Att vakna upp ordentligt först efter att värsta diskussionerna är förbi är någonting jag vant mig vid. Fastän det jag tangerar i följande text inte är så aktuellt längre, så är konceptet precis lika aktuellt nu som alltid.
För tillfället diskuteras det en del om att inträdesproven till universiten skulle slopas. Detta är någonting så hemskt och förskräckligt så jag inte kan uttrycka det med ord. Om vi rent konkret tänker vad det här skulle betyda i praktiken, så skulle det första en tänker på vara att studentskrivningarna skulle spela den viktigaste rollen vid val av studerande till universitet. Troligtvis påverkar det inte största delen av befolkningen, skulle man hastigt tänka. Men hur är det egentligen? Vad skulle ske? Jag är rätt så säker på att hela sociala infrastrukturen skulle kollapsa. För att få studieplats skulle det krävas att ifrågavarande eleven skulle ha minst sagt utmärkta betyg. Studentskrivningarnas nivå skulle troligtvis förändras, redan att få studieplats i gymnasiet skulle troligtvis försvåras.
Allt det här är enligt mig bagateller jämfört med det verkliga problemet; barnen skulle hamna i prestationshelvetet strax de lär sig läsa. Det skulle krävas massor av dem. Hela livet skulle vara en förberedelse inför studentskrivningarna. Helt absurdt. De unga stackarna skulle måsta tävla,tävla,tävla, tävla, för att bevisa att de hör till den eliten som har möjlighet att studera på universitetsnivå. De svaga krossas, medan de starkt begåvade uppnår sina mål i livet, målet som troligtvis ändrats totalt under den långa resan dit. Det skulle vara föräldrarna som styr barnet till deras ekonom-drömyrke; prep-kurser och inriktade skolor, som försäkrar barnets kunskaper i precis de ämnena som är viktiga för ifrågavarande utbildning. Ett så kallat urval av de bästa, en gallring före skolstarten så att säga. Det är klart att detta skulle leda till att den sociala eliten skulle ha betydligt större möjligheter att studera på universitetsnivå. Bra skolor, inriktade skolor etc. kostar pengar, pengar som alla inte har.
Eftersom universiteten tar in en viss mängd elever per år, så skulle det leda till att den tävling, som nu helt enkelt är inträdesprov där det mäts på ett vettigt sätt elevens kunskaper i ämnet på ett sådant sätt att elven har möjlighet ännu i senare skeden av sitt liv fördjupa sig i ämnet för att uppnå den kunskapsnivå som krävs. Men nej, det krävs tydligen förändring. Tävlingen skall börja så tidigt som möjligt, vänner skall bli personer du tävlar emot. Alla psykiska problem och skolskjutningar vi har nuförtiden skulle troligtvis mångdubblas; det krävs ju redan allt för mycket! Det har vi många gånger fått bevisa under de senaste åren!
Denna helvete till socialdarwinism skulle troligtvis rota sig djupare ner än bara uppe vid universitetsnivån, den skulle tränga sig genom jorden till gymnasiekraven. Efter att ha gjort slut på alla så kallade mindre presterande elever, skulle den säkert tränga sig ända ner till högstadiets gruppindelningar, som redan förstör självförtroendet för många bortgömda begåvningar, som har fått b-klass elev -märket inristat i pannan av lärare som dogmatiskt skickar vissa elever till mindre grupper där de får lära sig med hjälp av en handledare. Visserligen är det här inte så galet, om det skulle fungera. Men som sagt så efter att ha fått den stämpeln så kan det vara svårt att riva sig bort, fastän hur man försöker.
De svaga skall tydligen utrotas, och de som vid födseln bestäms vara så kallade starka individer, intellektuella människor, framtidens hopp, så skall få förverkliga sina drömmar. Denna socialdarwinism måste vi få slut på före det rotar sig i vår redan så förvrängda skolsystem!
tiistai 20. huhtikuuta 2010
keskiviikko 14. huhtikuuta 2010
The Hunt
Is The Hunt actually everything there is for people?
By the term The Hunt I refer to the endless hunt of a partner. Is that really SO important? To me, it seems like to some people that's everything there is to life. When you've found your partner you're happy; happiness is impossible before that. Of course I understand that it feels great to have someone beside you, someone who supports you etc. But you DON'T HAVE TO have a partner to be happy.
This endless search seems to destroy people. We live in a very dogmatic society where every person who's still single at 22 are seen as failures, to some extent that is. When relatives and friends ask if someone has found someone and they get a negative answer their usual reaction is "Oh, I'm sorry... that's too bad. But you'll find someone soon" WHAT kind of an answer is that? Do they really think the person is someway unhappy just because of that? People who live alone are usually considered as loners, even though they probably have a much wider range of friends and acquaintances as people who live in relationships have.
I'm not saying that everyone should live alone, I'm not saying that it's what I necessarily want. I'm just saying that it's nothing to have pressure over. I think that's one of the main reasons why people are depressed. It's not because they feel that they're lonely when they're single. It's because they feel that they aren't normal because of that, that there's something wrong with them.
Besides, I think most of the marriages which end up in divorce are because the couple just forced themselves to be with somebody they to some extent couldn't even imagine to love in a way they should. There are things you can't do if you're single, but there's also a lot of things you can't do when you're in a relationship, and I'm not only talking about sex... For example such regular thing as reading a book as long as you like in the evening, waking up when you want, making the food you want, when you want etcetc.
To conclude this: bläh.
By the term The Hunt I refer to the endless hunt of a partner. Is that really SO important? To me, it seems like to some people that's everything there is to life. When you've found your partner you're happy; happiness is impossible before that. Of course I understand that it feels great to have someone beside you, someone who supports you etc. But you DON'T HAVE TO have a partner to be happy.
This endless search seems to destroy people. We live in a very dogmatic society where every person who's still single at 22 are seen as failures, to some extent that is. When relatives and friends ask if someone has found someone and they get a negative answer their usual reaction is "Oh, I'm sorry... that's too bad. But you'll find someone soon" WHAT kind of an answer is that? Do they really think the person is someway unhappy just because of that? People who live alone are usually considered as loners, even though they probably have a much wider range of friends and acquaintances as people who live in relationships have.
I'm not saying that everyone should live alone, I'm not saying that it's what I necessarily want. I'm just saying that it's nothing to have pressure over. I think that's one of the main reasons why people are depressed. It's not because they feel that they're lonely when they're single. It's because they feel that they aren't normal because of that, that there's something wrong with them.
Besides, I think most of the marriages which end up in divorce are because the couple just forced themselves to be with somebody they to some extent couldn't even imagine to love in a way they should. There are things you can't do if you're single, but there's also a lot of things you can't do when you're in a relationship, and I'm not only talking about sex... For example such regular thing as reading a book as long as you like in the evening, waking up when you want, making the food you want, when you want etcetc.
To conclude this: bläh.
maanantai 5. huhtikuuta 2010
Childhood
"When I was a child...". Sound familiar? People think a lot about their childhood. Mostly they're just contrasting their, nowadays, so tedious lives with their lively, imaginative, adventurous, well, fabulous childhoods. Of course everything was better then. But is it really so? Is our childhood the best time of our life? You hear people talking about how they'll never be as happy as they were then. This is something that's, to me, really peculiar. This doesn't take my thoughts to a happy Astrid Lindgren -childhood. This takes my thoughts to a dogmatic adulthood, were we're governed by the laws and chains of our own minds. A time when all we have is our memories. Nothing new ever happens, nothing makes us really happy. A real dystopia. Personally I don't think adulthood's any way worse than childhood. We had happy time then, we have happy times now. We have worries now, but believe me; we had worries back then too. "But they weren't any real worries", one might think. My answer to that is simply: Bullshit. How come? According to OED a worrying is to keep thinking about unpleasant things that might hapen or about problems that you have. I have to say I really like that definition. A worry is a thing that feels unpleasant to us. Not being able to go play with your friends might feel just as unpleasant as not knowing how you'll pay your next rent. We have to see it in perspective to our own existence and life. To conclude what I'm trying to say here: I think every phase you go through in your life (physical or psychological) is just what you make of it. Remember the past, embrace it, but don't dwell in it.
Now when we're into childhood... One thing that scares the living shit out of me is what our media\IT -society does to children. Children don't have any freedom these days. In Finland they get a cell phone at an age that scares me. They're parents can, and trust me they do, get a hold of them at any given time. Because they're too afraid that something will happen. It's ridiculous! And in fact, it doesn't even help parents, it destroys their lives too by giving them the opportunity to get a hold of their kids, and thereby making them too worried about them all the time! What will the future look like when children haven't had the possibility to learn by their own mistakes? Will they do the mistakes they should have done in their childhood when they're adults? Is it in early adulthood when they'll start braking rules, just for the fun of it? Will children have any secrets any more? How will they cope with real life after all this pampering!? You can't just avoid problems by not letting children go through them on their own, which is the only way to learn! Everything can't be easy! Life has to have it's share of hardships and problems. Some things are of the manner that they have to be experienced to understand. There are some things that people have to learn and cope with by themselves; WELCOME TO LIFE ON PLANET EARTH!
Now when we're into childhood... One thing that scares the living shit out of me is what our media\IT -society does to children. Children don't have any freedom these days. In Finland they get a cell phone at an age that scares me. They're parents can, and trust me they do, get a hold of them at any given time. Because they're too afraid that something will happen. It's ridiculous! And in fact, it doesn't even help parents, it destroys their lives too by giving them the opportunity to get a hold of their kids, and thereby making them too worried about them all the time! What will the future look like when children haven't had the possibility to learn by their own mistakes? Will they do the mistakes they should have done in their childhood when they're adults? Is it in early adulthood when they'll start braking rules, just for the fun of it? Will children have any secrets any more? How will they cope with real life after all this pampering!? You can't just avoid problems by not letting children go through them on their own, which is the only way to learn! Everything can't be easy! Life has to have it's share of hardships and problems. Some things are of the manner that they have to be experienced to understand. There are some things that people have to learn and cope with by themselves; WELCOME TO LIFE ON PLANET EARTH!
Tilaa:
Kommentit (Atom)