The ruling elite may have missed out on lessons in reasoning
NO blows BARRED
Sipho Seepe
It is difficult to look back at my schooling with fond memories. How could I, when the philosophical grounding of education was to ensure that schools were conducted in such a way that “the natives will be taught from childhood to realise that equality with Europeans is not for them”?
Consequently, black schools were poorly managed and without resources. Many lacked laboratories, electricity, and at times running water. Textbooks, the most basic teaching aid, were in short supply in some areas. At home, I studied by candlelight.
I recently found myself reminiscing about grade 9 lessons in Euclidean geometry. In these classes we had to provide a reason for each geometrical statement we wrote. Reasons and statements had to reflect logical consistency. We had to distinguish between facts, propositions, descriptions and explanations. In science classes we had to separate cause from effect. Students were expected to recognise conclusions that did not follow from premises. They would be expected to dismiss as logically unsustainable statements such as “I am president, therefore I cannot be wrong”.
They would appreciate that the mere fact that a leader is democratically elected is not a guarantee that such a leader will respect democratic processes. Besides, as Bertrand Russell reminds us, some of “the most successful democratic politicians are those who succeeded in abolishing democracy and becoming dictators. Lenin, Mussolini and Hitler owed their rise to democracy.”
Students of logic and history will appreciate that while a constitution provides a framework to limit abuse of power it has not, and does not by itself, prevent such abuse. Africa is replete with tinpot dictators who either amended or ignored their Constitutions to prolong their stay.
This brings me to the making of propositions to explain phenomena. The more bold and unambiguous a proposition, the more it opens itself to being refuted. To refute a proposition, one must indicate instances where the proposition does not hold. Consider my proposition that “the silence from (dis)honourable members of the African National Congress is a reflection of either their intelligence or their moral integrity. Worse still, it could also be a reflection of the paralysing fear that Mbeki has managed to instil in the organisation.”
Evidence wa ka Ngobeni, in his response (“Seepe is wrong about Mbeki imitating Mobutu” September 28), finds the proposition too easy. Granted, there may be other explanations or factors to consider. However, the fact that the proposition is too easy does not disprove it. If we were to follow this reasoning, then we would dismiss many laws of physics simply because some of them appear too easy. One could easily refer to the simplicity of Newtonian laws such as F = ma (a mathematical articulation of the statement that if an object is acted upon by an applied [resultant] force, its acceleration will be directly proportional to the applied force and inversely proportional to its mass).
As Karl Popper has reminded us, this law and others of equal simplicity “became the foundation of Western science and technology, yielding marvellously accurate predictions of everything from the existence of predictions to the movements of the tides and the workings of machinery”.
As I contend with the incoherent and illogical correspondence from the ruling elite and its sympathisers, I recall those formative educational experiences with nostalgia. I sense that the representatives of the ruling elite did not have the benefit of these lessons or were not paying attention. Alternatively, they are being plainly dishonest.
By way of illustration, and to sharpen the debate, it is instructive to unpack some of the rebuttals that have been advanced as arguments. Let us ponder the Congress of South Africa Trade Unions’ attribution of the current spate of retrenchments, unemployment and deepening poverty to the government’s macro-economic policy, growth, employment and redistribution (Gear).
Students of Grade 9 Euclidean geometry will recognise two aspects of the statement one aspect refers to the objective reality of ongoing retrenchments, the second aspect relates to linking or attributing this reality to Gear. In rebutting this assertion, one could show that such a reality does not exist that it is an illusion derived from a fertile imagination. On the other hand, one could suggest that the retrenchments are a result of other factors.
Instead of rebutting the assertion, members of the ruling elite have sought to question the ideological standing and the commitment of Cosatu and the South African Communist Party to the ANC alliance. The assertion itself is not refuted.
Cosatu and the SACP have since been accused of pursuing a right-wing agenda. It is an irony of history that it is the so-called right-wing press and Western capitalists who commend Mbeki for resisting the temptation to succumb to short-term gains by not playing to a generally poor and impatient black electorate.
It is true that political parties insist on policy uniformity. To invoke this argument, however, in the context of the stifling of debates confuses policy with opinion. While people are guided by policies from their parties, this should not prevent them from harbouring and expressing different opinions. It is also ridiculous to characterise the deafening silence from members of the ruling elite regarding the president’s views on HIV/Aids as adherence to some policy. Equally ridiculous is to interpret the failure by ANC members to engage Mbeki as having something to do with policy.
The third aspect relates to the habit of linking and conflating suffering with commitment. This perspective erroneously views the length of suffering, imprisonment or banishment as a measure of political commitment. Aside from it being illogical, it assumes that those who were imprisoned or banished invited imprisonment or banishment. Aside from the fact that they had no control on the length of their prison sentences, no sane revolutionary would seek imprisonment. Yet we are told to measure suffering as a sign of commitment. Adherence to this misconception is being used to justify the so-called hierarchy of sacrifice (as a mark of contribution) with a hierarchy of benefits.
This line of reasoning runs the risk of pitting comrades against each other between exiles, former prisoners and those who were lucky to escape imprisonment. It is this faulty logic that has led to some organisations claiming monopoly to struggle and suffering.
If you are critical or belong to political parties critical of the ruling elite, then your commitment to the liberation of black people is suspect. In other words, political parties like the Pan Africanist Congress, the Azanian People’s Organisation and the Socialist Party of Azania must by extension of this logic be counter-revolutionary and anti-black. Nothing could be more ridiculous.
We expect the ruling elite to do better than Grade 9 Bantu Education.