Ubuntu and Buddhism in Higher Education

An Ontological Rethinking

David Robinson-Morris

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2018
• ISBN:
  9781351067942
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Education
• Subtopic: Education General

Ubuntu and Buddhism in Higher Education theorizes the equal privileging of ontology and epistemology towards a balanced focus on 'being-becoming' and knowledge acquisition within the field of higher education. In response to the shift in higher education's aims and purposes beginning in the latter half of the 20th century, this book reconsiders higher education and Western subjectivity through southern African (Ubuntu) and Eastern (Buddhist) onto-epistemologies. By mapping these other-than-West ontological viewpoints onto the discourse surrounding higher education, this volume presents a vision of colleges and universities as transformational institutions promoting our shared connection to the human and non-human world, and deepens our understanding of what it means to be a human being.

1 Turning Reality on Its Head, (Re)Imagining a New Way

All writing is situated within the world, that is, history, reality (everyday lived experiences), and futurity are ever present—each word, phrase, and sentence is an amalgamation of a space/time trinitarian onto-epistemology intricately woven into the very matter of the communicatory medium (Derrida, 1972/1981). This inquiry is no exception. At the time of writing, the world seems to be in crisis, or perhaps my awareness¹ of the physical, spiritual, ontological, and epistemological violence has been heighted as a result of the thinking and rethinking inherent in becoming-Ph.D., in becoming more human; at any rate, it seems that we are besieged from all sides by anti-intellectualism, totalitarian political conservatism, partisan politics, and a complete disrespect for the personhood of every individual. Over the past year, this country has experienced what can only be described as a year of killing, which among other things reveals—no, necessitates—a different way of being. I argue, the murders of unarmed people of color at the hands of American law enforcement officers—i.e. Trayvon Martin, Michael Brown, Eric Garner, Tamir Rice, Walter Scott, Freddie Gray, and too many more to name, but whose names must be spoken and most definitely deserved to be known—the mass shootings in schools and places of worship across the country; the kidnappings and religious massacres in Nigeria, the attacks of September 11, genocide, slavery, racism, war, colonialism, sexism, xenophobia, poverty, and homophobia are all symptoms of the same “dis-ease” (P. Hendry, personal communication, May, 7, 2015). This “dis-ease” (P. Hendry, personal communication, May, 7, 2015), this crisis at its core, is found the symptoms of a deficit in understanding our shared humanity or a failure in knowing we “are not, in fact, the ‘other’ ” (Toni Morrison, 1989, p. 9). These events “have a way of imposing themselves” (Waldron, 2003, p. 145); as we watch the nightly news, read the daily paper, and browse various digital news sites we are bombarded with images, “with the multiple faces of human evil and suffering,” and one could speculate that each of us, unconsciously, fears “an inescapably inhumane reality” (Waldron, 2003, p. 145). Indeed, to quote Shakespeare (1611/2004), it may appear that “Hell is empty, /and All the devils are here” (1.2.214–215); however, understanding the universe as pantareic² compels us toward radical hope (Lear, 2008), which sets in motion a new “being becoming” (Ramose, 2002, p. 233)—an onto-epistemological metamorphosis,³ which will require not incremental adjustments to thinking and doing, but a serious transmutation of Western subjectivity, a new definition of self. The convergence of Buddhism from the East and Ubuntu from Africa ushers in a new way of thinking the Western subject, metamorphosing the Western subject into the reconceptualized Being-Holon.

William Waldron (2003), writing on the possibility of combining the Buddhist notion of subjectivity with evolutionary science to understand the mess we now find ourselves in, posits, the ills of humanity are caused by a false human understanding of self—of the “I” that “we” become. In consonant with Buddhist and Ubuntu⁴ thought, he argues human suffering is the result of the “construction of and a deep-seated attachment to our sense of a permanent identity, what we mistakenly take to be a unitary, autonomous entity, independent of and isolated from the dynamically changing and contingent world around us” (Waldron, 2003, p. 146). This dominant view of the self, the “I” that we speak in the West runs counter to the Buddhist perspective, which holds we are all “ever-changing conglomerates of processes (skandha) formed in self-organizing patterns that are ever open, like all organic processes, to change, growth and decay based upon the natural functions of assimilation, interpenetration and dissolution” (Waldron, 2003, p. 147). Similarly, Ubuntu notions of the subjectivity knocks the independent and autonomous Cartesian subject off kilter by reinforcing “[t]he ‘I am’ is not a rigid subject, but a dynamic self-constitution dependent on this otherness creation of relation and distance” (Eze, 2010, p. 191). In short, through Buddhism and Ubuntu, we come to understand that we are beings deeply interconnected, (re)created through and in dynamic interaction with the universe (and all it encompasses), and always in the process of being-becoming. Again, I argue, the West’s misguided understanding of self, our interconnectedness and interdependence, is cause to the litany of inhumane effects that plague our existence.

We have failed, I argue, in the collective memory of humanity, to remember our interconnectedness, our shared being as human (Waghid, 2014). We—the global “we”—desperately need a dialogue on humanity; we need a dialogue on what it means to be a human being. If Nelson Mandela’s much quoted assertion, “Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world” (Nobel Peace Prize, 1993) rings with any truth, then it is within the hallowed halls of the academy—the training ground of future educators, politicians, lawyers, doctors, religious, law enforcement officers, policy makers, and leaders of the world—that provides an opportune setting to dialogue on, to be, and to model our shared humanity. Educators, who perhaps are more powerful than armies, who by their example and sole utilization of the power of voice and pen, can set about building a community—a culture—that values individuals over machines, ideas over manufactured products, and the needs of the community over our own narrow self-interest (Slattery, 2013). What, then, is the role of higher education institutions— professors, administrators, and student affairs professionals—in providing a rich educative environment conducive for human being-becoming? In this context, being-becoming can be defined as the rhizomatic formation of self, whereby the multiplicity of self in communion with other selves is always perpetually caught up in lines of flight through and emerging from ruptures and fissures created under the influence and pressures of socio-cultural, spiritual, and biological variables (Deleuze & Guattari, 1987; Tanaka, 2012).

Education, like life, is complex and chaotic; “the slightest perturbation has a significant impact on future patterns” (Slattery, 2013, p. 271). At the same time, education, or rather the act of and reflection on being educated, allows us to recognize just how unique and special we really are, which causes us to both bemoan that we are different only to then eventually celebrate our differences and those of others. “It is the disequilibrium [of schooling] itself that provides opportunities for creative tension and self-reflection” (Slattery, 2013, p. 271); this “creative tension” between the “what is” and “what can yet be” is the naissance of true education. What, then, is the goal of education in a complex, chaotic, and ever-evolving world rife with competing interests and global strife? Dewey (1902) asserts, “[n]ot knowledge or information, but self-realization, is the goal. To possess all the world of knowledge and lose one’s own self is as awful a fate in education as in religion” (p. 9). In the postmodern viewpoint, education should bring humanity into the fullness of itself and in right relationship with one another through an interrogation of power and discourse. More importantly, education should assist in developing the tools through which we are thereby able to fully express our soul’s purpose (Dewey, 1902; Slattery, 2013). Moreover, the endeavor of education “encourages chaos, nonrationality, and zones of uncertainty because [of] the complex order existing here in the place where critical thinking, reflective intuition, and global problem solving will flourish” (Slattery, 2013, p. 272). Education, given its permeability, flux, chaos, and complexity, “can improve in the midst of turmoil” (Slattery, 2013, p. 273); much like the universe it is “engaged in endless motion and activity; in a continual cosmic dance of energy” (Capra, 1975 as citied in Slattery, 2013, p. 275). Education should both enhance and value the human experience, while seeking to globally improve the human condition.

Background

American institutions are experiencing an erosion of the public trust, including institutions of higher education that have espoused egalitarian American principles and practice, in theory, the ideals of equity. Yet, even within the hallowed halls of the academy the juxtaposition of what is spoken and the “operational realities of racism, discrimination, and prejudice have trumped articulations of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” (Harvey, 2011, p. 3). This tension between the promises of equality and equity for all men and our national history of exclusion and segregation has been at the core of this great experiment called American democracy since its inception. The struggle between the ideals of freedom and epistemological confinement are felt no greater than in American institutions of higher education, heralded as “ethically-rooted laborator[ies] of inquiry where the initiates pursue truth and enlightenment, without regard to ideology, and with unadulterated objectivity” (Harvey, 2011, p. 5); however, in actuality they are held captive by the ideological shackles of the “hidden curriculum” that dominates them at every turn (Pinar, Reynolds, Slattery, & Taubman, 2008, p. 248).

Historically, institutions of higher education have been complicit in de facto and de jure segregation and other systems of exclusion, and given the nature of the historical role of higher education within American society, have served as evangelist of the white and male supremacy—institutionalized “othering” (Harvey, 2011). Harvey (2011), in agreement with Dewey (1916) regarding the role of education and democratic citizenry, argues that universities function as ideological filters due to their ability to produce knowledge. In the recent history of the country, higher education has utilized this function and its prominent role in society to promulgate the assertion that people of color and women hold inferior societal status. Today, in both society and within every level of the educational system, we continue to experience the effects of higher education’s past cowardice to traverse the terrain of moral injustice (Harvey, 2011); namely, a deficient understanding of our humanity as a mutual act of creation.

Over the course of the nation’s history and the maturation of higher education, these institutions emerged as the gatekeepers and authenticators of information, and “enjoyed the consequences of the societal maxim which proclaims that knowledge is power” (Harvey, 2011, p. 5). As the procurers and purveyors of knowledge, members of the academy maintained positional authority that allowed them to intellectually justify and rationalize practices that might otherwise be deemed inappropriate or inhumane. “This capability to establish significant qualifying and sorting concepts for the larger society—determining the ‘natural order,’ creating hierarchy, and assigning place, for example—became comfortably lodged in the ivory tower” (Harvey, 2011, p. 5). From their literal ivory tower, institutions composed solely of white academics utilized knowledge—biology and historical facts—to reinforce the doctrine of Western and white supremacy through obviously flawed scholarship. Colleges and universities, as a result of the “ivory tower” posture, took no responsibility and did not engage in social problems, especially not racial segregation, but rather reinforced institutionalized racism (Harvey, 2011).

Experiencing a shift over the last 50 years, the academy has languidly progressed from an overwhelming “ivory tower” ideological stance to one that recognizes an obligation for higher education institutions to actively engage in resolving the intellectual, financial, and technological problems of our time. Harvey (2011) posits that the commitment to resolving social problems is lacking, namely with respect to the education of minorities and the un-education of the so-called majority, “there exists some moral responsibility [of the academy] to see that minorities [and all the marginalized of the society] take their rightful places in an educated society. [The academy is] failing on that social objective, failing badly” (Tierney, 1991, as cited in Harvey, 2011, p. 10). In the long view of history, we have progressed much; however, given the current socio-political cultural milieu (the unabashed institutional and societal assault of/on black and brown bodies) it is clear we are feeling the tremors and lasting effects of the deeply ingrained stereotypes accepted and promoted by the nation’s ideological filters. Therefore, Harvey (2011) argues:

The higher education community has an obligation to help continue the forward movement toward a less racially prejudiced society, and it should seize the opportunity to help the nation progress toward fuller implementation of some of its most cherished goals. The responsibility to help implement positive change is also rooted in two inherent dimensions that coexist within the academy: ethical responsibility and practical responsibility.

(p. 10)

There is an overarching ideology that institutions of higher education are bastions of ethical and moral fortitude (Harvey, 2011). Higher education institutions must comprehend and accept their responsibility to create a positive future for society. Rather than just serving as an institution that sorts, certifies, and concentrates power within certain classes of the population, higher education must foster a diverse, racially, and culturally sensitive society (Harvey, 2011).

Recognizing our nation’s troubled past and present, the complicity of institutions of higher education, and the fact that the demographic composition is rapidly shifting—by 2050 no single racial group will be a majority of the country’s population—the importance of an onto-epistemological recalibration within colleges and universities takes on not only a moral importance, but the importance of nation building and futural global socio-anthropological paradigm shifting (Harvey, 2011; Kuhn, 1962/2012). Higher education institutions, Harvey (2011) stresses, have a moral obligation to recalibrate the moral compass of the academy and recognize the need for “increased diversity within the higher education community as a means of generating principled, constructive … positive changes in the larger society” (p. 9). Offering practical solutions for higher educational institutions to transform their hollow words into solid action, Harvey (2011) suggests:

First, [institutions of higher education] must identify, cultivate, enroll, support, and graduate substantially larger numbers of students from the underserved communities and prepare them to go forward to exercise leadership both within their respective groups and the larger society. Second, they must create meaningful academic and social opportunities for white students to engage and interact with their peers of color. The successful deracialization of American society is contingent on an informed acceptance by these students that in an evolving social order, their race offers them an equal, rather than favored, role for participation and advancement. Third, faculty members from underrepresented groups must be present in numbers that extend beyond mere tokenism so that a clear message is conveyed to all students that members of all races have the intellectual capability to hold such positions, and fourth, curricula must be broadened to debunk the myth that only people of European ancestry have been architects of and contributors to the development of American society, and acknowledge that there are antecedents to this civilization in various locations around the globe, not simply in Western Europe.

(p. 12)

In agreement with Harvey (2011), Eric Ashby contends that higher education institutions “must be sufficiently stable to sustain the ideal which gave it birth and sufficiently responsive to remain relevant to the society which it supports” (Altbach, Gumport, & Berdahl, 2011, p. 4). While Harvey (2011) offers curricular and policy solutions to make right historical wrongs, Ruthanne Kurth-Schai (1992) argues, “the primary barriers on the path to equity [are] philosophical rather than material or technical in nature” (p. 147 as cited in Pinar et al., 2008, p. 288). In that spirit, we turn to the philosophical questions of human subjectivity, of humanness, and the role of higher education institutions in bringing to conscious awareness our shared humanity (Kincheloe, 2004).

Why Higher Education?

A university, proclaims Barnett (2011), “has being [emphasis in original]” (p. 13). He continues, “A university has possibilities; and they are infinite. It has multiple options. Each university could be other than it is” (Barnett, 2011, p. 13). It is the possibilities of this other-than-ness of higher education that begs to question what it might become. Following Harvey (2011) and Barnett’s (2011) assertions, if higher education serves an ideological filter th...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title
• Copyright
• Dedication
• Contents
• Acknowledgments
• 1 Turning Reality on Its Head, (Re)Imagining a New Way
• 2 Ubuntu: The Great Gift of Africa
• 3 Buddhism: An Engagement With and in the World
• 4 A Map Not a Tracing: (Re)Thinking as (Non)Method
• 5 The Reconceptualized Being-Holon
• 6 Let Learn and Let Be: (Re)Thinking Higher Education Institutions as Onto-Epistemological Wombs of Being-Becoming
• 7 Educating for a Deeper Humanity: A New Plateau
• References
• Index