Evidently in the mmmm, sigh, 15 years+ since I started college, things have changed. No, I'm not talking about the laptop requirement and textbooks on computers. Yes, that has changed from back in the day, as well as many other things, but students now have to read a book BEFORE they arrive for orientation. Several years ago UNC's selection made quite an uproar. I don't even remember what it was now, but that was the first time I had ever heard about reading requirements before you even started classes that wasn't for a class (except for my AP English class in high school).
The N&O released the required reading list. Most of the schools had chosen either biographies or books about true stories that had current cultural significance, or dealt with an alumni, the history of the school/faith, etc (Here's the article with the list: http://www.newsobserver.com/2011/07/03/1315108/provocative-reading-from-colleges.html#storylink=misearch ) Imagine my surprise when I get 2/3 through the list and see this:
Thoughts anyone?
The N&O released the required reading list. Most of the schools had chosen either biographies or books about true stories that had current cultural significance, or dealt with an alumni, the history of the school/faith, etc (Here's the article with the list: http://www.newsobserver.com/2011/07/03/1315108/provocative-reading-from-colleges.html#storylink=misearch ) Imagine my surprise when I get 2/3 through the list and see this:
Duke University and UNC-Chapel Hill: "Eating Animals," by Jonathan Safran Foer. An examination of the stories we use to justify our eating habits.Say WHAT? I'm going to read the book, just to see what it says. I could be wrong. I shouldn't judge a book by it's title. But seriously, how is this going to help students with their college education? Granted, I have no idea what criteria are used in the book selection process, but it seemed wildly out of step with the other listings. I suppose this book could be educational, but unless you're studying nutrition, I think a person's eating habits are PERSONAL, not educational.
Thoughts anyone?
Comments
Well, anyone can go to the Amazon web site and read more about this piece of liberal enlightenment. The author tries to make you believe he is treating both sides of the "animal eating" issue equally. But when you have reviews that state the book's main thrust is the deplorable conditions that farm animals must endure, etc. And how we are idiotic to eat the pig which is smarter than the dog and ask, "Why?" Aye carumba!
One more example of those who use their lives to elevate animals while demeaning mankind (which is obviously the opposite of the biblical view of the privileged state of man--and not animal--made in the image of God). And that appears to be the ultimate summation (and endpoint) of the atheistic/humanistic evolutionary standpoint. "A rat is a pig is a dog is a boy." We are all nothing but cause and effect machines. Nothing more than carbon-based lifeforms whether it be person, animal or plant. So why should be really care about anything? Sad.