So imagine my disappointment when a friend sent me an email with the following headline: “Harry Potter Promotes Witchcraft” The ‘article’ goes on to say that when children and teens read the Harry Potter books they are encouraged (if not commanded) to go out and become witches. It equates witchcraft with Satanism and every negative connotation that comes along with that. The gist of the piece is that if you or your kids read Harry Potter you will burn in hell.  

I’m sure this friend’s motives were well intentioned. But I am upset that she sent me something that looks like a chain letter (because I hate that crap) and even worse a chain letter gushing with verbal diarrhoea. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion and if that includes giving over your opinion making faculties to someone else (such as a religious cleric) then that’s your right. But I draw the line when it comes to denying our rights by censoring what is read. 

Let us consider the merits of the argument that Harry Potter promotes witchcraft as put forward by the ‘article’ I received:

1.       The book is about a student at a school that teaches witchcraft and wizardry so it definitely promotes witchcraft to school children. 

2.       Harry, the main character, uses magic to help him in life and therefore endorses the idea that magic is a way to solve problems. 

3.       The primary audience are impressionable children; therefore, the JK Rowling knows that they will want to find out more about witchcraft.  

First off the ‘author’ definitely does not know what a syllogism is; those ‘arguments’ are direct quotes from the ‘article’ and to say they lack reasoning is an understatement. But I digress.  JK Rowling has expressly denied that she intended for her books to promote witchcraft and has also denied that they do in fact promote witchcraft. In one interview, J.K. Rowling said, “People tend to find in books what they want to find.” This certainly is the case here. I read the books because I find a great story there, some find it as a means of escape, others find a new and interesting world, while some find a saviour story similar to all the hero myths and then there are those who find in it a manual for witchcraft and a one way ticket to hell.   

Let us consider the arguments above:

1.       Yes, witchcraft is indeed a feature of the book, but the fact that a book includes or is about a certain thing does not mean it endorses it. Books about wars (The Kite Runner) or crime novels (A Time to Kill) do not advocate war nor do they encourage us to go out and kill people. They are what they are, fictional stories meant to entertain. If you want to get a book about witchcraft there is a wide selection in the non-fiction section of your bookstore (Wicca: A Guide …). And could we also say that since the Bible says we should kill anyone who works on the Sabbath then we should go out and kill Christians who do not observe the Sabbath? 

2.       Although Harry uses magic it is not indispensable. It is often the case that Harry and his friends must abandon their magical abilities and work together to solve their problems. There are many instances of wands breaking or being taken away leaving the characters powerless except for their mental acumen and teamwork. In fact, the major accomplishments in almost all novels are achieved without magic. 

3.       The primary audience are indeed children, who are impressionable, that is why parents have to be involved in their children’s lives in order to distinguish fantasy from reality. I admit that some children (who are by no means the majority) will want to find out more about magic and if they can also accomplish the feats that harry does. However, parents should step in here and guide their children the same way they would if the child wanted to know if there is a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. But remember that an active imagination is good for a child, teens and adults as well and so it should not be unduly stifled.  

And why don’t we hear this outcry against books by JRR Tolkien such as the Lord of The Rings Trilogy? Certainly, if we are to follow the arguments against Harry Potter, we could say that these books promote trips to middle earth to battle trolls and a mysterious fiery eye (I would sign up for a trip like this by the way). And I don’t believe that witchcraft has anything to do with Satanism but that’s another story.  

I could go on and on, but it will be sufficient to say that the arguments for a ban on Harry Potter books because they promote witchcraft are unwarranted and borderline fanatical. The section of Christian fundamentalists who believe that the books promote witchcraft and Satanism should ban the books in their own homes if they disagree with them– they have a right to. But they cannot impose their religion’s morality on the wider public.   

I’m not anti-Christian, let me make that clear. I am anti-dumb and pro freedom of expression, conscience and free will and I wish more people would be the same, especially those who purport to follow the Bible. The Bible, in the book of Genesis, says god created Adam (or Adam and Eve) and endowed him (or them) with the freedom to either eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil or not. They had free will. God gave them free will, please do not try and take away what God has given us. That’s if you follow the Bible anyway J    

 © 2008 Awkward Verb 

Think.

I believe this is an appropriate verb to start our journey with. But before we begin, it is necessary that we come to an agreement as to the meaning of the word. I suggest the following definition:

“… Thinking is a mental process which allows beings to model the world, and so to deal with it effectively according to their goals, plans, ends and desires. Words referring to similar concepts and processes include cognition, sentience, consciousness, idea, and imagination.” – en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Think. A more crude definition is “to use the brain” but I much prefer the latter meaning.

From this definition we can see that thinking is essential to human life and is a necessary and appropriate activity in which we should be regularly engaged since without thinking we are not able to effectively achieve our desires. I submit that the word, as defined above, is its proper and correct meaning and should be rescued from the gutter to which it has been placed by everyday uninformed usage.

So what is my issue with the word think? My concern is that too many people either refuse to or have forgotten how to think.

Thinking is both an active and reflective exercise. It is active in the sense that it is a means of achieving an end and it also reflective because we must consider what it is we wish to achieve before we set about achieving it. Take as an example someone watching a commercial for a car on television; the commercial grabs their attention but they do not rush out right then and buy the car. No, they first think … ‘I want this car because it looks good, and it would make my commute to work easier but I might not be able to afford it right now’. Of course the substance of thought will differ with each individual as we are all conditioned to varying degrees by culture and our unique societal and community values. But the faculty of thought and the act of thinking remain the same.

Thinking involves considering the utility of a thing or an action by applying rational and reflective thought (a process of receiving, discerning and judgement). Some may argue that this is not ‘thinking’ per se, but ‘critical thinking’; however I must disagree and submit that we do this type of rational reflective thinking everyday without even realising it. We need not embark on a difficult task of detailing our goals and the steps we should take towards them; instead thinking oftentimes acts as a reflex action and we can be said to ‘think without thinking’. Most people, if they are human, have this capacity; it is less developed in some and more developed in others while the majority of us fall somewhere in the middle.

So where have we gotten this far:

1. Thinking is an active and reflective exercise involving discernment and judgement,
2. Which allows humans to effectively model the world and realise their goals,
3. And all humans possess this ability.

And why have I even bothered to begin with this verb you may ask? Why because it is an awkward verb in the sense that it is inconvenient to most people. Most of us are averse to thinking, becloud or thinking or refuse to act on what we have thought. This has led us to undesirable consequences both for the individual and those around him. This situation is greatly magnified when the ones who refuse to think are those who wield socio-political or economic power. A cursory look at any popular media outlet will prove the truth of this statement.

As the definition says, thinking allows us to mould our world, it therefore follows that a failure to think leaves the world up to chance and accident, the whims of those who do not think and worse yet the whiles of those who put their thinking to diabolical purposes. The atrocities of slavery and the slave trade of the holocaust and the World Wars were the result of meticulous thinking so I urge you not only to think, but to think according to what is fair to all parties as dictated by reason and conscience.

In conclusion, I invite you to think when reading awkwardverb.wordpress.com. Please read with an open mind, consider what is written, compare it to what you have decided to be true and then form an opinion – you can do it, that is if you are a human. Do not come to the page with rigid opinions and then consider the extent to which what is written corresponds with them. Your opinions as well as well as mine may be wrong. What I would like is that we bring together our minds to see how we can form a better opinion from our collective thinking.

In the spirit of Descartes Cogito, ergo sum.

Awkward Verb

  © 2008 Awkward Verb