【星洲日报】东方不如西方？

诚然，从今天的角度看，科举制度是落伍的，但它倡导公平竞爭、择优录取，政权向平民开放的精神，相比於西方原有的贵族等级制、君主赐官制等选官制度，无疑更具优越性。


邱家金是爱国的。这点，我不质疑。

但是，他爱国，不等於我不爱国。

这样的逻辑，浅显易懂。

推而广之，要团结，不一定要唸国小；唸华小，不等於不能团结。

我对魏家祥副部长和邱家金教授这场“文抄公”的爭论，实在没有太大的兴趣。但邱家金的某些论调和逻辑，却令我摸不著头脑。例如他说，华教不是团结人民的方案，因为它与西方教育制度背道而驰，就很奇怪。

他的意思是甚么？他是要说，华教破坏人民的团结？还是要强调，唯有西方教育制度才能团结人民？

若说破坏团结，罪魁祸首应该是那些搞牛头示威、袭击宗教场所，把“寄居论”念兹在兹的极端份子，怎么把账记到华教的头上来了？

若说西方教育制度可以团结人民，那邱教授的潜意识里是不是认为，东方一定不如西方？

不错，现代的教育制度，基本上是源自西方。但备受邱教授推崇的西方，其考试制度源自哪里？

早在100年前，孙中山便指出，现在各国的考试制度，差不多都是学英国的。但穷流溯源，英国的考试制度，原来是从中国学过去的。

事实上，西方学术界也早已公认，现代西方文官制度，乃源自中国的科举制。

我在谷歌网站找到了这样的资料：中国科举制度对西方產生影响可追溯到16世纪后半期。最早向西方介绍中国科举制度的是葡萄牙的两位传教士克鲁兹和胡安‧冈萨雷斯‧德万多萨。前者所写的《中国游记》，极力推崇了中国通过科举考试选拔官员的做法；后者在《伟大的中国》一书中，则详细介绍了科举考试的方法和內容。这两本书影响了欧洲各国仿效中国，纷纷建立文官考试制度。

诚然，从今天的角度看，科举制度是落伍的，但它倡导公平竞爭、择优录取，政权向平民开放的精神，相比於西方原有的贵族等级制、君主赐官制等选官制度，无疑更具优越性。

邱家金不应一句“与西方教育制度背道而驰”，就认定华文教育制度是狭隘，落后的。作为一位歷史学家，他应该比我们更加瞭解上述史实，他也应该告诉我们，世界上並没有一个尽善尽美的教育制度，只有最適合我们的教育制度。而一个好的教育制度，不是坐井观天，故步自封，而是可以不断向他人借镜，不断丰富自己，不断完善自己。

我不认为邱家金所谓的“一种学校”真能达到团结国民的目標，因为我们的大环境还未具备平等、自由、民主的成熟条件；而我们的当权者，也还无法放弃把学校作为意识形態阵地和政治附属的“最终目標”！

××××××××××××××××××
The East can never be as good as the West?

University of Malaya professor Tan Sri Dr Khoo Kay Kim is patriotic. I have no doubt in it.

However, he is patriotic does not mean that I am not.

Such a logic is simple enough.

Similarly, to achieve national unity, it is not necessary to study in national primary schools while studying in Chinese primary schools does not mean that we are not able to unite.

I do not really have much interests in the controversy between Khoo and Deputy Education Minister Datuk Dr Wee Ka Siong. But some of Khoo's arguments and logic have confused me. For example, I found it strange when he said that Chinese education is not a formula to unite the people as it is contrary to Western education system.

What did he mean by that? Did he mean to say that Chinese education has undermined national unity? Or did he mean to stress that only Western education system can unite the people?

If he was referring to undermining the national unity, the culprit should be those who were engaged in the cow-head demonstrations and arson attacks on churches, as well as extremists who kept the "pendatang (immigrant) theory" in mind. How could he blame Chinese education?

If he wanted to say that Western education system can unite the people, then does his subconscious think that the East can never be as good as the West?

Yes, the modern education system is basically originated from the West. But where is the examination system of the Western education system, which is highly praised by Khoo, originated from?

As early as 100 years ago, Sun Yat-sen had pointed out that the current examination system is almost learned from the British. However, the British examination system is actually originated from China.

In fact, the Western academia has long recognised that the current Western civil service system is originated from the Chinese imperial examination system.

I found this from Google: The influence of Chinese imperial examination system on Western countries can be traced back to the latter half of the 16th century. The Chinese imperial examination system was first introduced to the West by two Portuguese friars Gaspar da Cruz and Gonza Mendoza. In his book Treatise on Things Chinese, the former highly praised the practice of selecting government officials through the imperial examination system in China while the latter gave a detailed description of the examination's methods and content in his book. The two books have affected European countries to imitate China and establish their own civil service examination systems.

Indeed, from today's perspective, the imperial examination system is outdated. But it advocates fair competition and merit-based admission. The spirit of opening the civil power to the public is no doubt more advantageous compared to the old aristocracy, hierarchy and monarchy systems of the West.

Khoo should not conclude that Chinese education is narrow-minded and outdated by saying only that "Chinese education is contrary to Western education system". As an historian, he should understand the above-mentioned historical facts better than us. He should also tell us that there is no single perfect education system in the world but there is an education systems that suits us the most. And a good education system does not sit idle. It will not be complacent and conservative. Instead, it will continue learning from others, constantly enriching and improving itself.

I do not think the so called "one type of school" suggested by Khoo can really help to achieve the goal of national unity as the big environment has not yet possessed the conditions of equality, liberality and democratic maturity. Meanwhile, those who are in power are still unable to give up schools as the battlefield of ideology and the "ultimate goal" of political subordination!

(By LIM MUN FAH/Translated by SOONG PHUI JEE/Sin Chew Daily)

星洲日报／云淡风轻‧作者：林明华‧2010.02.03