Skip to main content

Oppression


The worst oppression is that of knowledge. I think, an expert who assumes he has right to direct you is the most cruel oppressor. If one speaks and gives 'advice' without concerning his audience, their needs and capacities, he actually tries to maintain his authority over them. Knowledge, in this sense, becomes a tool in hands of an expert for sucking all the nourishment from non-expert people.
Look at those so-called possessors of knowledge. They are as if gods of the society. Any word coming from their mouths gains an authorization quickly. However, their words not always open locked doors, rather sometimes lock the doors to people in order to keep their privileged position in the society. They consider themselves as ‘gatekeepers’ keeping lay people away from the source of knowledge. They are afraid of that once people get access to the sources, there would be no need for these so-called keepers of knowledge.

Knowledge is only about to change one’s self. Therefore, no knowledgeable person has right to alter life of others by way of using his expertise, by way of oppressing people’s minds and wills. This is the most prevalent and fewest known type of oppression.

Popular posts from this blog

Philosophy as the father of science

Philosophy was long regarded as the sole method of thought that would explain phenomena, be it imaginary, concrete, celestial, or terrestrial. Aristotle was a biologist, if we look at his work from today's perspective. He was mainly interested in the species that scattered all over the places. His concern was to collect as many different animals and plants as possible, so that he would have been able to talk about them with greater certainty. However, he was also a strong advocate of categorization and in order to categorize what he had collected, he needed to contemplate on what to put in this or that category or on what makes two things different. This contemplation made him a philosopher, as we understand it today.

Camus's Absurd End

"Camus was only 46 when he died in an automobile accident. Ironically, he had once said that he could not imagine a death more meaningless than dying in a car accident." From Understanding Philosophy, Joan A. Price

The Civilization of Clash - A Critique

Samuel Huntington, the writer of ‘The Clash of Civilizations’ article, imagines a disagreement between major cultures of the world. He suggests, for the future, a certain separation between civilizations that cannot be avoided. Through the centuries, a fault line between civilizations was created by the different views of God and man, the individual and the group, and so on. This line is also gradually growing because of the unbearable Western military, economic and cultural superiority to others. The line will not soon disappear because it is more fundamental than the separation created by political approaches.