What do you think?
Rate this book
La escuela ha muerto
A la misma distancia de la tradicional idolatría que de los planteamientos críticos parciales o basados en determinados aspectos, la exposición de Everett Reimer nos acerca a conclusiones radicales: nuestros costosos y monopolíticos sistemas de educación consisten en instituciones cuya función final es la esclavización intelectual y emotiva de la infancia y la deformación sistemática de sus sujetos sometidos a una universal disciplina represiva. El libro valora los sistemas educativos no a partir de las situaciones que han establecido en el presente sino de la consideración de sus supuestas finalidades haciéndonos conscientes de su inevitable fracaso. Nuestra concepción actual de la educación debe ser sustituida por una pluralidad de alternativas radicales dirigidas a la consecución de una sociedad verdaderamente libre.
191 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1970
12 people are currently reading
250 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews
May 17, 2009
This book presents more cogently and in greater detail the argument Ivan Illich made in "Deschooling Society":
School undergirds the totalitarian tendencies inherent in global capitalism by socializing us to think of learning as a packageable commodity, and by disguising the fallacy underlying capitalism: that we live in a world of scarcity. School perpetuates social class hierarchies by reproducing the class structure, while claiming to be an engine of egalitarianism.
School makes learning a scarce commodity by a whole series of inefficiencies (which parallel the inefficiencies of industrial capitalism). Furthermore, by its attaching learning to grades and certificates, it heightens the illusion of scarcity in knowledge and learning. School absorbs more and more resources, mirroring the infinite appetite of capitalism. It is not possible to educate everyone up to even the current level deemed adequate; anyway, as soon as that level is approached, "competition" bids up the minimum level of "necessary" schooling. The affluent always manage this minimum, the poorest never can, with few --always celebrated! -- exceptions. That's all I can cram into this space, but there's lots more! Alternatives to the entire school nexus are outlined. Reimer is vaguer here, but still valuable.
School undergirds the totalitarian tendencies inherent in global capitalism by socializing us to think of learning as a packageable commodity, and by disguising the fallacy underlying capitalism: that we live in a world of scarcity. School perpetuates social class hierarchies by reproducing the class structure, while claiming to be an engine of egalitarianism.
School makes learning a scarce commodity by a whole series of inefficiencies (which parallel the inefficiencies of industrial capitalism). Furthermore, by its attaching learning to grades and certificates, it heightens the illusion of scarcity in knowledge and learning. School absorbs more and more resources, mirroring the infinite appetite of capitalism. It is not possible to educate everyone up to even the current level deemed adequate; anyway, as soon as that level is approached, "competition" bids up the minimum level of "necessary" schooling. The affluent always manage this minimum, the poorest never can, with few --always celebrated! -- exceptions. That's all I can cram into this space, but there's lots more! Alternatives to the entire school nexus are outlined. Reimer is vaguer here, but still valuable.
August 8, 2016
Es interesante, pero me pareció un tostonazo.
January 4, 2026
„Educația ar trebui să ducă la o lume bazată pe libertate și dreptate; o lume în care libertatea înseamnă minim de constrângere din partea altora, iar dreptatea, distribuire a bogăției, puterii și a altor valori în armonie cu acest tip de libertate.
(...)
Obiectivul de bază al educației trebuie să fie înțelegerea lumii în care trăim și a celei la care sperăm, o înțelegere ce poate duce la acțiune efectivă.”
(...)
Obiectivul de bază al educației trebuie să fie înțelegerea lumii în care trăim și a celei la care sperăm, o înțelegere ce poate duce la acțiune efectivă.”
August 2, 2021
Understandably for a close colleague of Ivan Illich, this covers much the same ground as Deschooling Society. That book itself was so dizzying in scope and implications that it is very helpful to read a restatement of the same perspective in other words, focusing on other details.
At the same time, it helped me to understand the fundamental flaw of all theories of revolutionary change, namely that all humans have access to some version of Universal Reason, or Logos, which will allow everyone to arrive at consensus about fundamental issues. Thus stated, the basically religious faith behind this theory (and it is notable that both Reimer and Illich were professional clergymen in the catholic church) is immediately apparent, although in most guises nowadays this is obscured by thoroughly secular, in fact stridently anti-clerical, language.
Needless to say, such a dubious thesis can neither be tested, proven nor disproven. Laozi likewise asserted that in ancient times all men had access to the Dao, and therefore needed no government, by the time of his writing in 500BC, the world had already lost the Way for long generations. If our ancestors once lived in the golden age, what prompted them to abandon it for the miseries of this age of iron? The domestication of plants and animals during the neolithic revolution has often been blamed for this fall from grace, but the reasons for this transition have themselves been subject to much controversy -- not helped by the fact that this is known to have occurred independently in several places around the world, often with quite different consequences.
Rather than being guided by Universal Reason, all evidence suggests that individuals, tribes, nations, civilizations, and history as a whole, are guided by precisely the same unconscious biological instincts as all other animals, with no discernable telos or direction to be found anywhere in sight. Just as the benevolent image of mother nature in her guise of Gaia, constantly directing her Works towards greater complexity, order, and diversity, cannot survive close scrutiny when taking into account the history of mass extinctions, the notion of human Progress, constantly directing humankind onwards and upwards toward the stars, cannot survive close scrutiny when taking into account the history of civilizational collapse and the brutal destruction, enslavement and alienation of entire peoples by expansionist empires.
The rise of the present global civilization has taken place just as blindly as all the others, and it careens towards its doom just as blindly. Building castles in the sky out of revolutionary theories will do nothing to change this. Through a radical reimagining of education, a great deal of good can be accomplished for a very small amount of people. There is quite likely very little that these people can do to alter the suicidal course of the present, given the massive momentum driven by the exponential rate of change in our era. A crucial paragraph, which encapsulates all the best and worst of this book, is the following:
"Schools cannot be disestablished and education made freely available to all while the rest of the world remains unchanged. Competition among nations, classes and individuals will have to be replaced by cooperation. This means placing limits upon what any individual or group can consume, produce or do to others; limits which are being widely transgressed today by many individuals and groups. Acceptance of such limits implies an increased self-insight into what the real interests and possibilities of groups and individuals are. More than that, it implies a sacrifice of short-term interests for those, which are more enduring. This is not the kind of behavior for which the human race is noted. It remains quite probable, therefore, that it will not be learned except under the impact of catastrophe — if then. There is no need, however, to plan for catastrophe. There is every need to plan for its avoidance."
The author´s recognition of the central importance of self-insight and sacrifice, is commendable, as is his acknowledgment these are probably never going to be learned unless under the force of catastrophe -- and plenty of historical evidence suggests that not even this is enough to force people to learn what constitutes so deep an affront to the basic functioning of their own minds. In this context, planning to avoid the plainly unavoidable is, I would suggest, rather a futile endeavor. It is likely to be far more productive for people to practice self-insight and sacrifice for themselves, demonstrating and teaching those few around them who are genuinely prepared to learn, than to draw up grand plans for a revolutionary program based on disestablishing school and changing the world that is never going to be put into practice.
At the same time, it helped me to understand the fundamental flaw of all theories of revolutionary change, namely that all humans have access to some version of Universal Reason, or Logos, which will allow everyone to arrive at consensus about fundamental issues. Thus stated, the basically religious faith behind this theory (and it is notable that both Reimer and Illich were professional clergymen in the catholic church) is immediately apparent, although in most guises nowadays this is obscured by thoroughly secular, in fact stridently anti-clerical, language.
Needless to say, such a dubious thesis can neither be tested, proven nor disproven. Laozi likewise asserted that in ancient times all men had access to the Dao, and therefore needed no government, by the time of his writing in 500BC, the world had already lost the Way for long generations. If our ancestors once lived in the golden age, what prompted them to abandon it for the miseries of this age of iron? The domestication of plants and animals during the neolithic revolution has often been blamed for this fall from grace, but the reasons for this transition have themselves been subject to much controversy -- not helped by the fact that this is known to have occurred independently in several places around the world, often with quite different consequences.
Rather than being guided by Universal Reason, all evidence suggests that individuals, tribes, nations, civilizations, and history as a whole, are guided by precisely the same unconscious biological instincts as all other animals, with no discernable telos or direction to be found anywhere in sight. Just as the benevolent image of mother nature in her guise of Gaia, constantly directing her Works towards greater complexity, order, and diversity, cannot survive close scrutiny when taking into account the history of mass extinctions, the notion of human Progress, constantly directing humankind onwards and upwards toward the stars, cannot survive close scrutiny when taking into account the history of civilizational collapse and the brutal destruction, enslavement and alienation of entire peoples by expansionist empires.
The rise of the present global civilization has taken place just as blindly as all the others, and it careens towards its doom just as blindly. Building castles in the sky out of revolutionary theories will do nothing to change this. Through a radical reimagining of education, a great deal of good can be accomplished for a very small amount of people. There is quite likely very little that these people can do to alter the suicidal course of the present, given the massive momentum driven by the exponential rate of change in our era. A crucial paragraph, which encapsulates all the best and worst of this book, is the following:
"Schools cannot be disestablished and education made freely available to all while the rest of the world remains unchanged. Competition among nations, classes and individuals will have to be replaced by cooperation. This means placing limits upon what any individual or group can consume, produce or do to others; limits which are being widely transgressed today by many individuals and groups. Acceptance of such limits implies an increased self-insight into what the real interests and possibilities of groups and individuals are. More than that, it implies a sacrifice of short-term interests for those, which are more enduring. This is not the kind of behavior for which the human race is noted. It remains quite probable, therefore, that it will not be learned except under the impact of catastrophe — if then. There is no need, however, to plan for catastrophe. There is every need to plan for its avoidance."
The author´s recognition of the central importance of self-insight and sacrifice, is commendable, as is his acknowledgment these are probably never going to be learned unless under the force of catastrophe -- and plenty of historical evidence suggests that not even this is enough to force people to learn what constitutes so deep an affront to the basic functioning of their own minds. In this context, planning to avoid the plainly unavoidable is, I would suggest, rather a futile endeavor. It is likely to be far more productive for people to practice self-insight and sacrifice for themselves, demonstrating and teaching those few around them who are genuinely prepared to learn, than to draw up grand plans for a revolutionary program based on disestablishing school and changing the world that is never going to be put into practice.
July 1, 2025
Pe lângă faptul că această carte este editată efectiv mizerabil, cu niște greșeli de exprimare și de ortografie înfiorătoare, promovează niște idei efectiv absurde.
E adevărat că sistemul educațional poate fi îmbunătățit în orice țară, că sunt lipsuri și că în puține locuri se fac eforturi suficiente pentru a-i sprijini pe cei defavorizați și pentru a e echilibrat decalajele de ordin social, dar de aici și pana la a susține ideile utopic-marxiste ale acestei cărți drumul e foooarteee lung.
E adevărat că sistemul educațional poate fi îmbunătățit în orice țară, că sunt lipsuri și că în puține locuri se fac eforturi suficiente pentru a-i sprijini pe cei defavorizați și pentru a e echilibrat decalajele de ordin social, dar de aici și pana la a susține ideile utopic-marxiste ale acestei cărți drumul e foooarteee lung.
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews