PEDAGOGY OF THE OPPRESSED PAULO FREIRE ‘TRANSLATED BY ‘MYRA BERGMAN RAMOS, CONTINUUM + New York si KKTZ The Continuum Publishing Company 370 Lexington Avenue ' New York, NY 10017 Thirty Second Printing, 1990 All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the written permission of The Continuum Publishing Company. Printed in the United States of America Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 70-110074 ISBN 0-8264-00477 2hole. 995 ConTENTS Foreword, by Richard Shaull 9 Preface 19 Chapter 1 21 ‘The justification for a pedagogy of the oppressed; the contra- diction between the oppressors and the oppressed, and how it is overcome; oppression and the oppressors; oppression and the oppressed; liberation: not a gift, not a self-achievement, but a mutual process. Chapter 2 57 ‘The “banking” concept of education as an instrument of op- Pression—its presuppositions—a cri em-posing concept of education as an instrum i suppositions; the “banking” conce contradiction; the problem-posing concept and the superse~ dence of the teacher-student contradiction; education: a mu- tual process, world-mediated; man as an uncompleted being, conscious of his incompletion, and his attempt to be more fully human, 5Cuarter 1 While the problem of humanization has always, from an axiological point of view, been man’s central problem, it now takes on the character of an inescapable concern. Concern for humanization leads at once to the recognition of dehumanization, not only as an ontological possibility but as an historical reality. And as man perceives the extent of dehumanization, he asks himself if humanization is a viable possibility. Within history, in concrete, objective contexts, both humanization and dehumanization are ‘pos- sibilities for man as an uncompleted being conscious of his incompletion, 1 movements ic : they on ‘the polar oer ae ee me fest in their essence this preoccupation with man and men as beings in. the world and with the world—preoceupation with what and how they a 7h pation wih 5 d institutions in the attempt to affirm men as the Subjects ‘sion, all these movements reflect the style of our age, which is, ‘more anthropological than anthropocentric,But while both bumanization and dehumanization are Feal alternatives, only the first is man's vocation. This voca tion is constantly negated, yet it is affirmed by that very negation. It is thwarted by injustice, exploitati sion, and the violence of the oppressors; it is affirmed by the yearning of the oppressed for freedom and justice, and by their struggle to recover their lost ‘humanity. Dehumanization, which marks not only those whose humanity has been stolen, but also (the way) those who have stolen it, is a dist tion of becoming more fully human. This distortion occurs within history; but it is not an historical vocation. Indeed, to admit of dehumanization as an historical vocation would lead either to cynicism or total despair. ‘The struggle for hhumanization, for the emancipation of labor, for the ‘overcoming of alienation, for the affirmation of men as persons would be meaningless. This struggle is possible Snly because dehumanization, although a concrete histor- ical fact, is not a given destiny but the result of an unjust ‘order that engenders violence in the oppressors, which in turn debumanizes the oppressed Because it is a distortion of being more fully human, sooner or later being less human leads the oppressed to struggle against those who made them so. In order for this struggle to have meaning, the oppressed must not, in seek ing to regain their humanity (which is a way to create it), become in turn oppressors of the oppressors, but rather restorers of the humanity of both. a This, then, is the great humanistic and historical task of the oppressed: to liberate themselves and their ‘oppressors: as well. The oppressors, who oppress, exploit, and rape by virtue of their power, cannot find in this power the strength to liberate either the oppressed or themselves. Only power sufficiently strong to free both. 28 this. In order e continued opportunity to express ‘Hair “generosity,” THe Oppressors must perpetuate injustice as. An unjust 80° jet is the permanent fount of o enerosity,” which is nourished by death, despair, and Poverty. That is why the di f false generosity be- ‘come desperate at the slightest thr ois iri generosity consists preci the causes which nourish false charity. False charity con- strains the fearful and subdued, the “rejects of life,” to ex- fend their trembling hands. True generosity lies in striving so that these hands—whether of individuals or entire peo- jples—need be extended less and less in supplication, so that more and more they become human hands which work and, working, transform the world. ‘This lesson and this apprenticeship must come, how- * ever, from the oppressed themselves and from those who are truly solidary with them. As individuals or as peoples, by fighting for the restoration of their humanity they will be attempting the restoration of true generosity. Who are better prepared than the oppressed to understand the ter- rible significance of an oppressive society? Who suffer the effects of oppression more than the oppressed? Who can Detter understand the necessity of liberation? They will not gain this liberation by chance but through the praxis of their quest for it, through their recognition of the neces- sity to fight for it. And this fight, because of the purpose given it by the oppressed, will actually constitute an act of Jove opposing the lovelessness which lies at the heart of the oppressors’ violence, lovelessness even when clothed in false generosity. y But almost always, during the initial stage of the strug- Ble, the oppressed, instead of striving for liberation, tend 29themselves to become oppressors, or “sub-Oppressors.” The very structure of their thought has been conditioned by the contradictions of the concrete, existential situation py which they were shaped. Their ideal is to be men; but f¢ them, to be men is to be oppressors. This is their mode] of humanity. This phenomenon derives from the fact that the ‘oppressed, at a certain moment of their existential exper ence, adopt an attitude of “adhesion” to the oppressor, Under these circumstances they cannot “consider” him sufficiently clearly to objectivize him—to discover him “out. side” themselves. This does not necessarily mean that the oppressed are unaware that they are downtrodden. But their ___ perception of themselves as oppressed is impaired by their submersion in the reality of oppression. At this level, their perception of themselves as opposites of the oppres- sor does not yet signify engagement in a struggle to over- come the contradiction;? the one pole aspires not to Iiberation, but to identification with its opposite pole. In this situation the oppressed do not see the “new man” as the man to be born from the resolution of this contra- diction, as oppression gives way to liberation. For them, the new man is themselves become oppressors. Their vision of the new man is individualistic; because of their identi- fication with the oppressor, they have no consciousness of themselves as persons or as members of an oppressed class. It is not to become free men that they want agrarian re- form, but in order to acquire land and thus become land- owners—or, more precisely, bosses over other workers. It is a rare peasant who, once “promoted” to overseer, does not become more of a tyrant towards his former com- rades than the owner himself. This is because the context of the peasant’s situation, that is, oppression, remains un changed. In this example, the overseer, in order to make used i ction” denotes the eddesiamrien Sheet er cs Sort 30 er—and more or of Bs Oo ‘ove fas anerion that during 10. Ths i eof their struggle the | oppressed find in the tho init Their model of “manhood. oe oppressor tht tion, which transforms a concrete situal Even revolt establishing the process of liberation, of oppresicr this phenomenon. Many of the oppressed must confront telly participate in revolution intend— who directly "tne myths of the old order—to make it onal? yvolution. The shadow of their former OP js sti er them. er Le ereedomy” which afflicts the oppressed,” fe teat which may equally well lead them to desire the role ee oppressor or bind them to the role of oppressed, should b crFrnined. One of the basic elements of the relationship between oppressor and oppressed is prescription. Every prescription represents the imposition of one man's choice upon another, transforming the consciousness of the man prescribed to into one that conforms with the prescriber’s consciousness. Thus, the behavior of the oppressed isa prescribed behavior, following as it does the guidelines of the oppressor. ‘The oppressed, having internalized the image of the oppressor and adopted his guidelines, are fearful of free- dom, Freedom would require them to eject this image and replace it with autonomy and responsibility. Freedom is acquired by conquest, not by gift. It must be pursued con- stantly and responsibly. Freedom is not an ideal located outside of man; nor is it an idea which becomes myth. It is rather the indispensable condition for the quest for hu- man completion. an —— “To surmount the situation of oppression, men must first 3. This obvious, fear of freedom is also to be found in the oppressors, though, freedom; 1 in a different form. The oppressed are afrai ‘the oppressors are afraid of loxing the “freedom to oppress a1critically recognize its causes, so that through tr action they can create a new situation, one whi Thing Possible the pursuit of a fuller humanity, But thee ks, to be more fully human has already begun in the ode struggle to transform the situation. Although the Authente ‘of oppression is a dehumanized and dehumanizin, Situation affecting both the oppressors and those whom they ty it is the latter who must, from their stifled huma2jc?e™S% for both the struggle for a fuller humanity; the > "age who is himself dehumanized because he di OPPTesso, is unable to lead this struggle. ]ebumanizes othe, However, the oppressed, who have adapted ture of domination in which they are immeney become resigned to it, are inhibited ante have struggle for freedom so long as they feel incapable of By ning the risks it requires. Moreover, their” struggle ty freedom threatens not only the oppressor, but ako their ‘own oppressed comrades who are fearful of still greater repression. When they discover within themselves the yeamning to be free, they perceive that this yearning can be transformed into reality only when the same yeaming is aroused in their comrades. But while dominated by the fear of freedom they refuse to appeal to others, or to listen to the appeals of others, or even to the appeals of their own conscience, They prefer gregariousness to au- thentic comradeship; they prefer the security of conformity with their state of unfreedom to the creative communion Produced by freedom and even the very pursuit of free- om. The oppressed suffer from the duality which has estab- lished itself in their innermost being. They discover that without freedom they cannot exist authentically. Yet although they desire authentic existence, they fear it. They are at one and the same time themselves and the oppressor whose consciousness they have internalized. The conflict 32 ‘being silent, castrated in their power 1 S their power to transform the world. gene and pe lemma Pe the oppressed which their education must ‘take into account. of what the writer ‘This book will present some ercoreaeal a pedagogy has termed the pedagogy of the oP Ecned which must be forged with, not for, the oppr "i wi or individuals or peoples) in the incessant Strugel to regain their humanity. This pedagogy makes PO Od and its causes objects of reflection by ‘the oppressed, from that reflection will come their necessary engagement in the struggle for their liberation. And in the struggle this ‘pedagogy will be made and remade. ‘The central problem is this: How can the oppressed, as divided, unauthentic beings, participate in developing the pedagogy of their liberation? Only as they discover them- selves to be “hosts” of the oppressor can they contribute to the midwifery of their liberating pedagogy. As long as ~ they live in the duality in which to be is to be like, and to be like is to be like the oppressor, this contribution is impossible. The pedagogy of the oppressed is an instru- ment for their critical discovery that both they and their oppressors are manifestations of dehumanization, iberation is thus a childbirth, and a painful one. The ey is a new man, viable only as the op- humanztion of all men. OF to put ieareten wey, we solution of this contradiction is Vorn in they ee brings into the world this new man ne Leeg ee Which new man: no longer oppressor 33feeders PPresed, but man in the process of g tic This solution cannot be achieved in idealist ‘ onder forthe oppressed to be able to Wage tha jy their liberation, they must perceive the Teality of Usa ft Rot as a closed world from which there is nd ono? Pi | limiting situation which they can transform, ‘ify’ 8 tion is a necessary but not a suiicient condition’ Pep —in itself constitute liberation. The oppre: the contradiction in which they are cught ‘only, whee Perception enlists them in the struggle to free themselve ‘The same is true with respect to the individual opprecey as a person. Discovering himself to be an oppressor m cause considerable anguish, but it does not necessarily ad to solidarity with the oppressed. Rationalizing his guit through paternalistic treatment of the oppressed, all the while holding them fast in a position of dependence, will not do. Solidarity requires that one enter into the situa tion of those with whom one is solidary; it is a radical Posture. If what characterizes the oppressed is their sub- Ordination to the consciousness of the master, as Hegel affirms, true solidarity with the oppressed means fighting at their side to transform the objective reality which has made them these “beings for another.” The oppressor is solidary with the oppressed only when he stops regarding the oppressed as an abstract category and sees them as the master and the consciousness of the oppressed, Hegel states: fone is independent, and its essential nature is to be for itself; the ot is dependent, and its essence is life or existence for another. The is the Master, or Lord, the latter the Bondsman.” Jbid., p. 234. 34 gets oppression must be trans- which be; formed. +s radical demand for the objective trans- To present Cas combat subjectivist immobility formation of reality, ition of oppression into yhich would divert the recogniti is not = iting for ion to disappear by itself, is n¢ patient wating for oppression t0 diSaPPea tye to change fo dismiss the role of subjectivity inthe struggle to char structures. On the contrary, one cannot conceive of objec tivity without subjectivity. Neither can exist without the other, nor can they be dichotomized. The separation of objectivity from subjectivity, the denial of the latter when analyzing reality or acting upon it, is obje . On the other hand, the denial of objectivity in analysis or action, resulting in a subjectivism which leads to solipsistic posi- tions, denies action itself by denying objective reality. Neither objectivism nor subjectivism, nor yet psychologism. is propounded here, but rather subjectivity and objectivity in Mant dialectical relationship, © deny the importance of subjectivity in oces: piasforming the world and history is awe mod Timplisue chjeoty tthe impossible: a World without mer "This Position is as ingenuous as that of subjective a5ism, which postulates men without a world, men do not exist apart from each other, they nen ce ration, Marx does not espouse such stit nt for does any other critical, realistic thinker, witay Tatsied and scientifically destroyed was not sort Many but subjectivism and paychologism. Just as objeoss reality exists not by chance, but as the product of he i Prod Wortg Reality which becomes oppressive results in the con _Realit in th distinction of men as oppressors and oppressed. The ate Whose task it is to struggle for their liberation together | with those who show true solidarit i mit how ban solidarity, must acquire a critical thereby acts to submer : rge men's consci i sh, as domenicating consciousness. Function- 3 on Ts emerge from it and i a be done only by means of the fay reflection rea ion upon the world in order to trancform i mint Hay que hacer al opresién quella la concidncta den apres es OPS i incia de a ‘opresi6n haciendo iatafamis toda oe 7. Katt Mark nd Friedvch Ecos Mexico, 1962), p. 6 Exp ais! Foniig otros 36 LN igh the praxis of this | __ One of the gravest obstacles to the achievement of ite | tion is i lit | ion is that oppressive reality absorbs those within it and | - To no longer be prey to | Jom more oppressive still by add- Moving, “Fe oPFfon of oppression” corresponds t0 *be ing 10 itv relation between the subjective and the objec cal relation Drerdependence is an authentic praxis Gre. Oty iO sich it is impossible to resolve the posses oppressed contradiction, To achieve ths Soo r epee confront reality ec, simultane te oPPresrving and acting upon tht reality, A mese ously “ion of reality Dot followed by this critical interven- peeption of read transformation of objective 88) sion wily because it i not a true perce jption. This is the ea ry abet perepon by same, who ive reality and creates a false substitute. exGifferent type of false perception ook. sau fe to behave “neurotically.” The fact exists; but both the feet and what may result from it may be prejudicial to him. Thus it becomes necessary, not precisely to deny the fact, but to “see it differently.” ‘This rationalization as a defense mechanism coincides in the end with subjectivism. ‘A fact which is not denied but whose truths are rationalized loses its objective base. It ceases to be concrete and becomes a myth created in defense of the class of the perceiver. Herein lies one of the reasons for the prohibitions and the difficulties (to be discussed at length in Chapter 4) designed to dissuade the people from critical intervention in reality, The oppressor knows full well that this inter- vention would not be to his interest. What is to his interest is for the people to continue in a state of submersion, impo- 37tent in the face of ressive reality. Of f Tekéce ware ty. Of rela hr the revolutionary party: In affirming this necessity, ing the problem of criti Lukécs is unquestionably pog. ical intervention. “To explain to the masses their own action” is to clarify and illuminate that action, both regarding its relationship to the objective facts by which it was prompted, and regarding its purposes, ‘The more the people unveil this challenging reality which is to be the object of their transforming action, the more critically they enter that reality. In this way they are “con- sciously activating the subsequent development of their experiences.” There would be no human action if there were no objective reality, no world to be the “not I” of man and to challenge him; just as there would be no human action if man were not a “project,” if he were not able to tran- scend himself, to perceive his reality and understand it in order to transform it. In dialectical thought, world and action are intimately interdependent. But action is human only when it is not merely an occupation but also a preoccupation, that is, when it is not dichotomized from reflection. Reflection, which is essential to action, is implicit in Lukacs’ require- ment of “explaining to the masses their own action,” just as it is implicit in the purpose he attributes to this explana- tion: that of “consciously activating the subsequent devel- opment of experience.” . For us, however, the requirement is seen not in terms of explaining to, but rather dialoguing with the people about 8. Georg Lukécs, Lénine (Paris, 1965), p. 62. 38 7 event, no reality transforms itself,? doer actions ch Lukes ascribes vo the revolutionary and thee jaining to the masses their own action” coin Part oe eo affirmation of the need for the critical inter- cides mot the people in reality through the praxis. The ventiopey of the oppressed, which is the pedagogy of men peda) the fight for their own liberation, has its roots engagea Ht those who recognize, ot begin to recognize, here. ‘hes as oppressed must be among the developers of them’tdagogy. No pedagogy which is truly liberating can this Povdistant from the oppressed by treating them as Tefortunates and by presenting for their emulation models a among the oppressors. The oppressed must be their own example in the struggle for their redemption, . "The pedagogy of the oppressed, animated by authentic, humanist_(not humanitarian) generosity, presents itself as a pedagogy of man. Pedagogy which begins with the egoistic interests of the oppressors (an egoism cloaked in the false generosity of patemalism) and makes of the oppressed the objects of its humanitarianism, itself main- tains and embodies oppression. It is an instrument of dehumanization. This is why, as we affirmed earlier, the pedagogy of the oppressed cannot be developed or prac- ticed by the oppressors. It would be a contradiction in terms if the oppressors not only defended but actually implemented a liberating education. But implementation of a liberating education re- s ical power and the oppressed have none, how then is it possible to carry out the pedagogy of the op- Pressed Prior to the revolution? This is a question of the Sreatest importance, the Teply to which is at least tentatively 9. “The materialist doctrine that men of and upbringing, and that, therefore, changed ease produce of atiet Sreumtanees and changed upbringing, forgets that it ie men vee change Aad Fricdnag, 32 thatthe educator himself needs educating” Kel Mare iedrich Engels, Selected Works (New York, 1968)" . 28. 39the expulsion of the myths created and d , old order, which like Pesca and developed in the The pedagogy of the first stage must deal with the prob- Tem of the oppressed consciousness and the oppressor con. Sciousness, the problem of men who oppress and men who Suffer oppression. It must take into account their behavior, their view of the world, and their ethics. A particular prob. Jem is the duality of the oppressed: they are contradictory, divided beings, shaped by and existing in a concrete situa. tion of oppression and violence. Any situation in which “A” objectively exploits “B” or hinders his pursuit of self-affirmation as a responsible pet- son is one of oppression. Such a situation in itself con- stitutes violence, even when sweetened by false generosity, because it interferes with man’s ontological and historical 10. This appears to be the fundamental aspect of Mao's Cultural Revo- tution. 40 i ishment ily human. With the establis! qocation to be Mee airvesion, violence has already Pe af a relationship Cory has violence been initiated by t quo. Never i” could they be the initiators, if they them- pressed ‘result of violence? How could they be a cies fe Peemething whose objective inauguration called sponses Gr existence 8 oppressed? There would be 80 forth thet fd there been n0 prior situation of violence oppress their subjugation. ; cpabish their sted by those who oppress, who exploit, Violen Fecognize others as persons—not by those who who fll to rereexploited, and unrecognized. Tt is not the are OPPre "initiate disaffection, but those who cannot unloved who ty Tove only themselves. Tt is not the help- love 01 : a Ea emer who initiate terror, but the violent, ; is er create the concrete situation which win wi igeevts of life” Tt is not the tyrannized who ate despotism, but the tyrants. It is not the despised who hatred, but those who despise. It is not those whose humanity is denied them who ‘negate man, but those who denied that humanity (thus negating their own as well). Force is used not by those who have become weak under the preponderance of the strong, but by the strong who have emasculated them. For the oppressors, however, it is always the oppressed (whom they obviously never call “the oppressed” but— depending on whether they are fellow countrymen or not ‘those people” or “the blind and envious masses” or “savages” or “natives” or “subversives”) who are disaf- fected, who are “violent,” “barbaric,” “wicked,” or “fero- cious” when they react to the violence of the Oppressors, ne it is—paradoxical though it may seem—precisely in Pressors that a gesture of love may be found, Conscious: °F unconsciously, the act of rebellion by the Oppressed. (a 41act which is always, or nearly t which , ly alway 7 inal violence of the oppressors) ‘oat Violent ay e violence of the oppressors pitt lot ae Po Of take away the Pressed, fightin econ oppressors’ power to dominate ax, 7 nay, the humanity they hadi they restore to the oppressors the exercise of oppression. terms of licti This eee ee Fe ees nea impli; tis not. Resolution of he Pression, is ae when it prevents men ei os in themseives sign tat poor eae dona become today’s Jesterday's oppressed“ have a it the new regi e hardens into a rowevet Ibe marry the Honanist dimension of je is lost and jt is no longer possible to speak of the struBe ce our insistence that the authentic solution jperation. © or-oppressed contradiction does not lie in @ of the OPPO Position, in moving from one pole 10 the suse Tove does it Lie in the replacement of the former other wth new ones who continue 19 subjugate the oP se all in the name of their liberation. ret ‘even when the contradiction is resolved authentic- ally by anew situation established by the liberated laborers, fhe former oppressors do not feel liberated. On the con- trary, they genuinely consider themselves to be oppressed. trary oned by the experience of oppressing others, any situation other than their former seems to them like oppres- sion. Formerly, they could eat, dress, wear shoes, be edu- wired, travel, and hear Beethoven; while millions did not tat had no clothes or shoes, neither studied nor traveled, much less listened to Beethoven. Any restriction on this ‘way of life, in the name of the rights of the community, appears to the former oppressors as a profound violation © their individual rights—although they had no respect for the millions who suffered and died of hunger, pain, sortow, and despair. For the oppressors, “human beings” refers only to themselves; other people are “things.” For the oppressors, there exists only one right: their right to live in peace, over against the right, not always even recog- nized, but simply conceded, of the oppressed to survival. ‘And they make this concession only because the existence of the oppressed is necessary to their own existence. 11, This rigidity should not be identified with the restraints that must be: sed on ih Br a me PP ralosen whic become sageant ale, using the old repressive, bureaucratic State ‘have been drastically suppressed, as Marx #0 43ae This behavior, this way of understanding the men (hich nevesarly makes the oppressor, "td ag installation of a new regime) is explained by their ect thy ence as a dominant class. Once a situation of Violen . oppression hasbeen established it engenders an enn 2 of life and behavior for those caught up in jt, '¢ Way and oppressed alike. Both are submerged in this PPro and both bear the marks of oppression. Analysis of ™% tential situations of oppression reveals that their inogs lay in an act of violence—initiated by those with s/t This violence, as a process is perpetuated from gente to generation of oppressors, who become its heirs and a shaped in its climate, This climate creates in the pmec® a strongly possessive consciousness—possessive of the ean and of men, Apart from direct, concrete, material al sion of the world and of men, the oppressor Conscion; could not understand itself—could not even exist, From said of this consciousness that, without such Possession, it would lose contact with the world.” The oppressor con. sciousness tends to transform everything Surrounding it into an object of its domination. The earth, Property, pro- duction, the creations of men, men themselves, time—every. thing is reduced to the status of objects at its disposal. In their unrestrained eagerness to possess, the oppres- sors develop the conviction that it is possible for them to transform everything into objects of their purchasing Power; hence their strictly materialistic concept of exis- tence. Money is the measure of all things, and profit the Primary goal. For the Oppressors, what is worthwhile is to have more—always more—even at the cost of the op- Pressed having less or having nothing. For them, to be isto have and to be the class of the “haves.” As beneficiaries of a situation of oppression, the oppres- S018 cannot perceive that if having is a condition of being, itis a necessary condition for all men, This is why theit 44 ‘ty ig false. Humanity is a “thing,” and they possess ene right, as inherited property. To the op- it as a asciousness, the humanization of the “others, Rt people, appears not as the pursuit of full humanity, but as se rs dO not perceive their monopoly on having 7 ThecPprrvilege which dehumanizes others and them- br ‘They cannot see that, in the egoistic pursuit of | oe as 8 possessing class, they suffocate in their own tareaions ‘and no longer are; they merely have. For them, | Posse eis an inalienable right, a right they acquired fe their own “effort,” with their “courage to take risks.” If others do not have more, it is because they are in- mmpetent and lazy, and worst of all is their unjustifiable fngratitude towards the “generous gestures” of the dominant class. Precisely because they are “ungrateful and ‘envious,’ the oppressed are regarded as potential enemies who must be watched. wos Tt could not be otherwise. If the humanization of the oppressed signifies subversion, so also does their freedom; hence the necessity for constant control. And the more the ‘oppressors control the oppressed, the more they change, them into apparently inanimate “things.” This tendency of the oppressor consciousness to “in-animate” everything and| everyone it encounters, in its eagerness to possess, questionably corresponds with a tendency to sadism. The pleasure in complete domination over another person (or other animate creature) is the very essence of the sadistic drive. Another ‘way of formulating the same thought is to say that the aim of sadism is to transform a man into a thing, something animate into some- thing inanimate, since by complete and absolute control the living loses one essential quality of life—freedom.12 Sadistic love is a perverted love—a love of death, not of life. One of the characteristics of the oppressor conscious- 12. Eric Fromm, The Heart of Man (New York, 1966), p. 32, 45ness and its necrophilic view of the worlg the Oppressor consciousness, in orde; isth Sag” deter the drive to search, the restlesaneng mina tA, power which characterize life, it kills life. $77 the at and repression."* The oppressed, as objoet ™2dipyjy have no purposes except those their oo 8 % it for them. me aoe PP Fessorg i ™ Given the preceding Context, another j ; importance arises: the fact that certain wa Andtbitay, oppressor class Join the oppressed in their m_ Of thy eration, thus moving from one pole of the come’ for iy the other. Theirs is a fundam: diction ay 5 them the marks of their origin: their Prejudices ow deformations, which include a lack of confidence in the People’s ability to think, to want, and to now. Accord. ingly, these adherents to the People’s cause constantly ma the risk of falling into a type of generosity as maleic a that of the oppressors, The generosity of the oppressors is nourished by an Unjust order, which must be maintained in order to justify that generosity. Our conv mn the other hand, truly desire to transform the unjust order; but because of their background they believe that they must be the executors of the transformation. They talk about the people, but they do not trust them; and trusting the people As the indispensable precondition for revolutionary chang, i ae Jal control,” see Hertet oars One Dimer on So SS aad Es ed Cv tion (Boston, 1955), 46 mmanist can be identified more by his trust in the Al ch engages him in their ange: than by 8 ror d actions in their favor without that trust. ae who authentically commit themselves to the peo- ust re-examine themselves constantly. This conversion ple radical as not to allow of ambiguous behavior. To se” this commitment but to consider oneself the pro- oe of revolutionary wisdom—which must then be Pri to (or imposed oa) the people—is to retain the old : ‘The man who proclaims devotion to the cause of Ttvgation yet is unable to enter into communion with the Je, whom he continues to regard as totally ignorant, is perously self-deceived. The convert who approaches the a le but feels alarm at each step they take, each doubt They express, and each suggestion they offer, and attempts to impose his “status,” remains nostalgic towards his °"Eonversion to the people requires a profound rebirth. Those who undergo it must take on a new form of exis- tence; they can no longer remain as they were. Only through comradeship with the oppressed can the converts under- stand their characteristic ways of living and behaving, which in diverse moments reflect the structure of domina- tion, One of these characteristics is the previously men- tioned existential duality of the oppressed, who are at the same time themselves and the oppressor whose image they have internalized, Accordingly, until they concretely “dis- cover” their oppressor and in turn their own consciousness, wey nearly always express fatalistic attitudes towards their situation, ‘The peasant begins to get courage to overcome his dependence when he realizes that he is dependent. Until then, he goes along with the boss and says “What can I do? I'm only a peasant,” 14 ™4. Words of a peasant during an interview with the author, 47‘When superficially analyzed, this fotay. - interpreted as a docility that is a trajt*tlism jg Fatalism in the guise of docility jut" Ration "yy Jn point in their existential Y 4s the frujg MAL chathy hand, at a certain point in their and sociological situation, not an essenteit of an wi On the other hand, & people's behavior. It almost a} mal et ed feel an tible attraction is toyota Tie ae eer and his way of life. Sharing this way of destiny or fate or fortune jo related tony towards ee overpowering aspiration, in their aliene- distorted view of God. Under the tle forces oflite becomes ed want at any. cost to resemble the the oppressed (especially the pean, St magic ange, ion, the to imitate him, to fllow him, This phenomenon submerged in nature) # se¢ gis a Who are OR, oP ecaly prevalent in the middle-class oppressed, w explotaton as the will of God as it Gai the GO of this “organized disorder.» a the “eminent” men of the upper class. Were the aan exceptional aati ofthe olnied erged ity." refers tothe contempt he felt towards cunt “order” wid The OPPTESSed cannae “ ee vara with “passionate” atraction towards him. ly the Which serves the inte Pera, colonizers | i it * a rkers while Te etsedoes oF a tey ve internalized Chet gp ol te cnt ook fer awoken whe patey peettctons of this order, they often manifes go gunning down sis yet make such excessive demands? How could be horizontal violence, striking out at their Own come Re aslo crusty Yot me mine them a0 pesiuatsly? (too te “Oma fg bas the enon in apa of ysl) ‘The colonized ‘man will first manifest this Beressi . E-depreciation is another characteristic of the op- | been deposited in his bones aeainsthis own people Tene it pose ich derives from their internalization of the Men the niggers beat each other Up, and the posers ee Po do not know which way to pinion the oppressors hold of them. So often do they hear tum When faced with the aie cPr ‘waves of crime in North Africa, : ing, know nothing and are | a tin that they are good for nothing, . \ ag Mile the settler orthepsics incapable of learning anything—that they are sick, lazy, ‘man has the right the livelong day to strike the nate inalthig — OaP. ‘ve—that in the end they become convinced re kguake him crawl to them, you will se the naive racuan, 24 Uunproducti * 7 his knife atthe slightest hostile or agoressive gl another native; for the last resort e lance cad onhinyy oftheir own unfitness, ‘The peasant feels inferior to the boss because the boss seems to be the only one who knows things and is able to run things. Ttis possible that in this behavior they are once more wet —_They call themselves ignorant and say the “professor” festing their duality. Because the oppressor exists withia is the one who has knowledge and to whom they should their oppressed comrades, when they attack those comrais ston, Tre criteria of knowledge imposed upon them are they are indirectly attacking the oppressor as well. the 15. See Candido conventional ones. “Why don’t you,” said a peasant vsiaw —-Pticipating in a culture circle," “explain the pictures Me Me dos vivos—A Esquerda catélica Bras (Rio, 1966), ann anmemaecns rt, 160 1 Te Celene ad the Colonzed Bonton PO), 2. rantz F; rth (New y Words of a peasant during an interview with the abtker, es ‘anon, The Wretched of the Ea 19. See Chapter 3p 113 fe ctramsey ah he a 48 49first? That way it'll take " headache.” fess time ang Almost never do thi * ge” Alm ey realize tha & things” they have learned in their relatic'®* too, « * and with other men. Given i Not infrequently, peasants in educational po: to discuss a generative them: ional Project 4 stop suddenly and say to the oo, 2 ely mana’ Py nv educator: 4 manner, the, ought to keep quiet and let you talk ya, e*cuse knows, we dontt know anything Teou & the ont thing.” They re there is no difference between them ars tien inst they do admit a difference, it favors animals As long as their ambiguity persists, the Oppressed are Teluctant to resist, and totally lack confidence in thm. selves. They have a diffuse, magical belief in the invulner ability and power of the oppressor." The magical force of the landowner’s power holds particular sway in the ral areas. A sociologist friend of mine tells of a group ol armed peasants in a Latin American country who recently took over a latifundium, For tactical reasons, they planned 20. Asentamiento refers to 2 production unit of the Chilean agrarist reform experiment. —Translator's note. 21, “The peasant has an almost instinctive fear of the boss.” Intervet ‘with a peasant. 50 Jon, one must neither lose sight of this passivity nor over- ‘moment of awakening. lorjnin their unauthentic view of the world and of them- . For the latter, to be is to have, almost always at Fee eof those who have nothing. For the oppressed, at a certain point in their existential experience, fo be is not to resemble the oppressor, but to be under him, to depend on him, Accordingly, the oppressed are emotion ally dependent. steam with the boss because he thinks the boss is a superior being, ‘Lots of times, the peasant gives vent to his sorrows by drinking? a see‘Repia DebrayyRevolution in the Revolution? (New York, 23, Interview with a peasant, 31‘This total emotional dependence can lead the what Fromm calls necrophilic behavior: the qo? Iifetheir own or that oftheir oppressed fellowe tg ~) Itis only when the oppressed find the oppress ® become involved in the organized strugole for 4% /ton that they begin to believe in themselves, yt ie! | cannot be purely intellectual but must involve a," 1 Gan it be limited to mere activism, but must ingie*%°% ng | geflection: only then will it be a praxis, INR ety Critical and liberating dialogue, which action, must be carried on with the oppresseq P™°'PPay the stage of their strugele for liberation. The "tte that dialogue can and should vary in accordance tt & torical conditions and the level at which the ope. his ceive reality. But to substitute monologue, sees! Dee communiqués for dialogue is to attempt to liberate Real pressed with the instruments of domestication, aire? fig to liberate the oppressed without their ni participation in the act of liberation is to treat them as ob. jects which must be saved from a burning building; itis p lead them into the populist pitfall and transform them in masses which can be manipulated. At all stages of their liberation, the oppressed must se themselves as men engaged in the ontological and historical vocation of becoming more fully human. Reflection and action become imperative when one does not erroneously attempt to dichotomize the content of humanity from is historical forms. ‘The insistence that the oppressed engage in reflection ot their concrete situation is not a call to armchair revolution On the contrary, reflection—true reflection—leads 1 action. On the other hand, when the situation calls & action, that action will constitute an authentic praxis of 2A. Not in the open, of course; that would only provoke te F274 the oppressor and Jead to still greater repression 52 the object of critical reflection. asin raison détre of the ch inaugurates the his- is not viable apart olvement. Otherwise, ces become apis consedeipe praxis is iti jon on the side of the oppressed must be Political action oF he authentic sense of the word, and, anger mn with the oppressed. Those who work fot ere aes not take vantage of the emotional depen aoe of the oppressed—dependence that is the fruit of the concrete situation ‘of domination which surrounds them and which engendered their unauthentic view of the world. Using their dependence to create still greater dependence isan oppressor tactic. Libertarian action must recognize this dependence as a weak point and must attempt through reflection and action to transform it into independence. However, not even the best-inte ed leadership can bestow independence as a gift. The liberation of the oppressed is a liberation of men, Not things. Accordingly, while no one liberates himself by his own efforts alone, neither is he liberated by others, Uberation, a human phenomenon, cannot be achieved by en Sate Any attempt to treat men as semihumans only aeverats ra men pee already dehumanized, Iberation eres a ey suffer, the process of their The ; bse loy the methods of dehumanization, correct method for a revolutionary leadership 53— in their trust. The correct method lies in, ial Conviction of the oppressed that they must fing Be Iberation is nota gift bestowed By the revolutionary ty, ship, but the result of their own conscientizacag, 9 Yay, Pie revolutionary leaders must realize that tha conviction of the necessity for struggle (an ings dimension of revol wisdom) was not gives yk uuthentic. This conviction © be packaged and sold; it is reached, rather, by meant totality of reflection and action. Only the leadery gt volvement in reality, within an historical situation, lan i tocriticize this situation and to wish to change jt,” * Likewise, the oppressed (who do not commit thems to the struggle unless they are convinced, and who, it do not make such a commitment, withhold the inj? able conditions for this struggle) must reach this comp a Subjects, not a objects. They also must interven att ally in the situation Which surrounds them and whose ma they bear; propaganda cannot achieve this. While the om. viction of the necessity for struggle (without which ty struggle is unfeasible) is indispensable to the revolutionay leadership (indeed, it was this conviction which constitute! that leadership), it is also necessary for the oppressed. ts necessary, that is, unless one intends to carry out the tran- formation for the oppressed rather than with them. Itism) belief that only the latter form of transformation is valid* The object in presenting these considerations is to fend the eminently pedagogical character of the revolution The revolutionary leaders of every epoch who ‘bare afimed that the oppressed must accept the strugle ft their liberation—an obvious point—have also thereby i 25. These points will be discussed at length in Chapter 4. 34 i \c. jcal aspect of this strusel eaders, -Petever (perhaps due to natura es ders Magainst pedagogy)» have ; Mipestandable UIOS, Te chods employed by the OPPresS the dagoHical Mretion in the liberation process, oF to convince. oe 2 re ‘the oppressed to realize that when Ft Be OF umanization they also accept, from te teir otal responsibilty for the struggle. a mone realize that ‘they are fighting not merely for free- ton rom bbunger, but for .nd to construct, to wonder and to venture. 5 ‘puividual be active and responsible, Such freedom ered cog in the machine. . . . It is not enough ota save OF 8 Were: if socal conditions further the existence, © that en fo el wl ot be Tove of ie, but love of death? by the death- ‘The oppressed, who have been shaped Yorough their atieming at iifecitimming humanization, which does Cay ‘imply in having more to eat (although it does in- wolve having more to eat and cannot fail to include this aspect). The oppressed have been destroyed precisely because their situation has reduced them to things. In order to regain their humanity they must cease to be things and fight as men. This is a radical requirement. They cannot enter the struggle as objects in order later to become men. ‘The struggle begins with men’s recognition that they have been destroyed. Propaganda, management, manipula- tion—all arms of domination—cannot be the instruments of their rchumanization. The only effective instrument is a humanizing pedagogy in which the revolutionary leader- ship establishes a permanent relationship of dialogue with the oppressed, In a humanizing pedagogy the method 26, Fromm, op. cit. pp. 52-53. 35eee. eh. revolutionary leaderchin\ > vache instance, the revolutionary leadership) can mart yy, students (in this irae oppressed), ena it s of tu presses the consciousnes students thems? 8 ‘The method is, in fact, the external form of coy inacts, its Conscigne ity 8 Wig le. Accong, Se omethi in self, which surrounds it and which it Ent ha its ideational capacity. Consciousness is thus hen a method, in the most general sense of the wordt? Sui) A revolutionary leadership must accordingly prac co-intentional education. Teachers and students te ship and people), co-ntent on realty, are both Subjecs gy only in the task of unveiling that reality, and thereby con, ing to know it critically, but in the task of re-creating tha knowledge. As they attain this knowledge of reiy through common reflection and action, they discover then. selves as its permanent re-creators. In this way, the pre ence of the oppressed in the struggle for their liberation will be what it should be: not pseudo-participation, but committed involvement, 27. Alvaro Vieira Pinto, from a work in preparation on the philosop!? ‘of science. I consid quoted portion of great importance for the UF Sind ole Conran gz (ote eee Wonk pro 1 pane test Vieira Pinto for permission 56 CHAPTER 2 i acher-student relationship at 4 eet analy atsde the school, reveals its funda- any Jere arrative character. This relationship involves a menting Subject (the teacher) and patient, listening nuvfe (the students). The contents, whether values OF empirical dimensions of reality, tend in the process of being narrated to become lifeless and petrified. Education is suf- i narration sickness. ; ste teacher about reality as if it were motionless, _ static, compartmentalized, and ict: Or pounds ona topic completely ali experience of the students. His t dents with the contents of his narrati that engendered them and could gi Words are emptied -of-their-eenereteness-and—become—a— hollow, alienated, and alienating verbosity. ~The’ outstanding characteristic of this narrative educa- tion, then, is the sonority of words, not their transforming, Power. “Four times four is sixteen; the capital of Pard is Belém.” The student records, memorizes, and Tepeats these 37uk, “OSITOT: ow —tuniqués , phrases without perceiving what four times means, or realizing the true significance of ip,, {ur affirmation “the capital of Pard is Belém,» pans Belem mean for Paré and what Pard means for We Narration (with the teacher as narrator) Jeqq dents to memorize mechanically the narrateg’ * w, Worse yet, it tums then into “containers, into Mey tacles” to be “filled” by the teacher. The more com he fills the reseptacls, the better a teacher he ig Tee) “eekly the receptacles permit themselves to be-qee =e better students they are. “Education thus becomes an her i tead of communicating, the teacher issuce® muniqués and makes deposits which the students Patiens Teceive, memorize, and repeat. This is the ing on cahOP concept of education, in which the scope of auc’? actic lowed to the students extends only as far as receiving lng and storing the deposits. They do, it is true, have the op portunity to become collectors or cataloguers of the things they store. But in the last analysis, it is men themselves who are filed away through the lack of creativity, tran formation, and knowledge in this (at best) misguided sys tem. For apart from inquiry, apart from the praxis, men cannot be truly human. Knowledge emerges only through invention and re-invention, through the restless, impatient, continuing, hopeful inquiry men pursue in the world, with the world, and with each other. In the banking concept of education, knowledge is # ft bestowed by those who consider themselves know jose whom they consider to know nothing Projecting an absolute ignorance onto others, 2 ae istic i¢ ideology of oppression, negates education InngWledge-as processes Of in uiry, "The. teacher preseais himself to “his students_as_thei e i 58 ir_necessary_ opposites | Festa "alienated Tike the sive 3 he eons justi 7 ‘ ¢ their ignorance 8 } elian Sisley accept inlike the slave, they HeEt o's existent the teacher. oon the other seachers they educate the Hone education, : or oO veards reconciliation. Education ‘phe raison student con ties io. its tution of the teacher-stutet st so we am es oe ction, DY desi students, i intains- anking education maint . the contrary, Danks © nrough the follow concept. OF olates the contradiction ive society sic am sam as the students are taught; cher teaches and the s dents i the teacher knows everything and the st know nothings at (c) the teacher thinks and the students are thougt about; " Ady; 4) the teacher talks and the students listen—meck1ys, 8 the teacher disciplines and the students are dis- iplined; : a (ff) the wacher chooses and enforces his choice, and the students comply; . (g) the teacher acts and the students have the illusion of acting through the action of the teacher; (h) the teacher chooses the program content, and the students (who were not consulted) adapt to it; (i) the teacher confuses the authority of knowledge with his own professional authority, which he ____ Setsin opposition to the freedom of the students; () the teacher is the Subject of the learning process, while the pupils are mere objects, 59It is not surprising that the banki; tion regards men as adaptable, maine Soncen more students work at storing the de, able bent fy them, the less they develop the eqiech'® ear which would result from their interventi, mie’ as transformers of that world. The aa in ey accept the passive role imposed on them, Peay % tend simply to adapt to the world as it is a. nog mented view of reality deposited in them, "4 © the The capability of banking education to min; 4 nul the students? creative power and to a2 o: credulity serves the interests of the opprecete & neither to have the world revealed nor t9 ©," formed. The oppressors use their “humanite it try iinati arian preserve a profitable situation. Thus they react is stinctively against any experiment in education \* stimulates the critical faculties and is not conten” partial view of reality but always seeks out the tat link one point to another and one problem to anothen ta deed, the interests of the oppressors lie in “chang: the consciousness of the oppressed, not the situation ea oppresses them”;? for the more the oppressed can be ki to adapt to that situation, the more easily they cant dominated. To achieve this end, the oppressors use t banking concept of education in conjunction with a pe temalistic social action apparatus, within which te oppressed receive the euphemistic title of “welfare rect ents.” They are treated as individual cases, as margist men who deviate from the general configuration ot! “good, organized, and just” society. The oppressed at regarded as the pathology of the healthy society, wit must therefore adjust these “incompetent and ls7y ¥ to its own patterns by changing their mentality TH 1. Simone de Beauvoir, La Penste de Droite, Aujordhul (Pe. El Pensamiento politico de la Derecha (Buenos Aires, 1963), 60 to be “integrated,” “incorporated” into the marginals need Piney have “forsaken.” jet eh TD however, that the oppressed are not “mar- ‘ gre not men living “outside” society. They have ginal” a inside” —insde the structure which made “integrate” formation, Of course, ‘ ansform™ses; hence their utilization of the banking rot Prrpesation to avoid the threat of student com- scien ach to adult education, for example, ‘The banking 9pPrr tance ao -n grass to the rabbit. The “humanism ie inj ‘masks the effort to tum men into ‘qutomatons—the very ne} vation of their ontological voca- more " see ebanking approach, knowingly or unknowingly (for there are innumerable well-intentioned bank-clerk teachers who do not realize that they are serv- ing only to dehumanize), fail to perceive that the deposits themselves contain contradictions about reality. But, sooner or later, these contradictions may lead formerly passive students to tum against their domestication and the attempt to domesticate reality. ‘They_may discover through existential experience that their present way of fe is iJable with their_vocat come full human. They may perceive through their relations with reality that reality is really a process, undergoing con- stant transformation. If men are searchers and their onto- logical vocation is humanization, sooner or later they may 61% YS 4 “ “ perceive the contradiction in which bank, to maintain them, and then enga, DB educan struggle for their liberation. ss Mensa But the humanist, revolutionary eqy ay for this possibility to materialize, Frog Cate efforts must coincide with those of the wu the Ot in critical thinking and the quest for mutua® took Fis efforts must be imbued with profouy pra and their creative power. To achieve this a Trust ig partner ofthe students in hs relations with th be may g8 ‘The banking concept does not admit en, ‘ ship—and necessarily 50. To resolve the Tet Paty, contradiction, to exchange the role of depositor domesticator, for the role of student among tae ‘be to undermine the power of oppression and pe cause of liberation. & im licit in the banking concept is the assumpt dichotomy between man and the world: man is meh ‘the wor if if man see | tator, not re-creator, In this view, man is not a conscicy being (corpo consciente); he is rather the possessor ¢ @ consciousness: an empty “mind” passively open to te reception of deposits of reality from the world outside. Fr example, my desk, my books, my coffee cup, all the o jects before me—as bits of the world which surrounds m —would be “inside” me, exactly as I am inside my stud) right now. This view makes no distinction between being accessible to consciousness and entering consciousness. Th distinction, however, is essential: the objects which su round me are simply accessible to my consciousness be Jocated within it. Tam aware of them, but they are 001 side me, It follows logically from the banking notion of cousioy ness thatthe Sica role is raputte the way the wo ‘enters into” the students. His task is to organize 4 PO™ 62 taneously, to “qi” the students core nformation which he considers to knowledge” ‘And since men “recelve the ities, education should ae ee an to the world. The educa’ ees js better “fit” for the is concept is well suited yuility rests ses of the Oppressors, whose tranq! fit the world the oppressors have created, the majority adapt to the Purposes core completely the maj ty adap nem thereby dominetge ght to thet own POO) communication. ‘Yet only through communication can human life hold meaning. The teacher's thinking is authenticated only by 2. This concept corresponds to what Sartre calls the “digestive” Of ‘of education, in which knowledge is “fed” by, the ‘to “fill them out.” See Jean-Paul Sartre, “Une eat prtsomenolgie de Husserl: Lintentionalité,” a : sxample, some professors specify in their reading lists that wae AnST Oe So a 1 and co Bl 63the authenticity of the studenty cannot think for his students, noe "8. Thy thought on them, ic thinking trey t® ing ata Tei jought has ms eI it is res world, the subordination of students *Y lee ‘comes impossible. Cs Because banking education begins with ‘ standing of men as objects, it cannot promote ment of what Fromm calls “biophily,” the Peri edo its opposite: “necrophily.” ht nse pt While life is characterized by growth in a structured, fu nner, the necrophilous person loves all that does not om a mechanical. The necrophilous person is driven by the des, form the organic into the inorganic, to pall Te as if all living persons were things. . . . Memory, mie Perience; having, rather than being, is what counts, The neropty Person can relate to an object—a flower or a person—oay ith Possesses it; hence a threat to his possession is a threat to hina, ihe loses possession he loses contact with the world... . Helow control, and in the act of controlling he kills life Oppression—overwhelming control—is necrophilic; itt nourished by love of death, not life. The banking con of education, which serves the interests of oppression, i also necrophilic. Based on a mechanistic, static, natunh istic, spatialized view of consciousness, it transforms st dents into receiving objects. It attempts to control thinks and action, leads men to adjust to the world, and ish) their creative power. , When their efforts to act responsibly are frustrated, W™8 they find themselves unable to use their faculis suffer. “This suffering due to impotence is rooted i 4 Fromm, op. cit, p. 41. 64 that the human equilibrium has been dis- ory fact that TY ability to act which causes ments qured."* Pguses them to sect their impotence, Py anguist attempting sorestore tet capacity t at, But can they) and owt One a =aP'identify with a person or group having way is sie participation in another person’ {men owe. By ns 7g, when in reality iby} only submit and have a psof hone wo aeL® ifestati best exemplify this Populist mani as ho by aang ohh ot etn adore ceme to feel that they themselves are charismatic Wrective. The rebellion they express as they active ant’ Ne historical process is motivated by that desire emerge Fectively. The dominant elites consider the remedy to 06 frore domination and repression, carried out in the to be of freedom, order, and social peace (that is, the peace of the elites). ‘Thus they can condemn—logically, Fem their point of view—"the violence of a strike by ‘rorkers and [can] call upon the state in the same breath toase violence in putting down the strike.”* Education as the exercise of domi credulity of students, with the ideo! ical intent (often not perceived by educators) of indoctrinating them to adapt to the world of oppression, This accusation is not made in the naive hope that the dominant elites will thereby simply abandon the practice. Its objective is to call the attention of true humanists to the fact that they cannot use banking educational methods in the pursuit of liberation, for they would only negate that very pursuit, Nor may a . Reinhold ee ‘sei nal loral Man and Immoral Society (New York, 65the pressor society. The revolutionary enethod directly or indirectly seit Wier bani ception of their situation, the prob- a its this very situation to them 25 ituation becomes the object of their gical perception which produced ives way tO perception which is able to atee it perceives reality, and can thus be jecti that reality. say eC nes of their situation leads men with other men in a movement of me dd at et that movement, it would be (and is) a violation of men’s humanity. Any, situation in which some men prevent others from engaging in the process of in- quiry is one of violence. ‘The means used are not impor- tant; to alienate men from their own decision-making is to change them into objects. This movement of inquiry must be directed towards humanization—man's historical vocation, The pursuit of full humanity, however, cannot be carried out in isolation m, but only in fellowship and solidarity; therefore it cannot unfold in the antagonistic relations be- tween oppressors and oppressed. No one can be authen- tically human while he prevents others from being so. Attempting to be more human, individualistically, leads to 3having more, egotistically: that it is not finden oe Of deh Precisely because it is necessary © 2 orden not be allowed to constitute an bo Be N must not consolidate = latter, the Power of the timate presntlem posing education, a8 a humar. “ay Posits as fundamen ination must fight for their ee et maja enables teachers and students to ee Tonge educational process by overcomin, al Subjegy i an alienating intellectualism; it alse enanotttang ¢ come their false perception of realty 2% x longer something to be described with aoe oie becomes the object of that transforming e™ tue, Which results in their humanization, ©“ y Problem-posing education does not and the interests of the oppressor. No oppressive ous Permit the oppressed to begin to question: Why? m only a Tevolutionary society can carry out this ieee systematic terms, the revolutionary leaders need nu us full power before they can employ the method revolutionary process, the leaders cannot utilize the tai ing method as an interim measure, justified on gromi of expediency, with the intention of Jater behaving ini genuinely revolutionary fashion. They must be revoltit ary—that is to say, dialogical—from the outset. 4 Caaprer 3 dialogue human phenome- eae eee sing een the essence of ca mt St the word. But the word is more than just Teen ent which makes dialogue possible; accordingly, ical i ction that if one is sacrificed—even in part— ar immediately suffers. There is no true word that js not at the same time a praxis” Thus, to speak a true word is-to transform the world. ‘An unauthentic word, one which is unable to transform reality, results when dichotomy is imposed upon its con- stitutive elements. When a word is deprived of its dimen- sion of action, reflection automatically suffers as well; and the word is changed into idle chatter, into verbalism, into 1. Action