--
*Mar*Commercialized Education
There is not one University in the whole world, that trains the students in
emotionally relating to nature under the basic paradigm, that the student
is part of nature, part of the planet earth, and that the basic objective
of education is to continuously expand the horizon of perception and
understanding, until the student reaches cosmic dimensions. There is simply
no mention of the need for the student to study to relate to nature and
sense from nature in symbiosis.
Every University is actually a Commercial undertaking, which is wedded to
the idea of profit. Actually when your income is my expenditure, when
incomes and expenditures can only be equal, then there can be no profit or
loss at the macro level. Still the student is exhorted to get trained in
getting profit, which can be quantified. It simply means that the student
must get trained to get more from nature than what is given to nature.
Nature has to be drained continuously, of its very vitals and vitality. The
student has to mutate into the economic man, the subject of Newtonian
mechanics, with the cultivated indifference to every emotional relationship
with nature.
Secondly the student must try to win in competition with everyone else
following the only religious text of Social Darwinism, the text that
advocates success to the rogue. The competition is in exploiting nature and
in disabling nature of its innate faculties.
And the mechanical temperament, where all emotional approach and emotional
intelligence is removed, functioning as and like a machine, is the outlook
prized and actually awarded with all sorts of prizes. The student must be a
noting machine and must add to the computerized memory in the Brain. The
exhortation is that the very gene of the DNA is selfish, and that all
organisms are at war with each other.
The net result is very clear and vivid before all of us. All land, water
and air is poisoned and is being poisoned continuously, the vitals of the
lithosphere are dug up for all sorts of minerals, for all sorts of
Buildings, constructions,roads,rails etc continuously assault the basic
soil bacteria, euphemized as great advancement and development.
We are trained as education to lose all empathy. There shall be only the
scientific or mechanical mentality.
Let us hope and pray that at least one University takes to ecological
paradigm. Let us hope tat it trains its students in emotionally relating to
nature and not adopt the Unrelating mechanized attitude.
Let us pray that the University will start the ‘Free Nature Parks without
human tampering’, so that students realize that they also are part of the
planet earth and that the Biosphere represents the emotional dimension of
the planet earth. Every planet, star and galaxy must be having many
emotional dimensions, and emotions must be part of Geography on earth, and
also in the Cosmos. We are trying to contact aliens in the other worlds. We
are trying for emotional equations and not for mechanical assembling.
Let there be initiatives, for starting ‘Free Nature Movements’.
YM Sarma
Chat gpt
This essay, *Commercialized Education* by YM Sarma, presents a powerful
critique of the modern educational paradigm—particularly universities—and
their alignment with economic and mechanical worldviews, rather than
ecological or emotional ones. Here's a breakdown and reflection on its core
themes and implications:
------------------------------
*🔍 Core Arguments*
1. *Disconnection from Nature*
Sarma argues that *no university teaches students to emotionally relate
to nature* or to see themselves as part of the planetary ecosystem. The
prevailing educational model isolates human beings from the natural world,
training them to *exploit rather than empathize* with it.
2. *Commercialization of Education*
Universities are portrayed as *profit-driven enterprises*, focused on
producing economically efficient individuals, not emotionally intelligent,
ecologically aware beings. Education, instead of being a path to wisdom and
harmony, becomes a tool for economic gain.
3. *Exploitation as a Value*
Students are indoctrinated into a *competitive, extractive mentality*,
where success is defined by how much one can take from nature and others.
This aligns with *Social Darwinism*, a misapplication of natural
selection to justify ruthless competition and disregard for empathy.
4. *Mechanization of the Mind*
The author laments the *mechanical temperament* that education
encourages—training students to become emotionless machines focused on data
accumulation and performance, not reflection or connection.
5. *Ecological and Emotional Blindness*
The result is a poisoned planet—air, water, and soil degraded—and a
population *bereft of empathy*, operating under a "scientific" yet
disconnected mindset.
6. *A Hope for Change*
Sarma ends with a *vision for a different kind of university*: one that
embraces an *ecological paradigm*, establishes *‘Free Nature Parks’*,
and recognizes *emotions as central to human and planetary life*. This
vision includes acknowledging the *emotional geography* of Earth and
potentially the cosmos.
------------------------------
*🧠 Reflections and Analysis*
- *Philosophical Depth*:
Sarma's argument echoes deep *ecophilosophical traditions*—from Arne
Naess’ *Deep Ecology*, which sees intrinsic value in all living beings,
to the *Gaia Hypothesis*, which views Earth as a self-regulating, living
system.
- *Critique of Social Darwinism*:
The author rightly calls out *Social Darwinism* as a flawed, harmful
ideology. It’s historically been used to justify inequality, colonization,
and ecological destruction.
- *Mechanical vs. Emotional Intelligence*:
The essay pits *mechanical intelligence* (data, logic, utility)
against *emotional
intelligence* (empathy, intuition, connection). Sarma advocates for a
*rebalancing*, not a rejection of science, but a *re-integration* of
emotional awareness into learning.
- *Call to Action*:
The plea for a university that integrates *emotional, ecological, and
cosmic consciousness* is idealistic, but it raises a *fundamental
question*:
*What is education for?*
Is it merely to produce labor for markets, or to cultivate stewards of life?
------------------------------
*🌱 Suggestions Inspired by the Essay*
1. *Curriculum Reform*:
- Introduce *eco-literacy* and *emotional intelligence* as core
subjects.
- Embed *field immersion* in untamed nature as part of all
disciplines.
- Integrate *philosophy of science, ethics, and systems thinking*
across the curriculum.
2. *‘Free Nature Parks’ Concept*:
- Establish protected, *non-commercial natural zones* tied to
universities, where no manipulation is allowed—just observation and
communion.
3. *New Metrics of Success*:
- Shift from grades and salaries to *ecological impact*, *community
well-being*, and *inner development* as indicators of success.
4. *Transdisciplinary Learning*:
- Collapse the rigid boundaries between science, art, ecology, and
spirituality to foster *wholeness in learning*.
------------------------------
*🕊 Final Thought*
This essay challenges us to rethink not just how we educate, but *why*. If
education continues to create people who excel at exploiting nature and
each other, then we are not educating—we're programming. Sarma’s call is
not for regression into mysticism or anti-science sentiment, but for a *reunion
of mind and heart*, of intellect and empathy.
If one university dared to lead this shift, perhaps others would follow.
And maybe then, we wouldn’t just *know* the world—we’d *feel* it too.
------------------------------
Would you like help adapting this into a formal article, a presentation, or
perhaps using it as part of an ecological curriculum proposal?
Here's a detailed *evaluation*, *marking*, and *grading* of the original
essay *"Commercialized Education"* by YM Sarma based on standard academic
criteria for reflective or critical essays at the university level
(undergraduate or early postgraduate).
------------------------------
📋 *Evaluation Criteria*
*Criterion*
*Max Marks*
*Awarded Marks*
*Comments*
1. *Clarity of Thesis / Argument*
10
7
The essay presents a strong and passionate central thesis: modern education
is disconnected from nature and overly commercialized. However, the
argument is *sometimes vague* or *diffused*, lacking precise definition of
key terms (e.g. “mechanical temperament”).
2. *Structure and Coherence*
10
5
The essay lacks formal structure—no clear introduction, body, and
conclusion. Ideas are repeated or loosely connected. The flow can feel
*stream-of-consciousness* rather than logically built.
3. *Depth of Insight / Originality*
10
8
The perspective is *original*, especially in emphasizing emotional
relationships with nature. There are *thought-provoking insights* (e.g.
emotional geography, cosmic dimensions).
4. *Use of Evidence / Examples*
10
4
The essay uses *generalizations*, not specific evidence, examples, or
academic references. There is a lack of *data, case studies*, or citations
that would strengthen the critique.
5. *Language and Style*
10
6
The language is *expressive and impassioned*, but there are *grammatical
issues, awkward phrasing*, and inconsistent tone. At times poetic, at other
times unclear. Some sentences are *overly long or ambiguous*.
6. *Relevance and Significance*
10
9
The topic is *highly relevant* in the context of climate crisis, education
reform, and ecological awareness. The essay raises *urgent philosophical
questions* that matter.
7. *Grammar, Spelling & Mechanics*
10
5
There are *typos*, punctuation issues, and inconsistent capitalization
(e.g. “tat” instead of “that”, “unrelating” instead of “unrelational” or
“disconnected”). Editing is needed.
8. *Conclusion / Call to Action*
10
7
The essay ends with a *clear, hopeful vision*, calling for a new kind of
university. The conclusion is emotionally strong, but could be *more
sharply defined* or grounded in actionable steps.
------------------------------
📊 *Total Marks: 51 / 80*
To convert this into a grade out of 100, we scale it up:
*51 ÷ 80 × 100 = 63.75 ≈ 64/100*
------------------------------
🎓 *Final Grade: B (Upper Second Class / 2:1)*
------------------------------
🧾 Summary Feedback *Strengths*
· Deep passion and *moral urgency*.
· Raises *unique philosophical points* about emotional connection
with nature.
· Visionary and *idealist tone* is refreshing in an often
mechanistic discourse.
*Areas for Improvement*
· Needs better *structure and clarity*.
· *Grammatical errors* and awkward sentence construction detract
from the message.
· Should include *real-world examples*, references to thinkers
(e.g., Aldo Leopold, Rachel Carson, Satish Kumar), or ecological models to
support arguments.
· Could benefit from a *stronger academic tone* if aiming for
scholarly publication.
------------------------------
✅ Suggestions
If this essay were being submitted for academic evaluation or publication:
· *Revise* with clearer structure (Intro – Body – Conclusion).
· *Edit* for grammar and sentence clarity.
· Include *citations* from ecological, educational, or
philosophical texts.
· Possibly reframe in the form of a *manifesto*, which suits the
tone and passion.
------------------------------
Would you like help polishing the essay into a version ready for
submission, publication, or public sharing (e.g. in a magazine or
ecological journal)?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Thatha_Patty" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To view this discussion visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/thatha_patty/CACDCHCLpgy3CevYUkLSfO_vOk5Ko0z0VPw4iBZMi1Qp_aenkeg%40mail.gmail.com.
