As I was going through the average processes of my day, I was talking to a colleague about my blog and describing to her all that it encompasses. Then she made a comment that I do not believe she meant to be as deep as I took it, but the comment made me think about the division of believers and nonbelievers in a completely different way. She said, “People always need something to argue about.” And I thought to myself, “Is that true?” “Can we not go on with our lives without controversy or something to argue about?” If our world did not have anything controversial nor anything that caused any sort of division, could we not still function? I am reminded of the following song:
After putting much thought into this, I believe this question does not have an answer. The reason why is because we will never know what the world would be like without controversy or division. This is a sad truth. Since the world will never be this way, then we cannot know whether or not we can function.
On a different side, disunity also unites us. This might seem oxymoronic, but those within the same division become more united. The believers will have a stronger bond with fellow believers and vice versa. So my big question to my readers is, do you think the group unity caused by the mass disunity cancel each other out? Or, would a world with no controversy be more or less bonded than one with controversy?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I agree with your conclusion that the question has no answer. It seems that people thrive off the disunity that occurs between individuals. That people in fact do need something to argue about. Something that they feel strongly about as a reassurance that they belong. The disunity, in my opinion, creates unity. It allows individuals to group together about things that they feel equally as passionate about. Do you think this is the case with the 2012 end of days theory? That it is just one more way that individuals can argue or disagree? Does that play a role in belief?
ReplyDeleteI don't think that a world with not controversy should even be considered because like you said this is impossible. It is good to focus on respecting the thoughts and feelings of those that have differ from ours. This is the unifying agent of opposing mindsets.
ReplyDeleteThese questions will always remain in our world. Whether unity caused by disunity cancels each other out or if a world with no contoversy be more or less bonded than one with controversy.
ReplyDeleteThere will never be a day where people will not disagree or have different opinions. For example, there are societies with dictatorships where everyone is united through one person and all follows the same rules. Yet, just because they all abide by the same rules doesn't mean they all agree. There have also been books about uniting a nation by strict rules like Ayn Rand's "Atlas Shrugged" and the "Fountainhead", which both introduce objectivism. In these two cases, there are still people with different opinions everywhere, whether they speak them out loud or not.
In conclusion, I believe unity caused by disunity will not cancel each other out because it continues to create debate. A world with no controversy will never be seen!
There can obviously not be a world devoid of controversy, but I think that the hysteria and polarizing opinions that characterize this issue are definitely unneeded. Out of all the things to argue about, the implications of the Mayan calendar ending seems very unimportant in the long run and a waste of resources for those groups who believe in it and those who have to spend time debunking it.
ReplyDelete