The Logic Behind Educational Policy Formation as a Vehicle for Establishing Dominance: An Examination of Higher Education Policy in Iran

Document Type : پژوهشی

Author

• Hojjat Saffarheidari

Associate Professor, University of Mazandaran, Mazandaran, Iran

10.22067/fedu.2023.75504.1139

Abstract

This paper aims to address the relationship between educational policy-making and metaphysical narratives. It claims that such linkage leads to the production of domination. Traditional narratives of metaphysics consistently long for a homogenous understanding of the essence of objects. However, such a volition is attainable but through the construction of binaries and the neglect of differences. Likewise, establishing higher educational policies based on metaphysical narratives reinforces the aforementioned attribute. Aligned with the subject matter, the methodology of the paper is descriptive, analytical, and critical. The research consists of both primary and secondary sources, especially the Document of Strategic Transformation of Science and Technology and the Document of Comperhensive Scientefic Plan of The Country, which were offered to the researcher. The result indicates that Iran’s higher educational policy-making is influenced by a Platonic and Aristotelian dualism. As a result, such a dualism is explicitly reflected in the theoretical and value foundations of Iran’s higher education documents. One of consequences of such a dualism, among many others, lies in the marginalization of a pole and the inevitable domination of the other. It appears that to resolve such a problematic condition a new philosophical perspective is required so that it might be able to render the possibility of a new distinctive perspective for educational policy-making.
Keywords: policy–making, documents, higher education of Iran, metaphysics, domination, critique.
 
Synopsis
Educational policies, whether it be public or higher education, are part and parcel of the political regimes’ intentional effort to ascertain the educational institutions' (broader political) orientations. Hence, the close association between politics and higher education policymaking involves questioning the very rationale of such policymaking. As a result, this necessitates two primary questions: what the rationale behind educational policymaking is and why it is of importance at all. According to Codd, policies serve the implementation of power, surveillance, and the perpetuation and imposition of the preferred order in society and school” (McLaughlin, 2000). However, how such an imposition of power is possible? and what are its implications? The paper basically aims to address these issues. Different perspectives are likely to approach these questions through different analytical lenses. Yet, the goal of this paper is to examine the impact of metaphysical or philosophical foundations on Iran’s higher educational policymaking regimes as far as the below documents are concerned: Document of Strategic Transformation of Science and Technology and   document of Comprehensive Scientific Plan of The Country. The philosophical foundation of documents, as an amalgam of religio-metaphyical doctrines, discloses a structural binary of the world. This mixture has been resulted from the Greek metaphysic’s influence, particularly from Plato and Aristotle, on the philosophers from the Islamic tradition. Among other things, one of the characteristics of Plato’s philosophy lies in his emphasis on binary oppositions and its indispensable totality and rationality. Such a condition is described by Derrida as the “metaphysics of presence”. According to this metaphysics, Plato legitimizes the production of social systems through a hierarchy of power and the application of educational apparatus to establish a utopian society. Accordingly, the state domination over the people could be traced in and is justified by the linkage between the individual and political regime as well as the amount of truth acquired by the state through the implementation of educational apparatuses. This supremacy itself reflects the binary of culture (education)/nature. Those who are more cultured (educated) are more predisposed to enjoy a more complete nature. The consequence of such a worldview is but the legitimization of the domination of the state over the people. This domination is of course reinforced by the platonic metaphysical duality. Duality involves the necessity of one pole’s supremacy over another. Platonic educational and political systems are built upon such dualities and binaries. A good example for the context of the production of domination can be found in Plato’s view on the social structure according to which free citizens are inherently and already superior to other people and individuals ( Popper, 2001). The Platonic metaphysics, rendered more logical and argumentative by Aristotle, gave birth later to the mystical visions of Islamic and Christian philosophies. For these philosophers, platonic metaphysics could provide them with a rational instrument to logically interpret and understand the dual-dimensional religious doctrines   (Al-Fakhory & Al-Jar, 2004). With a glance at the historical sources, one could easily see the strong influence of platonic and Aristotelian structural metaphysics on the formation of Islamic philosophy. Based on such an observation, we could argue that metaphysical foundations of Iranian higher education are built upon a platonic narrative.
 
Conclusion: Policy-making as an Act of Openness
The theoretical content of the higher education documents primarily consists of religious doctrines. Nevertheless, the content is impacted by metaphysical narratives. Through observing such a narrative one could explain the dualism within the mentioned documents. Some of the present dualities in the documents are these: deism / humanism, spirit/physicality, appearance/depth, material/spiritual, noumena/phenomenon, world/afterlife, reason/revelation, rationality/sensation, total/relative, holistic/atomistic, and individual/social etc. What matters here in understanding these binaries lies in the way in which we interpret them. It does not appear that philosophers’ struggle in disposing of binaries has been fruitful and successful. However, its infelicitous implications are obvious concerning educational policymaking. One of the binaries we can find in this context is individual/institution, distinguishing and highlighting one pole by excluding another. While about 3040 words in the Document of Strategic Transformation of Science and Technology refer to the institutional elements (such as science, technology, system, etc.), only 67 words in this document allude to individual elements (such as freedom, individual, identity, and reason, etc.). This proportion in the document of Comprehensive Scientific Plan of The Country is 1012 and 15. What is especially interesting is that even when the documents touch on the individual needs, their individuality and personality is not considered of any value. Rather, its boundary is likely to be defined and ascertained within a broader framework. Even, the institutional and collective profits have been interpreted beyond their own common signification. As an alternative for policymaking as domination, in this paper, we suggest policymaking as openness. While policymaking as domination is characterized by binaries and is reproduced through the negation, or overlooking of one pole by legitimizing another, the policymaking as openness would open up spaces for the excluded or “the other”. Such an effort would emphasize the critique of the metaphysics of presence and pay attention to difference, in such a way that it allows the promulgation and promotion of silent voices. Decentralization is the core of this policymaking. The theoretical foundation of such an approach could be found in various philosophical schools. However, in this paper, yet in a transitory way, the focus is on two contemporary philosophers: Emanuel Levinas and Jacques Derrida. What is informative about Levinas’ philosophy is that policymaking as an ethical action, identifying the boundary and range of an actor's actions, should not be built upon a total and closed narrative. Rather, what is required in all forms of policymaking is the fact that one needs to acknowledge the other as an ontological principle. Also, Derrida is of importance in so far as his critique of the metaphysics of presence can be helpful in theorizing the policymaking as openness. 

Keywords

• policy–making
• documents
• higher education of Iran
• metaphysics
• domination
• critique

Main Subjects

• Educational Philosophy

---

References

Al-Fakhory, H., & Al-Jar, K. (2004). The History of Arabic Philosophy (A. Ayati, Trans.). Scientific and Cultural. (In Persian)

Aristole. (2019). Policts (H. Enayat, Trans.). Scientific and Cultural Publishing. (In Persian)

Brown, C. (2005). Philosophy and The Christian Faith (T. Mikaiilian, Trans.). Sceintific and Cultural. (In Persian)

Davis, C. (2007). Levinas: An Intrudaction (M. Olia, Trans.). Iranian Institute of Philosophy. (In Persian)

Document of Comperhensive Scientefic Plan of The Country. (2010). Tehran: Secretaritat of the Cultural Revolution Concile. (In Persian)

Document of Strategic Transformation of Science and Technology. (2009). Tehran: Ministry Of Sciences, Research and Technology. (In Persian)

Gadamer, H.-G. (2006). Truth and Method. Continumm

Heidegger, M. (1977). The Question Concerning Technology (W. Lovitt, Trans.). Harper & Row Publishers.

Heidegger, M. (2001). Being and Time (J. Macquarrie & E. Robinson, Trans.). Balackwell Publishers Itd. (1962).

Horkheimer, M. (1997). Les Débuts de la philosophie bourgeoise de l'histoire (M. J. Poyendeh, Trans.). Ney. (In Persian)

Jaspers, K. (1963). Philosophy and World. Henrey Regnery Company.

Jaspers, K. (2019). Existenzphilosophie (l. Rostaii, Trans.). Parseh. (In Persian)

Khabazi, M., & Sebti, S. (2018). Derrida, Philosophy And Question Cocerning Essence of University. Siahroud. (In Persian)

Machiavelli, N. (2010). The Prince (D. Ashouri, Trans.). Agah. (In Persian)

Madkhor, E. (2007). Farabi (A. M. Kardan, Trans.; M. M. Sharif, Ed. Vol. 1). University Publishing Center. (In Persian)

Marshall, J. (2004). Poststructuralism, Philosophy, Pedagogy. Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Matthews, E. (1999). Twentieth Century French Philosophy (M. Hakimi, Trans.). Ghoghnoos. (In Persian)

McLaughlin, T. H. (2000). Philosophy and Educational Polcy:  Possibilities, tensions and tasks. Journal of Education Policy, 15(4), 441-457.

Peters, M., & Bubules, N. C. (2004). Poststructuralism and Educational Reseach. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. INC.

Popper, K. (2001). Open Society and Its Enemies (E. Foladvand, Trans.). Kharazmi. (In Persian)

Rorty, R. (2007). Philosophy and Social Hope (A. Azerang, Trans.). Ney. (In Persian)

Royle, N. (2009). Jacques Derrida (P. Imani, Trans.). center (In Persian)

Saffarheidari, H. (2020). A Critical Reflection on the Influencing Cultural Narratives in Iran’s Higher Education: Eclecticism or Integration (A survey of documents). Foundation of Education, 10(2), 28-45. https://doi.org/10.22067/FEDU.2021.31670.0

Saffarheidari, H. (2021). Critical Reflection on the Cultural Narratives in Iran’s Higher Education:(A survey of documents). Jornal of foundations of Education, 10(2), 28-45.

Shabestari, M. (1996). Hermenutics, Book and Tradition. Tarh Now. (In Persian)