« Moral Truth or Mere Consequences? Part 1 | Main | Not Just Genitalia? »
June 02, 2005
Harmful Books and Scary Movies
There has been a bit of buzz regarding this listing of the ten most harmful books by Human Events online. Michelle Catalano believes that books aren't harmful, humans who don't read them are:
What's more harmful or dangerous is people who are afraid to let others read ideas that are opposed to theirs.
Books are not dangerous. People with narrow views who fear people learning about things outside that view are incredibly harmful.
Kevin T. Keith just sees this as another example of the right's ignorance:
While Joe Carter is running a project to compile the best lists of books for expanding your mind in any direction, his fellow conservatives are compiling a list of books close-minded people should avoid becoming knowledgeable about. As with every demonstration of the right’s addiction to ignorance, it tells us more about them than about their intended subjects.
A few points:
1. I agree with Michelle that books in themselves are not harmful (unless they are traveling at a high velocity), the narrow-minded application of bad ideas is harmful. The best way to identify bad ideas is to expose them, which I hope is the purpose of this list.
2. Both of these fine writers seem to assume that conservatives are trying to avoid these books, ban them, or maybe even burn them. I see no evidence that this is the case (although I did previously post this on banned books). I expect to expose and teach my children the poor ideas found in the books on this list, so they can be ready to refute them when expressed by narrow minded ideologues.
3. It is a bit ironic that each of these books can be read in the public school, where this book cannot. Which one should be considered more dangerous?
4. Kevin especially wishes to believe that all of his political opponents who are Christian theists are ignorant, narrow-minded simple individuals locked in their houses in fear of being exposed to challenging ideas. I for one have to laugh at this stereotype. I am a conservative follower of Christ not because I lack exposure to other ideas. I am a follower of Christ precisely because I have been exposed to poor ideas, and have found them wanting.
Ironically, presumably tolerant, open-minded, free-thinkers are trying to get the Smithsonian Institute to back out of their contract to show a movie entitled the Privileged Planet. PP makes the incredibly harmful argument that scientific knowledge regarding fine tuning and our ability to explore our surroundings is potential evidence for an intelligent Creator. Who is really afraid to expose themselves to ideas that are opposed to theirs?
Posted by OMFSerge | June 2, 2005 | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8342034c553ef00d83457fc6e69e2
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Harmful Books and Scary Movies:
» The Most Harmful Book in the World from the evangelical outpost
The conservative weekly Human Events asked a panel of 15 conservative scholars and public policy leaders to help us compile a list of the Ten Most Harmful Books of the 19th and 20th Centuries. Each panelist nominated a number of... [Read More]
Tracked on Jun 10, 2005 4:01:53 AM
Comments
What makes the list genuinely disturbing, aside from simply calling them "harmful" (a label which, for most of the books, doesn't even apply to their influence -- how much influence, positive or negative, has Beyond Freedom and Dignity really had, unless you're an Ayn Rand fan who's read Skinner?), is that the descriptions make no attempt to accurately describe the books contents. In most cases, the descriptions blatantly misrepresent those contents, and in many, they attempt to connect the books to things they don't like (e.g., Clinton) in ways that are, at best, absurd.
If those who created the list were genuinely interested in exposing the bad ideas of these books, they would do so, rather than lie about that content.
Posted by: Chris | Jun 6, 2005 4:32:40 PM
"It is a bit ironic that each of these books can be read in the public school, where this book cannot. Which one should be considered more dangerous?"
This is incorrect, you can read the Bible whenever you want to in school. (except maybe during an algebra test). You can even teach it as a historical document. What you cannot do is preach your Religion from it and get paid for it by the public taxpayers.
Thats not the same as being "banned" etc., at all.
It's true that there are occasional examples of anti-religious bias in the public school system. But when you make hysterical and false claims like the one above you only discredit yourself and do your cause no service.
Posted by: Patrick | Jun 11, 2005 10:30:01 PM
Hysterical and false claims indeed. In most public schools you'll find these books only in the most limited sense....gathering dust on the back of a library shelf somewhere. Even many college students will go thru four years without even reading a passage from these books...let alone actually rading the entire thing!
Posted by: Boonton | Jun 13, 2005 10:13:17 AM
While I suppose it is true that a large buzzer will not go off if you choose to bring your own Bible to School, and the mere mention that such a book exists will not cause a teacher to be fired, you are missing the point. Teachings from each of these books can and are taught everyday, while the same cannot be said about the Bible.
Allow me an example. When our public schools teach sex education, students will probably hear about the "10% of the population is gay" myth perpetuated by the Kinsey Report. Will they be able to evaluate any ethical characterization of homosexuality from a Judeo-Christian view? No.
Serge
Posted by: Serge | Jun 13, 2005 11:07:48 AM
Actually, under current federal rules and in most states kids are more likely to hear that homosexuality is a damaging deviance. If you can find a single curriculum that cites Kinsey, you've found the real needle in the haystack.
It is disturbing that conservatives tend not to read any of the books on the list. The demonizing of good, righteous and noble people like John Maynard Keynes and Charles Darwin is bizarre, and demonstrative of the moral lapses in conservatism. Keynes, after all, was the guy who arrived at the philosophical foundations for the Marshall Plan and continuing peace in Europe. Darwin, after all, remained a faithful Christian to his death and is interred in Westminster Abbey.
And then, to top that off with your mis-stating the law regarding the Bible -- well, yes, we know conservatives are afraid of books. The books-to-be-burned-after-the-revolution list suggests once again that it is important to prevent such a coup d'etat against our nation.
Posted by: Ed Darrell | Jun 20, 2005 2:59:29 PM
