The Fight over Harvard's 'kindness pledge'

     I believe some people are naturally kind, and others are not. Plain and simple, there's the thesis. In an ideal world all would be kind, but in reality, there will always be bad to accompany the good. Wherever there is kindness I'm sure there will also be unkindness. When I saw this article and read about Harvard's pledge for all freshman to "Act with integrity, respect, and industry, and to sustain a community characterized by inclusiveness and civility," I didn't see what the harm in it was. People argue that you can't force people to be kind; this is true. Not true in the way that it's wrong to force someone to be kind, but true in the way that no matter what pledge students sign, some are naturally kind and some are not.

 

       In the article "The fight over Harvard's kindness pledge" by Joshua Rothman, Rothman  presents both sides of the argument. The pledge begins; "As we begin at Harvard, we commit to upholding the values of the College and to making the entryway and Yard a place where all can thrive and where the exercise of kindness holds a place on par with intellectual attainment.” Those who oppose the pledge, just oppose pledges in general. Some think the idea of a pledge,"even if it’s a kindness pledge  —  unnerving: Harvard,has historically taken a stand against pledges, which, in the form of religious oaths, used to be routine at colleges; Emerson, would have found the whole concept absurd." Others claim kindness is "hardly a civic virtue." Those for the pledge think it is a worthwhile effort to make Harvard an ideal community. I am indifferent about the pledge, like I said, a pledge won't change the true nature of a human. The pledge seems like it will have little to no affect, it's just making students go through the motions. You can't force people to be kind, simple as that. Everyone should practice kindness, regardless of whatever pledge they take. 

To read more on this Article>>>>The Fight over Harvord's 'kindness pledge'