Opinion
Revisiting UNESCO’s 4-Pillars Of Education
Prior to entering the 21st Century, there was the Millennium Development Goals, (MDGs), providing eight objectives to serve as global focus for human development (2000 – 2015). Similarly, the United Nations’ Educational Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) provided 4-point agenda for education and social development for the 21st century, applicable beyond 2015. The 4 goals became known as 4-pillars of education for the century. Briefly, the four pillars of modern education are ;learning to know; learning to be; learning to do, and learning to live together.
Learning to know includes practical learning experiences through daily interactions and also being able to absorb and turn such learning experiences into useful instruments for addressing challenges and problems of life. Such ability to transfer and apply learning experiences is known as educability. Learning to know demands a persistent urge to search and explore various issues and perplexities of life, to strive to find meanings and answers to questions of every-day encounters, and to place no limit on what can be known. Emphasis on learning to know should go beyond “stomach infrastructure” and mundane quests and hustling to get something for nothing.
A life-long learning urge does not depend on school as the place to learn to acquire experiences, but in life itself as the theatre of learning to know. Neither must the acquisition of certificates be the aim of learning to know. Nations that value certificates rather than practical competence and ability, soon produce a large pool of intellectuals with crippled heads and hands.
Learning to be, as UNESCO’s second pillar of education, has to do with educability and the fact that the educated person is one who has learned to discover and be himself, as unique individual. Educability is the extent which an individual is able to see himself as a part of a large human family, life or existence as a school, and able to benefit from all learning experiences, exposures and opportunities. It also includes how far an individual is able to integrate and use learning experiences as resources for further upbuilding and as instruments for addressing the challenges of life.
The pillar on learning to be, enjoins the individual to strive to be self-reliant, able to think and judge issues independently without being swayed by the hysterical clamours of the masses. It takes self-exertion to develop oneself to the optimum and to be able to fulfill the duties and obligations incumbent on the individual. A summary of learning to be, embraces: simplicity and clarity in thinking; having personal conviction, values and beliefs; freedom from any form of addiction; having no room for self-pity; being a patriotic citizen, with charity for all and malice towards none.
Other items included in the pillar of learning to be, call on the individual to take only what is necessary in life, rather than seek to own all the property in town; to imbibe an attitude of letting what is gone and past help, to be past grief or brooding about. The classification of Nigeria as one of the most stressful places to live on earth is because there are lots of human parasites and caterpillars of the commonwealth who are rarely themselves.
Learning to do, as the third pillar of UNESCO’s prescriptions for education in the modern era, calls on individuals to see learning as an open and continuing process involving the acquisition of skills, knowledge and increasing awareness. It demands the use of the head to think and reason intelligently and logically, and apply the hands in diligent and productive labour which does not involve shameful deeds. Since no prize is won without diligence and self-exertion, this item from the UNESCO, enjoins every individual to engage in continuous learning, of which formal education is a very small part of the whole process. Without condemning or ignoring school learning as irrelevant, the emphasis is that learning is a continuous, lifelong activity; do it yourself!
To cease to learn and to exert oneself, is to cease to live, because, the duty and fun of life include engaging in activities, joyfully, as opposed to forced labour. Voltaire, a French satirist and author of Candide, would remind us that work banishes boredom, vice and poverty. Therefore, learning to do, includes forcing ourselves to overcome the temptation of sliding into the common pitfalls of life, which include myopia, indolence, idle comfort and degeneration.
We are also reminded that constant application of our limbs and the entire body in movements, exercises and labour are necessary for good health and longevity. Nature and its laws stipulate that resources, talents and abilities not utilised regularly and in productive activities, soon go into a state of atrophy. To learn to do also means to learn to choose aright, so that what is done would bear the tag of nobility.
UNESCO’s 4th Pillar of Learning to live together is a call on humanity to live in harmony with others, in spite of diversities arising from historical, environmental and cultural factors of life. Oneness of humanity does not imply uniformity, but the joy of diversities includes the opportunity to learn so see and absorb what is noble in different people. Learning to live together in harmony does not mean tolerating injustices and thereby fostering evil, but it entails providing the mirror for mutual self-examination. Indeed, the faults and annoying actions and behaviours we see in others, are messages that we ourselves are not far too different.
Justice as the pillar and essential condition of any sane environment, demands that people should learn to know what it entails to live together in harmony. Any society where justice is mistaken for indulgence and permissiveness, is a society that goes speedily into a state of corruption and eventual decay. Therefore, learning to live together is a task of learning to foster justice in interpersonal relationships. This demands pointing out breaches which demand sanctions, without resorting to violence, and without enthroning impunity as a sub-culture. Wrong deeds deserve penalties!
Learning to live together also requires recognising where there are weaknesses, lapses and deficiencies and then having the political will and resources to correct and check them, in the interest of the nation. Most vulnerable groups in society, including children and women must be given attention and protection. We live together in freedom, not bondage arising from tyranny and impunity!
By: Bright Amirize
Dr Amirize is a retired lecturer from the Rivers State University, Port Harcourt.
The events that unfolded in Abuja on Tuesday November 11, 2025 between the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Chief Nyesom Wike and a detachment of soldiers guarding a disputed property, led by Adams Yerima, a commissioned Naval Officer, may go down as one of the defining images of Nigeria’s democratic contradictions. It was not merely a quarrel over land. It was a confrontation between civil authority and the military legacy that still hovers over our national life.
Nyesom Wike, fiery and fearless as always, was seen on video exchanging words with a uniformed officer who refused to grant him passage to inspect a parcel of land alleged to have been illegally acquired. The minister’s voice rose, his temper flared, and the soldier, too, stood his ground, insisting on his own authority. Around them, aides, security men, and bystanders watched, stunned, as two embodiments of the Nigerian state clashed in the open.
The images spread fast, igniting debates across drawing rooms, beer parlours, and social media platforms. Some hailed Wike for standing up to military arrogance; others scolded him for perceived disrespect to the armed forces. Yet beneath the noise lies a deeper question about what sort of society we are building and whether power in Nigeria truly understands the limits of its own reach.
It is tragic that, more than two decades into civil rule, the relationship between the civilian arm of government and the military remains fragile and poorly understood. The presence of soldiers in a land dispute between private individuals and the city administration is, by all civic standards, an aberration. It recalls a dark era when might was right, and uniforms conferred immunity against accountability.
Wike’s anger, even if fiery, was rooted in a legitimate concern: that no individual, however connected or retired, should deploy the military to protect personal interests. That sentiment echoes the fundamental democratic creed that the law is supreme, not personalities. If his passion overshot decorum, it was perhaps a reflection of a nation weary of impunity.
On the other hand, the soldier in question is a symbol of another truth: that discipline, respect for order, and duty to hierarchy are ingrained in our armed forces. He may have been caught between conflicting instructions one from his superiors, another from a civilian minister exercising his lawful authority. The confusion points not to personal failure but to institutional dysfunction.
It is, therefore, simplistic to turn the incident into a morality play of good versus evil.
*********”**** What happened was an institutional embarrassment. Both men represented facets of the same failing system a polity still learning how to reconcile authority with civility, law with loyalty, and service with restraint.
In fairness, Wike has shown himself as a man of uncommon courage. Whether in Rivers State or at the FCTA, he does not shy away from confrontation. Yet courage without composure often feeds misunderstanding. A public officer must always be the cooler head, even when provoked, because the power of example outweighs the satisfaction of winning an argument.
Conversely, soldiers, too, must be reminded that their uniforms do not place them above civilian oversight. The military exists to defend the nation, not to enforce property claims or intimidate lawful authorities. Their participation in purely civil matters corrodes the image of the institution and erodes public trust.
One cannot overlook the irony: in a country where kidnappers roam highways and bandits sack villages, armed men are posted to guard contested land in the capital. It reflects misplaced priorities and distorted values. The Nigerian soldier, trained to defend sovereignty, should not be drawn into private or bureaucratic tussles.
Sycophancy remains the greatest ailment of our political culture. Many of those who now cheer one side or the other do so not out of conviction but out of convenience. Tomorrow they will switch allegiance. True patriotism lies not in defending personalities but in defending principles. A people enslaved by flattery cannot nurture a culture of justice.
The Nigerian elite must learn to submit to the same laws that govern the poor. When big men fence off public land and use connections to shield their interests, they mock the very constitution they swore to uphold. The FCT, as the mirror of national order, must not become a jungle where only the powerful can build.
The lesson for Wike himself is also clear: power is best exercised with calmness. The weight of his office demands more than bravery; it demands statesmanship. To lead is not merely to command, but to persuade — even those who resist your authority.
Equally, the lesson for the armed forces is that professionalism shines brightest in restraint. Obedience to illegal orders is not loyalty; it is complicity. The soldier who stands on the side of justice protects both his honour and the dignity of his uniform.
The Presidency, too, must see this episode as a wake-up call to clarify institutional boundaries. If soldiers can be drawn into civil enforcement without authorization, then our democracy remains at risk of subtle militarization. The constitution must speak louder than confusion.
The Nigerian public deserves better than spectacles of ego. We crave leaders who rise above emotion and officers who respect civilian supremacy. Our children must not inherit a nation where authority means shouting matches and intimidation in public glare.
Every democracy matures through such tests. What matters is whether we learn the right lessons. The British once had generals who defied parliament; the Americans once fought over states’ rights; Nigeria, too, must pass through her own growing pains but with humility, not hubris.
If the confrontation has stirred discomfort, then perhaps it has done the nation some good. It forces a conversation long overdue: Who truly owns the state — the citizen or the powerful? Can we build a Nigeria where institutions, not individuals, define our destiny?
As the dust settles, both the FCTA and the military hierarchy must conduct impartial investigations. The truth must be established — not to shame anyone, but to restore order. Where laws were broken, consequences must follow. Where misunderstandings occurred, apologies must be offered.
Let the rule of law triumph over the rule of impulse. Let civility triumph over confrontation. Let governance return to the path of dialogue and procedure.
Nigeria cannot continue to oscillate between civilian bravado and military arrogance. Both impulses spring from the same insecurity — the fear of losing control. True leadership lies in the ability to trust institutions to do their work without coercion.
Those who witnessed the clash saw a drama of two gladiators. One in starched khaki, one in well-cut suit. Both proud, both unyielding. But a nation cannot be built on stubbornness; it must be built on understanding. Power, when it meets power, should produce order, not chaos.
We must resist the temptation to glorify temper. Governance is not warfare; it is stewardship. The citizen watches, the world observes, and history records. How we handle moments like this will define our collective maturity.
The confrontation may have ended without violence, but it left deep questions in the national conscience. When men of authority quarrel in the open, institutions tremble. The people, once again, become spectators in a theatre of misplaced pride.
It is time for all who hold office — civilian or military — to remember that they serve under the same flag. That flag is neither khaki nor political colour; it is green-white-green, and it demands humility.
No victor, no vanquish only a lesson for a nation still learning to govern itself with dignity.
By; King Onunwor
