Against Criticism
Although it may be true that the nay-sayer is correct more often than is the person proposing a solution, I would much rather be an imperfect resolver than a perfect complainer.
I say this because I just heard something that grates on my nerves and I felt that writing this post was one way I could fight against such ideas.
As I was approaching the building in which my office is located, I passed a couple of my fellow Ph.D. students. They were discussing the problem of the prison system in a Pacific Island country, which is that many of the inmates purposefully reoffend because it is preferable to stay there than return to what they have or don’t have outside the prison.
One of them said, “When I hear things like that, I cringe.” The other student said to him, “Well, then get in there and fix it.” His response is what sticks in my craw. He said, “I don’t want to fix it. Fixing it is an assumption that there is no flaw in the conception [of the proposed solution].”
This bothers me for a number of reasons. It bothers me because it highlights one of the great, glaring weaknesses in academia. While the majority of academics work hard to make a positive impact on the world, many of us are often quite comfortable sitting in our ‘ivory tower’ criticizing structures, institutions, policies and practices throughout the world, without offering any solution. A person can ‘enjoy’ a ‘respectable’, successful academic career built solely on showing how someone or something else is wrong. I put ‘enjoy’ and ‘respectable’ in commas, because I don’t know how anyone can enjoy being perpetually negative nor do I think that such a career is respectable.
Such a statement also bothers me, because this person will soon complete the Ph.D. process, no doubt successfully, and then will become the teacher of the next generation of university students. While I don’t know what his career aspirations are, I assume he will become a university instructor because I can’t imagine someone with that attitude choosing or lasting long in any other profession. But it worries me that this attitude will have a platform of influence over part of the next generation of students, including my children. I think that while university instructors should certainly help their students see the difficulties and challenges of the world, they should also prepare their students to meet these challenges--with skill and with hope.
The statement also bothers me because it is weak. It is an excuse to keep from engaging with difficult issues. It reminds me of those members of my church who regularly criticize the leaders for their weaknesses yet don’t fulfill their callings or do their home teaching. I have often counseled members that we are qualified to criticize and complain once we are ready to do something about it. Otherwise, keep it to ourselves.
The statement also bothers me because it is cowardly. Many criticizers don’t offer a solution simply because there is a possibility to be shown that their own ideas are flawed. It reminds me of a kid in a neighborhood I lived in as a child. He didn't like anyone. He would throw things at other kids from the safety of his front yard where he could quickly retreat into the house if you tried to catch him. Or, if he saw you wrestling with your friend, he would wait until you were inextricably entwined before running up to kick you in the ribs or the head and then sprinting back to his house. He was a coward. I hope he outgrew it.
A respectable academic (or person) follows their criticism by proposing action. Perhaps this is a courageous step, because they are quite aware of the possibility that their approach will be flawed, but they take it anyway, prepared to be kicked in the ribs by the cowardly neighborhood intellectual while they wrestle with the problem at hand.
I'm happy to hear your thoughts.
I say this because I just heard something that grates on my nerves and I felt that writing this post was one way I could fight against such ideas.
As I was approaching the building in which my office is located, I passed a couple of my fellow Ph.D. students. They were discussing the problem of the prison system in a Pacific Island country, which is that many of the inmates purposefully reoffend because it is preferable to stay there than return to what they have or don’t have outside the prison.
One of them said, “When I hear things like that, I cringe.” The other student said to him, “Well, then get in there and fix it.” His response is what sticks in my craw. He said, “I don’t want to fix it. Fixing it is an assumption that there is no flaw in the conception [of the proposed solution].”
This bothers me for a number of reasons. It bothers me because it highlights one of the great, glaring weaknesses in academia. While the majority of academics work hard to make a positive impact on the world, many of us are often quite comfortable sitting in our ‘ivory tower’ criticizing structures, institutions, policies and practices throughout the world, without offering any solution. A person can ‘enjoy’ a ‘respectable’, successful academic career built solely on showing how someone or something else is wrong. I put ‘enjoy’ and ‘respectable’ in commas, because I don’t know how anyone can enjoy being perpetually negative nor do I think that such a career is respectable.
Such a statement also bothers me, because this person will soon complete the Ph.D. process, no doubt successfully, and then will become the teacher of the next generation of university students. While I don’t know what his career aspirations are, I assume he will become a university instructor because I can’t imagine someone with that attitude choosing or lasting long in any other profession. But it worries me that this attitude will have a platform of influence over part of the next generation of students, including my children. I think that while university instructors should certainly help their students see the difficulties and challenges of the world, they should also prepare their students to meet these challenges--with skill and with hope.
The statement also bothers me because it is weak. It is an excuse to keep from engaging with difficult issues. It reminds me of those members of my church who regularly criticize the leaders for their weaknesses yet don’t fulfill their callings or do their home teaching. I have often counseled members that we are qualified to criticize and complain once we are ready to do something about it. Otherwise, keep it to ourselves.
The statement also bothers me because it is cowardly. Many criticizers don’t offer a solution simply because there is a possibility to be shown that their own ideas are flawed. It reminds me of a kid in a neighborhood I lived in as a child. He didn't like anyone. He would throw things at other kids from the safety of his front yard where he could quickly retreat into the house if you tried to catch him. Or, if he saw you wrestling with your friend, he would wait until you were inextricably entwined before running up to kick you in the ribs or the head and then sprinting back to his house. He was a coward. I hope he outgrew it.
A respectable academic (or person) follows their criticism by proposing action. Perhaps this is a courageous step, because they are quite aware of the possibility that their approach will be flawed, but they take it anyway, prepared to be kicked in the ribs by the cowardly neighborhood intellectual while they wrestle with the problem at hand.
I'm happy to hear your thoughts.
posted by Unknown | 1:54 PM
|
5 comments
