Paulo Freire's pedagogy of the oppressed integrates political, educational, and philosophical

theory. The author delves into the topic of oppression and the basis of liberation. Paulo Freire
believes that in order for people to experience liberation, they must develop critical
consciousness and a critical thinking process. According to Freire, this can only be
accomplished through pedagogy that fosters a bond between the teacher and the learner,
encouraging the learner to engage in dialogue and the practice of humanization through thought
and its corresponding action (Freire 2004). The purpose of this document is to provide a critical
review of Freire's work by examining his claims about humanization and dehumanization, as
well as oppression in the context of education and sham generosity.Freire recognizes the
importance of humanization to humanity and believes that concern for humanization culminates
in recognition of dehumanization as a "ontological possibility as well as a historical truth" (Freire
2004, p. 43). He claims that if a person perceives a high level of dehumanization, he may
question the viability of humanization. Freire sees humanization and dehumanization as
potentials for an individual, as an incomplete being who is aware of their incompleteness. Freire
believes that injustice, oppression, exploitation, and oppressors' violence have stymied
humanization (Freire 2004, p. 44). Humanization is exemplified by the oppressed's desire for
justice, independence, and reclaimed humanity.According to the author, dehumanization is a
sign of those who have lost their humanity as well as those who have taken humanity away from
others. He claims that dehumanization is to blame for the distortion of the humanization
vocation. He regards distortion as a historical occurrence rather than a vocation. The author is
opposed to the idea of admitting dehumanization as a historic vocation because it would breed
cynicism. He goes on to say that struggles for humanization, labor liberation, and the abolition of
discrimination would be futile. According to Freire, the distortion of humanization may cause the
oppressed to retaliate against the oppressors in an attempt to reclaim their humanity. He
believes that the oppressed's actions transform them into "oppressors of the
oppressors."According to the author, it is the oppressed's responsibility to ensure the liberation
of both themselves and the oppressors, because the oppressors lack the ability to free
themselves and the people they oppress. He believes that the oppressed have enough power to
transform the oppressors into humane beings.True generosity, according to the author, is that
which employs the fight in order to distort the vices responsible for the nourishment of sham
generosity. He believes that true generosity and humanity should begin with the oppressed
because they understand the value of a liberated society better than the oppressors (Jackson,
2007).To achieve liberation, the oppressed must be committed to the task, demonstrating love
in contrast to the lack of love in the hearts of the oppressors. According to Freire, the
oppressed's "fear of freedom" may lead them to adopt the oppressor's behavior or put them in
the position of the oppressed. As a result, he advocates for a study of the "fear of freedom"
(Freire 2004, p. 46). The author believes that in order to achieve freedom, one must be
responsible and steadfast in their pursuit of it. He believes that people can overcome
oppression by being aware of its origins and creating situations that value humanity.When it
comes to the teacher-student relationship, Freire criticizes traditional pedagogy because he
opposes memorization, which he believes turns students into "containers" to be filled by the
teacher (Freire 2004, p. 72). He claims that the practice transforms education into a deposition
practice in which the teacher is the depositor and the learner is the receptor. This concept is
referred to as "banking" by the author because it only allows for the receipt, filling, and storage
of deposits in "containers." According to Freire, the "concept of banking" assumes that students
are ignorant and that the teacher or educator must bestow this knowledge on them. The author
believes that education should follow a better concept in which the teacher-student relationship
is transformed into a collaborative relationship.According to the author, the oppressor's goal is
to change the oppressed's perception, not the condition that leads to their oppression. He
claims that the "banking concept" of education perpetuates oppression by employing patterns
and instruments that convert the oppressed into "welfare recipients" (Freire 2004, p.74). To
break free from the constraints of this concept, the teacher and learner should work together to
promote critical thinking in both the educator and the learner.To break free from the constraints
of this concept, the teacher and the learner should work together to promote critical thinking in
both the educator and the learner. Students will be transformed into people capable of
performing various tasks as a result of this approach, rather than simply memorizing existing
words (Holst, 2006). He believes that this practice causes some people to have naive
consciousness, which, despite their knowledge of possession, does not change the situation;
they perceive it as normal. Critical thinking would assist students in subjecting themselves to
reality and thus fighting for their freedom. Although Friere advocates for self-awareness, he
contends that those who succeed in liberating themselves end up becoming what they were
fighting against.Friere advocates for dialogical education, which he sees as a deliverance
practice. This concept entails a mutual exchange capable of altering circumstances (Bowers,
2005). The dialogical concept encourages students to criticize various everyday situations and
come up with solutions to them. It is possible to create knowledge in the reality that surrounds
the individual by problematizing situations (Schugurensky, 2011). It is possible to overcome the
oppressors' limiting situations. According to Freire's assertions, if there is a need to conduct a
study of a generative topic, it is also necessary to conduct a study of the thoughts of people in
need of liberation. This is done to avoid de-contextualization of their work. The goal of liberating
people is to make the world a better place.The author contends that in order to achieve man's
liberalization and defeat oppression, it is critical to avoid the use of common ideas (Bowers,
2005). He suggests that one develop one's own ideas and communicate them through praxis
and communication. A good study of a generative topic entails the person's action of visiting the
region where the action occurred. This is done to bring the oppressed's thoughts to light. It is
also critical to apply thinking to the learning process by focusing on group communication
among contestants. This is due to the fact that through communication or interaction,
participants can gain consciousness of reality while also fully expressing this reality.Freire views
formal schooling and the educational system that surrounds it as undesirable. This is because
he believes it stunts human growth and initiative. That is why Freire proposes opposing
educational methods, one of liberty practice and the other of dominance. Education, according
to Freire, should raise political consciousness. Freire's educational methodology aims to
destabilize oppressive regimes. The author's methodology views development as non-material
and, as a result, sees the individual as the primary contributor to national development. Freire's
views on education appear to be rather selective. They make no attempt to express the breadth
of their views on issues concerning the collective personality of man's humanity (Pitts 1972, p.
116).Freire's work lacks a concise gender analysis and a clear description of the role of the
teacher in the proposed models. The issue of the educator's authority is briefly discussed,
despite the fact that he sees the teacher as a source of oppression. He appears to present a
pedagogy of the oppressed, the main goal of which is to perform colonial criticism while, on the
other hand, viewing the world through the imperfect and meticulous lens of patriarchy. Freire's
work does not address the issues of gender, class, and race among teachers and students. He
also fails to take into account their structural locations.The author appears to have forgotten the
importance of structural inequalities, especially when articulating the idea that transformation is
possible through individual thought and action. I believe the author should have considered
structural inequality, race, and class in order to present a clear description of possible change
through the utopian concept of actions and dreams.The pedagogy of oppression provides the
reader with facts that can be used to shape researchers into knowledge creators. Freire's work
has served as an inspiration to students and teachers who have recognized the injustices
perpetuated by formal education's "banking approach." Furthermore, Freire's concept of
education has benefited a variety of settings, including sociological, institutional, and economic
ones.Freire's critique of traditional pedagogy as oppressive, as well as his proposal for a
learning concept based on "problem posing," are useful in transforming communities. His work,
however, fails to discuss the significance of a teacher in his proposed concept. Furthermore, the
author's work excludes gender, race, and class, leaving it open to criticism. The author
discusses the issue of humanization and dehumanization, claiming that oppressors stymie
humanization by perpetuating injustice, violence, and exploitation. Freire's pedagogy is notable
for its ability to transform individuals into thinkers capable of fighting for their liberation.