Conference Agenda

This paper explores the impact of technological advancements on education, particularly focusing on the changes in our “attention” as a response to these advancements from a technological philosophy perspective. The increasing importance of digital-related skills in education is a major topic in South Korea and worldwide. Consequently, what is the significance of attention at present? Bernard Stiegler(2012) contend that the cultivation of 'attention' is unattainable for individuals in isolation and exclusively arises through engagement with the social realm (Stiegler, 2012: 1). It differs from the posture and concentration exhibited by animals, and according to Stiegler, the acquisition of attention requires a process known as education, drawing upon Simondon's theory. This is because when we assert our social nature, it is made possible through the process of education, and during this period, education aids in the formation of individuals who cannot be individualized solely based on their mental and social (or collective) meaning. Education fosters a more refined form of attention, which is the fruit of accumulating experiences passed down through generations (Stiegler, 2012: 1-2). One captivating and crucial attribute of attention in this context is that the regulation of my conduct is contingent upon the collective physical environment. Let's contemplate the educational environment, such as the classroom setting. The teacher is positioned in front of me to impart knowledge that is deemed important within this society, and I make a conscious effort to accept, acknowledge, or comprehend that. The physical setup of the classroom, along with its occupants, is specifically designed to facilitate focused attention. The classroom's setup and its occupants are physically conditioned to concentrate in a certain manner. Thus, the attention developed during education can be guided by shared memory and the ongoing physical conditions that support this memory. However, technological advancements are transforming the way we exist in the realm of education. It is of greater significance for students to independently explore and actively participate in their own learning activities, rather than solely relying on teachers for extended periods of time within the classroom. Posthuman theorist Katherine Hales (Hayles, K., 2007: 167) characterizes this particular feature of online information acquisition and the capacity to attend to numerous sources concurrently as the "hyper-attention" exhibited by the younger generation. She argues that the same kind of attention as Stiegler's "deep attention" is drawn to a single stream of information, focusing on one specific object for an extended period of time and blocking out external stimuli, similar to the way it was done in the past in the humanities. Deep attention possesses the advantage of exhibiting patience over extended periods and excelling in resolving intricate problems. However, it exposes vulnerabilities in attentiveness towards rapidly changing surroundings and flexibility in response. Conversely, heightened focus enables us to swiftly redirect our attention towards different objects, facilitating prompt decision-making or assessments in the online realm where attention is in high demand. This phenomenon is characterized by an inability to tolerate monotony as it prefers to engage with multiple streams of information simultaneously and consistently seeks out more stimulating experiences. This shift in attention, accompanied by the advocacy for privatization in education and the establishment of a learning-centered society, has revolutionized our perception of education within the school setting and redefined the significance of defining educational time as a cultural phenomenon. This paper argues that there is a necessity to articulate and ponder upon the transformation of educational practices caused by the technological unawareness resulting from our repeated utilization. It aims to investigate the ways in which these alterations in educational time reshape the rapport between students and teachers and their very existence.

This paper explores, in its three sections, how the local/global and cosmopolitan education of democratic hospitality shapes individual and collective identities.

The first section examines whether democratic education's local and global contexts have a centric position that promotes border-thinking in understanding individual and national identities. Here, I use Derrida’s discussion about hospitality's conditional and unconditional factors to understand the limitations of individual and national identities.

In the second section, I argue that a cosmopolitan education focused on democratic hospitality enables us to understand a more fluid approach to individual and national identities. To further explain this concept, I refer to Papastephanou's notion of cosmopolitanism, which she formulates from an off-centre position, or what she calls “eccentric circles.” In cosmopolitan democratic hospitality, individuals have more freedom to explore their identities from a non-centralised position. This can also have an impact on how national identities are perceived. However, the potential of education to promote cosmopolitan democratic hospitality is sometimes hindered by our volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous (VUCA) environment, leaving us as mere spectators to society's powers.

The third and final section of the text suggests that a social imaginary of cosmopolitan democratic hospitality can help us overcome feelings of despair or giving up. This imaginary can help us develop pedagogies, as UNESCO claims, that allow us to learn in and with the world, which can lead to societal improvements. Education is not limited to schools but is a lifelong project that requires individuals to continue learning and sharing knowledge. This can make education more robust in an uncertain future. However, this promising point can also be challenging, as we strive to bridge the gap between theory and practice locally and globally. It is important to remember that even as our identities shift and change, education remains a valuable tool. Through education, we can challenge negative actions and promote cosmopolitan democratic hospitality. Its social imaginary reminds us that we are all connected as humans and that our collective actions can make the world a more habitable and welcoming place, especially during times of uncertainty.

Burdened by a humanistic Enlightenment legacy (Bojesen, 2020), there exists a powerful human desire to control the uncontrollable world (Rosa, 2020). For example, as the ski industry becomes challenged by the variability related to climate change, we increasingly endeavour to plan skiing holidays to locations that guarantee snow (Willibald et al., 2021). Lured to these places by images that promise us ‘real’ snowscapes, our vision is often shattered when, on our arrival, we are faced with the large snow-making machines that are required to fulfil the advertised promises. The ‘reality’ of the scenes is lacking and what we get is a manufactured ‘synthetic’ experience; an artificial landscape filled with the distinct texture of imaginary snow and not the ‘real’ thing. Moreover, the consistent images that matched our thoughts of snow, are fractured by the inconsistent work of the noisy and intrusive machinery. Rosa (2020) suggests that such levels of control create a fabricated or engineered version of the snowscape focused on producing reality in pursuit of a specific goal despite the accompanying undesirable consequences. With this in mind, our study builds on previous exploration of negative universality (Rüsselbæk Hansen et al., 2024) and contributes towards the sustained inquiry into the phenomenon of human desire and control in the context of education and its implications for the philosophy and functioning of contemporary schooling.

In our exploration, we problematise the hope and desire for education evidenced by the OECD conceptual learning framework – Learning Compass 2030 (OECD, 2019a) and critique the notion of the compass metaphor and the ideas expressed in the values and attitudes component of the framework (OECD, 2019b). We draw on the lens of negative universality combined with Rosa’s (2020), Ruti’s (2008,2012) work and Saul’s (2021) notion of cultural criticism to examine possible inadequacies in the documents that will prompt teachers, researchers, and policymakers to adopt a more ‘negative’ gaze when considering possibilities for their practice. For example, one of the challenges of education is the overwhelming ‘positive’ lens used to view schools’ positioning on global uncertainties related to environmental, social, political, and cultural issues. Saul (2021) critiques schools as sites where such issues and similar problems can be solved because of their desire to manufacture positivity, infantilize young people and focus on short-term economics.

The promise of control or engineering education in the context of uncertainty leads to the establishment of false hope. In this regard, we show, using examples stemming from OECD’s “The Learning Compass 2030” framework, how the OECD is trying to engineer the contemporary reality with the aim of forming "the future we want" (OECD, 2019, p. 2), a controllable ‘future world’ without too many uncertainties. The question is what risks and constitutive effects, for example lacks, exclusions and impossibilities the OECD ‘machinery’ produces by its positiveness and how it frames students’ possibilities in the (future) world (Ruti, 2012)? On that basis, we suggest that researchers, teachers and policymakers as public intellectuals critically reflect on and discuss what impact the global OECD machinery has on our work so that we can resist ‘false hopes’ and identify the next steps based on our professional judgement (Heck, 2022) to influence the philosophy and functioning of contemporary schooling for the future.