Preston Ball
Experiences Determine our Opinions
Loyola Students, as well as people in
Baltimore are human beings whose opinions are formulated not by what we
consider to be right and wrong, but by our past experiences and circumstances. But
not only that, our opinions are also formed by the news we watch, and by the
people we talk to. At Loyola, people, including myself love to talk about how
we believe certain ideas because we are principled and our opinions align with
what is “right” rather than what we call “wrong.” However, perhaps if I had
grown up in Allentown, PA, like my mother, rather than in Raleigh, NC, my views
would be completely different.
Last week, I went to Julian Zelizer’s
talk titled, “Does the Political Establishment Matter Anymore,” where he argued
that people should not just consider career politicians to be part of the
political establishment, but that we also must consider the media a part of the
political establishment also. Dr. Zelizer argued that whether we want to
believe it or not, the media has an agenda, both on the national and local
level, and that its agenda determines what news, people hear about and often
what events people care about. As a result of going to Dr. Zelizer’s fantastic
talk, I began to think about how, Loyola Students are affected by outside
influences which cause us to believe in specific ideas.
One of the primary things I thought about
after listening to Dr. Zelizer’s, was how is the Loyola Community affected by
being in the city of Baltimore. The effects of Baltimore on Loyola are endless
but I realized that the most important effect is that being in a city where
many people are in poverty and one where there is a high crime rate, forces
Loyola Students to volunteer and create programs to caringly and compassionately
care for parts of the impoverished and suffering parts of Baltimore. Loyola’s
widespread commitment to service certainly stems from its Jesuit principles but
it is forced by the community which surround this school. It is my belief that
Loyola, as a result better prepares its young men and women for life after
college because of where it is located.
I noticed a similar conflict in Nathanial
Hawthorne’s “Birthmark” as Aylmer asks his wife Georgiana about having her
birthmark removed. Aylmer and Georgiana certainly differ in their opinions
about the mark. The reason for their different opinions on man’s control of
Nature, I believe is not because they are different genders but rather because
they come from different backgrounds. On one hand, Georgiana comes from a
background which places a significant value on how a person looks naturally and
that a person’s body is made perfect by God. She believes that mankind should
not alter nature to satisfy man’s preferences. On the other hand, I believe
that Aylmer comes from a family which places let value on nature due to the
fact that he believes nature can be altered, changed and even perfected by
sciences of man. It is tempting to call Aylmer’s view of nature a “character
flaw” but in reality it is a result of his past experiences which lead him do
his current beliefs.
I am able to see now, that at Loyola and
in this country today, we classify others, and at times ourselves too
simplistically. We group people by race or by gender or by their socio-economic
situation, but what people should do instead is view individuals, not as black
or white, but instead as human beings with unique backgrounds and experiences
which all together make up a single person. Everyone is created by their past
experiences and at Loyola and in life we need to be careful not to oversimplify
and person because in so doing we take away their humanity.
No comments:
Post a Comment