The Background and Theories of Ivan Illich - Case Study Example

The Background and theories of Ivan Illich Name Institution Date Introduction Several philosophers have looked at matters concerning education. The philosophers such as Ivan Illich critically looked at problems associated with modern schooling and suggested the best system for learning (Peters & Roberts, 2011). Ivan illich was a social philosopher with an admirable historical background. With his good education background, Ivan Illich developed several theories that advocated for transformation of education system (Kennedy & Kennedy, 2010). The theories concentrated a lot on disestablishment of traditional schools and enhancement of advanced informal learning webs. This paper looks at the historical background of Ivan Illich and his theories that fall within the theme of education. Ivan Illich background Ivan Illich, a social philosopher, is an author of various books, which include The Deschooling of society, Medical Nemesis and Gender. He was born in 1926 in Vienna, Australia and raised by a Roman Catholic father, Ivan Peter and a mother, Ellen Illich, who had a Jewish ancestry. Ivan Illich studied at piaristengymnasium in Vienna and later after secretly vacating a Hitler-controlled Australia, joined the University of Florence and majored in chemistry (Kennedy & Kennedy, 2010). At twenty four years of age, Ivan Illich acquired his Ph.D. in history at the University of Salzburg. In 1951, after training for priesthood at Gregorian University in Rome, he was ordained a priest. As a priest, Ivan Illich met with Jacques Maritain, a catholic philosopher, who happened to be his mentor and all-time friend. It is through Jacques Maritain that Ivan Illich managed to further develop his philosophical ideas. Ivan Illich moved to America in 1951and was assigned to Puerto Rican parish. After five years, he was made a monsignor and allowed to be a vice-rector of Catholic University at Ponce in Puerto Rico. Ivan Illich worked for church for several decades as he moves from country to country. His criticisms on formal education made him to leave U.S. and settle at Cuernavaca in Mexico for several years before moving to German. In 1970s, Ivan Illich called for transformation of the prevailing social institutions. He claimed that schools are like lottery for which majority of the people invests but very few win. He therefore suggested for de-schooling society as a way of solving the prevailing unjust situation. For over thirty five years, Ivan Illich proved to be a prominent social critic who analyzed the claims of individuals’ daily lives (Illich & Cayley, 2005). Theories of Ivan Illich Ivan Illich suggested several theories that criticize the modernization and corrupting effect of institutions. His theories were based a lot on counter productivity principle. According to Peters & Britez (2008), counter productivity is a situation in which a primarily beneficial process transforms into a negative one. Ivan Illich applied the principle majorly on matters pertaining de-schooling and travel. He believed that past a certain crucial speed, saving time is not possible without making another person to lose it (Giddens, 2006). Ivan Illich is an intellectual maverick who applied metaphors and parables in his philosophical work. Individuals who did not read his related works found it hard to understand his philosophical ideas particularly on matters pertaining de-schooling, conviviality, institutionalized values, measurements of values, packaging values and self-perpetuating progress. Ivan’s theory of Institutionalized values was based a lot on belief that schooling process generates something of value. It was assumed that learning can only be obtained from schools and that the demand for schooling is due to existence of schools. This therefore implied that effective education can only be obtained through learning, that the significance of learning enhances with the size of attendance and that the value of learning can be measured and documented by grades and certificates. Ivan Illich, however, in his institutionalized values theory had different perceptions (Illich & Cayley, 2005). He believed that learning is a human activity that requires a little manipulation by others. Most learning, according to him, can be obtained through active participation in meaningful settings but not through instruction. Illich & Cayley (2005) argues that School enables learners to identify their personal, cognitive growth with detailed arrangement and manipulation. Under measurement of values theory, Ivan Illich believed that individual development cannot be measured by schooling’s yardstick. Ivan argued that the moment individuals understand that values can be generated and measured they tend to comply with all types of rankings. He suggested that individuals who accept the standard of other people for measurement of their development, finds themselves employing similar standard. Individuals therefore need to put themselves in the required slots, force themselves into the niche that they are expected to look for and put their fellow individuals at a place they fit best until everyone and everything fits (Illich & Cayley, 2005). In packaging values theory, Ivan suggests that the school normally sells curriculum and the outcome of the process of curriculum production can resemble any other contemporary staple product. The distributor or the teacher provides the final product to the consumer or pupil, whose response is critically analyzed and charted to give research data that are used to prepare the model, which can be graded or aided visually (Giddens, 2006). Ivan Illich, under the theory of self-perpetuating progress, discuss about consumption, production and development. Ivan relates the three with the race for certificates, diplomas and degrees, since the size of educational qualifications is relative to the likelihood of obtaining a good job. According to Ivan Illich, consumer working societies is based greatly on this theory and its continuation is essentially part of permanent regimentation’s game. Self-perpetuating progress is very essential since it develops both the survival of economic order created on co-production of commodities and demands and political order created on the nation-state and received by students through schooling. In this theory, it is believed that pupils or consumers are taught how to transform their demands to marketable values, even if the eternal progress cycle can never head to maturity. Ivan illustrates in the theory that apart from schools there are other modern institutions whose main aim is to shape the perception of individuals about the reality. Illich & Cayley (2005) argue that factors such as media, informal socialization networks, social origins and family environment have contributed in shaping people’s view about the reality. These factors, according to Ivan Illich, are essential elements that mould behavior and values of a person. He believed that the school is the most enslaving system. Ivan Illich argued that school impinges closely on individuals in a way that it makes it hard for a person to move a way from it. Under conviviality, Ivan Illich suggested the involvement of independent and creative association between individuals and between individuals with the surrounding environment. He believed that his views contradict individuals’ conditioned response to demands made on them by man-made environment and other individuals. In his argument, Ivan Illich considers conviviality to be freedom of a person that is identified in personal interdependence. He also suggested that when conviviality is minimized below a particular level, the needs developed among members of the society cannot be satisfied effectively by any amount of industrial productivity. Ivan claimed that a more pleasing future depends on individuals’ deliberate selection of life of action over life of consumption, upon engendering lifestyle. The selection, according to Ivan Illich, can assist individuals to be independent, but still associate with one another. Ivan Illich was against a lifestyle that only permits the making and unmaking, production and consumption. He viewed this kind of lifestyle as purely a way station on the road to environment’s depletion and pollution. Ivan believed that the future relies heavily on people’s choice of institutions that supports life of action rather than people’s creation of new technologies and ideologies. He therefore supported the development of conviviality rather than institutions that are manipulative. In matters pertaining de-schooling, Ivan Illich argued that an excellent education system need to have three purposes, which are to offer everyone what they need to learn through resource accessibility, opening doors for everyone who are willing to share knowledge by identifying a group that is interested in knowledge sharing and developing opportunities for individuals who are willing to present an idea to the public so as to familiarize their arguments (Spring, 2006). Ivan Illich suggested four discrete channels or learning exchanges that can assist in attaining a good education system. He later named the channels, educational or learning webs (Ballantine & Spade, 2008). Conclusion From the discussion, it is quite clear that Ivan Illich is a social philosopher with a strong educational and religion background. Having brought up by a religious father and mother, he was ordained as a priest and served in several countries. At the age of 30, Ivan Illich managed to secure a Ph.D. in history from University of Salzburg. Ivan Illich suggested several theories that criticize the modernization and corrupting effect of institutions. Majority of Ivan’s theories were based on counter productivity principle. Ivan Illich talked about Institutionalized values, measurement of values, packaging values, self-perpetuating progress, de-schooling and conviviality. Under institutionalized values, Ivan believed that learning is a human activity that requires a little manipulation by others. In matters pertaining de-schooling, Ivan Illich argued that an excellent education system need to have three purposes. References Ballantine H. & Spade J. (2008). Schools and society: a sociological approach to education. New York: Pine Forge Press. Giddens A. (2006). Sociology. New York: Polity. Kennedy P. & Kennedy C. (2010). Using Theory to Explore Health, Medicine and Society. New York: The Policy Press. Illich I. & Cayley D. (2005) .The Rivers north of the future: the testament of Ivan Illich. Toronto: House of Anansi Press. Peters, M. A. & Britez, R. (2008). Open Education and Education for Openness. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers. Peters, M. A. & Roberts, P. (2011). The Virtues of Openness: Education, science and scholarship in the digital age. Boulder, CO: Paradigm Press). Spring H. (2006). Wheels in the head: educational philosophies of authority, freedom, and culture from Socrates to human rights. London: Routledge. Read More