Individual Character, Basis Of Unity Multiplicity Of Voices

Your Name
Course Code
Assignment
Professor
November 2, 2017
In “Speaking In Tongues” Smith explores human nature and individual character on the basis of unity and multiplicity of voices. She attempts to compare what it means to be single voiced and multi-voiced. Although Smith introduces herself with a voice that she acquired while studying at Cambridge University, She still cherishes the voice that she acquired in childhood from the affluent neighborhoods of England. In the excerpt below, she states:
“Hello….The voice with which I speak with these days this English voice with its rounded vowels and consonants in more or less the right place-this is not the voice of my childhood. I picked it up in college…” (Smith 132)
Smith supports multiplicity rather than a unitary identity. She evidently states that a single identity limits an individual arguing that having multiple identities is important as it defines individuals’ social-cultural perspective enabling them to express themselves in plural rather than in singular. She cites Presidents Obama’s frequent use of “we..” in his speeches as a suggestion of inclusivity that comes from having multiple identities. On the other hand, Wendell suggests that fundamentalists are largely concerned with “…investing their opinions with power” (Wendell . Thus he seems to suggest that the advantage of acknowledging doubt in our intellectual potential is that it opens us up to begin to seek for and ultimately acquire more knowledge. In the process, an individual will acquire both ‘knowable’ and unknowable’ knowledge. He acknowledges division as essential in the process of unification since the power of self-reconciliation lies first in the acceptance of the pre-existing disparity. An individual must first accept their internal diversity as distinct for them to begin to appreciate the diversity from without.
Acceptance of one’s identity helps in the elimination of identity crisis, which could be a hindrance to appreciating other people’s identity. Thus multiplicity, from both Berry and Smith’s standpoints helps an individual better deal with social, cultural fears and stigma that is often linked to a single identity. Acknowledging the ambiguity and ambivalence of the self is a critical step towards complete emancipation of the self from the captivity of unitary identity. This freedom is necessary as it enables an individual to tap into the unique potential that is embodied in each single identity. Both writers have a common perspective on the advantages of identity acknowledgement. Their argument suggests that an individual’s greatest potential lies in their ability to switch between different identities as they are able to speak to people in their native language. Thus Smith argues that identity is entrenched in the multiplicity of ethnic histories and social afflictions. She cites an example of president Obama, whose social-cultural multiplicity enables him to take on different identities hence he is able to speak to millions of people in their language.
Wendell’s fundamentalist mindset discussion can be compared to Smith’s single identity discussion since they bear similarity. From the two authors, it’s apparently clear that a fundamentalist’s mindset exhibit limitations that are inherent in a unitary identity. Just as a unitary identity limit’s an individual culturally and socially, so does a fundamentalist mindset. Single identity compares to fundamentalist’s mindset as both lack diversity and multiplicity. In the same way an individual with a unitary identity is limited to speaking in one voice to a single group of people, so are other fundamentalists. Berry suggests that fundamentalists have a tendency to seek to explain things from a narrow perspective which eventually limits their ability to acquire new knowledge, especially knowledge that is beyond science. For instance, Smith cites professor Weinberg, whose fundamentalist mindset confined him to the knowledge of what is knowable, while denying him an opportunity to know what could not be known. Professor Weinberg’s argument on the non-existence of God and life after death attests to the limited nature of a fundamentalist mindset.
In concurrence with Wendell, Smith praises to writers such as Shakespeare, Obama and George Bernard for their exceptional to uphold multiplicity of identity throughout their writings. She observes that these writers were able to simultaneously speak in multiple voices, thus helping them acquire multiple identities. Smith cites Shakespeare, whom she praises for his ability to maintain a multiplicity of voices throughout his writings. This universality of speech that enabled him to create characters that can speak in multiple voices and have diverse identities helped him be enabled him to be able to address a wider audience. Likewise, President Obama was able to reach to millions of Americans through his multiple voices. Thus, according to Berry, a fundamentalist’s mindset is limited due to its unitary perspective. Smit...