47 word sentence
I am a sentence that likes to go ride bicycles while eating bananas, though I don’t know why I am restricted to only being forty-seven words because I want to be something more than a bicycle riding banana eating forty-seven word sentence that I’m told to be.
College Pressures
William Zinsser’s article College Pressures was a little had for me to start reading, one: that it was such a beautiful day and two: that the excerpts were a little annoying to read.
Beyond that I really enjoyed the article a lot. Though it was talking about the students at a Yale law school in the 1970’s I could relate. Today I wanted to just sit on the lawn soak in the sun and just listen to the sounds outside, yet I’m under the pressure to pass this English class. I am under pressure to do well. Either for the benefit of raising my GPA so that I can get better scholarships to help pay for this education that I need to get to do well in the world or simply to become “the best person I can be”. Either way there is ALWAYS pressure upon the modern day college student. We (I use “we” in that I am part of this whole experience) are taught that we must decide on a subject to focus our studies on so that we can get a degree in a particular field. This degree is supposed to get us started ahead of everyone else so that we don’t have to start at the bottom of the ladder. This degree is supposed to prove that we are knowledgeable in a particular field. That it makes us worth more.
The thing is that though the standards have changed, the standards that raise the competitiveness that we are brought up in to believe to be the best and you will be happy, that pressures Zinsser states are all in the same: economic pressure, parental pressure, peer pressure, and even self-induced pressure.
The concept of “the Gentleman’s C”, is a glorious concept. And in theory it is the standard of passing. Getting the grade “C” is the minimum someone can learn while proving that they can be knowledgeable in the subject. If you car getting “Cs”, lets say in all of your classes and all your classes are supposed to be different subjects. Yet that isn’t the case anymore. All the classes one takes these days are related to the ultimate goal of that glorious degree. The gentleman’s C is supposed to make you well rounded, to be knowledgeable in all things of the world, from history, to arts, to philosophy, to science. I like this concept of the gentleman’s C. It takes the pressure out of trying to be the best.
Sunday, February 28, 2010
Sunday, February 21, 2010
02.22.10: An Animals Place
I found Michael Pollan’s article “An Animal’s Place” very intriguing. He gave the idea of not eating meat or using animal products through an investigation and allowed the reader to come to their own conclusion.
He first started his article by explaining Peter Singers’ viewpoints in Animal Liberation. Singer argues that as humans we have a moral obligation for the rights as animals. Pollan goes on to say that philosophers, ethicists, law professors and activists are convinced that as humans need to treat animals as we treat ourselves. He even found a poll that claims that 51% of Americans believe that primates are entitled to the same rights as human children.
Our current society is inflicting more suffering on animals due to the increase in factory farms and slaughterhouses. We have disconnected with the animals we eat and use for experiment. How many of us actually know where our food comes from and how it is processed? Pollan’s view is that everyone would be a vegetarian if they visited a capitalist slaughterhouse.
The arguments that Pollan came up with are:
“Animals kill animals all the time. Why treat animals more ethically than they treat one another?” – Humans don’t need to kill other creatures in order to survive.
“Animals on factory farms do not know any other life.” – True but their suffering is the daily frustration of having their instincts controlled.
“Do animals feel pain?” – It’s argued that their pain is different than ours. What is really needed is the distinction between pain and suffering. Human and animals feel pain but do animals feel suffering?
Chickens cannibalize on one another when stuffed into cages; pigs chew each other’s tails off. These animals do not do this when raised in a natural setting.
So I understand that by looking at the way we raise and butcher our meat can determine how I feel about animal rights or as Pollen suggest “animal welfare”.
Pollan also took the extra step and found a small farm that raises its’ animals that way it was done before factory farming. Pigs are outdoors; chickens are in coops that release to the cattle grazed fields to forge for bugs. They slaughter their own chickens. They would slaughter their own pigs and cattle if the USDA would allow it. He looks after his animals, feeds them, cares for them and in return they provide eggs, mild and meat. Isn’t this how humans and animals have evolved?
I have found Pollan’s writing to be very effective in giving both either side of the spectrum on the views regarding animal rights. His arguments flow smoothly with his point of view backed up with research, experience and humor. His closing paragraph summed up the article with good advice. Maybe we should eat less meat and “with consciousness, ceremony and the respect they deserve.”
He first started his article by explaining Peter Singers’ viewpoints in Animal Liberation. Singer argues that as humans we have a moral obligation for the rights as animals. Pollan goes on to say that philosophers, ethicists, law professors and activists are convinced that as humans need to treat animals as we treat ourselves. He even found a poll that claims that 51% of Americans believe that primates are entitled to the same rights as human children.
Our current society is inflicting more suffering on animals due to the increase in factory farms and slaughterhouses. We have disconnected with the animals we eat and use for experiment. How many of us actually know where our food comes from and how it is processed? Pollan’s view is that everyone would be a vegetarian if they visited a capitalist slaughterhouse.
The arguments that Pollan came up with are:
“Animals kill animals all the time. Why treat animals more ethically than they treat one another?” – Humans don’t need to kill other creatures in order to survive.
“Animals on factory farms do not know any other life.” – True but their suffering is the daily frustration of having their instincts controlled.
“Do animals feel pain?” – It’s argued that their pain is different than ours. What is really needed is the distinction between pain and suffering. Human and animals feel pain but do animals feel suffering?
Chickens cannibalize on one another when stuffed into cages; pigs chew each other’s tails off. These animals do not do this when raised in a natural setting.
So I understand that by looking at the way we raise and butcher our meat can determine how I feel about animal rights or as Pollen suggest “animal welfare”.
Pollan also took the extra step and found a small farm that raises its’ animals that way it was done before factory farming. Pigs are outdoors; chickens are in coops that release to the cattle grazed fields to forge for bugs. They slaughter their own chickens. They would slaughter their own pigs and cattle if the USDA would allow it. He looks after his animals, feeds them, cares for them and in return they provide eggs, mild and meat. Isn’t this how humans and animals have evolved?
I have found Pollan’s writing to be very effective in giving both either side of the spectrum on the views regarding animal rights. His arguments flow smoothly with his point of view backed up with research, experience and humor. His closing paragraph summed up the article with good advice. Maybe we should eat less meat and “with consciousness, ceremony and the respect they deserve.”
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
02.04.10: Gould-Darwin's Middle Road
“The idea of steering a course between undesirable extremes emerges as a central prescription for sensible life.”- An averaging between unpleasant alternatives, the golden mean of Aristotle.
Main Concept:
To build a theory comes about buy using both inductivism and eurekaism. Darwin did not come up with his theory of natural selection from his time on the Beagle. Darwin allowed his thoughts to go in many different directions after reading and researching for over a year and a half.
Inductivism: to study the facts with an unbiased option. Great scientists are most of all great observers and patient gatherers of information.
Eurekaism: allowing your powers of intuition to hit their maximum. It happens only to a few “persons of genius”. It can come out of nowhere, unexpected, random, and not explainable.
“The theory of natural selection arouse neither as a workmanlike induction from nature’s facts, nor as a mysterious bolt form Darwin’s subconscious, triggered by an accidental reading of Malthus.”
Howard E. Gruber’: Darwin on Man- traces all the false leads and turning points in the phase of Darwin’s life between when the Beagle gets home and Darwin coming to the conclusion of the natural selection theory.
- Gould could have talked more about this book, too support his “middle path” theory, thus the idea for the title of this article. Even though Darwin started his journey with unbiased mind, he did still have in the back of his mind the longing for answers. This leads to reading and re-reading, observing, and re-observing the same thing.
My Thoughts:
Gould could have simplified his idea of inductivism and eurekaism. It was hard for me to dissect really what he was getting at until he quoted Pasteur-
”fortune favors the prepared mind”.
These five simple words simplify inductivism and eurekaism to come to the culmination of a theory; you must have a plethora of information to draw from. You must observe everything you can, some may be drastic some may be very faint. After all you have gathered there will be some point in your life that all the pieces to a grander puzzle, that you never knew existed because you were not yet equipped with the necessary tools from the society that you live in to the places that you visit to the things that you have read or seen or listened to, will finally fit together.
“The sources of idea is one thing; its truth or fruitfulness is another.”
Main Concept:
To build a theory comes about buy using both inductivism and eurekaism. Darwin did not come up with his theory of natural selection from his time on the Beagle. Darwin allowed his thoughts to go in many different directions after reading and researching for over a year and a half.
Inductivism: to study the facts with an unbiased option. Great scientists are most of all great observers and patient gatherers of information.
Eurekaism: allowing your powers of intuition to hit their maximum. It happens only to a few “persons of genius”. It can come out of nowhere, unexpected, random, and not explainable.
“The theory of natural selection arouse neither as a workmanlike induction from nature’s facts, nor as a mysterious bolt form Darwin’s subconscious, triggered by an accidental reading of Malthus.”
Howard E. Gruber’: Darwin on Man- traces all the false leads and turning points in the phase of Darwin’s life between when the Beagle gets home and Darwin coming to the conclusion of the natural selection theory.
- Gould could have talked more about this book, too support his “middle path” theory, thus the idea for the title of this article. Even though Darwin started his journey with unbiased mind, he did still have in the back of his mind the longing for answers. This leads to reading and re-reading, observing, and re-observing the same thing.
My Thoughts:
Gould could have simplified his idea of inductivism and eurekaism. It was hard for me to dissect really what he was getting at until he quoted Pasteur-
”fortune favors the prepared mind”.
These five simple words simplify inductivism and eurekaism to come to the culmination of a theory; you must have a plethora of information to draw from. You must observe everything you can, some may be drastic some may be very faint. After all you have gathered there will be some point in your life that all the pieces to a grander puzzle, that you never knew existed because you were not yet equipped with the necessary tools from the society that you live in to the places that you visit to the things that you have read or seen or listened to, will finally fit together.
“The sources of idea is one thing; its truth or fruitfulness is another.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
