Me edjamacated
Since 9/11, one thing often heard about the perpetrators of that awful act, or about other suiciders since then, is that poverty is not a determining factor in driving someone to commit these murderous acts. In fact, often it is said they are "well educated".
I very much wonder just what that phrase means. Just what entails being "well educated"?
Do the suiciders have a keen understanding of, say, international politics? Can they balance chemical equations in their sleep? Rather than poking fun at the social mores in Jane Austen, who wrote of a time when going for a walk on a Sunday afternoon was a big deal, can they readily discuss the implications that such clearly defined moral standards have in other parts of society, and how that plays out in Austen's works?
Does being "well educated" imply something far more than just being able to balance a checkbook, or to fill out a job application?
There is little attempt in the media to examine just what makes up the education of these suiciders, and how it might or might not have affected their decisions.
I think the left naturally gravitated towards poverty as an explanation for terrorism because it is an external cause. It avoids the question of evil within the hearts of man. And, avoiding the question of evil means the left can avoid the problem of confronting evil while at the same time allowing arbitrarily determined moral standards. And if facing evil requires a moral standard from an outside source, that inevitably leads to the question of God, and more than anything, the left wants to avoid any acknowledgement of God as an Authority to be recognized, whether in our personal lives or in society as a whole.
Similary, the impulse to shake our heads and wonder how an educated person can commit acts of evil hints at a belief that knowledge can be a substitute for moral standards. Not for nothing does Proverbs 26:12 say "Do you see a man wise in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him."
Certainly, the left loves to pride itself on their knowledge. "We are educated", they say, in justifying their political beliefs, implying that the soundness of their beliefs rests on firm unassailable academic footing, and anyone gauche enough to practice conservative politics must be an uneducated rube.
No, we should never mention a suicider's education in the same thought where we describe their murderous acts. Education is not the right band-aid for the sores that cover our fallen souls. It never was, and it never will be.
I very much wonder just what that phrase means. Just what entails being "well educated"?
Do the suiciders have a keen understanding of, say, international politics? Can they balance chemical equations in their sleep? Rather than poking fun at the social mores in Jane Austen, who wrote of a time when going for a walk on a Sunday afternoon was a big deal, can they readily discuss the implications that such clearly defined moral standards have in other parts of society, and how that plays out in Austen's works?
Does being "well educated" imply something far more than just being able to balance a checkbook, or to fill out a job application?
There is little attempt in the media to examine just what makes up the education of these suiciders, and how it might or might not have affected their decisions.
I think the left naturally gravitated towards poverty as an explanation for terrorism because it is an external cause. It avoids the question of evil within the hearts of man. And, avoiding the question of evil means the left can avoid the problem of confronting evil while at the same time allowing arbitrarily determined moral standards. And if facing evil requires a moral standard from an outside source, that inevitably leads to the question of God, and more than anything, the left wants to avoid any acknowledgement of God as an Authority to be recognized, whether in our personal lives or in society as a whole.
Similary, the impulse to shake our heads and wonder how an educated person can commit acts of evil hints at a belief that knowledge can be a substitute for moral standards. Not for nothing does Proverbs 26:12 say "Do you see a man wise in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him."
Certainly, the left loves to pride itself on their knowledge. "We are educated", they say, in justifying their political beliefs, implying that the soundness of their beliefs rests on firm unassailable academic footing, and anyone gauche enough to practice conservative politics must be an uneducated rube.
No, we should never mention a suicider's education in the same thought where we describe their murderous acts. Education is not the right band-aid for the sores that cover our fallen souls. It never was, and it never will be.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home