Be Curious, Ask Questions

In a modern democracy, what responsibilities do citizens have to question economic and political systems – and what happens when people stop asking difficult questions? 

A society that ceases to question the status quo, reflect on its present and future, and strive for improvement may ultimately become a society deprived of its freedom. Below, I present arguments supporting this claim.

The essence of asking difficult questions lies in the pursuit of truth, which people seek to discover from the onset of their lives. From a child wondering why the moon seems to follow them during a car ride, through young individuals searching for guidance into adulthood, to adults reflecting on whether their most important life decisions were the right ones. Similarly, from scientists developing new understandings of reality through empirical evidence, to artists and philosophers attempting to grasp the meaning of existence — all seek truth.

In order to attain truth, asking questions is fundamental. Much like in a mathematical equation, some hypotheses lead to the correct solution, whilst others must be rejected. Questioning shapes an individual’s identity, just as doubt, critical thinking, and constant choice-making reveal how we understand the world around us. It also allows us to resist the visions of reality imposed upon us — especially by those who seek to govern us.

The natural human desire to discover the truth gives rise to the need to ask questions — even the most difficult ones. However, what happens to a society when this curiosity is suppressed? Can democracy survive if citizens do not question the state of the country?

The failure to question governmental decisions and the passive acceptance of whatever the state provides deprive citizens of control over their own lives and effectively allow absolute power to emerge. As demonstrated in The Captive Mind by Nobel laureate Czesław Miłosz, the development of totalitarianism suppresses individualism and free thought, along with the ability to question one’s own situation. Intellectuals themselves, who in principle should seek truth and confront difficult questions, become enslaved by an illusion (in Miłosz’s book, seduced by the pill of Murti Bing), their minds dulled and incapable of resisting the dominant system. Even in contemporary democratic states, power may remain beyond the control of citizens. Only an active and engaged society can sustain civic agency, and only a willingness to resist can prevent the emergence of absolute power.

But what, in fact, is democracy based on? This question becomes particularly important in times of democratic crisis, when the fundamental principles of this system are increasingly undermined, and its benefits forgotten and underutilized. These principles include freedom of choice, collective sovereignty, justice, the rule of law, and pluralism of views. These values rely on the active participation of citizens in shaping and sustaining their community through free elections. At the same time, they possess the right to question the authority of government — although this right is often neglected in practice.

These principles formed the foundation of the first democratic system, established in ancient Greece. There, expressing one's opinion was not merely a right, but a civic duty — albeit one reserved only for male citizens. It was in ancient Greece that the human capacity for thought gave rise to conscious reflection on the problems of the world and, within it, the search for truth. It is from this period that we first encounter the great thinkers.

From the earliest formation of social groups, systems, hierarchies, and governments, the freedom to hold and publicly express one's own views has remained a fundamental element of democracy. It enables individuals to make free choices, being part of a community, and actively shaping it — primarily by posing questions and pursuing answers.

Let us consider one of the first advocates of active questioning. The necessity of presenting reality as it truly is constitutes a central theme in The Apology of Socrates, written by his devoted student, Plato. Socrates was brought before a court accused of spreading falsehoods and corrupting the youth by exploring issues that, according to his accusers, should never be known by humans. These included divine and inviolable aspects — aspects of belief and untouchable principles — which Socrates, in their view, questioned without due respect.

According to his critics, there exists a boundary between what may and may not be questioned. Yet Socrates challenges this theory: can we truly stop reflecting on the meaning of existence? Can we simply accept the reality around us without question? His accusers regarded him as a nuisance, even a threat to society, someone who corrupted the youth by instilling impious beliefs. In their view, such an individual deserved severe punishment, even death.

In response, Socrates addressed his fellow citizens directly and honestly. He argued that if he shared his beliefs, it must mean that he believed in something: perhaps not in traditional gods, but in reason itself; not in fixed doctrines, but in their meaning and development. Through his words, Socrates sought to demonstrate that life is not about imitation and uniformity. The world is too vast for all people to think alike, share identical beliefs, or hold permanently unanimous opinions. Such uniformity — the opposite of democratic pluralism — cannot satisfy individuals who seek to understand whether the world they inhabit is the only possible one, or whether something exists beyond it. Difficult questions do not necessarily arise from a lack of respect for society, but from curiosity, the natural desire to go beyond existing boundaries. For meaningful human relationships to exist and for individuals to exercise their freedom within a democratic state, we must not fear to express our own views, nor suppress the voices of others.

Although The Apology of Socrates presents itself as a record of real events, both the accusations against Socrates and the key elements of his defense reveal a timeless message. Perhaps this is because Plato captured the essence of what his teacher wished to convey. Socrates' words remain relevant in the modern world, particularly in the context of shaping political systems. The decline of natural curiosity leads not only to intellectual limitation, but may also result in the domination of individuals or entire societies by authority. A failure to question those in power, combined with the passive acceptance of what the state provides, deprives people of control over their own lives and effectively permits the emergence of absolute power.

Nevertheless, the problem arises not only when the government suppresses public questioning (as Socrates noted), but also when people voluntarily cease to ask questions. This is not necessarily the result of being deprived of that right, as in the authoritarian system depicted in The Captive Mind. In that book, Miłosz highlights the fact that people on the lower levels in the social hierarchy have little real influence. However, when the right to ask questions is universal but remains unused, its value gradually diminishes, and society becomes increasingly ignorant of the political and economic circumstances of the country in which it lives, and even more so about the future that may await it. As a result, citizens lose influence over the possible course of events, since they are not engaged with the current situation and, consequently, with the decisions made by those in power.

Hannah Arendt was a critic of the passive attitude embodied by what she described as "mass society.” As a political philosopher and author of numerous works, she portrayed human indifference as a form of implicit consent to the functioning of totalitarian systems. To understand her critique, it is necessary to clarify the concept of totalitarianism. It is based on the atomization of society, imposing a single, all-explaining ideology while simultaneously depriving people of any form of autonomy. In such a system, the individual has no right to stand out, and no ability to question, since nothing is considered open to doubt. The only active role of the individual is to sustain life itself and to participate in production, that is, in the creation of the material world for the supposed benefit of the state.

How, then, can a "poor" and seemingly powerless society be held responsible for a state that violates its fundamental rights? Arendt connects the problem of the decline in curiosity and a lack of independent thinking with thoughtlessness and mediocrity. Individuals who embody these traits contribute to the formation of mass society. They are unable to build genuine communities, as they themselves are incapable of maintaining authentic interpersonal relationships. For this reason, the absence of engagement in collective life leads individuals into isolation and loneliness. Like Miłosz, Arendt argues that totalitarian systems enslave the human mind. However, she emphasizes that this is society itself that allows this enslavement to occur. This perspective is expressed in her concept of the „banality of evil”: a form of wrongdoing rooted in thoughtlessness, the absence of responsibility, and pure conformism.

This form of evil could be interrupted by a single spark: a single word or idea that might encourage someone to break free from ignorance, trigger wider resistance, and above all, reawaken critical thinking within society. Only then could genuine relationships emerge, pluralism of views develop, and ultimately, democracy take shape. The activation of citizens could initiate true political life, understood as a space for action and speech.

Questions and attempts to answer them generate debate, in which citizens can participate in shaping their shared world in a sovereign and just manner. In such conditions, political engagement would become a fundamental human activity, giving greater meaning to all other aspects of life. As Socrates said, "the unexamined life is not worth living.” Similarly, the state must also be questioned if citizens are to participate in its improvement.

The search for "truth" — from childhood curiosity about the world, through scientific dilemmas, to reflection on what is right — requires asking questions. As can be observed in the works of philosophers throughout history, from antiquity to the relatively recent and turbulent period of the twentieth century, inquiry constitutes a fundamental condition of human development — both internal and personal, as emphasised by Socrates, and one of the development of the state, ensuring that it does not resemble societies governed by absolute power described by Czesław Miłosz and Hannah Arendt.

Individuals who actively engage with the environment in which they live, that is, people who ask difficult questions, are better able to understand their role in shaping the state. In a democracy, every vote matters. And it matters not only once every few years during elections, but also whenever something in the functioning of the state appears disrupted, overlooked, or deliberately concealed by those in positions of power. It is equally important to understand the decisions made by the government. For this reason, even the most difficult questions must be asked, in order to fully comprehend the condition of the state and the ways in which it may evolve.

As a young person who feels obliged to engage daily with and attempt to understand the latest information from around the world, I leave you with this appeal: ask questions, debate, and reflect, even if someone attempts to take away your right to do so, and especially when no one forbids it. Above all, do not allow your curiosity to be suppressed.

Czesław Miłosz, The Captive Mind. Penguin Random House, Ireland, 2001.

Plato, Euthyphro; Apology of Socrates; Crito. Clarendon Press, 1977.

Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism. Penguin Random House, Ireland, 2017. 

Hannah Arendt, Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil. Penguin Books Ltd, 2022.

---

Basia Osiecimska, ur. w 2010 roku, uczennica 2 klasy w III Liceum Ogólnokształcącym w Gdyni. Uwielbia czytać, rysować i grać na pianinie. Autorka będącej projektem szkolnym książki The Art of Dreams, w której opisuje disnejowskie animacje jako formę sztuki. W ramach pracy nad książką dotarła i przeprowadziła wywiady z animatorami Disneya. Marzy o studiowaniu na Columbia University albo University of Oxford, a także o byciu pisarką, prawniczką lub jednym i drugim. 

Powyższy esej otrzymał Distinction Award na międzynarodowym konkursie Lumiere Scholars Essay Award, który promuje uczniów szkół średnich i gimnazjów za umiejętności krytycznego myślenia, tworzenia oryginalnych argumentów oraz obronę własnych tez na ważne tematy społeczne i naukowe. Więcej informacji o konkursie: https://www.lumiere-education.com/lumiere-scholars-essay-award