From the good number of concerns generated by the vision of the conflict that is manifested in the capture of the Faculty of Social Sciences, UBA, one upon another, my attention and I am alarmed.
Entered in the seventh week of taking no relevant actor, or the intellectual, or the journalist or the politician (and there are three specific individuals associated with the faculty) has decided to give visibility to the conflict and to trouble, from the recognition that something important in a college social devoted to what he does.
De ponernos a pensar en la desaparición de Sociales, llegaríamos a la conclusión de que a pocos, demasiado pocos, les importa ese destino. Pensemos un instante porqué esto es así.
Resulta claro que a los que están llevando adelante la toma lo animan espíritus de cualquier naturaleza menos la del conocimiento. Sea el de la revolución, el de la gastronomía (curiosa y repetida muletilla) o el del espíritu santo, el conocimiento en las ciencias sociales no figura dentro del millón de prioridades de los “tomistas”. Mientras Meanwhile, authorities of the faculty took five weeks to realize that something had to do and their first reaction was to write (in some way have to call it) a statement that all that mattered was clearly not run by left .
social power in the long time that there are issues to discuss - and I mean the unique building, and maybe some of them are related to the limited power of attraction that outside the "social universe", is our current state of affairs. Long ago, can begin to be measured in decades, the faculty has taken a dangerous road. On the one hand have been prioritized logic of political aggregation over academics and intellectuals and the other has not reflected enough on the role of social science on the difficult path of building a democratic society. No offense meant, I could never do, the political character of our university, nothing good can happen if we lose sight of the object that enables us to deliver that answer political dimension, in fact, another record. This scheme led by its consequences, in the expulsion of many of the best young teachers and the impoverishment of the academic offerings, both in compulsory and optional. By not think what would happen to surrender so easily to the logic of permanent accreditation no longer think for itself about the problem posed by the tension between massive and generous faculty insists on being thought by others while screams from an autonomous vacuum and simplistic. In the same vein, the lack of thought about the excesses surrounding the professionalization on the one hand and awards are not meritocratic logic on the other, have come to build a mud of difficulties in the form of parallel chairs, ghostly electives that respond to personal tone compensation, friendly or foreign political and asymmetries within professorships.
However, this is not the worst, most painful of all this process is the emotional desresponsabilización that promotes, directly or indirectly, for a long time and the final formulation is a lack of love for knowledge, reading and intellectual work. Reaching here, the question arises, is it so hard to imagine why the invisibility of our problems? When the place where the thoughts arise hypothetically should propose solutions and not for power but for a country, not the least being discussed, you can not ask the rest we pay attention. When the same institution should take care, destroy it, is not unusual morning spent or transferred, the lack of social power to pass entirely unnoticed.
0 comments:
Post a Comment