Education vs. Me: What's more important?

This past week in class, we have been examining education and conflicts that arise from it. The first synthesis prompt we were exposed to questioned whether or not religious attire could/should be worn during school hours. The controversy centralized about Aishah Azmi-a muslim teaching assistant-who refused to remove her hijab at the primary school she worked when British officials confronted her due to complaints from her colleagues and the parents of her students.

 In source A of the prompt, the present Prime Minister at the time, Tony Blair, stated that Azmi's failure to remove her hijab denied the "right of the children to a full education." However, the hijab originally served as a symbol of chastity sacrilege, a self-choice regarding personal identity.

 Now, most of the world follows a christian faith, the majority falling in the continent of Europe. In Luke 6:31, Jesus states: "as you wish that others would do to you, do so to them." In simpler terms, give others the respect for who they are so they may return you the respect you deserve. This moral code is part of the "one true moral law" as an absolutist would claim (Walter T. Stace, The concept of morals). 

That being so, it seems ridiculous that by denying Azmi her identity--albeit Muslim, a gentile so to speak--somehow the children are receiving a 'fuller education.' I mean, the purpose of the hijab is to prevent promiscuity, so by enforcing martial law for woman not to cover up, isn't the government insinuating the ideal that women should strip down--possibly as far as nude--for students to learn better? Doesn't that sound like objectifying? Americans want less women in the street as prostitutes, yet somehow we want to have the role models of the nation's youth be skin-clad? I'm confused. 

Referring back to Stace's, The Concept of Morals, absolutism establishes that there is "one moral code," so both of the contradicting sides cannot be correct, right? Being me is already hard enough in America as is. But I'm not going to lie, we've moved pretty far since we started as the thirteen colonies. Just take a look at the 13th, 14th and 19th amendments in the U.S. Constitution, which the supremacy clause deems the Law of the Land. We've done some great things in the past, but we can't settle for less. America's got to strive for more. I hate to say it, but Trump is right, She needs to be great again. And that greatness starts from fixing the small issues. If you hit an oak tree a thousand times in the same spot, it is bound to fall.

The above political cartoon is a parody of Donald Trump's reality TV show, "Celebrity Apprentice." The only difference is that in this instance it seems that Trump is the employee and Hitler is the Nazi. It's fairly easy to identify the two, as the man on the left has Trump's iconic bleached blonde comb-over and black suit and red tie, while the man on the right sports the classic comb-over and toothbrush mustache combined with the obvious swastika armband. The cartoonist here is quite clearly suggesting that Donald Trump is taking over the position of spreading Adolf Hitler's racist and fascist philosophies, similarly to how an employee would take over a position in a business. It's evident that the seat Hitler is in is larger than the one Trump sits in, also the paperwork is under Hitler, and not to mention the fact that Hitler says, "you're hired"--all of which support a sense of succession or rite of passage. The cartoonist also uses shadowing in her background to foreshadow possible results of Trump becoming president. There are two shadows in the picture, one that falls behind Hitler and one that hangs over Trump. The placement of shadows suggest that the destructive era of Hitler is behind us, but if we allow Trump to become a world leader, we can only expect a re-submergence into chaos and segregation.

Newton's Cradle

I thought it'd be a fun idea to do the other puzzle paragraph for this week's blogpost, while still attempting to incorporate what we talked about in class this week.

1.  others might say 

2.    ; 

3.    casino 

4.    Lone Ranger 

5.    however 

6.    profiling 

7.    memoir 

8.    Jeannette Walls 

9.    fire

--------------------------
NEWTON'S CRADLE

Knowledge is a perception, examination and transcription, then reanimation within one's memoir of life around him. Knowledge is that slot machine at the casino where it offers a grand prize that covers all the rest of your expenses for life, the slot machine where the chances of winning are slimmer than none--ultimately, taking the little you had left and leaving you better off dead. Since the earliest of days, man has been in search of "knowledge"--the harborer of advancement and destruction. Man can make subjective observations of the life around him, "primitive" and "diverse"(Okefenokee); he can develop intricate and emotional depictions as well--"vast...primeval" and "hellish" (Okefenokee). By the words of Jeannette Walls, "[We] live in a world that at any moment could erupt in fire" (the Glass Castle). Because of this, man seeks knowledge out of fear. However, that knowledge has always been downfall of the greatest minds the world has to offer. Knowledge is man's "liquid sunshine"--a failed and inaccurate replica of the world's generator by the hands of man. The Sun is a public benefactor. It provides energy for nature to operate continuously, however get too close and it will incinerate. In retrospect, knowledge and wisdom play along the same relationship as "liquid sunshine" and the Sun. Wisdom is a complete and accurate profiling of the world, while knowledge is just a cheap knockoff suggestion as to why things happen--and usually knowledge is incorrect. The world isn't flat, radium has no health benefits, and humans are in fact born with proclivities (sorry, Aristotle). So what's the point? Am I telling you to live like the Long Ranger, ignorant of everything that gives you purpose? 

To be honest, I'm not even sure. 

If knowledge is a man's perception of life, and if knowledge  is generally incorrect, and if everyone has a different perspective on knowledge, and if...I don't even know anymore. I mean beyond it being the sole reason for my existence, should I really bother searching for an answer I'll never find? Eh, whatever. I'm just going to leave this here, and live life instead. Not really worth, fussing about--or dying early for. 

Is life to live understanding ephemerally or is it to exist in a perpetual state of falsehood and unknown? Leave a comment below and let me know what you think.

1. ;
2. hot for humility 
3. everyone
4. today
5. haiku
6. hereafter
7. :
8. rhetoric
9. Gandhi
   
   Non-violent acts
   Create peace in the now and
   In the hereafter.
   
   

   -A Haiku by Daniel Qin

   
   
   Today, everyone who advocates non-violence as activism against oppression reference the rhetoric of Mahatma Gandhi: "An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind." Likewise, Martin Luther King Jr. shared similar ideals; Chavez brings up such studies on combating the violence with opened fists throughout his piece time and time again--a belief that he begs that his audience follows. However, the pleas Chavez places at the feet of his readers, seem slightly shallow. In retrospect, acting in non-violence is simple. Nothing is done; only words are exchanged. So if defiance with weapons set aside is such a simple concept, why do nations aim its futuristic artillery and nuclear weaponry at another? Heck--why do children, which Jesus established as the bodies of innocence, still throw stones and pick fights? If those little demons that Jesus deemed as the purest of our race can't even solve conflicts through non-violence, how can Chavez expect the brotherhood to drop its weapons? Instead of asking his audience to engage in the "farmers' movement," Chavez should advocate what nourishes nonviolence--what sort of soil the succulent philosophy must be sowed in. Open fists alone will not shake the hands of enemies, it needs to be accompanied with unfurrowed brows. A man must be hot for humility and without anger for any sort of non-violent actions to truly have effect.