A Zen Preist's Rant on Society and School Teachers.

 Annonymous said: "Do teachers get paid a wage that is commensurate with the contribution they make to the children? Of course not. But, like it or not, that is not what their wage is based on. And, bottom line, being a teacher is a choice. If they feel they are underpaid, they can choose a different profession."

Jay Rinsen Weik Jay Rinsen Weik @Annonymous: you are right; being a teacher is a choice, no question about it. And they can just make another more profitable choice if they want to. True. And I feel this understanding while true, is not comprehensive. The 'choice only' position absolutizes agency, but we also live in communion, social structures exist and also factor into everyone’s choices, consciously or not.

What I observe is that in a society based on profit, 'talent' is likely to go after the profit. I also observe that what little attraction there was for talent in the teaching profession in terms of financial security and respect is eroded, if not gone. So I speculate that this social structure will create the conditions where the next generation of would be teachers will to go into other more profitable lines of endeavor and leave teaching far behind. From the point of view of agency that's all fine, let them and the markets make the choice. But from the point of view of communion, we are, I would say, making a huge mistake with this social/structural choice.

The societal result, it seems to me, will be that the quality of teachers and therefore the teaching is likely to fall radically, and the education gap will grow just as radically. The problem with that as I see it is that for Democracy to flourish and evolve in a healthful rather than pathological way it requires an educated electorate. This really matters allot, as there is the bit about societies destabilizing as they become over-stratified.

Time after time we see this in history: Rome, Nazi Germany, the American Revolution, the Marxist revolution, and the Mideast today. This stratification is usually about wealth, and wealth is tied to education. So if the wealthy are increasingly able to educate their kids well and the poor are not, the gap will grow accordingly. I observe that this is not healthy for the society, which is the field within which the individual’s choices are made. It could even be fatal for the society, and it wouldn't be the first time.

On the other hand, it is true that some people absolutize the communion piece, and expect social structures to do all the lifting. This clearly doesn't work either. Then we see things like generations of chronic welfare families, the decay of the communist experiment, etc. In fact, it could even be fatal for the society, and it wouldn't be the first time.

So that is where, for me, your comments about choice are so important. Agency matters, for sure. But so does communion. So it seems to me that the healthy answer must integrate both perspectives and not absolutize either one. That is where, for me, the attitude you expressed of 'let them just make another choice' while true and important, is also reductionistic and short sited.




So for me as a Zen Priest, I feel it is important that I hold myself to account as much as possible that I do not take a partial view as whole, that I don't miss the important truth of partial views, and that I don't attach to any view at all.  To be sure, this is much more involved that living in a black and white world, but what fun would a world with out different kinds of blue be anyhow?