A) The essence of education and its importance
A university can only exist thanks to the state in which it operates. But the idea of the university itself is super-state, so it cannot be perfected only by the service of the state.
From the point of view of the state, the university, as an institute, along with many other duties, also distributes the activities of the state. Subject to its purposes. These include the benefits, the training of specialists in the community, the ability to use the technical field of science, and the ability to make legal or political recommendations.
From the standpoint of the university itself is independent and does not aim at knowing every possible way of carrying out the truth. It is a co-operative and opposing movement of its members in terms of unity and universality. It is powerful when it comes to the most clearly recognized, as a spiritually effective mirror reflecting the subject universe. In essence (Existenz) it is identical to the whole. He contemplates his own destiny in the state, the destiny of integrity, when he radiates it with the power of enlightened purpose.
In fact, the university and the state are not considered without each other. For their successful coexistence, the interests of the state must coincide with the university's idea that the state wants the university to nourish itself with its eternal, super-state source. It grants the university its own, state-independent space. The university, in response, praises the state for how it carries out its freedom measure and for its path. Both the university and the state recognize their common origin.
In this case, the university, with its nurturing essence, is especially important for the internal politics of the state, as it is concerned with the ethical future of its people, in line with the truth. University developments have had a positive or negative impact on the population for a long time. What is being done through management, support, and restraint in this area only emerges after a few generations. We enjoy past educational achievements, successful events and decisions, but we are burdened by the state's negligence and inaccurate (illegitimate) advice, the initiators of which we can no longer answer, though history itself imposes their eternal responsibility.
If the accident, minor goals followed, and they are completely chaikarga, interested only in the superficial effects of noisy events, the present pressure outweighed the more distant future, if he was driving avoids its own people in the domestic life of the arrangement of the greatest responsibilities, then the care of universities and schools in the superficial, top iruli and eye-catching. In this sense, the university should arm the industry with the means of knowledge and thereby train "skilled workers" who will be involved in many different fields of modern technical life. Then the state will try to regulate education and the university will lead to its tasks and to the loss of itself. Such a state shall manage funds previously unheard of for its own purposes. Relatively scarce funds are devoted to improving and developing the thinking, especially in the historical humanities, to facilitate a burdensome process free of all the purposes of seeking the truth. Even these small funds are wasted on school production, which kills the soul.
In essence, the university, as a center for teaching and education, is pushing people to the future. Who, by their ethos, their vision and their lives, decide how the state will govern itself and through it - the people. Only in a critical situation does it become clear what values we should uphold, why they are worth life, and what we can sacrifice.
B) University autonomy
Even if there is a coup in the scientific field (research and means), truth will retain its autonomy. This autonomy, once established in the ecclesiastical, faith-based order and, in most cases, guided by church decisions, has emerged since the Middle Ages in the creative pursuit and search for truth. As modern science progresses, it will turn into a struggle for truth only in a situation of diversity. Autonomy is not regulated from any one place in the world. The change in the content of the notion of science introduces new fields of knowledge, which are often opposed to the old, diverge from it, but they only follow new ways in the all-encompassing whole of possible cognition. At last this is known as a whole methodical, but it cannot be accessed completely. It turns into an idea that leads us to the humble infinity of every temptation. This idea is, in principle, ready for every opportunity, every opportunity for thought, to restore even the forgotten truth. University autonomy today means its freedom in this open space for all. The autonomy of the search for medieval intelligences, which is bound by obligations and falls within the framework of regulated determinism (a search that is not yet familiar with modern forms of freedom, leading to infinite thought), is compared to theological "institutions" (which differ from contemporary philosophical faculties). The depravity, which in its conditions of freedom, refused autonomy to seek the truth and chose dogmatic immobility based on linear teaching. Autonomy is changing. In the medieval era, autonomy actually exists, albeit in a vague form. But knowing him leads to his rejection. Individual ecclesiastical disciplines were spiritually immersed in themselves, escaping the modern world. For example, when you read Anselm Canterbury, Nicholas Kuzanelli, and others, you can breathe freely, while modern Thomist textbooks tell you the truth.
The guarantee of the autonomy of truth is a free, democratic state (Article 5 of the German Constitution reads: "Art and science, research and teaching are free"; moreover, freedom of the press and speech: "There should be no censorship"). Such a state protects the autonomy of truth even in state-dependent universities.Add paragraph text here.
What does this guarantee? Ketgen's comment is this: The concept of the substantive science of science in this way is only mandatory when it is not explicitly stated. The "variability of the notion of truth" does not change the guarantees; it obviously seeks to complement the contemporary understanding of science and therefore concludes: "The right of science - duties may be questioned by them." The state as a guarantor relies on the partner's internal self-control. ”Science also has a constitutional-legal obligation to self-criticize (Ketgen leaves open the question of whether science is properly dealing with the obligation).
The state is a guarantor of freedom of science, even if it cannot interpret the notion of science (which is precisely the guarantee of church freedom). Katgen says: "The Church", which is called upon to assist in the formation of the state's self-consciousness, reserves the right to claim self-interpretation, which takes the form of writing (meaning the Scriptures), which is not entitled to "corpus academicum". This is true insofar as the university is not a minor, sinless instance, and the church claims to have this role among its parishioners. The basis of this dogmatic assertion is that only the church has the right to make decisions about the correctness of the Scriptures. The university's claims, however, are no less, for here, too, the process of seeking the truth is based on the collaborative work of all its members, a self-criticizing discussion that cannot be organized in any legally localized instance.
The university will develop not only what is considered to be a problem today, but also something that can become a means of understanding in the process of continuous confrontation with the underlying forces, and this will lead to complete clarity; it is impossible to restrict this freedom; The State protects it from the Church as well and restricts its activities to theological training. The freedom of the university and the church is not like each other. The freedom granted to the Church in the field of teaching implies a method of thinking which, unlike the university, is not based on the freedom of science and philosophy. Therefore, the authority of the Church as a teacher is based on the indefinite scope of research and freedom. The state grants the Church only the outward freedom of teaching, and does not think about inner freedom. If the university also gives it the freedom of outward appearance but at the same time demands freedom of scientific research and true thought.
According to Ketgen, this is the aspiration of the state to establish a legal form through the constitution. Indeed, the will of the state, in which the university does not interfere, should in fact provide for the freedom of truth, with the boundlessness of ideas and discoveries, to create the conditions for this aspiration. In such a case, the state also places freedom on the ground of unlimited self-criticism. Guaranteed freedom of church teaching is only allowed by the State. He does not control himself, he gives up other kinds of freedom. The truth of the university is the essence of the path, and the truth of the teaching is the delays on that path.
The question arises when can the conflict between the state and the university autonomy arise? What is the consequence of such a conflict? What does the state guarantee anyway? Would it be necessary to clarify a specific situation? Who plays a crucial role at this time?
In such a conflict situation, both the state and the university autonomy can be seen as both. University autonomy is essentially opposed to the state as a truth-seeking lifestyle. Its radicality is conditioned by the methods and methods of thought, as well as continuity, which establish it as a discursive integrity, but in a formal, legally regulated space, this way of life claims corporate autonomy.
On the whole, it is very difficult to objectify some notions of what the state must adhere to, so in a conflict situation, its source and reason, it becomes necessary to find a way of reasoning that can convincingly explain the essence of autonomy that needs protection.
If self-criticism as a commitment is rejected at the university, then the path to a completely different interests is opened up, resulting in unhealthy forces uniting, and narrow dogma is replaced by the pursuit of truth. But instead of attitudes and spirituality (slander and abuse are punishable by court) there will be intrigues and manipulations that generate other deceptive methods. Thus, the state, which is the guarantor of university freedom, must strive to eradicate it, to restore its true form.
If the state itself has fallen into disrepair and exhausted its interest in the university as an organization for its benefit, then the indefinable idea of truth will be distorted, weakened by state interests, and the autonomy that still exists will be used to protect the state itself. Those who receive education must become, not only part of a properly constructed machine, but also a person in the service of truth and science.
The work of the state and the university will be successful when they pursue common goals, stemming from a common goal. Since both are at risk of degeneration, so you are on guard. Trust is gradually gained through joint efforts. It does not arise unconditionally and immediately.
The university will lose the power of the soul even if it is occupied with very broad tasks. It also gathers the wisdom that is required above all other institutions if it does not protect autonomy - its dignity. He will not be able to convince people of his own strength, which is attained by the search for truth. The university is a place where people need to change their minds in order to better understand their creatures.
B) University legal understanding
Based on the possibilities of legal concepts (that is, the concepts of objective definitions), legal thinking generates various forms. Through them, drafts of laws, constitutions and statutes are created, which are mutually agreed to be legally binding.
If the situation in the case is ambiguous, unclear and this uncertainty is of a principled nature, then legal reasoning would be powerless to explain the substance of the case.
Legal forms are based on outwardly visible rules of some reliability. The task of delineating the tangible, clear boundaries of the legal field is itself the task of the field itself. This goal will remain unfulfilled if we try to deceive ourselves and explain in legal terms what is inexplicable. We consider such notions to be more precisely 'non-existents', for example, 'normative force of facts' and others.
The university is characterized by contradictions, which are in the nature of the subject itself: it is both a state institution and has autonomy. On the one hand, it depends on state acts, on the other, it is protected from interference and instructions. The legal field is generally limited because the external aspects are so definable (they have important implications). However, when it comes to the autonomous existence of the soul itself, this restriction is inadmissible. Only the coherence of the laws protecting the truth of the university and the state is here to be saved. The legal relations on this ground are governed by the very essence of this unity, mutual agreement. The unity of the university and the state demands that the Ministry of Culture - ministers, officials - be a group of people who value the idea of a university, that only such people can be persuaded by the university's sanity, only that they can prevent their university from misleading the truth. If a State University appoints incompetent people as governing authorities, then the University demands that they be fired, and it has the right to request the appointment of persons who, through their thinking and education, develop the University's idea. Only the environment of such people will create an atmosphere of solidarity and trust in the university.
If the irresponsible party government appoints a minister of culture as an unqualified person, then the university, which defends its autonomy, has no right to remain silent, must use its assertive power and publicly express its opinion (even in the run-up to the elections), which is the only concern for the politicians, the only danger. Represents Raba).
The state fights through violence (Based on the results of the elections, mistrustful parties gain the right to make uncontrolled, arbitrary decisions on behalf of the people).
If the state is normal, it will use force of proof instead of violence. And the university relies solely on this power and responds to passive opposition, internal violence, and violence. It can call on people to rebel against injustice. However, in any case it is a bad solution that does not exclude accidents.
The co-operation of the university and the state also requires that everything starting with the university charter (status, constitution) and ending with any ordinances - the establishment of new departments, scientific representations, new institutions - be established by mutual consultation. The university charter should include initiative and force, regardless of who designed it - the university or the ministry itself. In any case, the result can only be achieved on the basis of mutual decision, except in one area: the research and teaching process is entirely at the discretion of teachers and scientists. University autonomy grants each one indefinite freedom. Not even the university itself has the right to interfere in this process.
C) Free and total state.
The university is linked to the state, but it cannot exist in every state because it strengthens the freedom that is truly gained. The university should be founded only in a state that strives for truth and freedom, itself embedded in a scientific spirit, with the idea of a university.
It should be noted, however, that no country in the world aims to create such a state or university. It will never happen.
A perfect implementation of the idea of a university is nowhere to be achieved, as political and personal freedom in any country is not based on truth to the point that it becomes a real freedom. The difference is, the way to freedom is whether the path to freedom is open or closed. In other words, the difference between the demands of the state itself, whether based on truth or falsehood, fiction, falsehood (externally expressed as such - states that strive for freedom, impose indefinite publicity of thought and speech, non-free states, on the contrary, deny publicity, instead of spirituality. They fight against the pursuit of the truth, which is soothing to them, they are bound by iron curtains). In the totalitarian state, no one wings the truth, because it will threaten the very foundations of the regime, the regime itself.
In a total state, science is a weapon of power, in so far as it can be used. It does not contain the grain of truth that leads to freedom.
It is the duty of educational institutions in such a state to train qualified workers (in the broadest sense) and functionaries. An institute that bears the name of a university could not be considered a university simply because of its name. Only some specialists in freelance work at Total University, primarily in the natural and medical faculties. But such a university is still not integrity. It is also misunderstood that free universities, which find themselves in uncertainty, recognize total institutions and, with them, create comprehensive integrity.
In a free state, a free university takes the place of supranational and supranational truth. In our time, this is the only form of its existence. It unites people within the framework of infinite, dogmatic thinking, but also through the infinite pursuit of diverse communication. Where the truth reigns, pluralism of spiritual powers is quite natural.
Thus a university which is more than apolitical, and more apolitical, is the only thing that "politics" pursues in its pursuit of truth is not in the interests of the total state. Politics in such a state is dead by itself (replaced by manipulations partly described by Machiavelli, especially in the Indian "Artashastra". Such a system of manipulation that ruled people, including Western Europe and only today in the era of technological civilization, was reversed). . Therefore, the existence of the university was impossible under the national socialist regime, and in almost all states it was abolished. Although he was drawn to the socialist and communist economy, totalitarianism - never. A policy that fails to embody the truth cannot be incorporated by the university.
The truth served by the university is of great political importance; it needs people who, by virtue of the truth, become politicized, public beings as citizens. Only such people serve the truth and freedom. Such a person is capable of disobeying the totalitarian regime and living with other people in the order and order established by them. Accordingly, the idea of the university entails the following task: to continually reflect, to show the world both its own face and that of the university itself. On the road to freedom, there are tendencies against it, an actual lie that must be revealed and overcome. It is the responsibility of the university. If the free world strives to be righteous and truly free in this way, it will indeed inherit itself as such. Otherwise, he will find himself under a total yoke, which deprives him of both freedom and freedom. The university should ensure its existence in general through politics and through such voluntary spiritual forces as education, understanding, persuasion and truth.
