The Ultimate Goal for Society: Paulo Freire

Alexandria Combs

Paper on Education for Critical Consciousness

EDF 300-03

When looking at an educationalist like Paulo Freire, being open-minded is essential. His writing is meant to be taken seriously, but not literally. Individual interpretation is a huge aspect to think about when reading books by any philosopher or educationalist. Conforming to any of these ideas would not help their cause; only prove that this is what happens throughout our culture. Organizing different opinions and generating free-thought will ultimately, form rational people and create a larger scheme of perspective in society.

Freire (1974) starts off by clearing stating that the human race is a species like no other, and that "men, unlike animals, are not only in the world but with the world" (p. 3). We are distinguished creatures that thrive off of one another, being alone is not in our nature. Humans adapt to their environment through experience, logic and calculating the best possible outcome. We look at our world objectively and never fully allow the present to overrun thought processes. Making decisions based on the future is what makes us different from animals. People are able to reflect on themselves consciously, and think about their actions and can choose to change or continue on the same path.

The human race exists in an almost alternate state apart from biological nature. Many of those rules do not apply to us. In a civilized state away from Darwinism and "survival of the fittest", we are able to experience other emotions and feelings besides the animal-like instincts every creature must possess. Unlocking a creative sphere of knowledge, and the power to create or transform reality into how we want it, is the ultimate mechanism that makes us all human. Whether we act on this power or not, is a choice made by each individual.

Freire (1974) discusses the difference between an integrated person, "having the capacity to adapt oneself to reality plus the critical capacity to make choices and to transform reality", and an adapted person, "losing the ability to make choices and is subjected to the choices of others" (p. 4). Two completely different characteristics, yet they both exist in our society. This is a contradiction of what the definition of being "human" should be. We are evolved beings who should be able to make changes to our own reality, and yet, many people hold on to characteristics of the animal-sphere by conforming to other opinions and ideas. If no one participates in the direction of their own lives, what does this say about the future of the human race mentality? Freire argues this point by saying these two types of people co-existing, will never create a Democratic society.

Decision-making is Man-kind's responsibility. Without it, we might as well be living under natural conditions with the animals. It is a waste not to embrace the individual's mind and utilize the power of integration and critical consciousness. We should all be viewed as subjects in history, not objects. Adaption will be the ultimate death of creative input and uniqueness throughout humanity, and obtaining a truly Democratic society will never be possible.

Paulo Freire compares these ideas to those of his home country, Brazil. This is a colonized area where education, government, religion etc. was brought into the country. The ideas were presented to the people until it was integrated into the culture. The natives were told this is how it should be and many of them chose to follow. He explains that eventually once the pioneers left Brazil, education in a post-colonial society was very difficult. Citizens had to decide if continuing the methods they've always known shown stand, or if there needs to be changes. Confusion occurs between individual beliefs and the "custom" way of doing things the way everyone was taught. After a while, patterns form and people adapt to these changes and begin to lose the meaning of their individual decisions. There lies the separation between the people, those who opt for change and those who are afraid to abandon it. Critical thinking began to occur during this transition, but there are still many problems the citizens face to this day.

As I think back through our history, signs of an uprising have always been described as irrational rebels trying to overtake a power. In my own education, I remember being taught that this was a bad thing, and we needed to trust our government. Freire (1974) describes the "elite's" mentality as "not permitting any basic changes which would affect their control over decision-making" (p. 11). This is an accurate description of power in all countries. When any kind of questioning takes place, the elite automatically count it out as some sort of "illness". The term 'radical' in our nation has been used so negatively, when in fact, these are the people who are not willing to conform, but speak up for their thoughts and opinions. If more people took the critically-conscious, radical mentality, then transforming our society would be a much easier goal.

Humanity contains many different types of conscious outlooks. All people as individuals will think differently, but many forms can be grouped together and classified since they have similar characteristics. Paulo Freire describes them as Magical Consciousness, Fantasized Consciousness,