I think people are smart.
I mean, communicating is complicated-- take speaking, for example. Every word is a symbol with no inherent meaning. Then, those words are organized into grammar, which is complex and full of patterns that sometimes undercut one another in weird ways. Then, you factor in context, and facial expressions, and body language, and inflection, and you attach that meaning to what you already know. You take into account the listener's bias. That's a lot of stuff to do, a lot of patterns to attend to.
I find it difficult to accept that people are capable of all that without trying, but aren't highly intelligent.
And I don't really know who would argue against that.
Today, you told me the way society represses creativity separates those who can hold onto it from those who can't. The result is "Smart" people and "Stupid" people. You also challenged me with this hypothetical: What if you had a government that didn't allow freedom of thought, but all of the citizens were always happy, and didn't know any different? That's a good hypothetical because of the questions it raises. Do people have a right to think for themselves? Is independent thought inherently valuable? Is it possible to really control thought? If you were able to fully control thought, would that, in fact, be self-serving in the long run? Orwell asked a lot of the same questions in 1984, and I didn't know the answers when I read it either. So I'm still mulling over that one, but here are thoughts in the meantime.
This country is a democracy. In fact, most countries are, now. Democracies assume that the masses are, in fact, capable of making the best choice, that people are intelligent, and do have good judgement. Why would you want to educate people out of the ability to think critically? Isn't that essential for making good decisions? If you, as a citizen of a democracy, are personally invested the actions of the country, which are determined by the people, wouldn't you want to educate the crap out of them so they can think intelligently and make intelligent decisions? I would.
I'm pretty sure thought exists only in patterns, that intelligence is the ability to notice, describe and manipulate those patterns, and that creativity is like intelligence but with a stronger emphasis on manipulating patterns. I'm pretty sure intelligence is the most the most prominent evolutionary adaptation this species has, that it's a large part of the reason we're still living, and that it's most of the reason we're living this way. (The gigantic pull toward entertainment? In incredible comfort? With the ability to postpone death lots and lots of times per capita? Have you seen the first world?) And I know I'm biased, but I think the way I get to live is awesome. Why thwart the ability that's kept humans alive and improving their surroundings since forever ago until now? But I recognize that I started with assumptions, and that they may be incorrect.
These are just thoughts. They might be wrong. They might be only partly wrong. They may rely on assumptions that are flawed. I reserve the licence to change my mind whenever I so choose, and I give you, whoever you are, every licence to call me out on bad thinking.
Sincerely,
Claire
Post Script: Dear [The Name of the Kid Who Sits One Desk Up From Me],
I find it difficult to reconcile your statement "I don't understand why school needs to be reformed" with your statement "I will not let you turn me into a sheep. Even if free thought brings my destruction, it is worth fighting for."
No comments:
Post a Comment