Memories of the Academic Confusion of Others
I would pay good money to buy a surplus day from someone. What do you think, folks, is there someone in Mongolia, or Lesotho, or maybe Paraguay who might have an extra day they'd be willing to part with for say, fifteen bucks?
Okay. I've owed Chazza a response to her long post from January - yes, January - regarding climate change. That's simply unacceptable, and it may take a couple of days to write, but I've decided to write my response to her this week. I'm going to start that response tonight. For today, though, I'm going to recount a couple of frustrating experiences from college that, to me, really demonstrated a big issue in modern higher education.
It's always interesting to me how academics can wilfully misinterpret or ignore certain items. Two examples of this, both from my time at [Generic State University], have recently been running through my head, and I thought that I'd share them with you.
During my fourth of five years in school, I took the second of the two courses that I would take from the English Department during my time in school: Literature of Western Civilization. The instructor, one of the senior professors in the department, was also a local clergyman and specialized in the The Divine Comedy by Dante. We read the entire Inferno, and selections from Purgatory and Paradise. In one of the lectures, he made a claim that I found to be absolutely outlandish: that Dante had a great respect for Islam. Please keep in mind, my dear friends, that Dante wrote during the Renaissance, not during modern times. Dante was a devout Roman Catholic, to the degree that he actually condemned Boniface VIII for his grievous crimes against the church. Dante was about as devout a Christian as you could be in that day and age.
So, why did my professor claim that Dante had a great respect for Islam? Simple: he included two Muslim scholars, ibn Rushd and ibn Sina among the virtuous pagans in Limbo in Canto IV. It's a logical conclusion, right? Well, you might be able to make an argument for it if it weren't for the fact that Muhammed and Ali are consigned to the Eighth Circle of Hell in Canto XXVIII. This would lead most folks with basic reading comprehension to believe that Dante loathed Islam, and happened to approve of two scholars whose work overlapped considerably with Western scholarship; oh, yeah, and they just happened to be Muslims. As bitter as I may sound, I really enjoyed this course, and had a great deal of respect for the professor, but this one really threw me for a loop.
The other example came when I attended a friend's honors thesis defense. His research highlighted the dispute between Israel and Syria over the Golan Heights, and how the water in the large aquifer beneath the region impacted the dispute between the two nations. (link, BBC) He went through some of the history of the conflict. As it was a combination history/political science presentation, he took a position, and his position was that the Golan Heights, aquifer and all, belonged to the Syrians, and should be ceded back to them. I quizzed him on this, and asked him if he acknowledged the Israeli claim to the land that extended back to before Titus' Sack of Jerusalem in 70 AD, commemorated by the Arch of Titus in Rome. (For the record, I didn't mention the Arch, but I did mention Titus.) His answer was no, that he didn't acknowledge that claim. So, what led me to remember this incident? An article I saw yesterday about the popular denial and ignorance of ancient Israeli history. In the past, I've noted a completely biased, but extremely accurate, History of "Palestine". It's always worth reviewing.
I make a concerted effort to take history and accurate facts into account when I develop an opinion: political, academic, or otherwise. It's very frustrating when I see people who are supposed to be both educated and dispassionate in their research and instruction, who then ignore information that's blatantly obvious. As far as Dante and Islam go, it's not as if that professor was reading the book for the first time - in fact, he was extremely familiar with the material, and had been researching and teaching it for years. In the case of the Israeli issue, it's not as if the history of the ancient Jewish state, or the history of the Arabs, is obscure and unknown; in particular, the history of the Israelites forms the majority of the most influential book in the history of Western Civilization. Quite frustrating, for various reasons. Honestly? I blame the Sixties. Oh, and did I mention that they're both likely Blue-type voters? Wonderful.
Alright, folks. Either tomorrow or Thursday, I'll post my response to my distinguished friend, Chazza. Meanwhile, stay out of trouble - that means you, Mighty Mo! In case I don't finish my response to Chazza tomorrow, I've kept a couple of topics in reserve. Have a great day!
UPDATE: Speaking of Mo, I'd like to dedicate this link to her.
Okay. I've owed Chazza a response to her long post from January - yes, January - regarding climate change. That's simply unacceptable, and it may take a couple of days to write, but I've decided to write my response to her this week. I'm going to start that response tonight. For today, though, I'm going to recount a couple of frustrating experiences from college that, to me, really demonstrated a big issue in modern higher education.
It's always interesting to me how academics can wilfully misinterpret or ignore certain items. Two examples of this, both from my time at [Generic State University], have recently been running through my head, and I thought that I'd share them with you.
During my fourth of five years in school, I took the second of the two courses that I would take from the English Department during my time in school: Literature of Western Civilization. The instructor, one of the senior professors in the department, was also a local clergyman and specialized in the The Divine Comedy by Dante. We read the entire Inferno, and selections from Purgatory and Paradise. In one of the lectures, he made a claim that I found to be absolutely outlandish: that Dante had a great respect for Islam. Please keep in mind, my dear friends, that Dante wrote during the Renaissance, not during modern times. Dante was a devout Roman Catholic, to the degree that he actually condemned Boniface VIII for his grievous crimes against the church. Dante was about as devout a Christian as you could be in that day and age.
So, why did my professor claim that Dante had a great respect for Islam? Simple: he included two Muslim scholars, ibn Rushd and ibn Sina among the virtuous pagans in Limbo in Canto IV. It's a logical conclusion, right? Well, you might be able to make an argument for it if it weren't for the fact that Muhammed and Ali are consigned to the Eighth Circle of Hell in Canto XXVIII. This would lead most folks with basic reading comprehension to believe that Dante loathed Islam, and happened to approve of two scholars whose work overlapped considerably with Western scholarship; oh, yeah, and they just happened to be Muslims. As bitter as I may sound, I really enjoyed this course, and had a great deal of respect for the professor, but this one really threw me for a loop.
The other example came when I attended a friend's honors thesis defense. His research highlighted the dispute between Israel and Syria over the Golan Heights, and how the water in the large aquifer beneath the region impacted the dispute between the two nations. (link, BBC) He went through some of the history of the conflict. As it was a combination history/political science presentation, he took a position, and his position was that the Golan Heights, aquifer and all, belonged to the Syrians, and should be ceded back to them. I quizzed him on this, and asked him if he acknowledged the Israeli claim to the land that extended back to before Titus' Sack of Jerusalem in 70 AD, commemorated by the Arch of Titus in Rome. (For the record, I didn't mention the Arch, but I did mention Titus.) His answer was no, that he didn't acknowledge that claim. So, what led me to remember this incident? An article I saw yesterday about the popular denial and ignorance of ancient Israeli history. In the past, I've noted a completely biased, but extremely accurate, History of "Palestine". It's always worth reviewing.
I make a concerted effort to take history and accurate facts into account when I develop an opinion: political, academic, or otherwise. It's very frustrating when I see people who are supposed to be both educated and dispassionate in their research and instruction, who then ignore information that's blatantly obvious. As far as Dante and Islam go, it's not as if that professor was reading the book for the first time - in fact, he was extremely familiar with the material, and had been researching and teaching it for years. In the case of the Israeli issue, it's not as if the history of the ancient Jewish state, or the history of the Arabs, is obscure and unknown; in particular, the history of the Israelites forms the majority of the most influential book in the history of Western Civilization. Quite frustrating, for various reasons. Honestly? I blame the Sixties. Oh, and did I mention that they're both likely Blue-type voters? Wonderful.
Alright, folks. Either tomorrow or Thursday, I'll post my response to my distinguished friend, Chazza. Meanwhile, stay out of trouble - that means you, Mighty Mo! In case I don't finish my response to Chazza tomorrow, I've kept a couple of topics in reserve. Have a great day!
UPDATE: Speaking of Mo, I'd like to dedicate this link to her.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home