It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. – Aristotle
I’ve always been a firm believer in free thought. Even in high school I preferred to talk to someone who disagreed with me because of his own independent thought processes, rather than one who agreed with me because some “authority” had told him mine was the correct position. One day when I was about 19 I was going into the Liberal Arts Building at UNO and had to pass a young man and a young woman who were engaged in a heated argument; I didn’t know either of them but apparently they thought I looked “normal” because as I approached I heard the guy say, “OK, we’ll ask her!” He then turned to me and asked, “Don’t you agree that abortion is murder?”
I immediately replied, “Well, I think it’s killing, but I also think killing is sometimes justified.” They were both dumbstruck, and I kept on going. Their reaction told me everything I needed to know about both of them and their stupid argument; had either of them arrived at his position by logic (or any other kind of independent thought) he wouldn’t have been so surprised to hear a complex and unusual answer. But because both of them had obtained their opinions from leaders who had told them what to think, they couldn’t understand any answer to that question other than a binary “yes” or “no”. They both bought into a false dichotomy and been issued a checklist of statements with which they had to agree in order to become an accepted member of the Young Fascists for the Fatherland or the Kampus Kommies (respectively), and an answer which fit on neither list shut them down like the androids on Mudd’s Planet.
I’m not quite as much of a smartass as I was at 19, but I still respect people who disagree with me, especially when they in turn respect me for disagreeing with them. As I wrote in “Never Too Many”,
I have readers who identify as libertarian, liberal, conservative, socialist, anarchist, minarchist, monarchist and apolitical, and who call themselves Pagans, Christians, Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, agnostics and atheists. Some consider themselves feminists, others men’s rights advocates, others anti-feminists or humanists or transhumanists or environmentalists or intellectuals or just “geeks”…But the one thing you all have in common is a recognition that it is wrong for government to use brute force to suppress the right of individuals to associate with whomever they choose, however they choose and for whatever reason they choose, even if money is involved.
Sometimes my readers disagree with me, and sometimes y’all disagree with each other, but it’s rare that I see name-calling or other ugliness; for the most part my readership is one of the most civil and mutually-respectful groups on the whole internet, and I’m very proud of that. But in a very small number of cases (three in two years, if memory serves) a reader has announced his or her disagreement not with a “Well, Maggie, I respect you but I think you’re wrong on this,” or a “We’re just going to have to agree to disagree on that,” or even a “What the hell were you smoking when you wrote this, you silly tart?” but rather with a stated or implied ultimatum: “If you dare to disagree with me again, I’m going to stop reading you.”
Frankly, this sort of thing makes me scratch my head; I’m not sure what such a person really hopes to accomplish. Everyone who’s ever written to me knows that I’m very generous with my time and help when approached nicely, but anyone who’s ever read more than three of my columns can probably guess how I tend to react to threats; it’s the difference between stroking a cat’s fur the right way or the wrong way. It’s inevitable that once in a while, a regular reader will begin to find that he or she is disagreeing with me a bit too often to enjoy reading any more, and so stops coming here; there’s certainly nothing wrong with that. Life is too short to annoy oneself unnecessarily, and I certainly wouldn’t stick around on a blog where I felt uncomfortable or unwelcome. But neither would I make an ass of myself by demanding that a prolific and strong-willed blogger change his or her style or opinions to suit the whims of one reader, and neither should anyone else.
One Year Ago Today
“Because We Say So” examines yet another example of Western cultural imperialists who stick their noses into another country’s business, define a problem into existence and then attempt to “solve” it with brute force.
Agreed. Integrity, integrity, integrity!
Mark Blasini
I’ve read you enough to know that you’ve thought things out, and you express them well. That what you say is worth thinking about.
Now I don’t always agree with you. That doesn’t matter. We agree on the end goals, just differ in how to achieve those. What matters is that you often get me to reexamine my opinions, and even if you don’t change them, that’s a good thing.
We’ve too many ranting entertainers today, people’s whose “opinions” are calculated only to provoke and draw a larger audience. They do not respect the intelligence of their audience. You do, and that makes you much different.
I’m glad you’re out there, speaking up.
Perfectly put
Whenever Maggie says something that hacks me off – I don’t get mad … I just do a searchie for the RED UMBRELLA … or the KITTEN … or the SNAKEY-WAKEY … and those pics just make me feel all warm and fuzzy! 😛
There’s about three ways a blogger “loses” me …
1. They become boring.
2. They down some road of “insult” that is childish and they usually lose me like this when they are actually defending something I agree with. It really irks me to be associated with imbeciles though who are arguing my point of view – so I leave.
3. They go completely bonkers. Anyone else used to like reading Andrew Sullivan’s writings? I mean, I was never overboard with the guy but I would keep up with his blog. Then he had to go on this “Trig Truther” attack where he insisted that Trig was not Sarah Palin’s kid but belonged to her daughter and he was demanding DNA evidence because he’s an “investigative reporter” and uhm …yeah … GOOODBYE LOONIE!!! LOL It was just beyond “Twilight Zone” weird.
Thank y’all very much! I’m glad this post has been received so well; I agonized over the wording to a much higher degree than is usual even for me. From your four reactions, I know that I managed to get the point across in the manner I wished to do it. 🙂
Yes, it was well written.
But I think there’s a problem with the attitude that holds up free and independent thought as a crucial virtue: many, if not most people, find thinking too difficult to reason independently with any real success.
To put this into perspective, remember how easy you found highschool? Only about three-quarters of Americans are able to pass it. They have trouble enough just learning to solve mathematical equations or parrot the ideas of the establishment. It doesn’t make sense from their perspective to struggle and sweat their own way through confusing issues, only to run into a more intelligent adversary with more rhetorical firepower who will humiliate them for their mistakes. There’s a huge expenditure of effort, accompanied by high risk, with little or no return. I used to loathe and scorn people who blithely conformed to convention or authority, but having accepted that they are simply not very bright, I find my life is much more pleasant.
I don’t think the dropout rate for High School in America has a proven relationship to the intelligence of the dropouts. Having worked with a lot of high school dropouts in the Navy – many are very intelligent and dropped out for reasons that had nothing to do with being able to pass the curriculum. Lots of kids make bad decisions and leave high school.
I also have to say that my first job after I retired from the Navy was supervising 13 GIS programmers on a NOAA contract. I hated that damn job – the only reason I was in it was because I could lead those guys and gals – and because I could edit their reports because their English skills – even after 4 years of college – were absolutely horrible. I have ONLY a high school degree.
When I came to the USA, I was placed in what’s called “Middle School”, or Junior High, here. It was one of the most boring times in my life. I was easily at least two years ahead of studies in that grade level. My teachers recognized that, and allowed me to do a lot of independent study. I’m amazed at how anyone could find USA secondary schooling too difficult.
And yes, I dropped out. But Krulac is right, it had nothing to do with not doing well in school.I was on the advanced track when I left school.
This is what I suspect- So many have difficulties in school not because they are not intelligent enough, but because for years we’ve been fed the myth that all learning should be easy, and fun. Even today, when I read books on advanced math, or science concepts like quantum mechanics, I often struggle. That’s not easy material. To be rigorous, it can’t be. It address complicated concepts. But it’s worth the struggle.
If you expect everything in school, or life to be easy, you surrender at the first hint of difficulty. I suspect this is why the USA is graduating so few math, science and engineering degrees.
I think that you’re on to something here. I think it depends on the person; for some people, it does indeed have to be easy, or fun (not the same thing of course), or both. For others, it doesn’t. Well, except that for people it doesn’t have to be easy for, the challenge itself makes it fun. But my point is that people differ in their needs.
We’ve gotten better at recognizing, and doing something about the fact, that people who are, say blind, have different needs than the sighted, and that people with ADHD* have different needs than those who are able to pay attention to almost anything. But we have yet to do much about the fact that people simply differ in how they learn, and in how much they like to. Not disorders or genius, but just individual differences.
* While I don’t deny the existence of ADHD, I think that it is over-diagnosed, because it’s easier to say that there must be an epidemic among children (caused no doubt by TV or vaccinations or Internet porn or video games or Harry Potter or…) than to admit that our schools are dead boring.
I don’t know enough about US politics to follow some of your caustic criticisms; but my mental image of the States is gradually changing (and not for the better). I do like how you “challenge the givens” and base your opinions on facts, rather than on opinions, urban myths or theocracies. I too like to look at things “sideways” as a bit of a contrarian, and to dig below the surface.
In the very near future – your opinions on the US will be irrelevant because the US will be irrelevant.
The “relevant” ones are going to be the Chinese and the Russians for you guys. Good luck with getting them to cooperate with you. 😀
Nicely put! I am not always the one that searches for “right words” when having an argument, I can do heated discussions euro style very well (you americans are always so polite ;-)….) , so for me personally the diplomacy does not always present a proper argument per se. But I agree on discussing things and I prefer heated discussions – even when disagreing on topics – to get the brain going. This “Oh we agree to disagree” thingie is like “coitus interruptus ” for me ;-). Either you do it , or you don`t. If you don`t know how to “wear a hat”, better not go at it in first place ;)) (lol)
Goddammit Maggie, I’m going to have to stop reading your stuff if you keep on being so reasonable.
What are y’all lookin’ at? Somebody had to say it.
I’m the same way myself; and in fact, the 300 or so blogs, newsgroups, and mailing lists where I’m frequently seen include many I disagree with. I try to read all viewpoints, including some that there’s no chance I’ll ever accept.
Which is not to say there aren’t people I no longer listen to. The nice thing about listservs is that you can filter out the known bozos.
I’ll say that sometimes a person has to work through emotional issues when dealing with some kinds of arguments. Lot’s of subjects bring this up (sex is a particularly touchy area, for example), and people can’t always remain coldly rational. I mean this as a compliment, but sometimes I think you might be part Vulcan, Maggie, because you are so rational all the time.
So, when someone says “I’m going to stop reading you,” you should possibly read it as “Wow, I can’t emotionally handle what you are saying, so I better stop reading before my increased blood pressure gives me a heart attack” or even worse, “I better stop reading before I say something it will be hard to take back.”
Even when I think Maggie is utterly, amazingly wrong, I know that she’s not stupid, and she’s not evil. I can deal with “we don’t agree,” I can deal with “wrong as hell,” I can even deal with “oops, I’m the one who’s wrong as hell!” (I didn’t say it was easy).
So when I have a disagreement with her, I don’t default to “look you dumb evil bitch” like I might with somebody else. I’d be lying if I didn’t admit the fact that it helps that we do agree on a whole lot.