By Marcus Bussey
The philosophy of Neohumanism sits at the core of this reorientation. It fosters an ethos in classrooms, schools and their communities that is relational, co-creative, participatory and pragmatic. Put simply Neohumanism is an invitation to explore human identity not from the rarefied heights of human uniqueness and anthropocentrism but through finding our humanity in relationships to the world we inhabit. This world is filled with a host of ‘others’: the soil and air, the biological, the human, the Cosmic. All play a part in our neohumanist identity. We access this richness by growing our inner life through meditation and service. These two elements link spiritual practice with social and ecological action. This bridge allows us all to continue to expand the inner wealth of our lives whilst accepting the practical constraints the material world places upon us.
It is this connection between inner expansion and social action that makes neohumanism special. As pedagogy this approach results in the recognition of the many dimensions of life that education prepares us for. In this it goes beyond the focus on intellectual achievement which lies at the heart of Humanism. It also goes beyond the vocational and utilitarian focus of Industrial education. It also extends the focus of spiritual, democratic and cultural schooling – generally characterised as ‘Alternative’ – by retaining commitments to the full human project of becoming a cosmic-citizen. Of course this is an ideal goal, something to aim for. It is not a utopian state of perfection.
To work towards becoming a cosmic-citizen we need to develop processes that engage the material, the mental and the spiritual as equally significant domains of learning and growth. Each domain speaks to different elements of the Neohumanist vision. The material requires a hands-on approach to the world and its processes and problems; the mental calls for the development of a critical and compassionate consciousness that embraces both a practical optimism and also a robust ignorance; the spiritual focuses on developing an awareness of the inner life, the tools for reflection and creative expression, and a meditative orientation to life that can be described as spiritual pragmatism. Curriculum is being developed to address these domains. Its growth is shaped by the context for the learning, the resources available and the needs of students and their communities.
Key areas of concern for Neohumanist educators are:
- Positive outlook
- Practical life skills (personal and social)
- Service orientation
- Intellectual inquiry and curiosity
- Environmental/Ecological consciousness
- Interpersonal and intercultural capacity
- Creative and aesthetic sensibility
- Reflexive awareness of culture (the good and the bad of it)
- Spiritual grounding
There is no doubt that physical limits will bring changes to our world and the ways we live but there is no necessary condition that states that we are destined for diminished futures. Indeed the future according to Prabhat Rainjan Sarkar, the founder of the Neohumanist Education movement, is bright. It is bright because a richer more inclusive consciousness is on the rise. It is part of the growing global consciousness we all share in. This consciousness – of which neohumanism is an expression – ultimately will have social, economic and ecological effects as people challenge and change systems of injustice that are driving segments of humanity towards increased poverty and marginalisation and other sections of the planet towards ever growing resource consumption. Key to this work is the fact that resources of this planet are not simply physical. The ecological, cultural and spiritual resources are open to all when the basic needs of life are met.
To recognise this calls for a reorientation in the practices of people. At the risk of belabouring the point, these practices are physical, mental and spiritual in nature. Neohumanist educational approaches to this rethinking of limits focuses on the importance of Service as a driver of co-creative learning. True service empowers both the served and the one serving. This wonderfully simple insight has implications for curriculum, for action and for the pushing back of the limits that constrain human imagination and learning. Service decentres the modernist fixation on ego-driven learning. Learning is no longer about personal command over a set repertoire of culturally and socially enabling literacies. Now the focus is on literacies that foster partnership and compassion. In this neohumanism operates as a form of critical spirituality that reframes learning as a co-creative act involving the learner and the object of learning in a deep loving dialogue.
This dialogue can be mapped, as in Table 1, around six kinds of service. Each with its own curricular implications. When engaged in service to the Present, to the Collective, to the Past, to the Future, to the Whole and to the Cosmic Principle we immediately find a new orientation to the pressing question of limits. We find meaning and purpose in our learning with, for and on behalf of this world and also with, for and on behalf of our interior world. This releases educators from the compulsion to focus on the surface instrumentalities that keep us locked in current, maladaptive, materialist responses to the major issues we face as a global community today. So for me bringing a neohumanist approach to education is a no brainer – it invigorates and deepens my personal and teaching life whilst sharing something magical with all who join me on the learning journey.
It is also possible to look at ways to measure the impact of Neohumanist principles in our life and work. Table 2 below is one way I do this when looking for concrete and also subtle outcomes in my Neohumanist teaching practice. For me simple tables like this help affirm what I am doing and also act as useful reflective practices to keep observing and evolving as a teacher/learner. I have left parts of the table blank for readers to fill in. Have fun!
Table 2: Quantitative and Qualitative Assessment tool