| |
| Writings Discussion Authors Help Search Home |
A Valediction: Forbidding Ignorance By: Matthew Patterson on 5/23/2003; 1:45 AM Many of my classmates are probably not surprised to hear that I spent a lot of my childhood hearing, Youre too smart for your own good. Teachers, relatives, my parents, other people my age, telephone solicitors... well, anyway, I heard it a lot. And Im sure a lot of other people have, too sayings like youre getting too big for your britches or youre ten going on twenty-three permeate a lot of our childhood memories. Recently, when I was traveling around the country for college visits, I heard the same thing from a percussion professor for whom I auditioned. "It sounds to me like you're too smart to be a music major," he said at one point. Beyond the fact that I was incredibly dumbstruck that he would actually say something like that DURING THE AUDITION, something about the way he put it just felt wrong. Not wrong in that he broke some grammatical rule or misused a word, but that his statement was by definition incorrect, incompatible with the proper functioning of the universe. So I went back home, and thought, and when I got that college's rejection letter I thought a bit more, and I think I'm finally beginning to realize what it is about that professor's proclamation that unnerved me so. Beyond the obvious, that by his definition musicians must not be very intelligent, I think his words betray a lack of knowledge about the very basics of what it means to live. Any living thing has to make the best possible use of the traits it has in order to have the best possible life. Human beings differ from all the other creatures in the specific feature of our advanced intelligence. Physically, let's face it, we're puny. If the apes ever got the idea in their heads to get rid of us, we'd be gone in a week, and the world would start to look like one of those dystopian films we're always watching in science fiction class. However, being alive for a human doesn't just mean failing to die. Because of this defining trait, for a human to truly be *alive* means that he must take advantage of this intelligence as fully as possible. Therefore, it is never possible to be too smart for anything, because it is never possible to be too alive. So what does this mean for us, the class of 2003, we who are about to set ourselves upon the world? I'm still not entirely sure. I may never be. At least one thing I know we can all take from it, though, is that this kind of thinking is not only wrong, but dangerous. If you repeat a message enough times, eventually people will start believing it. This idea that you can be somehow too smart for something has the effect of confining ones intelligence to a box where it cannot grow or flourish. Theyll tell you that means youve succeeded, when youre so specialized that you dont care about anything other than one specific thing. This is a lie. All you have done is to close off any possibilities of growing into something greater. Limiting your knowledge and your capacity for understanding in this manner ultimately makes you less human. This world of 2003 and beyond will be the world of our choosing. Our actions can bring it revolution or plunge it further into disarray. All I can ask is that we who will decide its fate remember that, as human beings, our lives and our fortunes depend on our minds and our intelligence more than anything else. No matter what some professors may say, it is *never* possible to be too smart, to somehow participate too much in the one thing that makes us uniquely human. When we all become as fully human as it is possible to be when we all take as much advantage of our brains and skills as possible on that day, we will all shine together. Now then. One of the other things I always got told was to always thank people for what theyve given you. With this in mind, I have just a few more things to say: To my parents: There arent enough words to say what needs saying here. Sometimes, language just fails. I would not be who I am without your examples. I would not *be*, period. Thanks and gratitude arent sufficient, but theyre the only words I have for what I feel. Be assured, you made a difference, and I love you greatly for it. To all our teachers: I honestly doubt whether I will ever see again another group of men and women so professional, so dedicated to what they do, even in the face of occasional fits of what must seem to be truly massive apathy. Seriously, though, time and again you have gone absolutely above and beyond the simple instructional role. You guided us, nurtured us, protected us. You have attempted to instill in us the most important value there is: that a life lived without questions, without knowledge, is not really a life at all. Lecturing is just a boring recitation of facts, but real teaching that involves a sharing of the self. You have given of yourselves freely, a gift we can never match or repay. Our highest thanks and praise to you for it. Finally, to the class of 2003 itself: I like to think I saved the best for last. I have had a relatively short time at Episcopal compared to some of you, only four and a half years. My only real regret is that I did not take the time to know all of you as well as I could have, and should have. I cannot say that I have ever been right in the thick of student activities and student life, and perhaps in this I was in error, because it means I will never know exactly how much of a difference you all could have made in my life, and in the world at large. I *do* know, however, that I could not have handpicked a better group of people with whom to experience all the indecisions and revisions of high school. No matter how we have chosen to show it in sports or scholarship, in acolyting or anarchy, in physics or poetry we are all examples of people who live by the principle that one can never know too much or succeed in too many different areas. If we can carry this throughout our lives, I cannot even begin to imagine how incalculably wonderful our world will become. If we can avoid the trap of limiting intelligence, of putting our minds in a box, there will be no end to the tremendous things we will accomplish. This was my valedictorian speech, delivered Friday, May 17, 2003, in the Chapel of the Good Shepherd of Episcopal High School, at approximately 7:40 PM.
RE: A Valediction: Forbidding Ignorance By: Brian Webber on 5/26/2003; 11:46 PM That was brilliant. It's essays like this that make me almost ashamed of the prattle I've spewed over the past few years at this board. This one speech is better than all my essays (the few I didn't steal), and my fiction combined.
RE: A Valediction: Forbidding Ignorance By: Evan on 5/27/2003; 1:00 PM That was very brilliantly written Matthew. Have you ever heard of Abraham Maslow? He was/is (I don't recall offhand whether he's still alive or not.)a humanistic psychologist who came up with a heirarchy of human needs, the highest of which were called self-actualization needs, the need to fulfill one's unique potential as a human being. Oh and when did they get a science fiction class at Episcopal? Who teaches it?
RE: A Valediction: Forbidding Ignorance By: Matthew Patterson on 5/27/2003; 4:26 PM Science Fiction got added in the 2001-2002 school year, and as far as I know is here to stay. (Any senior English class that twenty people will voluntarily take pretty much has a permanent spot.) Ms. Thompson is teaching it. And no, I haven't heard of Maslow, since I have a complete lack of knowledge of any kind of psychology. (Well, there were those books by slavish disciples of Jung that we read for Myth in Literature last semester, and all I have to say about those is, if Robert A. Johnson isn't dead, I'd like nothing more than to kill him myself. Fisher King, my ass.)
RE: A Valediction: Forbidding Ignorance By: Evan on 5/27/2003; 10:49 PM Hmmm Ms. Thompson, I don't think I ever had her. Well, as for disciples of Jung, that's understandable. A lot of the psychoanalytic and neo-analytic psychology, tends to be a bit well, uhh stupid. This is probably because they don't usually believe in doing hard research to prove any theories or more often than not by their very nature the theories cannot be proven. Although I must admit I find the idea of the collective unconscious kind of intriguing.
RE: A Valediction: Forbidding Ignorance By: Matthew Patterson on 5/28/2003; 1:48 AM The problem, I think, is that the collective unconscious is an interesting literary idea I mean, I can see plenty of fantastic story ideas present in the idea that everyone, on some level, is fundamentally identical and linked to everyone else, and this has been explored in various and sundry ways, from Star Trek's Borg to Madeleine L'Engle's kything but as an actual scientific theory... not so much. If psychology is going to be considered a science, it needs to play by the same rules as any other branch of science, and spouting off wacky untestable ideas that sound good just ain't gonna cut it. By analogy, I can write a great essay about why my pens disappear, and I can dress it up in science by talking about other dimensions, but the actual reason why they go away is probably far less entertaining. The same goes with this. It's fun to think about some of Jung's stuff, but as a means of serious analysis, it just doesn't work.
Thats just plain ignorant By: Vlad Vostok on 9/11/2003; 10:11 PM Psychology is above all a science of FEELINGS...."play by the other rules of science"?..where those rules have subjectivity as a BARRIER to truth? Dont quit your day job dude
RE: A Valediction: Forbidding Ignorance By: Mark Morgan on 9/12/2003; 1:07 AM Dont quit your day job dude You know, that's just a bit rude, don't you think? (Before you ask: I'm the guy in charge of the site. I'm a pit picky about anything cruising through the neighborhood of namecalling.
RE: A Valediction: Forbidding Ignorance By: Matthew Patterson on 9/16/2003; 7:29 PM He may have a partial point; I do tend to think of psychology (inasmuch as I think of it at all) in terms of biochemistry more than anything else. However, I still contend that the "collective unconscious," while a fascinating idea, would require some entirely new laws of physics, and there is no compelling reason at this time to suggest that this should be done. (The reason being that there is no known particle that could carry some kind of information between brains without being detectable by conventional means, and furthermore not a great deal of evidence to show that there's some kind of cerebral region dedicated to processing said imaginary particles. People *have* postulated theoretical particles in the past and were later proven to be correct in their theorizing, but there was good experimental reason for them to do so, and there is none here.) Other than that, Mark's right. Plus, I study physics and music in my day job, so... yeah.
RE: A Valediction: Forbidding Ignorance By: Ben C on 9/24/2003; 9:09 PM In reference to your original essay (which I just read): You're a cool person. Cooler than what's good for ya. Just thought I'd let you know, :Ben
RE: A Valediction: Forbidding Ignorance By: Evan on 9/26/2003; 3:27 PM Psychology is a hodge podge of other disciplines, philosophy, biochemistry, and genetics in particular. A problem occurs however because many psychologists refuse to admit that the other disciplines within psychology actually apply. I had a problem with this in that I had a teacher for my personality who was a behaviorist and therefore did not believe in the existence of personality as a concept. Psychology is weird. That's why it is my major.
RE: A Valediction: Forbidding Ignorance By: David Loredo on 10/2/2003; 7:25 PM Too smart for ur own good. What they mean by this is that after you gain a certain lvl of knowledge about the world u begin to find it pointless. It is the mistery in this world that inspires questions and the struggle to become better. Take away the mistery in the world and replace it with total knowledge and what happens... total lack of will to go on. They said that u were too smart becuase they believe that for an individual to be happy he has to have some sence of uncertainty within him. Some ignorance to actually make his life enjoyable. But then ignorance as we all know can bring great damages to oneself and humanity as a whole. So one as a human being must acheive a balance.
RE: A Valediction: Forbidding Ignorance By: Ben C on 10/5/2003; 3:14 PM As our friend MR. spock might have said, had he been born yet: fascinating.
RE: A Valediction: Forbidding Ignorance By: ScottN on 10/4/2003; 1:27 AM Uh Ben, it's "Mr. Spock". Dr. Spock is a reknowned pediatrician.
RE: A Valediction: Forbidding Ignorance By: Matthew Patterson on 10/4/2003; 12:49 PM Re: David Loredo Some ignorance to actually make his life enjoyable. But then ignorance as we all know can bring great damages to oneself and humanity as a whole. So one as a human being must acheive a balance. Well... not to be rude, but that's *their* opinion, and while I am aware of it, the essay pretty much indicates that I wholeheartedly reject it. This stuff wouldn't be out there for me to know if I weren't meant to find it out, or at least to have a shot at it.
RE: A Valediction: Forbidding Ignorance By: David Loredo on 10/19/2003; 8:39 PM opinion? no man its fact. Think of it like this.. you see a red hot stove and you just want to touch it, you want to know what its like , the texture... you throw your hand in to it and you lose all feeling of your hand... Knowledge is like that. But youre right, its out there but i can garanfreakenty you that even if you spend your whole life reading and living and expiriencing everything that this earth has to offer, youll never know everything. And in the end what will you have? a quest that lead you no were, KNow why? becuase it is mans destiny to use what little knowledge he can gain in order to live a productive and honorable life. And no u dont have a shot at it... as if it wasnt obvious by now.lets see it was carl sagan who first put that thought in to my mind. the brain is capable of holding 10 to the tenth power "bits" of information and the amount required to fully understand a grain of salt with all its molecular complexity is 10 to the fourteenth power, he then states that although we arent capable of fully understanding everything in the universe we can deduce from the limited information we can get certain laws that it will follow"general relativity" "qauntium mechanics" so try and try my little ant but the picknic is of your reach.... perhaps in 1 billion years when man no longer needs a body and his mind wonders the cosmos with no boundrys till then... dont strain yourself too hard
RE: A Valediction: Forbidding Ignorance By: Ben C on 10/20/2003; 8:45 AM Whoa, that's pretty cool actually. Where did you find all this 10 to the tenth power stuff about the brain though? I'd be interested in learning more about...
RE: A Valediction: Forbidding Ignorance By: Matthew Patterson on 10/20/2003; 2:40 PM But youre right, its out there but i can garanfreakenty you that even if you spend your whole life reading and living and expiriencing everything that this earth has to offer, youll never know everything. And in the end what will you have? a quest that lead you no were, Did I ever say otherwise? I'm not deluded enough to believe that I actually *can* know everything, but I *do* think that the only way to get anywhere is to make that my ultimate goal. Because otherwise... I might finish. And then what would I do with myself. A quest that leads me nowhere, though? Exactly what *would* you consider a worthwhile goal? I fail to see how the continual acquisition of knowledge could be considered pointless. Every day I go to bed knowing more than I did before. Or is self-improvement not worth enough for you?
RE: A Valediction: Forbidding Ignorance By: ScottN on 10/22/2003; 4:11 AM 10 to the 10th bits is nothing. It's 10 gigabits, or just about a gigabyte of info. The human brain may have 10^10 *interconnections* but I have never seen anything about the human brain's capacity. Side note: I do recall seeing somewhere that the number of atoms in the visible universe is estimated to be in the vicinity of 10^80.
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Copyright Notice | Privacy Policy | Contact | |
 |
|