bildung and freedom.pdf

8/14/2019 bildung and freedom.pdf

1/22

89

Bildungand freedomthis topic presents a provocation in itself. Bildungis being

associated with many things; the subject of freedom however is a secondary object.Every respective search will lead to a discussion about the problem of participation,with Bildungmostly seen as an instrument to make participation possible. Othersearch processes will lead to the result that freedom, in connection with Bildungisthought of as programmatic and more neo-liberal, either concerning the access orconcerning the possibility to choose freely between institutions and offers whichpromise Bildung. Bildungtherefore is not given an innate value, especially a connec-tion between Bildungand freedom is said to be non-existent, even if this connec-tion is seen as intrinsic and thus dissoluble in the field of philosophy.

Following thoughts are not only about this relation. Rather they try to assertthe concept of Bildung(and its notions) in all complexity against the trivializationswhich it nowadays constantly has to endurein public and political debates as wellas in disputes, which are subordinated to the peculiar imperialism of educationalresearch which says of itself to be empirical. Indeed: his fight seems to be DonQuichote like in light of the astounding power of the trivial understanding of Bil-dungparticularly as ones own thoughts could end the same way as the books DonQuichote throws into the fire; with this fatal campaign he wanted to secure Bildung.

he problem in fact is that appropriate thoughts have to be complicated in a waythat they seem to be even contradictory. It cannot be ruled out that the triumph of

K. Schneider (ed.), Becoming oneself, DOI 10.1007/978-3-531-19156-0_6, VS Verlag fr Sozialwissenschaften | Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden 2012

6Bildungand Freedom

Michael Winkler

M. Winkler ()Institut fr Bildung und Kultur, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena,Am Planetarium 4, 07743 Jena, Germanye-mail: [email protected]

ranslated from German by Anna Dobler (Bad Abbach near Regensburg, Germany).


2/22

90

the trivial is connected with the complexity the world and its contexts have gainedand which only leaves one wish: Simpler please. Probably this also accounts for theunderstanding of Bildung; the success of PISA and its likes (to say it flat) is linked

to this then understandable desire for simplicity.his indicates the structure of this text. Speaking methodologically the con-siderations are structured systematical, critical,and constructive: A first systematicsection illustrates the elements which are seen as the intension and the meaningof Bildung. his section seems apodictic and comes close to something which isgladly and misleadingly said to be a definition, which Adorno rightfully stigma-tized as a rechthaberische Erkenntnistheorie, die dort auf Exaktheit dringt, wo dieUnmglichkeit des Eindeutigen zur Sache selbst gehrt.1It is about the approachof a theoryin a strict sensewhich advances the concept as it was historically

build, so that its system at least becomes accessible to heuristic and hermeneuticsof current reality of Bildung. he critical second part analyses the current discourseof Bildungin its trivialization. he systematic approach is also the basis for the con-structive attempt to find sense in present events. It is assumed that the trivializationof Bildungimplies a social sense, which is not free from an utopian dimensionithints at the promise to be able to win back the undisguised concept of Bildungas anutopia of humanity. o phrase it more cheeky and provocative: Facing the size of thepossibilities of reflection which the concept of Bildunggives, people probably willnot forever engage with and count on the stupidity the currently common stupidchitchat about that what Bildungexpresses today.

6.1

Friedrich Schlegel once said that the historian is a prophet looking backwards. hisphrase, applies particularly to the analysis of BildungSchlegel naturally had thisin mind2: he affirmation of the idea of history and of the theory, which are inher-

ent to the concept of Bildung, both are a kind of normative framework for thinking.his frame is normative, because it holds onto and brings forward that which is tobe unexamined when we think about Bildung. As old and out-of-date it seems to be,we need the classical Bildungto account for that which is not mentioned in currentdiscourses or is completely missing in ostensibly or truly empirical results aboutBildung: Quite a lot indicates that this framework nowadays stays empty, especially

1 Adorno, 1964/1965/2006, p. 198.2 cf. Schlegel (1991, p. 45).

M. Winkler


3/22

91

when it comes to the aforementioned connection between Bildungand freedom.3his connection does not play a role in respect of social and especially economicprogress which is anticipated from Bildung today; the human being is made the

addressee of organizational and pragmatic efforts. he past loses its empatheticsubjective meaning and substance, which is mostly used to give an impulse to theBildung anticipated from society, politics and experts, but this can actually onlycome from the subjects themselves. You feel reminded of Max Horkheimers mainphilosophical work4: he Eclipse of Reason; It is about the darkening, the eclipseof Bildung. he German title, Kritik der instrumentellen Vernunft tells us whathappens: he demand of education is being exploited; it is required yet the im-pulse is taken away. his is not insignificant: One has to assume that the trivializedconcept of Bildungis successful, because people bow to pressure of social circum-

stances and therefore follow ideas in which these circumstances are shown. On theother hand it has to be mentioned that against all experiences of suffering fromnew educational realities the ideal and normative content of the concept of Bildungis strong enough for people not only to engage in but also to push events. In otherwords: here is a lot of evidence which tells that background conceptswhich areto be systematically shownof education stayed so powerful that people are willingto follow this discourse whichif looked at matter-of-factlydenies this concept.If Bildung, at least its discourse, is being so successful, even if the social and culturalreality, programmatic developments, structures, organizations, institutions andpragmatics are hybrid and full of tension, contradictory and torn5, it is initially andprimary the basis of what was to be erased: Apparently there are many, fundamentalintuitions about what a human being is; these are historically comprehensive (i.e.anthropological), at least in what is said to be modern and is therefore normativerelevant because they have to be secured practically. he concept of Bildunginsofarunderlines a fact which cannot be ignored and makes critic and praxis possible.oday this is more important than ever before. Modernity is not a trustworthy state.Rather it is a possibility which always has to be critically secured, also and especially

because it can be lost:

Te first intuition states: Te concept of Bildungwas examined and developedin the context of Enlightenment and Romanticism, the German classical periodand German Idealism. In a sense it dictates, disillusions and radicalises those. 6Contemporaries did see these connections: Moses Mendelssohn assigned them

3 see Vieweg and Winkler (2012).4 see Horkheimer (1991).

5 cf. Mnch (2007, 2009, 2011).6 cf. Beiser (2003), Seigel (2005).

6 Bildungand Freedom


4/22


5/22

93

Tis fundamental intuition of freedom interconnected with Bildung, means thatBildung is something in which the subjects constitute themselves, they consti-tute their humanity and themselves as relatives of the Genus Humanum, which

itself needs this process of educationi.e. the humanization of humanity. Tisintuition indicates that the configuration the individual and the species at wholehappens against societys and cultural demands, yes, even against the bindings ofreligion. Again with knowing that one cannot outrun these demands and claims,that Bildungis connected to sufferings, an intentional bearing, which has to betaken over again and again. It can be added up into one formula: Bildungis con-nected to the pathos of freedom; autonomy is experienced as something possibleand at the same time as something which is always denied.

Surprisingly this intuition of freedom corresponds withparadoxically phrased

a transcendentconnection. Bildungcannot be separated from spirituality; there isa certain idea of belief, of religiousness, of transcendencein it. One gets the feelingthat the idea of Bildungis being developed to provide a safety net, to give hopeagainst the risk of modern freedom. his is probably connected to the feeling thateducational processes in themselves are unsettling, that they cannot be separatedfrom a sceptical, even ironical, point of view. Educated people do not take them-selves, their relations and general living conditions serious, because they count oncontingency.11his is not calmingtherefore one looks for connections whichlast longer than one day. Indeed, this religious and transcendent characteristic isintertwined with the oldest trace of the concept of Bildung. his goes back to theidea of human representativeness of God, which is connected to the conception ofhuman dignity and biography, as well as it points to mysticism, to a pre-rational,overall experience with spirituality.12his mysticism is inherent in educationalthinking, with a huge ambivalence by the way: On the one hand it is influenced byPascals thinking, which holds onto a God given character of reality, on the otherhand Protestantism forces Bildungas a learning project, but at the same time re-fers back to humanity inwardness. his brings us to the golden hour of German

literature, as Heinz Schlaffer showed13

, it leaves a psychological trace which con-tinues to have an effect, but also inserts this un-political, if not anti-political streakinto educational thinking. Finally resemblance to God has a moment of transcen-dence. A transcendence for the subjects themselves as well as for the conditions inwhich they move, even if the crossing of those is only an imaginative possibility.Who approaches God is risking overreaching his/herself and being brought backto earth. It is possible to fall even deeper, at the end even into hell.

11 cf. Rorty (1991).

12 cf. Lichtenstein (1966).13 cf. Schlaffer (2002).



6/22

94

he thought of freedom, religion and transcendence in a way stand for a struc-tural understanding of the human situation related to present times and future.he concept of Bildungserves as an antithesis, it concerns a historicity which

is transported and at the same time illuminates the concept. his notion fightsagainst a thinking which is only oriented at the present and commits itself tothat which Henry Ford (and Aldous Huxley in Brave New World) fend off withhis formula: history is bunk. Indeed, the concept and notion of Bildung(notthe word itself) developed early, actually in the ancient worldjust think ofPlatos Cave Allegoryand was reinvented in the Renaissance. Nevertheless itwas only firmly established as late as the beginning of the 19th century. heconcept therefore is not truly new, even if it is now perceived as new. It justunfolds its full meaning and is registered by people in those days. It becomes

the leitmotif of their self-conceptionin cutting out all forms of unreflectingcertainty, in overcoming immaturity, at the same time it is a self-imposed duty,to find and develop what is now being shown as a possibility namely human-ity. he context is easy to identify14: he concept of Bildungwas developed inrelation to the Era of Enlightenment, to be more precise as its continuity and itscritique of giving up its agenda. he connection with pedagogy plays a vital rolein this context. Pedagogy is said to downsize itself to the level of bare educationaltechniques, which follow thoughts about necessity, but give up the individual. Atthe same time the concept of Bildungcannot be isolated from the developmentof the bourgeois society as a society which designed and developed humansas a project to be the reality of humanity: here is a strong relationship to theconception of the public, which initially just allows to talk about critique anddemands knowledge over pure belief15; another relation concerns the project ofemancipation, especially as it was followed through by the Jews who were fight-ing for their membership in bourgeois society. Basically this discourse aboutBildungtakes up a sceptical element as early as 1800. It is being discussed witha sceptical view concerning the endangering of humanity. On the one hand this

can be perceived through the excesses of the French Revolution: Robespierre orMaratinspired by Burkesuggested a more evolutionary way of developmentas an alternative for educational theoreticians. On the other hand educationaltheoreticians realized that bourgeois society was not truly honouring their owndemands and therefore asking for radicalisation which asked even more conse-quently for the anthropological condition of Bildung. Schiller discovered a mea-suring modality of human existence in the game and difference of the aesthetic,

14 For the following part cf. Koselleck (1976, esp. 105 ff).15 cf. Koselleck (1976).

M. Winkler


7/22


8/22

96

takes place in subjects and happens to them as their own deed. his procedurecannot succeed without substantialityhere in its widest sense, which enclosesideas. he crucial point is: Bildungcannot circle in itself; the educational process

needs a foreign, so to say alienated object, whatever this may look like. his rep-resents the second intrinsic relation of Bildung: It is always connected to some-thing else. Even more: It is a constituent of Bildung, that this other is reflexivelybeing averted to Bildungitself as one possibility of the own being of the subjector person. Hegel shows this through the relationship between lord and servant:Bildungdemands being sure about the others position. oday one would callthis Perspektivenbernahme (taking over the perspective of another person).But Bildungcannot be satisfied with that. he educational process includes afurther step: examination concerning the possibility of generalizing the experi-

enced objectivity. Hegel offers the possibility of universality as a debatable topic,which does not necessarily need a positive outcome. Bildung, however, allowsthe subject to see and appreciate the singular as something essentialby theway: one can see a connection to love, which will here not be pursued further.

Finally: Despite this bond between Bildungand worldly objectivity, even thoughBildung is always connected to working with substantiality and measure thissubstantiality with universality, Bildungis in all its aspects subjectiveconcern-ing the subject and all of his/hers achievements-, it is a personal matter, whichdoes not close. Bildung is an individual process of development, which takesplace in a subjective view of the world; it cannot be finished and certainly not bemeasured. he judgment that someone is educated wants to hold onto a certainstate, but in the end it merely is a social distinctionas seen clearly by FriedrichPaulsen.16hose who talk about Bildunghave to be very careful not to try toconnect Bildungwith systematically organized, systematized, institutional andstandardized, professional contexts. Bildung has a relatively weak, as bitter asthis might soundfor exampleto teachers, connection to pedagogy. hosewho think systematically about Bildungwill at most realize that education, if it

wants to do justice to its concept, only tries to make processes of Bildungpossibleand to accompany how they are realized in a relatively contingent way throughall individual peculiarity of developing subjects and against all worldly liabilities.If it does not want to drill, then education cannot do any more, but also not lessconcerning Bildung.

At latest with the beginning of the 19th century it became clear that Bildungis con-nected to the development of the individual subject, to the development of a per-son, who has to ascertain him/herself in an area of conflict which is given from the

16 see Paulsen (1903).

M. Winkler


9/22

97

experience of its regulations originating from its nature and social contexts. Bildunglargely means coping with given contexts, bearing Gods given will in what is calledprofession17, acquiring ones own body, understanding of the own and other, the

individual subject enclosing nature, and lastly the understanding of given historicaland social conditions. At the same time Bildungmeans debating about all of theabove mentioned, overcoming and realizing a difference that develops from onesown self-governed producing process, which in the endas Schiller showedispossible especially in the aesthetic practice and in a game. Both, the suffering ofthe subject as well as the active, seemingly self-governed, but nevertheless limitedpractice, are about being oneself, later being caught in the term identity, they how-ever are about freedom. Even suffering, that means having to cope with the given,includes the element of freedomnamely freedom as a proposition to act free with

all certainty. his requires a distance that has to be builteven if only reflexive.Vice versa Bildungitself restricts this freedom, which is the basis of activitypara-doxically this is the meaning of autonomy which at the end of the 18th century canbe and is defined: autonomy means cultivating ones own freedom. Kant exemplarydescribes this as the main problem of education in his pedagogy: How can one cul-tivate freedom within constraint? But only Herder, Schleiermacher and Hegel trulygrasp this problem because they refer it to rationality: Herder, who points out howsubjects can find and define their freedom if they understand the historical process;Schleiermacher, who understands how a developing subject can only determinehim/herself in ligations to others; finally Hegel, who reconnects Bildungto every-thing that is being found in practical morality within a real societyadmittedlywith the perspective that this society is a step in the development of the intellect andtherefore proofs as an expression of reason.

6.2

Against this background one can now critically examine what nowadays happenswith the concept of Bildung and the aforementioned intuitions. Prima facie it isnoticeable that and how the concept of Bildungis described in a non-understandingand non-conceptual way. If one insists on evidence based thinking and action itdoes not really catch ones eye that the discourse stays pre-theoretical, it is bound totalking which does not ascertain its own self, the actual situation and especially notthe normative implications. his is surprising as every effort to win data from expe-rience is connected to antecedent rationality. oday this somehow differs: research

17 cf. Witte (2010).



10/22

98

concerning Bildung, the educational praxis, political talk about it, they all pretendthat Descartes, Locke, Hume and Kant did not exist, not to speak of the newertheoreticians of cognition and science, who were concerned with empirical studies.

But it is not possible to take the easy road, even if it is often done todayunless onewants to blacken out the emptiness and hollowness of ones own business.What is executed as pre- and un-theoretical nothingness here in todays dis-

courses on Bildungindeed means that we are not talking about a concept of Bildunganymore, but that we can put the focus on a use of the word itself. By the way thisis not methodological and methodically pretentious, neither in a sense of commonlanguage approach nor in a sense of theoretical discourse. Bildungtoday is only aword nothing more, this is what the widely noticed experts (or especially those)agree on and this actually could be an argument for the current discourse. Indeed

a historical insight does not play an important role within educational debates andpublic as well as political contextsHumboldt would probably turn in his grave ifhe knew who cites him when and what is citedin addition the critical consider-ations, which were produced since the middle of the 20th century are blanked out.hose include Adornos heorie der Halbbildung as well as Heydorns attemptto hold onto an idealistic concept of Bildungagainst the bitter comprehension thata society inspired by Marxist analysis implemented on him. But the reality is: heconcept of Bildungwas yet actually depleted in the 20th century. On the one hand itwasin the truest sense of wordsused up and devalued by educational econom-ics, although the involved persons were more earnest than common today: Duringthe 1970s there was a spate of reforms in which educational economics developedthe notion of human resources and the human demand approach to skim the educa-tional reserves with all-day and comprehensive schools18. his approach was moreearnest as it did not even use the seemingly moldy concept of Bildung, but fromthe beginning only talked about skills, which were to be measured and calculatedin their value-adding notions. On the other hand historical analysis documents ina more or less bitter way that the concept of Bildung was contaminated as a bad

formula which was only used to secure the status of the intelligentsia. It seemed tohave been used as resentment to amalgamate the connection between the presump-tuous educational aspirations, ideas of intellectual ideality, a conservatism whichfeared mass society and quite simply brutal, antidemocratic ambitions of power,which all together destroyed the Weimar Republic. Georg Lukcs already wrotethis in his Destruction of Reason, even if there is a certain amount of scepticismagainst his interpretations; further evidence can be found in Georg Bollenbecksgroundbreaking survey about the German pattern of interpretation of Bildungand

18 Critical on that Altvater and Huisken (1971), Huisken (1972).

M. Winkler


11/22

99

culture19, Martynkewicz illustrates the events through the connections between thepublisher couple Bruckmann from Munich and the National Socialists20.

If looked at matter-of-factly the concept of Bildungbecame quite shabby, caution

seemed and seems advisabletodays canonization gives headaches: Bildungis anunholy concept, a zombie in many respects. In fact, not the concept Bildungis usedtoday but only thewordBildung, though in a downright universal meaning, oftenrecited in a kind of self-affirmation-attitude and connected to a requesting gesture.Bildungis a joker so to speak, which can open, carry on and endlessly lengthen ev-ery conversation, sometimes this becomes the quality of Dadaistic art, sometimesone feels like being in the middle of abstraction processes, which were practiced inthe irritatingly so-called concretepoetics. Lastly even EHEC was connected withBildungthrough consumer information and hygiene regulations. Some people call

Bildung a container-term, a concept like a ship-container, either empty or filledwith variable content.

But this image is limited because we are confronted with the word Bildungnear-ly everywhere. What are the reasons for this ubiquity of usage? Negatively seen onewould firstly assume that today language is used rather insensitive, that there isbarely any accurateness to be detected. his applies to private language use which isin need of dictionaries to decode texts and emails, but it applies even stronger to thepublic and academic usage which tends to arbitrariness. Words are used to attractattention and provoke a stir. We are dealing with a successful word, its success de-pending on good luck. Like other consumer goods words are thrown into the mar-ket and tested there, just to silently disappear again. he word Bildungshows howmodern societies are following the economics of attention-policies21. he value ofan expression is decided not through its contents but through its ability to arouseexcitement andto tie it to a figure of Niklas Luhmannto save Anschlusskom-munikation (following communication), preferably in various talk shows. Withthat it fulfils its duty, especially in a society where experts are proud of not anylonger having time to read. How did these experts get their expert opinion? hey

do not have any, because for receiving expertise it is enough to talk publicly andjuggle with words. Bildung is basically used without content; one should not waitfor any substantial information. his gives us the impression that the agitated de-bates about the so-called Bildungsstudien (educational studies) are without effect,because they leave out the actual meaningin the end it is the ministry of finance

19 cf. Bollenbeck (1994).20 Martynkewicz 2009.21 cf. Franck (2005), rcke (2002).



12/22

100

which decides about the educational reality. his reality did not really change indepth, but only on the level of talking about it.22

But then the ubiquity of Bildungs-chitchat ormumble as this societys key note

is based on its role as an alternative for religion. A symptom for that would be theon-going repetition of the term and its usage at all times. If one cannot think of any-thing else, the word Bildungcan serve as common ground, it seems to be a mysterybut at the same time a disclosed one, which cannot be grasp rationally (and doesnot need to be). he structure is a rather catholic one: Bildungis the one and onlytrue church, there are no other beliefs next to itquestions about security, equity,about a good life are possible, but they have to be asked sub auspiciis concerningBildung. he word Bildungbrings together all social protagonists and it can be car-ried around before oneself like a monstrance.

But this evidencei.e. the contingency which correlates to the mechanism ofa society full of attentiveness, the assurance of Anschlusskommunikation as thebasis character trait of society and finally the ritualistic momentare insufficient:In reality the linguistic use shows a discrepancy between a certain usage and emp-tiness of content. his arbitrariness can paradoxically be seen in the usage of thedefinite article. One needs the Bildung, it all depends on the Bildung. he inher-ent ambiguity for German terms ending in -ung disappears, process and product,procedure and result are named at the same time. Bildungpoints to an objective,fossilized object that can be measured. his petrifaction practically accompaniesthe unindulgent tendency to sum up Bildungin a process of regular and everlastinginstitutionalization for everyone at the earliest age. Bildunghas since long ago beenstrongly and only connected to school. Schoolthis disgusting modern krakenwhich sucks out the vitality of human life, pockets and suffocates it with its ten-taclesis the reality of Bildungnowadays, which no longer concerns the subjectsand persons but only the addresses. Only the observer, not the involved personis puzzled how this objectivity is accompanied with a psychology of learning thatpraises the constructivism and stands against teaching and individual learning, es-

pecially in non-formal educational contexts.23

But, as soon as it comes to the very

22 he discussion about day-care centers could serve as an example: Some years ago theywere seen as highly problematic as they did not communicate the seemingly necessaryWeltwissen. Although proof is missing, if and how they fulfill their duties today, day-care-centers are obligatory for all children as early and as extensive as possible.23 Not to mention that here again all historical debates about the formal and official side ofinstruction is pushed aside; the debate concentrated strongly on mere formal learning as it is

used in schools and tests. Social pedagogy and youth welfare excelled in this topic and suc-cessfullyand quite empiricalintroduced non-school learning spaces, just to turn back toschool as the only possible place of education.

M. Winkler


13/22

101

core, constructivism, life-long-learning and non-curricular contexts are pushedaside to make room for a institutionalised formatting of Bildung.24

6.3

Every speech about Bildungis therefore not really about Bildungitself. What thenis the social sense of this Bildungs-chitchat? Bildung is not saying anythingandthat is exactly why this word means reification and objectification and repudiatesdirectness and flexibility. Young people are being specific behavioural patterns,which are seen as competences, by professional engineers of souls. hese thenare performative examinedcontents have since long ago been left out because

they cannot be connected to flexibility, fungibility and fleetingness as demandedby those societies, which determine the project as their own content and likenessof their members.25he new educational discourse has the prior function of col-lectivization within the demands of current circumstances: he antra of Bildungwith its pseudo-religious parts serves the construction of social integration; theBildungs-chitchat secures the key note, the prosodywhich is used to define a so-ciety and its members, though not in a Beachboys-Good-Vibrations way. It is notabout the people themselves; they rather are to be erased within their humaneness.he function is in fact to press the individuals into the logics of consumer society,in which on the one hand everything becomes something that can be consumed, onthe other hand everything stays a process, to be exact, stays performative, becauseone is not supposed to hold onto stuff, as society then would not be able to operate.

If seen this way we are concerned with a collectivisation of Bildung, with itscommodification. he subjects of Bildungare becoming consumer goods and areoriented at market mechanism. Consequently the realization of Bildung in pro-cesses of institutionalisation and the disappearance of the debate with regard tocontent is getting cloudy, but it also calls attention to the integration of Bildunginto

24 cf. Rauschenbach (2009). his is a truly perfidious phrase, as formatting means erasingearlier data. It thus deletes history so that new programmes can overwrite with new data.25 Within this all potential critics are being silenced. he curricular development serves asevidence for that: subjects are being abolished or freed from those contents which wouldneed reflection. hinking about society, power and authority becomes obsolete. he Bavar-ian G8 timetable for higher education cuts down topics like National Socialism to give morespace to activities concerning the development of an industrial society. In Saxony historylessons have been more or less abolished. he shock over murdering neo-Nazis can therefore

only be seen as hypocrisy. he question is: Isnt the ministry of culture the supporter of thatdevelopment?



14/22

102

a society which is oriented on the exchange value of basic processes. his society isaccompanied by a highly formal notion of freedomnamely freedom, which notonly enables and enforces the reduction to being a consumer good and its embed-

ding in trade, but also bents this as an integrated character trait on human existencein general. Bildungs-chitchat serves as a dynamo of performance which is poweredby constructive learning. o make them stay on track they are caught in institu-tionseven family seems to be too high a risk, one could gain autonomy. hosewho do not want to adapt these new norms of flexibility are threatened with strictinstitutions: youth welfare, psychiatry or even prisons. hese are being enlargednearly everywhere.

Bildungas mere chitchat, to be precise: the usage of the word without contentand meaning, only with performative relevance, but then again attaining its social

sense exactly through this usage, is indeed connected to modified social and cul-tural contexts. If Bildungreally exists in modernity it has to have exactly this mean-inginsofar critics are wrong, if they moan too strongly about Unbildung (lackof education)26. Unbildungis in a manner of speaking a character trait of society andits culture, one should not marvel about it. With actually enabling reproduction,Unbildungis a feature of this society. his can be seen through the sanctions whichare implemented on those who do not want to be a part of this new educationalformation, who do not want to be drilled to adjust themselves. his adjustmentcorresponds with a dimension of development in modern society. Old capitalisticstructures are restituted in this dimension. hose can be seen in class relations, innew forms of social layering with a sometimes dramatic inequality and brutal socialexclusion, which involves human life as a whole27. Social membership is overalldefined in a negative way, either as a materialistic doom, or often as a stigmatising,random identification which is accompanied by controlling affected persons. Anexample for such an assignment to a specific group is the concept of underclass.hat way a growing group of people daily fighting for survival is developing. Some-times they have seemingly decent employments, but often they are employed in the

so-called Niedriglohnsektor (low wage sector). his sector spreads epidemic likeand will become something which cansocially and individuallyonly be calleda precarious system of full-time employment. Bourdieu said about these circum-stances: Misery of life is raging. Increasingly these new social differences end in so-cial exclusion i.e. exclusion from society: humans are being marginalized; their lifeis perceived as wasted or they are literally cleared away28. Humans become socialand cultural garbage without any value, allegedly useless and unnecessaryor they

26 cf. Liessmann (2006).

27 cf. Wilkinson and Picket (2010).28 see Bauman (2005a), Bude (2008), Bude and Willisch (2008).

M. Winkler


15/22

103

are only able to live off garbage. Sometimes they live their life directly in front ofothers e.g. when searching public garbage bins for usable stuff. More and more localauthorities banish the poor and miserable. It is just a matter of time until bottle col-

lectors, who try to improve their pension, have vanished from public areas. heseliving conditions firstly mean that humans do not even have the slightest chance tolook into subjects in which there can be seen something like humanity. hey arequite simply eliminated from the process of humanizing the humanethey evenare bereft of the hope for spirituality as it is indicated in thewrongly interpreteddictum of religion as opium of the people. Social exclusion also means that theyare forced to imprisonment or exclusion and being forgotten about. hey are onlyable to receive Bildungif they find a way to themselvesbut this seems improbable.

hese cultural and social hardenings turn life something very icy indeed. hey

are escorted by a strange dissolution of social and cultural institutions which isaccompanied by increasing dynamics of change. Worldly wisdom is defined byacceleration29, this has long been examined by French sociology30. Processes ofchange, which characterize modernity in a manner of speaking overwind and endin a certain state, the formative situation of liquid modernity31, in which all exist-ing aspects and dimensions become at first brittle and fragile, then liquid and liquidin love32. Identity becomes frailer or disappears, only the single moment count asan event which is prepared as a project33. Humans are forced by circumstances toabsorb this notion and organize their own existence as projects this is the newmode of their existence34. Continuity becomes unlikely, if not illegitimate. o endrelationships one just has to press the power-off button. he up until now framingand binding milieus, churches and political parties, unions and clubs, all of whichbrought together people, are fading into the background. Only short-dated, fash-ionable life-style models are offered, the Synopticum replaces responsibilities aswell as the old-fashioned surveillance system of the Panopticum.

his is followed by a dramatic situation which affects Bildung: Because livingonly in the status of an event the personal subjects being reduced to a mode of liv-

ing in a project way and in presence of performance will not find an resource for atrue life, no source of their selfto quote Charles aylor. hey will not find sourceson which they can rely, which will strengthen their life or give them a kind strong-hold. here is nothing left of that we-experience in which sociality acts as solidarity

29 see Rosa (2005).30 cf. Aubert (2004, 2010), Ehrenberg (1991, 1995, 2000).31 cf. Bauman (2009).32 Bauman 2005b, 2007.

33 see Keupp (1996).34 see Boltanski and Chiapello (2003), Boltanski (n.d.).



16/22

104

and as a condition for socialization, in which people constitute themselves in theirown specific character. Jean-Claude Kaufman shows how this mixture, which ex-ists between cultural absorption and coming-out, is being dissolved35; partly this

means provocative de-socialization, which lies in secure socialization. his mixturewas necessary for managing open societies, for the integration of individuals in it,the mixture contributed to integrating and reproducing the society itself. Atomisedindividuals are dealing with events, in all tragic aspects, but these events instanta-neous lose their eventful quality because their recapitulation is advertised with thepromise of excrescence; heroes of oneself, hros de soi-mmeappear, without notic-ing how the Culte de lurgencecorrodes their character36. hat, which the individualhas always perceived as a supporting and important, highly relevant fact of personalhistory, is denied. Society and culture become porous; they cannot offer any foot-

hold to the individual. Shallowness and arrogance compensate this; sometimes theylose their grounding, their sense for reality. Dis-embedding becomes the relevantexperience and a structural characteristic of socialization processes. hese corre-spond to modern society, which demands a formal, market like subject that cannotbe predicted and is only able to live as an artist of his/herself. Socialization thenmeans this strange form of de-sociality, which allows deviance as a way of life. hemodern individual, the individu hypermodernestarts within itself37, it is a-priorifree, detached and relieved from all constraints and attachments. Distinguishingcharacter traits are no longer interesting; the only thing that counts is the appear-ance, the acting and in the end the exhaustion, which develops from depressivebreaking down over ones own enforced nothingness.

he new model of Bildung, as it is shown in educational chitchat, matches thiscondition. It not only realizes a socially and culturally given freedom, it postulatesgrowth freed from institutions and frames and at the same time wants to preparethis state. In this respect it is about a technique of power, namely mastering peoplein their new freedomwhich includes that they themselves cultivated this free-dom. What is said to be Bildungand especially how Bildung is said to be leaves

the subjects to fulfil structural empty conditions: to talk about Bildung withoutcontent, to abstain from true awareness of things, allegedly earning competence,which in reality is only performance, and in the end to be confined to the trivialityof handling testsall this composes Bildungand is as such functional. he newtechniques of power which seem to be Bildungdemand and enable complete flex-ibility, which furthermore is attained by throwing away all weightcynics speak of

35 Kaufmann 2005, p. 287.36 see Sennett (1998), Aubert (2004).37 cf. Aubert (2010).

M. Winkler


17/22

105

the beautiful art of pauperising. Bildungs-chitchat as techniques of power meansthat the individual is being made available as they comply with demands and stan-dards, all of which strangely stay in the dark. Norms for ones own physique are

being formulated and used. he belief in fitness demands to stay fit i.e. to adjustto satisfy certain norms, which are open and volatileat the same time substantialelements of modern identity fall into the domain of current society. Autonomy andself-reflection constitute basic regulations which are activated through the subjectsfor self-control. But without breaking an ethical agendaas Hegel said in his Phn-omenologie des Geistesand in his Grundlinien der Philosophiefrom which therecould grow self-determination that would allow distance to social powers and ironyagainst oneself.

Here at the latest one can see a counter movement: he new educational dis-

course suffers from an inner antagonism. his antagonism develops because mod-ern freedom can only be handled through Bildung,otherwiseas the possibility ofexclusion showsthe terroristic game of exclusion wins. But this is not working,as society then is not reproducing itself, least of all with its dynamics of chanceand even lesser as a consumer society. his is one of the reasons for the success ofeducational chitchat: Bildungand freedom belong together; even the most modernmodernity cannot avoid this without destroying its own requirements. his is evenmore valid in transient modernity: It is therefore quite true to say that Bildungisnot dispensable. But the only dilemma is: Bildungin liquid modernity as well asthe Bildungwhich is oriented on flexibility, projects and performances of subjectsneeds the requirements, the frames of securing terms and conditions. he moremodern society ignores these requirements due to its own strangely empty edu-cational efforts, the more it only wants to generate the volatile subject, the moreit demands competences which only care about manners concerning themes andmotifs, social conditions and the subject itself, the more it abdicates the acquisitionand mediation of contents, the more this society is trapped. It then needs even moreprotective terms and conditions to stabilize a subject which is no longer able to hold

onto objects and to constitute itself through the association with objects. Societyreacts to this with the aforementioned enforced institutionalisation and a tendencyto professionalism and training. But through this it creates a prison like structurewhich contradicts its own fleeting and dynamic character.

hose who focus on Bildungcannot do this without the subjects; it is even lesspossible under the condition of an a-social sociality. his becomes the Achilles heelof modern society, which wants to save itself from reproduction problemspara-doxically saidthrough Bildungas mere educational chitchat. hese reproductionproblems are produced by societys liquid structure. Educational chitchat here ap-

pears to be some kind of magic formula, with which one can activate subjects to



18/22

106

bow to those mechanisms modern society demands. o intensify the effect of thismagic formula it is strengthen by a socialpolitical promise, an appeal to equityand equality. his does the job wonderfully because on the one hand it distracts

from the emptiness of the educational discourse, on the other hand it serves classicmechanisms of distinction as they appear in educational panic38: he way Bildungis talked about, namely empty, binds the individuals. hey are forced to freely de-cide on Bildung. An enforcement which is intensified through talks about Bildungwhich transports a claim of universality, that is to be applied to free individuals.hus Bildungensures freedom and at the same time binds people. his is to ensurean identical starting point for everyone in the educational system. But at the sametime everything is done to bring people to their starting blocks and to create com-petition. From the beginning the idea of cooperation is suspended although evo-

lutionary biology and neurobiology give out warnings that basic human charactertraits are altruism and community which secure evolutionary progress39. Nobodyis interested in the mere possibility of humans being able to actually generate thedemanded efforts. Even worse: those who fail in competition have to take the wholeblame; there are no longer any infra-structural systems to help.

It is no coincidence that these mechanisms function so well with talking aboutBildung. his talking has to be aimed at the people themselves and is backed up byan invaluable benefitit still sounds like the concept of Bildungand its assignedintuitions. Patterns of mentalities, hopes, utopian energies, which were born dur-ing a century long fight for Enlightenment, even more: the older religious feelings,which are aroused through the word Bildungand therefore are still viable in its con-tentall that still exists, even if only rudimentary, sedated, in the depths of humansouls. his may not be something modern technicians of education in pedagogicalpsychology like to hear as they do not know the soul because it is not measurable.But this is not something that can be hold against its existence; the exact opposite istrue: hat it cannot be measured actually proves its ability to resist.

he educational chitchat, the current educational discourses are parasitic, they

attach themselves to the echoes that still exist in human ears. And this is exactlywhere Bildungbecomes powerful. hat what the concept of Bildung could revealbecomes a utopian energy which can be found in places where nobody wants toknow about it. here is an even greater suspicion: because the concept of Bildungis empty today, it not only needs stuffing. It rather even wins its stuffing. he al-ternative grows through humans themselves, not only because they remember theintuitions, which back them up in their freedom, better and longer, but becausethey notice and know that there are relations and requirements that cannot be given

38 cf. Bude (2011).39 cf. omasello (2009, 2010).

M. Winkler


19/22

107

up, they do not want to give them up. raditions are effective because they arecherished by people who are not satisfied with innovation and reform, but whoask about the content. Maybe the Wutbrger (someone who openly acts against

things he/she does not like, mostly political) is the subject of a new educationalthinking, which tries to affirm the concept of Bildungand takes in intuitions thatmark this concept.

his reclamation of Bildung could be done in pedagogical praxis. Andy Har-greaves showed that even the daily teaching business could contribute to that40,other scouts and educators might assistwith all reservations against pedagogy,which still tends to legitimise power and control, repression and enforced happi-ness. What is there to say against this pedagogic optimism? It is the ability of resis-tance of Bildungin its inherent systematic sense, especially in its pedagogic context.

he lasting and expanded talks about Bildungshow this as well as the mere engag-ing in these talks even if people realize that these political, public and pedagogicaldiscourses have not much to do with their intuitions about Bildung. he length ofthe discussion foils the statement of acceleration, fleetness, eventful character andpoints to a connection of a different quality. he talks about Bildungdo indeed missthe material structure of Bildungbut this tattle beyond all constraints seems to beconnected to a need that lies deeper. Neither the educational chitchat and murmur,nor those disgusting testing procedures constructed by featherbrained, pedagogicpsychologists and educators who pass on substance and objectivity, nor the ludi-crous ignorance of affects and emotionseven against the moral and ethicalcandestroy the inner core of Bildung. Even if it is only resisting as a word, it gives peoplehope to maybe find themselves, to develop something that could save their human-ity. hat what they experience as a runaway world (Giddens) shows them whatactually is important for them and their lifeincluding the danger to trap oneselfin a cocoon, to abandon the discussion with those who want to control them.

he educational chitchat nourishes a desire for Bildung, a desire for Bildungandfreedom, as Schiller realized. People are looking for something else, not for an in-

stitutionalised, standardized and constructed by experts of formatting pedagogicalprofessionalism. At the moment we are still imprisoned in the time of PISA, whichrepresents these wrong and evil concepts of Bildung. But this wont be the case for-ever; the idea of Bildungwill not be overheard for much longer. It will be accom-panied by a search for secure, stable spaces, for islands of de-acceleration; it will beaccompanied by the effort to find new social logics, which will fight with a warmingcare for each other against the cruel cold logic of markets. he basic human mecha-nisms point to this development, lastly with the experience of evolutionary biology,which not only shows that joint activities and cooperation is primarily human and

40 Hargreaves 2003.



20/22

108

enables communication, but also that it is the basis of the breathtaking culturalevolution. In the end the desire for Bildungembodies the search for humane co-operation, whichto say it in the words of French philosopher Levinasdoes not

reject the other, but does the exact opposite: it realizes this other as a condition forthe possibility to flee the pitfalls of present times41. hose will be the topics of a fu-ture debate about Bildung, which is indicated in the wrongs, but cannot be avoided:he debate will be about stability, about a safety in which individuals can identifythemselves; it will be about solidarity and objectivity which allows acquisition. hedebate about Bildungwill be carried out in a new way, indeed more with a view onthe other, in search of concrete humanity which respects substantial freedom.

Acknowledgement hanks go to all those who have given sharp critics to a forgoing version

of the paper delivered as a lesson. For that the paper was rearranged completely. NeverthelessI do not know whether my argument has got sufficient clearness by now.

References

Adorno W (1964/1965/2006) Zur Lehre von der Geschichte und von der Freiheit .Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main

Adorno W (1959/1997) heorie der Halbbildung. In: Adorno W (ed) GesammelteSchriften, Band 8. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main, pp. 93121

Altvater E, Huisken F (eds) (1971) Materialien zur Politischen konomie des Ausbil-dungssektor. Politladen, Erlangen

Aubert N (ed) (2010) Lindividu hypermoderne. Edition rs, oulouseAubert N (2004) Le culte de lurgence. La socit malade du temps. Flammarion, ParisBauman Z (2010) Wir Lebensknstler. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am MainBauman Z (2007) Leben in der flchtigen Moderne. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am MainBauman Z (2005a) Verworfenes Leben. Die Ausgegrenzten der Moderne.Hamburger Edi-

tion, HamburgBauman Z (2005b) Liquid life.Polity, CambridgeBauman Z (2004) Identity conversations with Benedetto Vecci. Polity, Cambridge

Bauman Z (2000) Liquid modernity.Polity, CambridgeBeiser FC (2003) he romantic imperative. he concept of early German romanticism,Har-vard University Press, Cambridge, MA/London

Bollenbeck G (1994) Bildung und Kultur. Glanz und Elend eines deutschen Deutungsmus-ters, 2. Auflage.Insel, Frankfurt/Leipzig

Boltanski L (n. d.) Leben als Projekt. Prekaritt in der schnen neuen Netzwerkwelt. In: DasOnline-Magazin zur Zeitschrift polar. http://www.s173721806.online.de/frontend/posi-tion.php?id = 110#110

Boltanski L, Chiapello (2003) Der neue Geist des Kapitalismus, UVK, Konstanz

41 cf. Levinas (2005, 2007).

M. Winkler


21/22

109

Bourdieu P et al (1997) Das Elend der Welt. Zeugnisse und Diagnosen alltglichen Leidensan der Gesellschaft. UVK, Konstanz

Bude H (2011) Bildungspanik. Was unsere Gesellschaft spaltet. Hanser, MnchenBude H (2008) Die Ausgeschlossenen. Das Ende vom raum einer gerechten Gesellschaft.

Hanser, MnchenBude H, Willisch A (eds) (2008) Exklusion. Die Debatte ber die berflssigen. Suhrkamp,

Frankfurt a. M.Ehrenberg A (2011) Das Unbehagen in der Gesellschaft. Suhrkamp, BerlinEhrenberg A (2000) La Fatigue dtre soi. Dpression et socit. Odile Jacob, Poches, ParisEhrenberg A (1995) Lindividu incertain. Hachette, ParisEhrenberg A (1991) Le culte de la performance. Hachette, ParisFranck G (2005) Mentaler Kapitalismus. Eine politische konomie des Geistes. Hanser,

MnchenHargreaves A (2003) eaching in the knowledge society. Education in the age of insecurity.

eachers College Press, New York/LondonHegel GWF (1973) Phnomenologie des Geistes. In: Moldenhauer E, Michel KM (eds)

G.W.F. Hegel: Werke in zwanzig Bnden, Bd. 3. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am MainHorkheimer M (1991) Zur Kritik der instrumentellen Vernunft. In: Horkheimer M (ed)

Gesammelte Schriften, Band 6. Fischer aschenbuch, Frankfurt am MainHuisken F (1972) Zur Kritik brgerlicher Didaktik und Bildungskonomie. List, MnchenKaufmann J-C (2005) Die Erfindung des ich. Eine heorie der Identitt. UVK, KonstanzKeupp H (1996) Bedrohte und befreite Identitten in der Risikogesellschaft. In: Barkhaus A

et al (eds) Identitt, Leiblichkeit, Normativitt. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main, pp. 380403

Koselleck R (2010) Zur anthropologischen und semantischen Struktur der Bildung. In Ko-

selleck R Begriffsgeschichten. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main, pp. 105154Koselleck R (1976) Kritik und Krise. Eine Studie zur Pathogenese der brgerlichen Welt, 2.

Auflage. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am MainLevinas E (2007) Die Spur des Anderen. Untersuchungen zur Phnomenologie und Sozi-

alphilosophie, 5. Auflage. Alber, Freiburg/MnchenLevinas E (2005) Humanismus des anderen Menschen. Meiner, HamburgLichtenstein E (1966) Zur Entwicklung des Bildungsbegriffs von Meister Eckart bis Hegel.

Quelle und Meyer, HeidelbergLiessmann KP (2006) heorie der Unbildung. Die Irrtmer der Wissensgesellschaft. Paul

Zsolnay Verlag, Wien

Lvlie L, Mortensen KP, Nordenbo SE (2003) Educating humanity. Bildung in postmoder-nity. Blackwell, OxfordMartynkewicz W (2009) Salon Deutschland. Geist und Macht 19001945. Aufbau-Verlag,

BerlinMnch R (2011) Akademischer Kapitalismus. ber die politische konomie der Hochschul-

reform. Suhrkamp, BerlinMnch R (2009) Globale Eliten, lokale Autoritten. Bildung und Wissenschaft unter dem

Regime von PISA, McKinsey & Co. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am MainMnch R (2007) Die akademische Elite. Zur sozialen Konstruktion wissenschaftlicher Exzel-

lenz. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am MainPaulsen F (1903) Bildung. In: Rein W (ed) Encyclopdisches Handbuch der Pdagogik, 2.

Auflage. Beyer, Langensalza, pp. 658670



22/22

110

Rauschenbach (2009) Zukunftschance Bildung. Familie, Jugendhilfe und Schule in neuerAllianz. Juventa, Weinheim/Mnchen

Rorty R (1991) Kontingenz, Ironie und Solidaritt. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am MainRosa H (2005) Beschleunigung. Die Vernderung der Zeitstrukturen in der Moderne.

Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am MainSchlaffer H (2002) Die kurze Geschichte der deutschen Literatur. Hanser, MnchenSchlegel F (1991) Der Historiker als rckwrtsgewandter Prophet. Aufstze und Vorlesungen

zur Literatur. Reclam, LeipzigSeigel J (2005) he idea of the self. hought and experience in Western Europe since the

seventeenth century. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeSennett R (1998) Der flexible Mensch. Die Kultur des neuen Kapitalismus (Orig.: he corro-

sion of character). Bchergilde Gutenberg, Frankfurt am Mainomasello M (2010) Warum wir kooperieren. Suhrkamp, Berlinomasello M (2009) Die Ursprnge der menschlichen Kommunikation. Suhrkamp, Frank-

furt am Mainrcke C (2002). Erregte Gesellschaft. Philosophie der Sensation. Beck, MnchenVieweg K, Winkler M (2012) Bildung und Freiheit. Schningh, Paderborn

von Humboldt W (1793/1960) heorie der Bildung des Menschen. Bruchstck. In: Flitner A,Giel K (eds) W. v. Humboldt: Werke in fnf Bnden, Bd. 1., 2. Auflage. WissenschaftlicheBuchgesellschaft, Darmstadt, pp. 234240

von Humboldt W (1792/1960) Ideen zu einem Versuch, die Grnzen der Wirksamkeit desStaats zu bestimmen. In: Flitner A, Giel K (eds) W. v. Humboldt: Werke in fnf Bnden,Bd. 1., 2. Auflage. Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, Darmstadt, pp. 56233WilkinsonR, Picket K (2010) he spirit level. Why equality is better for Societies. Penguin. London

Winkler M (2010) Von den Schwierigkeiten der Pdagogik mit dem Begriff der Bildung.

In: Eichenhofer E, Vieweg K (eds) Bildung zur Freiheit. Zeitdiagnose und heorie imAnschluss an Hegel. Kritisches Jahrbuch der Philosophie. Band 13. Knigshausen undNeumann, Wrzburg, pp. 97115

Witte E (2010) Zur Geschichte der Bildung. Eine philosophische Kritik, Alber, Freiburg/Mnchen

M. Winkler

Documents

bildung and freedom.pdf