Uniform climate of academia will cause some disciplines to wither and die.

-


Imagine a climate controlled room for growing plants. You set a certain temperature, a certain humidity and lighting conditions, you will find that some species might bloom and grow beautifully, while some species die a natural death. Sayur kangkung will flourish in a greenhouse where coral lettuce will die because of the heat.

The situation in Malaysian universities is not far from this. The standard ‘climate’ controlling of academia currently prefers certain type of knowledge, certain type of scholars and certain type of output that results in uneven development of disciplines. Some disciplines will be highlighted as heroes and saviors of the university ranking game, while some will be hard pressed to justify their existence in a university. 

With overpowering control of academic climate, a significant portion of the academia, especially from the arts and humanities feel demoralized and worthless. They are measured based on scientific thinking and scientific publications favoured by hard science and lab-based disciplines. These are not the forte of artists, philosophers, designers and other humanists’ scholars.

The formula to address this problem is conceptually understandable and logical. First accept the fact that just as human differs from one another in terms of traits, habits, demeanor and psyche, so do the various disciplines of knowledge differ in their process of creations and dissemination. All we need to do is to give different disciplines different climates to grow. We will see those scholars currently deemed useless will suddenly bloom and be the source of knowledge and innovation the nation is in dire need of.

 Z Jaafar

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Intellectual crisis in Malaysian Academia: In search of an overall philosophy

-
Image
We often refer to the progress of western civilisations in terms of their contributions in science and technology. We believe if we can have access, or even replicate their technological advancement as well as achieve the same level of prosperity, we will reach the same status they enjoyed as developed nations. With relative prosperity that enabled us to acquire the best technology out there, the best infra and with democratisation of information, by right, we should be behaving and thinking like one. But yet, something is amiss. Our mentality, our culture, our politics, don’t seem to reflect one. Why can’t we do this? Do we lack the psycho-sociological make up to stand like one? (cite K Mahbubani, “can Asian think?”). Why don’t we feel like living in a developed society? We don’t behave like one, even worse, our collective way of thinking as a nation doesn’t seem to be beyond those of ancient civilisations, stuck in bygone era. If we look at our public dialogues more often than n
Read more

From Ubercab to Uber: The Needed Paradigm Shift in Malaysian Education

-
Image
When UberCab decided to ditch the word Cab from its name, it was a revelation in the importance of stepping back and doing less and not doing more. This is something that our education system in Malaysia can learn. We are at the time  when doing something different almost always mean doing something new, the idea of doing away with unnecessary baggage as a way to progress is almost unheard of. In 2011, when Uber CEO decided to change it's name from UberCab to Uber, one of its team asked "If we ditch the word Cab from UberCab, then we are Uber what?", as if Uber cannot stand on its own as a word. Nevertheless the company proceeded changing the name. The move was quite significant in the history of the company. San Francisco Municipal Transport Authority has been threatening UberCab with many potential lawsuits due to its unconventional practice in cab service. By getting rid of the idea of the company as a cab service, and reposition itself as a non cab service,  it simply
Read more

The Scientific mind and modern world crisis. (In search of an overall academic philosophy- part 2)

-
Image
In my previous article , I talked of the absence of an overall, cohesive philosophy for Malaysian academia. This time the focus will be on a particular philosophy permeating academic realm,  pushing out alternative paradigms aggressively. Instead of bringing about cohesion, it divides academia and degrades it into fragmented chaos. Philosophy is not a subject favoured by contemporary scholars. Any discussion bearing any abstract concept  would quickly be labelled "rhetoric" and not worth serious attention. What matters are real 'empirical' hard data. Swift judgement based on scientific data would be the hallmark of modern and sharp intellectualism. For academia, this is unfortunate. It creates the current crisis or paralysis currently infecting it. Ironically, for all the low admiration of philosophy currently in academia, it embrace one particular philosophy religiously. Admit it or not, this particular attitude highlighted above originates from A particula
Read more