Thou Art That*

Subjects shouldn't be separated. Though it was not my intention to talk of a people, those that make up a nation, yet separation by class, race, faith and culture came to mind at the same time as this thought about curriculum in schools; as did its opposite of integration. Of course, if I had wished to speak in that context (since I now appear to be going against my original plan) that first sentence would stand and ring truer still. Because we are – by country, by clashes of religion and culture, by systems – and we do naturally, like a river that branches off into a stream. We band together through intolerance and fear, as well as in the need for sameness, to at times feed back into the river of humanity.
We all turn to the source we came from or to one we experienced and grew to love, where we feel most at home and which may not be the one we were born or brought up in, for reassurance, for comfort, to belong. It could be a land, a particular setting, to peoples that are similar to or as different to our own as they can possibly be in terms of outlook and culture. Because all that separates us really is perspective, but then wouldn't it be dull if we all thought the same? And isn't it a shame that we still don't respect one another's differing views, feeling and giving into the urge to criticise or undermine, rather than simply listen.
Dialogue is important, yet language is not a barrier quite as much as we like to think or claim. Sure, it can be a difficulty, but you can get by if the willingness is there to observe and bridge gaps. A lot can be conveyed and gathered without discourse, so language shouldn't wholly separate us or necessarily be seen as a all-uniting factor. Too frequently it's used as a weapon when essentially it's just a tool of communication which imparts information but relies on the power we give it. Words, how they are expressed and interpreted, depends on the individual, as does the reaction to them. Nothing said should be divided from what is in front of us: what you can also hear and/or see, for together it forms a clearer (and bigger) picture, which if you choose to be inattentive to only remains fuzzy.  
That comprehension is marginally less important in the written word, because for that you need careful deduction rather than senses. An intellectual reasoning because you cannot observe the orators. True, more words can and may be used to deliver the unspoken sentiment since print allows them to be expanded upon, but there has to a certain style to foster engagement as otherwise the meaning (or goal) gets lost. Which I suspect I'm doing here.
Does there have to be a goal? That surely is another topic entirely. One I'll resist the temptation to divert to, though it would be interesting to ponder...
Language, as in spoken instead of written, only has such an outline when it's a public address, whereas the everyday is mostly driven by impulse and abetted by the body. Neither, however, are without their dilemmas, and so whilst they do and can divide they cannot be divided. There is no permanent, definitive split because they always meet. Although right now (probably like you!) I'm feeling kind of lost, though I know what I've put down is a truism which hasn't revealed itself fully yet, and may not before this talk is over.
Streams and rivers, and eventually oceans, that's what it returns (and leads) to. And why do we use interchangeable words for bodies of water?
My initial design had been to discuss about how I wish in my time school subjects had been combined (Q. are they now?) to provide greater comprehension of the world i.e. places and peoples. For example, geography was segregated from history and was dry and unhelpful, and largely geology-based, which could have been covered as a specialism if I pursued the subject further. I would have benefited more if it had instead widened my world view and teamed up with the history syllabus. As it was I dropped geography to study sociology as soon as I had the option.
Systems and instruction create division where rationally they shouldn't be any.

*in Sanskritic language Tat tvam asi, a doctrine that asserts everything you think you are and everything you think you perceive are undivided. To realize fully this lack of division is to become enlightened.
(Source: Chapter 12, Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance, Robert M. Pirsig).

Picture credit: Church of the Minorities II, Lyonel Feininger