Week 5 Prompt 5

Why We Like What We Like, by ALVA NOË.

ca: the author believed that we like doing things we like only BECAUSE we chose to. i agree BECAUSE of the CAPABILITY of the nose, presentation, and we are spoilt.The nose is a marvel, of the human body. In appearance it has insignificant image, but the things that it is capable of is amazing. The nose helps us define different smells, it helps us tell the difference between nice and bad smells. It also helps in taste. When we taste a particular food we know what it is because we have smelt it earlier and know what it is like, and the taste buds in our tongue help make more accurate theory’s on what the particular food is. If some one were to taste three different liquids, say water, vinegar, and apple juice while their nose was blocked, they will probably not be able to tell the difference. When it come to eating food our choice of enjoying food comes from our capability of nose. When its comes to food, or people, we as humans always look forward for presentation. We are selective according to the presentation of the person of food. Suppose a chocolate cake was presented very sophisticatedly, with dressing and style, we would select that piece of cake. However, if the same chocolate cake was shaped in the image of poop, not many would dare to even eat the cake, let alone look at it, even though is was same cake as earlier. In humans, a fashion statement makes it clear, what type of person you are. Since a statement is a big deal, most people make sure they blend with change, rather than being the odd one. Our choice of being normal, looking like every one else is a choice, a choice that allows others to evaluate us, so that we may become naturally accepted into society , rather than expecting society to change for us .Changes is good, but not the best option always. Just because an authority says so, does not mean that person has the right to individually change something. 

Choices define who we are, and what we do, Isaac Newton’s third law of motion,states that every action has an equal and opposite reaction, this theory is a proven fact, and it works for every choice we make. Choice in taste and presentation also work together. We are spoilt by nature, we are given too many choices, and too many conclusiios. When a choice does not exist we are forced to chose what is given, just because the world has portrayed goods that can be substituted over another good, we chose those lower end products because we gain the same, or better amount of satisfaction from the product without paying a hefty amount.

The capability of choosing is great a power, and with great power come great responsibility, thats why we like doing things we like.

Week 5 Prompt 6

“Please Read This Story, Thank You” by Linton Weeks

Linton Weeks believes that newly developing world has taken no interest in is using proper etiquette and manners. I disagree, because the new world  has changed the meanings of words and the style of presentation.

For a place to develop, it has to change, for change to occur ancient practises need to be forgotten, and new forms of art need to be accepted. The generation gap that exist the young and the old is big hole. The IT explosions around the world cause the change. The young changed fast with it while the elders moved on slow. Linton Weeks believes that that old is gold. Just because a person displays appreciation in a different form, which does not mean that the person actions are unworthy. The language has also changed, slang words are often substituted for the actual terms, ways or methods of addressing someone have all also changed. The younger generation is always looking for easier ways, to get the job done, use of slang words and different methods of interaction are considered improper. Our generation likes changes, and since we have the power to change the world, we have the power to changes everything. People cannot judge as improper or having no manners, because we are different, change is necessary. People cannot always live in shadow of other who think "old is gold." Everyone has different ways of expressing delight or appreciation. Their actions will be different, more common to those of his generation. How can the author say that the person does not have etiquette, because he is young. Young people hated when they are compared and asked to be more like their parents.Linton Weeks is discriminating the younger generations because we lack the old school methods of her generation.

WEEK 3 PROMPT 4: Does Surveillance make us morally better.

Emrys Westacott asks a probing question his essay, published In Philosophy Now. Westacott believes that constant surveillance is better than we making immoral choices. I disagree with Westacott's theory, because of the novel One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest, Being curious, Utopia does not exist.

The book One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest, written by Ken Kesey is a story about a patients in a mental asylum. Constant surveillance by the team of nurses and workers at the ward tries to keep their patients mentally and physically stable, therefore keeping morally stable. The health of these patients became worse  over the years because of constant surveillance. The patients became zombies, there was no freedom and were  not allowed to make choices for themselves. The men were dying and were in need of a savior. A new patient enrolled at the ward, his acts were completely immoral. His presence gave the ward and the patients a new life, a life had been waiting for. An immoral life not held together by rules.

          Being moral towards ourselves and others is a nice manner of living, but the best. We have to be immoral, we cannot be under surveillance all the time. We cannot show the world what we are capable of until we let go.

We can only educate and understand by being curious all the time. We learn from our mistakes, and know what the difference is between good and bad.  Everyone has memories of action they did, that they would not do again; whether it may be playing with fire or stealing. Since we know the outcome we chose not to do it again. That action makes us moral. If we were held to together by rules, that never allowed us to chose what we would want, we would never be able to control our curiousness, we may become afraid, and that fear may control us Some once said, that we have to master our fears, only then will we have the courage to act.

Over the years, human have tired looking for a Utopian society. Some have found some, but those entire place have changed because of greed, and being moral was too main stream. Change is needed to prosper. Utopian societies does exist humans are not made to be moral. We call ourselves the most advanced and intellectual organism on earth. We did not achieve it by being moral, but by being immoral. It is in our blood. Greed has always made us make the wrong choices as individual, but has helped others prosper. Drugs for example, greed brought to us, it is harmful to an individual, but in Mexico, the economy is prospering because of the drug trade. Without that variable, Mexican economy would fall if there was surveillance and everyone had to be moral. Utopian societies never exist because of this.

Westacott's theory is invalid, because of the novel One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest, Being curious, and  Utopia does not exist.

WEEK 3 Prompt 3: The Rise Of Awesome

In the article, the  Robert Lane Greenee explains that god his god is awesome  and the word awesome has no honor left. i agree becusae god is a man so men are mortal, and global trend.

In every religous book that i have read and heard about so far, god is a man. In the bible its jesus, the koran its muhammad, in buddism it in buddha and so on.If god is a man, that mean all men are mortal, which is true. Everyone has a expiry date, and so did god.Since god is a mortal man, he is seen as like every other individual present on this planet. There is nothing awesome about a mortal man, therefore there is nothing awesome about god. In the past there have been wars fought in the name of god, first were the crusades, then came Palestine's and Israelites, and the start terrorist groups like the Al-Qaeda, killing in the name of their awesome god.

 If this is the reality, then the term awesome will desecrate god. What is the point of fighting The bodies of the holly men  didn't live on, but their name do.In the author article, he says that the word god itself meant awesome. But over the years, the word has lost its legacy. The word awesome is not fit to represent god, but dirt. The irony being that a word like"sick" means great, but the word"awesome" now means terrible.

As we know, that  what happens in the past, stays in the past. Most like to move on, old ways are left out, its a global trend, and it happens everyday.Old methods of industrialization have stopped, english language and vocabulary is has changed, fashion keeps changing. The word awesome, has changed too. The article says it was first published in 1598, in the Oxford English Dictionary. The word has been around for 414 years to date, has gone through a process of changes. Teenagers have moved on, but the older generation stick on.

The word is symbol of change, it has played its parts in changing the thoughts and the faith of people who used. The word " awesome" may have been awesome in the older days, but since everything has a shelf life, the word has been recycled to portray a new, and opposite meaning will change how we use it.  It is a pattern that will continuously  repeat, and nothing can be done to stop it.

Week 2 Prompt 2

"Of Studies"

CA:  Sir F. Bacon believes in the importance of studies on how it can change people.

Sir Francis Bacon was an English man that lived sometime in the 16 to 17 century. He was an old man of many talents and occupations. Sir Francis bacon’s understanding on studies is about the capacity it has to make a difference in person life, for anyone who utilizes it. Studies are important It definitely changes a person thinking and character, whether they become good or worse depends on their studies. People may find it boring or interesting, but after the time that put in, a sense of accomplishment in felt. It feels good. I agree with his central argument because of three reasons, sports, Feudal Class System, and to inherit experience.

Most people assume that sports have nothing to do with studies. They think Academics and sports are two different fields. To learn a sport, people need to study, more practical than theoretical. There is some knowledge present in sports, and it can change a person character and life. Studies is the indirect influence on changing character. Money, fame, awards are the variables that actually change character, but they all link, and connect back to studies.  Take Video gaming for example, a lot of people don’t consider it a sport, but there are still many tournaments. The genre’s of games can change a person. The game its self is a book. Violent games, Games with use of bad language etc; can change character. Games area actually put into different levels that equal to an age of a human being. From + three to +18. Books are also classified according to the level of knowledge a human has. Fishing can change a person. It may sound boring; people may think there nothing to learn from the spot.

The Pyramids are unique sturcures. The ones in Egypt and the one that classifies humans. The pyramid that was used to denote lasses in humans was based in education and character. At the top being the most educated, and at the bottom, the least educated. Everyone else just filled up the empty space, which gave rise to new classes. In England, and In India there were classes. When the english, french etc colonized the world, they had a Pyramid, with whites on the Top. Since white people at that time were considered educated, they changed character, they either grew good or worse in their minds and the colonzed. When countries broke away from colonization they adopted the same Pyramind. In India, The Brahman's were the learned ones, and they had education and automatically had character. This supports Sir F.Bacon's argument of out doing everyone else.

While studying, a person naturally gains experience through practice or through theory. Reading or conversations, knowledge is just flows and changes according to the moment. Knowledge gained outside class, or work also boots experience, gives a person the upper hand. This supports Sir F. Bacons argument that people study to gain 

There are more reasons and conclusion to what Sir F. Bacon is suggesting. Sports, Experience, and Outdoing the opponent help a person.

WEEK 2 PROMPT 2 " Youth and Age"

"Of Youth and Age"

Central Argument: Sir Francis bacon believed that a man young in his years was not be compared to man of age.  I agree because of the generation gap that is present, difference of opinion, and what history has to show.

Sir Francis Bacon was an English man that lived sometime in the 16 to 17 century. He was an old man of many talents and occupations. His view on age difference of man was that the youth were not to be compared to an older man. He said that the errors of young men, are the ruin of business. In his time, only few men of his age and quality were worth considering, just like him there were others like Shakespeare, Julius Caesar etc. In a family the father was considered the head of the family, there was no reasoning or difference in thought among the youth and the parent. It was and is still considered foolish for the youth in the family to go against the word of the parent.

My reason for agreement of his statement is because of the generation gap between the elders and youth. This gap is the cause for a lot a difference. Elders don't understand the youth, and, they have no respect the youth. The elders are stuck in their time capsule, and can only relate to up to their knowledge limit. Rapid technological advances have made it hard for others and easier for the youth to understand. The old and the young are like to parties fighting to get simple messages across.

The difference of opinion is needed in any debate or argument. The youth always have a different opinion because they always want to move ahead in their research, while older people like to hold on to old ways. The youth have imaginary and visions while the older generation believe in practise. The youth is also very hasty i decision making on an average make the choice, which is not always the best one, while the elders take a long time to make a decision. They know what is right or wrong. The youth has little experience, while elders have knowledge gained through the years.


Throughout history, from the time of Sir Francis Bacon, to present there have been very few men or women who became famous in their youth. Everyone else was an older person, a person that had the experience, time and ideas. In the present, i can only think of Mark Zuckerberg, who is the CEO of Facebook. he created facebook at he age of there is no else,

The generation gap, difference of onions and what history has shown us, is what i believe is the reason that Sir Francis Bacon is right. 

Week 1 Prompt 1

"TV Is Good for You" By Joel Waldfogel (Slate)

The central argument in Joel Waldfogel's article, TV Is Good For You, is that television has the power of empowerment, only for rural Indian woman.

In Waldfogel’s article, TV Is Good For You, he says that TV has the power of empowerment. It has the power to teach and help spread knowledge for Indian rural women, only if the audience is. The article uses data collected from different states in India from 2001 to 2003. The date he saw proved that TV has the power to enrich. In his article, he only mentions that TV is con for Americans, and that is it. No reference made to other people of different ethnic background.

When I was a little boy, I had television at home I think. The memory has been lost since TV never influenced me. When I moved house to the semi-rural part of the country, for the first two years there was no cable or dish TV. I doubt that dish TV was around, but the idea of wanting a TV never came to thought. I used to listen to the radio.
Years after that, we moved quite a few times, and places were lonely, that was when TV actually came into my life. I got addicted, I used to come after school, finish my homework, and then finally watch some TV. It became a problem, and I was only allotted an hour a day. That rule stayed for a few years, until I lost interest, and now I barely watch, I do not feel the need to watch TV just because I am bored.

Introducing, the TV program into the lives of rural Indians has both its pro and cons. Yes is true, that some channels have enrichment programs and have the power of empowerment. I can name a few that I know; they are Nat-Geographic, Animal Planet, The Discovery channel and the Science Channel. That is far as it goes. News channels cannot be added because those channels are corrupted with false information.  Just like Waldfogel says, " Women with more education have access to better jobs outside the home”. Anyone with an education may get a job, but the problem comes down to that women can not leave home, and the area because they entitled to staying at home and looking after family, another reason for that is the whole village needs to has to be connected to urban world, that mean losing old habits. Introducing TV does not connect people; it is just like a parasite travelling across the globe colonizing and spreading media influenced programs. Waldfogel says that TV has improved the rural Indian women understanding of raising a family, and keep the family alive, and prosperous. It can only go that far, other channels pose a threat to who ever is watching. It will become an n addiction. Attitudes will change, people will change, and their mindsets will change. I was reading a Nat-Geographic magazine once; the topic was TV and the Brain. The magazine said, the people tend to believe that what they watch on TV is conversation happening in real time, therefore is the actors can do it, so can the audience watching the programs. TV series have become violent over the years, and most of them have the same theme, action and love. Children and teenagers watching TV are the first to be affected through watching TV, the whole can family can disintegrate even though, the idea was directed to rural woman. This TV program could influence other variables that could change life.
There is evidence of what The TV program has done to the some people in a country like
USA. Waldfogel says, ”Americans tend to denounce television even as they devour it”. Indian people will change, so will the rest of the world. The TV program will influence, change and create a new world through its power of empowerment. 
Source:
Waldfogel, Joel. "TV Is Good For You." Slate Magazine. Slate, 20 Aug. 2007. Web. 07 Mar. 2012. <http://www.slate.com/articles/business/the_dismal_science/2007/08/tv_is_good_for_you.html>.

Week 1 Prompt 4.

 "Why Good Advertising Works (Even When You Think It Doesn't" by Nigel Hollis (The Atlantic)

The central argument for this post is that advertisements  alters our chain of thought unconsciously.

Advertisements are mood changers, and they are good at what they do. An ad is all about imaginary people with imaginary lives. Everyday, while watching TV, when an advertisement starts playing I always switch to another channel. Consciously doing so, I make a choice and stick with it, that, that particular advertisement will not change about the way I feel or think about the objects the advertising company is showcasing. Day after day, this is the routine for every ad that is showcased. Once, actually a few times when I went out to buy toothpaste, I bought Close up. The image that came to my mind was of the advertisement. Brushing with give Close up would give me long lasting fresh breath. Unconsciously I bought it, only to realize later, that when I left home I had another toothpaste in mind. The author who is a marketer tells us that the advertising agency of USA spends up to 70 billion dollars a year. 70 billion dollars is a big sum, and I believe that this money actually changes are decisions. At the moment I am chewing on chewing gum, Orbit's sugar free gum. I bought it because the ads I have seen promote the fact that this gum I good for your teeth, before Orbit was always Big Babbool. The reason being that bubble's could now be blown bigger.

         Nigel Hollis says that “perfect advertising” does not exist anymore since there is no “argument” or “call to action”, present. I have never seen a perfect ad that uses these terms, I have watched ads that use Pathos. Pathos means emotion, it was a term used by Aristotle, to describe rhetorical strategies and used in arguments. However, advertisements of this day and age have mastered the art of pathos. Advertisements send positive messages across to mess with our feeble minds, and we always give in. In Hollis’s article, he mentions two ways of persuasion are used and they are “raw persuasion” and the “power of engagement.” Raw persuasion meaning that an advertisement will give the consumer an idea to work on, and then will encourage them to buy the product. However, the power of engagement creates a positive effect that will stay in our memories. I side with the power of engagement, and know that only when I am fully engaged in a conversation between someone and something, makes the argument believable, and worth trusting. The memory also sticks for a long time.

Nigel Hollis, in his article " Why good advertising works( Even when you think it doesn't)"   argues that the fact is true because advertisement’s do change our perspective unconsciously, through the power of engagement. Good advertising does influence our thoughts and decisions, and years of data proves the point.

Source:

• Hollis, Nigel. "Why Good Advertising Works (Even When You Think It Doesn't)." The Atlantic. The Atlantic, 31 Aug. 2011. Web. 05 Mar. 2012. <http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2011/08/why-good-advertising-works-even-when-you-think-it-doesnt/244252/>.