When I first heard the concept of the Greek education versus
Hebrew education, I found it extremely fascinating. There was something almost exhilarating as
well as liberating to see outlined how I had been a walking contradiction. The methodology and results between the two
clearly put them as opposing forces and I had been trying in vain to make them
compatible. Some of the points that
impressed me are as follows:
The Greek is focused on the mastery of knowledge and
skills. The Hebrew is focused on purpose
and relationships (where knowledge and skills are a by-product or acquired
along the way while building relationships and fulfilling purpose). The Greek
philosophy sees the mind as a container that needs to be filled. The Hebrew sees the mind as clay which needs
to be molded into its masterpiece.
The Greek teacher manipulates its student through
behaviorism. The Hebrew teacher inspires
the student to desire to change their behavior.
The Greek approach is to shape the mind.
The Hebrew approach is to shape the heart. The Greek method is to put knowledge in so
they can regurgitate it and know what to
think. The Hebrew method is to draw
knowledge out so as they search inwardly and learn how to think.
The differences continue.
The Greek method is very organized and systematic – compartmentalized
subjects and packaged curriculum. The
Hebrew method is messy, where all subjects and concepts are intermingled in a
unity or wholeness.
Greek education is dependent on teacher’s training and tools
(curriculum), whereas Hebrew education is dependent upon the teacher’s love for
the student and the content. Greek students attempt to
learn what the teacher knows. Hebrew
students attempt to become what the
teacher is. The Greek focuses on Content. The Hebrew focuses on Context.
If the opposing views were looked at with anamosity it might be said that the goal of the Greek education is to create individuals who are “useful idiots”
to serve the state. Whereas the Hebrew
strive to create individuals who are “blindly obedient” to serve their
creator.
The Hellenistic objective is ‘knowing’. The Hebrew objective is ‘BECOMING’ or the
practical application. The Greek is
concerned with right thinking. The
Hebrew is concerned with right conduct. The Greek learn in order to
comprehend. The Hebrew learn in order to
worship God or serve mankind.
The Greek thinker views success as acquiring or owning
beauty, brawn, intelligence, money, or popularity. They ask the question “How will this benefit
me”. The Hebrew mindset views success as
demonstrating service to others, worship to God, and obedience to his
commandments. They ask the question “How
will this benefit others”.
That long list probably would have been better organized as
bullet points in two separate columns (Greek style) but the poetic factor
(Hebrew style) of the contrast would have been lost. Yet another demonstration of the two
divisions of thought.
So now a couple questions.
1) Is it true? and 2) Does it matter? Of course there are proponents and opponents for
both sides of those questions. In my
humble opinion, it is more a matter of principle than a matter of facts.
I agree that the factual application of this idea is in gross
error. Not all Greeks were consistent in
this way of thinking and neither were all Hebrews so saintly in their
application.
Chicken or the Egg?
The world loves to view things in the extremes. And people love to sensationalize their
perspective is superior than another – stuck in an either/or mode of
thinking. But that doesn’t necessarily
indicate that reality exists in that mode.
One of the philosophies may have possibly been foundational
or a preparation to the other. Such as we find in the comparison of the lower (mosaic) law versus the higher (Christian)
law. Both are valuable for the purpose
they were meant to perform, but one is more complete. That applies in this context as well. The Greek focus of content or knowledge is a
valuable objective to pursue, but it is lacking in completeness of the whole
person.
The Greek way of thinking may be different and lacking, but
still had influence on the Hebrew. The
Hebrew ideal originated from Adam and so must have had influence on the Greek
perspective. It all sounds like the
childhood dilemma - Which came first, the chicken or the egg? The Greek or the Hebrew?
Again, chronology of influence may be missing the boat. Identifying the distinguishing
characteristics of each mode of thinking is valuable to clarify where one may
be or where one would like to go, but it doesn’t establish which one is consistent with truth.
The Greek education has been all I've ever known in my own schooling experience. It's always been Greek to me. But should it continue to be. The Hebrew philosophy pulls on my heart as what I want to obtain for myself, my children, and ultimately, for all society at large. Focusing more on the BECOMING rather than simply the KNOWING.
