Questions 46-50 are based on the following passage. 　　No matter what our work is, we all have to face that choice - in my field no less than in others. There may not be a more important field for the dissemination of values in our country than the entire communications 　　industry - most strikingly, television. Networks are very sensitive to that fact, and they employ dozens of censors to prevent all of us from using language on television that an eight year old might have to explain to his parents. But the point that censors miss, I think, is that it is not so much what we say that teaches as what we don’t say. Even programs that attempt to make a moral point don’t always make the point that they intended to. Because when we sense we are being sole something, we automatically defend ourselves against it. I think it may be the unspoken assumptions that mold an audience. 　　Look at the way, for instance, that violence is treated on television. It is not only the quantity that offends. There probably is no more violence on television than there is in a Shakespearean tragedy. But on television you find unfelt violence and in Shakespeare you tend to find felt violence. In Shakespeare the characters react with a human response: They fear, they hurt, they mourn. Most of the time on television, violence is dealt with by sweeping it under the rug as fast as possible and by having people go on about their business as if nothing had happened. (If I can’t have less violence, I want at least a better grade of violence.) One of the unspoken assumptions is that violence can be tolerated as long as you ignore it and have no reaction to it. But that seems to me to be dangerously close to psychopathic behavior. I wonder if there is any connection between the long acceptance by our people of the Vietnam War and the thousands and thousands of deaths that we have seen on television over the years that were never mourned, never even paused for except to sell shampoo for sixty seconds. 　　Maybe our greatest problem is that we have two separate sets of value systems that we use - the one we talk about and the one we live by. We seem to place a very high value on fairness and on human concerns. And yet we still have widespread discrimination based on race, sex and religion. You still don’t find Jews, blacks or other minorities in any significant numbers in decision-making positions in the banking industry, for instance. You think that’s an accident I think somebody puts a value on that. And you don’t find women in any significant numbers in decision-making capacities in any industry. Why Because we place a higher value on appeasing the fragile male ego than we do on fairness and decency. Maybe what we need is a declaration of interdependence. 　　Questions: By citing the examples of the Jews, blacks, and other minorities in the last paragraph, the author aims to show that ________.