, Christian socialism , liberation theology

Direction: Period: Main interests: Significant Ideas:

Pedagogy of the oppressed, "banking" system of education, critical consciousness, anti-repressive education, practice

Influenced: Influenced by: Awards:

Biography

Born in a middle-class family in Recife, Pernambuco, Freire experienced hunger and poverty during the economic crisis of the 1930s, when economic hardship prevented him from receiving a full education. In 1931, the family moved to Jaboatão dos Guararapes.

Freire entered the University of Recife in 1943. Although he trained as a lawyer, he spent much of his time studying philosophy (especially phenomenology) and the psychology of language. After graduation, he decided not to work in his specialty, but became a teacher of Portuguese in a secondary school. In 1944 he married Elsa Maya Costa de Oliveira, with whom he worked at school and raised five children.

In 1946, Freire was appointed Director of the Department of Education and Culture of the Social Services of the State of Pernambuco.

In 1961, Freire was appointed director of the Department of Cultural Development at the University of Recife. In 1962, he gets the opportunity to put his theory into practice and teaches 300 sugar plantation workers to read and write in 45 days. After that, the Brazilian government approves the creation of thousands of such cultural circles throughout the country.

In 1964, after a right-wing military coup, the dictatorship banned their activities. Freire, a Christian socialist who sympathized with the Cuban Revolution and the country's leftist movements, was arrested and imprisoned as a "traitor" for 70 days. After exile and a short stay in Bolivia , Freire works for 5 years in Chile for the government and FAO at the UN . In 1967, Freire published his first book, Education as the Practice of Freedom. Education as the Practice of Freedom ). Which is followed by his most famous book, The Pedagogy of the Oppressed (port. Pedagogia do Oprimido, English Pedagogy of the Oppressed), first published in Portugal in 1968. In 1970 the book was translated into Spanish and English. In Brazil itself, the book was published only in 1974 in the face of the weakening of the authoritarian regime.

After spending a year in Cambridge, Massachusetts, where he taught at Harvard, Freire moved to Geneva, Switzerland, where he was the World Council of Churches' Special Educational Adviser. In addition, he advised the left-wing movements that came to power in the former Portuguese colonies (including Mozambique and Guinea-Bissau) in the development of educational systems and the fight against illiteracy.

Freire was able to return to his homeland only in 1980. Freire joined the Workers' Party and was in charge of the party's adult literacy program in São Paulo from 1980 to 1986. When the PT won the 1988 municipal elections, Freire was appointed Secretary of Education for the State of São Paulo.

Creation

Paulo Freire worked in the field of public education and was engaged in the philosophy of education, which made it possible to combine not only the classical approaches of Plato, but also modern Marxist criticism and the theory of struggle against colonialism. "Pedagogy of the Oppressed" can be seen as a development or response to Franz Fanon's book "The Cursed" (fr. Les Damnes de la Terre), which emphasizes the need to provide the indigenous population with an education that is both modern (instead of traditional, patriarchal) and anti-colonial (and not just planting the culture of the colonialists).

Compositions

see also

Write a review on the article "Freire, Paulo"

Links

• , Brazil
• , Malta
• , Finland
• , Arizona
• , Tel Aviv

An excerpt characterizing Freire, Paulo

“Yes, yes, do it,” he replied to various proposals. “Yes, yes, go, my dear, take a look,” he turned first to one, then to another of his associates; or: “No, don’t, we’d better wait,” he said. He listened to the reports brought to him, gave orders when it was required by his subordinates; but, listening to the reports, he did not seem to be interested in the meaning of the words of what was said to him, but something else in the expression of the persons who, in the tone of speech, informed him, interested him. He knew with many years of military experience and understood with an old mind that it was impossible for one person to lead hundreds of thousands of people fighting death, and he knew that the fate of the battle was decided not by the orders of the commander-in-chief, not by the place on which the troops stood, not by the number of guns and killed people, and that elusive force called the spirit of the army, and he followed this force and led it, as far as it was in his power.
The general expression on Kutuzov's face was concentrated, calm attention and tension, barely overcoming the fatigue of a weak and old body.
At eleven o'clock in the morning news was brought to him that the fleches occupied by the French were again recaptured, but that Prince Bagration was wounded. Kutuzov gasped and shook his head.
“Go to Prince Peter Ivanovich and find out in detail what and how,” he said to one of the adjutants and after that turned to Prince Wirtemberg, who was standing behind him:
“Would it please your Highness to take command of the First Army.”
Shortly after the prince's departure, so soon that he could not yet reach Semyonovsky, the prince's adjutant returned from him and reported to his lordship that the prince was asking for troops.
Kutuzov grimaced and sent an order to Dokhturov to take command of the first army, and asked the prince, without whom, as he said, he could not do at these important moments, he asked to return to himself. When the news of the capture of Murat was brought and the staff congratulated Kutuzov, he smiled.
“Wait, gentlemen,” he said. - The battle is won, and there is nothing unusual in the capture of Murat. But it is better to wait and rejoice. “However, he sent an adjutant to pass through the troops with this news.
When Shcherbinin galloped up from the left flank with a report about the occupation of the fleches and Semenovsky by the French, Kutuzov, guessing from the sounds of the battlefield and Shcherbinin’s face that the news was bad, stood up, as if stretching his legs, and, taking Shcherbinin’s arm, took him aside .
“Go, my dear,” he said to Yermolov, “see if anything can be done.”
Kutuzov was in Gorki, in the center of the position of the Russian troops. Napoleon's attack on our left flank was repulsed several times. In the center, the French did not move further than Borodin. From the left flank, Uvarov's cavalry forced the French to flee.
At three o'clock the French attacks ceased. On all the faces coming from the battlefield, and on those who stood around him, Kutuzov read an expression of tension that reached the highest degree. Kutuzov was pleased with the success of the day beyond expectation. But physical strength left the old man. Several times his head sank low, as if falling, and he dozed off. He was served dinner.
Wing adjutant Wolzogen, the same one who, passing by Prince Andrei, said that the war should be im Raum verlegon [transferred into space (German)], and whom Bagration hated so much, drove up to Kutuzov during lunch. Wolzogen came from Barclay with a report on the progress of affairs on the left flank. The prudent Barclay de Tolly, seeing the crowds of the wounded fleeing and the disorganized behinds of the army, having weighed all the circumstances of the case, decided that the battle was lost, and with this news he sent his favorite to the commander-in-chief.
Kutuzov chewed the fried chicken with difficulty, and with narrowed, cheerful eyes looked at Wolzogen.
Wolzogen, casually stretching his legs, with a half-contemptuous smile on his lips, went up to Kutuzov, lightly touching his visor with his hand.
Wolzogen treated his Serene Highness with a certain affected carelessness, intended to show that he, as a highly educated military man, leaves the Russians to make an idol out of this old, useless man, while he himself knows with whom he is dealing. “Der alte Herr (as the Germans called Kutuzov in their circle) macht sich ganz bequem, [The old gentleman calmly settled down (German)] thought Wolzogen and, looking sternly at the plates that stood in front of Kutuzov, began to report to the old gentleman the state of affairs on the left flank as Barclay ordered him and as he himself saw and understood him.
- All points of our position are in the hands of the enemy and there is nothing to recapture, because there are no troops; they are running, and there is no way to stop them,” he reported.
Kutuzov, stopping to chew, stared at Wolzogen in surprise, as if not understanding what he was being told. Wolzogen, noticing the excitement of des alten Herrn, [the old gentleman (German)], said with a smile:
- I did not consider myself entitled to hide from your lordship what I saw ... The troops are in complete disorder ...
- Have you seen? Did you see? .. - Kutuzov shouted with a frown, quickly getting up and advancing on Wolzogen. “How dare you… how dare you…!” he shouted, making menacing gestures with shaking hands and choking. - How dare you, my dear sir, say this to me. You don't know anything. Tell General Barclay from me that his information is incorrect and that the real course of the battle is known to me, the commander-in-chief, better than to him.
Wolzogen wanted to object something, but Kutuzov interrupted him.
- The enemy is repulsed on the left and defeated on the right flank. If you have not seen well, dear sir, then do not allow yourself to say what you do not know. Please go to General Barclay and convey to him my indispensable intention to attack the enemy tomorrow, ”Kutuzov said sternly. Everyone was silent, and one could hear one heavy breathing of the out of breath old general. - Repulsed everywhere, for which I thank God and our brave army. The enemy is defeated, and tomorrow we will drive him out of the sacred Russian land, - said Kutuzov, crossing himself; and suddenly burst into tears. Wolzogen, shrugging his shoulders and twisting his lips, silently stepped aside, wondering at uber diese Eingenommenheit des alten Herrn. [on this tyranny of the old gentleman. (German)]
“Yes, here he is, my hero,” Kutuzov said to the plump, handsome black-haired general, who at that time was entering the mound. It was Raevsky, who had spent the whole day at the main point of the Borodino field.

PEDAGOGY OF THE OPPRESSED

(50th Anniversary Edition)

Translation from English by Irina Nikitina (preface, introduction, ch. 3 and 4, notes to all sections, afterword, interviews with modern scientists), Maria Maltseva-Samoilovich (ch. 1 and 2, edited by Irina Nikitina). Unless otherwise indicated, translations of quotations in all chapters are by Irina Nikitina.

© Paulo Freire, 1970, 1993

© Donaldo Macedo, foreword, 2018

© Ira Shor, Afterword, 2018

© Nikitina I. V., Maltseva-Samoilovich M. I., translation into Russian, 2017

© Edition in Russian, design. LLC Publishing Group Azbuka-Atticus, 2018

Hummingbird®

* * *

Freire's book ... calls on all educators in general, and critical educators in particular, to move beyond the fetishization of methods that paralyzes the thinking, innovation and creativity of teachers.

Noam Chomsky, linguist, publicist, philosopher

The Pedagogy of the Oppressed has the main criterion of a classic: this book has outlived its time and its creator. It is a must read for every teacher who cares about the link between education and social change.

Stanley Aronovich, Professor of Sociology and Cultural Studies, City University of New York

Without a doubt, Freire's work caused an impressive response around the world. He is perhaps the most influential scholar in the field of education.

Ramon Flecha, Professor of Sociology, University of Barcelona

Freire's theory continues to this day to push scholars to consider the variety of personal and geographic nuances that need to be taken into account when talking about education. Freire encourages us to look at everything critically, especially when working together with others in a community context to try to address pressing issues of inequality. It also puts the research into the realm of everyday life - everyday realities, real destinies, people's real life conditions, their struggles and their aspirations - in order to make the research accessible to the people we work with and with/about whom we write this very research.

Valerie Kinlock, Dean of the School of Education, University of Pittsburgh

Dedicated to the downtrodden and to all those who suffer and fight alongside them

Preface to the 50th Anniversary Edition of the First Publication

Before New York had time to show the world a $1,000 bagel, a local restaurateur included a $27,000 chocolate sundae on the menu, setting a Guinness record for the most expensive dessert in the world.

It is my great honor to write the foreword to Paulo Freire's Pedagogy of the Oppressed, a book that is no doubt already a classic as it slowly gains popularity over the past half century as the world enters the dark 21st century. Leading intellectuals - Noam Chomsky, Zygmunt Bauman, Henry Geru, Arundati Roy, Amy Goodman, Thomas Piketty and others - have repeatedly appealed to the prudence of the inhabitants of our planet, warning of dire consequences (which include climate change denial, shameless economic inequality, the threat nuclear holocaust) a hegemony of far-right political forces that, if left unchecked, could lead to the total extinction of humanity as we know it. Therefore, it is necessary not only to choose a different political path, but also to take into account that it should be based on the development of a critical awareness by people of the fact that they exist in the world and interact with it - it is precisely this position that Freire insisted on and it is precisely this position that permeates his brilliant, insightful thoughts expressed in Pedagogy of the Oppressed. In other words, The Pedagogy of the Oppressed was written primarily not to propose a new methodology (which would be contrary to the author's critique of stereotypical models of education), but to stimulate the development of a liberating educational process that challenges students, calls them to action and demands, that, through literacy and critical thinking, they learn to change the world in which they live, evaluating it thoughtfully and critically; so that they can identify and confront the divisions and contradictions inherent in the relationship between the oppressor and the oppressed. Thus, Freire wrote Pedagogy of the Oppressed primarily with the aim of awakening in the oppressed the knowledge, creativity and undying capacity for critical thinking that is necessary to expose, demythologize and understand the relations of power that have placed them in the position of marginals, and through this awareness to initiate the work of liberation through praxis, which invariably requires constant, unceasing critical reflection and action. Although more and more educators now agree with Freire's thoughts, many of them, including those who adhere to liberal and progressive views, do not pay attention to the fact that their political discourse is inconsistent: on the one hand, they condemn the conditions oppression, and on the other hand, they adapt to the dominant structures that directly created this situation of oppression. We will return to this issue a little later.

Freire always remained true to his view of history as a possibility and fervently hoped for the possibility of creating a world where there would be less discrimination and more justice, less dehumanization and more humanity, but nevertheless he was always critical of "liberation propaganda ... [which can only] to plant faith in freedom in the heads of the oppressed, thus trying to win their trust. Accordingly, Freire believed that "the right approach is built on dialogue ... [a process that awakens] the conviction of the oppressed that they must fight for their freedom [which is] not a gift given to them by a revolutionary leader, but the result of their own conscientization (conscientização) » . During this long and fruitful walk, Freire, partly in jest, told me that “the ruling class will never send us on holiday to Copacabana. If we want to go to Copacabana, we have to fight for it.” In the course of this long - and final - conversation, Freire several times showed annoyance, sometimes bordering on "sheer fury," as he used to call it, towards some progressive renegades who conform to neoliberal theology. They included his friend, former Brazilian President Fernando Henrique, who, like Freire, was exiled to Chile by a brutal neo-Nazi military dictatorship that killed and tortured thousands of Brazilians. In essence, the Brazilian experiments with neo-liberalism under the auspices of the government of Fernando Henrique exacerbated already dire conditions and plunged millions of Brazilians into hunger, poverty and despair, which in turn led to deepening economic and educational inequalities, while unleashing systematic corruption in ruling circles. Unfortunately, the socialist governments of the Western world of that time largely abandoned the principle of the struggle for social justice, equality and equal rights, leaning towards a neoliberal, market-obsessed ideology that not only trampled on the hopes of people who dreamed of a better world, but also brought down these very governments. , creating the conditions for blatant corruption. This is exactly what happened in Portugal, Spain and Greece. In Greece, the Socialist Party, under Prime Minister Georgios Papandreou, allowed corruption to reach epidemic proportions, so that, for example, the PASOK party was able to buy votes by offering free flights to Greek citizens who left the United States and wanted to fly to Greece, provided that they vote for the socialists. Such actions are reminiscent of the strategies regularly criticized by Western Democrats as attempts to rig elections, which they say are plague-ridden in what are pejoratively referred to as "Third World banana republics." It can be said that socialist governments on different continents have lost power, in part because of outrageous corruption scandals, which generally gave rise to the emergence of center-right and far-right governments (Greece, where the radical left party SYRIZA won the elections, was an exception). These governments came to power at the expense of disgruntled and disenfranchised voters—voters who fell victim to the austerity regime imposed on them by neoliberal policies.

Freire also made no secret of his “sheer rage”, denouncing the critical stance of many soft-hearted liberals and some of the so-called critical educators who often find shelter in the walls of higher educational institutions, hiding their dependence on shameless consumerism and at the same time attacking the market in their written discourse. theology of neoliberalism. Very often, the tastes of such soft-hearted liberals and so-called critical educators and their ways of being in and interacting with the world remain, according to Freire, inextricably linked to the highly neo-liberal market views, which they themselves denounce at the level of written discourse. In their daily actions, such soft-bodied liberals and so-called critical educators often do not act in the way that praxis prescribes for them, turning the declared political project into a fossil, into obscure analytical rantings that cannot go beyond the framework of "delayed" action - action planned with aim to transform the existing neo-liberal deification of the market into new democratic structures that will lead to equality, equal rights and the formation of truly democratic political methods. In other words, many soft-bodied liberals and so-called critical educators flaunt their leftist principles by ostentatiously proclaiming themselves Marxists (which in most cases is expressed only in written discourse or within the safe walls of higher educational institutions), and sometimes feel the need to boast also that for example, their radicalism goes beyond the ideas of Marx, since their political principles are closer to those of Mao - a position they consider even more radical. As a result, the title of leftist in the academic world becomes an appropriated, exotic political and cultural currency: belonging to the Marxists sitting in an ivory tower provides a person with status, but in reality it is just a stylish brand, the personification of consumerism, supported by the manipulation of an empty space. , a symbolic list of names and labels that are otherwise essentially meaningless. In essence, the term "Marxist" in the academic world, which is used by some critical educators, turns ethical and political activity into a spectacle, and the leftist worldview into a commodity. Becoming a commodity, these arbitrarily appropriated "radical" positions and the title of radical turn out to be empty shells, losing their progressive content to such an extent that they become divorced from principled actions. This gap underlies the reproduction of a theology of neoliberalism that frowns on collective social action based on critical thinking and encourages a zealous, merciless competitive spirit. This insidious process of decoupling critical discourse from action makes it possible to act contrary to belief: it enables self-proclaimed Marxists in the service of educational institutions to say, for example, that they are against racism, and at the same time turn the fight against racial prejudice into lifeless clichés that leave no pedagogical space for criticism of white supremacist ideology. In this process, their progressive principles are often used, put into action only insofar as they denounce racism at the level of written critical discourse, invariably benefiting from the cemented institutionalized racism that they voluntarily refuse to recognize and against which they voluntarily refuse to fight.

Thus, these Marxists in the service of the education system are also ignoring the political and systemic influence of racism, which was prominent during the 2016 U.S. presidential campaign and which grew more and more horrifying with every calculated hate speech Donald Trump made. on the part of whites against fellow citizens, and not against the state or the conditions created in large part by neoliberal politics, which the enraged white representatives of the working class, paradoxically, are willing to put up with. Trump's election to the presidency essentially exposed the lies behind the post-election slogan that proclaimed "the end of racism" - a slogan coined after the election of Barack Obama, the first black president. Moreover, denying the existence of racism while expanding the ghetto, normalizing the school-to-prison pipeline that operates primarily for blacks and Hispanics, and exacerbating poverty as a side effect of racism is racist. These self-proclaimed supporters of Marx and Mao in the service of the educational system are racist when they preach anti-racist sermons, presenting racism as some kind of abstract idea and resisting intellectual and social pressure that requires them to turn this abstract idea expressed at the level of written critical discourse into action, which would lead to a radical democratization of society and its institutions. How radically democratic are, say, universities if most departments are taught and taught by whites, except for a handful of black professors and a tiny number of non-white students? For example, does racial bias play any role in the near absence of African Americans in classical literature departments—both among faculty and students—or are African Americans genetically disinclined to study the classics and therefore reluctant to enter such departments? Even more pernicious is the situation when such self-proclaimed leftists in the service of the educational system join the social structure of denial of entrenched racism, which is expressed in their speech and behavior. Take, for example, the statement of a liberal white professor at a major city university—an institution that prides itself on its ethnocultural diversity: “We just want these black guys to learn how to learn.” Statements like these demonstrate not only the highly ethnocentric view of the act of knowing, as Freire so insightfully discusses in Pedagogy of the Oppressed, but also that some people who make such remarks are still shackled by a white supremacist ideology that has implanted myths into their minds. and the belief that children of a particular race or culture are born incapable of learning until they receive the recipes provided by educators to the poor and oppressed. The latter often carry pre-packaged lesson plans in their leather Gucci bags and briefcases, according to which they are going to teach, say, African Americans something that they could not yet know by definition, because until now they did not have the ability to acquire knowledge. The very existence in the cruel conditions in which these non-white children were doomed to grow up testifies to how well they learn, because they managed to survive in circumstances of “inhuman inequality”, as Jonathan Kozol tartly called it in some of his books. Could the sons and daughters of these university Marxist educators have endured such deep-rooted social inequalities and survived unscathed while excelling in final qualifying exams? Probably not. Therefore, survival in itself under the conditions of the most blatant racism, segregation, gender and class discrimination indicates not only the high level of intelligence of those children who are forced into the ghetto, but also confirms Howard Gardner's theory of the existence of multiple intelligences, which goes beyond the Western notion of "intelligence".

One of the most influential teachers of the 20th century. was the Brazilian Paolo Freire. His main moral orientation was to defend the oppressed masses. As a very young man, he realized that in Brazil, as well as in other third world countries, tens of millions of people eke out a half-starved existence, they constitute a silent majority and, due to their illiteracy, are not able to realize their own social position and, therefore, protect themselves. According to the main position of Freire's theory, education is a condition for the emancipation of the broad masses of people.

It should be noted that in his reflections, Freire sought to take into account the achievements of many philosophical trends, rather eclectically combining their characteristic features. The main installations of Freire were most organically combined with the existentialism of K. Jaspers and the historical materialism of K. Marx. From existentialism, he took the conviction of the relevance of the value of freedom. Existentialists believed that a person is responsible for his freedom, which is the quintessence of his existence. Freire deviated from this line: a person is not free initially, he needs literacy. In addition, he is not alone in his aspiration, but is part of a certain social class. But class collisions were considered more thoroughly than others by K. Marx. And Freire resolutely turned to Marxism, believing that oppression would certainly call for revolution, he took an active radical position. That is why he is considered the most prominent representative of radical pedagogy.

The exceptionally ascetic socio-political activity of Freire was assessed differently by the authorities. In some cases, it was welcomed as corresponding to the struggle for national independence, but often condemned as directed against the national bourgeoisie. After the military coup in Brazil in 1964, Freire was expelled from the country. It was during his 14-year exile that he published his major works, Education as the Practice of Freedom (1968) and Pedagogy of the Oppressed (1970).

The first book discusses the problems of industrialization, urbanization and the eradication of illiteracy, which, according to Freire, should have been solved democratically. In the second book, he took a more radical position, bringing to the fore strategic goals: conscientization, revolution, dialogue and cooperation imposed on the authorities by the masses of the people.

The concept of conscientization was invented by Freire. This means that scientific truths are not simply communicated to the broad masses of people, but they serve as a means of shaping their self-awareness. The thesis about the revolution also appeared not by chance. Freire was aware that revolutionary extremes were often accompanied by voluntaristic unjustified actions. But he also understood that the authorities were not in the mood for a real dialogue with ordinary people, and therefore they had to be forced into it, not allowing them to eradicate the revolutionary spirit.

So far we have considered the strategic goals of Freire's pedagogical theory. But a teacher can be called outstanding only if he has a special didactic method. In this regard, Freire was not particularly productive, however, his theory is not without a bright didactic component. He contrasted the "banking" didactic concept with a problematic theory of learning. Within the framework of the "banking" concept, knowledge is communicated to the student as true, not subject to doubt, not related to his consciousness and understanding, they are stored like money in a bank. The teacher, dominating the student, in fact, suppresses him. Within the framework of the problem-setting concept, the teacher enters into a dialogue with the student, discusses problems, forms a unity of opposites with him. The links between them are not vertical, but horizontal. Dialogue and self-governance are at the forefront. Curricula are compiled jointly by the teacher and the student.

Freire demonstrated the possibilities of a problematic didactic theory by teaching illiterate adults to read and write as an example. His successful attempt to teach reading and writing to 300 sugar plantation workers in 45 days received wide public outcry.

Briefly, his method was as follows. First, the universal vocabulary of the group of people who are learning the basics of literacy is determined. Secondly, these words are written out on special posters, the objects that they designate are indicated. As a result, a visual image of the word is formed. Thirdly, the meaning of the chosen words for this group of people is discussed. Fourth, the word is divided into syllables that vary (eg ba-, be-, bi-, etc.). Fifth, new words are formed. Sixth, their meanings are discussed. Thus, words are not excluded, but, on the contrary, are included in the socio-cultural context.

Let's move on to criticisms. Freire was criticized by both Catholic socialists, on the one hand, and Marxists, on the other. Each party was jealous of his rivals. It has also been argued that Freire's pedagogy only applies to adults. However, it is known that children successfully repeat the actions of adults, and sometimes are more successful in their implementation. The view has been repeatedly expressed that Freire's theory can only be applied in developing countries. Freire sharply objected to this reproach, arguing that developed countries are afraid to admit their similarity with developing states.

In fact, Freire became the leader of radical pedagogy, winning the support of numerous supporters. Not all of them, following him, were ready to defend socialist ideas. More popular was another point of view, according to which the widespread instrumental and conservative methods of education conserve the existing state of affairs, they are not facing the future. Such, for example, was the position of the American educator Henry Giroud (1943)

Another notable figure who also belongs to the broad current of postmodernism is the Brazilian Paulo Freire. His book Pedagogy of the Oppressed, published simultaneously with Illich's A Society Without Schools, was generally accepted by the pedagogical community - the ideas expressed in the book were widely discussed, Freire had (and still has) followers. In his ideas, existentialism, experimentalism and Marxism are peculiarly mixed. Key words of his lexicon: domination, liberation, practice, dialogue, border situation. The main problems of the current era, according to Freire, are the domination of people over each other and the role of its various forms in the dehumanization of man.

The dominance of some people over others is generated by an unjust social order and is expressed in many forms. It reduces the individual to the position of an object of economic, political or cultural exploitation, it limits the consciousness of people, makes them passively relate to the conditions of their existence.

The very conceptual apparatus that ordinary people have to use is provided to them by their oppressors. People speak a language that reinforces their subservience and prevents them from thinking about how a person should truly live.

To be human, according to Freire, means to be free, and freedom, in particular, is expressed in the possibility of using one's own, independently developed language. Language contains patterns, patterns of thinking and action, and people fill the language with meaning in the process of their own action and thinking. “Human existence cannot be silent, nor can it be nourished by false words - only true human existence feeds on genuine words, words through which people change the world. To exist as a human being is to name the world and change it.” (Paulo Freire) False in this context means words prescribed for use by someone else, suggesting a passive-contemplative attitude towards the world.

Free people use genuine words, the pronunciation of which implies a thinking and acting being in a person, bringing his intentions and meanings into the world and thereby changing it. Although freedom in Freire is associated with the inner dimensions of the personality, he does not look at a person as a lonely and self-sufficient being, he defends the need for dialogue between people as the only form of communication in which there is no suppression of one person by another. It is this kind of social communication that should be developed, he believes, if people want to realize their human potential. Dialogue implies reciprocity, trust, openness and a desire to learn together. All this is opposed by a monologue with its isolation, distrust of a person, full of prescriptions, rigidity and authoritarianism.

Paulo Freire thus emphasizes the connection between certain forms of communication (monologue) and the growing dehumanization of the individual as a result of their use. Life in conditions completely determined by external power is a dehumanized form of existence. People who live in accordance with their human nature achieve liberation by taking full responsibility for the conditions of their existence. A person who has assumed power over himself, lives in a dialogue and community with other people, he constantly thinks and acts.

No, maintaining human, that is, free conditions of existence.

“People, since they are aware of themselves and the world, are conscious beings, they live, constantly defining the boundaries of their own freedom. By separating themselves (through critical reflection) from the world, from their own activities, placing in themselves and in their relations with the world and other people the center of decision-making, people overcome the situations that limit them ... When critical perception is translated into action, an atmosphere of hope is born and trust that leads people to try to overcome their limitations” (Paulo Freire).

Freire's idea that a person is constantly threatened by repression from the authorities, that he is constantly forced to overcome obstacles, get out of problematic and even borderline situations, reveals a certain closeness with Dewey's position, according to which the experience that forms a person is precisely the sum of solving problems. . Freire, using a slightly different language, expresses essentially the same view: "As reality is transformed and the problems in the queue are resolved, new ones will arise, which in turn imply new boundaries, new limits." Freire speaks of problem-based learning as a "revolutionary future": "problem-based learning recognizes people as beings who can overcome their limitations, go beyond their limits, beings who move and look ahead, for whom immobility is a mortal threat, and looking into the past must be only a means to more clearly understand what and who they are, so that they can intelligently choose the direction of movement and build the future.

One of Freire's most striking features is his lack of any doubts about the nature and methods of liberation. He, in fact, does not delve into the complexity, his designs are very simple and polar (perhaps this is the secret of his popularity). For him, it is quite clear that liberation is opposed to domination and is the most important theme of the era, and in order to destroy oppression, one must overcome the subordinate position in which a person cannot speak out and act naturally. An education that promotes dialogue as the primary means of identifying and discussing the boundary situation is for Freire essentially political in the sense that it includes the practice of freedom - an exercise in free discussion. Educational

Thus, knowledge is viewed as a process of critical reflection on the conditions of existence, as well as a means of forming new grounds for decision-making and action.

The starting point for establishing forms of education that bring liberation is the immediate life world of the individual. To teach, according to Freire, means to show how the values ​​embodied in the structures of everyday existence limit human thinking and behavior. Since the person who must overcome his subordinate position is often depressed and oppressed to such a state that his everyday experience seems to him the only possible one, it is necessary that the teacher (who acts as a coordinator and collaborator in research) helps the student somehow fix his life situation. This process of fixation, which the author opposes to work on foreign and alien programs that have nothing to do with the life experience of students, encourages them to look from the outside at themselves, at those personality structures that have developed under the influence of external social conditions, were unconsciously absorbed from the outside.

Through a dialogue that includes all its participants in the process of learning, one can move from passive acceptance of the situation to critical reflection on what was previously taken for granted. The words spoken at the same time by the participants help to comprehend the ongoing changes and realize the need to transform reality, and since as some boundary situations are overcome, new ones arise, the process of awareness must be started again and again.

Those who are truly committed to the idea of ​​liberation must completely reject the "banking" concept, and instead accept the concept of people as thinking beings and world-oriented consciousness. They should stop considering the goal of education to be "contributions of information", and instead offer an understanding of people's problems and their relationship with society. Problem-posing education, corresponding to the essence of cognition - awareness, denies messages and embodies communication. It embodies the specific characteristic of consciousness - to understand, to be aware - not only by immersion in the object, but also with the help of internal reflection, just as the edges play on the fracture of jasper: consciousness as consciousness of consciousness.

Liberal education consists of acts of knowledge, not of the transmission of information. This is a learning situation in which a cognizable object (far from being the last in the act of cognition) mediates the process of cognition between its actors: the teacher, on the one hand, and the students, on the other. Accordingly, the practice of problem-based education first of all requires the resolution of contradictions between the teacher and the student. Relations should be built in the form of a dialogue, which is necessary to realize the ability of cognizing actors to interact in the process of comprehending a common object of cognition, otherwise it is impossible.

In fact, the problematic concept of education, which breaks the vertical ties of "banking" education, will be able to fulfill the function of the practice of freedom only if it succeeds in overcoming the aforementioned contradiction. Thanks to the dialogue, the vertical connections of the domination of the teacher over the student and the student over the teacher cease to exist, but new horizontal connections arise between the teacher and the student and vice versa. The teacher ceases to be the only one who teaches, but becomes one of those who learn in the process of dialogue with the students, who, in turn, also teach while learning. They receive shared responsibility for the process in which everyone grows. In this process, arguments based on power are no longer valid; to function, power must be on the side of freedom, not against it. Here no one teaches another and no one learns himself. People teach each other, mediated by the world and objects of knowledge, the very ones that are appropriated by the teacher in the "banking" approach to learning.
The "banking" concept (with its tendency to divide everything into parts) distinguishes two stages in the actions of the teacher. During the first, when he prepares for lectures in his office or laboratory, he studies the object of knowledge. During the second, he gives students information about this object. Students are offered not to understand the subject, but to remember the content told by the teacher. Students do not perform an act of cognition, since the object in relation to which this act should be performed is, as it were, the property of the teacher, and not an object that mediates cognition and awakens the teacher and students to critical analysis. Thus, under the guise of "preservation of culture and knowledge," we have a system that does not contribute to the achievement of either genuine knowledge or genuine culture.