English 3080J
1 March 2017
Wendell Berry
throughout his writing often argues or defends the idea of community and the
local. The three readings provided, each give a different approach and
understanding to what Berry is trying to convey in his writings. The first paper
provides a perspective from a political and educational point of view, and the
second paper looks at Berry’s works through the lens of economics, while the
last focuses on the philosophical/educational aspects. If there is one
underlining theme to each piece it is the idea that too much power has been
stripped away from the common person, and this power to make decisions about
one’s life, child’s learning, or economic position has been given to those high
up in the state, federal, or even international social order.
When comparing
Henderson’s and Cuddeback’s papers, there is one clear connection. Each paper
focuses on the idea of Oikonomic, Oeconomica, or husbandry. These terms
represent the idea that the economy should begin within the home, focusing on the
family, community, and care of the land. Rozema’s work also shows the idea of
reviving the local community however, he takes a different approach. In his
article, the economic theories presented through Berry’s works are applied
directly to the current educational systems in America. Henderson’s article
also looks at the educational systems; however, he places the blame on a
political ideology of neoliberalism.
Although these
papers look at the same problems through different perspectives, there are several
similarities which stick out. The biggest of these being that both writers
identify that the bulk of individual decision making power is being stripped
away from those who are most effected. Through the work of Wendell Berry, each
of the writers make a clear and direct argument for why the revival of the
local is necessary, while simultaneously being acutely aware of how much work
must be done before Berry’s conceptualizations can be actualized.
Work
Cited
Henderson,
Joseph A. and David W. Hursh. "Economics and Education for Human
Flourishing: Wendell Berry and the Oikonomic Alternative to
Neoliberalism." Educational Studies, vol. 50, no. 2, Mar/Apr2014, pp.
167-186. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1080/00131946.2014.880927.
Henderson argues that due to the
rise of neoliberal ideology, decision making power has been taken away from the
local residents, who are affected most directly, and has been given to “... the
economically and politically powerful: the corporate elite, politicians, and
venture philanthropists via mechanisms of privatization, competition and
choice” (172). Throughout the paper, Henderson takes two stands. The first is
against the philosophical cornerstones of neoliberal economics such as how
markets should be regulated, in addition to the economic goals set forth by the
ideology:
Economics has been
defined by corporate executives, financiers, politicians, and academics to
focus on monetary growth as represented by the obsession with corporate
profits, stock market reports, and expansion of the Gross National Product.
Economics is presented as an objective science where experts derive the meaning
of various statistical reports and develop economic policies. Even more
alarming has been the rise over the last several generations of neoliberal
economic policies that elevate profits, markets, and the private sector above
all other concerns, including human well-being and environmental
sustainability. (167-168)
He argues against the idea of
neoliberalism by providing arguments for the local through the works of Wendell
Berry and Aristotle. Henderson deploys an alternative to the Neoliberal mindset,
by introducing Aristotle’s idea of Oikonomic, “which is the process and goal of
engaging in dialogue in how to build economic, social, and ecological systems
in which humans, other living beings, and the land community flourish” (169).
This idea is also represented in the works of Wendell Berry.
Wendell Berry
helps us sort out those implications as he challenges neoliberalism’s
privileging of monetary values over all others, and the individual over
relationships, while, at the same time, its faith in technology. Berry provides
a means for challenging the tenets and processes of neoliberalism by
articulating an alternative arrangement based on the wisdom of Aristotle and
rooted in the flourishing of local community. (175)
The second stand
Henderson makes is against the neoliberal education system. He once again
argues that the power of choice over what children are learning is being
further removed from the local and given to the state, federal, and
international elite. “Although most individuals are left with choosing between
what is on offer, increasingly education and environmental policies are decided
at national, federal, and international levels where corporate, philanthropic,
and political elite have disproportionate monetary and cultural resources to
negotiate and implement policies” (170). Henderson proceeds by discussing
“...three themes that Berry has woven through his writing over the years: a
critique of the neoliberalism’s faith in technocratic expertise as undergirding
progress, a critique of the notion of the autonomous liberated individual, and
an embrace of the importance of relationships, of people to one another and to
the environment” (176). He ends the paper by making the case for why the
concept of Oikonomic should be revived in our culture, and furthermore, the
author outlines the difficulties that will coincide with reinstatement of the
local’s power of decision making.
Cuddeback,
John A. "Renewing Husbandry: Wendell Berry, Aristotle, and Thomas Aquinas
on "Economics." Nova Et Vetera (English Edition), vol. 10, no. 1,
Winter2012, pp. 121-134. EBSCOhost, www.library.ohiou.edu/ezpauth/redir/all_weak.php?http%3a%2f%2fsearch.
ebscohost.com%2flogin.aspx%3fdirect%3dtrue%26db%3da9h%26AN%3d72955785%26site%3dehost-live%26scope%3dsite.
In Cuddeback’s
paper, he talks about the connection between Wendell Berry’s idea of Husbandry
and how it tires into the economic idea of Oeconomica. His primary showing is
that just as Berry makes the case for this kind of economy, so did other major
historical thinkers, the two, in his paper, being Aristotle, and Thomas
Aquinas. Cuddeback dives deeper into the economic landscape by explaining the
differences in the philosophical economies which exist, “There are two
fundamentally distinct kinds of wealth-getting: what we can call natural
wealth-getting (possessive naturalis), and moneymaking (pecuniativa)” (128).
The first system which he dives into, is the concept of wealth making. This is
most closely represented by Berry’s notion of husbandry, and its fundamental principles
are man’s most basic requirements such as, “nature, needs, and living well
(bene-vivendum)” (129). This philosophy shows the economic ties which we have within
the “home”, with the “Environment”, and stresses the idea of “home management”
above that of monetary gain.
The second style,
which he extrapolates from the works of the above writers, is the monetary
economy. He uses a quote from one of
Wendell Berry’s published works to give an idea of how this form of economy is
situated in today’s world, “For complex reasons, our culture allows “economy”
to mean only “money economy.” It equates success and even goodness with
monetary profit because it lacks any other standard of measurement” (125). Cuddeback
ventures on by showing through the historical works of Aristotle and Aquinas
that there are many things that one should be careful of in a strictly monetary
economy, and that such a policy more often than not, leads to places which no
person would willing go. The paper concludes with a summary of Cuddeback’s
thoughts such as the revival of the conceptualized husbandry and a movement
back to the idea of a more Oeconomica based economy with both our local
environment and our households. Worded differently, the idea that our economy
starts within the home, (bottom-up approach), rather than the national level
(top-down approach).
Rozema,
David. "The Polemics of Education." Journal of Philosophy of
Education, vol. 35, no. 2, May 2001, pp. 237-254. EBSCOhost, proxy.ohiolink.edu:9099/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com
/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=4825226&site=ehost-live.
Rozema’s article draws a connection
between Wendell Berry’s two theories of economy, “(a) ‘the kind of economy that
exist to protect the “right” of profit’ and (b) ‘the kind of economy [that]
exist for the protection of gifts’” (237), and the idea that there are in fact
two different conceptualizations of how educational systems behave. As Rozema
states this in his opening abstract:
“(a) the education
of commodity –the kind of education that seeks to produce persons who will
maintain and increase the economy of profit. And there is (b) the education of
community –the kind that seeks to foster persons who will maintain and preserve
the essential characteristics of community” (237).
Throughout the paper the author
argues that the educational systems which currently occupies the school systems
is one of monetary profit seeking; rather than, one which holds knowledge above
all else. He talks about how educational institutions and universities continually
repackage old ideas and sell them as “new”, thereby allowing administrators to
resell ideas for a greater profit. He
also elaborates on how technology has altered learning facilities and how we
learn. Rozema takes his analysis one step further by talking about how students
are being taught facts but not how to think critically and assess information
thoroughly. The author expresses this by stating, “But the evaluation skill
must be more than just being able to tell whether the information ‘accessed’ is
factually accurate or not. A more fundamental skill is being able to
distinguish between information and a sales pitch” (243). In the finial part of
this article, Rozema argues that education should be brought back to the local.
He summarizes his thoughts by stating, “But an education (and an economy) of
community includes in its curriculum both the visible and the invisibles; both
wisdom and knowledge. It exists to both form and inform. It is, in a word, human.
This ‘home economy’ is the economy of community Berry has in mind” (246).
Back to Essays
Back to Essays
No comments:
Post a Comment