In consideration of the book and film, The Diving Bell and The Butterfly as well as your own life, to what extent can we distinguish between knowing as an individual and knowing as a community? How much of one's knowledge depends on interaction with other knowers?
I think it can be difficult to distinguish between what we know as an individual and what we know as a community. There are some things that I feel like can be clear. An example is Knowledge by acquaintance. It is something that is known by you, and not the community. You can determine how someone is feeling by how the act, and from prior knowledge of their actions. Knowledge by description however can be a bit fuzzy to determine. You can know that something does something, which can be knowledge as a community member. But you can also know that something feels a certain way, which would be knowledge as an individual. I also believe that a large, if not most of peoples knowledge Is based off of their interactions with others. This may lead them to obtain knowledge as a individual or as a community member.
There are many strengths and limitations to knowing as an individual vs. knowing as a community. Knowing as an individual is a more personal experience that cannot necessarily be expressed to other people. It is impossible to explain to other people the feelings that you feel. You can know that you love someone, but you cannot explain to them how it makes you feel. Also you can know how something tastes, but you cannot describe it to someone with out stating another type of taste to describe it. Example “This chicken taste salty.” There is no possibly way to fully explain what salty taste like. Also knowing as an individual you are able to obtain knowledge by your own beliefs and perceptions. Knowing as an individual can be strong because your views and beliefs are not affected by the popularity of the community. Making it so you are able to be your own self. When you know as a community though, knowledge is more accepted by what the majority of the people have come to accept as reality. For example, if one person sees a purple monkey in the room, but the other 20 people in the room do not see it then as a community it is accepted as not being there. However, for that one person they themselves know that there is a purple monkey in the back of the room. Knowledge as a community can be a good thing though. It can help to establish similar believed truths, like the sky is blue. However there can be some serious problems with knowing as a community. For example, the slave trade. The majority of the people who lived in the countries who purchased slaves believed that these people were inferior. This majority of the people ‘knowing’ that Africans were inferior lead to the slave trade being accepted as an ok thing, even though it was very inhumane. I think that Bauby would agree that both are important. He would feel like it is very important to know as an individual. This is what gives him his butterfly. All of the knowledge that he knows is able to set him free when he is stuck in the hospital bed. His feelings and emotions toward certain things create such strong images that he can almost escape from the reality that he is now in. He must also feel that knowing as a community is important, especially for his condition. Since the all of the doctors have the agreeable knowledge on his condition they are able to care for him. If they all did not know as a community of doctors about locked in syndrome they may not have known what to do to help Bauby. Or they could have had many different views on how to handle it. However, knowing about it as a community lead to them to be able to help him.
I do not think there is anyway to gain knowledge by description or acquaintance without any type of interaction with others. Knowledge by Description is when you know that something is something. Abel describes it as ‘knowing that’, but you also need to be connected to what ever you know, you must have seen it, or have some type of interaction with it. For example, you can know that the sky is blue or you can know that someone loves you. I think it is impossible to gain this type of with out some type of human interaction. To be able to know that someone loves you, you need to first feel that emotion. Also I do not think that you can know the sky is blue without being taught what blue is or what the sky is. I also do not think that knowledge by Acquaintance can be gained with interaction with others. Knowledge by acquaintance is described as ‘raw feels’ by able. What this means is that you can know someone from interacting with them. You can tell what type of mood they are in when they walk into the room or by little things they do. This knowledge can certainly not be obtained without interaction between other people. If you were to never interact with another person you would not be able to ‘know’ them. Bauby would most likely agree with this view. He would feel that his interaction with others is the most important thing with his condition. For example, whenever his butterfly is traveling back to things from his past, he is using knowledge of description. He is remembering interactions he had with people. He is remembering things that he knows that exist. Also he would agree to the fact that in order to obtain knowledge by acquaintance. Even though his interaction with people has become very limited he cannot gain any type of knowledge by acquaintance with out some type of interaction with these people.
In gaining knowledge one of the most powerful ways we justify our knowledge claims is reasoning both by induction and deduction. I think this is most powerful because when people hear, see, smell, touch, or taste something they are more apt to feel stronger about what they know. For instance if you are to eat a carrot you know what it is. If you were to be blindfolded and handed a carrot and told to eat it you would know that what you are eating is a carrot. People also seem to believe what they experience and feel that they are able to justify it easier. Also when people use deduction, using logic to create reason, they are able to explain to people how they came across the knowledge they have. I think that Bauby would agree with this. Throughout his book when he is describing all of the emotions and feelings he has gone through. However I feel that for him his memory is the most powerful way to express his knowledge. He is only able to communicate through blinking his eye and his whole book is based off of his memory of his experiences and things from his past. Even his butterfly. When his mind is traveling to events from the passed it is all based off of memories that he has seen and or experienced from the passed. With out any sense of memory he would not have any way to express himself, his experiences, and way to ‘travel back in time’. His memory is the best way for him to justify his knowledge.
Tuesday, December 16, 2008
Saturday, December 13, 2008
Pink Noise
Why do you think Pink Noise works? Do you think Sturgis should pump in Pink Noise throughout the school? Why or why not?
I think pink noise works because it gives the brain a different sound to focous on than rather than focousing on the louder, more annoying sound. Also since the sound is closer and louder it is able to block out the unwanted sound. By giving off a pleasent sound the person in the work place or wherever will most likely consentrate on the more pleasen sound then the distracting annoying one. However i do not think that Sturgis should pump in the pink noise. First of all we do not have that many distractions that are happening outside of the school, well ones that we havent come accustomed too. I also personally think that it almost makes the noise more noticeble. In the example when the play the music and the hammer thing at the same time it almost bugged me because it didnt fit in with the music at all. I also have the a feeling that other students at sturgis would feel the same, since we have so many musically inclined students.
I think pink noise works because it gives the brain a different sound to focous on than rather than focousing on the louder, more annoying sound. Also since the sound is closer and louder it is able to block out the unwanted sound. By giving off a pleasent sound the person in the work place or wherever will most likely consentrate on the more pleasen sound then the distracting annoying one. However i do not think that Sturgis should pump in the pink noise. First of all we do not have that many distractions that are happening outside of the school, well ones that we havent come accustomed too. I also personally think that it almost makes the noise more noticeble. In the example when the play the music and the hammer thing at the same time it almost bugged me because it didnt fit in with the music at all. I also have the a feeling that other students at sturgis would feel the same, since we have so many musically inclined students.
Thursday, December 11, 2008
Diving bell
1. After reading Vegetable, respond to Bauby's statement: "I belonged on a vegetable stall and not the human race." Why do you think it is necessary for humans to put people into categories? Is our language so limiting in describing the world that we need a way to ourganize our thoughts?
I think it is necessary for humans to put people into categories for needs of communication. It makes it easier to describe someone if there is a premade and understood category to place someone into. Like in the book, the term 'vegetable' is a well known term and makes it alot easier to express that someone is physically alive, but in a coma, or not mentally and physically able to be there. I belive that our language is that limiting that we need to have categories to expressing people and our thoughts. However i do think that a large part of the need for organization and categories is for easiness and fast communication. People are constantly looking for a faster and easier way to do things, so why would they want to spend the time explaining things when they could just put it in a category and have someone understand?
2. Bauby claims that, "Capturing the moment, these small slices of life...I hoard all these letters like treaure." What do you hoard and why?
I hoard gifts and notes. Not like the expensive gifts, but those little signs of affection. The gifts based off an inside joke. I have a wall completely made out of random drawings, cards, signs, pictures, notes, and things like that from my friends. On it it has petals from flowers i have been given on different occasions. I hoard this because there is many happy memories sitting right there on my wall. I just have to look at one of these things and automatically the 'moment, these small slices of life' comes flooding back to me and instantly I become happy. Its a way to never have to forget some of my most precious memories with the friends I love most.
3. Read Outing and respond to Bauby's statement: "I know who he is, but who is he really?" Is he getting any closer to understanding what makes people tick? Also, why will Bauby never tire of the smell of French Fries?
I think he is kinda getting closer to understanding what make people tick. He has come to the realization that even thought he knows this man, and who he is. He doesnt know what the man really is. He doesnt know this mans past, what is going on in his head, why he does the things he does. I think that Bauby will never tire of the smell of french fries becuase its as close as he can get to eating them. Because of the condition he is in now he is unable to eat food and cannot taste them. When you smell something very to you almost a sense noslagia comes over you and you can rember the taste that that certain food has.
4. Read Twenty to One. Bauby claims that, "the memory of that event has only come back to me now, now doubly painful: regret for a vanished past and, above all, remorse for lost opportunities." Do you ever look back on something in your life as a "small near miss"? Is it ever beneficial to have regrets?
I think it is impossible for one not to have some memories that they look back on and wish that they had gone differntly. After something has happened, over a period of time (long or short it doesnt matter) you are able to have knowledge of the effect of what ever had happened. By looking back at it you arer able to have certain view, which leads to regret. I think that some regrets are deffinatly a good thing. They can lead you to act differntly in a bad situation, making what ever the situation is better than the last time you had encountered it.
5. Read Duck Hunt and explain what Bauby means by the statement: "I must have butterfly hearing."
To be 100% honest im not really sure what he ment by this statement. I think he was trying to illustrate to the reader how he can easily find butterflies to escape his reality. Mabey that he seems to notice things others dont now? I'm not really sure.
6. Read Sunday. Why do you think Bauby dreads this day?
I think Bauby dreads this day because he has no human interaction. He is left to only communitcate with himself and search through his head for interestion memories to relive. The only interaction he can get with the world is through his visitors and his thearipists. Since they do not come on sunday he is unable to communicate with them
I think it is necessary for humans to put people into categories for needs of communication. It makes it easier to describe someone if there is a premade and understood category to place someone into. Like in the book, the term 'vegetable' is a well known term and makes it alot easier to express that someone is physically alive, but in a coma, or not mentally and physically able to be there. I belive that our language is that limiting that we need to have categories to expressing people and our thoughts. However i do think that a large part of the need for organization and categories is for easiness and fast communication. People are constantly looking for a faster and easier way to do things, so why would they want to spend the time explaining things when they could just put it in a category and have someone understand?
2. Bauby claims that, "Capturing the moment, these small slices of life...I hoard all these letters like treaure." What do you hoard and why?
I hoard gifts and notes. Not like the expensive gifts, but those little signs of affection. The gifts based off an inside joke. I have a wall completely made out of random drawings, cards, signs, pictures, notes, and things like that from my friends. On it it has petals from flowers i have been given on different occasions. I hoard this because there is many happy memories sitting right there on my wall. I just have to look at one of these things and automatically the 'moment, these small slices of life' comes flooding back to me and instantly I become happy. Its a way to never have to forget some of my most precious memories with the friends I love most.
3. Read Outing and respond to Bauby's statement: "I know who he is, but who is he really?" Is he getting any closer to understanding what makes people tick? Also, why will Bauby never tire of the smell of French Fries?
I think he is kinda getting closer to understanding what make people tick. He has come to the realization that even thought he knows this man, and who he is. He doesnt know what the man really is. He doesnt know this mans past, what is going on in his head, why he does the things he does. I think that Bauby will never tire of the smell of french fries becuase its as close as he can get to eating them. Because of the condition he is in now he is unable to eat food and cannot taste them. When you smell something very to you almost a sense noslagia comes over you and you can rember the taste that that certain food has.
4. Read Twenty to One. Bauby claims that, "the memory of that event has only come back to me now, now doubly painful: regret for a vanished past and, above all, remorse for lost opportunities." Do you ever look back on something in your life as a "small near miss"? Is it ever beneficial to have regrets?
I think it is impossible for one not to have some memories that they look back on and wish that they had gone differntly. After something has happened, over a period of time (long or short it doesnt matter) you are able to have knowledge of the effect of what ever had happened. By looking back at it you arer able to have certain view, which leads to regret. I think that some regrets are deffinatly a good thing. They can lead you to act differntly in a bad situation, making what ever the situation is better than the last time you had encountered it.
5. Read Duck Hunt and explain what Bauby means by the statement: "I must have butterfly hearing."
To be 100% honest im not really sure what he ment by this statement. I think he was trying to illustrate to the reader how he can easily find butterflies to escape his reality. Mabey that he seems to notice things others dont now? I'm not really sure.
6. Read Sunday. Why do you think Bauby dreads this day?
I think Bauby dreads this day because he has no human interaction. He is left to only communitcate with himself and search through his head for interestion memories to relive. The only interaction he can get with the world is through his visitors and his thearipists. Since they do not come on sunday he is unable to communicate with them
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
Diving Bell Questions
1. What is significant about the last line in Guardian Angel?
The last line in Guardian Angel is significant becuase it helps the reader to understand the fact that he is almost losing himself, and that he isnt able to be fully himself or fully human. He replies to the question "are you there, Jean-Do?" that at times he does not even know if he is there. He is so in and out with his thoughts it must be hard to judge reality. His illness leads him to lose himself.
2. What is ironic about the photograph he recieves from his father in The Photo?
Bauby's butterfly is not arround in My Lucky Day. He is unable to escape from the annoying situations aound him and does not go off into thought about another place, instead he is mentally trapped in the situation around him
5. After reading, Our Very Own Madonna and Through a Glass, Darkly, Bauby seems to have regrets about not appreciating small moments from his earlier life. Can you think of a moment from your own life that you did not truly appreciate until it was over? How can we learn to live so that we appreciate significant moments. Is this even possible?
I can remember several moments in my life that i didnt truly appreciate until it was over, and i have not met another person who has not. I htink it is impossible to learn how to appreciate some significant moments while they are happening. I feel as though it is amlost human nature to not notice things untill they are gone. We are so busy with the present and the future that we do not have the time to appricate the simple things until we are without.
The last line in Guardian Angel is significant becuase it helps the reader to understand the fact that he is almost losing himself, and that he isnt able to be fully himself or fully human. He replies to the question "are you there, Jean-Do?" that at times he does not even know if he is there. He is so in and out with his thoughts it must be hard to judge reality. His illness leads him to lose himself.
2. What is ironic about the photograph he recieves from his father in The Photo?
The photo he revives from his father is ironic becuase it is a picture of just him that was taken near the hospital he is at now.
3. Do Bauby's dreams give us any insight into his condition? Be specific.
Bauby's dreams gives us alot of insight to his condtion. First of all in the main dream that he seems to have more than once he is unable to communicate. Also in the dream he starts off as paralyzed and is unable to communicate while an opperation is preformed on him. Another similiarity is the "liquid" that he 'drinks'. He states that he has then been drugged and is unable to function. The drugs can be related to the hospital medications he is having pumped into him. It could also relate to to sleeping pill that he takes, which leaves him even more unable to function then normal.
4. Where is Bauby's butterfly in My Lucky Day?Bauby's butterfly is not arround in My Lucky Day. He is unable to escape from the annoying situations aound him and does not go off into thought about another place, instead he is mentally trapped in the situation around him
5. After reading, Our Very Own Madonna and Through a Glass, Darkly, Bauby seems to have regrets about not appreciating small moments from his earlier life. Can you think of a moment from your own life that you did not truly appreciate until it was over? How can we learn to live so that we appreciate significant moments. Is this even possible?
I can remember several moments in my life that i didnt truly appreciate until it was over, and i have not met another person who has not. I htink it is impossible to learn how to appreciate some significant moments while they are happening. I feel as though it is amlost human nature to not notice things untill they are gone. We are so busy with the present and the future that we do not have the time to appricate the simple things until we are without.
Sunday, December 7, 2008
1. Read The Ladies of Hong Kong. Think of a place you know by smell. Can you adequately describe it? Which situation is more horrific? Bauby's or Jean-Paul K. Please explain your answer.
A place I know by smell is the barn, I don’t think I could accurately explain to someone the smell of the barn except for that it smells like dirt, horse manure, and horse. Besides that any detail would be impossible to go into. I think Jean-Paul K’s situation would be more horrific, because of the atmosphere. Even though they were both put in situations where their future was unsure, I feel like Jean-Paul’s was much worse. He had people surrounding him that were trying to hurt him. While everyone around Bauby was trying to help him.
2. After reading Wax Museum, why do you think Bauby is "fond of all these torturers"?
I think Bauby is fond of all of them, because even though they tend to do things wrong they are there for him. He also sees them as people, outside of their jobs. It seems to give them a more of a human aspect to them rather than the nurses and doctors that they are.
3. Read The Mythmaker and explain why you think Bauby has admiration for Olivier. What is the connection between memory and emotion?
Bauby has an admiration for Oliver because of his ability to come up with stories on the spot.
4. Why do you think Bauby likes the song A Day in the Life? Why do humans always wait for life's crescendo? Why do you think he places this chapter towards the end of the book?
I think Bauby likes the song because it gives him a sense of nostalgia from when he was young. Humans always wait for life’s crescendo because they wanto experience the most exciting parts, and not the boring ones. I think he puts the chapter toward the end so that people can see who he is now before they see who he was before. He seems to be ashamed of some of the acts he has committed previous to his accident, and its almost like he wants to get that across before he opens up who he used to be
5. Read Season of Renewal. Why is he savoring the last week of August? Is there something we can learn from him beause of his reaction to the end of vacation?
He is savoring the last week of august because he is finally starting not feel like death is emanate, and is looking forward to a new start. We can learn from him that the end of vacation is not really an end but a start of something new.
A place I know by smell is the barn, I don’t think I could accurately explain to someone the smell of the barn except for that it smells like dirt, horse manure, and horse. Besides that any detail would be impossible to go into. I think Jean-Paul K’s situation would be more horrific, because of the atmosphere. Even though they were both put in situations where their future was unsure, I feel like Jean-Paul’s was much worse. He had people surrounding him that were trying to hurt him. While everyone around Bauby was trying to help him.
2. After reading Wax Museum, why do you think Bauby is "fond of all these torturers"?
I think Bauby is fond of all of them, because even though they tend to do things wrong they are there for him. He also sees them as people, outside of their jobs. It seems to give them a more of a human aspect to them rather than the nurses and doctors that they are.
3. Read The Mythmaker and explain why you think Bauby has admiration for Olivier. What is the connection between memory and emotion?
Bauby has an admiration for Oliver because of his ability to come up with stories on the spot.
4. Why do you think Bauby likes the song A Day in the Life? Why do humans always wait for life's crescendo? Why do you think he places this chapter towards the end of the book?
I think Bauby likes the song because it gives him a sense of nostalgia from when he was young. Humans always wait for life’s crescendo because they wanto experience the most exciting parts, and not the boring ones. I think he puts the chapter toward the end so that people can see who he is now before they see who he was before. He seems to be ashamed of some of the acts he has committed previous to his accident, and its almost like he wants to get that across before he opens up who he used to be
5. Read Season of Renewal. Why is he savoring the last week of August? Is there something we can learn from him beause of his reaction to the end of vacation?
He is savoring the last week of august because he is finally starting not feel like death is emanate, and is looking forward to a new start. We can learn from him that the end of vacation is not really an end but a start of something new.
Tuesday, November 25, 2008
Thursday, November 20, 2008
Diving Bell 2
1. What do you think of Bauby's line in Bathtime when he states, "But I see in the clothing a symbol of continuing life. And proof that I still want to be myself. If I must drool, I may as well drool on cashmere."
I think that Bauby is trying to have something in his life that feels normal. Obvioiusly since his condition developed he has been in a hospital, around different people, doing differnet things, a completly different enviorment. And to make it even harder on him he can not communicate with the outside well or even to some people at all. Before being the co-Editor of the French Elle hewould be in constant communication with other people, and be in constant motion, from all of the work that comes with being an editor. The cashmere would give him something that is bringing him back to the old realty that he used to have. Also it is a way to express himself since so many ways of human expression have been shut down to him.
2. Considering how Bauby wrote the book, does it matter that he happened to speak French? How would have the writing of the book been different if he spoke Japanese or Chinese?
It does matter that Bauby spoke french and not any other language like Chinese or Japanese. If he was to speak one of those two languages it would take his system of communication a lot longer to happen, and because it would have taken longer, he may have ended up leaving out stuff that didn't seem important at the time but in the end helped to tell his story and experience better.
3. Why does Bauby find his appearance humorous?
Bauby finds his appearance humorous because he sees that not only is "exiled, paralyzed, mute, half deaf, deprived of all pleasures, and reduced to the existence of jellyfish" but that he is ugly to look out because of the newly formed deformities on his face. All of these piled up on each other and the realisation of them left him to have no other way to react to it but laugh. A "nervous laughter-when, after a final blow from fate, we decide to treat it all as a joke."
4. After reading the Chapter, Cinecitta, think of a place where, if given one last opportunity, you could spend an afternoon. Why did you choose this place? Please describe it in detail.
If i could spend one afternoon anywhere by me self it would have to be at the barn with my horse. Even though it is somewhere i go frequently it would be nice to just have the barn to myself, because it is normally quite busy there. (not that i don't like these people, we all get along very well). When there isn't to many people there it is a very quite and relaxing place where the stress of 'the real world' does not seem to enter. Horses are very needy and in need of constant care. My horse seems to absolutely adore me and when i walk over he perks up his ears and whinnies. Just being with my horse and at the barn doing anything, taking care of him, taking him out for a walk on a trail, or training for show season, seems to take all of my attention off anything else on my mind. Its almost like its own world. Its great.
5. After reading Tourists, please think of why we don't make more of an effort to connect with those that might look or act different than us.
I think we don't make more of an effort to connect with those who are different from us out of fear of leaving our comfort zones. If we interact with someone who looks or acts different it the interaction will be a different from what we are used to. Some people do not know how to act so end up acting pitying, or letting off an awkward vibe. They do not want this to happen however so people end up avoiding these situations. Like in the book, when the 'tourists' were staring at Bauby, and looked away when he looked up. They were unsure of how to deal with his situation because it is different from what they are used to, so they avoided potentially awkward situation or pitying situation and looks away.
6. Read Sausage and then consider the following: if you couldn't eat again, what meal would you miss the most?
If i knew i was never going to be abel to eat again the meal that i would miss the most is pizza, with sour cream and chedar ruffels chips, and root beer.
I think that Bauby is trying to have something in his life that feels normal. Obvioiusly since his condition developed he has been in a hospital, around different people, doing differnet things, a completly different enviorment. And to make it even harder on him he can not communicate with the outside well or even to some people at all. Before being the co-Editor of the French Elle hewould be in constant communication with other people, and be in constant motion, from all of the work that comes with being an editor. The cashmere would give him something that is bringing him back to the old realty that he used to have. Also it is a way to express himself since so many ways of human expression have been shut down to him.
2. Considering how Bauby wrote the book, does it matter that he happened to speak French? How would have the writing of the book been different if he spoke Japanese or Chinese?
It does matter that Bauby spoke french and not any other language like Chinese or Japanese. If he was to speak one of those two languages it would take his system of communication a lot longer to happen, and because it would have taken longer, he may have ended up leaving out stuff that didn't seem important at the time but in the end helped to tell his story and experience better.
3. Why does Bauby find his appearance humorous?
Bauby finds his appearance humorous because he sees that not only is "exiled, paralyzed, mute, half deaf, deprived of all pleasures, and reduced to the existence of jellyfish" but that he is ugly to look out because of the newly formed deformities on his face. All of these piled up on each other and the realisation of them left him to have no other way to react to it but laugh. A "nervous laughter-when, after a final blow from fate, we decide to treat it all as a joke."
4. After reading the Chapter, Cinecitta, think of a place where, if given one last opportunity, you could spend an afternoon. Why did you choose this place? Please describe it in detail.
If i could spend one afternoon anywhere by me self it would have to be at the barn with my horse. Even though it is somewhere i go frequently it would be nice to just have the barn to myself, because it is normally quite busy there. (not that i don't like these people, we all get along very well). When there isn't to many people there it is a very quite and relaxing place where the stress of 'the real world' does not seem to enter. Horses are very needy and in need of constant care. My horse seems to absolutely adore me and when i walk over he perks up his ears and whinnies. Just being with my horse and at the barn doing anything, taking care of him, taking him out for a walk on a trail, or training for show season, seems to take all of my attention off anything else on my mind. Its almost like its own world. Its great.
5. After reading Tourists, please think of why we don't make more of an effort to connect with those that might look or act different than us.
I think we don't make more of an effort to connect with those who are different from us out of fear of leaving our comfort zones. If we interact with someone who looks or acts different it the interaction will be a different from what we are used to. Some people do not know how to act so end up acting pitying, or letting off an awkward vibe. They do not want this to happen however so people end up avoiding these situations. Like in the book, when the 'tourists' were staring at Bauby, and looked away when he looked up. They were unsure of how to deal with his situation because it is different from what they are used to, so they avoided potentially awkward situation or pitying situation and looks away.
6. Read Sausage and then consider the following: if you couldn't eat again, what meal would you miss the most?
If i knew i was never going to be abel to eat again the meal that i would miss the most is pizza, with sour cream and chedar ruffels chips, and root beer.
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
a) What is 'Locked-in syndrome'? Why would one consider Bauby's condition a prison? What is the significance of The Butterfly?
'Locked-in syndrome' is basiclay when your body is not functioning, almost as if your body is in a coma, but your mind is still completly functional. You are still there mentally, can precive things, but are unable to move, speak, twitch, whatever. This could be considered as a prision because you are still able to form opions, want to speak, want to communicate, want to have contol of your body, but instead everything about you is controlled. It isolates you from the ones that you love becuase of not having an accurate way to communicate. The butterfly is significant because it symbolizes the freedom that he wishes to have.It also shows how his thought proscess seems to flaot around from one thought to the other, and how he does not have a huge effect on what is going on around besides just something to look at.
b) What was Bauby's "frightening truth'?
Bauby's "frightening truth" was that he might be stuck in a wheel chair for his whole life. That he may never fully recover from this state of being.
c) In your opinion, how do you think Bauby should measure progress? Why do you think Bauby ends the chapter "Prayer" with the phrase, "I set out for the kingdom of slumber with this wonderful talisman, which shields me from all harm."
I think Bauby should meausre progress by what he is able to do. Whenever a part of his body becomes even slightly accesible for him to control i think that should be counted as some type of progress. I think he choses to end the chapter in this way because sleep is the one place where he can feel completley free, he can imagine whatever he wants. He also is comforted by the idea of his daughter praying for his recovery, and this helps guide his dreams to a better place and keeps him positive in a situation that couold lead many to be quite depressed.
'Locked-in syndrome' is basiclay when your body is not functioning, almost as if your body is in a coma, but your mind is still completly functional. You are still there mentally, can precive things, but are unable to move, speak, twitch, whatever. This could be considered as a prision because you are still able to form opions, want to speak, want to communicate, want to have contol of your body, but instead everything about you is controlled. It isolates you from the ones that you love becuase of not having an accurate way to communicate. The butterfly is significant because it symbolizes the freedom that he wishes to have.It also shows how his thought proscess seems to flaot around from one thought to the other, and how he does not have a huge effect on what is going on around besides just something to look at.
b) What was Bauby's "frightening truth'?
Bauby's "frightening truth" was that he might be stuck in a wheel chair for his whole life. That he may never fully recover from this state of being.
c) In your opinion, how do you think Bauby should measure progress? Why do you think Bauby ends the chapter "Prayer" with the phrase, "I set out for the kingdom of slumber with this wonderful talisman, which shields me from all harm."
I think Bauby should meausre progress by what he is able to do. Whenever a part of his body becomes even slightly accesible for him to control i think that should be counted as some type of progress. I think he choses to end the chapter in this way because sleep is the one place where he can feel completley free, he can imagine whatever he wants. He also is comforted by the idea of his daughter praying for his recovery, and this helps guide his dreams to a better place and keeps him positive in a situation that couold lead many to be quite depressed.
Thursday, November 6, 2008
Able Questions Part 2!!!!!
According to Abel, what is perception?
According to abel perception is "indeed a task to be accomplished and a problem to be solved." He thinks that perception is what we use to obtain knowledge and to solve a problem. When we see something we can interpret meaning from it by the way we percive it.
What does Abel mean by “seeing as”?
Able means that everything we ‘see’ is based off of the way we perceive it as. So whenever we see something happen our brain takes what we saw and interprets it based off of experiences or biases we may hold. According to Abel we do not truly see something but we see it as our brain perceives it.
To see what is the case, what is required? Please define each term.
Context-the set of circumstances or facts that surround a particular event, situation, etc.
Inference- The act or process of deriving logical conclusions from premises known or assumed to be true.
Concepts- A general idea derived or inferred from specific instances or occurrences.
Experience- knowledge or practical wisdom gained from what one has observed, encountered, or undergone
Interpretation- a mental representation of the meaning or significance of something
What did Nietzsche mean by “the fallacy of the immaculate perception?” How does Psychologist Joseph Jastrow prove this point? When have we done this in class?
Nietzsche means that there is no correct perception of what a person saw, and that one interpretation can exclude all others. Jastrow proves this point by creating the illusion drawing that resembles both a rabbit and a duck. Both interpretations of the drawing are right, but they cannot both be seen at the same time. We did something like this in class with the drawings from the little kids. Because the two groups had two different directions we both came up with different perceptions of the drawings.
What does Abel mean when he writes: “there is no sharp line dividing perception and illusion?”
Abel means that there isn’t an absolute clear difference between perception and illusion, that there is some gray area between the two.
Why is perception selective by nature?
Perception is selective by nature because as humans we are not able to take in every piece of stimuli that is presented around us. We mostly pick up things we are used to, expect to see, believe to see, or want to see. Also the humans brains tend to try to ‘fix’ things that do not appear to be right, which changes how we actually perceive what is going on.
What does Abel mean when he says: “To perceive is to solve a problem?”
What Abel means is that when we perceive what we see we do it in order to put meaning to it. Like If a tree was to randomly fall in the woods you could come to the conclusion that the inside had rotted out, causing it to fall. You may have learned about trees rotting which lead you to come to this conclusion, solving the problem of why the tree fell.
What is the role of social conditioning in determining how things “naturally look?”
Social conditioning is important in how things naturally look. Especially when it comes to art. People have different interpretations of how things ‘naturally look’ when it comes to drawing them out. Also some one can look at a photo or a piece of art that is supposed to look real and get it into their head that this is the way that that thing looks like. Like what happened with Gericault’s Horse Race.
What is significant of the Durer rhinoceros story? How was the influence of convention demonstrated when some tribes were given a photograph?
Durer’s rhinoceros story is significant because it shows how we tend to see what has been told to us as being right, or what we are used to. When Bruce saw actually rhinos he drew a representation of them that was very close to the one done by Durer. He had become so used to Durer’s rhino being an actual rhino that he perceived the real rhinos to look like that. The photographs shown to the tribe showed similar results. These people only know their surroundings as 3D objects. Seeing them in a smaller size and not 3D it did not occur to them that it was an image of something they had seen before, so they just saw it as a bunch of random colors.
How does convention influence perspective drawing?
Convention influences perspective drawing because it is striving to put an element of 3D in it to make it look more realistic.
What does Abel mean when he writes: Believing is seeing? How might this point be seen in the study of natural and the social sciences?
I think what he means that you cannot see something unless you believe you saw something. Like in the discovery of the planet of Venus. Once scientists had began to believe that there could be such a thing they began to realize that they had seen it before.
What does Abel mean by “hearing as…”?
Abel means that we interpreter sounds before we hear the whole word, and use our knowledge of the English language to put it together. Also this lead to the different pronunciation of sounds and to accents, since people are trying to imitate the sounds they hear.
According to abel perception is "indeed a task to be accomplished and a problem to be solved." He thinks that perception is what we use to obtain knowledge and to solve a problem. When we see something we can interpret meaning from it by the way we percive it.
What does Abel mean by “seeing as”?
Able means that everything we ‘see’ is based off of the way we perceive it as. So whenever we see something happen our brain takes what we saw and interprets it based off of experiences or biases we may hold. According to Abel we do not truly see something but we see it as our brain perceives it.
To see what is the case, what is required? Please define each term.
Context-the set of circumstances or facts that surround a particular event, situation, etc.
Inference- The act or process of deriving logical conclusions from premises known or assumed to be true.
Concepts- A general idea derived or inferred from specific instances or occurrences.
Experience- knowledge or practical wisdom gained from what one has observed, encountered, or undergone
Interpretation- a mental representation of the meaning or significance of something
What did Nietzsche mean by “the fallacy of the immaculate perception?” How does Psychologist Joseph Jastrow prove this point? When have we done this in class?
Nietzsche means that there is no correct perception of what a person saw, and that one interpretation can exclude all others. Jastrow proves this point by creating the illusion drawing that resembles both a rabbit and a duck. Both interpretations of the drawing are right, but they cannot both be seen at the same time. We did something like this in class with the drawings from the little kids. Because the two groups had two different directions we both came up with different perceptions of the drawings.
What does Abel mean when he writes: “there is no sharp line dividing perception and illusion?”
Abel means that there isn’t an absolute clear difference between perception and illusion, that there is some gray area between the two.
Why is perception selective by nature?
Perception is selective by nature because as humans we are not able to take in every piece of stimuli that is presented around us. We mostly pick up things we are used to, expect to see, believe to see, or want to see. Also the humans brains tend to try to ‘fix’ things that do not appear to be right, which changes how we actually perceive what is going on.
What does Abel mean when he says: “To perceive is to solve a problem?”
What Abel means is that when we perceive what we see we do it in order to put meaning to it. Like If a tree was to randomly fall in the woods you could come to the conclusion that the inside had rotted out, causing it to fall. You may have learned about trees rotting which lead you to come to this conclusion, solving the problem of why the tree fell.
What is the role of social conditioning in determining how things “naturally look?”
Social conditioning is important in how things naturally look. Especially when it comes to art. People have different interpretations of how things ‘naturally look’ when it comes to drawing them out. Also some one can look at a photo or a piece of art that is supposed to look real and get it into their head that this is the way that that thing looks like. Like what happened with Gericault’s Horse Race.
What is significant of the Durer rhinoceros story? How was the influence of convention demonstrated when some tribes were given a photograph?
Durer’s rhinoceros story is significant because it shows how we tend to see what has been told to us as being right, or what we are used to. When Bruce saw actually rhinos he drew a representation of them that was very close to the one done by Durer. He had become so used to Durer’s rhino being an actual rhino that he perceived the real rhinos to look like that. The photographs shown to the tribe showed similar results. These people only know their surroundings as 3D objects. Seeing them in a smaller size and not 3D it did not occur to them that it was an image of something they had seen before, so they just saw it as a bunch of random colors.
How does convention influence perspective drawing?
Convention influences perspective drawing because it is striving to put an element of 3D in it to make it look more realistic.
What does Abel mean when he writes: Believing is seeing? How might this point be seen in the study of natural and the social sciences?
I think what he means that you cannot see something unless you believe you saw something. Like in the discovery of the planet of Venus. Once scientists had began to believe that there could be such a thing they began to realize that they had seen it before.
What does Abel mean by “hearing as…”?
Abel means that we interpreter sounds before we hear the whole word, and use our knowledge of the English language to put it together. Also this lead to the different pronunciation of sounds and to accents, since people are trying to imitate the sounds they hear.
Monday, November 3, 2008
Blink 2 :)
1.Three Fatal Mistakes
Mistake number one, the cop automatically assumed that Diallo looked suspicious of something, rather than doing such an innocent task as getting a breath of fresh air. Mistake number two, when Diallo didn’t move at the sight of the police coming toward him the police officer mistook this action as him being ‘brazen’ since he had already assumed him guilty. It did not occur to him that he might not be fleeing because of curiosity since he was innocent. Mistake number three was the police officer mistaking Diallo’s fear and his reaching for the wallet to prove his innocence as a dangerous task. He made assumptions without finding any knowledge on whether or not they were true, therefore jumping to conclusions and killing Diallo.
2. The Theory of Mind Reading
This section is about Silvian Tomkins and Paul Ekman. Silvian Tomkins was taught Ekman the art of “mind reading” by being able to read people’s facial movements. Together they created a book that using all of the muscles in the human face told all of the different possible combinations of faces that could be made, and how each one relates to an emotion.
3. The Naked Force
This section is about how emotion controls our facial expressions, not the other way around. Even though we are able to voluntarily control our facial expressions every emotion we feel is projected on our face, even if it is only truly shown for a millisecond. Also it states that if you force your face to form a certain emotion, like sad for example, you will feel sad.
4. A Man, A Woman and a Light switch
This section is about how autism can make a person unable to have the ability to mind read. They are unable to decipher what is meant by facial expressions, body language, and subtle hints portrayed through persons eyes. They pay more attention to peoples movements as objects, and lose the meaning that may actually be being portrayed to them.
5. Arguing with a Dog
This section is about how adrenalin makes it so people no longer have “mind reading abilities”. For example polices officers when in a car chase become so obsessed with the chase that they are told to back away from the chased when they finally submit. This is said because police officers have made rash judgments while still hyped up on adrenalin that they have shot people who posed to threat. It is also stated that people become almost autistic, all of their focus is put on the target, and time appears to slow down.
6. Running Out of White Space
This section talks about how the more space between a person and a person trying to “read their mind” the more time/likelihood they have of getting it right. If someone is close to them and makes decides to shoot someone it would be harder to notice, since there is less time to notice their body movements or actions. It also mentions how police officers are trained to stand behind the driver when pulling over a car at night to reduce the chance of the cops adrenalin becoming to high, and accidentally shooting someone from judging them off of something they mistook as a dangerous action.
7. Something Told Me...
In this section it talks about how learning how to “mind read” Is a skill that can be learned over time. It states that putting yourself into a situation that raises your adrenalin can make it so each time your heartbeat does not increase as much, eventually making it so you can function in this stressful situation with practice.
8. Tragedy on Wheeler Ave.This section sums up all of the knowledge that was obtained from the previous sections and applies it to what happened on Wheeler Street. It states how lack of experience, heightened adrenalin, preconceived biases, and lack of space lead to Diallo’s death.
Mistake number one, the cop automatically assumed that Diallo looked suspicious of something, rather than doing such an innocent task as getting a breath of fresh air. Mistake number two, when Diallo didn’t move at the sight of the police coming toward him the police officer mistook this action as him being ‘brazen’ since he had already assumed him guilty. It did not occur to him that he might not be fleeing because of curiosity since he was innocent. Mistake number three was the police officer mistaking Diallo’s fear and his reaching for the wallet to prove his innocence as a dangerous task. He made assumptions without finding any knowledge on whether or not they were true, therefore jumping to conclusions and killing Diallo.
2. The Theory of Mind Reading
This section is about Silvian Tomkins and Paul Ekman. Silvian Tomkins was taught Ekman the art of “mind reading” by being able to read people’s facial movements. Together they created a book that using all of the muscles in the human face told all of the different possible combinations of faces that could be made, and how each one relates to an emotion.
3. The Naked Force
This section is about how emotion controls our facial expressions, not the other way around. Even though we are able to voluntarily control our facial expressions every emotion we feel is projected on our face, even if it is only truly shown for a millisecond. Also it states that if you force your face to form a certain emotion, like sad for example, you will feel sad.
4. A Man, A Woman and a Light switch
This section is about how autism can make a person unable to have the ability to mind read. They are unable to decipher what is meant by facial expressions, body language, and subtle hints portrayed through persons eyes. They pay more attention to peoples movements as objects, and lose the meaning that may actually be being portrayed to them.
5. Arguing with a Dog
This section is about how adrenalin makes it so people no longer have “mind reading abilities”. For example polices officers when in a car chase become so obsessed with the chase that they are told to back away from the chased when they finally submit. This is said because police officers have made rash judgments while still hyped up on adrenalin that they have shot people who posed to threat. It is also stated that people become almost autistic, all of their focus is put on the target, and time appears to slow down.
6. Running Out of White Space
This section talks about how the more space between a person and a person trying to “read their mind” the more time/likelihood they have of getting it right. If someone is close to them and makes decides to shoot someone it would be harder to notice, since there is less time to notice their body movements or actions. It also mentions how police officers are trained to stand behind the driver when pulling over a car at night to reduce the chance of the cops adrenalin becoming to high, and accidentally shooting someone from judging them off of something they mistook as a dangerous action.
7. Something Told Me...
In this section it talks about how learning how to “mind read” Is a skill that can be learned over time. It states that putting yourself into a situation that raises your adrenalin can make it so each time your heartbeat does not increase as much, eventually making it so you can function in this stressful situation with practice.
8. Tragedy on Wheeler Ave.This section sums up all of the knowledge that was obtained from the previous sections and applies it to what happened on Wheeler Street. It states how lack of experience, heightened adrenalin, preconceived biases, and lack of space lead to Diallo’s death.
Sunday, November 2, 2008
Blink one
1. Describe how Warren Harding rose through the Republican Party to become President in 1920.
Warren Harding rose through the Republican Party to become president by other people’s encouragement and not through his own passion. People felt that he looked like a president, and when the Republican Party came to a dead lock in deciding who the candidate should be they picked Harding. Harding was picked because he looked like a president, he wasn’t picked because of his ideals or what he wanted to do for the country, but because he seemed to radiate common sense and dignity. “By early middle age, Harding’s biographer Francis Russell writes, his ‘lusty black eyebrows contrasted with his steel-gray hair to give the effect of force, his massive shoulders and bronzed complexion gave the effect of health’” The appearance of him made people assume that he would be a powerful man who could be a great president.
2. Why does the author believe that people were in error in promoting Harding to higher office?
The author believes that people were wrong in promoting Harding to higher office because it was done only on the fact that he looked like a president. They used ‘Thin-slicing’ and only looked at the fact that he possessed such an aura of power that they became to caught up in the fact that because he looks like this he must be a powerful. Because of prior knowledge of how successful presidents looked they became prejudice towards the way he looked, and automatically assumed that he would do a good job because presidents from the past who had power in the way they looked had done a good job. However, since people did not bother to see if he was actually fit for the job, he ended up becoming one of the worst presidents ever.
3. What was the point of the “Implicit Association Test (IAT)?”
The point of the IAT test is to show how observations from the world around us (including media) create connections of things that we pair together. The IAT test tries to show these connections. For example: if you took of list of names, family stuff, and career things and to separate them into two categories “male or career” or “female or family” according to the belief of the IAT test it would be quite simple. But however if you were to take the same list and separate them into the categories “male and family” and “female and career” it would take you longer or be a little harder, according to the belief of the IAT test. Gladwell states that this is because we are used to having family stuff connected with women and career stuff with men in our lives, so when it comes to putting the words in categories you would want to put the family words in the same category as the female name category. Making it a little bit harder.
4. What are the advantages to completing the IAT on computer? Why does Gladwell believe the IAT has become “so popular in recent years?”
The advantages of completing the IAT test on computer is that the words can be flashed in front of you, making it so you have to chose your first reaction, and not have time to analyze your answer. By doing this it makes it so you are able to get a score based off of the connections in your brain, not off of your morals. It has become very popular in recent years because the results are not subtle or vague, it comes as a shock to some people that they have these connections drilled into their head.
5. Why, according to Gladwell, did he become mortified upon completion of the first part of the IAT test on race? What occurred on the second part of the IAT test?
Gladwell became mortifies upon the completion of the first part of the test because he found it hard to put bad things in the category ‘European American or Bad’ rather than ‘African American or Good’. The second part of the test switched the categories, making them ‘European American and Good’ and ‘African American and Bad’. He then found this column a lot easier to complete.
6. Did it make any difference how many times Gladwell took the test? What does the author believe is the reason for our answers on the IAT (i.e. what does the IAT measure)?
It didn’t matter how many times Gladwell took the test, after four times he found he still had the same answer. According to the test he had a ‘moderate automatic preference for whites’, which was quite odd considering that he himself is half black. Gladwell believes that the test does not necessarily measure our hatred of a certain race, but more of the connections that are instilled into our brains by the society around us. Living in North America, which is dominantly, white prejudices are installed in our brains that are pro-white.
7. If Gladwell is correct, that your unconscious acts as a computer that “crunches all the data” from our lives and “it forms an opinion”; would you consider this to your true self? Please explain your answer.
I would defiantly agree with this statement. We can act a certain way just because that’s how we believe that is what is right. However in our subconscious if we have a certain belief engraved in there no matter how much we fight it, or may not eve recognize it, we may act differently because of the prejudice. For example, a person can say that they are not a racist. But because of where they live it is a mostly white population, maybe their grandparents grew up during a time when African Americans were fighting for equal rights and they were racists. The prejudices that are installed in this person may lead this person to act differently around an African American than around a white person without even realizing it.
8. Does Gladwell feel that it matters if one has a “strongly pro-white pattern of associations?”
Gladwell does feel that it matters if one has a ‘strongly pro-white pattern of associations”. He feels as if this person will act significantly different than someone who does not around a African American. They might laugh a bit more at their jokes, stand a bit farther away from him or her, smile a lot, stumble over words, and other things like that.
9. How does the Warren Harding error impact the business world?
The Warren Harding error impacts the business world because people are more likely to employ people who seem to give off an aura of power. For example there is a larger amount of taller people employed in higher positions in the business world then there is short people. This is because tall people tend do give off a more powerful stance, (since they have more mass to control) people tend to make the same prejudices that were made to Harding, judging off of the look of power from their outside rather than the power actually in them
10. How does Bob Golomb’s strategy defeat the Warren Harding error?
Bob Golomb is a car salesman who tries to not judge people at all. He listens to the customer and always thinks that this person is going to buy a car, and doesn’t blow them off because of the way they are dressed or their race, height or age. He also keeps in contact with each of his customers, making sure that each one is happy, ensuring that he is not biased to one race or gender.
11. What were the results of the Ayres study? What does Gladwell believe to be the explanation for these results?
The results of the Ayres study was that black men and black women received higher prices than that of white men and women. Gladwell believes that in their subconscious they have the prejudice from the world around them that women and African Americans are inferior which lead them to thinking that they could make more money off of them by selling the car for the ticket price.
12. How does Gladwell believe you can change your score on the race IAT? How, according to Gladwell, can we apply this rule to our everyday lives? Do you agree?Gladwell believes that you can change your score by looking at good things that were done by African Americans and bad things done by European Americans before taking the test. He also believes that if you expose yourself to minorities in your daily life it will help to raise your score. For the most part I agree with this, but only if it is done for a while. I don’t believe you can spend a few hours with an minority then drastically change your score. I feel that if over time you expose yourself to minorities and good influential African Americans your score will be raised.
Warren Harding rose through the Republican Party to become president by other people’s encouragement and not through his own passion. People felt that he looked like a president, and when the Republican Party came to a dead lock in deciding who the candidate should be they picked Harding. Harding was picked because he looked like a president, he wasn’t picked because of his ideals or what he wanted to do for the country, but because he seemed to radiate common sense and dignity. “By early middle age, Harding’s biographer Francis Russell writes, his ‘lusty black eyebrows contrasted with his steel-gray hair to give the effect of force, his massive shoulders and bronzed complexion gave the effect of health’” The appearance of him made people assume that he would be a powerful man who could be a great president.
2. Why does the author believe that people were in error in promoting Harding to higher office?
The author believes that people were wrong in promoting Harding to higher office because it was done only on the fact that he looked like a president. They used ‘Thin-slicing’ and only looked at the fact that he possessed such an aura of power that they became to caught up in the fact that because he looks like this he must be a powerful. Because of prior knowledge of how successful presidents looked they became prejudice towards the way he looked, and automatically assumed that he would do a good job because presidents from the past who had power in the way they looked had done a good job. However, since people did not bother to see if he was actually fit for the job, he ended up becoming one of the worst presidents ever.
3. What was the point of the “Implicit Association Test (IAT)?”
The point of the IAT test is to show how observations from the world around us (including media) create connections of things that we pair together. The IAT test tries to show these connections. For example: if you took of list of names, family stuff, and career things and to separate them into two categories “male or career” or “female or family” according to the belief of the IAT test it would be quite simple. But however if you were to take the same list and separate them into the categories “male and family” and “female and career” it would take you longer or be a little harder, according to the belief of the IAT test. Gladwell states that this is because we are used to having family stuff connected with women and career stuff with men in our lives, so when it comes to putting the words in categories you would want to put the family words in the same category as the female name category. Making it a little bit harder.
4. What are the advantages to completing the IAT on computer? Why does Gladwell believe the IAT has become “so popular in recent years?”
The advantages of completing the IAT test on computer is that the words can be flashed in front of you, making it so you have to chose your first reaction, and not have time to analyze your answer. By doing this it makes it so you are able to get a score based off of the connections in your brain, not off of your morals. It has become very popular in recent years because the results are not subtle or vague, it comes as a shock to some people that they have these connections drilled into their head.
5. Why, according to Gladwell, did he become mortified upon completion of the first part of the IAT test on race? What occurred on the second part of the IAT test?
Gladwell became mortifies upon the completion of the first part of the test because he found it hard to put bad things in the category ‘European American or Bad’ rather than ‘African American or Good’. The second part of the test switched the categories, making them ‘European American and Good’ and ‘African American and Bad’. He then found this column a lot easier to complete.
6. Did it make any difference how many times Gladwell took the test? What does the author believe is the reason for our answers on the IAT (i.e. what does the IAT measure)?
It didn’t matter how many times Gladwell took the test, after four times he found he still had the same answer. According to the test he had a ‘moderate automatic preference for whites’, which was quite odd considering that he himself is half black. Gladwell believes that the test does not necessarily measure our hatred of a certain race, but more of the connections that are instilled into our brains by the society around us. Living in North America, which is dominantly, white prejudices are installed in our brains that are pro-white.
7. If Gladwell is correct, that your unconscious acts as a computer that “crunches all the data” from our lives and “it forms an opinion”; would you consider this to your true self? Please explain your answer.
I would defiantly agree with this statement. We can act a certain way just because that’s how we believe that is what is right. However in our subconscious if we have a certain belief engraved in there no matter how much we fight it, or may not eve recognize it, we may act differently because of the prejudice. For example, a person can say that they are not a racist. But because of where they live it is a mostly white population, maybe their grandparents grew up during a time when African Americans were fighting for equal rights and they were racists. The prejudices that are installed in this person may lead this person to act differently around an African American than around a white person without even realizing it.
8. Does Gladwell feel that it matters if one has a “strongly pro-white pattern of associations?”
Gladwell does feel that it matters if one has a ‘strongly pro-white pattern of associations”. He feels as if this person will act significantly different than someone who does not around a African American. They might laugh a bit more at their jokes, stand a bit farther away from him or her, smile a lot, stumble over words, and other things like that.
9. How does the Warren Harding error impact the business world?
The Warren Harding error impacts the business world because people are more likely to employ people who seem to give off an aura of power. For example there is a larger amount of taller people employed in higher positions in the business world then there is short people. This is because tall people tend do give off a more powerful stance, (since they have more mass to control) people tend to make the same prejudices that were made to Harding, judging off of the look of power from their outside rather than the power actually in them
10. How does Bob Golomb’s strategy defeat the Warren Harding error?
Bob Golomb is a car salesman who tries to not judge people at all. He listens to the customer and always thinks that this person is going to buy a car, and doesn’t blow them off because of the way they are dressed or their race, height or age. He also keeps in contact with each of his customers, making sure that each one is happy, ensuring that he is not biased to one race or gender.
11. What were the results of the Ayres study? What does Gladwell believe to be the explanation for these results?
The results of the Ayres study was that black men and black women received higher prices than that of white men and women. Gladwell believes that in their subconscious they have the prejudice from the world around them that women and African Americans are inferior which lead them to thinking that they could make more money off of them by selling the car for the ticket price.
12. How does Gladwell believe you can change your score on the race IAT? How, according to Gladwell, can we apply this rule to our everyday lives? Do you agree?Gladwell believes that you can change your score by looking at good things that were done by African Americans and bad things done by European Americans before taking the test. He also believes that if you expose yourself to minorities in your daily life it will help to raise your score. For the most part I agree with this, but only if it is done for a while. I don’t believe you can spend a few hours with an minority then drastically change your score. I feel that if over time you expose yourself to minorities and good influential African Americans your score will be raised.
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Dr. Gillan's Presentation
What were your impressions of the lecture and Test from Dr. Gillian? In your opinion, what should the average person know about how our brain perceives the world? What are the larger implications of this?
I thought Dr. Gilligan's Lecture was pretty interesting. I wish she had passed out some notes along with lecture, she talked very fast and i did not have enough time to type out the notes that she was presenting to us. The fact that i was always rushing to get the notes down so i wouldnt miss them before she moved on to the next slide took away from my learning experience. I felt that the information that was shared was really helpful to understanding how perception effects knowledge, but I felt as though there was so much presented in not enough time that I was unable to grasp all of it. I thought the test was interesting; it helped to prove the information that was presented to us. For example, when the sentence 'dog is a man's best fiend' flashed on the screen I wrote down that I saw 'dog is man's best friend'. This helped to show that the brain does fix things for us. I thought it would have been more effective to do the test first, instead of the notes. I feel like if the test was first I would not have been equipped with the knowledge I just learned, and not have been as aware of the tricks that the brain can play on my mind. It would have been more interesting to then compare our results to the knowledge learned in class, and it would have helped with the understanding of the knowledge. I feel like the average person should be aware of how your brain tires to fix things for you, and how that affects how you see the world. I also think it would be important for the average person to know that focus can make it so you may not be able to see what is directly in front of you. For example, in the ball toss video that we watched, I did not notice the gorilla the first time. I feel like if the average person were to watch that video it would give them a better understanding of how they are only aware of a fraction of what actually happens around them, and how their brain can block out what is not being focused on. An example of this is my own life is at the barn that I used to ride my horse at there was a shooting range and hunting in the woods near by, which is probably not the safest thing to have near a horse barn. At first I found the constant noise of gunshots in the background eerie. Overtime though I didn’t notice them until someone who had not been to the barn pointed them out. As I learned from this presentation, your brain tends to block out stuff you see or hear on a daily basis. Which is why I didn’t hear the gunshots in the background anymore, even though they were still there. This function of the brain can be highly dangerous though. In the case of gunshots at the barn, we would often take our horses out on trails in the woods. Being so used to the gunshots we didn’t hear them. If a hunter or were to come near us (which wouldn’t have happened, hunting was prohibited) we may have not heard the danger near.
I thought Dr. Gilligan's Lecture was pretty interesting. I wish she had passed out some notes along with lecture, she talked very fast and i did not have enough time to type out the notes that she was presenting to us. The fact that i was always rushing to get the notes down so i wouldnt miss them before she moved on to the next slide took away from my learning experience. I felt that the information that was shared was really helpful to understanding how perception effects knowledge, but I felt as though there was so much presented in not enough time that I was unable to grasp all of it. I thought the test was interesting; it helped to prove the information that was presented to us. For example, when the sentence 'dog is a man's best fiend' flashed on the screen I wrote down that I saw 'dog is man's best friend'. This helped to show that the brain does fix things for us. I thought it would have been more effective to do the test first, instead of the notes. I feel like if the test was first I would not have been equipped with the knowledge I just learned, and not have been as aware of the tricks that the brain can play on my mind. It would have been more interesting to then compare our results to the knowledge learned in class, and it would have helped with the understanding of the knowledge. I feel like the average person should be aware of how your brain tires to fix things for you, and how that affects how you see the world. I also think it would be important for the average person to know that focus can make it so you may not be able to see what is directly in front of you. For example, in the ball toss video that we watched, I did not notice the gorilla the first time. I feel like if the average person were to watch that video it would give them a better understanding of how they are only aware of a fraction of what actually happens around them, and how their brain can block out what is not being focused on. An example of this is my own life is at the barn that I used to ride my horse at there was a shooting range and hunting in the woods near by, which is probably not the safest thing to have near a horse barn. At first I found the constant noise of gunshots in the background eerie. Overtime though I didn’t notice them until someone who had not been to the barn pointed them out. As I learned from this presentation, your brain tends to block out stuff you see or hear on a daily basis. Which is why I didn’t hear the gunshots in the background anymore, even though they were still there. This function of the brain can be highly dangerous though. In the case of gunshots at the barn, we would often take our horses out on trails in the woods. Being so used to the gunshots we didn’t hear them. If a hunter or were to come near us (which wouldn’t have happened, hunting was prohibited) we may have not heard the danger near.
Sunday, October 19, 2008
Abel Questions.
How does Bertrand Russell differentiate between “knowledge by acquaintance” and “knowledge by description”? (Check out the footnote at bottom of p. 19)
Bertrand Russell differentiates between the two knowledges by saying that acquaintance is only 'raw feels' and that knowledge by description is 'knowing that'. Knowledge by acquaintance is when you know someone; you know how they are feeling by what they do. Knowledge by description is when you know that something is something. What I mean by that is like " I know that the sky is blue". In English these two different types of knowledge have the same word 'to know'. However in other languages it is easier to identify the difference because there are two separate words for each one. For example, in Latin the two words are scire and cognoscere.
How does Abel distinguish between “knowing how” and “knowing that”?
Able distinguishes between knowing how and knowing that by saying that knowing how is something that can not be easily expressed. You cannot tell someone how to breath or how it feels when your foot itches but you know how to do it and how it feels. Knowing that is when you know a fact or something like "I know if I drop something it will fall because of gravity".
What does he mean when he asks: “can knowing how theoretically always be reduced to knowing that? What is Abel’s answer? What do you think?
What he means is to ask if every type of knowing how knowledge can be explained through knowing that, for example: you can know how to ride a bike, and you can also know the physics that make it work. Able doesn't think that every type of knowing how knowledge can be reduced down to knowing that knowledge, and I agree with him. For example: you can know how water tastes but you can not know that water taste the way it dose with out experiencing it.
How does language become a problem of knowledge?
Language becomes a problem with knowledge because, for example: in the English language there is only one word for the word 'to know' while in others there is two to signify knowing that and knowing how. Also words like very, and highly. How can you accurately express how much those mean. Language tends to use words for estimation, which can throw off knowledge when trying to be communicated. Also language limits you to not being able to explain raw feels. For example: if you know how it feels to be in love, you cannot accurately describe this emotion to another person.
What do you think William James means when he says: “Life defies our phrases?”
I think William James is trying to say that our experiences help dictate to what we say and do and know. If we listen to a certain type of music we are able to make a statement on if we like it or not. If we have not heard that type of music, then there is no way we can comment on it.
What, according to Abel, is the difference between “experience” and “propositional knowledge”?
The difference between experience and propsitional knowledge is one id learned by doing and the other is learned from an outside source. For example an experience would be ridding a bike, and knowing hoe to ride it from that. The propositional knowledge here would be knowing the physics of how to make the bike move and why it does.
What are Abel’s Four Conditions for propositional knowledge? Where have we seen this before?
Abel’s four conditions for propositional Knowledge are as follows. His first one is about truth. You can know something because it is true. For example 3+3 = 6, and you can know this because it is true. The second is belife. In order to know something you have to believe it, you can not possibly say that you know the sky is blue but you don't believe it. You can however make the statement that you believe the sky is blue but do not know it. Belief is independent from knowing but knowing is not independent from belife. The third is that in order to have knowledge and or belife there must be a certain amount of justification to this knowledge. For example you can guess the numbers of a lottery ticket, and belive that they are right, and get them right, but you do not know the numbers. The fourth one is knowledge that has no evidence that could make your belife not true. For example, if you look at a clock you know that it is that time. We have heard this from the plationic knowledge that we learned about in class.
Why does he add a Fourth Condition?
He adds a Fourth Condition to show that some knowledge does not need evidence to be knowledge. You can know that it is a certian time without having the evidence that it is.
Bertrand Russell differentiates between the two knowledges by saying that acquaintance is only 'raw feels' and that knowledge by description is 'knowing that'. Knowledge by acquaintance is when you know someone; you know how they are feeling by what they do. Knowledge by description is when you know that something is something. What I mean by that is like " I know that the sky is blue". In English these two different types of knowledge have the same word 'to know'. However in other languages it is easier to identify the difference because there are two separate words for each one. For example, in Latin the two words are scire and cognoscere.
How does Abel distinguish between “knowing how” and “knowing that”?
Able distinguishes between knowing how and knowing that by saying that knowing how is something that can not be easily expressed. You cannot tell someone how to breath or how it feels when your foot itches but you know how to do it and how it feels. Knowing that is when you know a fact or something like "I know if I drop something it will fall because of gravity".
What does he mean when he asks: “can knowing how theoretically always be reduced to knowing that? What is Abel’s answer? What do you think?
What he means is to ask if every type of knowing how knowledge can be explained through knowing that, for example: you can know how to ride a bike, and you can also know the physics that make it work. Able doesn't think that every type of knowing how knowledge can be reduced down to knowing that knowledge, and I agree with him. For example: you can know how water tastes but you can not know that water taste the way it dose with out experiencing it.
How does language become a problem of knowledge?
Language becomes a problem with knowledge because, for example: in the English language there is only one word for the word 'to know' while in others there is two to signify knowing that and knowing how. Also words like very, and highly. How can you accurately express how much those mean. Language tends to use words for estimation, which can throw off knowledge when trying to be communicated. Also language limits you to not being able to explain raw feels. For example: if you know how it feels to be in love, you cannot accurately describe this emotion to another person.
What do you think William James means when he says: “Life defies our phrases?”
I think William James is trying to say that our experiences help dictate to what we say and do and know. If we listen to a certain type of music we are able to make a statement on if we like it or not. If we have not heard that type of music, then there is no way we can comment on it.
What, according to Abel, is the difference between “experience” and “propositional knowledge”?
The difference between experience and propsitional knowledge is one id learned by doing and the other is learned from an outside source. For example an experience would be ridding a bike, and knowing hoe to ride it from that. The propositional knowledge here would be knowing the physics of how to make the bike move and why it does.
What are Abel’s Four Conditions for propositional knowledge? Where have we seen this before?
Abel’s four conditions for propositional Knowledge are as follows. His first one is about truth. You can know something because it is true. For example 3+3 = 6, and you can know this because it is true. The second is belife. In order to know something you have to believe it, you can not possibly say that you know the sky is blue but you don't believe it. You can however make the statement that you believe the sky is blue but do not know it. Belief is independent from knowing but knowing is not independent from belife. The third is that in order to have knowledge and or belife there must be a certain amount of justification to this knowledge. For example you can guess the numbers of a lottery ticket, and belive that they are right, and get them right, but you do not know the numbers. The fourth one is knowledge that has no evidence that could make your belife not true. For example, if you look at a clock you know that it is that time. We have heard this from the plationic knowledge that we learned about in class.
Why does he add a Fourth Condition?
He adds a Fourth Condition to show that some knowledge does not need evidence to be knowledge. You can know that it is a certian time without having the evidence that it is.
Monday, October 13, 2008
Based on our conversation in class, what is the point of the story: "The Mouse That Ate The Cheese?"
The point of the story "The Mouse That Ate The Cheese" is to show different types of knowing. Each Charecter in the story has thier own form of knowlege on whether or not the mouse ate the cheese. The only charecters that had true knowledeg that the mouse did infact ate the cheese was Adrian, Virgina, and Bill (and of course the mouse knew). Bill knew that the mouse ate the cheese through justification. He saw that the mouse ate the cheese, and he belived what he saw. " 'Well, have it your own way. I just know what i saw' ". Since he saw the mouse eat the cheese and he belived in the fact that he did see this happen, through justification he had knowledge of this event. Adrian and Virgina, however, did not see the mouse eat the cheese. They were told by Bill that the mouse ate the cheese. "Bill obviously wasn't joking, his story was plausible enough and she knew him well enough to accept this evidence as true". From knowledge by acquaintce Virgina ans Adrian know Bill well enough to know that he would not lie or joke about a mouse eating a picece of cheese. They too come to know that the mouse ate the cheese through justification, they were told by authority (Bill), a prior knowledge of the event (Bill), and it seemed reasonable enough of a story. The other two charecters Alice and George do not know that the mouse ate the cheese, however they do not have this knowledge for to very different reasons. Alice belived that the mouse ate the cheese but had no knowledge that this infact was true. It is not true because there is nothing independent from her belief, she can only believe that the cheese was not eaten, she can not know it. George does not believe or know that the cheese was eaten by the mouse. He had been told by pest exterminators that there were no mouse in his flat and he belived them. He refused to belive what Bill was saying about the mouse, and since he did not belive in the possibility of a mouse being in his flat, there is no way he can know it.
The point of the story "The Mouse That Ate The Cheese" is to show different types of knowing. Each Charecter in the story has thier own form of knowlege on whether or not the mouse ate the cheese. The only charecters that had true knowledeg that the mouse did infact ate the cheese was Adrian, Virgina, and Bill (and of course the mouse knew). Bill knew that the mouse ate the cheese through justification. He saw that the mouse ate the cheese, and he belived what he saw. " 'Well, have it your own way. I just know what i saw' ". Since he saw the mouse eat the cheese and he belived in the fact that he did see this happen, through justification he had knowledge of this event. Adrian and Virgina, however, did not see the mouse eat the cheese. They were told by Bill that the mouse ate the cheese. "Bill obviously wasn't joking, his story was plausible enough and she knew him well enough to accept this evidence as true". From knowledge by acquaintce Virgina ans Adrian know Bill well enough to know that he would not lie or joke about a mouse eating a picece of cheese. They too come to know that the mouse ate the cheese through justification, they were told by authority (Bill), a prior knowledge of the event (Bill), and it seemed reasonable enough of a story. The other two charecters Alice and George do not know that the mouse ate the cheese, however they do not have this knowledge for to very different reasons. Alice belived that the mouse ate the cheese but had no knowledge that this infact was true. It is not true because there is nothing independent from her belief, she can only believe that the cheese was not eaten, she can not know it. George does not believe or know that the cheese was eaten by the mouse. He had been told by pest exterminators that there were no mouse in his flat and he belived them. He refused to belive what Bill was saying about the mouse, and since he did not belive in the possibility of a mouse being in his flat, there is no way he can know it.
Monday, September 22, 2008
class notes
Academic Knowledge
Plato: Knowledge-had to be described & communicated = certainty
“Propositional” knowledge/Platonic knowledge/ knowledge by description
N Reasonable & Convincing
‘Flying pig example isn’t knowledge’
Formac statement of convincing knowledge
(Conditions for knowledge)
“Knowing that”
Test:
1. Justified
2. 
True
3. Belief= necessary but not sufficient.
Truth
1. Public-Dog has to be friendly to all
2. Independent-separate from belief
3. Eternal –but must be true now & forever
Empiricism/Experiential
See it
Induction
Smell
Hear
Touch
Taste
Rationalism
Instructed using a prior knowledge
‘Knowledge that came before’
Deduction
General theory =specific
Sunday, September 21, 2008
CORN
Tangy Honey Mustard Sauce:
Water, sugar, dijon mustard (distilled vinegar, mustard seed, salt, water, white wine, spices), corn syrup solids, honey, soybean oil, distilled vinegar, food starch-modified, egg yolks, contains 2% or less of the following: mustard seed, turmeric (color), spices, xanthan gum, salt, titanium dioxide, propylene glycol alginate, sodium benzoate (preservative), yellow 5, yellow 6.
CONTAINS: EGG.
Sunday, September 14, 2008
Did any information in the book come as a surprise to you? If so, why do you think that specific piece of knowledge was kept from you? Does the producer of this knowledge have any responsibility? What is your responsibility as a knower?
I thought it was surprising that meat suppliers are trying to make it so they animals that they are raising eat corn. They are even using this practice on salmon, which are normally carnivorous animals. By doing this it probably saves money for the companies it self, corn being a much cheaper supply than another that would be needed to feed the animals. However by doing this it affecting the diet of the people who eat these animals. Besides the actually animal you ingest you are also getting nutrients from what the animal itself has eaten. If the animals by large amount of suppliers have only eaten corn then the people ingesting the animals are eating large amount of corn, changing their diet in a way that they are not aware of. If the animal was eating the foods that it would consume if it was not in captivity the humans consuming this animal would get these nutrients passes to them, bus since the animals are not eating this way, the humans are not receiving this. I feel like this specific information is kept from the public because if consumers were to know this, then they would most likely buy from meat suppliers that are not following this corn trend, causing the ones who do to lose massive amounts of business. The producer of this knowledge should have the responsibility to tell people what they are feeding their animals and how it affects their everyday diet. However that will not happen, for it would lead to them losing business. As a knower of this information I have the responsibility of sharing it with others, if I chose to do so.
I thought it was surprising that meat suppliers are trying to make it so they animals that they are raising eat corn. They are even using this practice on salmon, which are normally carnivorous animals. By doing this it probably saves money for the companies it self, corn being a much cheaper supply than another that would be needed to feed the animals. However by doing this it affecting the diet of the people who eat these animals. Besides the actually animal you ingest you are also getting nutrients from what the animal itself has eaten. If the animals by large amount of suppliers have only eaten corn then the people ingesting the animals are eating large amount of corn, changing their diet in a way that they are not aware of. If the animal was eating the foods that it would consume if it was not in captivity the humans consuming this animal would get these nutrients passes to them, bus since the animals are not eating this way, the humans are not receiving this. I feel like this specific information is kept from the public because if consumers were to know this, then they would most likely buy from meat suppliers that are not following this corn trend, causing the ones who do to lose massive amounts of business. The producer of this knowledge should have the responsibility to tell people what they are feeding their animals and how it affects their everyday diet. However that will not happen, for it would lead to them losing business. As a knower of this information I have the responsibility of sharing it with others, if I chose to do so.
Tuesday, September 9, 2008
how do we know what we know?
"How do we Know what we Know? What evidence do you have to support your claim?"
We know what we know because of what we have been told, and because of what we have experianced. We learn what we know from the people who teach it to us. From birth we are taught how to live and to be succsefull in life and society. We go to school where we learn facts and history. We also learn what we known through experiance. We can taste a certain type of food and know what it taste like, and know that the next time you taste it it will have the same taste (unless it has gone bad or something to that account). From experiance you know that when you touch ice it wil be cold, and whenever you touch it again it will still be cold. We know what we know because we rely on the fact that the reality that we see is what is real. Some people question whether "reality" itself is just a very complex dream. But by beliving in the facts thats are told to us when we are young and learning, and when we are experiancing life we belive in the facts that what we know. There is no possible way to prove if every single thing that we know is actually true, but human nature is to belive in the reality that is infront of them. Yes people do question whether the reality that they see is true. However they know what they know by excepting facts that are taught to them.
We know what we know because of what we have been told, and because of what we have experianced. We learn what we know from the people who teach it to us. From birth we are taught how to live and to be succsefull in life and society. We go to school where we learn facts and history. We also learn what we known through experiance. We can taste a certain type of food and know what it taste like, and know that the next time you taste it it will have the same taste (unless it has gone bad or something to that account). From experiance you know that when you touch ice it wil be cold, and whenever you touch it again it will still be cold. We know what we know because we rely on the fact that the reality that we see is what is real. Some people question whether "reality" itself is just a very complex dream. But by beliving in the facts thats are told to us when we are young and learning, and when we are experiancing life we belive in the facts that what we know. There is no possible way to prove if every single thing that we know is actually true, but human nature is to belive in the reality that is infront of them. Yes people do question whether the reality that they see is true. However they know what they know by excepting facts that are taught to them.
Tuesday, September 2, 2008
Do Parents Matter?
How would Gladwell respond to the identity question from August 27th? How would Levitt and Dubner respond?
I feel like Gladwell would respond to the identity question from august 27 by saying that we are our location. Gladwell talks mostly about how peers are what influences a person’s identity, and who they truly are. Gladwell mentions that a child who is born in poverty and in a place in which is full of poverty the child is more likely to be suitable to trouble and likely hood of dropping out of school. Where you live has a lot to do with the type of people you are going to encounter, according to Gladwell. Using the example that if a child is raised in a poor neighbor hood or environment the child is more likely to get in to trouble can also be an affection of the peers that the child would meet in this location. If what Gladwell is saying is true than a child being raised in that type of environment would be influenced by his or her peers of that environment. Making a child it's location. I feel that Levitt and Dubner would respond by saying that we are our family. They seem to believe that is our genes that make us who we are. If we have intelligent parents then we are most likely going to be intelligent. According to them our personality, and ultimately who we are comes from our family, the genes that have been passed down. They believe that when the parent is younger, and setting up patterns in their life on how they handle situations is what affects the child. Not whether or not they listen to Mozart in the womb or not. I do agree with this. i belive that our genes make up a huge part of who we are, but the rest that cannot be decided by genes alone is based on your peers. The people who you hang out with tend to be like you. There is no way that you can possibly interact with someone your own age and not be influenced by thier actions. Whether or not they influnece you not to be like them or not to do something or to be like them they are still influencing you, therefore becoming a part of who you are. I belive that parents do not have as much influence on a child or person as much as thier peers do. A parent is around thier child a significantly less amount of time than they are with thier friends, leaving more time for them to be influenced by them. For example high school cliques are not formed by parents telling them to fit into a certain sterio type, they are made and fit into by the influence of thier friends and how they present them selves.
I feel like Gladwell would respond to the identity question from august 27 by saying that we are our location. Gladwell talks mostly about how peers are what influences a person’s identity, and who they truly are. Gladwell mentions that a child who is born in poverty and in a place in which is full of poverty the child is more likely to be suitable to trouble and likely hood of dropping out of school. Where you live has a lot to do with the type of people you are going to encounter, according to Gladwell. Using the example that if a child is raised in a poor neighbor hood or environment the child is more likely to get in to trouble can also be an affection of the peers that the child would meet in this location. If what Gladwell is saying is true than a child being raised in that type of environment would be influenced by his or her peers of that environment. Making a child it's location. I feel that Levitt and Dubner would respond by saying that we are our family. They seem to believe that is our genes that make us who we are. If we have intelligent parents then we are most likely going to be intelligent. According to them our personality, and ultimately who we are comes from our family, the genes that have been passed down. They believe that when the parent is younger, and setting up patterns in their life on how they handle situations is what affects the child. Not whether or not they listen to Mozart in the womb or not. I do agree with this. i belive that our genes make up a huge part of who we are, but the rest that cannot be decided by genes alone is based on your peers. The people who you hang out with tend to be like you. There is no way that you can possibly interact with someone your own age and not be influenced by thier actions. Whether or not they influnece you not to be like them or not to do something or to be like them they are still influencing you, therefore becoming a part of who you are. I belive that parents do not have as much influence on a child or person as much as thier peers do. A parent is around thier child a significantly less amount of time than they are with thier friends, leaving more time for them to be influenced by them. For example high school cliques are not formed by parents telling them to fit into a certain sterio type, they are made and fit into by the influence of thier friends and how they present them selves.
Thursday, August 28, 2008
2/28/08
What were your impressions of the first class? Are we our Name, our Family, our Sex, our Nationality or our Location? If not, then what is responsible for our identity? Do we have an identity apart from our community?
My impression on the first class was that it seems like its going to be one of my favorite classes. I like the debates we have, and the people in my class seem like they wont get to defendsive. I belive ourr names or our nationality or what not do not define our idenity. I think it is our accomplishments and our personality that defines our idenity. When people first met someone or hear of them they normally come up with judgements by the persons name, family, sex, nationality, or location. But once they get to know the person that they have judged by sterio types that society have given them they get to know the real person and form knowlageble judgements on who this person is, showing thier true idenity. If our "idenity" is what we are precived by someone when they first come in contact with us than yes we are our name, family, sex, nationality, or location. But i personally belive that our identity is who we truly are from our personalties and our accomplishments. With this i think we do have an identiy apart from our community. Our community gives our idenity based off of when they first meet us (name....ect.) Since our idenity is something more personal that can not be truly percived until you get to know someone on a more personal level, as in getting to know thier personality and accomplishments we do have an idenity apart from our community.
My impression on the first class was that it seems like its going to be one of my favorite classes. I like the debates we have, and the people in my class seem like they wont get to defendsive. I belive ourr names or our nationality or what not do not define our idenity. I think it is our accomplishments and our personality that defines our idenity. When people first met someone or hear of them they normally come up with judgements by the persons name, family, sex, nationality, or location. But once they get to know the person that they have judged by sterio types that society have given them they get to know the real person and form knowlageble judgements on who this person is, showing thier true idenity. If our "idenity" is what we are precived by someone when they first come in contact with us than yes we are our name, family, sex, nationality, or location. But i personally belive that our identity is who we truly are from our personalties and our accomplishments. With this i think we do have an identiy apart from our community. Our community gives our idenity based off of when they first meet us (name....ect.) Since our idenity is something more personal that can not be truly percived until you get to know someone on a more personal level, as in getting to know thier personality and accomplishments we do have an idenity apart from our community.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
