Skip to main content

Fairness

Our history is full of examples of those who refused to accept change (often because it challenged ideas that were very important to them). You may already have studied one of the more famous examples of stubbornness. Early in the 1500's, many Europeans believed that the earth was the center of the universe. Around this earth, they said, moved ten “transparent crystal spheres.” The closest sphere was the moon, the next closest was the sun. The next five spheres held the “five known planets,” while the eighth sphere had the “fixed stars” (the last two spheres were created to accommodate small changes in the locations of stars). After the tenth sphere was heaven, with God and the “souls of the saved,” while the angels made sure the ten spheres moved “in perfect circles.” This idea gave some Christians a place for God, and it put humans at an important central place in the universe.

Starting in 1506, however, Nicolas Copernicus challenged these ideas. For twenty-six years, he developed an old Greek theory that the stars and planets (including the earth) moved around a central sun. It was the sun, he said, not the earth, that was central in the universe. Because this idea challenged the earth-centered (geocentric) principle, and the idea that God was outside the tenth sphere, some stubbornly rejected his views. One man, named Martin Luther, went far enough to call Copernicus a “fool” (“The fool wants to turn the whole art of astronomy upside down.”), while the Catholic Church also stated that his theory was false.

The response to another man, named Galileo, was even stronger. After his challenge to the traditional view of the universe, he was “tried for heresy,” “imprisoned,” and even “threatened with torture.” The pressure on Galileo was strong enough that he rejected and cursed his own theory. It was because of the work of people like Copernicus and Galileo, however, that we understand the universe and are better able to explain how gravity works (many times, humans will at first reject an idea, but later will accept it, just like we at first hate a new song we hear on the radio, but later grow to really enjoy it).

The point of this story is this: If you want to be a fair thinker, it is essential that you not reject ideas right away. It’s so easy to say someone is wrong just because you don’t agree with them. Fairness means thinking about why the idea might be right, but also thinking about why the idea might be wrong. Weigh carefully what you hear, therefore, neither rejecting nor easily accepting it. Fairness, like other human traits, is an art form able to be developed with practice. Those who do develop it become more classy in their interactions with others, and those others will truly appreciate you for it.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Heroes

Although we have several examples of heroes in our day, one of the best known is of a woman named Agnes Gonxhe Bojaxhiu (“Gonja Bojaju”), who devoted her life to sustaining the “poor, sick, orphaned, and dying.” Her venue was Calcutta, India, where she served as a teacher until she began to take notice of the poverty there. Seeking to do something about it, she began an organization that consisted of just thirteen members at its inception. Called the “Missionaries of Charity,” the organization would eventually burgeon into well over 5,000 members worldwide, running approximately 600 missions, schools and shelters in 120 countries; and caring for the orphaned, blind, aged, disabled, and poor. As her personal work expanded, she traveled to countries like Lebanon, where she rescued 37 children from a hospital by pressing for peace between Israel and Palestine; to Ethiopia, where she traveled to help the hungry; to Chernobyl, Russia, to assist victims of the nuclear meltdown there; and to ...

The Nice Guy Fallacy

I read part of a poem recently by one of my favorite poets. It reads: I envy not in any moods The captive void of noble rage The linnet born within the cage That never knew the summer woods. I envy not the beast that takes His license in the field of time Unfetter'd by the sense of crime To whom a conscience never wakes. Nor what may call itself as bles't The heart that never plighted troth But stagnates in the weeds of sloth Nor any want-begotten rest. I hold it true, whate'er befall I feel it, when I sorrow most 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all. At base, Tennyson contrasted a life of risk, and consequent pain, with one of security. He sides conclusively with the life of risk, and says he fails to envy those who have faced no hardship. I agree with him; and, for good or ill, his words are just as relevant today as they were in the nineteenth century. Like then, there are those today who choose to live their lives with as little risk as...

Comparative Medical Care

One thing I'd like to understand is why there is such a difference between medical costs here and those in Haiti. At the time the book Mountains Beyond Mountains was written, in 2003, it often cost $15,000 to $20,000 annually to treat a patient with tuberculosis, while it cost one one-hundredth of that-- $150 to $200-- to treat a patient for the disease in Haiti. Even if the figures aren't completely accurate, the sheer difference would still be there. Indeed, the United States pays more per capita for medical care than any other country on Earth. My first guess for why the disparity exists is that there is a market willing and able to pay more for medical treatment, so suppliers see the demand and respond with higher prices. According to at least one doctor (go to http://scienceblogs.com/denialism/2009/05/what_is_the_cause_of_excess_co.php), part of the reason is administrative prices here. People here have a higher standard of living, and so the cost of care is shifted to ...