Je upo uhalisia wa mawazo haya ya Nyerere ktk Tanzania yetu?

philosophy said:
mimi nafikiri kumchukia mtu au kutokumpenda mtu haihalalishi ubaya katika kile anachokifanya...sera za nyerere zilikuwa na manufaa kwa taifa.
Click to expand...

Sir I don't hate Nyerere. I like him but one thing for sure his policies didn't make the nation better. Tanzania doesn't exist in isolation and if you compare the well being of Tanzanians to those of other Africans, you will find that Tanzania didn't perform well. So you can't say his policies benefited the nation when all other Africans got almost exactly the same.
 
"Words in their primary or immediate signification, stand for nothing but the ideas in the mind of him that uses them". Hume

Hoja ya mleta mada imeuliza maswali yafuatayo hapo juu kuna ukweli wowote wa kauli ya Nyerere; na kama vyuo vyetu vinatotoa wanafunzi wenye uwezo huo?

Kabla ya kutueleza mwalimu alikuwa aja master chochote ungejibu walau hoja iliyoletwa mezani kuhusu statemenet ya mwalimu either ina ukweli au aina ukweli, ndio tujue kama vyuo vinatotoa au avitotoi wanafunzi hao na kwanini kama hoja ina ukweli.

Mkuu Mvuzendi

Sasa basi kwakuwa mada imejikita ki philosophy kabla ya kutuambia habari za kufeli kwa ujamaa, sijui habari zakuzuia mawazo pingani walau ungetuelezea through your philosophical reasoning on the statement posed.

Justification of the statement presented
In epistemology philosophy (adhering to reason and experience) statement ya Nyerere ina validity despite what you are presenting as a reason to why it was not possible under his rule to develop critical minds; despite the mere fact you were going outside the original question asked if it is the case today.

Sasa basi kwasababu zao la reason ni ideas acquired by an individual plus experience, this is according to Hume's school of thought. Kwa hivyo pale mtu unapojifunza swala jipya (kupata idea mpya na chuo ni pahala pa ideas) unatarajia mwanafunzi aweze kuweza improve his reasons ability, hata wakulima waliopata somo la kilimo kwanza awalimi tena vilevile kama awali.

Sasa je vyuo vyetu vinatoa elimu sahihi na zenye ideas za tija kuwafanya wanafunzi wawe critical na jinsi mambo yalivyo nchini kwetu, kwenye siasa, biashara, uchumi, uandishi wa habari, good governance na mawazo megine yenye tija na faida kwa jamii yetu na hapa tulipo sio mwalimu alipotukuta wala alipotuacha?

Tatizo lako bwana Mvuzendi
Sababu ya mimi kuileta hile extract ilikuwa kuongeza swala la experience kwenye huu mjadala na kuongezea changamoto alizokuwa ana deal nazo mwalimu.

Kama nilivyo elezea zao la reason ni 'experience na idea', sasa wewe nakala unaona inaelezea kulikuwa na matabaka ya kirangi hata hotuba ya JK ya mwaka jana anakumbushia tulipotoka kule kunaoitwa uzunguni, uindini na uswahilini sio kwa sababu ya majina tu, hapana reasons ni kwamba zilikuwa ni sehemu za namna hiyo na watu walikuwa wakiishi hivyo kwa matabaka. Nakala pia inaelezea asilimia kubwa ya administration aliyo iacha mkoloni ilikuwa ya rangi tofauti na weusi, isitoshe kulikuwa na argument za iweje na taifa limepata uhuru.

Walau ungesoma nakala basi uone reasons za mwalimu kwanini aliamua ujamaa na malengo halisi ya ujamaa kwasababu maelezo yanasema priority yake kubwa kama kiongozi ilikuwa ni kuweka kwanza walau misingi ya taifa lenye kuonana kwa usawa usio na rangi, dini wala kabila. Kwa hivyo to do so you need to reinforce a 'cultural homogenisation' of the nation which will level the playing field or atleat shape reasoning of citizenship.

Tatizo lako wewe unaangalia hili swala la mwalimu in term of your limited ideas acquired kwenye maswala ya uchumi tu huku ukikwepa hoja zingine muhimu za ufahamu wa jamii zinavyoishi na changamoto za siasa ya jamii in their co-existence challenges. Without learning those other aspects uzitendei haki reasons zake na uhalisia wa changamoto maana not everyone was happy for variety of reasons. Lakini malengo ya kiongozi ilikuwa ni national homogeneity in understanding ones citizens rights.

Sasa unaweza fanya hivi vitu bila ya kuwa na sera zilizo deterministic hata kama unjua kuna sera zingine za uchumi bora zaidi, je zinaweza fikia lengo kuu la kuweka fikra za usawa wa uraia, bila kutawanya uzunguni, uindini na uswahilini; kama malengo ni kutoa fikra za matabaka na mengineo yenye kujenga mshikamano.

Embu taumbie how could capitalism achieved those goals given those challenges of the time maana hata kwenye uchumi swali la kuzalisha lipo pia kitaifa; unamzalishia nani na kwa namna zipi (look at it given the time of independence).

Hivi ungekuwa wewe given the challenges ungefanya vipi to incorporate all na ufikie malengo ya mwalimu ya kufuta fikra za matabaka?

Wacha nimalizie na 'Locke' tena as food for thought to you:
In order to reason philosophically: It is important to produce the impression or original sentiments, from which the ideas are copied. These impression are all sensible and strong. They admit of not ambiguity. They are not only placed in a full light of themselves, but throw light on their correspondence idea, which lie in obscurity.

Ndio maana nikakuwekea na hile nakala lakini wewe bado umekazana na golden mountain reasoning according to hume kwa sababu umeshaona mlima na dhahabu basi una image of how that golden mountain would looklike; that is narrowing other factors of the debate kuelewa maswala ya uchumi tu akutoshi kuendesha jamii inatakiwa uweze ku negotiate na mazingira pia.

Binafsi sikatai kuna sehemu nyerere alikuwa anapwaya sana hata kwenye sera zake za ujamaa na kwenye hotuba zake za mwisho baada ya ku-retire unaweza ona he wasnt the best on economic matters but sometimes those weaknessed could be overlooked kwa sababu ya main mission yake which was succefull.

By the way there are a lot of others who have written complimenting or criticizing Hume at least kwenye kuingalia statement ya main thread.
 
It really still witnessing your ignorance on the term philosophy and thinking. My point was to discuss on Nyerere's belive on thinking for human person where he insisted our colleges to be a place of cultivating that culture. Thus, nothing can take place under human control without thinking/meditating/contemplating. All of what you see under human control are results of human thoughts. No thinking, no thoughts, no development. The notion of philosophy, i brought it as the support of my point hence your negligence on Nyerere....that was to show you that Nyerere could not be against the spirit of thinking, simply because to do so if to violate and betray his field as a philosopher. One, of the very essential characteristic of a philosopher is meditation/thinking. But for you, it seems you have been confusing about this term philosophy and thinking....in simple word and belief, you can separate philosophy and thinking, a philosopher and thinking are inseparable!
One of the character that defines man is rationality, thus, man is rational creature. To be rational creature mean to be a thinking animal. You think, then you reason.....a primitive man, without using his thinking (reason) he could never develop. You claim that, philosophers resulted from civilization...for me, i ask you very simple questions from your claim that, what's philosophy, where does philosophy come from, who's a philosopher, which one precedes the other? And, what is civilization, where does civilization come from or is the result of what? which precede between man and civilization and who's civilized ? if, you'll be able to answer these simple question i think you'll be able too to understand me and place yourself and your arguments. But, it would be very clear if you prove the invalidity of my claim. You speak of division of labor and commerce which are the product of human civilization.
Civilization is civilization an advanced stage or system of human social development. or the process of achieving this. Therefore, civilize/d is to bring to an advanced stage of social development. Or, polite and good-mannered.
The answer is very clear that, civilization, is the brought into being by human person, a creature of reasoning, thinking and putting things into clear manner. Commerce, agriculture, division of labor, any professional you know, cannot be there from nothing...it's a product of human person who think. Philosophers are called great thinkers because the always practice thinking and not only thinking but thinking critically. Before, there was a miserable in ancient Greek where barbarians destroyed the peace of life, but through the rebirth of philosophers like Thales, Pythagoras, Xenophanes, Socrates, Plato, Aristotle and many of others came to put the society into order though there was antagonist of this discipline like you.
 
katika mada hii, inaonesha wazi kuwa bwana Mvuzendi, yeye anayo chuki na Nyerere, na hivyo hataki kabisa hata kile alichofanya au kuelekeza kiwe kizuri au bora kwa kuwa anampinga. Kwa fikra zangu, kauli ya mwalimu naona ilikuwa inalenga kujenga taifa ambalo baadaye lingekuwa na wasomi wenye kufikiri na kuibua mambo na ndio maana akasema hivyo, kufikiri ni jambo linalomhusu binadamu, sio kila mtu anawiwa kufanya hivyo, na kama kila mtu hawiwi kufanya hivyo, lakini ni jambo zuri, haina budi kuhimiza shule, vyuo na vyuo vikuu vyetu kwa kuwa vinatengeneza wasomi na wakombozi wa taifa hili kujenga utamaduni wa watu kuzalisha fikara zao huru ambazo bdizo chazo cha maendeleo anayo yakariri bwa Mvuzendi. Nimemwambia Mvuzendi, kuwa bila kufikiri na kutafakuri juu ya mambo yaliyopo, unayoayaona, uliozaliwa ukakuta na ufundishwayo, hakika mtu huwezi kuja na kitu kipya. Yeye anakariri uchumi, ustaarabu kuwa ndio msingi wa maendleo pasi kujua kwamba hivyo vyote ni matokeo ya kufikiri kwa binadamu. Hivyo, bila kuwafundisha vijana wetu kufikiri tena kwa kujitegemea hakika huo uchumi anaoung'ang'ania hauwezi kuwepo. Anachokibishia ni ukweli wenyewe kuwa kufikiri ambako kulipiganiwa kwa kina na wanafalsafa wa magharibi ndiko chimuko la nchi hizo kuwa na maendeleo kutoka na ugunduzi wa kisayansi uliotokana na fikara zao makini.
Nikamwambia pia,laiti kama ujama na elimu ya kujitegemea ungeliangaliwa kwa kina na watu ambao wamewekeza katika kufikiri, basi ungelihimarika vema au kupingwa na kuleta mbadala wake lakini chanzo ikiwa ni watanzania wenyewe kuwa na tabia ya kufikiri na kuviangalia vitu kwa upekee. Mwl alifikiri, akaja na dhana ya elimu ya kujitegemea kutokana na falsafa ujamaa. Ila sisi tuliobaki tulipuuza mfumo huu wa kufikiri wenyewe na ndio maana leo hii kila wazo litokalo kwa wenye kufikiri linaonekana jema na bora kwetu kwa sababu hatutaki kuwekeza kufikiria.
Msomi wa chuo ni lazima awe ni yule mwenye uwezo wa kufikiri juu ya matatizo yanayoikumba jamii yake na kuyatafutia ufumbuzi na wala sio vinginevyo. Nkimnukuu mwanafalsafa Adolf Mihanjo, anasema kuwa, " Africa we are very poor and underdeveloped because, there were no culture of thinking...in Africa there was no independent thinkers who could think independently and eliminating themselves from their primitive mode of thinking in communal traditional thoughts."
 
Nikijikita kwenye mada zaidi ni kwamba Nyerere alikuwa anachochea watu wake wathamini fikra pevu na huru hasa kwa kuhusianisha kauli yake na vyuo vikuu kwa kuwa huko ndiko kisima cha fikra pevu. Kwa mlengo huo naweza kusema kuwa fikra za Nyerere zilikuwa sahihi ila zilikosa na zinaendelea kukosa uhalisia kwa sababu hakuna watu wanaojali au wanaotaka kutumia fikra au kuzibadili kuwa vitendo na hatimaye kuleta maendeleo.

Huo ndiyo mtazamo wangu kuhusu mada hii na kama nimetoka nje utaniwia radhi mtoa mada kwa kuwa hapo ndipo upeo wangu ulipoifikia.
 
Good question. Thanks for sharing.

To respond to your question the answer is NO. And I guess everyone knows the reasons. This country don't have properly working education system. Its sad our universities have failed to encourage free thinking habit among students. If you follow history you can notice a clear gap in term of thinking ability between our generation and mwalimu's generation. Students of today's generation are lazy all what they are good in is copy and paste.

I have studied with such people so I have the experience of my claims. I know a friend every exam he cheated and it happened that the Gods were with him. He never made mistakes. And he graduated with good GPA. Yeah its funny but crazy. Don't ask why I didn't take action.

Number two is that, government doesn't care about its people and the importance of education to them. If they cared would have invested enough money in the sector. Many students today fail to pay university expenses because government didn't allocate enough money in the so called HESLB. Students fail to listen attentively in lecture halls because no money to buy chai asubuhi. And if you are lazy you lose big. I hope somebody won't undermine this reason I have experience many students in my class njaa iliwatesa because they didn't have cash. You see! And I am sure it affected them academically.

Lastly I would like to say this, let's encourage debates its health the student engage in different issues which matter the most.

Thanks Nyerere. University should be a place where students are trained to think critically .
 

Man can never live in isolation! Then why claiming individualism is the only nature of human being? What should protect the unisoleted life of man if not collective measures?
Madai ya kuwa Ubepari ni kufuata nature of man, ni ya upotoshaji. Asili ya binadamu is both collectiveness and individualism.
Anaita sasa!
 

Lazima tutafautishe hekima/busara na Elimu ya chuo, watu huenda kufundishwa maarifa ya kazi na mwisho wa siku wanatakiwa wawekwe sehemu fulani watumikie. Hawawezi kuwa na fikra huru kwasababu wanalishwa na wanatakiwa kujibu kile tu walicholishwa. Utapasi ukijibu ulivyofundishwa na si vinginevyo. Mfumo uko hivyo hauruhusu fikra huru. kwahiyo mfumo hauruhusu creativity.

Watu wengi hawaendi chuo kutafuta maarifa kama maarifa ambayo wanatakiwa kuyakusanya ili yawasaidie katika maisha yao bali wanaenda chuo ili mwisho wa siku waje kuajiliwa na wala sio kuwa na fikra huru zitakazo wasaidia kujisimamia wenyewe. Tofauti na akina plato walitafuta maarifa kama maarifa wakayakusanya sio kwasababu ya pesa bali kwasababu ya umuhimu wa maarifa kwa maisha ya binadamu.

Na jamii yeyote iliyoendelea ni jamii ambayo ina maarifa ya kutosha. Iwe maarifa yale ya kujitegemea au waliyokopa kwa mataifa mengine. Ili taifa lolote liendelee lazima watu wake watafute maarifa kama maarifa.Wengi wetu tuna kremu badala ya kujua undani wa mambo mengi kwasababu tunataka kuajiriwa sio kupata ufahamu na ndio maana watu wanaiba mitihani. Kwahiyo ni muhimu watu wetu wakapenda maarifa kama maarifa. Nadhani watu wakipenda maarifa kama maarifa tutakuwa skilled workers wa kiwango cha juu.

Ili kupata elimu kunahitaji nidhamu ya hali ya juu kwa walimu na kwa wanafunzi. Maarifa hayawezi kutoka na kupokelewa vyema kutoka kwa mwalimu kwenda kwa mwanafunzi pasipo nidhamu. Hapa ni lazima tuangalie tabia ambazo ni muhimu pia elimu yetu iziunde ili watu wetu wawe na faida. There is No elightenment without self discipline. Na Enlightment au kufikia maturity kwa akili za watu wetu ni jambo ambalo ni muhimu sana. Uwezo wa watu wetu kufanya maamuzi sahihi. Kwahiyo mtu aliyeelimika tunatarajia afanye maamuzi sahihi kila wakati kwa taifa lake na hata kwa maisha yake binafsi kushindwa kufanya hivyo iwe fedheha. Kama mtu aliyeenda shule akijisikia poa kwa kushindwa kushindwa kufanya maamuzi ya mantinki na kuongoza matendo yake katika mkondo unaofaa hiyo elimu itakuwa na shaka. Na vyuo vikuu vitakuwa havina faida kwetu bali chombo cha kuzalisha wezi na mafisadi, ambao wameenda kupata maarifa ili wapate pesa pekee na sio maarifa kama maarifa.
 
Mkuu, unadhani hizo common elements tulizokuwa nazo, za free and united nation zilitokea tu from nowhere? NO! There were measures, we had to strengthen such measure to keep us free and united, so that we could stabalize our economy as well.
1. How can Individualism guarantee freedom and unity of the nation?
2. Je, Tanzania iko huru na moja kwa sasa?
Please Mkuu Mzuvendi, tuoneshe hayo.
Anaita sasa!
 
Last edited by a moderator:

JF:

I am not making it up. Even Nyerere himself admitted that the make up of our nation is unique. First the country is so vast. Second, we have small tribes and no one is a dominant force. Further, we have common language and so forth. These things are unique to our country and they have been there before the arrival of the Germans.

Elements that are unique Tanzanian didn't come for free. Due to our geographic position, there were dynamic forces that came to existence. First, the country was the center of trade between central Africa and coastal areas (Which includes slave trade). This trade spread Swahili language and also misplace various communities. For example, Sukuma, Nywamwezi, Manyema, Hehe Tribesmen were in contact with people in coastal areas for many years. It has been suggested Chief Mkwawa had Ethiopian blood.

The arrival Ngoni tribesmen caused havoc in Southern and forced some tribes to move somewhere or to join the ngoni tribe-sphere. Take for example Mirambo, The Napoleon of Central Africa. He copied military tactics from the Ngoni tribesmen. How did he meet them? Unyanyembe and Songea are far apart. And in order for Mirambo to copy Ngoni warriors, there were some contacts. Furthermore, at the height of his power, Mirambo went to visit King Kabaka of Baganda. How did he do that? How did he converse with Kabaka? Forks our ancestors didn't live in isolation. If your were living in caves, mine didn't.

I don't want to exhaustive you with historical events. But my point is Tanzania of per-German colonization and after was very fluid, almost chaotic. Some people suggest that Nyerere father was a Tutsi. I am not sure about that. But if its true, the question is how did he get there? What's language did he speak? Kinjeketile Ngwale united almost the entire southern part of Tanzania to fight the German. Which language did he speak? If there were tribalism, why didn't other tribes ignored him?

Again I don't want to exhaust you with historical facts. But one thing for sure you are underestimating the dynamics that existed before 1961. It seems to me that you all think that once we got our independence, we were ready to fight each other and without the special intervention of Western Philosophy passed through our educated elites we would have killed each other en masses. You are getting it all wrong.
 

I like Nyerere for many things. One of them being honest. At least he knew to admit his mistakes. For example when he was about to retire, he visited confiscated private farms. He said if he had known, he would have left them in private hands.

We are social creatures. But that doesn't mean any business enterprise should be under the ownership of the society. We can share the common good but not everything.
 

How do you train university students to think critically, when their entire journey to university didn't nurture them? Do you think 3 to 4years of university studies are enough to un-wire old habits that student acquired in primary, secondary and high school levels?

Those who have embraced critical thinking have taken the wholesale approach. Other countries have no time for critical thinking, China, Korea, even Singapore, prepare students for work and to compete in global market.
 
1. Ku-admitt ama kuto-admitt kwa Nyerere can never change the logic. Pia, tambua kuwa Nyerere was a man of his kind, you can't guarantee kumuelewa.
2. What makes you to think for a nation being vast, with small and dominantless tribes and common language are enough to make a nation united?
A nation can only be united if the people share Huzuni na Furaha, sharing of sweeter and bitter makes a family. How can individualism guarantee this to the citizens? Family members fight to each other, what is greater? Is it religion? Tribe? Language? Both are valueless if you are not fair to one onether.
3. I believe in Africanism, whatever it takes a nation should respect Mazingira na Nyakati zake za eneo lake mahususi. To hell Westernism!
Mzuvendi said:
We are social creatures. But that doesn't mean any business enterprise should be under the ownership of the society. We can share the common good but not everything.
Click to expand...
Not everything, but not in a way we do! And that is the actual price you mentioned.
Anaita sasa!
 


First, let me accept one fact. I didn’t go to college and have limited education. If that’s an issue, you can as well ask the admin to barn me from the room of Great thinker, philosophers, or rational thinkers.

Second, in respect to original philosophical question and its relevance in educating young people, Nyerere’s statement is valid. However, he didn’t practice the tenet and that’s my problem. If you allow your students to think critically, you should accept intellectual challenges and dissents as well, even if the opposition is direct to you. So far the evidence suggests that he didn’t tolerate irreconcilable ideas and my question what’s the point of being a critical thinker if you aren’t allowed to violate or even discuss the prevalent wisdom?

Third, I have mentioned to the moderator that thinking critically wasn’t a novel idea when Nyerere stipulated it. He just reiterated the obvious. So for him the importance wasn’t just to say, but also to act. If you read the history of liberal education movement around the word, you will discover that the idea wasn’t new after all. So the statement wasn’t his original idea and doesn’t make him a philosopher or for that matter a scholar.

Lack of critical thinking in our schools is a problem that has existed for many years. From the beginning Tanzania has never educated its people to think. Todate the education is dispensed to fulfill the workforce and the specialization of skills was at the center of it. For example, if you join the University of Dar Es Salaam, you know exactly which field of studies you are supposed to specialize and if you don’t make the grades, you are disqualified. In these types of highly competitive environments, how do you make a critical thinker?

Now with regard to you other points, the world is changing. Tanzanians of 1885 and 1920 weren’t the same. Tanzanians of 1920 and 1945 weren’t same and my point is the country didn’t stand still until December 9, 1961. The colonial master built schools, transportation systems, and hospitals. Even though their infrastructures weren’t enough, they changed our lives and the way we run our businesses.

Moreover, if you take Zambia and Malawi and compare them to Tanzania, you will uncover that during the same period these countries have achieved almost identical outcome even though some were more ambitious than others. To state it differently, the philosophical creed of the governing bodies can’t take credit on the improvements of the lives of Africans.

Your words without actions can’t instill traditions or excellence [Mz]
 


You are getting it wrong. Common good is what unite the nation (shared values). You as individual, you are the master of your own huzuni and furaha. If you can't make yourself happy, nobody will.
 
Mzuvendi said:
First, let me accept one fact. I didn't go to college and have limited education. If that's an issue, you can as well ask the admin to barn me from the room of Great thinker, philosophers, or rational thinkers.
Click to expand...
Your attendance of college has nothing to do with discussion at hand it is what you present at the going discussion which will either be rebutted as bunkum or add value to our understanding.

Having said that allow me to mark your work since you confess to have run away from college and your candid admission of being limited on the matter; hope you won't mind as there are so many contradiction on building your case at least in philosophical reasoning.


If I may ask where are the symbiotic relations on JKN statement and the argument of his iron rule in justifying the answer to the question? In other terms how does a poser which requires philosophical rationalism or empiricism deduction end up being explained in political reasoning and historical events?

what makes an individual a critical thinker?:
Pretty much by definition the process entails the ability to utilise acquired knowledge when reasoning or hypothesizing a way forward whilst showing some creativity on the subject. And this is where education or experience becomes an additional factor to our understanding of subjects if we are to widen our imagination on critical thinking.

Furthermore since critical thinkers are never alike and can use different arguments or application of knowledge and experiences in evaluating the same poser and therefore coming to different conclusion. How do we analyse a theoretical argument which will better our understanding from just another pure nonsense. ‘William Blake' offers us a method of doing so; first we reverse the ideas into their original sense and into their simple constituent (the reasoning and ideas used to justify the answer).

Simple constituents allow us to analyse characteristics of ideas and their origins and therefore their applications in the world of knowledge. That is to say a person who has been taught the principle of adding he should be able to add and when we look at his maths and they inform their answer came about as a result of adding we can spot those elements as they are universally accepted.

Knowing that if Tanzania Universities are teaching their students the principles of economics and all their theories, thereafter what their leaders choose to apply in their nation shouldn't restrict their independent reasoning of the subject and becoming critical thinkers given the chance. This is due to the fact because the basic of becoming critical thinkers on the subject were already acquired during their studying.

Why I said you were limited
To appreciate a person like ‘Stephen Fry' (kipanga wetu hapa UK) first you need to make attempts to acquire knowledge and understand what it takes. Before you do that you can never appreciate not just his eloquence but his depth in eclecticism on subjects in his justifications.

On the other end you tend to justify matters on the poser above us, very simply and out of the boundaries of the subject whilst building your argument. I don't know may be it makes sense to others but round here we read and we can tell bunkum from miles, because we make effort on acquiring knowledge at its reasoning lines of justification which are accepted in the academic world.

I mean how does a subject which needs explained in conceptual schemes and the ability to reason independently have to do with liberal economic lectures?

It is with point like this why I think you are all over the place and out of the poser. A novel idea which is accepted in the academic world will be taught in the university, it does mean a person who has learn that idea is not entitled to use it justifying his critical statement as it was used. It is no surprise the thread starter added if it was the case with our universities.

Furthermore Nyerere idea of ujamaa we know it derive from his understanding on the concept of socialism; nonetheless neither ‘Carl Marx' nor any of the people who wrote those subjects in depth advised him. In other words what he implemented was a result of critical thinking to the knowledge he had and tried to implement on our society with how he saw it fit at the time with nation challenges.

Now then do our university educate our students enough to think differently on what is best for us today after they have acquired their knowledge?


It does not mean if you learned the basics of management you cant tell on poor management at work, it doesn't mean if you learn about journalism you cant bother to be a better investigative one. In short do they come out with the ability to scrutinize anything and offer alternative based on their knowledge even in their field of expertise.

What has this got to do with critical thinking and our universities students?
 

There’s interdependence between the two since the original idea wasn’t his. So the question is what was his contribution to critical thinking? And a follow up question is what efforts did he make to take the idea to the next level? A simple example such as allowing students speak freely will suffice. So far you guys have failed to pinpoint at least one.

What he did was just to reiterate a well know idea in a political speech to score points. Any savvy political figure can perform the act. However, we should note that words without tangible actions doesn’t make the grade. It’s simple as that.

If you guys say he heavy handed critical thinking because the country wasn’t ready for that, I can understand that. For example, China has educated fabulous specialists in many advance disciplines, but for political reasons the country doesn’t tolerate dissident of opinions and Chinese are doing just fine. If Tanzania followed some sort of the Chinese model, then we don’t have anything to argue. We can as well say the old man thought about it, but for practical reasons he had to do what the president had to do (end of story).

You can examine the efficiency of the education system by examining the work of its graduates. The current crop of Tanzanian leaders are the product of the critical thinking of the dear leader. The question is what went wrong? It seems to me that he had all these fancy ideas, but nobody paid attention.

I don't expect every graduate to do better after school; however, if you witness failure by design is in place, you have to question the entire system.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…