Rousseauian Theory Of Education By Maria Montessoi

Devy then confronts the official terror imposed on the dialects, the violence inflicted on them by linguistic theory and the state, as a suppressor of dialects. Devy realizes that a sorority of bhasha as a cognitive domain, as a theory of survival places a different demand on cognitive politics. Neither Romanticism nor the pragmatic necessities of ethno-botany will be sufficient. To create a Rousseauian theory of education will appear too split. The equation, the sibling ship between primitive and child can be misleading, reinforcing current stereotypes. Harlan Lane opines:
One recognizes that the idea of the wolf boy produced fruitful theories of education for Maria Montessori but one needs a more deeply axiomatic theory. 12 (Harlan Lane:
Once language becomes the medium, the amniotic, cognitive soup of Cultural Revolution, the human being has to locate him in space and time. Devy adds that, ‘We control space through imagination and we control time through memory.’
Consciousness is essentially a dream world, and it comes to terms with space and time through memory and the imagination. Without language, memory and time, there can be no fiction. Devy locates the locus of fiction at the connection of these three worlds.
But for fiction to emerge it must be told. For storytelling to begin, it needs an act of otherness, to create the self as fantasy. Telling needs a ‘not me’, an ‘otherness’ for the social contract called listening to be born. If fiction needs language, memory and imagination, telling needs the presence of the other, the isolation between self and other that allows storytelling. The irony of memory is that it is a double-edged weapon. In an evolutionary sense, memory was used as a marker for dealings. Once transactions begin saving begins, capital pattern begins. Memory allows both for a surplus of capital and a propagation of stories. The basic purpose of the script was an act of numeracy, for counting. Devy argues