The Instigator
illwill9619
Con (against)
Winning
3 Points
The Contender
stevenac4
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points

Education develops a person.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
illwill9619
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/7/2013 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 542 times Debate No: 32211
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (1)

 

illwill9619

Con

It is impossible to think the purpose of education is the development of a person. Here is why, if we look at Paolo Freire"s "Pedagogy of the Oppressed " we notice he mentions the " banking" concept of education. He goes on to say this " Education thus becomes an act of depositing, in which the students are the depositories and the teacher is the depositor. Instead of communicating, the teacher issues communiqu"s and makes the deposits which the students patiently receive, memorize and repeat." Notice there is no mentioning of critical analysis. The ability to analyze has been taken away be a rhetoric pedagogy of teaching thus making the educational method a form of oppression stemming from the title of Freire"s passage. A teacher tells a student " Christopher Columbus discovered America when he sailed the ocean blue in 1492." The student in turn will memorize, recite this deposit given by the teacher (depositor). However, does the student critically analyze why or how did Columbus discover America? Can we even say that he did? I posit if we critically analyze this, we will find, there were indigenous natives already in America which leads to this conclusion, Columbus did not discover America since it had been occupied prior to his voyage. But, we still have children even adults reciting the deposit of information and not actually looking for themselves and truly understanding. Our minds have been confined to the knowledge forced upon us by filters of half truths and this does not develop a person only confines them.
stevenac4

Pro

Well I would have to disagree with you and say the purpose of education is the development of a person. Well I notice you start off with Freires banking concept of education and quote him onward. But, just because there is no critical analysis the person is still absorbing information creating an education for themselves, right? Going back to what you said "Christopher Columbus discovered America when he sailed the ocean blue in 1492." I do agree with you that this is a very vague topic and there is more to be discovered about the real origin of America. But, having known just this little much of Columbus discovering America in 1492 is enough to educate and create a development of a person. No matter how much knowledge you have you are still developing the person to be something bigger and better, going back to Columbus just because that is a catchy easy to remember phrase kids do learn it quicker doesn"t mean they are not educated, yes of course there is always more to something, but having the basic idea down is always a positive. Memorization is a form of education as well. I know in fact that for English class there were always words we had to remember for a vocabulary test. Now remembering them is as far as we can go there is no analyzing them because they all have simple meanings. Just because I memorized them does this make me not educated because I did not further look into the vocabulary word? In Freire`s Pedagogy of the Oppressed he quotes "Education must begin with the solution of the teacher-student contradiction, by reconciling the poles of the contradiction so that both are simultaneously teachers and students." Which in another words in order to begin the education process the student and teacher must create a bond that develops the person.
Debate Round No. 1
illwill9619

Con

So, you quote me on the Christopher Columbus statement and call it a "vague" topic. Then further say that by Knowing this catchy phrase one can say they are knowledgeable of the subject developing them as a person. This is I find contradicting. Here is why, if so it is a vague phrase and the phrase holds a higher meaning than the words then what exactly do we know aside from the phrase. If you consider reciting a vague phrase knowledge then you are a victim of the banking system of education. You have become the bank in which information has been filtered and deposited, filed and stored away. This does not develop a person in fact it oppresses them. Take a read of this claim by Freire " The truth is, however, that the oppressed are not "marginals", are not men living "outside" society. They have always been "inside"- inside the structure which made them "beings for others."" What is meant by this claim is simply this, the oppressed is not given the opportunity to develop or enhance as beings rather, they are confined by the threshold of their oppressor and used as pawns in society, If you can remember phrases and repeat what is told to you proves good memory which is not education and does not develop anyone. Its thinking for ourselves recognizing words we read and using background information to fully understand and dissect what we are taught. This is what develops a person.
stevenac4

Pro

Okay okay I see you mentioned towards the end about just because you are memorizing words and phrases does not develop you as a person, this is not true. You are right the act of memorization does fall along the lines of "the banking concept" of education. Well by remembering phrases and reciting them is a base to expanding your education, we all have to start somewhere right? Freire says "Knowledge emerges through invention and re invention, through the restless, impatient, continuing, hopeful inquiry men pursue in the world, with the world, and with each other." I agree with Freire here what he is saying in another words is that trial and error is what makes a person a person, only learn from themselves and not other instructors. But I see a key word in what Freire said which would be "men". Now, in order to develop as a person and become educated we must start somewhere. We all start school at a young age and are taught to memorize simple rhymes to learn the basics. In kindergarten the student may learn your "Christopher Columbus discovered America when he sailed the ocean blue in 1492" which is a very simple idea. This promotes develop of the person at a young age which then can be expanded by opening to other teachers and what they have to say. But what my main point is would you expect a five year old child to expand on the topic of Christopher Columbus going into tremendous detail. We start with small phrases to promote the development of a person.
Debate Round No. 2
illwill9619

Con

By compromising with me and saying I am right about the memorization pertaining to the banking pedagogy of education then you must agree that it does not develop a person hence, contradicting your entire argument. And since you do agree with me your idea of reciting and memorization falls with your ideals on education. You then end your argument to say " We start in small phrases to develop a person." Are you now changing your argument to say small phrases are the foundation of our knowledge? So, by saying "Columbus sailed the ocean blue in 1492" will constitute as education? What can you actually tell me about such a phenomenon without act actually having background information? This is a perfect example of the oppression caused by the banking concept of education. There is no dialogue with teacher-student, no critical think, no monologue within the student to fully comprehend the information being put out. The idea that we start off with small phrases to develop as a person falls along with memorization.
stevenac4

Pro

Yes, I do believe that the recitation and memorization falls into education. No, I am not changing my argument. Everything has a base to it and must start everywhere, you did not argue what I further brought up during the second round. I also said that once a base is developed then you are able to expand because you have a general idea about the topic. You have to start the develop somewhere, one day you will not just be able to think critically, you have to start from the base and work your way up. I would also like to raise another point of being literate is also the development of a person through education. In Hirsch`s readings it says "The chief function of literacy is to make us masters of this standard instrument of knowledge and communication, thereby enabling us to give and receive complex information orally and in writing over time and space". This means that over time we will be able to develop as a person with what we have learned. Also it says "In modern life we need general knowledge that enables us to deal with new ideas, events, and challenges". This goes back to your Christopher Columbus idea, knowing he sailed the ocean and discovered America in 1492 is general knowledge which develops the person.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by SuperiorArsenal 3 years ago
SuperiorArsenal
illwill9619, your arguement is working on a false premise. All you consider is the memorization of facts without analysis. You neglect to acknowledge that many teachers, from all levels of learning, don't merely teach and educate through memorization, but through analytical skills and class discussion. This is also something under the educational system, and it does indeed develop someone as a person.

Education is a lot broader than you might think.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by SuperiorArsenal 3 years ago
SuperiorArsenal
illwill9619stevenac4Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Though Con's arguement is tragically flawed, Pro not only failed to hit the arguments weak point, but also made an arguement that contradicted itself, which gives Con points for the argument.