Private University Dialog – My Response

We must not believe the many, who say that only free people ought to be educated, but we should rather believe the philosophers who say that only the educated are free. ~ Epictetus

I was reading all those arguments about private universities these days here, here and here and thought of writing an answer to all of them at once. So here it is. I’m trying to keep that in point form, so it is easy for anyone to challenge each point.

1. It is not free higher education. It is closed education.
It is true; one characters of our higher education system is “free” price tag, among other characteristics, such as class room education or weekday classes. But all those characteristics belong to a closed education system. When someone refers to free higher education system, they are defending or arguing not about the free price tag as one might think, but they are referring to the closed system.

2. “Free education” was an answer to a monopoly. Not meant to be a monopoly.
Until free education reforms, aristocrats were created by church, which had enough wealth to provide education with a free price tag to selected few, who they thought deserve to be educated. There was no challenge to such a monopoly back then, since concept of privately organized institutes was none exists. So government with a surplus budget did the right thing by breaking the monopoly of religion. Also in Early 1900s, Sri Lankans (and most of other countries) had unrestricted access to Europe where there was best organized higher education system in the world, for relatively cheap price. Free education was implemented in ADDITION to that, not as a REPLACEMENT. But this access and price tag dramatically changed after WWII.

3. Assumed Intelligence vs Wealth.
One argument keep on popping up loudly is, “fairness”. By letting people with private wealth access to knowledge openly, forces assumed intelligent without wealth, struggle “unfairly”. A person who simply passed A/L is no better or any special than illiterate Kamalawathi, who worked in Jordan and generated wealth for the nation. I can’t possibly see the principle behind the philosophy of assumed intelligence needed to be treated specially than proven wealth. I would be very glad if someone can explain the philosophy behind this argument.

4. A/L is not a way to decide intelligence.
There are three sub points:
1. One most arrogant and offensive argument coming up time to time is, people for open education or against close education are A/L dropouts. Let me simply say it is not true.

2. If only intelligent people deserve to be educated, then A/L is not the way to prove intelligence. Einstein, Da Vinci, Edison, Picasso, Churchill, Jefferson, Washington, Ted Turner, Richard Branson, Henry Ford, they all are dyslexic, therefore without what so ever possibility to be a success in Sri Lankan education system.

3. Even we have a solid way to locate intelligence; it is an unacceptable argument to say only intelligent people deserved to be educated. Intelligence is a result of education (whatever the form of education it may be), not education a result of intelligence. Therefore this argument fundamentally wrong.

5. People in Sri Lanka are poor and therefore they cannot afford Higher Education.
Simply not true. Those so called poor people already spend on higher education. Unfortunately may not on their own children, but on other group of kids selected by the government. Still that, closed education system is not an alternative to finical aid or scholarships. Open education system can increase the level of finical aid and scholarships to the people who rightfully deserve.

6. Where is our Socrates?
We have invested so much on a closed education. But what it has given us in return, that an open education system could not provide? All our major wealth generating industries base on human labor and contributed by people without higher education or higher education is not required. Right now people without higher education support and fund the higher education system and results of higher education system. A shame! Now please don’t tell me Sri Lankans work in NASA. A country can live on pride alone.

7. Where is the return of investment?
Education is a direct investment. It is perfectly alright for government to invest on individuals, but if those individuals could not payback, as a nation we should immediately look in to more profitable investments, such as milk cows.

8. Closed education system creates a form Aristocracy.
Back then Queen used to choose aristocrats, but in the absence of a Queen, our government chooses individuals and creates an elite group of people separated from the rest. They were provided free exclusive knowledge required for special set of jobs that do not open to rest of the society. As the same way Queen commissions her aristocrats, we commission our elite group to each of those jobs that may secure their future till death. This system morally and ethically contradicts with democracy. Whenever someone propose to open up the education to public, these aristocrats, start to bully the public viciously, the same way British aristocrats used to do back then.

I honestly don’t know any other country in the world that denies their people access to knowledge that we desperately need in this century. I don’t know if it is a crime to deny people education, but I know it should be a one.