Academia

August 5, 2013 Academia

Richard H. von Gremmler

   My assessment on the doctrine prescribed in today’s society comparative to academia and genuine and uncontaminated intelligence, is totally misconstrued.  Regrettably, the present-day system obliviously fails to embrace the fundamental variables such as life experiences, creativity, common sense, emotional insight (Self-awareness), and other essentials into the equation.         

   There are assorted areas of study, such as the science field, political science, social studies, business studies, psychiatry, and basically any subjects, which do not require emotional prerequisites or examination.  The only requirements for these fields of study necessitate having a qualified and stable academic background, and with respectable studying habits and financial stability. 

   The academic world, in essence, adheres to a curriculum designed and articulated by those in authority; having achieved their credentials through the compilation of paper credentials, which were acquired from analogous scholars: stressing and requiring redundant exams and adequate grades.  I guess we could equate this process with that of a conveyor system. 

   And the accreditation of grades and paper credentials justify to the quantity, but not necessarily qualities, with what individuals have learned as a result of their education.  But even though the curriculum may require mostly memorization, I believe emotional attributes are also necessary.  And this should definitely include the medical field, politicians, and any field responsible for the welfare of society.

    What most educators fail to comprehend is that, subjectivity will always be a latent variable.  This unpredictable element will always add more complexities to the educational process, as adequate grades are only attained through intellect and memorization; but unbeknownst to most, with the emotional component (subjectivity) always being an integral component.  (Refer to my blog on Subjectivity vs. Objectivity)

   What most, if not everyone, deeply rooted in the academic arena fail to consciously grasp is that, subjective subliminal emotional feelings are constantly being unconsciously interpreted and processed: whereby occurring without anyone’s conscious knowledge.  (Refer to my blog on Consciousness/Subconscious/Unconscious inner-Self)

   Subliminal feelings will always reflect either positivism or negativism, which are constantly bombarding and fluctuating as a result of an individual’s present emotional state within the unconscious inner-Self (Psyche, Self).  And again, this takes place without even understanding the dynamics of the situation.  (Refer to my blog on The Search for Self)

   But what if we should be engaged in the psychology field, requiring not only intellectual, but also emotional insight?  These studies MUST be designed to assist and motivate individuals with becoming capable identifying their own personal internal emotional environment. 

   The path by which the psychology field functions, at least in the past century; should we have acquired advanced credentials, through numerous specialized courses, research and degrees, we are led to believe that we are now qualified with experiencing our unconscious inner-Self; thereby possessing the wisdom and emotional competence with assisting others (clients) with their hidden emotional tribulations.

   What I perceive, is that, the curriculum (theories) generated over centuries within the psychology setting, which have been amassed through many years of previously researched and empirical experimentation, are memorized and regurgitated; but only logically, and in most courses, word for word.  And once having completed and attaining the compulsory degrees and levels of credentials, we are manipulated (brainwashed) to believe that we are emotionally and intellectually competent and, are then sanctioned with providing others with what we have mastered (memorized).  

   Consequently, the present psychology field curriculum is pretty much conventional and regimented, and presented in a somewhat monotonous fashion.  But pragmatically, this is the one field of study which should be extremely exciting, and challenging, resulting with no unchallenged dogma.

   My philosophy on the confusion and misconception of this subject matter is reinforced by how the standards and processes have progressed in today’s society.  They are now educating the students subscribing to this emotional and dynamic subject, through the use of the Internet!  How dumb is this!  This proves how robotic and unemotional our educational system has become!      

   The biggest problem scholars confront today is, they attempt to assimilate and impart their studies and theories logically, and with very little, if any, excitement and emotional understanding of the dynamics involved.  What they fear to take into consideration is that, they should engender interaction by challenging theories, rather than adhering to questionable dogma.

    To confuse matters even further, even though we may believe that we are subjectively aware with how we are entertaining a complex decision objectively, could our ego-defenses be preventing us from identifying with the dynamics and reality of the situation?  What if we are experiencing this conundrum just consciously, and unconsciously the tangible solution is in conflict with our consciously desired decision?

   It’s extremely problematic to be subjectively objective (logical), and, it’s impossible to be objectively subjective (emotional).  These two constants are always an arduous conflict for everyone in today’s society.  And since most everyone is emotionally complicated (lacking Self-awareness), individuals will react emotionally (subliminally) in all situations, even while needing to believe they are actually being logical.  (Refer to my blog on Emotional Needs)

   During my many years in academia and counseling since 1960, I have found the majority of professors, educators and students to be extremely susceptible with being influenced toward specific theorists, such as Freud, Jung, Maslow, Piaget, etc.  I eventually came to the conclusion that, the respective preferences were selected because of emotional comfort and the fear with challenging theories they don’t understand, especially when hitting on a nerve that reveals their own insecurities; rather than what might be realistically conducive for them.

   This is one of the reasons why many individuals will create their own reality, even though while totally out of touch with their actual reality.  (Refer to my blog on The Actuality of Reality)

   It’s much simpler and less stressful adhering to theories that are agreeable and compatible with an individual’s personal hypotheses.  This reveals that, because of the coincidental comfort with various theories, educators and students will ALWAYS choose the easiest path.   This allows for additional time for memorizing and achieving more impressive paper credentials, but mainly, not being required to face a theory that may have an effect on their weak egos. 

   The biggest complication arises with those individuals having achieved extreme credentials, and with negligible understanding of the emotional dynamics involved.  And again, it’s much less stressful than questioning and challenging the material for personal emotional gains, and especially if there’s no one to assist with determining the genuine resolution. 

   Also, and especially with the extremely erudite credentialed scholars, most of whom who have an inadequacy complex with not being able understanding various theories and philosophies, whereby, conveniently coming to the conclusion that the respective theories are unsubstantiated.  It’s much less stressful and time consuming pumping out degrees and credentials through memorization, rather than exerting time and energy challenging and evaluating various theories.  And all of this is accomplished through the assistance of ego-defense mechanisms.  (Refer to my blog on Ego-Defense Mechanisms)

   I always find it interesting observing the self-appointed or politically appointed so-called intellects parading and validating one another while disputing extremely well founded and authenticated theories that they fail to understand.  But because of their extreme insecurities and weak egos, and consciously experiencing failure for not understanding particular theories, their only recourse is to deny and attempt to discredit the theorists and theories they fear.

    Memorization and the understanding of certain conventional word usage and definitions in this field are essential.   But what about the emotional intensity and understanding the depth of the terminology offered? 

   What are we able to learn from memorizing emotional concepts and theories out of a book?  How can we understand and experience the emotional gravity of the feelings deriving from our emotions through researching subject matter that had been previously researched by others; theories that had been previously researched from someone else’s research, and so on; with no one having any clue as to the emotional depth of the text they had memorized and regurgitated? 

   We can study and attempt to internalize what various professed theorists have philosophized, but how are we able to emotionally experience the depth of the respective theories?  And especially when dealing with educators whom are relentlessly dogged about their biased beliefs?

   And again, because of insecurities and weak egos, and after dedicating many years toward their studies, it’s almost impossible for the more advanced educators (paper credentialed only) to be able to accept not understanding certain theories that they have been accredited with.

   It’s intriguing observing the numerous self-professed scholars at the various campuses, and also in politics, pretending to be superior to the students and other less paper credentialed staff.  It’s basically a pecking order mentality: dependent on the degree of tenure and, with paper credentials and politics determining an individual’s status.  It’s important to note that, the only audiences are those who are also extremely insecure and addicted to the biased beliefs instilled into the naïve minds of the students and followers (puppets).

   If this predetermined logically designed course of action was intended to be successful, why are there such a vast number of unfortunate and dysfunctional individuals clogging up our educational systems and governments?  And considering the extreme illiteracy, crime, violence and wars in the world, and especially within our own society, where are the dedicated, considerate and honorable leaders?  Boy, talk about screwing up our children!

   Looking at the current state of affairs soberly, tells us: crime and violence are substantially on the increase; wars and insurrections are at an all time high; prejudice of religion, race, and even within our educational systems, are constantly dividing and segregating. 

   What has ever happened to the compassion for one another?  Where is the nuclear family?  Where is the value of friendship?  Would money and power have any influence over which we might choose as friends and associates?  Astutely expressed, the Soviet Union defines capitalism in the western world as “man exploiting man.”  This is really something for our society to consider.

                                                70 % completed