Education: Right, Privilege, or Responsibility?

1. In Brazil, studying can be a matter of social survival

Imagine a person who did not go to college, but has a profession, works well, and can support their family.

In certain countries, this can be perfectly normal.

The person can be an excellent mechanic, electrician, carpenter, farmer, or merchant and have a comfortable and respected life.

Olavo argues that in Brazil the situation is different.

Here, formal education is often presented as the main path to achieving a better position in society.

The diploma comes to represent not just knowledge, but also status, salary, and recognition.

Therefore, studying stops being merely a pursuit of knowledge.

It becomes a necessity to achieve a life considered dignified.

2. The problem of turning education into an abstract right

Olavo questions the idea that simply guaranteeing education for all solves the educational problem.

For him, there is a difference between offering access to education and actually forming a person.

A school can be available to everyone.

A university can accept thousands of students.

Diplomas can be distributed.

But this does not necessarily mean that people have acquired enough knowledge to use what they have learned.

Education, in this sense, should not end at access.

It should result in formation.

3. Education requires effort

Knowledge cannot simply be handed over.

Personal effort is required.

It is necessary to read, study, think, make mistakes, correct, and try again.

One of the criticisms presented by Olavo is precisely that certain conceptions of education end up placing all the responsibility on the system and removing part of the responsibility from the student themselves.

But learning requires participation.

No one can think for another person.

No one can study for another person.

A teacher can teach.

A school can offer resources.

A university can provide books and teachers.

But there is a part of the process that depends exclusively on the individual.

4. A diploma is not synonymous with knowledge

Another important point of the criticism is the difference between schooling and knowledge.

A person can spend years within an educational institution and still have great difficulties interpreting texts, arguing, or understanding basic concepts.

This raises an important question:

Are we forming people or just distributing certificates?

The diploma should represent an intellectual achievement.

It should not be just a document needed to get a certain job.

When the diploma loses its connection to real knowledge, the whole society loses.

5. Higher education can also have problems

Olavo also directs his criticism at universities.

His concern is not only with the technical quality of teaching, but also with the possibility of certain institutions becoming ideologically closed environments.

A university should be a place where different ideas can be examined.

The student should be able to disagree with a teacher.

Should be able to question concepts.

Should be able to study different interpretations of history, politics, philosophy, and society.

Knowledge grows when different ideas can come into conflict.

If only one view can be discussed, the university fails to fulfill an important part of its intellectual function.

6. Education as a tool for social mobility

However, there is an even deeper issue.

If society transforms formal education into the main path for social mobility, studying takes on an enormous responsibility.

The student does not study just because they enjoy learning.

They study because they need to improve their living conditions.

Need to get a job.

Need to increase their income.

Need to earn respect.

Need to secure their future.

In this scenario, education stops being just an intellectual experience.

It becomes a tool for social mobility.

And this creates a contradiction.

The more society depends on the diploma to distribute opportunities, the greater the pressure for everyone to have a diploma.

But, if everyone needs the diploma to have opportunities, the diploma alone begins to lose its value.

7. Education should serve society

A central idea presented by Olavo is that knowledge should have a purpose.

It is not enough to accumulate information.

Knowledge needs to be used.

A person can study engineering to build better things.

Can study medicine to care for people.

Can study law to understand and apply laws.

Can study philosophy to learn to think better.

Can study history to understand the past.

Can study science to discover something new.

In this sense, education should prepare the individual not only to get something for themselves, but also to serve society through what they have learned.

8. Privilege does not mean exclusion

When Olavo uses the idea of education as a privilege, it may seem contradictory to the modern idea of universal education.

But we can interpret the word in another way.

A privilege is something that has value.

If knowledge is truly valuable, studying should be seen as an extraordinary opportunity.

Having access to great books, teachers, universities, laboratories, and knowledge accumulated over thousands of years should be treated with seriousness.

The problem would not be preventing someone from studying.

The problem would be turning study into something without responsibility.

If someone receives an opportunity to learn, there should also be a commitment to what will be done with that knowledge.

9. Society also educates

Olavo also questions the idea that the government alone can solve education problems.

A person's formation happens in many places.

The family educates.

The community educates.

Churches educate.

Companies educate.

Teachers educate.

Books educate.

And, mainly, the individual themselves can seek their formation.

The self-taught person is an example of this.

A person with access to the internet, books, and good sources can learn things that were previously available only to those who attended certain institutions.

This does not mean that schools and universities are unnecessary.

It means that education is bigger than them.

10. The true goal of education

Perhaps the most important question is not:

"How can we put more people in school?"

But:

"What do we want to form when we put someone in school?"

Do we want only workers?

Do we want people with diplomas?

Do we want people prepared to pass exams?

Or do we want individuals capable of thinking, working, creating, questioning, understanding the world, and contributing to society?

This difference is fundamental.

Education can be seen as a right.

Can be seen as a tool for social mobility.

Can be seen as an obligation.

But perhaps it should also be seen as a responsibility.

Conclusion

The great provocation presented by Olavo de Carvalho is that education should not be confused with schooling.

Having a spot in a school does not necessarily mean being educated.

Having a diploma does not necessarily mean possessing knowledge.

Attending a university does not necessarily mean having developed critical thinking.

True education requires something that no institution can fully deliver: the individual's will to learn.

And perhaps that is exactly where the biggest question lies.

A society can build schools.

Can build universities.

Can distribute diplomas.

Can create educational programs.

But it cannot force someone to truly want to know.

In the end, knowledge is an opportunity.

And an opportunity only becomes something valuable when someone decides to use it.