Month: February 2015

Houghton should increase the amount of language credits required for integrative studies in order to support the school’s mission of global service. With the increasing globalization of technological communication, it is important for students to learn a second language in order to relate in a world that thrives on interpersonal relationships. Because technology provides an easily accessible route for conversation, verbal communication has become a lost art for many modern students. The language learning process encourages cross-cultural communication that extends beyond words, helping a speaker to identify with cultural values.

Like any difficult task, language learning requires motivation in order for proper growth to occur. Most people think language aptitude, the mental ability to acquire a new language, should be the primary motivation for language learning. However, according to a study done at McGill University, “when measures of aptitude are correlated with grades in language courses, the validity coefficients show considerable variability from situation to situation.” Fear of inadequate aptitude should not hold anyone back from learning a second language. Instead, one should, with confidence and enthusiastic interest, strive to learn another’s language.

Houghton students strive to help others across the globe. However, we cannot achieve these goals if we assume that all cultures should conform to English as the one supreme language. This conformist view enables a subtle manifestation of ethnocentrism. Learning a foreign language combats ethnocentric tendencies by forming relationships between oneself and another culture.

Professor of Spanish, David Kinman, believes “the reason to learn another language is to be able to value the speaker of that language.” With the common bond of language, one better identifies with the other on a deep level. This approach transcends utilitarian uses of language by creating a foundation for building relationships of trust with people from other cultures. Professor Kinman disproves the misconception that only language majors have a purpose and motivation for learning a foreign language.

Not only does language learning promote valuing other cultures, it supports the Christian ideal of service to others. Professor of French, Jean-Louis Roederer, spoke from personal experience saying, “As Christians, it is critical that we understand people of other cultures in order to minister better. “

For instance, Roederer recounted an experience from when he was a student to demonstrate his point. He and wife, Sandy Roederer, took part in a ministry at Houghton called Torchbearers. The group went door to door sharing their faith in Wellsville. Upon arriving at a certain house, Roederer asked in English if he could share his faith with the woman. She politely declined, but as he was leaving, he heard her call in French to one of her children playing in the yard. Roederer turned around and began speaking French with the woman. Upon hearing her heart language, she welcomed the conversation and invited him inside to hear more about his faith.

This simple anecdote exemplifies how important learning a second language should be at a school thats mission statement prioritizes global service. In order to fulfill the command in Ephesians 5:21 to “Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ,” we must strive to relate to other cultures by conquering language barriers.

Throughout the years, Houghton has slowly gotten rid of the Classics major combining Latin and Greek studies, the German major, and the French major. The only language major that still exists at Houghton is a Spanish major.  Houghton students used to be required to take 12 credits, or four semesters, of language before they could graduate. Now, only 2 semesters of language are required. Most students test out of this requirement.  Houghton risks losing its language departments because the Administration worries that enrollment will go down if the school requires language credits for each student, regardless of previous experience. Fear of decrease in enrollment should not hinder Houghton from making decisions that will increase the growth of students. According to Roederer, Houghton sends out more international workers, missionaries, and linguists than any other Christian school in the nation. These students should be equipped with language learning tools in order for effective ministry to

When I finally found myself caught in a self-contradictory tangle of pop-activist ideals and “PC” jargon I decided it was high time to rethink my position on the political spectrum. As I have organized thoughts, ideals, opinions, and beliefs, I have encountered more than a few complicated “isms,” and the ever-popular feminism is one of them. Unfortunately, discovering the meaning of feminism for Western people today seems like an impossible task.

Feminism has become a catch-all term used in a variety of contexts, from internet comment threads to political and literary texts. Our common discourse is overrun by opinions, and not a few of them seem blatantly heretical in their barest, ugliest forms. A multiplicity of definitions detracts from meaning, and feminism loses its concision and strength.

If an ideal is a belief or standard that influences action, defining feminism by what it does may be the place to start. While I’m at an immediate loss for what exactly feminism should do, I certainly have a few thoughts on what feminism shouldn’t do.

Feminism should not shame housewives and conservative women. Feminism should not categorically label and degrade men. Feminism should not encourage anger or violence. Using feminism as a soapbox or a sob story to attract attention to individual people accomplishes nothing for the greater good of the whole. Rejecting people because they don’t fit the bill weakens the name of the cause.

If feminism seeks equality for women, it is on the basis that all people deserve respect. No matter the race, sex, gender, orientation, beliefs, or identity, freedom to operate without fear of discrimination is a primary goal. If feminism so eagerly applies its force to free women from the bonds of sexism, it seems that feminists should be as eager to stand against discrimination across the board.

Which is why I find myself sadly disturbed by the conversations flowing around me on a daily basis, espoused by people who would claim to be feminists but willingly degrade and disrespect others on the basis of sexual orientation, religious belief, or political ideology. Too many “feminists” fall into the trap of blaming and stereotyping men rather than educating and empowering men and women alike. Women who choose to live a lifestyle of religious conservatism that is interpreted as oppressive are mocked and patronized. The internet can be a snake’s den of hatred masked by anonymity.

I certainly do not have all of my own beliefs figured out, let alone a confident grasp on some of our culture’s most popularized beliefs today. But I can say that it seems to me there is a glaring contradiction in a feminism that despises and discriminates. Feminism begins with respecting, uplifting, and encouraging people for the pure fact of their humanity. Therefore, it is an originally justified idea and this respect should carry beyond the limits of sex and gender.

Maybe this topic is overwrought, but I’m tired of the hypocrisy. Regardless of how we identify as individuals, we should offer the same respect we expect for ourselves to everyone else. Besides, wouldn’t Christ do the same?

If there’s one unarguable fact about the digital age, it is that images dominate our lives. Every day we’re bombarded by advertisements, Snapchats, Instagram notifications—an unstemmed tide of visual narrative.  If you’ve ever taken a class with Professor Dave Huth, you’ve undoubtedly heard what opponents of our image-saturated age think of this flood of images; how they destroy our culture, decrease social capital and interaction, and ultimately make us a bunch of gibbering idiots covered in x-pro filters.

At this point, you’re either tired of hearing this argument, terrified that we’re all going to devolve into those chair people from Wall-E, or, like the skeptical Houghton postmodern that you are, you’ve decided that images can’t be the end of human intelligence. In a way, I identify with all three of these perspectives. On the one hand, I see what appears to be a rapid decline in what has classically been defined as ‘society.’

People statistically talk face-to-face less often, hang out in shorter increments, and on the face of it, literacy and basic common sense seem to have been pushed to the side by our new, selfie-stick-wielding, 24-hour-news-cycle-watching overlords. Recently, this hit me as, ironically enough, I watched the 1963 film Contempt by French director Jean –Luc Godard. Characters in the film consistently quoted from memory the likes of Dante, Virgil, and Homer. And not only did they quote, but they APPLIED what they quoted. The words that they committed to memory, astonishingly enough, impacted their lives.

Now, I don’t know about you, but I find that our culture can barely remember which 125 characters we sent five minutes ago, let alone a passage from Dante’s journey through the bowels of Hell. The likes of media critics would assert that this is due to our increased dependence on our televisions, phones, and computer screens and the resulting ‘death’ of word-based, literary culture. In short, when a phone or a computer becomes your primary means of information gathering, you condense your thought life into a measly 125 characters.

However, before we finish unplugging our routers, deleting our contacts, and in some case (I see you, Neil Postman) fashioning tinfoil hats, I urge consideration of a blended co-existence with technology. While the dangers of technological dependence are well-documented, albeit highly contested, the benefits are often overlooked. Through computing power, we can create twice as fast, reach an exponential number of people with our ideas, and pretty much do ten times the work that we normally could. For instance, the current business idea of the ‘lean startup’ would be largely impossible without the ability of a small staff to work efficiently and effectively—two game-changing characteristics of technological improvement.

In short, our tendencies are to create binaries—we can either have this or that, but not both. But that does not have to be the case in regards to our interactions with technology. If we foolishly allow ourselves to become entirely absorbed by yakking, snapping, and tweeting, we miss out on a significant portion of beneficial literary and interpersonal communication. Concurrently, if we focus only on the interpersonal and literary, we miss out on the benefits of mass communication, entirely disregarding the current trends of overlap between these two. Ultimately, by applying some self-control and a little creativity, the two often “opposing” parts of modern life can be brought together into a continuous whole.

So here’s my advice: go read a book, discuss it, and then snap about it with your friends. *
*(data and message rates may apply)