Margaret Mead would have agreed. Mead could speak with authority on most things that were happening in contemporary society because she refused to be trapped into any view or paradigm that based its raison d’etre on immutability as such immutability would require an army of solipsistic directives to keep it in a state of power. It would always engender ‘lop sidedness’ in the world making it vulnerable to conflicts, distracting it into a reactive state in which, like armies at war, one side would gain some advances at the expense of the other and vice versa with the reasons for the battles in the first place being either long forgotten or reinvented so many times that all meaning is lost. An Orwellian state of knowing would then emerge.
KeywordsDiscipline Knowledge Modern Education Education Today Cultural Epistemes Young People Today
- Bateson, M. C. (2005). Using and abusing the works of the ancestors: Margaret Mead. Pacific Studies, 28(3/4).Google Scholar
- Mead, M. (2004a). Our educational emphasis in primitive perspective (1970) in Margaret Mead: Studying contemporary society (Vol. 51, pp. 80–191). Oxford: Berghahn Books.Google Scholar
- Mead, M. (2004b). Early childhood experience and later education in complex cultures (1971) in Margaret Mead: Studying contemporary society (Vol. 51, pp. 80–191). Oxford: Berghahn Books.Google Scholar
- Orwell, G. (2008). 1984, Penguin Books.Google Scholar
- Spindler, G. (Ed.) (1955). Education and anthropology. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
- Textor, R. B. (Ed.) (2005). The world ahead: An anthropologist anticipates the future, in Margaret Mead: The study of Western contemporary cultures (Vol. 6). Oxford: Berghahn Books.Google Scholar