9. CONCLUSION:
Social responsibility is the mechanism of enforcing social values
upon new citizens, born and migrated. The problems possibly associated with
social responsibility is unacceptable values, example racism in American
pre-civil war slavery and German pre-world II racism against Jews, was
propagated through social responsibility. Furthermore, ensuring silence and
responsiveness will put man (and woman) in threat of satisfying their thirst
for 'conviction' at risk of accepting supremacist ideologies, i.e., being
better than others. Combining social responsibility with diversity of reality
presents the hope of overcoming ‘dogma.’ Preserving the rights of minorities
and those ‘prosecuted’ strengthens the diversity of every society. In
collaboration with democracy, the human rights movement plays a maintenance
role in ensuring the effectiveness of the mission, i.e., ‘freedom’ from your
prejudices vis-à-vis towards other cultures.
Knowing and making explicit diverse values, our own and that of
others, enables comparative analysis, knowing and possible commitment
eventually to enable awareness and freedom of choice. Science of education and
research should be true to the nature of our diverse world by revealing and
conveying the diversity of values embedded behind actions and institutions,
without forcing an agreement among unique persons. Personal commitment by those
unsuspected will probably follow socially defined values while commitment by
the critical participant will probably sham their way through the process. In
both cases the system has failed the ethical test. The system has to 'change'.
Change as a principle, as an icon of attitude of well-being, is resisted by the
education system. Education as normative dogma is behaving like religion.
The proposal is about being 'different', re-cognizing[1] 'differences', making
differences 'explicit', letting the different 'be', is an alternative receipt
for well-being. The process starts by briefing about current institutional
values about education and research. Through a systematic process of awareness
building by seeking and acquiring knowledge about human existence and its
diversity -- not habits responding to diversity -- can we reaffirm or recommit
to prejudice that benefits society without sacrificing the individual. To
aggressively pacify others in fear and anticipation of future aggression is a never-ending
loop. Punishment, projected as preemptive measures, of those prejudged without
cause as criminals or for anticipated crime is not just.
In conclusion, we have demonstrated the possible justification for
eroding prejudices, an educational principle pervasive today. We have also
demonstrated that this principle is unsuitable for alternative cultures and
have argued that an alternative world view based on the process of revealing
systematically different values would benefit self and others towards peaceful
coexistence. And finally, we have demonstrated the contradictions of being
prejudiced against prejudice, being socially responsible to racist values, and
that science, as a fact-finding mission, should be true to reality.
[1] Recognition is defined as
acknowledgement of the existence, validity, or legality of something frames the
concept as a process of acceptance, acknowledgment and respect. Alternatively,
recognition, in an epistemological sense, is to re-cognize the familiar, a
‘déjà vu’ as oppose to experience as confronting the new. While cognition
is a process of internalizing reality, recognition happens when you see a state
or event of known characteristics. Recognize assumes knowing beforehand
and can be described as a process where reality resonates with prior known
characteristics.