Weblog Inquiry 1: What Do I Believe?

This blog entry is for the first English 112 course assignment. In reading the first chapter of the textbook, Writing Arguments: A Rhetoric with Readings, I quickly realized that I had to realign my thinking on what would be involved in an argumentative writing class. As articulated in the first few pages, I was one of those people who thought that this style of writing would be combative, or structured like a debate. I enjoy writing, but thought that a writing course on argumentative research would feel somewhat dry and obligatory. However, since this semester’s project employs the I-Search methodology, (an inquiry-based approach to research), I suspect that my experience will be much more enjoyable than originally anticipated.

In English 111, I found that narrowing my theses was one of the most challenging aspects of the course. I learned a lot through that process, especially in honing each thesis statement so that I would be pleased with my output while meeting the size requirements for each essay. In contrast, approaching a topic as broad as the meaning of life (the assigned topic for our I-Search project) is a bit daunting, but I am excited about working through the process. While I may not find the answer to the question I pose as my research statement, I am sure to learn something about my classmates and myself in the process.

Prewriting Part I requires us to finish the following twelve statements as a way to explore our personal beliefs:

• I believe that people spend too much time trying to conform to others.
• I believe that society should be more altruistic.
• I believe that government is not entitled to intrude into the private lives of its citizens.
• I believe that justice is not as balanced as it should be.
• I believe that knowledge allows us to release fear.
• I believe that science is an important tool, but is not absolute.
• I believe that reality, as most people understand it is an illusion.
• I believe that life is a continual process of learning.
• I believe that happiness is both a right and a privilege.
• I believe that goodness is a decision to be made every day.
• I believe that death is another step in our evolution.
• I believe that God expects us to accept responsibility for our own choices in life.

Prewriting Part II requires us to choose one of the previous beliefs, writing a paragraph that explores our thoughts about it. Since this is to be an exercise in free-writing, the resulting paragraph will probably sound more like a rant than a cohesive exploration of my feelings on the topic. Nevertheless, here it is:

I believe that government is not entitled to intrude into the private lives of its citizens.

Of the twelve statements, this is the one response that came most quickly to me. I believe that government has lost sight of the original intention of its existence – to represent the interests of the people that empower it. Instead, we have a long history of government officials making decisions about what is and is not appropriate behavior in the lives of its citizens. For instance, I believe that no one should have the right to dictate what people do with or to their own bodies, as long as those actions do not negatively impact others. I do not believe that government has the right to stop a person from ending his or her own life, particularly if he or she is experiencing overwhelming, debilitating physical pain. When did it become acceptable for our government to monitor our phone calls, or our mail, or our computers? I am incensed by the way our current officials wield terrorism as a justification to impinge upon our privacy and strip us of our rights. What about a person’s actions in his or her own home? How can we condone a government telling us what we can and cannot do in the privacy of our own bedrooms? Taking this a step further, government should fairly and equally represent the rights and interests of all of its citizens, not just those who fall within a certain “accepted” framework of cultural or religious beliefs. The government spends entirely too much time imposing itself as the “moral compass” of its citizens, rather than ensuring that all citizens are treated equally under the law.

Prewriting Part III requires us to consider that same belief from the opposing point of view. As such:

There are many laws created by the government that help guide individuals to make socially responsible decisions. Perhaps it is too idealistic to believe that what people choose to do with their bodies will not impact others in the community. For instance, a prostitute could potentially spread diseases by unsafe sexual practices. A person who chooses to take drugs could end up stealing from others to feed an out-of-control addiction. Although society has its share of prostitutes and drug addicts, the laws that address these two lifestyle choices serve to protect our communities and must certainly act as a deterrent for some people. In the case of suicide, doesn’t emotional anguish sometimes cause physical pain? People who are suffering physically or emotionally might not have the mental clarity to realize that their circumstances could possibly improve with time. Doctors who agree to assist these individual are legally culpable for their actions because they provide easy access to medications and related administration methods. Regarding the government’s decision to tap into our phone calls and email, isn’t it worth it if even a single life is saved because an attack is discovered before it happens? Regarding the government’s choices in how to assess and uphold the rights of each individual, it is sometimes necessary to make the best decision for the majority, even if those left in the minority perceive themselves as being mistreated. This approach obviously does not make everyone happy, but it does serve the greater good of society.

Advertisement