The concept of critique was never as popular or as successful as it is now. Today "critique" seems to be celebrated and praised more then ever before. Does this reflect the progress of thought or of the actual humanization of the world? Does it mark the edification of the interests, ideals and values of the critical project in general, and in present-day education more specifically?
What is our responsibility as critical educators in face of the sophistication of the current dehumanization of reality, of which "critique" has become a vital part? Should critical educators rework their concepts of education and critique? Or perhaps transcend "critique" or "education" itself?
At our meeting we will try to elaborate on the various concepts of "critique" in what is presently recognized as "critical education" and address these challenges in respect of what we are doing individually, as a group, and as different and conflicting educational collectives and agendas.
I think it is of vital importance that this meeting, the assembly of some of the most influential minds in the field of critical education and young scholars, address the following questions: should we rework the concept of "critique" and continue what we are doing in the field of education, or is it our responsibility to depart from the concept of "critique" and transcend critical education, – orienting ourselves to what is beyond the horizons of "critique", on the way to new human and educational possibilities, to reconstituting our understanding and our work as educators? And if so, is it possible for us already in the present historical moment to articulate something meaningful concerning the new educational language and the alternative praxis? Or should we go farther, even beyond the language of "emancipation", "transcendence" and "going beyond"?
Until now critical education has not normally acknowledged the importance of love, creativity, improvisation, responsibility and the infinity of the moment. It has overestimated the intellectual dimension and the emancipation of consciousness, while almost neglecting the body, the aesthetic dimension, the relations between these and the ethical dimension and the historical/political. Maybe we should expand. Maybe we should edify our sensitivity to the absence of these connections, and, where possible, even develop new connections and sensitivities for these connections/absences: properly to address the present triumph of the concept of "critique" and the challenges imposed by the current advance of the sophisticated dehumanization of present reality.