Mine and Mind

MICHAEL KARIUKI – 0721 666 098, mickariuki@yahoo.com

Should we and can we develop an African philosophy of education?: Pedagogy of Sagacity

In 1986, Njoroge and Bennaars, published Philosophy and education in Africa; an introductory text for students of education. Since the publication of this textbook there has been an intellectual aridity in this area of educational philosophizing in Kenya. This is in spite of the said textbook being merely introductory or prolegomenon. More importantly is the model proposed and formulated in this textbook intended as a conceptual framework for developing an African philosophy of education (1986; 92). This model has remained un-attempted.

My paper will argue in the affirmative while distinguishing should as a non-moral normative imperative and can as a question of ability. While indeed we should develop African philosophy of education this imperative remains unachievable until we have experts with requisite scholarly abilities.

Problem of shortage of educational philosophers

Experts in philosophy of education are called educational philosophers. They should be trained in technical philosophy and educational sciences. The two disciplines must meet in one. To ‘meet in one,’ means that an educational philosopher should integrate both technical philosophy and educational sciences as an integral area of academic specialization. Educational philosopher is the middle term between technical philosophy and educational sciences. In other words one should have academic qualification as a technical philosopher and as a trained professional teacher.

Lack of this ‘meeting in one’ of the two areas is to blame for lack of resources in this area. It means persons who are lesser than the ideal are teaching this discipline. There are two types of categories of teachers of philosophy of education in Africa who are lesser than the ideal.

The generalists and the specialists, the former are professional educators without philosophical footing. The latter are academic philosophers without educational training. Both as Plato would say must be debarred and be made to give way for educational philosopher.

Generalists make philosophy of education be about general principles, aims and goals of education. The technical philosopher makes philosophy of education too abstract and unrelated to everyday concerns of professional teacher in schooling. The latter stand accused of arm chair speculation, the latter stands accused of generality.

The model of African philosophy of education: Pedagogy of sagacity

Pedagogy of Sagacity stands on two feet – one foot is planted in Sage philosophy and the other in Pedagogy of Oppressed – both feet are rooted in the conceptual model for developing African philosophy of education as articulated by Njoroge and Bennaars (1986, 88-89).

Pedagogy of Sagacity or Sagacious Pedagogy is developed as an attempt to transcend the original impetus of the project of Sage philosophy of Nairobi School. As Gail Presbey states,

I suggest that the original impetus for starting the sage philosophy project – the defense against Euro-American skeptics who thought Africans incapable of philosophizing – has been outgrown. The present need for studies of African sages is to benefit from their wisdom, both in Africa and around the world. I also suggest that the title ’sage’ has to be problematized. While there were good reasons to focus earlier on rural elders as overlooked wise philosophers, the emphasis now should be on admiring philosophical thought wherever it may be found-in women, youth, and urban Africans as well. In such a way, philosophy will be further relevant to people’s lives, and further light will be shed and shared regarding the lived experience in Africa.

Gail concludes by pointing out that

Whether, and in what way, sage philosophy continues and grows will be determined in part by the ideas of those who have the will to continue it; their works will help define the terms “sage” and “sage philosophy” in the future.

Pedagogy of Sagacity is contemplated here as a possible contribution to the development of Sage philosophy in terms of African philosophy of education. Njoroge and Bennaars (1986, 98) have formulated

…a basic framework within which philosophical thinking about African education must be located. Within this model we identified four distinct areas of concern each reflecting a specific function of Technical Philosophy, a specific approach in educational Philosophy and a specific trend in African Philosophy. These areas of concern are: the Ethnophilosophy of Education, the Phenomenology of African Education, the Critique of African Education and the Philosophical analysis of African Education.

The authors (1986, 88) intend this to be a normative ‘framework within which to locate educational philosophy in Africa.’ Thus they state that (1986, 89),

…we can now establish what ought to be the major features or concerns of an African Philosophy of Education; thus we may arrive at a MODEL that brings out the specific features of a truly African Philosophy of Education.

For this model to be realized two criteria or conditions must be fulfilled, namely technical and African. As regards the former criterion ‘an African Philosophy of Education, to be recognized as truly technical, (it) must display similar functions and approaches as the Technical Philosophy of Education’ (1986, 89). There are four functions of technical philosophy namely, critical, rational, phenomenological and speculative (1986, 23-24). Corresponding to these four functions respectively are four approaches to philosophy of education namely, implicational, existential, critical and analytical approaches (1986, 89).

With regard to the second criterion or condition African philosophy must be African that is ‘it must reflect the trends characteristic of philosophical thinking in Africa’ (1986, 89). Njoroge and Bennaars (1986, 83-89) have delineated four trends in African philosophy namely, ethno-philosophy, cultural philosophy, political philosophy and formal philosophy. Each of these trends is paired with a corresponding function from the four technical functions of philosophy. The resulting combinations are four distinct approaches to African philosophy of education these are; ethno-philosophy paired with speculative function results in implications approach in African philosophy of education; cultural philosophy paired with phenomenological function results in existential approach; political philosophy paired with critical function results in critical approach; and lastly formal philosophy paired with analytical function results in analytical approach (1986, 89).

We can therefore identify ‘four major areas of concern, which may be called the basis … of a truly African Philosophy of Education.’ These are ethno-philosophy of education; phenomenology of African education; critique of African education; and philosophical analysis of African education.[1] In Aristotelian causality technical functions of philosophy are the formal causes while trends in African philosophy are the material causes. Formal and material causes are co-constitutive principles of substantial being, the substance of African philosophy of education is possible within the framework of Njoroge and Bennaars. As Wittgenstein states (1981;2.14) ‘what constitutes a picture is that its elements are related to one another in a determinate way,’ this is ‘the pictorial form’ of reality (2.15). In a pictorial form of reality ‘a picture … attached … to reality … reaches right out to it’ so that the picture is the measure of what reality should be. (2.1521). The framework of Njoroge and Bennars is the measure of what is to be regarded as African philosophy of education.

Platonic middle term

The model proposed by Njoroge and Bennaars has not yet been worked out in practice. This could be due to lack of experts who are ‘extremely rare’ (1986;78) with the right combinations namely, training in technical philosophy and training as professional educators (B.Ed). Further still development of African educational philosophy requires experts with knowledge and skill in African philosophy. The requirement that African philosophers of educators be doubled edged experts in technical philosophy and professional educators (1986; 77-80) is akin to Plato’s (Republic Book, V. 473d) observation that

Cities will have no respite from evil … unless philosophers rule as kings in the cities, or those whom we now call kings and rulers genuinely and adequately study philosophy, until, that is, political power and philosophy coalesce, and the various natures of those who now pursue the one to the exclusion of the other are forcibly debarred from doing so. Otherwise the city we have been describing will never grow into a possibility or see the light of day.

To paraphrase Plato in the framework of Njoroge – Bennaars we can state that: Kenya will have no African philosophy of education unless philosophers teach and research in educational foundations, or those who teach philosophy of education genuinely and adequately study philosophy; until, that is, technical philosophy and educational sciences coalesce in African educational philosophers and the various scholars who now pursue one to the exclusion of the other are forcibly debarred from meddling in this area. Otherwise the proposed model of African philosophy of education will never develop into a possibility or see the light of day. Plato in the cited place provides a middle term which logically links technical philosophy and educational sciences in philosophy of education in Africa. The middle term is a technical African philosopher who is also a professional philosopher i.e. a scholar who integrates both technical philosophy and educational profession. It is from such a one that hope lies for possibility of developing an African philosophy of education. With such rare experts we can develop African philosophy of education.

Pedagogy of Sagacity: Thought Experiment on African Philosophy of education

Of the four trends in African philosophy identified by Njoroge and Bennars Sage Philosophy is not included, yet Odera Oruka (1990;16-17) includes it as a distinct trend in African philosophy. There are four trends in African philosophy identified by Oruka (1990, 13 – 20) namely, ethno-philosophy, philosophic sagacity, nationalist-ideological philosophy and professional philosophy. For Oruka (1991,43) ’sage philosophy comes as a third alternative’ it lies between folk philosophy or (ethno-philosophy) and ‘the written critical discourse’ or  (professional trend); sage philosophy ‘demonstrates the fact that traditional Africa had both folk wisdom and critical personalized philosophical discourse.’ Sage philosophy is here subjected to phenomenological analysis within the model of Njoroge – Bennaars in attempt to develop African philosophy of education. As the model of Njoroge – Bennaars requires African philosophy of education should be worked out on two-fold points, firstly, technical method of philosophy and secondly a trend in African philosophy. To develop pedagogy of sagacity, phenomenology is the opted technical function of philosophy while philosophic sagacity or sage philosophy is the trend in African philosophy; from these two a new area in African educational philosophy arises namely, pedagogy of sagacity.

Banking versus problem-posing education

Pedagogy of sagacity is influenced by pedagogy of the oppressed. Paulo Freire, a Brazilian educationist developed a trend in philosophy of education called pedagogy of the oppressed (1972). Pedagogy of the oppressed ‘is an instrument for … critical discovery … of dehumanization’. ‘The central problem’ of pedagogy of the oppressed ‘is this: How can the oppressed, as divided, unauthentic beings, participate in developing the pedagogy of their liberation?’ ‘This pedagogy makes oppression and its causes objects of reflection by the oppressed, and from that reflection will come their necessary engagement in the struggle for their liberation. And in the struggle this pedagogy will be made and remade’ (1972, 25). Pedagogy of the oppressed is a critique of traditional pedagogy that is teacher-centered; the teacher assumes the dominant role while the learners are passive. In traditional pedagogy Freire identified two dialectically opposed poles, the oppressors – who happen to be teachers, and the oppressed – who happen to be learners. The teacher is in a dialectical opposition to the learner in which case the teacher has-knowledge but the learner has-not knowledge, he is assumed to be tabula rasa. Freire employs analogy of the banking industry to expose ten contradictory pedagogical ‘attitudes and practices, which mirror oppressive society as a whole’ (1972, 46-47). The teacher acts as the ‘bank-clerk’ by use of ‘banking methods of domination’. Freire institutes a pedagogical paradigm shift where he replaces ‘the educational goal of deposit-making …with the posing of problems of men in their relations with the world’ (1972,52). This is also called liberating education which ‘consists in acts of cognition, not transferrals of information’ (1972,53). The ‘practice of problem-posing education first of all demands a resolution of the teacher-student contradiction. Dialogical relations – indispensable to the capacity of cognitive actors to cooperate in perceiving the same cognizable object – are otherwise impossible’ (1972, 53). Iconoclasm of banking education allows freedom for ‘the critical reflection of both teacher and students’ this leads to ‘emergence of consciousness and critical intervention in reality.’ (1972, 53-54).To contrast ‘banking education … and … problem-posing education’ Freire (1972;56-57states

… the two educational concepts and practices under analysis come into conflict. Banking education attempts, by mythicizing reality, to conceal certain facts which explain the way men exist in the world; problem-posing education sets itself the task of de-mythologizing. Banking education resists dialogue; problem-posing education regards dialogue as indispensable to the acts of cognition which unveils reality. Banking education treats students as objects of assistance; problem-posing education makes them critical thinkers. Banking education inhibits creativity and domesticates the intentionality of consciousness by isolating consciousness from the world, thereby denying men their ontological and historical vocation of becoming more fully human.

Freire is in total rejection of banking education the means for emancipation from ‘authoritarianism and an alienating intellectualism’ is to begin with people ‘in the ‘here and now’, which constitutes the situation in which they are submerged, from which they emerge…. To do this authentically they must perceive their state not as fated and unalterable, but merely as limiting – and therefore challenging.’ (1972;57-58)

Pedagogy of sagacity is an attempt to develop African philosophy of education.  It is a critical reflection on possibility of African pedagogy, as Freire notes ‘critical reflection is also action’ in the sense that ‘action and reflection occur simultaneously’ (1972, 99).

Two Typologies of Sages

Odera Oruka (1991; 34) identifies two types of sages in Africa, namely, folk sage and philosophic sage.

Findings in Kenya show that there are two main divisions of sage philosophy. One is that of the sage whose thought, though well informed and educative, fails to go beyond the celebrated folk-wisdom. Such a sage may not have the ability or inclination to apply his own independent critical objection to folk beliefs. He is, therefore, a folk sage in contrast to the second type of the sage, the philosophic sage. The former is a master of popular wisdom while the latter is an expert in didactic wisdom.

The philosophic sage may know, as the folk sage does, what the cardinal beliefs and wisdoms of his community are, but he makes an independent, critical assessment to what the people take for granted. Thus, while the sagacity of the folk sage remains at the first order level of philosophy, that of the philosophic sage is a second-order philosophy, that is a reflection on and a rationalized evaluation of what is given in the first order. What is given in the first order is a mixture of conventional-cum-customary beliefs and practices.

Oruka (1991, 37) believes that ‘There are and there will be sages even among Africans with modern education’ for instance Nyerere. To be a sage one needs ‘to be wise and able to utilize that wisdom for the benefit of one’s community.’ ‘The concern in the sage research is not to claim that sagacity is, by definition, philosophy but to look for philosophy within sagacity, that is, to get to their overlap. ‘Within this overlap, both the philosopher and the wise man have the same function: they employ abstract reasoning for the understanding and solution of the basic questions of human life’ (1991, 41). Odera Oruka (1991, 34) carried out his research project in Kenya. ‘One major aim is to look for philosophy or traces of philosophy in traditional Africa….by talking to the living sages…. Exposing the value of such thoughts is again one other important aim of the sage research’ (1991, 41). However, most importantly the sage project was meant ‘to help substantiate or disapprove the well-known claim that ‘real philosophical thought’ had no place in traditional Africa.’ This claim implied that ‘existence of philosophy in modern Africa is due wholly to the introduction of western thought to Africa’ (1991, 34). The invalidation of this claim could only be established if traditional Africa was found to host philosophic sages. The project was successful for it identified philosophic sages (individuals with didactic wisdom) in Kenya while distinguishing them from folk sages (individuals with popular wisdom) (1991, 33-34).

This European prejudice is reflected in the work of Mullin J (1965) which was meant to be an attempt ‘to lay down guide-lines for the … Christian apostolate in modern Africa’ (1965, 3). Mullin (1965, 32-33) contrasts African mentality with European mentality he states:

The African’s reasoning methods are not discursive; he knows nothing of the syllogism, he thinks inductively rather than deductively; nor is his thinking analytic: it is intuitive and synthetic …. This is a mentality different from the European, and to be respected as such …. One consequence of it is a circular manner of thinking, a collecting of impressions, a feeling of the way before coming to the kernel of a problem …. A more important consequence is the primacy in his thought of the concrete over the abstract; and the human over the institutional …. European teachers, trained in deductive thought, pass on ideas in a way impossible for the African to assimilate. They do not square with his reasoning’.

While the philosophic sage engages in sagacious didactics, the folk sage engages in narration. Philosophic sagacity is often ‘a product and a reflective re-evaluation of the culture philosophy. The few sages who possess the philosophic inclination make a critical assessment of their culture and its underlying beliefs.’ They use power of reason to produce ‘a system within a system, and order within an order’ (1991, 49). Folk sagacity is first order culture philosophy. ‘It is absolute in its ideas and truth claims and has an ideological war with anything to the contrary.’ Folk sages ‘are specialists in explaining and maintaining this order…. Their explanations or thought do not go beyond the premises and conclusions given by the prevailing culture’ (1991, 49). Philosophic sage is critical reflection on the first order philosophy of culture. It is ‘a critical rebellion against the first order conformity and anachronism’. While the first order glorifies the communal conformity, philosophic sagacity is skeptical…it employs reason to assess it. The first order is purely absolutist and ideological, the second order is generally open-minded and rationalistic. Its truths are given as tentative and ratiocinative, not as God-sent message (1991, 49). Further contrast between the two sage includes (1991, 36)

The folk sage is versed in the common-place culture, customs and beliefs of his people. He can recite or describe them with much competence.  However, he is unable to raise any critical question about them, nor is he able to observe the inherent contradictions. The philosophic sage, like the folk sage, may equally be versed in the beliefs and values of his society. His main task is to make critical assessment of them and recommend, as far as the communal pressure allows, only those beliefs and values that pass his rational scrutiny. The folk-sage is identifiable by his consistent inability to isolate his own opinion from the beliefs of the community and his ready inclination to take refuge behind the popular unexamined wisdom wherever he is intellectually challenged. The philosophic sage, on the other hand, is clearly able to isolate the given beliefs of the community from his own evaluation, rationalization and even criticism of those beliefs. He is also able to enjoy a dialectical or intellectual game with the interviewer.

Mullin’s characterization of African mentality is a fallacious generalization which collapses African thought to folk sagacity. There are philosophic sages capable of syllogistic reasoning in Africa both in literate and pre-literate societies. ‘There is possibility for sagacity both in pre-literate and literate societies’ (Oruka 1991, 37). To be a sage is not necessarily to be philosophic

Pedagogy of sagacity

Pedagogy of sagacity uses phenomenological method of philosophy to anayze two typologies of teachers based on the paradigms of Oruka’s two sages, philosophic and folk sages. This is in attempt to fructify Njoroge – Bennaars (1986) model or conceptual framework for developing African Philosophy of education.

Folkish teacher versus philosophic teacher

By use of phenomenological analysis we can draw implications from the two sages. Philosophic-sage points to a teacher who is critical and empowers learners to think for themselves. He uses student-centered pedagogy. His classroom is community of researchers; his role is to midwife students in their search for solution to problems. Classroom is related to real life problems. Folkish-sage points to folkish-teachers who merely recycle old lecture notes. They do not update themselves they dictate notes to learners who are expected to be passive recipients. Such teachers fail to criticize educational theories and practices. They are authoritarian and aim at making learners memorize notes in order to pass examinations. Such a teacher fears questions and fails in self-criticism. The folkish-teacher uses banking pedagogy, while philosophic-teacher uses problem-solving pedagogy.

In the movie Sarafina Mrs. Masumbuka exemplifies philosophic-teacher who is gadfly that stings learners to dare to think, that is to critically question the received traditions. She midwifes regeneration of learners as enlightened and emancipated active learners who demystifies the stratified sanitized syllabus. The teacher who replaces her is an example of folkish teacher. He can at best impose and popularize authorized apartheid pedagogical narrative which  is oppressive to the African students. That teacher mechanically transmits fossilized pre-packaged ideas without critical reflection. This is a dogmatic teacher who fails to emancipate himself from dominant oppressive pedagogy of white supremacist in apartheid South Africa.

Conclusion

Model by Njoroge – Bennaars is useful in developing African philosophy of education. Pedagogical Sagacity is a product of that model and proves that it is pragmatic and relevant to African philosophy of education. There remains more areas in education in Africa where sage Philosophy needs to be explored and logical conclusions be drawn to improve teaching/learning in philosophy of education in Africa, Kenya in particular. Sage Philosophy furnishes a productive conceptual framework for educational philosophizing not only in Africa but also anywhere else where critical analysis of pedagogical theory and practice is to be carried out. This is a proposal of one possible direction among others where Sage Philosophy can be relevant beyond Oruka’s original concern. It points at possible contributions of Sage Philosophy (in department of Philosophy) to educational philosophy (in department of Educational Foundations).

Bibliography

Freire P, (1972) Pedagogy of the oppressed, translated by Myra Bergman Ramos, Middlesex: Penguin Books.

Mullin, J. (1965) The Catholic Church in Modern Africa, a pastoral Theology, London: Geoffrey Chapman.

Njoroge – Bennaars (1986) Philosophy and education in Africa: An introductory text for students of education. Nairobi: Transafrica.

Odera O, (1990) Trends in Contemporary African Philosophy. Nairobi: Shirikon

________  (1991) Sage Philosophy; indigenous thinkers and modern debate on African Philosophy. Nairobi: ACTS

Big Business,
Indoor Plumbing and Toilet Paper,
before Ethics was understood,
and
before the National Security Agency (NSA).

Hidden Microphones & Cameras,Our Political System was a revelation in 1776, before

The actions of our political Representatives like George Washington were shaped by the ethics of honor instilled by the educational system and social awareness of that time.  Ethics plays no large part in our present educational systems.  Ethics should be a formal part of every class from pre-school to doctoral presentation.  Instilled formally, the people would better understand how to predict consequences from any proposed action.  The corrupt would die out with time and attrition.

Since the Declaration of Independence (and the first fights against taxation without representation), technology has allowed Special Interest groups (to include Terrorist Groups, souless Corporations, and corrupt politicians) to use the innate weaknesses of our political structure to undermine the basis for our Constitution; a modern form of racketeering and organized crime, jeopardizing national security.

The Citizens of the United States
require implementation of
State representation, including ALL states,
by a large and diverse Ethical Oversight Committee
to ensure the security of peoples Freedoms,
to manage National Security Agency (NSA) operations,
and
to determine how the information collected and derived by
the NSA shall best be used
as it relates to our Freedoms and Security,
and to “absolutely” restrict this information
from any other purpose.

Who are the ghosts behind the faces of our government, who continues to manipulate the world into a continuous chain of wars. A chain that has killed many millions of people, and that deters development?  This is only one relationship the NSA should be informing the public about.

The NSA is soley controlled by the office of the President of the United States and only needs a single judge to obtain a warrant to covertly monitor any person or corporation (wire tapping, covertly breaking in to copy documents, copy by any means computer information, record in detail the habits and personal relationships of anyone, …).

Recently, President Bush took control away from that judge and even though the judge was ineffectual, the President now has absolute control over the NSA.

The President is a puppet of the same organization that controls the Federal Reserve. Therefore they control the United States, not the President, not the People, and certainly not ethics.  The Fed encourages war to promote special interest prosperity.  Loans with interest to both sides of every war.  Interest paid on every dollar produced for the United States.  Who benefits from the interest paid?

Current NSA warrants are meaningless and effectively allows the NSA to collect information without public scrutiny, while Presidential directives prevent the NSA from monitoring special interest group corrupt practices and disclosing those actions to the public

Under our current system a single judge would have to oversee thousands of covert transactions nationwide to adequately monitor national security issues, and to follow up to ensure those requests were legitimate. Further, since information collected by the NSA can be arbitrarily “classified”, the NSA can arbitrarily prevent the judge from monitoring the kinds of data collected.

The current system is not practical and therefore unethical, there is no reasonable way the judge would know what the NSA does with the information collected; and since the judge is controlled by the President, this is highly susceptible to corrupt practices. The current system allows for shielding corruption while promoting unscrupulous special interest activities.

The “Protect America Act” is unconstitutional. But a “simple change” to provide “REPRESENTATION by all States” in the covert collection and processing of data would make the Act Constitutionally sound.

The NSA must be managed by doctors of science (one parallel position for each State elected political representative; but with no affiliation) to evaluate all data collected and eliminate the useless requirement of warrant by a judge (presently coerced into signing off on any NSA warrant presented before them); and to require the NSA to monitor for corrupt political practices (terrorist activities, criminal activities, political practices that endanger National Security, …), with the mandate to notify the offending parties quietly to correct their unethical behavior, only then after they have failed to correct their actions adequately, their actions are publish on a NSA publicly available website.

We the people would then boycott corrupt representatives and their supporting corporations. The associated District Attorney would be notified, and be given the details to substantiate investigation. The District Attorney would then fully investigate and prosecute in accordance with the law. The NSA would at no time directly intervene, thereby limiting their power to nudging our political system away from corrupt activities.

The following details how to update our 200 year old political structure to provide representative governance that promotes the economy, desires of the masses, and ethical government practices; allowing the Government and the people to think as ONE.  This same system can be seeded into other governments like Iraq to create an ethical environment for all peoples.

_______________________________________________________

To find & email your specific Congressmen and Senators:

• Your State’s Congressmen
• Your States’ Senators

To email Congressman all across the United States:

• http://www.conservativeusa.org/mega-cong.htm

To talk directly with the staff of your representatives:

• (202) 225-3121 for the House
• (202) 224-3121 for the Senate

—————————————————————————————————

COPY & PASTE THE FOLLOWING to your Representatives

Subject: Create an “Oversight of NSA Ethics committee” (ONE) to manage NSA Data Collection, Assessment, and Directives in the United States

As your constituent, I request that you forward the following to all political delegates in every State of the United States, and that a Highly Ethical group of diverse people representing every State and its population be instated to provide ethical oversight and management of all National Security Agency (NSA) data collection, assessments, and directives.

Because this large representative body of individuals will act as a covert, but highly trained publicly elected governing body, this will allow the NSA to continue data collection without warrant. The Senate and Congress will provide “oversight and not direct control” of this new branch in our political structure, thereby providing the needed checks and balances.

The problem with our current political system is that Special Interests (Oil Companies, Defense Contractors, Big Business Corporations, Foreign Interests, …) actively and covertly influence our political representatives. Private research (to include Terrorist involvement with genetic engineering in all its forms, nuclear physics research, economic initiatives, social reform efforts, …) are potentially high risk threats to National Security, yet are largely unmonitored. Corrupt and Neglective influences are not ONLY the fault of our Representatives, they are the fault of our unupdated 200 year old political structure.

To correct this weakness in our Government, in addition to the Senate and Congress, create a new branch of State elected political representatives whose only purpose is to manage the National Security Agency (NSA), which did not exist at the birth of our political structure.

Candidates for these new positions must be doctors of science with proven understanding of ethical evaluation. Doctors of science are necessary because they need to understand and interact with the inner workings of computer software to continuously analyze the large amounts of diverse real world data collected.

Our present political structure does not have an ethical political component to effectively neutralize the criminal aspect of political pandering, coercive control over our Representatives, or Terrorist influences in our Society and in our Government, but we do have the resources to do so.

The National Security Agency (NSA) monitors ALL organizations: CIA, NIS, Air Force, Army, PLO, Al-Qaeda, Defense Contractors, Oil Companies, Greenpeace, ALL of our Politicians, and basically all organizations whether domestic or abroad. Anyone with this information controls the focus of our Nation, along with our Freedoms and Security.

An important point here is that collecting information is necessary and of little negative consequence in an ethical environment, what specifically is done with that information is extraordinarily important, especially in unethical and abusive hands. Currently, Special Interests unethically manipulate our country’s assets, despite “We the Peoples” desires. How many people and soldiers have died supporting a business interest rather than a national interest?

Greater than $12 Billion “lost” in Iraq, destruction of New Orleans, War in Iraq, manipulation of the media, greater than $12 Billion illegally allocated to Halliburton where they subsequently moved outside of our legal system to Dubai (Saudi Arabia), …

As a consequence of Special Interest actions, they erode human rights, leave our country unnecessarily exposed to security threats, and hinder commerce that would flourish were it not for unethical business practices of Special Interests and Large Corporations.

Each “Oversight of NSA Ethics committee” (ONE) delegate represents elected representation by certified highly ethical doctors and non-partisan control over our country’s human rights, freedoms, and security.

Together with Congress and the Senate, ONE delegates provide a tertiary and complementary system of representation, with each representative political faction having unique assets and control mechanisms. The combination of focused representation for business, the people, and ethics makes the system innately representative, well informed, ethical, and stable. Businesses will continue to sponsor individual Senators and Congressmen, however, all money contributed to ONE candidates shall go into a common fund to promote all potential ONE candidates equally within each State.

Because this large representative body of individuals will act as a covert, but highly trained publicly elected governing body, this will allow the NSA to continue data collection without warrant.

No longer will we need to have less Freedom to have more Security, or vice versa.

These highly trained elected personnel provide for independent maximizing of Freedoms and maximizing of Security for all citizens !!! While the Congress and Senate provide oversight and continues to control the military as part of the checks and balances to make this political structure stable.

Presently, special interests make Security and Freedom mutually incompatible. Many countries have the same political structure as we do and yet live in a police state where the individual has no recognized rights; we must prevent a similar situation from happening here in the United States. The current actions of the President’s Office are a prelude of worse things to come.

To take into account all perspectives and actual events to maximize both Freedom and Security for our entire country requires much more raw information than 10,000 people can amass, and assessment that would take these people many lifetimes to be just. But events happen concurrently every day that threaten our Freedoms and Security.

NSA computers process diverse data at great speeds to provide minute by minute evaluation of threats to our national security, and currently as directed by special interests. To stop the unethical use of NSA resources, a large group of persons extensively trained in ethical reasoning needs to create the “computer-based automated keys” (Directives) for unlocking relationships related to promoting BOTH Freedoms and Security.

Directives are computer software analysis functions that sift through real world information. Something like Antivirus programs for protecting your computer. When key relationships are found, a task is generated to cleanup that corrupt system. Ethical care must be taken to ensure good relationships are not disturbed, while corrupt activities are corrected. The concept being: “To do the least necessary to allow unhindered natural social development; while ensuring that repeated corrupt practices of the same types identified do not recur.

As Directives are developed that can be generalized for a particular class of social system, they can be shared amongst similarally structured nations. Thereby helping to reduce the development costs for all countries; and provide international peer review of all Directives developed. At no time will raw data be shared by various National Security Agencies of the different nations.

Computer systems have been used for similar purposes for many years with great success in economics to limit risks and promote investment diversity. By developing automated directives, this helps to provide integrity and consistent behavior of the NSA. The derived results can then be evaluated by this large team of elected Representatives using state of the art ethical evaluation tools; thus ensuring the information collected is used solely to independently promote the Freedoms and Security of ALL citizens.

Please instate a comprehensive “Oversight of NSA Ethics committee” (ONE) to manage the National Security Agency (NSA) as outlined below, a system allowing the Government and the people to think as one.

• To maintain equitable representation of all peoples, each State shall publicly elect an Oversight of NSA Ethics (ONE) delegate paralleling each elected Congressman and Senator position; but having no affiliation.
• The Constitution for each State shall act as the basis for the ethical perspective of each delegate.
• The requirements for election as a ONE delegate are:
  • shall be a certified doctor from a nationally accredited school
  • shall have authored and published a paper related to ethics in a nationally distributed professional journal
  • shall be a permanent resident of that State
  • shall pass uniform but unique tests related to Ethics, Critical Reasoning, probability, and statistics
  • shall be free of a felony record
  • shall not be strongly biased regarding any special interests
  • shall forever be disallowed from ever discussing any information formulated or witnessed while in office; and shall teach ethical evaluation for two years after their term in office
  • shall submit themselves for lie detection and questioning periodically to prevent outside influence by any special interest
• The delegates shall be relocated to the surroundings near the NSA and will be furnished Government owned housing while in office. Physical security for the delegates shall consist of NSA surveillance with an armed NSA controlled security force to control any attempt to access or disproportionately influence the delegate or their family.
• Each delegate shall have a two person staff at the NSA and a two person staff in their home State to monitor, collect, and research information.
• Each State shall have one highly trained field agent for each delegate for that State whom shall collectively implement directives from the NSA using legal resources.
• All work surrounding NSA data collection shall be done in a secure facility protected from military threat.
• Absolutely no raw data or interest specific data or interest specific directives shall ever leave the facility under penalty of treason related to all intentionally involved.
• No interest specific data or interest specific directive shall be propagated outside of the confines of the NSA by delegate staff or agents under penalty of racketeering.
• The ONE delegates shall poll their respective communities related to values and perspectives, but polls shall not contain any Special Interest specific information.
• The NSA shall devise and maintain a relational database to allow delegates to productively relate all measure and kind of ethical issue to the vast amounts of information collected by the NSA.
• The delegates shall formulate “Automated Directives” for automatically: flagging potentially destructive relationships, developing priorities, developing issued directives to field agents, monitor metrics to verify results, track long term effects and related relationships, provide for a continuously updated scores related to the qualities related to our freedoms and security at that moment in time, and provide simulations for anticipating the effects of issuing a proposed directive and how it would affect the freedoms and security scores, …
• The creation of directives shall solely be governed by the ONE Committee. The President, Congress, the House, the Military, nor any other special interest group shall ever have any influence over the creation of directives, other than approved ethical channels of communication. Any attempt to do so outside of approved channels shall be considered treason within the confines of the NSA, and racketeering otherwise, and all involved shall share the same fate, regardless of political standing or financial backing.
• Because the positions of the delegates are elected positions. Data would be provided by the NSA which tracks the number of hours each delegate actively performed research, the influence each delegate had on the overall freedom and security qualities, and the core generalized formulas for creating the Automated Directives would be publicly disclosed but would not relate delegate involvement nor the data or type of data that they relate. This is necessary to help ensure high-tech corporations do not fillfully subvert NSA monitored data. Each delegate would be allowed to create public announcements that do not violate that which is outlined above.
• The ONE delegates shall govern themselves regarding inappropriate actions generated by a delegate, with periodic oversight by the Senate and Congress. A delegate that fails to use ethical reasoning in promoting a Directive and which benefits a special interest may be penalized and a State elected alternate may take their place.
• The term of service for each Delegate shall be four years; followed by a two year mandatory position at an accredited University teaching related ethics topics involving analysis and software. The Delegate may then accept nomination for the following election cycle.
• Classes in ethics for learning to create automated Directives shall use independently developed computer models and simulation systems. At no time shall any Directive from the NSA be directly analyzed. The simulated environment would cause errors inconsistent with NSA real world processing. However, relationships discovered can be submitted to the NSA for review through approved ethical channels.
• Collectively, the ONE committee shall determine the information necessary to guide the President, Congress, Senate, and the Military. The President, Congress, Senate, and the Military will have continuous one-way input into the NSA as part of NSA data collection, without warrant, the feedback will be immediate, so there is no need for any political party or military component to have dialog with ONE delegates or the NSA data collection and assessment systems.
• The Congress and Senate shall provide a team trained in ethical evaluation to periodically monitor (not control) the NSA and report back to the Senate and Congress.
• The military remains under the control of the Senate and the Congress; and the NSA shall only be allowed restricted control over a military asset with minute by minute support of the majorities of both the Senate and Congress where time critical relationships exist.
• Every political representative in the United States will be able to send their viewpoints to the NSA by sending an email to a NSA server, with only an automated response. But their views will be collected and processed automatically by the data collection system. The same applies for all citizens. All citizens shall have representation and voice.
• The administrators necessary to manage the NSA regarding operations personnel, supplies, existing field agents, the budget, and all other aspects of the NSA shall answer to the ONE committee and shall provide a continuous and accurate assessment of resource managment to Congress.
• As technology provides greater capabilities in diverse areas such as spy technologies, computer modeling of world economics, …, the NSA shall continue to evolve systems to better represent and anticipate the needs and desires of all citizens.

Under this system, the NSA shall collect and assess all information as practically possible worldwide, without the need for warrant in the United States.

Instate a comprehensive “Oversight of NSA Ethics committee” (ONE) to govern NSA data collection systems as outlined above; a system allowing the Government and the people to think as one.

Many people have concern about what is happening with the American educational system. Politicians throw money at it in an attempt to please their electorate. Recently private schools and home schooling have gained ground and in fact produce higher academic numbers on average. But nobody that I know of has taken a look at where we went wrong and when.

But first a look at when we were doing well. Noah Webster once known as the headmaster of American education and author of the first American English dictionary 1828. Noah Webster could be called one of the founding teachers. He was an educator himself and wrote many educational texts including the Blue back Speller which was the spelling book of the 19th century which had sold 80 million copies by 1899. Noah Webster said in his dictionary that education “should enlighten the understanding”. But I invite everyone to look at the full definition which can be accessed on the internet. There were others who contributed to the original philosophy of American education namely: Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, the Quakers etc. etc.. Thomas Jefferson stated that “young people should study history to be able to recognize tyranny in embryo and so crush it.” So these were the individuals that were responsible for creating the original American educational philosophy which was successful.

So now, what went wrong? And who is responsible? Well, it was actually a very fundamental change in the philosophy. It all started around the turn of the century. There was a new school of thought germinating from Wuntian psychology out of Germany (Wilhelm Wunt father of modern psychology). The philosophy was definitely materialistic and totally opposite of the original meaning of the word psychology – the study and doctrines of the human soul.

The new idea was that humans were not spiritual beings but that we were all just animals and that the way you understand human behavior is by comparing us to animals. If you understood how a rat behaved you would then understand how a human behaved. So this philosophy was gradually entered into every university begining at the turn of the century. It became behaviorism and that became the standard philosophy taught in colleges by 1960 to all teachers as part of there training as educators. The teaching philosopy was conditioning and not understanding as Noah Webster had statedThis by the way, was a direct date coincidence with the statistics of the failure of American education.

So what can we do about this? Well there is private schools or homeschooling both of which are a lot more successful on average than public schools. I am not trying to upbraid teachers as I think it is one of the most important jobs in our society and teachers are, for the most part, well intentioned. I just think they have been misinformed. We need to make education so that young people actually reach for it instead of having it forced upon them. Also education is not for the masses it should be tailored to each student. In other words each student should get the basics reading writing arithmatic. But after that they should have their own personal program based on their goals. They should be made aware of the importance of history but should explore the subject themselves and should read the writings of the people who were actually a part of history rather than somebodies interpretation of it. Example, the autobiography of Benjamin Franklin.

There are about 1.5 million elementary school teachers and 1.1 million secondary school teachers in the United States, and the amount spent, by average, on home schooling per child in the United States is about $450. (Source: Charity Navigator.com)

- Between 8 and 15 million children nationwide are unsupervised at the end of each school day;

- An average deaf child isn’t introduced to English until age six, upon entering school.

- About 87% of Americans aged 18 to 24 have completed high school with a diploma or an alternative credential such as a General Education Development certificate;

-The school districts in the U.S. with the highest child poverty rates have $1,139 fewer state and local dollars to spend per student than the wealthiest districts; and

- When among 18 to 24-year-old Americans are given maps, 70 percent cannot find New Jersey and 11 percent cannot find the United States.

This country is in a sad state of affairs when it comes to the education of our youth and based on these statistics, it will take the political and philanthropic community to continue dialogue around educational, social, and humanitarian needs of disadvantaged children and families in the future to help resolve the problem.

Although public education has always played an important part in politics in this country, it has also been subject to continual political scrutiny.

Local politics and education are inseparable, as every city’s local school system is an organization with a political culture. Various groups from both within the system and outside the system compete for power. Typically there are very limited budgetary resources.

Yet our local school systems are devoted to children and tax dollars — two of our most important resources. Often times, limited resources cause varying degrees of funding ability for most local school systems, which in turn creates a lot of competition for existing resources.

Because of this, special interest groups compete, and funding priorities become the object of political debate – local, state and national.

Education is often a major part of both national political party platforms as well as local community discussions. The focus in the news surrounding our country’s recent elections.

But just in case we have forgotten, our country’s Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution delegated authority over education to the states. Each state varies from highly decentralized local education systems to more centralized state systems like Hawaii. However, the most recent trend has been movement toward increased state standards with new accountability systems.

Interest in Education at the Federal levwel has long been part of our culture, and in 2001, under direction of President Bush, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act was renewed and renamed No Child Left Behind Act (2001). This was a critical step in bettering our country’s public education – the objective being – to increase the accountability of schools that needed improvement. The ACT also called for “highly qualified” teachers in every classroom.

Of all the localized special interest groups – from football supporters, planning and zoning committees, business, boards and various other local agencies, there is also the idea that diverse communities can become divided on school issues in areas of socio-economics.

Religion and political affiliation can also play a role in the politics of our local education, while public education advocates and privatization groups often differ on local policies.

Even community business groups can also be divided regarding the money required for facility improvement projects such as stadiums or school facilities. That is why effective local school leadership lies in balancing these diverse special interest groups.

The reality is that politics are part of every local school system. Local school leaders must learn to work within the unique political reality of their local system to accomplish the goals of an organization.