of freedom. Since this guidance cannot be provided by any political or social means, each individual must strive to attain inner freedom by using the means available to him or her. We may start searching for this guidance by contemplating the meaning of our existence and what freedom really means in relation with our status in the universe. Perhaps, complete freedom is never attainable as all of us are connected somehow with each other and with the rest of the creation.

However defined, freedom is the fundamental requirement for the flourishing of the individual. Through much of the historical developments in the concept of freedom, there are two certain conclusions we can draw. First, freedom as a human condition has been ignored and has become subject to violations. Our history is full of examples that support this contention in which everything is expressed in terms of abstract-plural concepts. Remember our history books: Nations migrate, armies fight, states make peace, or civilizations clash. The individual human being, if not an exaggerated hero, is individually absent in history.

Secondly, freedom has prevailed as an intrinsically valuable notion for our existence. Several unpleasant examples in history witness that negligence or resistance to the use of this fundamental right only results in drastic changes that make it more valuable.

Ozgur tagla is a teaching assistant at the School of Arts&Sciences at the University of Pittsburgh.

The teacher-student relationship, or rapport, is the most important factor contributing to effective teaching. How a teacher portrays him/herself or is perceived by the students, the label he/she is given (bad or good teacher) determine the quality of the teaching-learning process.

Numerous studies, a great deal of research, books, and articles all shed light on this topic. Teachers are presented with many suggestions and ideas on how to become a good teacher. On the other hand, it seems that teachers are so bombarded with ideas that they can hardly digest and utilize them in their daily lives.

I would like to take a different approach and highlight an often overlooked corner of this field: How to become a bad teacher.

The principles of teacher-student relationships

Establish friendships with your students, but do not stop there: act like a child. Worry about what to teach rather than how to facilitate the learning process. Assisting one student at a time is good enough. Others can wait. Don’t worry about trying to assist more than one student with group activities. Be presumptuous towards your students. You have years of experience, you can decipher a student in a few minutes.

It is none of your business if the students develop good relations with each other. Do not bother to adopt a leadership role for this purpose. Some teachers try to get the popular students and the not so popular ones together, helping them to respect one another. These are efforts in vain. With your strong presence everybody will behave and that’s good enough.

Students are too young to develop a sense of responsibility anyway. They cannot be taught how to resolve their own problems, make their own decisions and self-criticisms. You must be there to enforce discipline.

Expected teacher behavior

Assign homework as a way of punishment and threaten your students with grades. Adopt one teaching method, preferably one in which you talk and they listen. If it has worked for so many generations, it ought to work for you.

Do not use encouragement or praise. Do not make any jokes. Do not check the student’s work or monitor progress. Let only the high achievers talk in class discussions. You do not have time to waste listening to poor achievers. They probably have nothing to contribute to the discussion anyway.

Do not tell the students what the expected behavior is. Do not provide a suitable environment in which expected behavior can flourish. Let your own behavior be inconsistent with that of your colleagues. When responding to unacceptable behavior or mistakes use negative criticism. Criticize your students instead of their actions. Be easily affected and distracted by negative comments. Discipline your students using only reprimands and punishment. Do not give time for your students to correct themselves.

Do not have a good lesson plan and let the kids be without a task from time to time. Include topics which you have not previously covered in your assignments. Be a book-oriented teacher. Go into your classroom, deliver your lesson, and leave. Remain distant from students. Do not position yourself in such a way that all the students in the room can see you. Turn your back to your class frequently. That way they will learn to value their time with you.

Do not take into consideration physiological and social development phases or the academic levels of your students. Do not cater for the needs of students with different learning paces. Do not let the students enjoy their achievements.

Focus on undesirable behavior rather than desirable behavior. Address some of your students with their first names while calling others “boy” or “girl.” Do not worry about fairness in awarding or punishing your students. Do not speak clearly. Use slang words.

Handle aggressively even minor discipline problems. Do not ignore anything however small it might be. Never laugh with your students and always keep in mind that you may lose control of the class if you do so. The students are expected to be obedient at all times without questioning anything. Tell students off in front of others if you need to. Never forget that discipline is a major problem; this has been suggested by so many other teachers. Ignore the fact that sometimes students may violate the rules because of your attitude. Do not let the students know that bad behavior is actually showing disrespect to themselves.

Teachers must be mean in order to discipline the students. Punish the whole class if you are not able to find the student who caused the discipline problem. Keep in mind that punishment is easier than prevention. Do not inform the administration, even if the students make it impossible for you to conduct the class. Keep it to yourself as this will protect your reputation.

Conclusion

Resist the temptation to listen to the suggestions of educators from around the world, take the easier path and become a bad teacher. Believe me it is very easy.

Plato’s (427-347 B.C.E.) political ideas remain influential. His idealist philosophy emphasizes ideas and ideals (independent of material and historical contexts), virtue vs. vice, and essential human values, and thus challenges modem philosophy’s general dependence on materialism, excess “objectivism,” and relativism. His search for the ideal person and the ideal city based on justice and harmony still motivates us. Although Plato is criticized for the totalitarian nature of his ideal city, his ideas are helpful when it comes to understanding the limits of democracy, especially direct democracy.

Plato was born into an aristocratic Athenian family. In The Republic, he analyzes the main psychological and sociopolitical pillars of the ideal person and the ideal city. His analyses are affected by such contemporaneous sociopolitical crises as the Peloponnesian War and Socrates’ execution by popular decision.(1) Believing that these problems have individual and systemic causes, he considers both the just person and the just city as an indispensable whole. In other words, a good individual life can be lived in a good city and good people can create a good city.

According to Plato, absolute truths are objective facts beyond relativistic opinion. Things have ideal Forms, whether they differ from the real ones or not. He emphasizes that things are good or bad by nature, and thereby accepts psychosocial phenomena as primordial instead of socially constructed.

Justice, the pillar of the ideal individual and social life, is a crucial good value. Plato rejects the idea that “justice is nothing other than the advantage of the stronger.”(2) On the contrary, justice, regardless of power, is based on virtue and is the main source of happiness. Justice is awarded in this life and the Hereafter, and injus tice is punished.

Ideal People, Ideal Society

The soul, according to Plato, is affected by three groups of motives: reason, spirit, and appetite. Human justice means maintaining harmony among these motives. Similarly, social justice depends on the harmony among the three social classes symbolizing these motives. Each motive might result in virtue or vice. The virtue of reason, courage, and appetite are, respectively, wisdom, courage, and moderation. But these motives can result in ignorance, cowardice, and licentiousness.

Since reason is the most significant factor for harmony among people and within the city, it symbolizes the guardians (the golden class). Spirit is symbolized by soldiers (the silver class), and appetite by farmers and artisans (the bronze class).

Plato considers knowledge, the source of wisdom, as coming from education instead of experience. Therefore public schools are crucial, as is the guardians’ task to censor other educational sources, such as poetry, to protect students from vice. Children begin to study music and poetry, the sources of a balanced and harmonious education, at an early age and are socialized independently of any family influence.

The guardians are the “soulcrafts” and holders of wisdom having absolute power.(3) Thus politics is a technical issue-there is no political race or opposition, and public opinion is irrelevant. The guardians answer only to wisdom and live a pure communist life, one without private property and family.(4) Military power is not used for imperialistic and other common militaristic purposes, but only for self-defense. Production is based on satisfying the citizens’ necessities and avoiding any accumulation of capital or market competition.

Plato explains four deviant types of political regimes as following: honor-oriented timocracy, wealth-oriented oligarchy, freedom-oriented democracy, and personal-exploitation-oriented tyranny. These regimes differ from the ideal reason-based regime (aristocracy), because timocracy is based on spirit, oligarchy on appetite, and democracy on a mixture of these two. Plato explains cyclical transformations of these regimes in light of the changes in the value structure, thereby stressing the significance of values and ideas on political transformation.

Plato and Modern Thought

Plato and modern social theory analyze several common issues, such as the importance of the division of labor. He considers people social creatures who must live within a complex and interdependent social life. Although he accepts social class as a consequence of division of labor, he rejects class warfare and class-based economic disparity. His understanding of this division, with its vertical and disciplinary structure, also differs from liberal social relations in terms of agreement or social contract.(5) In addition, he insists upon gender equality, for one’s class membership depends only on merit, which, in turn, is based on one’s quality of soul and education. For example, as “a male and a female doctor have souls of the same nature,” they are equal.(6)

Plato made great contributions to political theory by describing, generalizing, and systematizing psychological and sociopolitical issues. The Republic’s main contribution to political science is its sui generis emphasis on the role of ideas, values, and ethics in politics. He attaches importance to ideas and an intelligence not restricted by custom, instead of material/historical structural factors.(7) He questions “what ought to be” in politics, and stresses such moral and ethical values as justice and virtue as being the main criteria of normative social theory. As Wolin points out: “No one has ever surpassed Plato in insisting upon the moral urgency and centrality of political vision.”(8)

These contributions are very relevant now, for “the primary problem today is the reconciliation of the classical aim of politics-to enable human beings to live good and just lives in a political community-with the modern demand of social thought, which is to achieve scientific knowledge of the workings of society.”(9)

Some Critical Remarks

Plato’s ideas become problematic when analyzing the relationship between theory and practice, as follows:

•Sociopolitical issues exist in a dynamic structure and always face change and transformation. Therefore, even if the guardians grasp the knowledge, the impact of change on time and space might render their knowledge obsolete.

•Sociopolitical problems cannot be solved by transcending them because ignoring certain facts does not change the outer reality. Plato, however, seeks continued peace and stability by ending competition in politics, economics, and other spheres of activity. Moreover, he seeks to create harmony through social homogenization. As political theory’s essential aim is to solve real-life problems, it must “create a common rule in a context of differences,” instead of destroying social diversity.(10)

• Power is necessary to translate knowledge into practice, and only a stronger source of power can emancipate people from the pressure of another source of power.(11) Plato offers no specific methods to solve this vicious circle and make power subservient to knowledge.

Another, problematic aspect of The Republic is its totalitarian political ideology, which is neither necessary nor convenient for realizing Plato’s ideal people and ideal city (based on justice and wisdom). In his book, Plato supports indoctrination and social engineering instead of social contract and consensus. Such a totalitarian system has many potential problems, among them the following:

• It destroys the private sphere (i.e., the family), uses censorship to prevent any space for individual freedom, and violates basic human rights. Moreover, as the Soviet Union proved, it destroys the citizens’ motivation, creativity, and efficiency.

• A system that classifies people in a three fixed groups (gold, silver, and bronze) denies multiple identities and also results in discrimination.

• Politics is too important to be left to guardians. As it affects human life, ordinary citizens must be able to intervene to politics and determine their own interests and goals.

• A guardianship regime makes it impossible for people to recover their rights from manipulative dictators. The only way out is revolution, which is made all the harder by the systemic brainwashing received in the public schools.

• It is hard to find rulers who accept authority not out of personal desire but out of fear that they could be “ruled by someone worse than oneself.”(12) In this regard, Plato’s philosopher-kings might be very dangerous, for “power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”(13) While disciplinary education may be somewhat suitable in semi-voluntary stitutions (monastic orders) or in the parent-child relations for a short time, it may be disastrous if applied to a whole society for a long time.

On the other hand, Plato’s non-democratic arguments include some good points that are used in modern political systems. For example, modern democracies are generally representative, instead of Athens’ direct variety, which Plato believes leans toward the tyranny of majority. The modern judiciary system, including a constitutional court and judges, symbolizes the dominance of knowledge’s quality over the majority’s quantity. Moreover, the main basis of a democratic state’s bureaucracy-meritocracy-refers to officials selected on merit, which is similar to Plato’s ideas.

Conclusion

Plato could not find the medium system and so tended toward totalitarianism as a reaction to Athenian direct democracy. Such a reaction derives from his bipolar mental world-everything is either good or bad. In this regard, his ideas resemble Zoroastrianism or the Confucian concept of yin-yang.(14)

However, as Aristotle stresses, psycho-social phenomena may be categorized into three groups, two of which are bad (excess and deficiency) and one which is good (means). For example, reason’s excess is demagogy, its negligence is ignorance, and its means is wisdom. The spirit’s excess is rage, its negligence is cowardice, and its means is courage. The appetite’s excess is licentiousness, its negligence is frigidity, and its means is moderation.(15) In this regard, the excess and negligence of political systems are Plato’s totalitarianism and Athenian direct democracy, while the ideal system is located in the middle way.

Footnotes

1. Arlene W. Saxonhouse, Athenian Democracy: Modern Mythmakers and Ancient Theorists (Notre Dame: 1996), 87.
2. Plato, “The Republic,” in Classics of Moral and Political Theory, ed. Michael L. Morgan (Indianapolis: 1996), 41.
3. Sheldon S. Wolin, Politics and Vision: Continuity and Innovation in Western Political Thought (Boston: 1960), 36.
4. In his ideal society, family ties are provisional and trivial.
5. George Sabine, A History of Political Theory (New York:1965),49.
6. Plato, The Republic, 125.
7. Sabine, A History of Political Theory, 63.
8. Wolin, Politics and Vision, 35.
9. Richard J. Bernstein, The Restructuring of Social and Political Theory (Pennsylvania: 1976), xxii.
10. Wolin, Politics and Vision, 61.
11. Ibid., 67.
12. Plato, The Republic, 48.
13. Robert Dahl, Democracy and Its Critics (New Haven:1987), 76.
14. Mulford Q. Sibley, Political Ideas and Ideologies: A History of Political Thought (New York: 1970), 69.
15. Aristotle, “Nicomachean Ethics,” in Classics of Moral and Political Theory, ed. Michael L. Morgan (Indianapolis: 1996), 268-71.

Where the school is situated effects the quality of education it can provide. Ideally it should be detached from urban centres. Noise and disturbance around the school can be just as disruptive as noise within the classroom. The easy access in town to cinemas and cafes, to sports stadia, to shopping or amusement arcades, prevent the pupils from committing themselves fully to their school life. Away from these temptations, pupils will be able to devote more time to reading and relevant conversation and, when they need to relax, to active, useful pastimes in each other’s company. In this way, they will have the freedom to become more broadly cultured. They will develop self-reliance, and independence and will be able to concentrate more on their academic achievement. Also, the beneficial effects of exposure to the freshness and restful colours of a rural setting are well known – to say nothing of the advantages for students of nature, whether artistic or scientific, of having the real thing outside the window

Physical design

As well as setting, the design of the school buildings and equipment are vitally important. For example, desks and chairs that are too comfortable may encourage an over-relaxed, even lazy, attitude in pupils; on the other hand, if they are too luxurious and ugly they may cause distress and restlessness in class. Each individual pupil should be assigned a desk and a locker specifically for his or her use. This would free pupils of the burden of carrying too much around with them from lesson to lesson. The general character of the school buildings should, I suggest, be traditional. At present, the primary consideration in the design of buildings is cost – the ‘best’ design is the cheapest. By contrast, in the past, efforts were made to surround the schools and universities with green, with trees and walks in wooded lanes, rivers and ponds, besides which the pupils could relax. Consider how well the learning environment was designed and presented in the ancient seats of learning like Oxford or Cambridge – their buildings seem, in a sense, to improve as they age. They used stone to build thick walls and walled many interior spaces with quadrangles and cloisters which owe their form and function, ultimately, to Islamic originals in the Maghreb and Spain.

Nosy cost-cutting has led to the building of separation walls so thin that teacher and pupils can hear what is being said in the next room:the resulting distraction can lead to irritability and loss of learning time. Lighting is another important factor, too often neglected. Artificial lighting is not as satisfactory as natural light. As well as being costly to run, many pupils daim that it leaves them feeling tired at the end of the day The maximum possible use should be made of natural light. Apart from being ‘free’, it is conducive to the well-being and cheerfulness of both teachers and pupils. Similarly air circulation should depend on openable windows rather than on noisy (and expensive) air coolers and fans.

It is necessary to give adequate attention to the maintenance of a mean temperature that is neither too hot nor too cold. In view of the cost of heating, it may be advisable to invest in a system that, although costly to install, may be cheaper in the long term, such as solar energy.

Tower block construction is quite unsuitable for educational buildings as it inhibits direct, physical contact between students. Again, telephone or computer networks, important as they may be, are no substitute for direct personal contact which is indispensable for teaching and learning.

The detachment of the school from the urban centre means that its buildings complex must be self- dependent. Facilities need to be provided on or very near the school so that leisure activities, vital to the enhancement of study can be easily accessed. They should include sports fields and gymnasia. It is important that the school caters for the needs of pupils so as to allow them to play and compete in a proper way: failure to do so will only encourage truancy.

The ethos of the school should encourage self-discipline and self- improvement. The school should not, in other words, try to mimic the society at large, rather it should aim to reform and improve that society. To this end, chewing gum and smoking and other such habits should be banned altogether, not only in certain areas or at certain times. The walls and halls of the school should bear the portraits, or record the achievements, of the men and women who have set a good example in their particular walk of life. The decor of individual buildings or rooms should, as far as possible, reflect their particular character and purpose: a biology laboratory should look and feel different from a chemistry laboratory; the walls of the dining room should not be the same as those of the classroom, and so on.

The school library should be one of, if not the, most important resource and access should be made easy. It hardly needs saying that books and periodicals should be as up to date as possible, that many kinds of newspapers should be made available to enable students to keep up with (and have informed discussion about) current affairs. In general, the equipment used by pupils should be the best and most modern available. It seriously damages morale if the pupils know that, for instance, the computers they are using are obsolete models. Also, the relevance of what is learnt using certain equipment is significantly diminished if that equipment is no longer in service outside school.

Relevance is a principle that needs to apply to course design as well as to decor and equipment. Unfortunately; too much of what is taught in existing schools is known (and felt) by pupils to be merely ‘academic’. It is particularly important in science and technology that pupils have the opportunity to try out, to apply in practice, what they have learnt in theory. Otherwise, pupils will leave school with a mass of information into their heads but no experience of how to translate that knowledge into practical design or actual manufacture.

The teachers

The teachers are the essential key to whether an educational institution succeeds or fails. A good teacher is one who stays abreast of the latest developments in his or her field and knows how to pass on that knowledge to others. Although there are worthy arguments against doing so, I favour the regular resting of teachers to ensure that they are keeping up in their subject areas. There are, alas, too many teachers who use the same notes they used twenty years before, and whose work (for the pupils as well for themselves) lacks freshness and appeal.

Beside intellectual and teaching ability teachers should be trained and selected for a number of other qualities:

1. strict punctuality – the teacher should not arrive late to class;
2. fairness the teacher must have an understanding of the personal frictions that can develop between teacher and pupil and how to overcome them;
3. sense of humour – while retaining some distance and authority the teacher should not be solemn for the whole of a teaching period, but vary and lighten the tone of the teaching in order to keep the attention of the pupils;
4. openness to innovations – new equipment and new techniques are always coming onto the market:the teacher should seek to exploit these effectively not avoid them because it might mean changing established methods and habits;
5. freshness – the teacher should seek to adapt and combine different teaching styles and methods in the way most effective for pupils doing that particular subject at that particular level: in language training, for example, some ready- to-use courses require the teacher to lecture, others to merely observe, others to participate with pupils, etc.- a good teacher should know how to mix and match from what is available to suit his pupils’ needs;
6. sensitivity – the teacher should be alert to the social and cultural norms of his pupils and go with care when mentioning or discussing ideas or symbols which have special resonance for them, even when he or she does not share the same norms.

Teachers need to be well-trained to start with. However, they also need to be provided with opportunities to further their knowledge and skills, if necessary going abroad on a direct or exchange basis with foreign establishments. And finally, to secure high morale among teachers and commitment from them in a taxing profession, they need to be much better paid than they are at present in Turkey for example: many, alas, have to devote some of their time and energy in a second job, simply to make ends meet.

The pupils

An effective class is one made up, more or less, of pupils of the same ability at the same level. To achieve this, testing of pupils before, and perhaps also after, they are admitted is essential. Mixed ability schools are one thing but mixed ability classes are quite another and impose intolerable burdens on the teacher who cannot know how to plan the pace and level of difficulty of what he is teaching: going too slowly he or she risks losing the attention of the brighter pupils, going too fast risks driving the weaker pupils to opt out of the lessons altogether.

It is important too for the school to screen the pupils it admits for personality or character as well as for academic potential. If such information is available to teachers, they will not overreact when a pupil with, say, a record of bullying or stealing, bullies or steals. Too harsh a punishment by a teacher could further intensify the pupil’s problems which would, in turn, affect class and school performance.

To diminish the effects of social class differences, at least during school time, pupils should wear a uniform or the same or very similar clothes. Teachers can be expected to behave more fairly towards pupils if they appear the same.

The administrators

Administrators, especially principals and heads of school, should be authoritative and serious. Their concern for discipline should be equitable, and focus on teachers as well as pupils. They should encourage and enable parent-teacher meetings at the school to discuss an individual pupil’s progress with his or her teachers. It is the duty of administrators to see to it that the school is clean and fit for all normal activities. It also falls on them to advertise the school effectively so as to raise its image in public perception and so attract more pupils.

Finally administrators need to keep abreast of the latest developments in educational psychology and innovations in methods or equipment.

The family

Parents mostly entrust their children to schools (rather than teach them themselves) and for many ‘out of sight, out of mind’ applies. However, education and upbringing are very much within the responsibilities of parents to children. The parents may be disappointed by their child’s performance but must not blame the teachers for it. Rather, they should openly acknowledge the effects of family life on the stability of children’s character and on the quality of their performance. Parents should exhort children to do their homework, to take part only in such leisure activities as are beneficial, and help their attendance at school by accompanying them to it.

Instruction and teaching materials

Instruction hours should not be overly prolonged as pupils’ attention span is limited. Particularly to be avoided is the habit some teachers now have of combining two periods into a double period which is simply much too demanding for ordinary pupils. Instructional material exists in great abundance hut only appropriate use of it benefits pupils. TV and video need not be a means of passively wasting time; they can be applied to the job of teaching many hundreds of pupils at the same time.

Computers, will never replace human contact but are useful tools which ease organizational problems and can stimulate children. They may match certain temperaments and help children over specific learning difficulties.

Always relevant are the traditional instructional materials such as pictures, tables, diagrams, maps and illustrations. But the technology exists to operate these maps and diagrams through the computer by scanning images, or transferring them to overhead projector slides for a modern version of the blackboard.