The movie enough is about a stereotypical perfect marriage that turns in the wrong direction. The main character role is a motherless young woman named Slim, played by the Jennifer Lopez. Slim works as a waitress in a diner and meets a guy named Mitch. A few years later, they become the stereotypical happy couple and seem to have it all; happily married, a perfect house, a precious daughter and a comfortable lifestyle. Slim then discovers that Mitch is sleeping around behind her back, and things begin to take a turn for the worse. The perfect Cinderella story turns into a nightmare when a former waitress' perfect marriage gives way to adultery and physical abuse and revenge. When Slim tries to protest on Mitch's cheating way, he slaps her around and uses their daughter to keep her in line. With the help of her friend, Slim tries to escape, and Mitch attacks and nearly kills her along the process. Slim then has to resort to changing her identity, by using wigs and different residencies, but Mitch still hires people to try and retreive her.
Basically, Slim becomes so terrified and helpless that she resorts to turning herself from the hunted to ther hunter. She begins going to trainers to help her with defense. In the end, Slim comes out safe and no longer bothered by Mitch.
This movie depicts the gender role of a female who is abused and takes action. Like the movie Thelma and Louise, this movie too depcits a battered woman seeking liberation. In the article Genre and Gender, it says that the stereotypical protagonist is increasingly entrapped the more desperately he/she seeks emancipation (Boozer 209). This is seen within the movie Enough. From the moment Slim finds out Mitch has cheated behind her back, she tries to protest. When she does so, he slaps her around, and the abusive side of Mitch shows. From this moment on, Slim seeks emancipation from him, only to become more and more entrapped. She confronts him and he slaps her around, she runs away and he attacks and almost kills her, she changes her identity and he hires people to seek her out. This film has an emphasis on the protagonist (Slim) forces response to an abusive male and her determination to regain control of her private destiny. The male character, Mitch, failed to maintain what we assume is the proper masculine image, and becomes a cheater, abuser, and along the lines of psychopath.
I chose this movie because it is a stereotypical gender role of a feminine response to male aggression (Boozer 213). It depicts more than one stereotypical aspect, ranging from the stereotypical perfect marriage, to the cheating, abusive husband trying to hunt her down, to her running, and her fighting back. The storyline could be inspirational to some, seeing that she remained strong for herself, her daughter, and did not remain with him after he was unfaithful, event if it meant the abusive things she had to endure.
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
Week 4 Blog Reviews
Krista Sigala:
Frida Kahlo ; You followed the guidelines for the first paragraph very well. You made a good point that in most of her paintings, she is the center of attention. You did a good job at pointing out her surroundings as well. At first glance, I didn't even notice the nails scattered throughout her body until I had read your first paragraph! I also got the same interpretation from the painting you chose. Frida pieced her life back together after enduring the agony, just like the broken column was. This painting strongly represents the pain she went through, as you pointed out. I thought this blog was very well organized. I liked how you described Frida in one paragraph, and the background in another.
Can machines think? ; In the first paragraph, you start out with a brief summary of the article and go on to talk about Wrights views on the things that were being said. Using all the examples in your blog from the article helped to support your final statements. Overall it was a very good, detailed summary.
Lauren Petrovich :
Frida Kahlo; In the first paragraph, you did a very good job at decribing every single detail in the painting! I found your second paragraph to be very good as well. Getting the idea that she is marrying into wealth or is wealthy herself is a good observation, because of the "royal" curtains you pointed out. Saying that from hr clothes and her posture she looks like a nice woman is also a good obersvation. I agree with your last paragraph that she looks like she might be confused, and possible is that way because of her marriage. In the article we read about her, she called her marriage somewhat of an accident. So saying that she looks confused makes sense.
Will Machines have Consciousness like humans?; This was a well written summary. It had very good examples, such as "Cog", and the chess game. Also, I liked how you included that emotions are one of the key things that make us human. I also liked how you ended your blog post with this statement from Wright, " Machines will not have the abilities humans have, and to create one that would have equal consciousness as a human would "exercise powers reserved for God".
Kim Kida: Unable to review.
Frida Kahlo ; You followed the guidelines for the first paragraph very well. You made a good point that in most of her paintings, she is the center of attention. You did a good job at pointing out her surroundings as well. At first glance, I didn't even notice the nails scattered throughout her body until I had read your first paragraph! I also got the same interpretation from the painting you chose. Frida pieced her life back together after enduring the agony, just like the broken column was. This painting strongly represents the pain she went through, as you pointed out. I thought this blog was very well organized. I liked how you described Frida in one paragraph, and the background in another.
Can machines think? ; In the first paragraph, you start out with a brief summary of the article and go on to talk about Wrights views on the things that were being said. Using all the examples in your blog from the article helped to support your final statements. Overall it was a very good, detailed summary.
Lauren Petrovich :
Frida Kahlo; In the first paragraph, you did a very good job at decribing every single detail in the painting! I found your second paragraph to be very good as well. Getting the idea that she is marrying into wealth or is wealthy herself is a good observation, because of the "royal" curtains you pointed out. Saying that from hr clothes and her posture she looks like a nice woman is also a good obersvation. I agree with your last paragraph that she looks like she might be confused, and possible is that way because of her marriage. In the article we read about her, she called her marriage somewhat of an accident. So saying that she looks confused makes sense.
Will Machines have Consciousness like humans?; This was a well written summary. It had very good examples, such as "Cog", and the chess game. Also, I liked how you included that emotions are one of the key things that make us human. I also liked how you ended your blog post with this statement from Wright, " Machines will not have the abilities humans have, and to create one that would have equal consciousness as a human would "exercise powers reserved for God".
Kim Kida: Unable to review.
Thursday, September 17, 2009
"Self Portait on the Border Between Mexico and the United States"
Frida Kahlo's Self-Representations and Questions of Identity The main focal point of "Self Portait on the border between mexico and the United States", is Frida herself. She is holding a mexican flag, standing on the border of Mexico and the United States. The left side of the painting is the side of Mexico. From the roots in the groud are various types of flowers. There are three different statues lying on the ground, one of which resembles a skeleton commonly used to represent "Dia de los muertos". There are a pile of stones, leading up to a building with multiple stairs. In the sky the image of a sun and a moon is displayed. On the right side of the painting, the United States is portrayed. From the ground, instead of roots, it looks like plugs leading to different machinery, rather than flowers. The Ford Hospital is shown, along with many industrialized buildings. The American flag is shown in a cloud of pollution.
The painting obviously portrays her to views and experiences in her life in Mexico, as well as in the United States. Her view of Mexico can be taken as traditional, this can be seen from the roots in the ground leading to the flowers. Also, the statues and buildings give off a traditional side of her Mexican heritage. She seems to view America as very industrialized and caught up in materialized items. The fact that she showed the Ford hospital was symbolizing the time she spent there while being in the United States. Frida used her self image in the middle of the two sides to portray the time she spent in both. The fact that she is holding a Mexican flag shows that she favors her home country.
I chose this painting because after reading the article about Frida Kahlo's life, when I saw this painting I immediatly thought back of the story of how she pleaded Rivera to return to her home country. With the love she had for Rivera and how much she enjoyed her paintings being praised by him and those in the United States, she favored her hometown more. This painting portrayed perfectly her view on Mexico and her views and experiences in the United States. Putting her self image in the middle of the two was a perfect way to show how she was being torn, and by places the Mexican flag clearly showed which of the two she favored.
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
"The lights are on, but is anybody home?"
In this essay, with his main question being "Can Machines Think?", Wright discusses the progress machines have made in being 'more like us'. He states that the field is making computers more like us, not just their actions, but how the actions are carried out- more like us on the inside. Considering this fact that they are trying to make machines more like humans on the inside, he points out the following questions relating to consciousness or mind. Could Deep Blue ever feel deeply blue?; Does a face recognition program have the experience of recognizing a face? Can computers ever have subjective experience? ( Wright 142). Wright makes the point that for AI, the hardest thing for computers is the simple stuff. Things such as small talk, recognizing faces, cleaning, recognizing jokes, or even common sense.
If machines cannot carry out simple things like these, how can they relate to us on the inside? Why are humans feeling undermined by machines? Wright states that computers are bringing about an identity crisis in humans, and he feels that such a crisis possibly is in order. He says that the crisis isn't just that as these machines get more powerful they do more jobs once done only by people, but also that in the process, they seem to underscore the generally dispiriting impulse of scientific request for knowledge and information(Wright 140). One of Wrights main points, he states, is that as the information age advances and computers get brainier, philosophers are taking the existence of mind, of conscious, more seriously, not less (Wright 140).
Wright makes a point that conciousness- the existence of pleasure and pain, love and grief- is a fairly central source of life's meaning (Wright 144). Wright opposes Chalmers statement that consciousness is "extraness", and that there is no apparent role for subjective experience. Wright says that consciousness actually does something in the physical world, like influence behavior. The robot Cog, has the ability that upon touching an object, the "skin" will send a data packet to the "brain" and could have impulses to recoil from an object, an example a hot object, jsut as humans do. Cog, however, would not experience the pain felt by humans.This goes back to his main question...Can machines think? If he has no experience, then how is it even possible? The only reason the robot could even recoil away from the heat, is because of the "skin" that was applied to him. This whole idea that they could even get a robot to so call "feel" the heat, arises the thought that they are creating a new species of sentient life and it is being taken seriously by philosophers. However, there is on going debate on whether machines can think, and personally, I do not think that humans will ever be underminded by machines.
If machines cannot carry out simple things like these, how can they relate to us on the inside? Why are humans feeling undermined by machines? Wright states that computers are bringing about an identity crisis in humans, and he feels that such a crisis possibly is in order. He says that the crisis isn't just that as these machines get more powerful they do more jobs once done only by people, but also that in the process, they seem to underscore the generally dispiriting impulse of scientific request for knowledge and information(Wright 140). One of Wrights main points, he states, is that as the information age advances and computers get brainier, philosophers are taking the existence of mind, of conscious, more seriously, not less (Wright 140).
Wright makes a point that conciousness- the existence of pleasure and pain, love and grief- is a fairly central source of life's meaning (Wright 144). Wright opposes Chalmers statement that consciousness is "extraness", and that there is no apparent role for subjective experience. Wright says that consciousness actually does something in the physical world, like influence behavior. The robot Cog, has the ability that upon touching an object, the "skin" will send a data packet to the "brain" and could have impulses to recoil from an object, an example a hot object, jsut as humans do. Cog, however, would not experience the pain felt by humans.This goes back to his main question...Can machines think? If he has no experience, then how is it even possible? The only reason the robot could even recoil away from the heat, is because of the "skin" that was applied to him. This whole idea that they could even get a robot to so call "feel" the heat, arises the thought that they are creating a new species of sentient life and it is being taken seriously by philosophers. However, there is on going debate on whether machines can think, and personally, I do not think that humans will ever be underminded by machines.
Week 3 Blog Reviews
Kim Kida
I was unable to critique.
Krista Sigala
BLOG 1: The title "Genius Computer" was very creative. She had a good opening paragraph, which stated what Minksy beliefs were, which was part of the assignment. I really liked how she related her past personal experience of her first time with a computer. Relating what she saw back then, to the things that exist today was a very good point. We shared the same idea that whether they can surpass the human brain is questionable. She clearly started that technology does hold some advantages of how much they can accomplish, but ended the paragraph well by saying that surpassing humans is questionable. Condluding her blog with her personal belief that computers won't be able to surpass humans because of things like feeling and small things that go unoticed was good. I also really liked how she ended her blog with a question, leaving the reader to contemplate about the points she just made.
BLOG 2: The overall flow of this blog was really good. She made a point that she feels that all ideas are thoughts, but not all thoughts are ideas, which I think could be true. She also made a good point that our ideas and thoughts assist our intelligence to progress further and our desire to continually learn and progress. Overall both blogs had really good points made and were written well.
Lauren Petrovich
BLOG 1: The first two paragraphs are very informing and strictly about Minsky's beliefs. I also agree with her that computers will not surpass the human brains and they are not capable of having emotions like humans. The main reason she thinks computers will not surpass humans is because emotions, she says since emotions can lead to so many other actions, the act that computers lack emotions sets them behind humans. I like that in the condluding paragraph, she stated that Minksy had some good points, but also stated her own beliefs as well.
BLOG 2: I really liked the first paragraph of "Any Ideas?" To start off both paragraphs with the definition of an idea and a thought was very informing. I do agree that people take personal pride in ideas., and depending on the type of idea, I also agree that morals can reflect or change it. To say that a variety of things can morph off of an idea and lead to different events was a very good point. I liked how she ended by saying that an individuals thoughts and ideas could possibly change someones life.
I was unable to critique.
Krista Sigala
BLOG 1: The title "Genius Computer" was very creative. She had a good opening paragraph, which stated what Minksy beliefs were, which was part of the assignment. I really liked how she related her past personal experience of her first time with a computer. Relating what she saw back then, to the things that exist today was a very good point. We shared the same idea that whether they can surpass the human brain is questionable. She clearly started that technology does hold some advantages of how much they can accomplish, but ended the paragraph well by saying that surpassing humans is questionable. Condluding her blog with her personal belief that computers won't be able to surpass humans because of things like feeling and small things that go unoticed was good. I also really liked how she ended her blog with a question, leaving the reader to contemplate about the points she just made.
BLOG 2: The overall flow of this blog was really good. She made a point that she feels that all ideas are thoughts, but not all thoughts are ideas, which I think could be true. She also made a good point that our ideas and thoughts assist our intelligence to progress further and our desire to continually learn and progress. Overall both blogs had really good points made and were written well.
Lauren Petrovich
BLOG 1: The first two paragraphs are very informing and strictly about Minsky's beliefs. I also agree with her that computers will not surpass the human brains and they are not capable of having emotions like humans. The main reason she thinks computers will not surpass humans is because emotions, she says since emotions can lead to so many other actions, the act that computers lack emotions sets them behind humans. I like that in the condluding paragraph, she stated that Minksy had some good points, but also stated her own beliefs as well.
BLOG 2: I really liked the first paragraph of "Any Ideas?" To start off both paragraphs with the definition of an idea and a thought was very informing. I do agree that people take personal pride in ideas., and depending on the type of idea, I also agree that morals can reflect or change it. To say that a variety of things can morph off of an idea and lead to different events was a very good point. I liked how she ended by saying that an individuals thoughts and ideas could possibly change someones life.
Thursday, September 10, 2009
Is my computer smarter than me?
The advances made in technology, even within the last decade, have grown so enormously that one can only imagine what the level of technology will be in the future. To think that a machine can grow to be smarter then its' creator is almost frightening. But, think back a few decades.....to say there would be devices in your car that will lead you in the direction you were headed, or that you could have one device used for internet, telephone, email, text messaging was almost unspeakable. So who is to say that a machine surpass the human brain someday?
Minsky and Aleksander refer to the "walking state of mind"; which they say is a synthesis of a number of attributes- learning, language, planning, attention and inner perception (Minskys 119). He throughouly provided evidence that demonstrated how a machine could complete each one of those tasks. But does that mean that they surpass the intelligence of a human? Some scientists and philosophers argue that mechanical intelligence is not the same as the mind. I agree with this statement. Yes, I do agree that computers have the ability to perform tasks involving reasoning, learning, planning and other functions usually associated with the human intelligence, but they can only do so because they were programmed by a human. Simple phrases like "on top of" or "to the right of", that the article points out, could not be understood by the machine. A machine could not complete everyday tasks such as cleaning, as the article pointed out.
Minskey and Aleksander are developing sophisticated neural networks and computer programs, which they believe will mimic, and possibly surpass, human consciousness (Davidson 115). I do not agree with Minsky's belief that machines could be even more conscious and intelligent than humans, for the same reasons that he himself pointed out. For one, common sense. Humans have the ability to adapt to their environment and develop common sense. I think that consciousness goes way beyond Minky's definition of awareness. I believe that consciousness is a mixture of thoughts, ideas, emotions, common sense, intelligence, and many of these factors machines lack. I do not think that computers have the capabilities that human beings hold.
Minsky and Aleksander refer to the "walking state of mind"; which they say is a synthesis of a number of attributes- learning, language, planning, attention and inner perception (Minskys 119). He throughouly provided evidence that demonstrated how a machine could complete each one of those tasks. But does that mean that they surpass the intelligence of a human? Some scientists and philosophers argue that mechanical intelligence is not the same as the mind. I agree with this statement. Yes, I do agree that computers have the ability to perform tasks involving reasoning, learning, planning and other functions usually associated with the human intelligence, but they can only do so because they were programmed by a human. Simple phrases like "on top of" or "to the right of", that the article points out, could not be understood by the machine. A machine could not complete everyday tasks such as cleaning, as the article pointed out.
Minskey and Aleksander are developing sophisticated neural networks and computer programs, which they believe will mimic, and possibly surpass, human consciousness (Davidson 115). I do not agree with Minsky's belief that machines could be even more conscious and intelligent than humans, for the same reasons that he himself pointed out. For one, common sense. Humans have the ability to adapt to their environment and develop common sense. I think that consciousness goes way beyond Minky's definition of awareness. I believe that consciousness is a mixture of thoughts, ideas, emotions, common sense, intelligence, and many of these factors machines lack. I do not think that computers have the capabilities that human beings hold.
Tuesday, September 8, 2009
A thousand thoughts a day
The "Great Uknown" was an excellent title for the article written by Robert Hazen. A thought, an idea, and consciousness are three concepts that are so in depth with questions and information yet to be discovered, that they baffle even scholars and scientist. Our mind undergoes numerous thoughts everyday. But what is a thought? What is making me 'think' of the ideas that I continue to express in my everyday work... including this blog? It seems almost impossible to come up with a single definition of what a thought and an idea is, which is why "the great uknown" is extremely appropriate.
In my own opinion, thought and ideas, lead us to form our awareness that is our conscious. A thought can be numerous things; a judgement, a reflection, reasoning, imagining, expectations, beliefs. Simply put, our mind is constantly running. Thoughts are an essential part of being human. Humans are able to use information, thoughts, and ideas, to reason and solve problems, even when the information is partial or unavailable. Thoughts lead to emotions and ideas. From these ideas and emotions comes our conscious, and some may argue vice versa.
Where do these thoughts and ideas originate? I agree that the complete answer to this question, what is thought, and what is an idea, and where do they come from, can be found somewhere between the realm of philosophy and science (Hazen 94). The answer will be found, when Hazens "hard problem" is solved. This 'hard problem' relates to the physical brain and self-awareness, emotion, perception, and reasoning. The article gave examples which support my opinion that thoughts lead to ideas and emotion. "How can music evoke a sense of longing, or a poem deep sadness", and "How does reading a book stimulate curiousty or fustration"; these questions are examples of how our cognitive thinking goes hand in hand with emotion and the blossoming ideas that we come up with daily(Hazen 95). The ability to think ande develop thoughts and ideas are one of the greatest elements that make us human.
In my own opinion, thought and ideas, lead us to form our awareness that is our conscious. A thought can be numerous things; a judgement, a reflection, reasoning, imagining, expectations, beliefs. Simply put, our mind is constantly running. Thoughts are an essential part of being human. Humans are able to use information, thoughts, and ideas, to reason and solve problems, even when the information is partial or unavailable. Thoughts lead to emotions and ideas. From these ideas and emotions comes our conscious, and some may argue vice versa.
Where do these thoughts and ideas originate? I agree that the complete answer to this question, what is thought, and what is an idea, and where do they come from, can be found somewhere between the realm of philosophy and science (Hazen 94). The answer will be found, when Hazens "hard problem" is solved. This 'hard problem' relates to the physical brain and self-awareness, emotion, perception, and reasoning. The article gave examples which support my opinion that thoughts lead to ideas and emotion. "How can music evoke a sense of longing, or a poem deep sadness", and "How does reading a book stimulate curiousty or fustration"; these questions are examples of how our cognitive thinking goes hand in hand with emotion and the blossoming ideas that we come up with daily(Hazen 95). The ability to think ande develop thoughts and ideas are one of the greatest elements that make us human.
Week 2 Blog Reviews
Kim Kida;
I was unable to critique due to the posts not being completed.
Krista Sigala;
I really enjoyed her introduction paragraph in her "Impressions" blog. It was short, has a thesis statment that would grab the readers attention, and by the end of the paragraph, I had an idea of the points she was going to be discussing. In her third paragraph, she stated that first impressions in an online class can be misrespresentative of who you really are because they can be controlled; I agree with her. Every statement she had made was backed up with facts and her opinions. She covered bothed sides of the argument, the traditional and online pros and cons, and at the end stated her conclusion. Our condluding paragraphs were very similar in that we both have the opinion that both the traditional and online classroom settings have advantages and disadvantages but it really comes down to the individual. Although in this blog, she didnt borrow any ideas from the book, it was really well written.
Again, her introduction paragraph in the blog grabbed my attention. I liked that she began with asking a question. In her third paragraph, she backed up her statement with not only a good example from Beedles, but a sociologist Alfie Kohn who studied the relationship of religion and behavior. This example was relevant to the purpose of the blog and was used in a proper way to have a background for her opinion. For the most part, I saw we share the same opinions of each topic. Overall, both blog posts were well written, interesting, and I enjoyed reading both.
Lauren Petrovich;
The introduction paragraph of the "Expressing ourselves through writing" blog jumped right into her opinion of the pros and cons of online versus traditional class settings. She used a number of ideas from Goffman to support her opinions, and each were properly used with MLA in text citations. I also agree with her when she says that she does feel like we can get to know one another through an online class, as long as we all remain truthful. She stated that she felt like she can express herself better in writing than she would face to face with someone, and I can see how that would be true. After reading her blog posts', I felt like they each gave off a sense of her personality.
From her introduction paragraph of "Who is God? and can we be good without Him?", right away she let the reader know that in her opinion, the answer an individual would have, would depend on who God was to them or if they believed. Although I do share the same belief in God, and I feel like I use God as a foundation for the goodness in my life, just as she does, we had different opinions on whether one can be good without him. I really did enjoy the fact that she shared a little of her background and that she was raised in a Christian home, all of her opinions really shined in both of her blogs and as I said before, gave me a feel for her personality. Overall, I enjoyed both blogs!
I was unable to critique due to the posts not being completed.
Krista Sigala;
I really enjoyed her introduction paragraph in her "Impressions" blog. It was short, has a thesis statment that would grab the readers attention, and by the end of the paragraph, I had an idea of the points she was going to be discussing. In her third paragraph, she stated that first impressions in an online class can be misrespresentative of who you really are because they can be controlled; I agree with her. Every statement she had made was backed up with facts and her opinions. She covered bothed sides of the argument, the traditional and online pros and cons, and at the end stated her conclusion. Our condluding paragraphs were very similar in that we both have the opinion that both the traditional and online classroom settings have advantages and disadvantages but it really comes down to the individual. Although in this blog, she didnt borrow any ideas from the book, it was really well written.
Again, her introduction paragraph in the blog grabbed my attention. I liked that she began with asking a question. In her third paragraph, she backed up her statement with not only a good example from Beedles, but a sociologist Alfie Kohn who studied the relationship of religion and behavior. This example was relevant to the purpose of the blog and was used in a proper way to have a background for her opinion. For the most part, I saw we share the same opinions of each topic. Overall, both blog posts were well written, interesting, and I enjoyed reading both.
Lauren Petrovich;
The introduction paragraph of the "Expressing ourselves through writing" blog jumped right into her opinion of the pros and cons of online versus traditional class settings. She used a number of ideas from Goffman to support her opinions, and each were properly used with MLA in text citations. I also agree with her when she says that she does feel like we can get to know one another through an online class, as long as we all remain truthful. She stated that she felt like she can express herself better in writing than she would face to face with someone, and I can see how that would be true. After reading her blog posts', I felt like they each gave off a sense of her personality.
From her introduction paragraph of "Who is God? and can we be good without Him?", right away she let the reader know that in her opinion, the answer an individual would have, would depend on who God was to them or if they believed. Although I do share the same belief in God, and I feel like I use God as a foundation for the goodness in my life, just as she does, we had different opinions on whether one can be good without him. I really did enjoy the fact that she shared a little of her background and that she was raised in a Christian home, all of her opinions really shined in both of her blogs and as I said before, gave me a feel for her personality. Overall, I enjoyed both blogs!
Thursday, September 3, 2009
A world without His foundation?
Can we be good without God? "Religion alone, many researchers agree, does not determine personal moral behavior. (Conyers, Harvey 63)." Although I am religious in my beliefs, I believe that that are many factors, beyond religion, that can determine an individuals morality. An individuals moral beliefs can be molded from numerous factors, such as the way they were raised, the household and surroundings they were raised in, past experiences, and the influential people in their lives. The article by Conyers and Harvey stated that even certain social groups in ones upbringing can mold behavior and determine whether a person will behave morally (Conyers, Harvey 64). The moral values a person holds and whether they are based off of their faith in God, is entirely based on the individual.
I personally believe that my morals and values coincide with my faith and my religious values make me a better person. I live my life, upon these beliefs. I believe in doing good deeds without personal rewards. However, I do not feel that one has to be religious to do these good deeds. I also do not believe in the idea that crime and religion are associated with eachother. Consider the ten commandments; Thou shall not steal , Thou shall not kill....many of the laws we have today are based upon these very commandments. I believe that God is a foundation for many of the laws and values that we consider moral. Which brings my question...without this foundation, how would we have a base of judging what is immoral and what is moral?
Since this foundation does exist, and having been raised in a Catholic household, I firmly believe God as well exist, hence my personal morals are stronger because of him. However, I do believe that one can be "good" without God. A persons moral values depend entirely on the individual.
I personally believe that my morals and values coincide with my faith and my religious values make me a better person. I live my life, upon these beliefs. I believe in doing good deeds without personal rewards. However, I do not feel that one has to be religious to do these good deeds. I also do not believe in the idea that crime and religion are associated with eachother. Consider the ten commandments; Thou shall not steal , Thou shall not kill....many of the laws we have today are based upon these very commandments. I believe that God is a foundation for many of the laws and values that we consider moral. Which brings my question...without this foundation, how would we have a base of judging what is immoral and what is moral?
Since this foundation does exist, and having been raised in a Catholic household, I firmly believe God as well exist, hence my personal morals are stronger because of him. However, I do believe that one can be "good" without God. A persons moral values depend entirely on the individual.
Tuesday, September 1, 2009
Online interaction vs. Face to face setting
It can be agreed upon that both the online and the traditional class setting can have various pros and cons. Personally, I do not believe that one is better than the other. I believe that the way an individuals personality will be shown depends on a wide variety of variables; such as the professor, the class size, the students personal learning and social interaction abilities and even the course. For example, in a 400 student lecture, the concept of self is basically lost. Although you may be face to face with fellow students, there is no, or very little interaction. The first impression is made solely based upon appearance and the way one carries themself. However, there is the possibility of learning large amount of information about someone, just by their words, actions, dress, mannerisms, etc (Gergen, 53). To answer the question if we as online classmates can ever really know eachother if we haven't met in person, my opinion is yes. This is my first online class and after reading everyones introduction blog, I feel like I know more about my fellow classmates than I would with a traditional lecture classroom setting, where I would get lost in the crowd. However, in a small traditional class setting I have had certain professors who like to do introduction workshops, but even then I still haven't told more about myself than the constant, " Stand up, tell us your name, grade, and major."
I do agree with Goffman when he assumes that when an individual appears before others he will have many motives for trying to control the impression they recieve, however I think this can go both ways, in an online as well as the traditional (Goffman, 49). In an online class one can express whatever personality they wish and never really give their true self. Using his example of the "dormitory girl", in the traditional setting many assumptions can be made for many actions, whether they are are false or true, only the indivudual knows.
The main difference between the two is that online classes lack the face to face interaction. The assumptions and judgements are skipped, and you know about the individual only on what they choose to share. As long as they are truthful in their description of themselves, it is easy to get a feel of what their personality is like. Do i prefer one setting over the other? No. But by being able to read from the individual themself, on what their likes and dislikes are and even on what they view themselves as and having the option of reading their opinion on the given articles makes it easier to get to know one another. After completing this course, I do not feel like we will be strangers!
I do agree with Goffman when he assumes that when an individual appears before others he will have many motives for trying to control the impression they recieve, however I think this can go both ways, in an online as well as the traditional (Goffman, 49). In an online class one can express whatever personality they wish and never really give their true self. Using his example of the "dormitory girl", in the traditional setting many assumptions can be made for many actions, whether they are are false or true, only the indivudual knows.
The main difference between the two is that online classes lack the face to face interaction. The assumptions and judgements are skipped, and you know about the individual only on what they choose to share. As long as they are truthful in their description of themselves, it is easy to get a feel of what their personality is like. Do i prefer one setting over the other? No. But by being able to read from the individual themself, on what their likes and dislikes are and even on what they view themselves as and having the option of reading their opinion on the given articles makes it easier to get to know one another. After completing this course, I do not feel like we will be strangers!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
