1.) I'm not particular to the blog style in regards to submitting coursework. Though I do enjoy the creativity in which one can add a touch of their own style. The hyperlinks added some basic backing and facts when arguing a topic. It is my intention on continuing this blog when the time arrives to write about something that is of particular interest to me or something I wish to debate. The format was somwhat generic though at this level it shouldn't be at an elementary level.
2.) They did relate to the class topics for the most part, though I would've like to discuss farnenhiet 451 at some point either in class or the blog more than we did.
I feel we could've spent more time on the text books as they had an integral part of our class, not to mention they are great reading.
3.)The non-text elements had an impact though could've been better. I wouldn't say they got in the way though the overall effect was not as much as it should have been. I did learn a great deal in the class, I thought the open style in class was good but could've been more stringent with regards of people talking out of turn, but I like this way of open communication. I think it helped with the class some, and it definitely didn't take away from it.
Thursday, May 6, 2010
Thursday, April 22, 2010
Propaganda vs. Free Speech
Propaganda often invokes images of communism, wars, drugs, and other hot topics of the era, though with the aid of critical thinking skills one can distinguish this blatant sway of influence to one attitudes towards certain ideas. Though free speech can include propaganda, it is all in the way it is presented and the biased from which the source is from.
Free Speech as garuanteed in our constitution can and often does have some form of biased opinion. There have been laws that have been implemented as to curb hate crimes, which many use the pathway of free speech peddle there bias. Examples of recent propoganda include the war in Iraq and American domination. Free speech in the political realm often include recent bills up for vote, genuine appreciation for certain acts or laws set into place through the peddling of the bill via free speech.
Most notably of free speech is the Juneau school board vs. Joseph Frederick, 'Bong hits for Jesus' which resided in a loss, it was stated that the state could sensor illegal drug use in schools.
It is all how it is interpreted, one might consider the source to distinguish whether it is propoganda or free speech. Laws often dictate, or goes to judicial review when certain topics come up whether or not something is protected by free speech.
Propoganda is often touted as an extremely biased sway to an idea but as stated previously it is often presented in a form that envokes emotion through the use of visual aid, often undermining one's concious thoughts.
Free Speech as garuanteed in our constitution can and often does have some form of biased opinion. There have been laws that have been implemented as to curb hate crimes, which many use the pathway of free speech peddle there bias. Examples of recent propoganda include the war in Iraq and American domination. Free speech in the political realm often include recent bills up for vote, genuine appreciation for certain acts or laws set into place through the peddling of the bill via free speech.
Most notably of free speech is the Juneau school board vs. Joseph Frederick, 'Bong hits for Jesus' which resided in a loss, it was stated that the state could sensor illegal drug use in schools.
It is all how it is interpreted, one might consider the source to distinguish whether it is propoganda or free speech. Laws often dictate, or goes to judicial review when certain topics come up whether or not something is protected by free speech.
Propoganda is often touted as an extremely biased sway to an idea but as stated previously it is often presented in a form that envokes emotion through the use of visual aid, often undermining one's concious thoughts.
Thursday, April 15, 2010
Friday, March 26, 2010
Blog #3 - What makes an authority on a topic?
“Education is an ornament in prosperity and a refuge in adversity” –Aristotle
Education is the key to knowledge, it is the great sword of empowerment that once earned and attained can be wielded with force if need be or to coax and educate others. To be an authority on any given topic it must take a well disciplined and yet open mind, to absorb like a sponge what is learned from even more educated and respectable peers in their field and in the process to leave their own unproven beliefs at the door.
One can claim to know what they are talking about yet if asked for their educational background most would fall short to prove they are knowledgeable at all on the given topic at hand. Take for instance the Theory of Evolution, sadly in this country there are still a vast majority that do not agree with it, for mere personal reasons which mostly include religious ideals and concepts. Be that as it may, one’s beliefs fall short of what is fact. It’s a hard pill to swallow and most avoid the pill by simply stating reasons why they do not take evolution as fact, these reasons are usually nothing more than emotional blurbs of disillusioned rhetoric.
Richard Dawkins the notable English scholar has spent his life on the very subject. He is British ethologist, evolutionary biologist and a well respected science author of several books, most recently: The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution (2009). He studied zoology at Balliol College, Oxford, tutored by Nobel Prize winning ethologist Nikolaas Tinbergen, he then graduated in 1962. He attended Oxford University graduating with an M.A and Ph.D. He was also an assistant professor of zoology at the University of California Berkeley from 1967 to 1969. He is best known for his gene centered view of evolution and introduced the concept of memes. He won the zoological Society Silver medal in 1989, the Faraday Award and the Kistler Prize and is also a fellow of the Royal Society and of the Royal Society in Literature, and many other numerous awards in science to date. He is a well know critic of creationism and intelligent design, the idea that a supernatural being created the human species, he is continually debunking this pseudo-scientific approach to evolution.
This person is obviously a very intelligent and well educated person and without a doubt an expert in his field of science. There are still many that contest what Mr.Dawkins proves about where the human species came from, though many without his degree of knowledge. To become such an authority on any topic as one can see here it must take an enormous commitment to pursue and learn the intricacies of the particular field in which one is interested.
Ad Astra
-Joe DeSalme
Education is the key to knowledge, it is the great sword of empowerment that once earned and attained can be wielded with force if need be or to coax and educate others. To be an authority on any given topic it must take a well disciplined and yet open mind, to absorb like a sponge what is learned from even more educated and respectable peers in their field and in the process to leave their own unproven beliefs at the door.
One can claim to know what they are talking about yet if asked for their educational background most would fall short to prove they are knowledgeable at all on the given topic at hand. Take for instance the Theory of Evolution, sadly in this country there are still a vast majority that do not agree with it, for mere personal reasons which mostly include religious ideals and concepts. Be that as it may, one’s beliefs fall short of what is fact. It’s a hard pill to swallow and most avoid the pill by simply stating reasons why they do not take evolution as fact, these reasons are usually nothing more than emotional blurbs of disillusioned rhetoric.
Richard Dawkins the notable English scholar has spent his life on the very subject. He is British ethologist, evolutionary biologist and a well respected science author of several books, most recently: The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution (2009). He studied zoology at Balliol College, Oxford, tutored by Nobel Prize winning ethologist Nikolaas Tinbergen, he then graduated in 1962. He attended Oxford University graduating with an M.A and Ph.D. He was also an assistant professor of zoology at the University of California Berkeley from 1967 to 1969. He is best known for his gene centered view of evolution and introduced the concept of memes. He won the zoological Society Silver medal in 1989, the Faraday Award and the Kistler Prize and is also a fellow of the Royal Society and of the Royal Society in Literature, and many other numerous awards in science to date. He is a well know critic of creationism and intelligent design, the idea that a supernatural being created the human species, he is continually debunking this pseudo-scientific approach to evolution.
This person is obviously a very intelligent and well educated person and without a doubt an expert in his field of science. There are still many that contest what Mr.Dawkins proves about where the human species came from, though many without his degree of knowledge. To become such an authority on any topic as one can see here it must take an enormous commitment to pursue and learn the intricacies of the particular field in which one is interested.
Ad Astra
-Joe DeSalme
Sunday, February 28, 2010
Blog #2 - Question #3 - Reasoning Cogently
Reasoning cogently and being right in fact are two entirely different dilemmas humans face when coming to a conclusion, though both have uses in our capacity to make sense of things from everyday decisions to theoretical knowledge, if left to only one, reasoning incorrectly to a true conclusion is by far better than to reason well to a false one.
Is this statement an oxymoron? Can one really reason well to a false outcome or incorrectly to a true one? The answer to this is yes, though unfortunate, as our feeble minds in the childhood of our species tends to still grasp to conclusions that claim to be true, but rather tend for the most part to be a resounding falsity. An ideological concept would be to reason well to a true conclusion, and one day perhaps when the human brain can handle it, it will.
Merriam-Websters defines Cogent as having power to compel or constrain, appealing forcibly to the mind or reason. It’s etymology from the Latin cogent, cogens present particple of cogens: collect, to drive together, from co- agere to drive. This serves as the literal translation to force together what the mind is cycling through, or making sense of what the internal or external stimulation might be, the thought tied with emotion, although the mind can be unaware and also unconscious of what the two are trying to tie together to form a conclusion. Confused yet? Good, one should be as this is what makes certain things in the mind that we as humans try to understand while coming to conclusions. This can lead some to cognitive dissonance, or the ‘uncomfortable feeling of holding two contradictory ideas’. This often plays out in arguments amongst religious believers and non believers. Most people are unaware of the cogent argument they endure day in and day out, it goes on unnoticed in just about every aspect of our life.
In their book, Logic and Contemporary Rhetoric: The Use of Reason in Everyday Life. Authors Howard Kahane and Nancy Cavender explain that:
“On the whole it’s a lot better reason incorrectly to true - right - conclusions than it is to reason well to false ones. But the most likely way to be right, in the long run, is to reason correctly!” (43).
The idea being as stated earlier, coming to a true or right conclusion is a good thing, though we should strive as humans to reason correctly right from the start. The fact that we are even conscious of this very thing is what has evolved, and set us apart from our primate ancestors, though it is still an evolving process. This can be deduced from the fact that the very word cogent was first used in 1659, the processes in which we make decisions and come to conclusions were there though the word in which we label it was not until then, thus giving us a realistic look at the infancy of our species. Our species has come a long way in regards to reason, though it is only a very small infantile step towards something greater we may or may never come to realize.
-Joe DeSalme
02-28-10
Is this statement an oxymoron? Can one really reason well to a false outcome or incorrectly to a true one? The answer to this is yes, though unfortunate, as our feeble minds in the childhood of our species tends to still grasp to conclusions that claim to be true, but rather tend for the most part to be a resounding falsity. An ideological concept would be to reason well to a true conclusion, and one day perhaps when the human brain can handle it, it will.
Merriam-Websters defines Cogent as having power to compel or constrain, appealing forcibly to the mind or reason. It’s etymology from the Latin cogent, cogens present particple of cogens: collect, to drive together, from co- agere to drive. This serves as the literal translation to force together what the mind is cycling through, or making sense of what the internal or external stimulation might be, the thought tied with emotion, although the mind can be unaware and also unconscious of what the two are trying to tie together to form a conclusion. Confused yet? Good, one should be as this is what makes certain things in the mind that we as humans try to understand while coming to conclusions. This can lead some to cognitive dissonance, or the ‘uncomfortable feeling of holding two contradictory ideas’. This often plays out in arguments amongst religious believers and non believers. Most people are unaware of the cogent argument they endure day in and day out, it goes on unnoticed in just about every aspect of our life.
In their book, Logic and Contemporary Rhetoric: The Use of Reason in Everyday Life. Authors Howard Kahane and Nancy Cavender explain that:
“On the whole it’s a lot better reason incorrectly to true - right - conclusions than it is to reason well to false ones. But the most likely way to be right, in the long run, is to reason correctly!” (43).
The idea being as stated earlier, coming to a true or right conclusion is a good thing, though we should strive as humans to reason correctly right from the start. The fact that we are even conscious of this very thing is what has evolved, and set us apart from our primate ancestors, though it is still an evolving process. This can be deduced from the fact that the very word cogent was first used in 1659, the processes in which we make decisions and come to conclusions were there though the word in which we label it was not until then, thus giving us a realistic look at the infancy of our species. Our species has come a long way in regards to reason, though it is only a very small infantile step towards something greater we may or may never come to realize.
-Joe DeSalme
02-28-10
Saturday, February 13, 2010
The Rational Approach
Rational vs. Irrational Thought in Society
“Somewhere ages and ages hence: Two roads diverged in a wood, and I – I took the one less traveled by, and that has made all the difference.”
-Robert Frost
Rational thinking and the concepts that can be brought to fruition can also be destroyed by that of the irrational which in conjunction have not only brought our species to a higher degree of consciousness but also to discern between what is and what is not. Given time, the essence of what it is to be human, that in which what distinguishes us from our ancestral primate cousins, is to a great degree the ability to rationalize what was once mysterious and start to cut the umbilical cord to irrational thought.
There have been for millennia, the dire need to explain and re-explain the world in which we live in. For the better part of our existence the human species have placated their mind with soothe saying ideas that have been culturally passed down through the ages. In some instances, such as the idea that the world was flat and that supernatural forces (this site exemplifies that of the Anthropic Principle, the circular, non sequiter and false dilemma arguments) are at work every day have skewed the mind and that of the masses. It can be said that one can create their own reality simply by the perceptions that the mind and body perceive as true in and of itself. The irrational thought process is the term that can lie in the grey area for those that still have beliefs that are unfounded, and can be mixed and left to ferment as is some potent cocktail of reason when the effect is perceived as rational. Often mystery and irrationality take precedence over one’s own mind to make sense of what is unknown, and for which transpire the need to believe and that of which one is said to exist for real.
Society today, as it was on the onset of modern man, needs to continually strive for the rational for it is the rational that has led our species out of caves and into the realm of the known and not of the mystical and nonsensical musings of the masses. At one time it remained poignant for our species to try and make sense of the world around us, though lacking in basic knowledge irrationality was used to explain common aspects of the world. To a certain degree both were needed to gain our freedom, and escape the irrational jail that most still cling to, as this for some still act as a blanket of protection, warming and coddling them from the cold truth. For it is easier to dismiss something as supernatural than it is to investigate it with an open mind and come to a conclusion based on evidence using rational thought processes. Robert Frost’s poem of the two roads gives us the choice as a metaphor for the rational. For this planet to survive it will take the majority of the populous to take the road less traveled into the realm of the rational and to permanently close the chapter and thus the road to the irrational, for on its path the only destination it presents is doom.
‘Ad Astra’
Joe DeSalme
2-12-10
“Somewhere ages and ages hence: Two roads diverged in a wood, and I – I took the one less traveled by, and that has made all the difference.”
-Robert Frost
Rational thinking and the concepts that can be brought to fruition can also be destroyed by that of the irrational which in conjunction have not only brought our species to a higher degree of consciousness but also to discern between what is and what is not. Given time, the essence of what it is to be human, that in which what distinguishes us from our ancestral primate cousins, is to a great degree the ability to rationalize what was once mysterious and start to cut the umbilical cord to irrational thought.
There have been for millennia, the dire need to explain and re-explain the world in which we live in. For the better part of our existence the human species have placated their mind with soothe saying ideas that have been culturally passed down through the ages. In some instances, such as the idea that the world was flat and that supernatural forces (this site exemplifies that of the Anthropic Principle, the circular, non sequiter and false dilemma arguments) are at work every day have skewed the mind and that of the masses. It can be said that one can create their own reality simply by the perceptions that the mind and body perceive as true in and of itself. The irrational thought process is the term that can lie in the grey area for those that still have beliefs that are unfounded, and can be mixed and left to ferment as is some potent cocktail of reason when the effect is perceived as rational. Often mystery and irrationality take precedence over one’s own mind to make sense of what is unknown, and for which transpire the need to believe and that of which one is said to exist for real.
Society today, as it was on the onset of modern man, needs to continually strive for the rational for it is the rational that has led our species out of caves and into the realm of the known and not of the mystical and nonsensical musings of the masses. At one time it remained poignant for our species to try and make sense of the world around us, though lacking in basic knowledge irrationality was used to explain common aspects of the world. To a certain degree both were needed to gain our freedom, and escape the irrational jail that most still cling to, as this for some still act as a blanket of protection, warming and coddling them from the cold truth. For it is easier to dismiss something as supernatural than it is to investigate it with an open mind and come to a conclusion based on evidence using rational thought processes. Robert Frost’s poem of the two roads gives us the choice as a metaphor for the rational. For this planet to survive it will take the majority of the populous to take the road less traveled into the realm of the rational and to permanently close the chapter and thus the road to the irrational, for on its path the only destination it presents is doom.
‘Ad Astra’
Joe DeSalme
2-12-10
Friday, February 5, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
