An educated young man likes to think; he likes ideas for their own sake and likes to deal with them disinterestedly and objectively. He will find this taste an expensive one, much beyond his means, because the society around him is thoroughly indisposed towards anything of the kind. It is preeminently a society, as John Stuart Mill said, in which the test of a great mind is agreeing in the opinions of small minds. In any department of American life this is indeed the only final test; and this fact is in turn a fair measure of the extent to which our society is inimical to thought. The president of Columbia University is reported in the press as having said the other day that “thinking is one of the most unpopular amusements of the human race. Men hate it largely because they can not do it. They hate it because if they enter upon it as a vocation or avocation it is likely to interfere with what they are doing.” This is an interesting admission for the president of Columbia to make - interesting and striking. Circumstances have enabled our society to get along rather prosperously, though by no means creditably, without thought and without regard for thought, proceeding merely by a series of improvisations; hence it has always instinctively resented thought, as likely to interfere with what it was doing. Therefore, the young person who has cultivated the ability to think and the taste for thinking is at a decided disadvantage, for this resentment is now stronger and more heavily concentrated than it ever was.
—Albert J. Nock
This is the production I made for my Audio Production Course. The topic was “American Values.”
It was difficult for me to figure out what to write for this, without it being satirical. But, after thinking more about it, I decided to select “serenity” as an American value. Serenity may seem like an unusual value for Americans to hold, at least, as far as most Americans being perceived more as advantageous go-getters than relaxing individuals. But it doesn’t necessarily have to be one or the other.
As is noted in the listening, the speaker is a hardworking individual; but also, the speaker enjoys his downtime. And, “thanks to progress,” the individual has the ability to spend more of his life living as he pleases, not needing to dedicate as much solely to create the means of his livelihood. This “value” somewhat plays off the Marxist perception of Freedom—that to increase Freedom one needs to minimize essential needs to sustain his/her life, to allow for a more free decision making process to select his/her choices without necessarily having to make those choices to survive. Surely this perception of Freedom is different than the commonly held perception of Liberal Freedom, to be free to act and be effected by the choices one makes. But the Marxist definition of Freedom isn’t necessarily mutually exclusive, as many people enjoy the ability progress has created to reduce the time necessary to sustain their livelihood, freeing up time for the activities they’d rather be doing. However, these views are different for determining societal obligations.
I won’t be getting into how these differing definitions of Freedom contributed to the development of Marxist thought or Libertarian thought. That would, preferably, be a conversation had over drinks. I just wanted to share my rationalization for the perspective I have for a legitimate “American Value,” one that cannot be easily refuted as not being something Americans value. … I could go on to troll the writing in both Marxist and Libertarian perspectives; but I see no reason to.
American Values
In my Audio Production course, the first assignment is to write a piece about American Values. Promptly, I asked the professor if I could make it satirical. He said no. So, since then, I’ve just been trying to figure out how I’m to seriously include a set of “Values” that, to me, seem absurd and hypocritical. But thinking further on the topic at hand it dawned on me this morning that the People of the United States have a different set of Values than the U.S. as a nation does. The assignment doesn’t distinguish People from State. I do, though.
My Values are very similar to most other Americans. And, similarly, your Values are. What you envision the end-goal as is very similar to what others envision the end-goal as. For instance: I love peace. I love prosperity. I love fraternity. Define those as you wish. But, is it not evident that people love to live their lives in prosperity associating with whoever they choose, seeking out the peace they desire? I know many of my friends agree to those ends. Do you?
“People with degrees get better paying jobs” vs. “More highly educated people get better paying jobs”
With each class I become more and more bothered by the students attending universities. Many of these kids pay for a piece of paper rather than an education. And, honestly, they think that this piece of paper is going to be very beneficial to them, disregarding the information required to perform such tasks that demand such education.
“C’s get degrees,” they say. They avoid constructive conversations in class, those conversations that challenge their beliefs and superstitions. Instead, they say, “I just want to finish the course. [And get it over with.]”
While these students exist in greater numbers these days, due to the social push of everyone buying into the student loan bubble, saying things like “people with degrees get higher paying jobs,” instead of, “more highly educated people get better paying jobs,” there are still those of us who wish to actually learn and be challenged. The problem with the current “higher education” climate is that those of us who are actually seeking an education instead of a degree are the small minority.
In my Political Science class this afternoon a statistic was brought up revealing pay differences between males and females. As I always do, I questioned the data. I asked questions such as “In calculating that percentage were the hours worked by both sexes taken into consideration” and “How old is this statistic?” After questioning the data and giving rational reasons to question the data, the professor asked if anyone was bothered by this information. A girl responded, “yeah, I’m angry about it.” And I quickly responded, “about the data, or something I said?” She said it was something I said. I then asked her what about it bothered her. Rather than addressing it and entering into a constructive conversation for her, the class and me, she responded with “I just want to finish the course.”
To me, this type of student is the type of student who is paying for a degree rather than an education, would rather stay in her box than question her beliefs, would rather avoid all conflict than use it to her advantage. This is the type of student that contributes nothing to the class. This is the type of student that, if I were a professor, a teacher, a mentor, I would wish not to have.
I am paying for an education, not a degree. I wish to learn, not stay in a bubble. I wish to see things from the perspectives of others, as I hope they would do. However, it seems this is too much to ask of the ignorant collective of sheep which make up the assemblage of students.
I apologize for being so absent lately. I’ve been busy dealing with pseudo-intellectuals* in college.
*someone who would rather look intelligent than be intelligent; someone who would rather have a degree than an education
