An idyllic order

There is a picture in the Indiana Memorial Union hanging across from the East Lounge. It depicts Alma Mater, a character representing of the University, spiriting away knowledge from Ignorance, portrayed as a
dragon.

While this admittedly fanciful artwork might not result in us going out to literally try to slay ignorance as pictured, there are many pundits in the mainstream media who see themselves doing just that.

You might have seen them, read their literature, or heard their opinions. They believe themselves the last defense against the ever-expanding tide of the unenlightened, standing stalwart and unyielding against the great unwashed. The true guardians of knowledge and sanity against the likes of the great enemy. Or so they believe.

Though adopting such a secretive and proud mind-set may work wonders for group cohesion, it comes at a great cost. Debate and rhetoric immediately shuts down when one side heralds its message with the bombast of a victory parade and an air of smug superiority.

This is not to discount the importance of standing on principle, as history has proven once-lunatics right on many an occasion.

Before the development of the transistor, no one would have thought that a computer could be miniaturized to a device that could fit into a pocket. Our smartphones say otherwise.

Our days as a oil-producing nation were seemingly finished until hydraulic fracturing unlocked billions of cubic feet of natural gas, making it a viable bridge fuel towards long-term energy solutions like nuclear fusion, high-efficiency solar panels and hydrogen-powered cars.

Having the courage to buck conventional wisdom should always be commended, but to live in an ivory tower cannot be similarly lauded.

To take a stand on an issue is to invite attack and ridicule, but to be unable to defend why we say what we say with solid principles and logical arguments invites an even worse reaction — apathy. Shouting from our soapboxes is not the way to convince others of the merits of our positions, but it is undeniably satisfying when we can single out others to be cast into the fires of our own righteous vitriol.   
There’s not much to do when the accusations and the mud-flinging reaches a near fever pitch, when partisans rattle off insults and condemnation and stain those who question with cries of heresy.

But highly spirited discourse can be productive and provoke insights as it allows for conversations that promote tolerance and understanding. When emotions and condescension get in the way, we may drive people away from the topics that we love and into the apathetic camp, which does nothing to promote diversity of thought here on campus.

We as columnists are not completely innocent of this failing, either. But before activists declare who is beyond redemption and begin preaching to the choir, they should ask if they seek to advance their cause or to pride themselves on being an idyllic order.

mjsu@indiana.edu