Review Questions

1. Compared to writing traditional essays as you have in other classes, were the expectations of the blog assignment easier, harder or just different? In other words, was it clear to you what the format of a blog was and how to produce one?

In comparison to writing traditional essays the form for blogging was a big unclear, but I feel this goes without saying for a blog is by nature a less ridged and more freeform style of writing. Therefore, even with the lack of a said format the idea of how to produce one was not extremely otherworldly. If a word of difficulty was applied to the blog writing process I would use the word: easier. This is not negative in any regard, for the freeing aspect of the blogs made them far more approachable and user friendly. Other peers of mine who are working on essays for other classes feel overwhelmed with the strict restrictions of essay formatting and the minute detail involved with citing sources. The use of hyperlinks enables the reader to access the source of information directly and is in that way easier on the writer as well as the reader.

2. Did the blog assignments, and the requirement to create a blog, relate to the class topics and course objectives? Why or why not?

The blog assignments related to the class topics often, but not always. I did feel that our class focus on popular culture was reflected highly through the use of a more modern way of writing and communication. The requirement to create was far more approachable in comparison to the standard essays of yester-years in high school and far more entertaining. It was more of an exercise than an assignment and I felt when one chose a topic related directly to in class conversation it reinforced the discussion points very well. However, some of the blog assignments felt out of place with the current topics being discussed in class, but in the same regard, they allowed idea to be addressed that were fresh and original.

3. Did the non-text elements of the blog program contribute to your learning in this class? Did they get in the way? Or did they have no affect at all?

The non-text elements of the blog program were not a hindrance to my learning in any way; there were however different that most other forms of research I have done in the past. I felt that using the Internet was limiting in regard to the amount of truly valid information that could be attained easily without sifting through invalid and biased articles, but its simplicity of use was its saving grace. I did feel that there was a slight learning curve with the use of Blogger and Animoto, but that was passed over quickly. All together, the use of non-text elements seemed to be more beneficial than harmful.

ANIMOTO!

http://animoto.com/play/DMR11b52IWlPOFT57xlyMg

Yay!

A Belief's Proof for an Emotional Justification

Why do human beings believe in things that are not (or cannot) be proven?

Beginning around 35,000 years ago Paleolithic representational art emerged in upper Europe. Faceless sculptures of well fed, nude, and commonly pregnant women were found in Austria and France. They are known as the ‘Venus figurines.’ Their exaggerated sexual characteristics imply not only a strong focus on the importance of female fertility, but also an idealization of the female identity as the giver of life. It appears quite clearly that events led these early people in Europe to worship the ability of women to birth children, and that these Paleolithic peoples believed that there was some power given to women enabling their bodies to gift life. These figurines and this idea of feminine worship began far before the concept of proof was created. Thus, perhaps human beings believe in things that cannot be proven, for there is truly no proof to be found. Some things may just occur or be in such a way that there is no answer for how or why. This notion then leads to a following question: Why must human beings attempt to prove the things that they believe in?

According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary the scientific method was invented around 1810 and is described as follows: principles and procedures for the systematic pursuit of knowledge involving the recognition and formulation of a problem, the collection of data through observation and experiment, and the formulation and testing of hypotheses. There is no natural law that states: all seen occurrences must be provided with a definition through the scientific method. There is no requirement that a set of facts must be analyzed and their relationship to one another be found. Therefore, there must be an emotional reason why humans seek proof for their beliefs. A study was conducted by the University of California, Los Angeles, that illustrated emotions connected with belief, disbelief and uncertainty effected specific parts of the brain. The analysis found that contrasting belief with disbelief yielded an increased signal in the ventromedial prefrontal cortex, which is involved in linking factual knowledge with emotion. It brought to light that when a belief is shown, or more correctly, felt to be true, the believer then associates a positive emotional response with the idea. If their idea is valid, they become heightened emotionally. According to the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, no aspect of our mental life is more important to the quality and meaning of our existence than our emotions.

If all of these factors are true, then one must then deepen the concept. If proof and belief are so directly connected emotionally, then why must one have beliefs at all? Why not just have raw emotions? The answer is a matter of rationality. The clearest notions associated with rationality are coherence and consistency, but they are held in a sphere of belief. The number of goals that are logically possible for one to attempt at any particular time is virtually infinite, as well, the number of possible strategies that one may employ in pursuit of these goals is even larger. Belief seems to provide a balance between the solid rational portions of existence and the unjustified and volatile ones of emotion. Belief holds a place in the realm of irrationality and emotional intensity. It is that realm of unexplainable certainty where one finds a severe lack of proof, and because of that fact, all many wish to do is find what is not present: the factual basis of something not tangible but emotionally defensible.

Same-Sex Marriage: The Controversy of Our Generation

Why are so many people uncomfortable with the idea that many problems don't have a single solution? Give an example of a current controversy in which there are different factions arguing that theirs is the one RIGHT answer and explain why there is in reality no one right answer to the issue.

‘There is a storm gathering.” There is a storm gathering that will make doctors choose between their faith and their job, a storm that will encroach on the rights of individuals, a storm that will leave parents helpless to stop its influence on their children. This is the warning issued by the National Organization for Marriage. This storm is Same-Sex Marriage.

There are many who are convinced that the institution of same-sex legal unions will negatively affect the whole of the American nation. These warnings about the perceived dangers of homosexual marriage are predominately the opinions of those who affiliate themselves with conservative views and Christian ideals. The largest portion of their fear is said to be that the “marriage covenant” is being infringed upon; that the sacred bond between a man and a woman is being broken and the result will be the disintegration of the family foundation, eventually leading to a fall in social order.

However, points have been made that these opinions are not valid and that they are influenced by motives not readily available to the public eye. It has been said that the fear the opponents of gay marriage have is less of gay marriage itself and more the fear of a breakdown. A breakdown of the traditional heterosexual family causing a shift in the role of women and the church in society. Denying someone the right to marry is seen as a denial of religious freedom and marriage benefits (i.e. joint ownership, medical decision making, etc), as well as a form of minority discrimination. But that means nothing to someone who feels that their values as an individual are being challenged and their families are being put at risk.

Whatever one’s opinion on the subject may be, it is clear that a satisfactory resolution for this idealistic conundrum will dubitably be reached. Those that are morally or religiously opposed to same-sex marriage will be offended and refuse to recognize the legal union. Contrastingly, those that openly support it will be joyous. Arguments can be made in regard to who is truly qualified to make decisions on who is allowed to marry. Or even what marriage is. Due to the simple fact that every individual will have a personal opinion on marriage makes finding one answer impossible. It would be like having the Supreme Court decide which ice cream is better: vanilla or chocolate? It cannot be done.

What is morally right or wrong resides wholly with an individual. It is the individual who decides for themselves what they believe and what they are comfortable with. Thus, there can be no ‘right’ answer reached in regards to same-sex marriage. For when all is said and done, people will always disagree on what is ‘right.’

Cell Phones: The Cigarette of The Modern Generation

Choose one way in which technology has changed human society and explain the impact of that change, positive and/or negative.

In almost every corner of the planet cellular communication has risen. Antiquating the telephone wires and curly pig-tailed phones of old, shiny black and silver portable communicators with sliding touch-sensitive screens have become prolific. They connect to others in seconds, to countries in moments. They send images and videos to friends and family isolated from one another by land and sea. They have become the defining point of a generation. Texting championships are held in New York, where youthful participants have the chance to win up to $50,000. Cell phone addiction has become a recognized medical diagnosis nation wide. These small telecommunicators have altered the way the world shares thoughts, messages, sights and sounds in ways that were unimaginable when Martin Cooper invented the first cellular telephone in 1973. The analog to digital transition, the landline to radio wave switch, has been met with great satisfaction by millions. There are underlying dangers waiting, however. With increasing evidence these still very new technological devices are becoming more dangerous then people would like to believe. This leaves some pensive. Others frightened.

The first telephone was invented by a Mr. Alexander Grahm Bell in 1876. He made his first call in March of that year to a Mr. Watson, simply stating: “Mr. Watson, come here; I want you.” This is tame in comparison to the endless amount of information that 87.7 million Verizon subscribers are able to access and share this year. It seems that no fall, fart or snotty sneeze is safe when 276.6 million wireless subscribers in the USA are able to transmit the photos and footage of the event to whomever they see fit. YouTube is swamped with grainy movies, shot on cell phone cameras, encapsulating moments that would have never been seen by more than a few people fifteen years ago. Homework problems can be shared on a peer-to-peer basis instantaneously though texting and photos of the actual assignments. This web of cellular telecommunication connects people in ways that simplify and expedite their lives. With unlimited access to the world from someone’s palm, what more could be asked for?

Cell phones operate on a full-duplex system. This means that the cell phone uses a frequency for talking and another separate frequency for listening, enabling both individuals on the call to talk at once. In the typical analog cell phone system used in the United States, the cell phone holder receives around 800 frequencies to use across the city they live in. The provider (i.e. Verizon, AT&T, T-Mobile, etc.) separates the city into cells. Each cell is typically sized at about 10 square miles on a hexagonal grid, thus “cell phones.” With this system comes the direct exposure to radio waves sent and received by the cellular device. Articles are popping up at an alarming rate, specifically analyzing the scientific dangers that cell phones present to the modern public:

Summer 2006: the Hamburg Morgenpost: ARE WE TELEPHONING OURSELVES TO DEATH?

December 2007: Agence France-Presse: ISRAELI STUDY SAYS REGULAR MOBILE USE INCREASES TUMOUR RISK

January 2008: London's Independent: MOBILE PHONE RADIATION WRECKS YOUR SLEEP

September 2008: Australia's The Age: SCIENTISTS WARN OF MOBILE PHONE CANCER RISK

Fall 2009: the Danish journal Dagens Medicin: MOBILE PHONES AFFECT THE BRAIN'S METABOLISM

In September of 2007, the European Environment Agency warned that cell phone technology "could lead to a health crisis similar to those caused by asbestos, smoking, and lead in petrol." A Fox News video article posted on Friday, January 29^th of this year informed viewers that the World Health Organization had determined a strong connection between cell phone use and brain cancer. It seems that this potential danger would be easily ousted if people stopped using cell phones. There in lies the rub.

For this generation, we will be faced with an addiction. An addiction to the speed of communication and the simplicity of informational access. Every call taken and every text sent is the same as the slow inhalation of a cigarette. The radio waves to the brain are the same as a cloud of smoke to the lungs. The slow and eventual creation of biological cellular mutation. Whether we decide to “quit” is entirely our choice. But as an active cell phone user, I wonder if I will have the strength to break the bond of an addiction stronger than nicotine.

The Call to Adventure (a.k.a The Blogatorium's First Post)

I would rather be ashes than dust.

I would rather my spark should burn out in a brilliant blaze than it be stifled in dry rot.

I would rather be a superb meteor, every atom of me in magnificent glow, than a sleepy and permanent planet.

Man's chief purpose is to live, not to exist.

I shall not waste my days trying to prolong them.

I shall use my time.

-Jack London

It is rare when one sees so much of themselves in another's words. I would be hard pressed to disagree with Mr. London on any of the points he has made, for I came to the same conclusions he did long before I found this quotation. I have seen the outcome of lives spent in waiting, lives spent in fear of the unknown, lives spent approaching each day as if another will come tomorrow. Tomorrow eventually passes, moments are lost, dreams are forgotten.

As a man who is fueled by dreams and the moments that make me love life, I refuse whisper away like the red in the dying coals of a fire. I seek every experience and sensation I can get my hands on. I do my very best to seize the day in any way I am able to. That way, in case I do not wake up the next morning, I can say I had one hell of a ride.

I spoke to my father last fall about death, about how we would cope with him no longer being around.

"Cope?" he said.

I responded, "Well, yeah. It's going to be sad."

He paused for a minute, then spoke.

"Shit, if you stayed awake all day and all night everyday for the rest of your life, you would still be no where near to having the fun I've had... If I died tomorrow, it'll still be hard to catch up."

I took a moment, then nodded in agreement. I think it is needless to say, I'm already working on catching up.