In 1965, The Rolling Stones released "(I Can't Get No) Satisfaction." They carried on with their 50 year carrier. Taylor Swift has been singing for around 10 years; imagine hearing her songs on the radio in 40 more. That'd be totally weird. I'm not arguing against it ⎯ long live the great T-Swizzle ⎯ but it'd be weird, and to be honest, it's likely not going to happen. This is because it's hard to stay famous, and I think eventually that she is going to say that she is done because she'll be satisfied.
The power of connotation is a fascinating thing, and it is rarely more clear than when contrasting "give up" with "be satisfied." These two phrases are, under close inspection, synonyms. To acknowledge that one is satisfied is to say that one has invested sufficient effort to stop doing or obtaining more of whatever one is satisfied with. Being satisfied is giving up without feeling bad about it. Satisfaction is willful cessation. It is a key principle in economics and underlies fundamental theories of that science. It is the reason I generally don't eat entire birthday cakes in one sitting. It is a key component in the Honors Program dilemma. Wait.
What is the Honors Program dilemma? Well, I came up with the name myself; it's very creative. In a nutshell, putting all the "smart kids" together fosters some great things: relationships with like-minded peers, confidence, academic ambition, faster paced and more effective classes. There are, however, disadvantages. Such programs foster complacent egotistic intellectualism and can isolate students. Appreciation of classic literature and other beautiful artifacts of academia can be snuffed out or missed because of the sheer volume that professors assign in their zeal. So there are some bad things and a whole lot of good things, too. I have no perfect solution, but I can say that if it was not for satisfaction, the negatives that I have listed wouldn't exist.
Satisfaction isn't just about whether or not I eat another donut. Satisfaction is about whether or not I walk away changed and with a different understanding of the fight against racism after reading a book of Martin Luther King Jr.'s sermons. I am going to define what I mean by complacent egotistic intellectualism here, and I am going to connect it with the idea of isolation because one is a natural byproduct of the other. Imagine two young adults in a classroom who are aware of each other's test scores. One scores a higher 80 percent without much effort and 90 percent with effort. The other scores a 75 percent after a good deal of studying. This does not change. How is the higher-scoring student going to view the other student? Even if both students are good and truly intelligent people, how is the higher-scoring student going to think about the other one eventually?
The answer is sadly obvious. I do not paint the illustration here to belittle the gifts of higher-scoring students; academically intelligent people are awesome. But as a Christian, I am inclined to think that we are blessed so that we may bless others. As a well-read young man who is familiar with a few Socratic dialogues, I am inclined to believe that it is only logical to work towards the betterment of the community. So ideally, it works like this: one student is better than the other in the course, so he/she helps out and tutors the other student. If the more naturally talented student is satisfied with where he/she is at in the class, then things don't change. But if that student can realize his or her talent and acknowledge that satisfaction with a non-ideal status quo is the biggest roadblock to progress, things will change. When the more naturally talented student is satisfied with the status quo, and the situation is repeated in other classes, an egotism naturally builds up. This, combined with the barrage of new and often complex ideas that should exist in any Honor's Program, creates a mindset that readily absorbs ideas without believing them or letting them have any impact. The Honors student is likely to deign other regular students' lifestyles as a less valid means of getting along. A rift develops, all the while being reinforced by a situation unknowingly propagated by the victim. If the better students are satisfied with their isolated lives, the benefit of interacting with and understanding the lives of others is lost.
Honor's Programs are intentionally a heavy academic load. A paradox arises here that is the second part of the Honor's Program Dilemma: to encourage study of classic subjects, more work is assigned. Because students have to get more done, they work faster and with less care. If the pressure is on, there is often not a lot of joy derived from the work. It's not fun anymore, so students don't pursue it as much on their own. So if students are made to do more work, they learn less. If students are not given a heavy work load, they don't work much, so they learn less. But if a student decides to not be satisfied with just an average dose of Shakespeare, then the problem is solved.
Satisfaction when people should not be satisfied is the greatest roadblock to progress. As Edmund Burke put it: "The only thing necessary for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing." But, of course, in some cases, we are not satisfied when we should be. Statistics prove that when the average church-going American family's income increases, their tithing decreases proportional to total income. Past experience shows that if it's donut day and I have time for another two old-fashioneds before class, I will grab four and multitask for the first few minutes of calculus.
Basically, my point is that lives could get a whole lot better if we become more aware of when we become satisfied and proceed to question whether or not we should be satisfied. To make this article worth reading, ask yourself a few times today the illuminating question: "Am I satisfied?"
