part of a distinct cultural group.
Another important reason to prevent the extinction of a language is to preserve the distinct
ideas that only that particular language can convey. Certain Native American and Oriental
languages, for instance, contain words symbolizing spiritual and other abstract concepts that
only these cultures embrace. Thus, in some cases to lose a language would be to abandon
cherished beliefs and ideas that can be conveyed only through language.
On the other hand, in today’s high-tech world of satellite communications, global mobility,
and especially the Internet, language barriers serve primarily to impede cross-cultural
communication, which in turn impedes international commerce and trade. Moreover, language
barriers naturally breed misunderstanding, a certain distrust and, as a result, discord and even
war among nations. Moreover, in my view the extinction of all but a few major languages is
inexorable--as supported by the fact that the Internet has adopted English as its official
language. Thus by intervening to preserve a dying language a government might be deploying
its resources to fight a losing battle, rather than to combat more pressing social
problems--such as hunger, homelessness, disease and ignorance--that plague nearly every
society today.
In sum, preserving indigenous languages is, admittedly, a worthy goal; maintaining its own
distinct language affords a people a sense of pride, dignity and self-worth. Moreover, by
preserving languages we honor a people’s heritage, enhance our understanding of history, and
preserve certain ideas that only some languages properly convey. Nevertheless, the economic
and political drawbacks of language barriers outweigh the benefits of preserving a dying
language. In the final analysis, government should devote its time and resources elsewhere,and leave it to the people themselves to take whatever steps are needed to preserve their own
11
distinct languages.
Issue 9
"Although many people think that the luxuries and conveniences of contemporary life are
entirely harmless, they in fact, prevent people from developing into truly strong and
independent individuals."
Do modern luxuries serve to undermine our true strength and independence as individuals?
The speaker believes so, and I tend to agree. Consider the automobile, for example. Most
people consider the automobile a necessity rather than a luxury; yet it is for this very reason
that the automobile so aptly supports the speaker’s point. To the extent that we depend on cars
as crutches, they prevent us from becoming truly independent and strong in character as
individuals.
Consider first the effect of the automobile on our independence as individuals. In some
respects the automobile serves to enhance such independence. For example, cars make it
possible for people in isolated and depressed areas without public transportation to become
more independent by pursing gainful employment outside their communities. And teenagers
discover that owning a car, or even borrowing one on occasion, affords them a needed sense
of independence from their parents.
However, cars have diminished our independence in a number of more significant respects.
We’ve grown dependent on our cars for commuting to work. We rely on them like crutches for
short trips to the corner store, and for carting our children to and from school. Moreover, the
car has become a means not only to our assorted physical destinations but also to the
attainment of our socioeconomic goals, insofar as the automobile has become a symbol of
status. In fact, in my observation many, if not most, working professionals willingly underminetheir financial security for the sake of being seen driving this year’s new SUV or luxury sedan.
In short, we’ve become slaves to the automobile.
Consider next the overall impact of the automobile on our strength as individuals, by which I
mean strength of character, or mettle. I would be hard-pressed to list one way in which the
automobile enhances one’s strength of character. Driving a powerful SUV might afford a
person a feeling and appearance of strength, or machismo. But this feeling has nothing to do
with a person’s true character.
In contrast, there is a certain strength of character that comes with eschewing modern
conveniences such as cars, and with the knowledge that one is contributing to a cleaner and
quieter environment, a safer neighborhood, and arguably a more genteel society. Also,
alternative modes of transportation such as bicycling and walking are forms of exercise which
require and promote the virtue of self-discipline. Finally, in my observation people who have
forsaken the automobile spend more time at home, where they are more inclined to prepare
and even grow their own food, and to spend more time with their families. The former
enhances one’s independence; the latter enhances the integrity of one’s values and the
strength of one’s family.
To sum up, the automobile helps illustrate that when a luxury becomes a necessity it can sap
our independence and strength as individuals. Perhaps our society is better off, on balance,
with such "luxuries"; after all, the automobile industry has created countless jobs, raised our
12
standard of living, and made the world more interesting. However, by becoming slaves to the
automobile we trade off a certain independence and inner strength.
Issue 10
"Most cultures encourage individuals to sacrifice a large part of their own personalities in order
to be like other people. Thus, most people are afraid to think or behave differently because