Neil Postman - Responses
Part I
On page 11, Postman quotes Niels Bohr as saying, "The opposite of a correct statement is an incorrect statement, but the opposite of a profound truth is another profound truth." What does this statement mean? Do you agree with it? Why or why not?
Opposition creates two points of view and provides a stronger meaning for both sides. A correct statement, “I like ice cream,” is opposed by the incorrect statement, “I don’t like ice cream.” If I only observe the correct statement, I have no reason to justify my liking of ice cream, but if I am challenged with the incorrect statement, I am forced to consider why I like ice cream—I like it because it’s cold, sweet, and creamy.
A profound truth, deep and unyielding, cannot be proven false; therefore, the opposition to it can only be another profound truth that acts as any opposition would, creating another point of view that provides a force to clarify or strengthen both truths. When one can find greater clarity in opposing truths, it allows one to gain perspective to widen and justify one’s own beliefs. I agree with Postman’s claim, “it is better to have access to more than one profound truth…to hold comfortably in one’s mind the validity and usefulness of two contradictory truths is the source of tolerance, openness, and most important, a sense of humor…” (1996, p. 11).
I consider Economic Utility, a profound truth that defines the purpose of education to “prepare children for competent entry into the economic life of a community” (Postman, 1996, p. 27). To oppose it, I consider the profound truth of Consumership that defines the purpose of education to provide students with the means to acquire goods. What does the former mean without the latter? It means simply that students should have jobs when they finish school. What does the latter mean, without the former? It means simply that students should be able to purchase goods when they finish school. When I considered both in opposition, Economic
On page 11, Postman quotes Niels Bohr as saying, "The opposite of a correct statement is an incorrect statement, but the opposite of a profound truth is another profound truth." What does this statement mean? Do you agree with it? Why or why not?
Opposition creates two points of view and provides a stronger meaning for both sides. A correct statement, “I like ice cream,” is opposed by the incorrect statement, “I don’t like ice cream.” If I only observe the correct statement, I have no reason to justify my liking of ice cream, but if I am challenged with the incorrect statement, I am forced to consider why I like ice cream—I like it because it’s cold, sweet, and creamy.
A profound truth, deep and unyielding, cannot be proven false; therefore, the opposition to it can only be another profound truth that acts as any opposition would, creating another point of view that provides a force to clarify or strengthen both truths. When one can find greater clarity in opposing truths, it allows one to gain perspective to widen and justify one’s own beliefs. I agree with Postman’s claim, “it is better to have access to more than one profound truth…to hold comfortably in one’s mind the validity and usefulness of two contradictory truths is the source of tolerance, openness, and most important, a sense of humor…” (1996, p. 11).
I consider Economic Utility, a profound truth that defines the purpose of education to “prepare children for competent entry into the economic life of a community” (Postman, 1996, p. 27). To oppose it, I consider the profound truth of Consumership that defines the purpose of education to provide students with the means to acquire goods. What does the former mean without the latter? It means simply that students should have jobs when they finish school. What does the latter mean, without the former? It means simply that students should be able to purchase goods when they finish school. When I considered both in opposition, Economic