::::::::
When I was growing up, it was perfectly acceptable to say someone was ignorant, just as long as it was absolutely clear the person was voicing an opinion or making a statement that had no basis whatsoever in fact. It is blunt, direct and impolitic. Nonetheless, when someone refuses to back down from their unsubstantiated opinion, when they hold fast to unsupported statements, when they insist they are correct but have no proof it is accurate to say that person is ignorant.
I know. I understand. I agree.
I started this entry a few weeks ago, writing the title, setting the tone, and describing an example. I left it to work on other things. I come back to it having lost my temper for the first time in five years ten months. I come back to it finding new insights and fresh evidence. I come back to it knowing more sharply now that sometimes people do not want to hear what I have to say when I repeat what I have to say because of the tone that comes to my voice when I say what I have to say repeatedly. I spoke the truth and I was asked to leave the room.
Governor Rick Perry believes President Barack Obama was born in Hawaii.
There is nothing to believe about where a person is born. It is a fact. It is a matter of public record. There are always witnesses, starting with the mother of the newborn. Belief assumes a lack of objective evidence. To use the verb "believe" with regard to a live birth evidenced by a birth certificate smacks of rhetorical alchemy, attempting to change a simple fact to opinion.
Governor Rick Perry is playing games when he says he believes President Barack Obama was born in Hawaii. He has admitted as much. He said it is fun to keep the birther issue alive. Fun? So be it.
According to a Gallup Poll reported on February 11, 2009, 25 percent of Americans do not believe in evolution, 36 percent have no opinion, and 41 percent believe in evolution.
There is nothing to believe about evolution. It is a scientific theory. It is a model consistently and scrupulously verified through decades of work by thousands of scientists. There are genetic changes observed in some species providing immediate evidence of evolution. To use the verb "believe" with regard to evolution promotes disregard for the scientific method and rational inquiry.
The Gallup Poll is careful in the wording of its surveys. It would be interesting to know the discussions that resulted in choosing "believe" for this one.
I stated in a sub-committee meeting of our Academic Senate that imposing a sanction on a student for violating the academic ethics code by a faculty member without providing the student an opportunity to respond to the accusation is a violation of due process. The other people in the meeting did not believe me.
There is nothing to believe about due process. It is a legal principle. It is a concept with a clear definition. There are many ways due process rights may be met, depending on the parties and the circumstances. At its most basic it is the right to refute an allegation prior to judgment and punishment. To use the verb "believe" with regard to due process ignores the plain meaning of the term and its established elements. The other people at that meeting demonstrated their ignorance by saying they disagreed with the definition of due process as I had explained it to them. I remained in the room long enough to lose my temper over their calm intransigence. I spoke the truth and I was asked to leave the room.
Last week, the chair of the Academic Senate visited me. She informed me that the academic ethics code will include the opportunity for students to respond to an accusation before a faculty member imposes sanctions.
I come back to this entry vindicated. With wisdom comes sadness. With knowledge comes proof of ignorance. The willful variety of ignorance gives me pause.
