Thursday, January 29, 2009
January Monthly connection
The issue of man versus woman, flower versus beast, sand versus dirt, and hammer versus nail the list continues I could go on for many days probably. But to close in on the point, the book Thousand Splendid Suns addresses this issue from the perspective of Afghanistan culture. The importance of equality is the point that this book tries to push across to the reader. The main male role is a wife beating husband who gets killed by one of his wives, obviously what the author is trying to say is that women should not be treated the way that he husband treated his wives so abusively. I have to agree just on the fact that they did nothing wrong yet revived punishment, this is not justice. I feel that grace and mercy balanced with objective judgment is the key to a good relationship, not violence. But the issue of equality is still presented in the aspect of even if people are different should they be treated the same. If a person has a mental handicap we must treat them different if we treat them the same then we are criticized. If there is a Spanish student who is in English class they get extra help even answers, where is the equality in that. Yet there must also be compassion for situations. So I feel that there is an absolute truth that can be applied but that no one person can completely understand it, that is why there are things such as “cultural relativism”, and why the world is screwed. We cannot treat people equal because they are different but we must be compassionate to our fellow man and it is no excuse for undeserved suffering.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Nice response Paul.
ReplyDeleteJust a few comments: I feel like you are getting caught up with the word "equal"- perhaps it would help if instead of using the word as a stand-alone term, you tried using it as the adjective it is intended to be. Are people born equal in the sense of skills, natural talents, intelligence levels, beauty, wealth, etc- no, of course not. But should we as human beings offer others equal respect despite differences in background? equal opportunity despite wealth, privilege, gender or ethinicity? I don't necessarily believe in treating all people the same. But I do believe in treating all people with respect until they deserve otherwise, and I believe in judging people based on their characters not gender, economic situation, ethnicity, or, more subtle yet equally oppressive, by the role society has doled out to them.
If you remember, the cultural relativism article discussed the fact that there are moral and ethical standards that are accepted universally. Murder, intentional physical harm to another, dishonesty, stealing are just a few of the universally accepted "wrongs" by all cultures in the world! Not all morals are open to subjectivity based on culture- it actually seems that only the morals that are culturally relative are the morals that oppress those who do not adhere to them!
A world that is not "screwed" is one that offers all of humankind the equal opportunity to become an individual- to reach a true identity- and to choose their own path in life without the obstacles that prejudice and discrimination put in the way. If you think about it Paul, you have experienced both of these things from birth- you have been encouraged to be an individual and to choose your own path in life with the confidence that if you work hard nothing will stand in your way- and yet you seem to scorn others who merely ask for those same opportunities. How can you put down the request of others to be given the respect and opportunity that you have never lived without? Let's talk about this more in class.... :-)
I feel that morals are how it is in the present tense and that ethics are the universal truth of what is right and wrong. so when you say "Not all morals are open to subjectivity based on culture- it actually seems that only the morals that are culturally relative are the morals that oppress those who do not adhere to them!" I would say "No ethics are open to subjectivity based on culture but that moral are and that a culture greatly influnces, whether in accordance with ethical standards or not, the morals of a people group.
ReplyDeleteThe basis of the difference of these words comes from a video thingy i saw where the dude got into the roots of the words... so im not exactly sure their differences but i could look it up if what i have said doesnt seem correct.
And as for scorning others who seek the same opportunities, i guess i really dont know what to say. For i am caught in the middle, based upon what i know to be truth and the ethical standards that go along with it as truth i must feel compeled to want them to have the oppurtuinty and such out of compasion if nothing else.
Yet the selfish human side of me says that hey it is natural selection. i got the oppurtunites from birth therefore that makes me better i surive and if they do they do if they dont then thats not my problem.
So when i think and talk about this topic i truely dont have a set anwser for i am in a constant debate in my own mind to which the only conclusion is that there is no satisifiable anwser.
The "video-thingy" sounds interesting ;-). I'd like to check it out some time. I wasn't really thinking about the semantics of the words "moral" and "ethical"- more so trying to make a point that there are some things that all cultures in all time periods view(ed) as being "wrong."
ReplyDeleteNow let me address the "selfish side" of you- which I think we both know is the much smaller side despite the big talk :-). You address your opportunities from birth as being a part of "natural selection." But it is not natural selection if the reason a group of people are not receiving opportunites is because of oppression. It is not that they are weaker from birth and therefore die off as weaker animals in the wild do-it is that they are treated as inferior and denied opportunity by others in the human race. Dicrimination and oppression are man-made- not a part of nature. Comparing equal opportunity to natural selection is like taking two plants, giving only one sunshine and water and then saying that the neglected plant died because it wasn't strong enough- oh well natural selection! If both plants are given equal sun and water and then one dies, it is then fair to say it wasn't strong enough to survive- natural selection... Or, if you prefer an animal metaphor, it would be like taking two equally competent wild animals, putting one in a cage and then saying it was the one of the two that died because of natural selection. In actuality, of course, had the animal in the cage been given equal opportunity to roam and hunt and fight, it could have earned its right to survive. If given that equal opportunity the animal still was not strong enough, then you could say, natural selection.
The groups of people who have been oppressed in American society have been denied the education and respect from society needed to thrive and be successful, this rejection came from human beings who believed themselves superior and therefore more entitled to education, respect and the power to decide the roles and positions of other people... not natural selection.
Is it your problem if others don't survive...? I can't really make an argument as to why it would be. Is it your problem if you become a part of a society that oppresses others, therefore robbing them of opportunities needed to be strong enough to survive? Don't your compassion, conscience, intelligence and humanity tell you yes?
P.S. I'm enjoying these discussions with you!
My delimia is the futality of trying to obtain characeristics of a utopian society that i know 100 percent will not be meet because humans are naturaly evil, and with a default of evil utopian can not exist as there is no evil in a utopian society.
ReplyDeleteSo yes i want to help people, but it is a constant inner struggle for me as i am a selfish person.
but I still feel that it can be viewed as natural selection, take skin color for an example, if an animal in the wild is born with a different color fur, it may die as it doesnt give the correct camoflauge and is easier for the preator to spot. so is that wrong is it opression i guess it is, but what can we do about it.
It is like trying to get rid of the lower class it is impossible, it will never happen people will always have an chain of comand. trying to get rid of it is what socialism tried to do and that doesnt work cause people are naturaly selfish and evil.
So the way that i choose to adress the problem is to say it is what it is and not worry about people as a whole, but do my own part when i can to help people out, for any governmental or univeral attemp will fail.
Okay, i will like to get in on this
ReplyDeleteFirst off, i like how all of these responses are longer than the acutal monthly connection. I want to act like the mediator and try and make a third opinion. I see both sides and you are both right. Mrs. Burnet, yes everyone deserves and equal opportunity but we as humans do not have to go above and beyond and do back flips to make it that way, a person who wants to be a doctor but isnt smart enough shouldnt be given a handout that no other person got because i dont want a dumb doctor. I think that we need to do what Carnagie did, do not give them the opportunities as a handout, make a person go forth and put the effort in to get those opportunities. A library is a perfect example, you have to go forth and put effort in to get out what a person who had the book already has. If i am born poor and my family doesnt have enough to send me to school because i would have to work, then do this, the child goes to school, gets free breakfast lunch and dinner, but the time in between school and dinner, he works for the school and maybe get extra help and get paid.
Bricklayer, ease up man. Natural selction is not what you say it is. Mrs B doesnt have it right either though. Natural selection is were two breeds or species compete and one wins out due to that animals nautral talents or learned practices. IE red squirrel verusu gray squirel. Yes there is an ethics that everyone knows but i think you so confulded it in your head that it is very hard to keep straight.
Keep going at it you two, maybe we can solve the problem
Oh, utopias dont last for a reason, the generation born into a utopia will be unhappy with what the first generation gave up to get that "perfect" society. Look up utopias in america, quite intersting
ReplyDeletehaha i think i have natural selection right, it is just a matter of applying it to humans cause there are different rules in our society that dont exist in "nature" we are different we were put in charge of all the other animals. and we can think, animals cant think they can only react. so i know what natural selection is so how would you Mr. Bubbles like to apply it to the human race.
ReplyDeleteand what Mrs. Burnet said, your missing the point. as i understand it, it the fact that the libarys that the poor born students have access to that you say they need to go to as that is there oppurtuinty, suck, compared to the libarys that hold the oppurtinities for others. so theoritically if all public schools where equally funded and had equal levels of teachers, supplies and learning enviroment (buildings) then there is equal oppurtuinity or as much as i can see in the current state of the world.
I think I understand natural selection pretty well- but thanks for the mini-lesson ;-)- which is why it does not make sense in this context. In the "species" we are discussing- male, female, white, black, hispanic, ect., one is NOT "winning out" "due to... natural talents or learned practices." One is "winning out" because they are placing themselves as superior over others and not allowing the other "species" to develop their natural talents or learn any practices.
ReplyDeleteDiscrimination is not a natural behavior, it is a learned behavior.
I, under no circumstances, in no way, would ever suggest that someone who is not smart enough to be a doctor should be given a "handout" or an easy way. If that is what you guys are getting from what I am trying to say, I am not expressing myself very clearly. Nor am I suggesting the possible existence of a utopian society.
A multi-million dollar school that has every possible advancement and opportunity in place, will still contain students without the intellectual capacity to be doctors and lawyers. The difference is that the students in these schools will each have the opportunity to reach their full and best potential- whether that be doctor or maintenance worker.
One can find the same gamut of intelligence levels in an inner city school as in a multi-million dollar one- the difference is the availability of opportunities for students to reach full potential. We are talking about the basic essentials- enough updated books for each student, paper, pencils, computers. We are talking about 45-50 students in each classroom to the point where not every student has a desk sometimes. Teachers who stay because they either have a crazy passion or they can't get a job anywhere else. New teachers every few months because many will escape the moment something better opens up or when they just can't take it anymore. Teacher shortage means this: teachers who are teaching subjects they are not certified in, the hiring of teachers who did not go to school for education, but received a very easily-attained emergency certification... no AP classes, not ones that exist the way we know them anyway. There are other factors at work (crime, hunger) that I don't want to get into because I'm not interested in having a debate on welfare etc.
Am I saying all of this because you have some kind of responsibility or I think you should be doing back-flips to help? No- I'm not. Not at all. It's just a matter of awareness and not patting ourselves on the back for having the good fortune to be born where and who we are.
It sounds like Paul is actualy agreeing with the point I am trying to make in the post right before this one (or just explaining it? I really can't tell- seriously clean it up, man!- but if that's the case then Ryan you have managed to bring us together on something ;-).)
This country has promised equal opportunity to all (not handouts, not an easy way out, not back-flips- just very simply: equal opportunity). If some of the students in our country wake-up and go to a school that places everything they need to succeed in front of them, within their grasps if they would only reach out and take it, and other students go to a school that is... putting it mildly, not quite as forthcoming with the opportunities, and therefore must make a greater effort if they want to find that same success... then this country isn't exactly keeping it's promises to everyone is it?
Perhaps there is something admirable in an inner-city student who goes that extra mile to succeed, maybe he or she appreciates his or her success more because of that extra cost. But as someone who did not have to experience this, I'm not really comfortable congratulating myself on my successes and looking over my shoulder to call "just get to the library" to someone else.
As far as a utopian society, I don't really believe an end to discrimination and the equal opporunity I am talking about will lead to this. There are "good" people of all races and genders and "bad" people of all races and genders.
Okay, that's all for now. Welcome to the conversation Ryan, in your next post would you kindly define "confulded." ;-)
I get everything your saying, its just a matter of application I guess. what do you think we need to do. We have been given alot as you say, the dice have feel well for us, why cant we just enjoy that.
ReplyDeleteWow paul, you agree. Well, see, the human condition is to always ask what if, and normaly what if we tried to make society all little better, sometimes it doesnt work, that is how slavery started, but that is also how slavery ended. I am glad you two resloved
ReplyDeleteOh confluded is like confuzzled, confused and fuzzy, like a well, i think i get what you are saying but i want to ask since if i take it the wrong way, then it can go horribly wrong
ReplyDelete