Be "close-minded"

As you gear up for classes here at our beloved Columbia, I urge you to be courageous. Though you are in for an enjoyable year here, you will encounter conflicts that require an iron constitution. The culture in Morningside Heights will present you with a philosophical modus operandi that you can either subscribe to or fight until the day you graduate.

What you will find here is an obsession with “open-mindedness”—one that dominates not only social interactions but also the academic environment and campus media. You will be asked to have an “open mind” about the philosophies and opinions of your classmates, professors, and authors of course material. At first, reader, you may not view the term “open-mindedness” as one that warrants resistance. Allow me to enlighten you as to the more dubious undertones that its syllables harbor.

At Columbia, this ideal seems at first glance to be that of promoting a willingness to consider other points of view—a sentiment that is hard to argue with. After all, how can someone who values being well-rounded object to exposing himself or herself to other viewpoints? Aren’t we here at Columbia because we want to become better global citizens by considering opinions different from our own?

Rest assured, if this were all that the term meant I would have titled this column quite differently. If the requirement of “open-mindedness” demanded little more than lending an open ear and questioning mind to an unfamiliar worldview, I would be as outspoken in support of “open” minds as any other Columbian. As is usual with such loaded terms, however, it is the deeper meaning that makes the difference and has compelled me to fight it.

Sadly, the ideal hiding behind this guise is much more sinister than a curious respect for all cultures and opinions. My experiences have shown me that the expectation that comes with “open-mindedness” is actually that you abandon many or all of your personal convictions. In the interest of having an open mind, you will be asked to surrender your beliefs that, in this world, there are condemnable practices, virtuous endeavors, and truth that transcends the individual. You will be asked not to have principles that apply to individuals beyond yourself. Any audacious attempt to believe in the existence of any universal truth or set of values for humanity will probably be viewed as bigoted, ignorant, presumptuous, or dangerously old-fashioned.

If you choose to follow their much-lauded path, you will be rewarded with the badge of “open-mindedness” and charged with the task of experiencing the world without your harmful biases or judgmental opinions. Without your dangerous and presumptuous worldview, you can be free to appreciate how others’ opinions are actually nobler, more considerate, and more acceptable than those you possessed at NSOP.

However, if sacrificing your principles on the altar of “open-mindedness” makes you uncomfortable, gird your loins for a shameful stain with which your peers will mark you: that of being “close-minded.” From the moment you give them even the slightest scent of your minority philosophy, this will be your Columbia-sanctioned scarlet letter. You have reason to rejoice, though. Despite how much they may try to make the term drip with disdain, the reality is that you are innocent of any philosophical wrongdoing.

Before I continue voicing my support of what is termed “close-mindedness,” though, allow me to clarify. What I am praising is not the practice of thinking that one has an answer for every situation. It is not clinging to one’s opinion in the face of contrary facts or belligerently forcing what you think is correct onto the minds of others.

What they term “close-minded” can actually be intellectually honest open-mindedness. They are accusing you of being in possession of the now-rare ability to have both an opinion and a willingness to engage different points of view without systematically presuming the inferiority of your own. There is a misguided but common sentiment here that in order to be able to consider another opinion, you cannot have your own convictions on the topic. Those of us in the “close-minded” camp are eager to rub our values against the heartiest objectors, open to the possibility of being incorrect in our assertions.

Being “close-minded” in the eyes of the Columbia establishment does not mean that you actually wield a stagnant and insulated mind, but rather, that you have the gall to use that mind, with all of its convictions and opinions, to engage the minds of those around you without apology. From such a vantage point, you can contribute your own beliefs while examining the myriad others found on this campus. Therefore, fellow Columbians, have the courage to look past the surface semantics and embrace the forbidden world of the truly open mind.

Derek Turner is a Columbia College sophomore. Opening Remarks runs alternate Tuesdays. opinion@columbiaspectator.com