Do Blog de Roberto Romano
*Roberto Romano é professor titular de Ética e Filosofia Política da Unicamp. Escreve quinzenalmente
Os assuntos universitários desafiam as consciências honestas. Uso o conceito de honestidade no sentido estrito: quem, nos campi, é reto, luta para que os critérios científicos garantam a verdade. Esta não é posse de um ou muitos indivíduos, pois consiste numa busca incessante. Os métodos e as disciplinas definem parâmetros nunca atingidos de maneira completa. Se os docentes, os pesquisadores, os estudantes, imaginam ser os proprietários do verdadeiro, se transformam no demagogo, no profeta, no militante.
Fora dos arquivos, bibliotecas, laboratórios, salas de aula, todos têm o direito e o dever de seguir propostas para o ordenamento social, político, religioso. Mas operar na pesquisa como defensor de ideologias e crenças é trair a ética universitária. Na Alemanha nazista o charlatanismo da cátedra cedo se ampliou em “experiências” médicas (e outras…) criminosas. Nazistas eram donos da verdade. Quem a eles se opunha seria inimigo do saber autêntico e do povo. Na União Soviética, existiram dogmas “científicos” impostos aos universitários e à massa popular. O charlatão e militante Lyssenko, para quem existiria uma genética segundo o materialismo histórico e dialético, arruinou aquela federação ao prejudicar colheitas e a natureza, que insistiam em desobedecer os preceitos da Academia de Ciências moscovita, serva do Politburo.
Sartre distingue o filósofo do ideólogo. O primeiro busca a verdade, o segundo espalha teses de partidos ou seitas. A ideologia mata o saber porque nela as interrogações, as dúvidas, a pesquisa, são descartadas em nome de um dogma soberano. Da ideologia ao fanatismo, a via é curta. Do fanatismo ao culto do líder, tido como onisciente, não é preciso nenhum passo.
Desde FHC, critico o conúbio entre universitários e ideologias políticas. Em entrevista à revista Caros Amigos, critiquei os administradores dos campi pela simbiose das reitorias com o Ministério da Educação. Após o reino tucano, petistas e assemelhados, que apreciavam minhas críticas, também geriram a educação nacional com os mesmos trejeitos e truques anteriores. Na entrevista citada, dizia eu que um reitor brasileiro representa o poder nos campi, não é o emissário dos campi junto ao poder. Isto explica o motivo pelo qual, até hoje, não foi regulamentada a autonomia universitária, inscrita na Constituição.
É mais fácil, para os gerentes universitários, vender apoio ao governo de plantão do que lutar pela autonomia plena, incluindo a financeira, da instituição por eles lideradas. Como a maior parte das nossas universidades resulta do trato de políticos regionais com o governo central, o esperado dos reitores é apoiar o Executivo brasileiro em troca de recursos. Nada que não seja comum aos prefeitos e governadores, no comércio com o Planalto.
De modo ilegal e contra a ética, reitores assinaram listas de apoio a Luis Inácio da Silva, na sua reeleição. Fizeram o mesmo com Dilma Rousseff. Docentes transformados em puros militantes propagaram aos quatro ventos que haveria dinheiro sem limite para estudos no Exterior, no Brasil, no cosmos! Dizer que tais recursos eram finitos foi considerado pelos fanáticos da cátedra como heresia. E, como sabemos, o destino dos hereges é sempre a fogueira. As redes sociais funcionaram como matadouros da honra alheia, para impedir a voz da razão.
Agora o MEC, na vala comum dos contingenciamentos e cortes do chamado ajuste fiscal, retira dos docentes, discentes, funcionários, R$ 9,4 bilhões. Reitores e militantes, fantasiados de pesquisadores, silenciam a própria subserviência, contrária às regras de autonomia ética e científica. Alexandre Kojève, pensador do século 20, ao comentar o dito de Hegel segundo o qual o mundo dos intelectuais é o reino animalesco do Espírito, acrescentou: o espaço universitário define-se como o reino dos ladrões roubados. Acertou em cheio. As greves chegam tarde, os universitários deveriam pensar no problema em seu devido tempo.
Roberto Romano: power and university
* Roberto Romano is Professor of Ethics and Political Philosophy at Unicamp.
University issues challenge all the honest consciences. I use the concept of honesty in the strict sense: who, on campuses, is fair, fight for the scientific criteria to ensure the truth. Truth is not the possession of one or many individuals, it is a constant search. Methods and disciplines never define completely achieved parameters. If teachers, researchers, students, imagine to be the real owners of the truth, they become demagogues, prophets, militants.
Outside the archives, libraries, laboratories, classrooms, everyone has the right and the duty to follow proposals for the improvement of social order, political, religious. But operate in the research field as a defender of ideologies and beliefs is to betray the university ethics. In Nazi Germany quackery of the chair soon expanded itself into criminal "experiences" medical (and other ...). Nazis were masters of truth. Criticize them was dangerous, it was like to be the enemy of the authentic knowledge and the people. In the Soviet Union, there were "scientific" dogma imposed on students and the people. The charlatan Lysenko and his genetic according to the historical and dialectical materialism, ruined that federation for the nature insisted in disobey the precepts of the Moscow Academy of Sciences, the servant of Politburo .
Outside the archives, libraries, laboratories, classrooms, everyone has the right and the duty to follow proposals for the improvement of social order, political, religious. But operate in the research field as a defender of ideologies and beliefs is to betray the university ethics. In Nazi Germany quackery of the chair soon expanded itself into criminal "experiences" medical (and other ...). Nazis were masters of truth. Criticize them was dangerous, it was like to be the enemy of the authentic knowledge and the people. In the Soviet Union, there were "scientific" dogma imposed on students and the people. The charlatan Lysenko and his genetic according to the historical and dialectical materialism, ruined that federation for the nature insisted in disobey the precepts of the Moscow Academy of Sciences, the servant of Politburo .
Sartre distinguishes the ideologue of the philosopher. The first seeks the truth, the second spreads theses belonging to parties or sects. Ideology kills knowledge because it denie questions, doubts, research, all discarded in the name of a sovereign dogma. From ideology to fanaticism, the route is short. From fanaticism to the cult of the leader, supposedly omniscient, it does not take any step.
Since the FHC government, I criticize the wedlock between researchers, teachers and political ideologies. In an interview with Caros Amigos, I criticized the administrators of the campuses by their symbiosis with the Ministry of Education. After the “tucanos” kingdom , PT and the like, who appreciated my criticisms, also managed the national education with the same mannerisms and tricks. In the mentioned interview, I said that a Brazilian dean represents the power on campuses, he is not the emissary of the campuses to the power. This explains why, to this day, has not been regulated university autonomy, enshrined in the Constitution.
It is easier for university managers, sell support to government rather to fight for full autonomy, including financial, to the institution led by them. As most of our universities are the resulting from collusion of regional politicians with the central government, the expected from deans is to support the Brazilian Executive in exchange of financial resources. Everything that is common to mayors and governors in trade with the Planalto.
In a illegal and unethical way, federal deans signed lists to support Luis Inacio da Silva, on his re-election. They did the same with Dilma Rousseff. Teachers transformed into pure militants spread to the four winds that there will money without limit for studies abroad, in Brazil, in the cosmos! To say that such resources were finite chair was considered by the fanatics as heresy. And as we know, the fate of heretics is always the bonfire. Social networks functioned as slaughterhouses of the honor of the critics, to prevent the voice of reason.
In a illegal and unethical way, federal deans signed lists to support Luis Inacio da Silva, on his re-election. They did the same with Dilma Rousseff. Teachers transformed into pure militants spread to the four winds that there will money without limit for studies abroad, in Brazil, in the cosmos! To say that such resources were finite chair was considered by the fanatics as heresy. And as we know, the fate of heretics is always the bonfire. Social networks functioned as slaughterhouses of the honor of the critics, to prevent the voice of reason.
Now the MEC cuts in the so-called fiscal adjustment R $ 9.4 billion. Deans and militants disguised as researchers, silence their ancient subservience, contrary to the rules of ethics and scientific autonomy. Alexandre Kojève, a 20th century thinker, commenting Hegel according to which the world of intellectuals is the savage realm of the Spirit, said that university space is defined as the kingdom of stolen thieves. He nailed it. The strikes come late, the university should think about the problem in due time.
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário