Smile That Breaks the Ice

There's a girl I have a few classes with. We're friends, or at least I like to think so. She's got an Inuit name and Bolivian blood. Figure that out.

So this gal and I were talking today after we discussed the Jonestown cult as an example of extreme social influence. I commented on how disappointing it was that we, the proclaimed leader of the free world, still had a good number of people who belonged to cults just like the Jonestown folks. Ibalu (that's her name, pronounced EE-ba-loo) offered up the position that maintstream religions started out as cults, and I think she argued that they were about on par with cults as well. That's very debatable, but beside the point here.

I suggested that the credibility of cults is much less than that of mainstream religions because of how widespread and "common sense" mainstream religions are compared to cults, which are many times smaller (not not necessarily based on any stranger beliefs than mainstream religions).

One way or another we got to talking about morality and education. How the two are intertwined, specifically. I asked her if education should entertain moral bias and she said no with good reason. After all, if you get education with bias, then you don't get the full picture. However, I said that not teaching education with common societal morals involved wasn't the way to go. Either way, we were trying to achieve the same means, just to a different end.

Consider her viewpoint. If we don't add morals with teachings, then that creates a relatively amoral (not immoral) society in which nothing has moral value--a nihilist society really. Therefore, Nazis would simply be taught as being Nazis, not being good or bad people, but simply belonging to the party they did and doing what they did. This is in contrast to the morals we teach about oppression and racism, using the Nazis as an example of bad guys. However, attempting truly objective education is admirable in that it doesn't allow for poisonous bias.

That's where my viewpoint fails. Adding morals to teachings means that there's bias involved, and that hasn't always worked out in the course of history. While morals attached to teachings further socialize us for the common good (such as teaching Nazis were bad for what they did), it can go awry. For examples, see the Middle East. See what I did there?

Like I said, the both of us were trying to do the same thing, and that was figure out what role morals played in education. See now, this is why I like Ibalu (as a friend mind you, she's pretty and sweet but she's married you know). We can talk about intellectual stuff just as well as we can shoot the breeze about banal things. I need to find more people like that, because most of my other friends have no concern with politics or religion or any of that jazz, like my hot model friend.

"Ignorance is bliss" and "knowledge is a burden" are certainly two sayings I can agree with on a regular basis, especially when it comes to politics. My model friend couldn't be bothered with them, and I kind of envy that carefree mindset. Having become as involved as I am in politics and religious debate, I can't give them up, they're too interesting to me. But her? Nah, no problem, got other things to worry about. Good for her really, but it's also a little disappointing for me.

I wouldn't mind disinterest in politics if they didn't affect all our lives. This healthcare debate is a prime example of that. The policies being argued about in this debate are so monumental regarding how we will support ourselves and our children with health insurance. Even now my friend is able to stay on her parents' insurance until age 26 thanks to health care reform. Otherwise, she would be on her own now.

So I'm not knocking her, but I'm trying to get across why I care about politics so much and why I love Ibalu. Well, not love her love her, but you get it. Look, I'm tired, it's 1:40 in the morning.