In so many ways, the
school
I attended in
South Africa
was unique. Modeled after traditional English public schools like Eton
and Harrow, the
South African College
School
(or
"SACS"
as it's known for obvious reasons) was an all boys school. We all wore
the same school uniform. And all of us in those halcyon days of
apartheid were white.
When I say "In many ways, the
school
(singular) I attended ... was unique", yes there was only one school I
attended. Remarkably I attended
SACS
continuously for sixteen years. And no, that's not because I repeated
any of my years there. The
SACS
curriculum comprised two kindergarden years known as "sub A" and "sub
B" (in the United States, first and second grade), followed by five
junior school years known as "standard one" through
"standard five" (in the United States, third through seventh grade),
followed by five high school years known as "standard six"
through "standard ten" (in the United States, eighth through twelfth
grade), the final year of which was known as the
"matriculation year" or simply "matric" (in
the United States, the high school senior year), followed by four years
of university (unusually, the
South African College
also comprised the University of Cape Town).
SACS high school
provided an
extraordinary
cultural introduction to Life. The music society run by English and
History teacher and cricket and rugby coach André "Ali"
Abrahams, met in the evenings not simply to intellectually discuss
classical music, but to really listen to classical music.
It was direct, hands on appreciation - perhaps that should be "ears
on" appreciation. The drama society run by English teacher
and rugby coach Douglas "Doug" Brown produced complex Gilbert and
Sullivan operettas annually, like "The Pirates of Penzance" and "HMS
Pinafore". The debating society run by headmaster and Latin teacher
Robin "The Boss" Whiteford, also met in the evenings.
In the debating society, your
opinion
really counted. In the world of debating,
opinion
is the
coin of the realm.
But
opinion
wasn't just the
coin of the realm
in the
SACS
debating society. It was the
coin of the realm
throughout the entire culture of
SACS high school.
"The Boss" made sure throughout the entire culture of
SACS high school,
a major part of our education comprised developing strong, clearly
defined, well expressed
opinions
as a means to getting along in Life.
It took me the better part of the next ten years to undo what I learned
at
SACS
about getting along in Life with strong, clearly defined, well
expressed
opinions.
Let me explain what I mean by this:
When I learned at
SACS
how to get along in Life with strong, clearly defined, well expressed
opinions,
there were two other related things I didn't learn. These
two other things weren't withheld from us. It's not that
"The Boss" and the other
SACS
teachers like Ali and Doug knew these two things, and intentionally
held them back. It's that they probably weren't aware of
them, so they may never have known how valuable it would
have been for them to be taught.
The first thing I didn't learn about my
opinions
at
SACS
is they're just my
opinions
- that, plus just because they're my
opinionsdoesn't make them real. The emphasis on developing strong,
clearly defined, well expressed
opinions,
didn't include or cover or teach me the most obvious thing there is for
me to know about my
opinions:
I made them up; then I forgot it was I who made them up;
and then I touted them as if they were real. Ouch!
In the world of the
SACS
debating society, the more debates my expressed
opinions
won, the better man I was. A lot of goodies are
gotten by being better than the next guy through having
stronger, clearer defined, better expressed
opinions
than him. Being better than the next guy this way, was the skill I
learned by debating. Having stronger, clearer defined, better expressed
opinions
than the next guy, became connected with being better than him.
It's very, very hard to unlearn this
mis-connection. But when I did start unlearning it, I soon
realized there was no point in unlearning havingopinions.
I realized once I no longer have
opinions,
I'll no longer be human. Humans have
opinions.
For the most part, we humans are a very
opinionated
species. Trying to
give up having my
opinions
goes about as well for me as trying to give up having my nose or trying
to give up having my legs. In this regard, I've discovered something
really useful I can give up: holding my
opinionsas real. I've given up holding my
opinions
as real, and instead I've developed the space for my
opinions
to be just my
opinions
- like my nose and my legs, and everyone's got them, and no big deal,
and
so what?!
The second thing I didn't learn about my
opinions
at
SACS
is this: the emphasis on developing strong, clearly defined, well
expressed
opinions
hides the fact that my
opinionsdon't define
who I am.
Getting along in Life with strong, clearly defined, well
expressed
opinions
but without a clear sense of
who I really am
is at best building the castle on shaky foundations. No amount of
strong, clearly defined, well expressed
opinions
can ever compensate for a lack of sense of
who we really are.
What's
interesting
is once my experience of
who I really am
fully matured, my need to dominate and to win (which is to say my need
to be right) with strong, clearly defined, well expressed
opinions,
dramatically diminished.
When I know
who I am,
I no longer need to debate you and be right
and be better than you by touting stronger, clearer
defined, and better expressed
opinions
than yours. Rather, when I know
who I am,
I am "I am"
(as
Werner Erhard
may have said).
At this point, the value to me of my
opinions
in winning points by being right in order for me to
presencewho I am
in the world, is minimal.
And those, for the most part, are the two things I didn't learn about
my
opinions
at
SACS.
They weren't included in
SACS'
curriculum.
While
SACS
may be unique in so many ways, in this way
SACS
is not unique. The talking heads on any television channel
I turn on at any time of day or night give eloquent testimony to the
prize people seek in touting
opinions
- if that's what you're
interested
in doing.
Consider this: could it be we're so addicted to having strong, clearly
defined, well expressed
opinions,
because having strong, clearly defined, well expressed
opinions
compensate us (and maybe even console us) for not knowing
who we really are?
In the absence of the experience of completion and wholeness and
fulfillment which comes from knowing
who we really are,
perhaps all that's available is to dominate and to win (which is to say
all that's available is to be right) through having
strong, clearly defined, well expressed
opinions.
I can only but wonder about the possibilities for television if, when I
turn it on, I'd see the usual gangs of
opinionated
talking heads, instead sharing
who they really are.
I can also only but wonder what it would bode in Life for
South Africa's
matriculants if these ideas were included in
SACS'
curriculum - starting with sub A.