In the past I’ve said that our curriculum needs serious work. And in one paragraph of that article he is discussing the education gap between the two types of schooling in Pakistan. A national curriculum is absolutely the right thing to do, it would have had to be done one day or another. And I’ve said as much in the past too, it can’t be one superior schooling for the rich, and a substandard experience for the poor.
As for his criticism of the proposed curriculum, I haven’t seen it myself so I can’t comment intelligently, but if what he is describing is true, then some of it sounds extremely regressive in some places and needs review. PH is a scientist and he like other scientists are fervent supporters of rational thinking over religious belief, dogma and ideology. This part of his personality and political thinking is evident in his writing, and it’s been evident for a long time.
Dawkins for example rails against it openly and fully, but also other popular celebrity scientists question things the way PH does. IMO PH has valid criticism of many things in Pakistan, naturally as an academic he sticks to he knows and what issues he sees in his own, or in adjacent fields. Our system of schooling (if one can call it a coherent system) in some cases promotes ideology over reasoning. Memorisation over understanding, parroting over critical thinking. This invariably means we will suffer when it comes to progress in the subjects that require these skills most; science, mathematics, social sciences.
On the subject of the place of Islam in schooling, I am a little torn. I have no problem in principle with a more secularised environment. It can have some benefits, and the introduction of more religious material if done right need not be harmful. Some level of religious teaching is good for societal wellbeing. But IMO religious upbringing is instilled at home, having seen Muslim kids who have been taught in the Islamic republic of Pakistan, and kids brought up in Muslim families in the secular nations of the US, UK etc.
I’ve seen that the kids out in the west were objectively better Muslims than their Pakistani counterparts. But how is this possible? The group that came out worse in my experience were the ones who grew up in Islamic society, taught religion at school etc. While the others were surrounded by secular society and taught critical thinking, and they faced pressure to relent to logic over religious belief.
This difference occurs IMO as a result of parents being complacent in Pakistan, not teaching their kids properly and giving them perhaps too much freedom in their formative years. Whereas parents here in the UK fear their kids becoming those that will drink, party, fornicate, abandon their religious upbringing. The environment is conducive to this so western Muslim parents watch over their kids a lot more and enforce many boundaries that are simply not enforced back home.
So what I meant to say by this is that imo religious upbringing is more the job of parents, schools can participate, but it should not be at the cost of crucial critical thinking and teaching of subjects which is essential for their academic progress and building a skilled economy.
There’s more to be said still on teaching of religion and sciences alongside one another, IMO a strict separation between the two is best. Plenty of folks here will disagree. Religion is not a subject that is taught with scientific critical thought, and science disavows any unverifiable beliefs and dogma. I don’t want kids who are being taught biology to also be taught that evolution can’t possibly be because [insert misconstruing of natural selection], or generally to have facts which can be arrived at thought scientific reasoning and testing to be mixed with that which we believe unquestioningly. The logic for these two systems is completely different, so they should be kept apart.
Nilgiri my friend, you want me to give my views at a thread whose first page was composed on attacking the author and calling him 'yahood boy' and the next three on how atheists are evil and liberals are evil traitors? Nobody is bothering about the content of the article nor are they providing for and against arguments. Of course why bother to use the brain in such a difficult manner when it is so much easier to attack the author and voila. In this mess no opinion can be given friend.
I hesitated at first too. Now I am awaiting being dragged into the mud in some reply, but for now I am happy that I’ve left a reply based on the content of the article and my own thoughts.
True I skip past that stuff (de-sensitized to it lately), but it does pile up I suppose.
99% of the forum lately has become attack the messenger rather than the message too.
I think you’re giving some folks too much credit. It’s attack the messenger rather than read or understand the message, let alone challenge it.
