End of Education reaction paper- Alfie Tutt

End of Education reaction paper

Neil Postman, in his book End of Education sheds light on the multiple issues with public schools, especially since public schools lack a diverse curriculum, when in fact schools in the 21^st century are getting increasingly diverse. Neil Postman accurately explains the need for information about different cultures in public schools, as well as the importance of learning about religious issues and time periods previously looked down upon.

Modern public schools create a society, which is lacking in knowledge of the diversity within the community.  Neil Postman highlights the lack of diversity taught in schools when America itself is a very diverse country. In fact the most recent US census showed that by the year 2043 over half the population could be Hispanic. This seems bizarre that for such a diverse country the understanding of different cultures seems to be seriously lacking in our curriculum. Postman explains that in an average  “American classroom, the student population will embody several different traditions” (Postman 159). Postman further shows that while it may be uncomfortable for students to learn about different cultures, it has the ability to help students in the future when approaching people of different cultures. Also it helps students who choose to travel abroad as they will be able to learn the customs of that society. Unfortunately public schools do not offer any of what Postman is advocating for and therefor have aimed to create a society based on true American spirit and failed miserably by not showing and teaching what makes America great, which is not the great level a patriotism, but the mix of different ethnicities and cultures currently in the country. Instead the population has seen to be uneducated on other countries and customs of those countries.

Public schools also lack the teaching of religious subjects and leave vital information out of the curriculum, just because it is controversial. Therefor when a student goes out into the real world they lack vital knowledge about the past, meaning public schools are creating a culturally unaware society. Unless going to a religious schools, current public schools in the US lack the teaching of other religions, which plays huge importance with a lack of political awareness of the students. Because most of the time, students don’t get the whole picture but instead few one groups actions as a whole religions actions, when instead it is only a minor portion of that religion that agree with what has been done. An excellent example can come from straight after the 9/11 attacks when unaware students were all to quick to call all Muslims terrorists when that statement is anything but true. Public schools also try to go on the safe side of caution, meaning subjects such as Slavery or Eurocentric issues are not covered in class, when they really should be because they teach students about how people used to think, and give students an incite into the future as well. Neil Postman also accurately presents the need for information about different religions and time periods that were previously not taught in school. Postman stresses that even though the Eurocentric time period is sometimes looked down on for its suppression of certain groups of people, US students should still study the topic. Studying the topic is important because to go forward we must look back into our past, and learn from our past mistakes, and how they were made in order to move forward. Furthermore, students need to learn about different religions to improve their global understanding and be able to make a contribution to the world when they are older. Postman believes that the reasons for studying religions are that “ so much of our painting, music, architecture, literature and science are intertwined with religion”(152 Postman). Postman expresses how religion has resulted in dramatic changes in Human history, whether it is challenging religion such as Copernicus did when showing an alternative theory to the Church’s belief that everything revolves around the sun, or the early writings of Islamic scripts, as well as the development of mathematics in the Middle East. Postman also adds that another reason for emphasis on religious education is that all great religions are stories that tell us about different cultures and places, giving us a greater understanding of how the world came to be how it is today.

Public school’s currently create culturally unaware while leaving key details out of the curriculum. Postman, brings up vital points about areas of education in the United States that are severely lacking, creating what is a diverse America into one which can not see past its own American dream.

Work Cited:

Postman, Neil. The End of Education: Redefining the Value of School. New York: Vintage, 1996. Print.

Darwin and S.I Hayakawa

Darwin’s theory of survival of the fittest is both similar and different to the beliefs of Hayakawa in his book Language in thought and action. While taking opposing views on issues such as categorizing humans and animals as one, as well as working together as a strategy to survival, they both agree that Humans and animals must possess similar qualities to indeed survive in the world. Darwin would most likely ask Hayakawa the following questions…

Do human’s change/evolve over time differently to animals, in reaction to the change in their surroundings?

 How are animals comparatively different to humans in their approach to the change in environment?

 Do humans need survival qualities that animals possess in order to survive?

Darwin would have disagreed with Hayakawa on the point of putting humans and animals in the same category. Hayakawa believed humans were more advanced compared to animals as humans are “the talking animals” (Hayakawa 5), splitting them apart from the theory of natural selection. Darwin in an opposing view to Hayakawa, believed that animals and men are similar. Gaarder, in her book Sophie’s World, explains that Darwin paid attention to “the great similarities between humans and animals” (Gaarder 412). Darwin also placed humans and animals in the same classification when referencing the theory artificial selection, believing that humans and animals both applied to the rule of the “survival of the fittest”.  

Darwin would also frown upon Hayakawa’s view of man working together in Language in thought and action. Darwin in Sophie’s World gives the impression that every man is alone and has to survive by himself. Gaarder displays Darwin’s belief that “breeders have made an artificial selection…no two individuals are exactly alike” (Gaarder 408), the selection has led to “Natural selection in the struggle for survival” (Gaarder 411). Darwin therefore presents the view that natural selection has resulted in humans working for personal gain and survival in opposition of Hayakawa’s claim that “Cooperation within a species (and sometimes with other species) is essential to the survival of most living creatures” (Hayakawa 5). Hayakawa believes that cooperation is necessary for survival because other people’s nervous systems may pick up on a future problem that ours did not.

Darwin and Hayakawa would agree however, on the fact that humans and animals both share qualities needed in order to survive. Darwin explains how natural selection leaves only the ones who have the qualities needed to survive. Similarly Hayakawa believes as well as cooperation, it is important that humans have “those qualities useful in fighting the environment and other species… and those qualities (such as aggressiveness) that are useful in fighting other people” (Hayakawa 5). Both Darwin and Hayakawa therefore believe humans and animals need to posses qualities such as aggression, in order to successfully survive.

In conclusion, both Hayakawa and Darwin’s view on how man must survive in the world share similarities and differences. Differences on their opinions about categorizing humans and animals as one, as well as man working together, whereas they both agreed on the conclusion that all species need some qualities in order to survive.

Works cited:

Hayakawa, S. I. Language in Thought and Action. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, 1964. Print.

Gaarder, Jostein. Sophie's World: A Novel about the History of Philosophy. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 1994. Print.

Negation to Chomsky's Article

Since 9/11 the US Primary Foreign Policy focus has been combating terrorism in all shapes and forms, and therefore striving to do right to those who did wrong. Philosopher Noam Chomsky, in his article Was There an Alternative? presents an opposing opinion to the United States Foreign Policy after 9/11. “American exceptionalism” is the idea (as explained in Chomsky’s article) that the US is indeed using these counter terrorism efforts in an attempt to show how the US is different from other nations because the US does not get punished for its actions. I strongly believe Chomsky was false in his words about alternative views to the 9/11 attacks. Operation Geronimo was justified and furthermore it is clear that the US was acting in defense and as a matter of international security.

Throughout Chomsky’s article, he displays ignorance and a lack of sensibility when discussing the alternative ways or views surrounding 9/11. Chomsky’s views bring false verification towards the idea of American exceptionalism. Chomsky in his article states “ presumably one reason why polls show that fully a third of American respondents believe that the US government and/or Israel were behind 9/11”(Chomsky 4).  While in the Muslim world the skepticism is much higher.”  Now the information presented by Chomsky has many falsities that make the information unreliable. Firstly it is generally agreed that the Muslim community is not favorable of Israel, mainly due to the disputes over Palestine. Palestine is a large area in Israel that has a huge Muslim population. Israel’s refusal to grant or recognize Palestinian independence has fueled the uprising of terrorist groups such as Hamas, and has increased the Muslim communities hatred of Israel. Therefore it is obvious to see, why the Muslim community, as Chomsky states, would blame 9/11 on the Israeli. Another mistake Chomsky makes is comparing the President of the United States to Osama Bin Laden. Chomsky says, “ How we would be reacting if Iraqi commandos had landed in George Bush’s compound, assassinated him and dumped his body in the Atlantic”(Chomsky 6).  Which is not an accurate comparison because Bush was the President of the United States and an international leader; whereas Osama Bin Laden was a terrorist who was not a country’s leader, but instead a radical terrorist.

George Washington, the First President of the United States, once said, “ If new difficulties arise, we must put forth new exertion and proportion our efforts to exigencies of the times”. In the quote George Washington is essentially trying to show the importance of handling new problems effectively, to reach a resolution to the problem quickly. It is these words that must carry on in the minds of the reader while observing, the second reason, that Operation Geronimo was indeed an act of justice and did not extend to an act in favor of American exceptionalism. Operation Geronimo was not an act of American exceptionalism mainly because it was not just the US that Osama Bin Laden had harmed, but instead multiple countries. As a result significant political figures from nearly every country in the world praised the US. Britain, a country that has been actively involved in the fight against terrorism since the British tube bombings, welcomed the news. Prime Minister David Cameron after hearing the news of the death stated that the killing of Osama Bin Laden “ is a massive step forward.” As well as Great Britain, countries such as Afghanistan also celebrated the death of Osama bin Laden.  Constantly in Chomsky’s article, he addresses the point that Osama Bin Laden should have been kept alive to have been questioned by authorities, and that the United States broke multiple international laws by not giving Bin Laden a fair trail but Former General Attorney of the US, Eric Holder, explains that the killing of Osama Bin Laden on the spot was legally justified because “He was the head of Al-Qaeda, an organization that had conducted the attacks of September 11th. He admitted his involvement and he indicated that he would not be taken alive. The operation against Bin Laden was justified as an act of national self defense.” It could also be said, that it was the United States duty as a world hegemonic power to in fact kill Osama Bin Laden as a matter of international security. Probably the most important justification to the killing of Osama Bin Laden as an act of international importance and not for the sake of American exceptionalism was that the UN, or United Nations. The principle world body, who creates and develops international law (what Chomsky said was violated) came out after the killing of Osama Bin Laden, and made a statement that welcomed “ the news on May 1, 2011 that Osama bin Laden will never again be able to perpetrate such acts of terrorism…The Security Council recognizes this critical development and other accomplishments made in the fight against terrorism and urges all states to remain vigilant and intensify their efforts in the fight against terrorism." The fact that the United Nations recognized the accomplishment and never states any violation of laws has occurred completely disproves Chomsky’s main point that the US broke international law, while also disclaiming American exceptionalism.

Lastly, the United States killing of Osama Bin Laden and war on terrorism was justified because it was a matter of national security, not an opportunity to recognize American exeptionalism.  Winston Churchill, in 1940, stated “without victory there is no survival.” Winston Churchill’s quote is very applicable to the situation regarding the killing of Osama bin Laden for the same reason, that similar to Britain, at the time of Churchill’s speech, the United States had been threatened. Therefore, offensive action by the US could be deemed as defense because it was required to defend the countries border, because for the same reason as Britain, if the US had never had pushed so tough on “the war on terror”, the US would have never won and therefore would be facing the same fate as it did on 9/11 constantly without any action. The United States killing Osama Bin Laden was not only an act of self defense for the US because of the thousands of citizens that had died, but also it was an act of defense for every country in which Osama Bin Laden had effected. And if it were not for the US using offense as a form of defense, Al Qaeda would still be one of the world’s most dangerous terrorist organizations. Because of Bin Laden’s death, Al Qaeda’s profit has dropped from billions to a little over 200 million, and has not caused as many atrocities due to the lack of leadership and stability. Therefore creating further justification for the United States acting to defend multiple countries in the world from Bin Laden’s wrath and strangle hold on such countries as Afghanistan, which since has been able to not only hold its first democratic election, but is now becoming more independent with the US pulling more troops out every year.

In conclusion, I believe Chomsky was wrong in his views of “American exceptionalism”, because of the falsity of Chomsky’s alternative views to 9/11, and because operation Geronimo was justified and furthermore the US was acting on behalf of the international community.

Work Cited:

Chomsky, Noam. "Was There an Alternative?" The Huffington Post. HuffingtonPost.com, 06 Sept. 2011. Web. 10 Sept. 2015.

 "Osama Bin Laden's Death: Political Reaction in Quotes - BBC News." BBC News. BBC News, 03 May 2011. Web. 10 Sept. 2015.

 "Osama Bin Laden Dead: UN Security Council Rejoices at Death of Bin Laden." The Telegraph. Telegraph group, 02 May 2011. Web. 10 Sept. 2015.

 Quotations of George Washington. Bedford, MA: Applewood, 2003. Print.

 The Quotable Winston Churchill. Philadelphia, PA: Running Book Publisers, 2013. Print.

 Williams, Pete. "Bin Laden Killing Was Legally Justified, Holder Says."Msnbc.com. Nbc News, 04 May 2011. Web. 11 Sept. 2015.