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.
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
