blog entry #10

This article by Thomas Armstrong is about how all brains aren’t the same just like flowers are unique in different ways. It is no because a person has a dysfunctional brain, that doesn’t react and work like a normal brain that this person should be treated differently. We have to be aware of the vast natural differences that exist from one brain to another regarding sociability, learning, attention, and mood. Treating them differently is a way of discriminating them. According to the author, we are all related just like the ecosystem so we need to have a greater tolerance upon those whose neurological systems are organized differently than our own. Armstrong also explains how the environment plays a major role for our brain, so for example for a person that has a problem to pay attention putting him in a environment where they have to sit down and concentrate won’t be the ideal working condition for them; the ideal working condition would be a job where they will have to move around and do different things. Another example the author gives us, is children who have a genetic vulnerability to depression or anxiety, the appropriate environment they need is a safe, warm and predictable homes and school.

I never really take into consideration or ask myself about what the author here is presenting us. After reading this article, I agree with Armstrong ideas; it is no because they have a different brain as ours than we should treat them differently. In the matter of fact, they are the one who should treat them differently because each one of their brain are unique and respond differently while ours (normal brain) are just normal, nothing special.

The video from Jeremy Rifkin really grabbed my attention. First Rifkin talks about how in the 1990’s the scientist discover through monkey, mostly chimpanzee that they have a mirror neurons and then later on discover that human being have also mirror neurons. Mirror neuron is like s soft wired for attachment, affection, sociability and companionship. To illustrate his point, he gave us different examples; in a new born nursery, when one child starts crying for whatever reason, the others babies will start crying as well without reason. Another examples Rifkin explains is how when one person is watching another person being sad, happy, stress or anxious the same neurons in his brain will react as if he was the one being sad, happy, stress or anxious. This is how we express empathy, by knowing how other feels.
Among the different topics Rifkin introduces us, the one that surprised me the most is when Rifkin says, that there is no empathy in heaven because once you in heaven there is no death, no morality and no suffering. And when there is no suffering there is not empathy. Rifkin also talks about how our first drive on the earth is to figure out where we belong to, and where we fit in.

Rifkin explains how our conscience changes throughout the years, from forager hunter to a medieval serf to a modern man. Rifkin also promotes how it is possible to extend our empathy to the entire human race (animal, human and biosphere) so we could safe our species and our common planet. And to symbolize his idea, Rifkin uses a hand as a form of empathy that will stretch our empathy.

Another factor Rifkin illustrates is how the communication helped us empathize over the years; blood ties, theological consciousness, detribalize and association, religious ties and nation ties. Rifkin also use how people responded so quickly at the disaster, the earthquake in Haiti; one hour by twitter, two hours later YouTube was projecting videos of the earthquake and three hours later people were already moving to rescue them. And this was an example of the entire human race in empathic embrace.

The main point Rifkin is describing here is that we all came from two human being, which mean we are all related in different ways, we are a family. As we take care of our own family, we should also take care of our planet and safe our biosphere.

I really liked this video from Jeremy Rifkin, this was a creative ways to express his ideas and make a point. Rifkin’s way of express his ideas is so powerful, that while I’m writing this reaction I still have the images in my head.

blog entry # 9

This passage, “The Myth of War” by David Hume, is about how war is affect everyone, the countries fighting and how the media tries to give the public the wrong idea about War. Hume described here two types of wars, the false information we get from the media, that lies about what is really going on in war and the one that the people in the war are seeing, which is the real vision of war. Those who goes to war, the soldiers (…) are the one that really know what is war, and the media is just giving us another image of the way so we won’t go against it. But we have to be aware that more we remove ourselves from the war for mythic the war becomes. Like the author described it “ the myth of war is essential to justify the horrible sacrifices required in war, the destruction and the death of innocents. It can be formed only by denying the reality of war, by turning the lies, the manipulation, the in-humanness of war into the heroic ideal. (p116)” One sentence that really stroked me was when the author said, “If you kill your enemy his body becomes your trophy, your possession, and this has been a fundamental part of warfare since before the Philistines beheaded Saul. And when the rhetoric of war is long forgot, what happens to the heroic dead, the bereaved mothers, fathers, husbands, wives, and children of those killed lost? What comes of those who made, in the glib term of politicians, the supreme sacrifice? (118)” and I know Hume is telling the truth.
I have my own opinion about war and use of violence to solve something. I don’t think there is no necessarily for human to use violence to resolve a major problem, there is always a way to stop something, that how I see things. I see the images that the media tries to promote from the war but I know that is much worse than it is.

blog entry #8

This passage by Keith Douglass Warner is about how the science affect our environment and our ecology. The first section introduce us how the role of science is to gather information using the scientific method and then obtain data and result about the nature or society. The science and technology have brought us advanced tools that makes our life’s easier. Cars, automobile made transportation easier for everyone, fossil, fuels and gas have made industry easier to manage the machines, nuclear technology have helped us promote health such as doing radiation treatment for cancer. All this factors have helped us in a certain way but still have an impact on our earth. By having cars, automobile we replaced farm land to street and high ways, the carbon dioxide is destroying and disturbing our atmosphere and climate ( global warming), and nuclear technology is used for war and have a tremendous impact on the population for years. This mean the scientific should take in consideration what are all this new technology will impact us and our environment.
The next section is about ecology which play a strong role for the understanding between humanity’s relationship with the natural world. We should know that all living organism share characteristic just like Darwin theory promoted about us the human being and the primate. “ Ecology is the study f the distribution and abundance of living organisms and the interactions among organisms and between organisms and their environment (p93).”ecology is about studying living organisms in dynamic systems. And to make sure certain living organism won’t extinct the environment ethic propose to conserve the ecological processes upon which life depends.
I don’t really know what to say about this passage, I’m aware of how the technology is affecting our environment and every day I try to do something that will somehow help our earth, for example recycle the garbage, use less paper… I’m a open mind person, and I completely follow Darwin theory and the fact that all living organisms share characteristics.

This dramatic and heartbreaking play “ The Merchant of Venice” by Shakespeare is illustrating us how the Jew were mistreated at that time and had to live in certain bad conditions. Shakespeare here doesn’t present the Jewish people as bad person, and doesn’t make fun of them like others plays at that time did, Shakespeare present the Jewish as the same people as them. This play is about a Christian Antonio that wants to borrow money from a wealthy Jew Shylock. However, Antonio have mistreated, spit and called this following a dog, which Shylock doesn’t appreciate but will lend him the money with certain conditions. They made a pact which is Shylock will lend the money, but Antonio will have to give him his money back in three months, if he doesn’t Shylock in return will take one pound of Antonio flesh anywhere in his body. Antonio thought Shylock was joking about the flesh pound and accepted the pact knowing he will pay his money on time anyway.
The boat where Antonio was expecting drown which mean Antonio won’t be able to pay Shylock on time. On the meantime, Shylock have grow a bitterness about the Christians because his only daughter flew with a Christian and he wanted now a revenge. Knowing that Antonio couldn’t pay his money, he now wanted what he have wrote in the pact, the pound of flesh from Antonio. Shylock brought this to court and is exigent about it and want justice. The judge and everyone asked Shylock to be merciful and just get what Antonio friend was offering, the double of the amount. Shylock didn’t want the money, but wanted his flesh, he was angry and was thirsty of vengeance. At the end of the trial,one of the judge Portia, who was a girls dressed up as a man, and was clever enough to find something Shylock didn’t cite on the pact; shylock didn’t talk about blood in the pack which means if Shylock shed on drop of Christian blood he will be punished and killed. Knowing that cutting out Antonio chest and getting pound of flesh will mean he will also shed blood on the floor; Shylock had to give up on his revenge and agreed to just get the money offered. However, Portia didn’t let it go that easy on Shylock, and command a severe punishment for Shylock. The punishment was that, Shylock must give part of his health to Antonio and the other part to the state, to give up his religion and become a Christian, and to beg for pardon.
None of the character is merciful to one another, they all trying to get their part of revenge. It is beyond horrible to demand someone to give up her or his religion. The justice at that time was unfair.