Given a lifetime’s worth of human tragedy in less than a calendar year in the United States, and in the West on the whole, the current situation is the antithesis of the “Domestic Tranquility” ideal stated in the Preamble of the Constitution. 

There is, nonetheless, a solution to the widespread mayhem if leaders would only use their intelligence, which remains unimpaired in its essence, to serve the people realistically.   

One lesson I never tired of teaching to my university students is the practicality of principles. A principle is abstract, and life is concrete. Nonetheless, they can be compatible with each other.  

A bridge cannot be built without the knowledge of abstract mathematics. So, too, life cannot be fulfilled, nor can society be at peace, without guiding principles.  

The principle of alphabetical order is indispensable for organizing the words of a dictionary. The principle of numerical order is required to locate houses on a street; otherwise, mail delivery would pose insurmountable problems. The same can be said for arranging rooms in a hotel and numbering the pages in a book. 

Two principles in particular are urgently needed to prevent our society from falling into anarchy. The very word “anarchy,” as a student of Greek would know, means “without a ruler.” Not being ruled by principles is like not knowing what to do or where we are going. It is a kind of intellectual blindness. 

Be willing to entertain an idea without necessarily submitting to it. 

Despite its simplicity, this principle has been woefully neglected in our present society and has created a number of significant problems. This principle has what we might classify as irresistible common sense. 

We are engulfed by ideas. We cannot get away from them. They visit us constantly throughout the day. They are of various kinds. Some are attractive, others are repugnant; some are reasonable, others are irrational.  

To be open-minded in the best sense of the term means to be willing to consider ideas while remaining free to accept or reject them. Ideas in themselves are incapable of harming us. They are just ideas, existing in an abstract mode. We need not be afraid of ideas. What we should fear, however, is a bad idea that is put into practice. 

In my teaching career, I encountered innumerable instances in which some students would get upset when I presented an idea that was the brainchild of some philosopher — Plato, Nietzsche, Aquinas or any other prominent thinker. Often, their displeasure would be directed at me. In my defense, I would remind them that I did not say this, nor should a mere idea provoke such antagonism. 

If we are to use the word “liberal” in a reasonable way, we should say that a liberal person is one who can consider an idea and decide for himself its degree of reasonableness. This is a simple exercise that every thinker should be able to make. And he should be able to make this decision without being agitated or (heaven forbid) moved to violence.  

The violent reaction to an expressed idea, unfortunately, has become a serious problem in contemporary society. The right to freedom of speech is based on the notion that the listener retains the freedom to accept or reject what he hears.  

Reasonable people will not accept an idea unless it is reasonable. Therefore, we can laugh at silly ideas and resist those that are impoverished. On the other hand, there are ideas that are sufficiently reasonable, like those contained in Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address, that they should be enshrined for posterity.  

Let us have the freedom and the common sense to entertain ideas without becoming enraged if we happen not to like them. There will always be an abundance of ideas we do not accept. The world will never be a world of one idea. 

A person should be able to accept criticism without necessarily being offended. 

The fact that no one is perfect is an undebatable truism and a truth that society needs to rediscover and implement. As a corollary to this truth, we all need, from time to time, to be corrected. Being offended is not helpful. We cannot grow without repeated doses of healthy correction.  

A writer, for example, feasts on correction. He is perpetually indebted to the suggestions of good proofreaders and competent editors. Correction, one should remember, may be given in the form of fraternal charity.  

The person who is easily offended may accuse others of being insensitive. But usually, such a person has an image of himself that is unrealistic. Here, the problem is pride. 

The conceited person does not bear correction. He would rather preserve an illusion of himself. When this problem is widespread, as it is in today’s culture, individuals are reluctant to mature, resulting in people being critical of each other without their criticism bearing fruit. It results in an anarchy of incompatible and uncorrectable egos.  

We pray that God give us the wisdom to accept, without being offended, the criticisms we need that allow us to grow. A world of people who are perpetually in a state of being offended is a world of alienation. 

Let us be able to entertain an idea while remaining capable of rejecting it without becoming enraged. This equanimity is critically needed today. Secondly, let us not be so attached to our ego that we are offended whenever a reasonable correction is presented to us. This principle is equally relevant in a society in which it has become fashionable to be offended.  

In order to avoid anarchy, people need to be of assistance to each other. To carry out this important mission, they need to tolerate one another’s foibles, while being nourished by each other’s wisdom.