Eile oli meil siis lõputööde kaitsmine. Ma sain D - D nagu Deeply philosophical või D nagu Disturbing the traditions. Kuigi ma oleksin oodanud paremat, arvan ma, et ega vahet pole.. hindel pole vähimatki tähtsust. Pealegi ma jäin enda vastu ausaks, tegin taas minuliku töö, millel on minu jaoks palju suurem olulisus kui misiganes traditsioonilisel teadustööl. Madala hinde tõigi ebatraditsiooniline, filosoofiline arutlev stiil, mis suures osas lähtus enda arvamustest ja kogemustest. Natuke ka märgiti ära puudusi allikmaterjalides. Üldiselt tekitas akadeemikutes vastumeelsust ilmselt ka mu töö teema, mis astus üksiku sõdurina vapralt vastu miljonipealisele haridustraditsiooni vastu. Või tegelikult,.. ega ma ei olnudki niivõrd haridussüsteemi kui pigem õpetajate omavõimu ja suurte egode vastu. Ja tuleb tunnistada, et mu töö esimene eesmärk,.. tõestada ära selline suhtumine õpetajate poolt, saigi täidetud. Lõpuks oli nii, et minu lõputöö juhendaja, endine osakonna juhataja ja isegi ka mu retsensent, kes ju tegelikult just peaks otsima tööst vigasid, asusid üheskoos mind kaitsma. See aga ei mõjunud. Akadeemikud, teadlased jäid enda arvamusele kindlaks ja ei lasknud ülejäänud komisjoni arvamusel eriti hinnet mõjutada. Nagu ma juba bakalaureuse lõpus ütlesin,.. see asi, mida nimetatakse kaitsmiseks, on täielik farss. Mingit kaitsmist tegelikult ei toimu. Kui sõnakamatel komisjoniliikmetel kujuneb oma arvamus, siis ei muuda seda ka kõige põhjendatum ümberlükkav argument. Isegi mitte siis, kui see tuleb nende mõnelt tagasihoidlikumalt komisjoni kaasliikmelt. Kõige veidram on see, et keegi peale juhendaja ja retsensendi ei olnud tööd läbigi lugenud,.. kõigest põgusalt sirvinud, kuid juhendaja ja retsensendi väga positiivsele arvamusele vaatamata jäädakse kitsarinnaliselt uskuma enda põgusat muljet.
Heaküll, ma ei lase sellel tegelikult enda tuju rikkuda, sest vähemalt ka minu põhieesmärk, saada kätte magistrikraad, on jõudmas lõpuni - enam pole ühtegi takistust. Siiski näitab see selgelt, kuidas mõned ei saa aru, et muutused toimuvad, tahavad nad seda või mitte. Ning ühel hetkel leiavad nad ennast nurka surutuna. Saage aru, suur osa tsivilisatsiooni arengust saab alguse just mässulisest ideest. Kuna ka enamus varasemaid suurte muutuste algatajatest ja propageerijatest on langenud esmalt mõistmatuse ohvriks, ei pea ma ennast üldse halvasti tundma. Samas ütleb see nii mõndagi inimolemuse ja tarkuse kohta (ja ärge ajage omavahel segamini tarkust ja teadmisi). Tihti ongi nii, et need kellel on tohutus koguses teadmisi, ei suuda hoida avatud meelt mitmete uuenduste kohapealt.. nad on kindlad oma teadmiste absoluutsuses. Ka arhiivis ja raamatukogus on massiliselt asjalikke teadmisi, kuid nende kasutamine oleneb just tarkusest, avatud meelest ja arutlevast kriitilisest suhtumisest, mis ei sea esile ainult miinus külgesid vaid ka positiivse. Nagu ma oma magistritöös ka välja tõin, on kätte jõudmas uus ajastu.. uus põlvkond on juhitud tundeloogikast, mis võitleb pealiskaudsuse, impulsiivsuse ja egoistlikkuse vastu. Ka hariduses tuleb prioriteedid ja toimimisviisid üle vaadata. Muutused saavad alguse ideedest aga ei saa reaalsuseks ilma tegutsemiseta. Tegutsemine aga ajab vihale need, kes on vanas usus leidnud endale võimukoha. See on üpris ebavõrdne võitlus just uuendaja jaoks kuni ühel hetkel hakkab see, kelle jaoks uuendus on loodud (ehk siis rahvas, õpilased) nägema ka tõesti toimivat kasu neile. Seejärel on aja ja julguse küsimus, kuni idee muutumisest reaalsuseks, sest varem või hiljem võtab rahvas võitluse enda kätte.
Case closed!
Translation into English 14.05.2009
FUEL.. CHECK! AMMO.. CHECK! FLIGHT TRAJECTORY.. CHECK!
Yesterday we had the defense of a graduation thesises. I got D for it - D as Deeply philosophical or D as Disturbing the traditions. Although I hoped for better, i think that it doesn't really matter.. it's just a mark. I stayed truthful to myself, again I made the work that is very well intrinsic to me, and that has much greater importance to me than any traditional research. Basically this was the reason for low mark - untraditional, philosophical reasoning that largely was based on my own opinion and experience. They also brought forth some flaws in used materials, but actually it seemed to me that couple of academicians among the commitee were more troubled about the theme of my thesis rising bravely as a lone warrior into the fight with the million-headed educational tradition. Or really.. I wasn't so much against the educational system as against the big egos and absolute rule of teachers that repels students to the secondary, maybe even to the tertiary position. And now I can confess that first of my objectives for this thesis - to prove that such mentality, stance, attitude is very much spread among the teachers - I achieved this goal.
Finally it ended with my instructor, former principal of the art department and even the reviewer, who should have actually bring out the flaws of my work and criticize it, started defending it. Still, this didn't change the verdict of these conservative academicians who simply talked more, basically not letting anyone who thought differently get much speech.. they remained true to their first impression and didn't let even the best arguments of other members of commitee get any power over the final decision. As I already stated at the end of bachelor studies, this thing they call defending of thesis is a total farce. There's no real defending - more commonly it even makes things worse. If the members of commitee who have more voice, more power over others, have already formed somekind of impression, then there's no way to change it.. more you argue, the more they start to believe their version is better. Most bizarre was that no-one else except my instructor and reviewer had not even read it throughoutly from cover to cover.. others only loked the table of contents, the list of used literature, and had a quick glance at some pages, mainly to find out if the references are done correctly (which by the way were perfect). It looked like they didn't even consider that instructor and reviewer had more complete understanding of how good this work really was. And both of them said that after reading it well (reviewer even read it twice), they fully understood why I went for unconventional form/solution.
Oh well.. I won't let this ruin my mood, because at least my main objective, to get the master degree, is coming to realization.. there's no more obstacles. Yet, all of this shows clearly how some people doesn't understand that changes happen, do they want it or not. One moment they find themselves cornered by life. Understand this, the development of civilization mainly gets its power and course from rebellious ideas. Because earlier innovations and protagonists-supporters of these ideas have also often fallen under the criticism and bewilderment of others at first, I shouldn't have to feel bad at all. It is just the human nature. Often those who have lots of knowledge, can't hold the open mind for many innovations.. they believe into the absoluteness of their knowledge. But what good will do knowledge when it is limited by conservativeness.. then there can not be any development, or it is much slower and smaller than it could be. I guess, we all agree that development is necessary, and standing in one place, saying that this is for stability, because everything already is good and there is no need for development, shows the first signs of danger. Also in the archives and in libraries lies huge amounts of good and needed knowledge, but the use of this knowledge depends on smartness - open mind in connection with critical reasoning, that doesn't only bring out either negative or positive sides of something but both.. and of course for everything we also need a purpose.
I also wrote in my thesis that right now is the beginning of the new era.. new generation is driven by emotional logic (additionally to thinking logic) that fights against the superficiality, impulsiveness and egoism. We must set new priorities and standards for education too, and look over the operational ways. Improvement gets its start from ideas, but these doesn't realize on their own and without action. Yet, often certain actions anger those who have already found themselves a comfortable place and the position of power in the old "faith". It's quite uneven fight for the innovator until at one time those for whom the innovation is meant (people, students etc.) find out and are finally convinced how it is for their own good and gain. Then it is only the question of time and will until people takes this fight for their own soul mission.
Case closed!
No comments:
Post a Comment