Curriculum furor was entirely of my own doing, I guess
First of all, I’d like to apologize if anyone was offended by my recent statement regarding the law of gravity.
Yes, I was outraged when my son brought home an assignment from his third-year university geology class which was clearly biased in favour of the law of gravity.
Much to my dismay, it seems that the law of gravity has been “infused” into all areas of the college curriculum, based on the assumption that an invisible force keeps us from floating off into space, whether we are fixed to the classroom floors of political science, sociology, chemistry or even drama.
What I had intended to propose, without doing any research on the matter beyond personal anecdotal knee-jerk conclusions, is that contentious subjects like gravity be rounded up and confined to their own individual places within the educational system. Might not gravity, for example, be less confusing to students if it were discussed only in high school physics classes where it belongs?
But really, beyond the issue itself lay the notion of academic freedom. Correct me if I’m wrong (something which has actually never happened, I assure you) but aren’t universities supposed to be places where one is free to question the status quo and to propose alternate facts?
Simply put, subject to probity — and, believe me, I’m a ton of fun at parties when I use words like “probity” — should the law of gravity continue to enjoy its exalted, undisputed status? I must ask this in what will definitely not be the first or last of my incoherent ramblings on the topic in the next several minutes.
What my critics have failed to understand, since I started this controversy in the first place for reasons unknown to God or man, is that I have not and did not, nor do I ever intend to disagree with the law of gravity per se. Indeed, I will continue to work toward its continuation and its strengthening.
But, as you know, my ancestors from the old country chose to settle here to be free of oppressive laws which defined their religion, political affiliation and inability to hover. What they sought, as they plowed their newly purchased fields, was the right to question the fact that the force of gravity acting between the Earth and any other object is directly proportional to the mass of the Earth, directly proportional to the mass of the object, and inversely proportional to the square of the distance which separates the centres of the Earth and the object. Thank you Wikipedia.
For is it not in this questioning that we are all truly free of the bonds of Earth? I ask this rhetorical question not to cause division within this magnificent province which was created by our premier in 2007 but to remind citizens to beware of facts, which are presented as facts.
But I see now that wading further into the controversy is getting me in over my head despite the fact that a TV news poll gave me the support of 52 per cent of respondents which, when you’re going down like the Titanic, is like a big, fat life preserver being thrown your way, believe me all you petition signers.
Being that as it may, I’ve decided to take the high road and, on the off-chance that a reporter digs up something which completely contradicts me, I have now taken a new position which is consistent with my old position in which I do not admit I was wrong but now — as before — allow that it would make many people’s lives easier, particularly mine, if I went along with the law of gravity as it may or may not pertain to homework assignments.
I offer this all-inclusive, sweeping apology unreservedly in the hope that I can put the recent unpleasantness behind me and get on with whatever it is that I’m supposed to be doing. Thank you.