Expensive Shit

Inteligencia, creatividad y educación pública.

Oh god!
After I listened and looked the video Kem Robinson says school kill creative, I have thought that the school don´t go invented for that everybody think. The school, the public education searchs to instruct  to the children more than to educate.
Now, what is the difference since to instruct and to educate? I think in only one difference: the first refer to the discipline, order and to reject the difference; the second, simply it refers to the equality condition in the relation since children, but too in the relation whit the educator. Educate is the acknowledgement of the difference, of the creative ability in each human, and too it refers to a "learning shared". We know that the public education transmit the knowledge that the State believe useful for the people, too, we know that the decisions of the State are subjugate for the Market, which enjoy thought that we are alone. The school reproduce this relation.
Anyone that stand out in the instructions in the school, anyone child that play in him creativity will be restrain for to want to be in others place.

Expensive Human

I had a lot of motivation, but I lost that desire...
I wanted to make a presentation about Contemporary Chilean Literature. In particular, I was going to analyze two novels: "Hijo de Ladrón" written by Manuel Rojas and  "Tengo miedo Torero" written by Pedro Lemebel: both refer to a marginal Chile. That is the interpretation that I should make, so, both novels addresses stories silenced for the Modernization Project (development) in Chile.

Firstly, "Hijo de Ladrón" presents the life of a child: Anacleto, son of a thief recognized in the underworld of Buenos Aires. Anacleto and his brothers are orphaned and alone, as the mother dies and the father falls prisoner. Since then, the experience of the unfortunate young shows us the reality of modernity rejected, poverty becomes clear and all those popular knowledge denied. From Buenos Aires to Valparaíso, it is a travel across underworld with stops as jail, disease, sea and spiral relationship between life and death. 


Then, "Tengo miedo torero" refer the life of "la loca de la esquina", a fagot that lives in times of the excesive violence of the Militar Dictatorship. Pedro Lemebel present the story of a body rejected by the love, which is nestled in the arms of one who passes. Talk of the double standard of Chilean masculinity , located in times of struggle, where the courage needed male balls. La loca de la esquina immersed in planning the assassination attempt by the FPMR against the dictator Pinochet. A love seconded by revolution.
How can sociology address these novels? Sociology has many tools that serve to analyze these works. I am content now to mention that without these writers Chilean sociologists were able to identify the everyday problems of Chile. The marginality from the human aspect, from those who live it and not from those who see it (like sociologists)

Oh, the sociology!

So, I finished school in 2008. I did not know what to do with my life,  do who know what to do with 18 years old? I don´t know. Now, I did not know what to do but I knew what I didn´t have to do: my parent wanted that I will enter at university and I did that. Why sociology? Because... because it was a discipline not much traditional and I like the kinds not traditional: I thought the tradition was a shit and the sociology was not much familiar.

Now that I study sociology I can to say it's a discipline in relation to the social relations, with the Chilean society, clear, I could say the sociology is a discipline that contribute to society, but what are criteria the there are criteria for to found what the best criteria are? I don´t know. The public politics are a contribution for the society, but there are a lot of ways to interpret the social problem. It´s relative to the (theoretical)  paradigm. But, yes, the sociology contribute to the society.

Really, I don´t think in the professional idea. I think the sociology is a tool that allows to the people (or students) grow and to grow competencies for contribute to the social investigation and, specially, to the knowledge.

I haven´t a favorite subject, well I think that to ''learn to know'', it need to know outsiders theory (or subject like the sociology) The sociology is a ''order of tool'' of social phenomenon, and it´s fine. The problem (that interest me) is the limit of the knowledge: the forms for to know, the question for the 'how', it permit to recognize the methodology of the investigators, for example. The human has corporal limits, his knowledge is limited.

The knowledge is an important question in my life, I think the life is always in the limits: it permit to improve!

Without Routine

I'm up in arms with the routine, with the norms, with the law! Why? because yes!

Why does it accept the orders? What does it take us to obey?

I think the norms exist like a demonstration of power, of power on others, on the things, on our ideas... a power on the social relations, and this power isn't common to all!

This’s the problem!

How many  people decide our norms? Who’re they? Which’s the route to go?

In this moment, I don't know if they are persons or other things who take our decisions! But, I'm not up in arms with the norms or laws, if not that, I'm up in arms with the institution o group the 'special persons' in the theme, for example: why do we have that to work five or six days in the week? I think  it  is unhealthy, or why do we have to spend so much money for to life? Where do they born these needs?  Why’s ‘the life' so much expensive? It could  all be easier: the life has to be to enjoy it.

We can work, yes but we haven´t always to be working  (or to be buying).

We should be more sensitives with our lives and our bodies, and our enjoyment with others!

The problem isn't the power, the problem is on who want all power!

They are always the same! The same faces, the same intentions, the same act mode!

Do they enjoy? I believe they don't enjoy with anything because they always want it all, and everyone are yours enemies!

But, we say to you: "We are for the others and since the others, we are with the others: the possibility  to enjoy is with a we"