The Brain and Consciousness: the Enigmatic Self (Final Project)

Throughout the history of mankind, the brain and the concept of consciousness have perplexed even the greatest minds. Yet even today and throughout the technological revolution, great minds are still seeking answers to this enigmatic organ’s functions and foundation. The brain has a long history of inquisitive intellectuals attempting to describe that which has long eluded mankind; a history that dates back to the earliest human civilizations.

Greek philosopher Herophilus was first in recorded history to propose that the brain was the center of intellect, although the view was not widely accepted, and the following century, Roman physicians concluded that mental activity occurred in the brain rather than in the heart as previously thought (Saladin, 2010, 515).  Brain and bodily dissections became increasingly ubiquitous during the Renaissance and incredibly, Leonardo de Vinci dissected and drew numerous, extremely detailed and anatomically correct examples as seen in figure one (Schwartz, 2002, 31). During these early centuries, dissections of the body and brain exposed a system of canals and compartments that seemed empty within the cadaver’s brain. These compartments were believed to contain the surreptitious human spirit, or the soul. Thus the brain was believed to be the seat of intelligence as well as contain the human spirit, but the roles of specific areas within the brain were far from discovery.

Figure 1. Da Vinci, Leonardo. “Central Nervous System.” History of the Brain. Web. Accessed November 30, 2010.

Nicolaus Steno and Thomas Willis rocked the foundations of brain anatomy in the 17^th century by demonstrating that the ‘house’ of the human spirit did not actually exist within the brain, but that the brain was a complete organ with its own specialized system of circulation. Previous beliefs suggested that what we now recognize as the lateral ventricles of the brain were actually houses for the spirit; Steno and Willis disproved this theory through experiments utilizing henna and demonstrating the flow of cerebro-spinal fluid through these areas (Saladin, 2010, 516). Yet even incorporating these incredible discoveries, the true brain revolution began with the invention of the modern microscope. But where exactly are neuro-scientists in their ever-present search to describe the mystery of human consciousness?

Modern scientists have long described the verified anatomy of the brain and descriptions of the numerous cells that compose the intricacies of this mysterious organ. They have also characterized various ways in which this enigmatic organ can become diseased and verified that our brain communicates via chemical and electrical signals. Furthermore, neuro-scientists have determined the process by which neurons ‘fire,’ the underlying mechanism of thought and action: A neuron creates electrical potentials that travel along the axon of that neuron until the signal reaches a synapse, or the meeting of two neurons. After releasing neuron-specific chemical signals, also known as neurotransmitter, across the synaptic cleft, the neurotransmitter binds to receptors on the next neuron and that neuron becomes excited. Thus continuing the cycle of electrical potentials until a thought or action occurs from the signaled instructions.

Neurons have been found to make decisions ten-seconds before we are conscious of that decision (Smith, 2008, 1), that a vital component of long-term memory includes long-term potentiation of neurons and the numerous areas involved in the process and storage of memories (Saladin, 2010, 538-39). We have discovered areas specific to understanding and interpreting written and spoken language (figure 3). We are learning about the inner-workings of the human brain to such a level that it seems preposterous to suppose that we have not discovered the precise mechanisms of human consciousness, yet it is the truth. Neuroscience has discovered that the reticular formation (found throughout the brainstem) is associated with the ability to become conscious of certain stimuli and thought and even the ability to be conscious of our body parts and ourselves, but there is no known pathway to which the model that most associate with consciousness arises. The personality, the ‘spirit,’ the ability to be conscious of the universe and humanity’s place within it as well as the mechanisms behind humanity’s ubiquitous desire to seek further knowledge are all concepts many consider vital components of consciousness. Neuroscience has designated the frontal lobe as the seat of various characteristics of personality through the accidental lobotomy of individuals and their subsequent deviations in personality, but we are no nearer to discovering the origin of our individual uniqueness in personality and preferences.

Figure 3. Hameroff, Stuart. “What is Consciousness?” The New Frontier in Brain/Mind Science, Quantum Consciousness. Web. Accessed December 5, 2010.

.

Works Cited

Pinker, Steven. “The Brain: The Mystery of Consciousness.” Time Magazine Friday, January 19, 2007. http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1580394-1,00.html

Saladin, Kenneth, S. “Anatomy and Physiology: The Unity of Form and Function, Fifth Edition.” New York, New York: Mc-Graw-Hill Companies Inc, 2010. Print.

Schwartz, Jeffrey. “The Mind and the Brain.” New York, New York: HarperCollins Publishers Inc. 2002. Print.

Smith, Kerri. “Brain makes decisions before you even know it.” Nature News. April 11, 2008. http://www.nature.com/news/2008/080411/full/news.2008.751.html 

Vuilleumier, Patrik, Armony, Jorge L., Driver, Jon, Dolan Raymond J. “Effects of Attention and Emotion on Face Processing in the Human Brain: An Event-Related fMRI Study.” Neuron 30:3, June, 2001, 829-841.

Figure 1. Da Vinci, Leonardo. “Central Nervous System.” History of the Brain. Web. Accessed November 30, 2010.

http://www.stanford.edu/class/history13/earlysciencelab/body/brainpages/brain.html

Figure 2. Saladin, Kenneth, S. “Anatomy and Physiology: The Unity of Form and Function, Fifth Edition.” New York, New York: Mc-Graw-Hill Companies Inc, 2010. Print.

(labeling by self)

                                                   

Figure 3. Hameroff, Stuart. “What is Consciousness?” The New Frontier in Brain/Mind Science, Quantum Consciousness. Web. Accessed December 5, 2010.

http://www.quantumconsciousness.org/presentations/whatisconsciousness.html

Blog Reviews!!

Jessica,
(For your Nov 2 post) I liked that you stated how extreme opinions promote close-mindedness and rigidity because I completely agree! Also, the way you incorporated that statement into your thesis was very well done and I do agree on some levels. I also agree that there should be a more-defined middle ground and that that is where government belongs and my boyfriend heartily agrees with your emphasis on state power. Throughout the piece you make strong statements and each one is supported by easily understandable evidence. In general this was a super! powerful post and I think it is a great basis for an essay. I can really feel the passion in your discussion regarding the power distribution and it makes the piece as a whole more interesting. I also really liked how you brought current issues into the piece and perhaps if you do decide to extend this into an essay you could delve a little deeper into how your proposed form of government would alleviate or fix our current issues. Great job!
Regarding your Nov 4 post, I think you did a great job summarizing and explaining the history and importance/ influence of finance and was actually a good deal more interesting than the actual article. I don't really have any critiques...it's still a sore subject XD.

By the way, I thought exactly the same thing when I was writing 'the greater good' as well! I just re-read it too XD! Sooo excited!!!!

Lauren,
I love! your title 'Rollin in the Benjamins!' The introduction was very absorbing and I think you did a terrific job of breaking down the monotony of finance and explaining it in a way that was actually somewhat exciting. Good job! One thing I noticed was a typo I think: Luckily, I have to choice of what I would like to do and that I can hire someone to deal with all of this because to me it is all boring ans makes no sense.  The sentence didn't quite make sense, but I understood what you meant. Overall it was very informative and much more enjoyable than the actual article! :) Regarding the Nov 4th post, I thought it was really interesting how you related 1984 to your idea and post. I also enjoyed how you explained the history of your opinions and how you described them in general, even if I don't quite agree. It would have been interesting to see some specific examples, but overall it was interesting :) Yay for November!

The Evolution of Finance

Finance, is an accepted, acknowledged degree option at most (if not all) accredited institutions and has existed as so since the 1960's. Yet the evolution of the 'science' of finance began hundreds of years earlier with great mathmeticians such as Pascal, and the work of many physicists, including Einstein. Surprisingly, numerous equations that describe the flow of money exchange, arbitrage and risk developed from Physics equations describing similar phenomenons concerning particles instead of money. In essence, finance has always been a science, yet it was not considered to be in the realm of Academia until shortly after WWII, when an economic boom prompted huge advances in the field of finance.
Presently, finance focuses upon how humans behave when faced with uncertainty, essentially the study of behavior regarding risk and risk management. In the past, the study of finance was most often characterized by the creation of equations, or the application of physics/math equations to the movement of money and the prediction of how an investment may change over time. Numerous famous names in other fields participated in the early work of finance: Einstein, Pascal, Pierre de Fermat, Bachelier and Gordon.
However, it was not until the 1980's that finance as a solid science and career was recognized. During this time, six Nobel Prizes were awarded to those who have advanced the progress of the current state of finance.  Differential equations, probability theories and derivatives all form vital components that describe the current state of finance, which includes most notably, the stock market, which first opened in Chicago in 1973. The flow of currency within the stock market is radically different than the flow of currency in the past, especially considering that the majority of cash flow is rather abstract. This may be one reason why the equations that describe this phenomenon are also utilized in physics and abstract mathamatics.

sorry it's not so good...it was REALLY hard to write because it was REALLY hard to read.

Centralized Government: the good, the bad or the ugly?

If you search the internet for quotes and popular ideas regarding government, you will find that the grand majority of such ideas concern the unnecessary placement of government and in general, negative aspects of government and democracy. “If human beings are fundamentally good, no government is necessary; if they are fundamentally bad, any government, being composed of human beings, would be bad also” (Fred Woodworth), is one example. While I do not believe that humans are ‘bad,’ I do believe that some form of greater power or control is necessary to procure and ensure harmonious living.

While I do believe that ‘Big government’ is a mistake, I do feel that some things should be under the jurisdiction of a central government agency, such as health care, many laws and regulations and the penal system. Health care and access to health care is a basic human right and needs to be exercised by all individuals in a population, with the aid of the federal government if necessary. In the case of the United States, I strongly believe that access to health care is in need of supervision and modification by the federal government because the current state of health care access and regulation is unacceptable. An estimated 50.7 million Americans are currently uninsured or have not had health insurance in the past 12 months (USA Today, 2010). The CDC reports similar numbers a one year earlier: an estimated 46.3 or 15.4% of all Americans reported being uninsured in 2009. This is a growing problem that I believe can only be solved by government intervention.

Laws are a vital element in human society and evolutionarily have played a key role in the development of modern societies. These laws only remain ‘laws’ if there is an authority by which to enforce them. In this case, while State Governments may play a part in the enforcement and creation of these laws, I still believe that the federal government should retain some control over the laws of this country. However, if federal control over this particular issue was diminished, but not completely eradicated, it could be argued as a beneficial alternative to the current state of things. For all intents and purposes, laws are one more rationale as to why our society requires some form of centralized government.

While there remain many explanations concerning the malaise of governments and ill-effects upon human society, I must abstain from jumping on the internet bandwagon. I understand that centralized government is far from perfect, but I do believe that it is necessary to intervene when the people deem it necessary and to uphold our laws and ensure that the basic human rights of its people are met. Also, as a personal note, arguments and ideas concerning this topic are extremely difficult for me to form a concise, simple argument for or against. There are entirely too many variables to consider, firstly, and when considering human nature in general, I feel that it is practically impossible to decide what is best for ‘the greater good.’

Citations:

Reynolds, Denise. “CDC: Number of Americans without Health Insurance Coverage Increases.” CDC, June 2010. Web. Accessed November 2, 2010.

http://www.emaxhealth.com/1506/cdc-number-americans-without-health-insurance-coverage-increases

Wolfe, Richard. “Number of Uninsured Americans Rises to 50.7 million.” USA Today, September 17, 2010. Web. Accessed November 2, 2010.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2010-09-17-uninsured17_ST_N.htm

Blog Reviews!

Lauren,

Your introduction to Thursday’s post was very interesting! The beginning of the second paragraph was funny, but I think the paper might have been stronger if you chose a couple of the examples and expanded on them and described exactly how they are incorrect instead of just naming the multitude of stereotypes. As far as grammar and punctuation go, you may want to look into adding commas in places where pauses are or where they are grammatically needed. Also, just as a simple way of making sure the piece is at its best is to perform a quick review or edit before submission – that will catch things like forgetting a letter in a word J I usually catch 2 or 3 when I edit.

Overall, your idea was very interesting and I enjoyed reading the post (it made me laugh!)

Your introduction to the Tuesday post was awesome!! I was really pulled into the piece immediately and I enjoyed your usage of quotes. I also liked how you included personal experience in the piece as well as your direct opinion. I enjoyed the general point of the entire paper and thought that overall it was a strong idea and a good post J.

Jessica,

Your piece regarding Native Americans in the U.S. and their economic influence was spectacular! I really enjoyed the fluidity and authority of the piece. I learned a lot. Everything you stated in your initial argument was supported by some citation or fact and your word choice was excellent! I also enjoyed how you put yourself into the post by explaining your connection with the subject. Great job!

Your post concerning materialism was also very interesting! You made a strong argument overall and I think you made very good points throughout. I liked the organization of the post as it was very easy to follow and straightforward. I agree with your statement that materialism breeds competition within the market and that it is a good thing and that materialism creates waste (and that is negative)! So much waste!  The first paragraph was interesting because it was so short and possible for an essay you may want to expand or create another introductory paragraph below (if the two sentences at the beginning are artistic intention). Either way, great post! J

China's Varying Influence

         Chinese immigrants have faced incredibly anti-immigrant sentiments from the late 1800's until quite recently. Past anti-Chinese immigrant policies resembled closely the anti-immigrant policies we see today regarding Hispanic and Mexican immigrants. The varying policies concerning Chinese immigrants is reflected in their economic influence (positive or negative) and the general status of the U.S. economy.
         Past prejudices concerning Chinese immigrants were due mainly to the fact that the majority of citizens, although descended from immigrants themselves, believed that the onslought of Chinese immigrants were mostly uneducated and had very little money and would therefore take the jobs of true American citizens and they would negatively influence U.S. economy by needing monetary aid. The majority of immigrants sought to escape China and find future job and educational opportunities in the U.S; a brighter future. This is also supported by our modern day example of anti-immigrant policies concerning Hispanics. This is easily portrayed by our blame laid upon Hispanic immigrants suggesting that is is they who negatively impacted our economy by requiring tax-paying citizens to pay for their health services and by taking the jobs of 'true' American citizens. The argument is repetitive, though given to defend anti-immigrant policies regarding diverse ethnic groups.
        Presently, there are no anti-Chinese immigrant policies, however it is still exceedingly difficult to obtain a visa and even more problematic to obtain a green card/citizenship. Also, the face of 'typical' Chinese immigrant has changed and evolved over the course of 150 years. Currently the majority of Chinese immigrants are younger and obtain student visas. There are numerous undergraduate and graduate opportunities for immigrants, many of which (especially on this campus) are Chinese. This could be due to the encouragement they receive in school to study abroad or the fact that they often retain a higher quality education and are easily accepted into programs here. Also, as I have heard from a friend, U.S. graduate and medical programs are more respected worldwide and in China than the programs available in China. Although the face of Chinese immigrants have evolved, along with other ethnic groups I am sure, their general welcome in this country frequently reflects its economic state.


-past xenophobia and anti-immig policies (fluctuated)
-past economic influence
-now welcome if educated
-current economic influence
-now majority are students,  both undergrad and grad

Week 10 Blog Posts

Lauren: Your ‘popular music’ piece contained a very interesting argument and I do agree with you. I had a little trouble putting together the last sentence in your introductory paragraph, but the following paragraph explained it well. Your introductory paragraph was very interesting and drew me in and your body paragraph supported your argument (or dual argument). It is difficult for me to take sides too! Just one thing: occasionally throughout your piece you need commas where there are none. Perhaps looking into adding them where pauses are?

            Your Manic Monday piece (awesome title by the way) was extremely well-written! I am sooooooo sorry your day was that horrible!!! I definitely understand though, when it rains, it POURS. I love that you wrote about your experience because your exasperation and frustration clearly shine through and the reader knows exactly how you feel/felt! And I understand about your work…I work with many autistic children and they can be quite the handful. When you said he pantsed the shy child I definitely pictured one of my students doing that! (because he so would). Basically I just really enjoyed your piece and I wish we had more prompts that would allow this type of writing because I feel that it had more passion and power behind it than many other pieces we have done. I really like your style and look forward to reading more! Have a better week! J

          Jessica – wow! I really like your blog J I think that's the first time I've noticed the blog BEFORE the posts. I REALLY enjoyed your take on feminist sexuality in popular music. It IS the men who create those opinions and I’ve found this occurring in various disciplines and ideas (for example, men are the policy makers regarding many laws that affect primarily women and even reproductive abilities and limitations concerning women!). Your writing style is very concise and your word choice is magnificent! That in itself made the piece more enjoyable. I mostly followed your arguments, but I think I would have liked to see an expansion regarding your second paragraph. You state many ideas and quickly move on to the next (although they are all highly related). One quick thing: I think in your quote in the top second paragraph it should say ‘irredeemably.” Great job!

            Your Corporate America piece was very well written, very easy to follow and your tone of excitement-turned-exasperation pervaded every word! It was very short and concise and usually I would say that I would have liked to see more, but I thoroughly enjoyed the piece as a whole (including its succinctness) and I do not think that any additions or changes are necessary. And if your story is true, that really really stinks! Oh, also, I really enjoyed your title! Great job and I look forward to future posts! J

Materialism: A Meaning Response

        Now anyone who knows anthropology recognizes the ‘meaning response’ mentioned above to describe the phenomenon most recognize as the placebo effect. However, the gist of the idea, that all objects are associated with their own proper meaning and that meaning is exactly what generates the response, is paramount to the idea of materialism. Essentially, as human beings, we respond to the meanings created by society and placed upon various objects and ideas, rather than the objects and ideas themselves. Materialism suggests a need or an ongoing need to obtain objects and the value of such objects, but when we associate meaning with these objects, we find that perhaps materialism is a little more than simply the hording of generous sums of things.

Twitchell, a professor who has written numerous pieces on the subject suggests that materialism, although frequently portrayed negatively, could quite possibly be beneficial to our society. He states that humans derive meaning from their possessions and utilize their possessions to demonstrate to other humans their likes, dislikes and some of the many complex ideas that create their identity. Basically, Twitchell suggests that materialism, in modern American culture is utilized to create and portray individual identity and this is the basis for the value of an individual’s possessions. He goes on to describe that humans can change, trade in and buy new possessions that express their identities when they change (as they invariably do). A simple example of this includes a tattoo on an adolescent to express rebelliousness or a gucci bag on a woman to express wealth. Twitchell also suggests that humans attach meaning to objects not only to define their identity, but also as a natural outlet. For example, he cites a study in which people we asked to describe important objects within the home. Happier people (as decided by the survey) described the objects by meaning, such as explaining the ‘many times the family had spent on a favorite couch’ as opposed to ‘the brown leather couch.’

Where materialism retains its shortcomings lies in the ease with which we accumulate things and go into debt. Many Americans are currently in debt, yet what is interesting is that debt is not a subject routinely researched, as in the collection of national information and presented to the public.* However, everyone knows that Americans have a high prevalence of debt. Buying without the immediate ability to pay is something our capitalistic society is built upon and while advantageous for those whose paychecks are turbulent, it is generally detrimental because of the risk and temptation associated with it. Another drawback of American materialism is a classic argument:

Essentially, materialism is much like numerous other subjects in which it is difficult to create a solid argument for or against it. There are advantages and there are disadvantages. Humans naturally attach meaning to their possessions and obtain meaning from other's possessions; so it is an important facet in the creation of our identity. Yet it creates rampant debt that seems hardly salvable. However, I can solidly argue that materialism is an integral part of our society and I do not see that fact shifting in the near or slightly distant future.


*Try looking it up! It is super difficult to find!

Popular Music

Capitalistic societies are composed of a free market in which corporations exist with minimal regulation. As such, corporations compose the bulk of the stimuli we are exposed to through media and advertisements. Corporations also retain  great influence upon the cultural norms  and structure within our society.  The TV, movies and music we are exposed to and encouraged to like or dislike are all heavily influenced by the rise and fall of corporations. Within the realm of music, what is considered popular is considered as such chiefly because of  its presentation within the media and its representation as 'popular' by the media, which is profoundly influenced by the corporations involved financially. But here's the kicker, record companies are completely financially involved in creating 'popular' music that sells and re-sells and have little interest in creating a diverse culture of music that allows big-name bands and local or small-scale groups to coexist harmoniously. Maximum profit is the goal, and when money is the only aim of a company or an industry, the small businesses are essentially, out of business.
Warner and Capital are two prime examples of mainstream record companies
--talk about the Format and their experience with big-name record companies and their revolt of the popular music industry and creation of Indie label/small-scale label.
sick. brb.

Cars...or Weapons of Not-so-Mass Destruction?

Most people have one, everyone uses one, everyone who doesn’t have one, wants one… even toddlers pretend to have them! Yet something most never realize is the potential danger we expose ourselves to through their continued and sometimes unregulated use. What am I referring to? Cars. Yes, cars are extremely necessary in the present climate, what with everyone needing to be where they need to be quickly. And yes, cars have increased rates of travel and ease of travel exponentially, yet countless individuals underestimate or simply do not acknowledge that what they are doing is potentially harmful. Most consider driving second nature, something simple which requires little thought or focus. And if any focus is attempted, it frequently concerns getting to the destination as quickly as possible, without regard to fellow cars or drivers. As such, car accidents are the 5^th leading cause of death in the United States (CDC, 2007).

            During my freshman year of high school I very much enjoyed visiting my friends who lived nearby. Who wouldn’t? Yet one night, three days before Christmas to be exact, I was at the mercy of a couple in a standard, white, four door sedan that conveniently had forgotten turn on their lights. As it was dark and I saw no lights veering toward me, I felt it safe to venture out into the road to cross. I did not realize that (perhaps) people forget to turn on their lights and thus I wouldn’t be able to see them, but how would I know? I didn’t yet drive. I was subsequently hit by the car and spent Christmas in the hospital and the following months recovering. Yet I am one of the exceptionally blessed; thousands die daily at the hands (or tires) of vehicles. Speeding, forgetting to turn lights on, driving under the influence, texting while driving or simply not paying due attention are all cause to associate danger (and weaponry) with people driving cars.

Now I’m not saying that you should sell your car and utilize public transportation for the greater good (unless you are perhaps, over 65). But I would like the population at large to consider that through driving, they are taking their own lives, as well as the lives around them into their own hands. Fundamentally, I suppose I am saying, “Drive safely, drive conscientiously and please, drive consciously.”

Blog Reviews week 8 -read update first! :)

April – I really enjoyed reading both of your posts because the two posts contained very different tones. In your first blog  you seem playful and your voice really shines through whereas in your second blog (Homosexuality in the Animal Kingdom), you have a very objective tone. I think it’s nice to see the variation in your writing J. Your intro in the first blog was AWESOME! Also, your word choice in the second blog really pulled the piece together and gave it a professional tone. I think I enjoyed your first post more because of the anecdote beginning and the voice you gave to it (you gave it serious personality). I think the argument in the second blog could be supported a bit more, but your idea was definitely understandable. Also, I liked how you included your own opinion, but at the end I think a tying together of all ideas is needed too. Overall they were both interesting, well-written (fun!!) pieces!

Tasha – I really liked the tone of your Homosexuality in the Animal Kingdom blog! You made the subject fun and appealing and funny! You are very good at introductions because you constantly write intros that pull the reader in (in creative ways)! Your conclusion was hilarious! The body was supportive of your idea (although I might have liked to see more from the article) and the conclusion drew everything together. I also like how your opinion pervaded the majority of the paper in a very fluid way. Great job! Your women’s sexual desires blog was also very interesting and I commend you for finding extra information! I think you did a great job describing the article – it was very succinct. You are really proficient at taking (what can be) difficult or confusing information and breaking it down in an easy-to-read format. I really enjoyed reading both of your blog posts, keep up the great work!

And thank you guys for being awesome :)

Update

Hi group!

I just wanted to update you both really fast. I don't have a blog for Tuesday so it's just Thursday. I just wanted to apologize for not being on the ball lately. All of my midterms are happening right now (Thurs, Fri, Mon, Tues) and I am super stressed out trying to keep up with them and work. I also lost my book over the weekend and had to buy another. Awesome when you've got to spend double on a textbook that I'm sure hundreds of students have boogered on. Anyway, I just wanted to let you know that it's not because I don't care and I appreciate all the hard work you are putting in! I will try to allocate my time better and not freak out as much...and definitely take midterms and finals weeks off work.

Thanks for listening and I really enjoy reading your posts! Blog reviews to come soon!
-Darien

Mother Nature's Open Mind

     Jeffrey Kluger, in his "The Gay Side of Nature" article presents a side of nature rarely discussed by society at large: that homosexual relations occur in animals and therefore in nature. By utilizing various species as examples, namely giraffes, bonobos, dolphins and macaques, Kruger aptly presents the idea that homosexual relations are 'natural.' He attempts to relate this idea to human homosexual relations with the premise that because homosexuality is a natural phenomenon (found within the animal kingdom) there should be no basis for anti-homosexual sentiments among humans.
     Humans are animals, although this fact is often forgotten by most.  It is comforting to find homosexual tendencies within the animal kingdom because (as Kluger states) in the past, many believed that homosexuality was a uniquely human occurrence. The fact that it is not lends support to a convincing argument for the acceptance of human homosexuality. Because homosexuality occurs within the animal kingdom, and not solely short encounters, but long-term partnerships (as in humans), human society should be more accepting of these relationships. Humans accept that death is 'natural,' sexual relations are 'natural,' and even that feelings of jealousy are 'natural,' so why can we not accept that homosexual relations are 'natural' even though we retain the same proof? Twenty percent of animals studied participate in these types of relations, how can we ignore this?
     The answer lies perhaps in one argument highlighted within the article itself: Martin Daly, an evolutionary psychologist suggest that "Sexuality helps animals maneuver around each other before making real contact," meaning that this form of sexuality (homosexual relations) evolved as a form of communication between animals that cannot speak. Other arguments against human homosexuality may lie along the lines of the displacement of humans from animals; that we are higher beings and therefore are not subjected to certain (or any) activities of animals, that we are 'above' them.
     Discovering evidence of homosexual relations among numerous species of animals is paramount in the future acceptance of human homosexuality. The suggestion that such relations are a part of nature may convince many lay persons to accept these relations as normal. The continued research of this subject within the animal kingdom and its careful presentation to the public may be key in future attempts for the general acceptance of human homosexuality.

Blog Reviews (10.5.10)

Tasha – Once again, I really admire that you can easily incorporate direct quotations into your posts…I always forget to do that. Also, your intro to the monogamy blog was interesting because (with the questions) I was actually quite interested (even though we were all doing the same thing XD). I also enjoy how you include your own opinion into the text fluidly and I agree with you about the preservation of monogamous marriages. Bringing in the interplay of overpopulation and how the evolutionary psych view is a bit outdated in that respect (or perhaps their explanation of our evolution) was a great point. Also, what’s pretty interesting is that in one of my classes we discussed fertility rates and their decrease over the past 30 years. At this point, the fertility rate is around 2.0 – 2.2 (the replacement rate – as in one child to replace each parent) and is even below the replacement rate (2.0) in some countries! So we really may be tending toward simply having children in order to have a family (like you said). Oh, and in the intro I did notice a little typo with the period, but I still got the gist of what you were saying. In your “Why isn’t he listening?!” blog (love the title, by the way), I really enjoyed your personal stories and thought that your voice was very strong throughout the piece. Overall they were both enjoyable reads and I agreed with most (if not all) of the points you made!

April – Your word choice in your monogamy blog was awesome! It felt very professional and made the piece more interesting J. I also enjoyed your usage of direct quotation, I seriously need to start doing that! (You also picked a very valid quote that aptly supported your statement). I think that you made very valid points from the article and presented them well, but I think a concluding paragraph is necessary…the blog sort of just ended after the second point was introduced. I would have definitely liked to see more because I really liked the style of writing you displayed! Your Sex, Lies and Conversation piece was well-written and whole (as in introduction, body and conclusion), yet I would have liked more points from the article (and your correlating experiences) presented in the blog as it presented solely one. The blog was very fluid and I enjoyed how you included yourself and your experience with the article (the light bulb) as it made me excited about the article as well.

Monogamy, Infidelity and Present Society

         According to evolutionary psychologists, namely Robert Wright and David Buss, humans have evolved to support serial monogamy and even the proliferation of infidelity…all for the propagation of genes. Studies performed by Buss et. al suggest that love is a universal human phenomenon (pgs. 262, 284) and that humans subconsciously participate in sexual strategies that may result in the dissolution of a serious relationship for better prospects or infidelity (pg. 265). While Buss does suggest numerous evolutionary explanations concerning infidelity (such as an incompetent or abusive mate or for the proliferation of male genes), Wright centers his article on the precarious position monogamy retains in our current society, aptly named “Our Cheating Hearts.”

            Wright is also an evolutionary psychologist, and as such supports Buss’s explanations regarding infidelity, stating that the key reason for a male to practice infidelity, in our ancestral setting, is the possession of markedly greater ‘resources, power or social status than the average Joe’ (pg. 286) This explains male infidelity, but what of female infidelity? Both Buss and Wright demonstrate that female infidelity does indeed occur and does indeed retain an evolutionary background. Women who had sexual relations with various men were more likely to have multiple venues of resources, simply because of the uncertainty of paternity.

            Wright argues that monogamy is in a precarious position in our present society/culture due to income inequality, the media and proliferation of an ideal female (or mate) throughout the media and magazines that is above average and that our societies are infinitely more anonymous than our ancestral hunter gatherer societies (in which everyone knew each other). Although these scenarios present obstacles for couples practicing monogamy, I do not believe that the dissolution of monogamous marriage (hetero or homosexual) is necessary. I believe that steps can be taken in order to protect this institution, supported by evolution. Monogamous coupling evolved because this type of relationship between mother and father produced the best environment for raising and caring for young. Some methods that may be undertaken to protect the institution of monogamous marriage include reducing income inequality as Wright states that men of higher socio-economic status are more likely to believe that they should have more than one wife or tend to obtain younger wives (through serial monogamy) and that women are more attracted to men of higher socio-economic status (pg. 288). Also, if men were expected (by law) to be accountable for their children following a divorce, more so than simply child support, the difference between the impact of divorce on men and women would most likely reduce. Women most often are saddled with childcare and are also less likely to remarry and often retain significantly lower socio-economic status. Although these obstacles remain for present day monogamous couples, as well as the evolutionary inherence of wanderlust, the institution of monogamous hetero and homosexual marriage remains an important advantage for child rearing and seems the natural choice for most humans.

Buss, David. "The Evolution of Desire: Strategies of Human Mating." Basic Books, 1994.
Wright, Robert. "Our Cheating Hearts." Time Magazine, August 15, 1994.

He said, She said, They said what?

Deborah Tannen’s article, Sex, Lies, and Conversation presents intriguing arguments regarding the age old question: “Why isn’t he listening?” Through identifying factors of body language, socialization and general tendencies between the sexes, Tannen is able to suggest a multitude of factors that influence the different interpretations of conversation between men and women. Eleanor Macoby, a psychologist at Stanford researched the socialization methods of children and associated the methods with future interpretation. Macoby’s idea stating that the socialization methods of children are extremely influential regarding future communication is paramount to understanding the differences in male to female conversation. Macoby suggests that girls utilize conversation and secrets as the basis for friendship (to show closeness) whereas boys utilize action and the act of doing something together to show closeness.

 Wives expect husbands to be like their best friends (girls).

Men’s groups are more hierarchical (wolf) and that may be somewhat of an explanation as to why women feel like men do not listen; listening may make the man feel inferior. Also, because of this hierarchical grouping, men may seem more talkative in public. Men feel as though they must show that they are intelligent and have an understanding of whatever the subject is in order to prove themselves. In the home, men may feel as though there is nothing to prove and are therefore more silent.

Another cause for women to state that men do not listen lies in the general body language of males and females during conversation. Men are more likely to sit at angles and not participate in eye to eye contact (they scan; look around elsewhere) whereas women are more likely to sit face to face and have regular eye contact. Also, men are more likely to jump from topic to topic and women are more likely to converse about a single topic for a prolonged period of time. This particular situation is one I am extremely familiar with; my boyfriend’s mind works a mile and minute and his mouth closely follows. Oftentimes I have to take a moment to realize that he has switched gears and is no longer speaking about the topic at hand, but something completely unrelated (or at least the relation is not quite apparent in my mind most times). Tannen suggests that this is another reason behind women’s belief that men are not listening, however, I have not felt that this phenomenon resulted from my boyfriend not listening to me (especially as I am A.D.D. and may do exactly the same thing at another point in time).

One point Tannen made seemed especially relevant: that boys tend to dismiss problems (to each other) while girls express understanding and oftentimes agreement. I enjoyed the suggestion that women must express directly these feelings while men tend to imply these feelings through dismissing statements. This follows men’s idea of pointing out the opposing side of an idea as a duty whereas women tend to express agreement (as a duty). I feel that this may have relevance, although I cannot at the moment picture an exemplary situation. Although! I can picture many a scenario that supports Walter Ong’s claim that men see conversation as a sort of competitive debate: I know a number of men (friends, acquaintances and my boyfriend) who seem more adept and willing to turn a simple conversation into a debate of opinions and ideas. This article presents numerous suggestions behind the differences in male/female communication and interpretation. I believe she hit upon the most influential factors and I look forward to watching for certain signs that she mentioned; perhaps it will aid me in my own communication with the opposite sex!

9.28 Blog Reviews

April - Your 9.21 blog post showed interesting choices for movies – I have also seen Rocky Horror (live), but I haven’t yet seen G.I. Joe. I love that you chose Rocky Horror because that is certainly a crazy example of ‘wild men.’ I think you made good points in your paper and I think that the G.I. Joe situation most likely happens quite often in male-dominated fields. I liked how you chose a few different examples because that let me understand diverse abnormal gender situations. There are a few grammatical and spelling mistakes – the majority of which are easily rectified by Word Spell Check. Also, you have many short sentences throughout your paper and it may be helpful for fluency to create compound sentences every now and then to break the pauses.

In your 9.28 blog post was also very interesting because I feel that you took a very different approach/understanding to the reading than I did. You made interesting points concerning step families and single parent families. Maybe using pronouns a little less often might help the reader follow and create a more professional flow to the paper. Also, at the end it would be helpful if there was a paragraph that tied all ideas together. Great job, I look forward to reading future posts! J

Tasha – I REALLY enjoyed your introduction on the 9.23 blog post. Introductions are always difficult because you have to draw the reader in, you did just that! (I liked the questions). Also, I liked that you included specific citations within your blog, I should have done that. I don’t think D’Emilio believes that homosexuality began with capitalism, but the homosexual identity emerged from capitalism – as in, people were free from interdependency (wage labor instead of having to work at home with family for family) and the necessity to form families so they were free to form identities outside of the family and work. I liked how you explained the changes that capitalism brought and I think your writing is very smooth. I really enjoyed reading it!

Your 9.21 post was also very interesting; I think you made a great choice with Enough. The movie does show a very typical situation, but the woman in the story atypically fights the situation and is successful. I think you conveyed strong points throughout the piece and were easily understandable. You may want to edit for grammar as a check at the end, but for the most part it was very well written. Awesome work, I can’t wait to read more! J

Also, sorry about the 9.21 post, I completely didn’t see it! I was super focused on making sure my essay was perfect and turning it in. I don’t usually miss assignments though so I shouldn’t miss any more (will be more carefulJ)

The Ideal Family, Capitalism and Homosexuality

     At the time when this article was written, American policy was against the formation of marriage bonds (legally) and undermined the formation of same-sex families. The ideal American family is the so called ‘nuclear’ family: the mother, the father and the two or so children. But times are changing; social policy and values are shifting slightly toward acceptance through increased access to social networks outside of the individual’s living space (the internet). However, I do agree with D’Emilio when he explains that major advances in gay rights were made in the 1970’s and has slowed since. Yet the last few years have yielded victories in the way of legal marriage (in some states) and possibly less discrimination (certainly less than in earlier years). The reason I say possibly is because I am aware of opposite sentiments, yet I am a firm believer in gay rights and I have a gay uncle that was recently married. I have spoken to him about discrimination and the changes that have occurred over the years and he does sense some lessening in the general animosity toward openly gay couples.

            In our time of internet networking and rapid world (or nation)-wide communication enables communities and groups to correspond and relay pertinent information as well as create meetings and movements with the push of a button. Also, through social networking, individuals are able to communicate and network with other individuals (like individuals) that they most likely would have never known (i.e. a young, confused individual with another young, confused individual living across the country). People who would otherwise simply be individuals (not belonging to a group) may be able to find an online community or a group to which they may belong and create an identity with.

            The social change wrought by the introduction of the internet and novel methods of social networking models the change in social structure brought by capitalism in the 19^th century. Before capitalism, the family was an ‘independent interdependent unit’ that created its own food supply and materials to sustain it. With the onset of capitalism, men began to work for wages and become dependent upon the market, but women still created the goods in the home (however, women at this point had to buy the materials using the husband’s wages). When true capitalism came about, both men and women became dependent upon the market and the distinction between the ‘personal life’ and the ‘work life’ was formed. Thus, the family became a mutually satisfactory relationship between husband and wife who create a nurturing environment for children. This was a great social change that affected the majority and eventually the entirety of the American population. The internet and networking has also affected the whole of the American population in equally paramount ways and is changing the manner of social interactions between individuals, families, homosexuals, heterosexuals…everyone. I believe that internet networking is the new method of creating movements and manufacturing social change. (I do not believe it is the only way, but the most populous way – i.e. twittering the decision to run for president).

Rough Draft

Justin:

Awesome(!) image choice! I'd thought we were rather tied to the ones present in the article, but you chose a really interesting absolutely intriguing painting! Also, your description of the piece itself was quite detailed and even before finding the image I was able to form a good picture in my mind. I would have liked to see a little more interpretation regarding the meaning behind each little nuance, but I enjoyed the interpretations you gave. Also, when I saw the 'green woman' she very much reminded me of the indigenous woman in Frida's "My Nurse and I" and the baby resembled Diego (creepy). Regarding the Wright essay blog, I enjoyed your word choice and the general flow of the piece. I would have liked to hear a bit more about how pleasure and pain relate to human consciousness. Your inclusion of the Turing test and why robots often fail it was enlightening and I think it is an important point, although they say that the test is outdated...may still be valid. Cheers:)

Morgan: Number one I think it's funny that you two chose the same painting :). Secondly, I would like to commend you on your interpretation that the child is Diego, I thought so too (super creepy)! Your depiction as well created a detailed picture in my mind before I saw the image (in your blog). Your personal interpretation of the painting was very interesting and you brought up a few things I had not thought of at first glance, especially the concise: this image is a depiction of Frida's view of herself and her role in the universe. I would have to agree. As for the previous blog, your writing is very well-written (concise and flowing) and I must agree that consciousness is not simply at the physical level. Your explanation of pandemonium was also well-written and it allowed a better understanding of the model (easy to understand:)). Also, I have to agree with the point that we may never be able to relate a physical response to consciousness...great job!:)

Kahlo, Frida. Henry Ford Hospital. 1932. Collection, Fundacion Dolores Olmedo, Mexico. Web. 9 September 2010.

The strikingly drastic image of Frida Kahlo's "Henry Ford Hospital" is unique to Frida's dramatic, shocking style and portrayal of her suffering. In this particular self-portrait, Frida depicts the traumatizing hospitalization in 1932, when Frida claims she had a miscarriage.  The portrait employs bold, yet dull colors (as in few dramatic, bright colors) with six key elements aside from Frida herself. Frida lies hemmorrhaging on a hospital bed engraved with Henry Ford Hospital, Detriot with the date of hospitalization on the front of the bed frame. The city of Detriot seems to be partitioned behind her. The six key elements are connected to Frida through red strings tied to her left pinky: a newborn/still-born baby boy, a pelvis (most likely female), a purple flower, a snail, a woman's abdominopelvic region, saggital view and a collection of metal items that resemble a blacksmiths working station. Frida is naked and crying. Interestingly, the hospital bed itself is not portrayed in a hospital setting, but instead seems to set itself outside of Detroit (city line) with a blue sky and natural earth below.

Concerning my own interpretation, it is quite obvious that the artist is suffering and believes quite firmly that a micarriage was the source of her woe. Through reading of her life story, it is somewhat simple to see the connections between events and beliefs in her life and this painting. The pelvis situated in the far right of the painting, tied to her little finger represents the accident that damaged her pelvic bone when she was young and to her, the reason that she was unable to have a child. Frida's lower abdomen was pierced by a metal rod from the bus she was riding when it collided with a heavy street car. She said many a time that she felt that this was the reason she was unable to bear children. On that note, the still-born baby boy represents the child she lost during the miscarriage and the pain she felt through that loss (her tears); the abdominopelvic region of a woman shown also adds to that sentiment. The mass of metal items situated in the far left corner may represent the metal inserted into her spine and pelvis to support her skeleton after the accident. When she was younger (shortly after the accident), she wrote many letters that explained her thoughts on her conditions and she wrote many a time that the metal and the devices that held her were bothersome, tiring and demoralizing. Their inclusion in the painting may be an extension of that sentiment. Lastly, the purple flower; this was indeed difficult to decipher and my guess is simply that, a guess. After the accident, Frida explained that the metal rod that pierced her body penetrated her uterus and exited through her vagina and stated that at that point, she lost her virginity. The flower to me seems somewhat broken (at least sad and flaccid) and that may represent her 'flower' which can represent the purity of a woman and the loss of it through the accident. It may also represent the life lost through the event. The snail, in the top right corner was also difficult to infer meaning from as the only association to snails that I am certainly familiar with is their quality of slowness. Perhaps this represents the slow healing of her body or the slow healing of her emotional state after hospitalization. Either way it is difficult to say; the artist clearly makes a strong association with the element, however. The entire piece is rather morbid, as became her style in her later years and carries a feeling of genuine grief; it is obvious that the ability to have a child was vital to her and that the event signified a great loss for Frida.

Abstract Science

Explain Dennett's comparison of philosophical thought processes/methods and those of robotics researchers.

     Daniel C. Dennett, a practiced philosopher likens the research process of present-day roboticists to that of philosophers. Dennett compares the thought processes of roboticists to those of philosophers through the reliable method of the thought experiment. Thought experiments are paramount in philosophy because they are essentially the only means of experimentation in the philosophical world (there are no distinct/concrete models to be created when deciphering the abstract). Dennett explains that robotics research is eerily similar due to the abstract nature of the researchers’ questions (how can we create consciousness? etc). However, there remains a distinction between robotics research and philosophical thought experiments – robotics researchers, after careful thought experiments (and when not considering experiments too complex*) are able to create concrete models of their thought experiments to determine whether or not their hypotheses were actually correct. Also, Dennett explains that in this way, robotics researchers may encounter surprises and unexpected variables (when constructing and testing their models) whereas philosophers can expect their thought experiments to work the way they expect (including all variables limited to their own specific thoughts).


*as in not in the realm of what is possible through current technology.
     Where I disagree with Dennett’s comparison of philosophy and robotics lies with Dennett’s critique of modern science; he states that scientists are not required to discover (or rediscover) the history that their predecessors realized (whether proved correct or incorrect). Yet Dennett also explains that philosopher’s require an intimate knowledge of the history of their specific subject. I do not agree that it is any different regarding scientists. Scientists, when contemplating a research question, must go forth and research/learn all the information available on their particular research subject, not unlike philosophical processes.

Complements and Critiques (blog reviews)

Morgan- I absolutely love your style of writing; you are extremely articulate (possibly due to your speech background) and I enjoyed the points you made in your "Can computers think?" blog. I agree that the cognitive functions are a complex array of organized and integrated functions and that to mimic consciousness, a computer/robot would therefore have to copy the organized, integrated manner of thousands of neural connectors. Also, you made an extremely relevant point that computers most likely could never truly reach our level of 'consciousness' due to the fact that many human functions do not require "conscious" (conscious vs. subconscious) thought or command - we simply do them; a computer would probably not obtain that ability. Also, I enjoyed your scientific/behavioral/biological portrayal of the Consciousness blog. I agree with you on most points. I also think I put the blog reviews in the wrong place, so I just wanted to reiterate the fact that I think you are an intelligent, kind person and I am very interested in your opinions as you are a speech/hearing major. I also glean from your blog that you are fun-loving and love your pets! They are super cute! I hope perhaps one day we can meet :).

Justin- I think you made excellent points in your "Can computers think?" blog and I hadn't connected the fact that humans manufacture computers and are therefore flawed. I wasn't quite sure how computers taking over people's jobs fit in, but you did make an interesting point. Also, I think it may be helpful for the lay people reading your blog if you explain terms such as ethos and pathos (just a short explanation) so that everyone is on the same page. Your definition of an idea is very concise and well-written, however, I have to disagree with you when you say that animals simply react to their environment and accept it whereas humans have the 'consciousness' to alter it. Humans are animals as well, and I think we often forget that. Also, as we are discovering day by day, animals and plants are much more alive and 'conscious' than we had assumed. Other than that, as I think I put the previous blog reviews in the wrong place, I enjoyed your self introduction! You seem to be a very free-spirited person and that is a rare find in this day and age. Pleasure to meet you and I look forward to reading your future posts! Oh, and your picture at the top of your blog is awesome:).

I-Robot

Explain the top-down and bottom-up theories. Why does Brooks criticize the top-down theory?

Rodney Brooks and Hans Moravec are two of the leading robotics experts in the United States, yet their views are hardly alike. Rodney Brooks is one of the most outspoken supporters of the bottom-up theory, of which the article by Michael Dery explains quite thoroughly. Essentially, the bottom-up theory states that the basis of human intelligence lies in motion. Hans Moravec, however, is a firm believer in the top-down theory, that in order to create human intelligence, we must mimic the functions and processes of the brain (as in vision and higher thinking). The article by Michael Dery focused primarily on supporting Brooks and his bottom-up theory while criticizing heavily the top-down theory and the future of Moravec's work.


The bottom-up theory consists of the notion that human consciousness and intelligence stems from sensory-motor skills or condition-action rules. Rodney Brooks, a doctor of philosophy at MIT, believes that by creating small, inexpensive, mobile robots, man can create human-like intelligence. His research focuses primarily on creating miniature insect-like robots that are relatively ‘unintelligent’ when compared with top-down model oriented supercomputer robots.

The top-down theory, as explained by Dery, states that in order to create human intelligence, robots must recognized pieced-together information and models to ‘think’ its way through problems and obstacles. This view proposes that humans use the process of vision and how the brain pieces information together through many neurons and regions to form a cohesive thought or action. This theory includes models of robots that are large and ungainly, as well as slow to process and piece together environmental information. One criticism of Moravec’s work (by Brooks) explains that these models are too complicated to process simple actions and perform them. He states that the tiny insect-like robots are more adept at movements and processing direction and environmental stimulus, although they lack the complicated supercomputer programming that Moravec’s larger counterparts.

The article by Dery is highly critical of the top-down approach as the majority of the article explicates Brooks’ view on the future of roboticis, his work and his criticisms of the top-down theory. Dery utilizes many of Brooks’ strongly supported criticisms and presents a convincing argument against the top-down theory. The fact that his miniature robots, mimicking the lower organisms on our evolutionary tree are more likely to complete a motion task than Moravec’s large, supercomputer-based robots is highly influential.

How do I know who I am?

 Is the study of consciousness scientific?
    The study of human consciousness is ever-fascinating, complex and controversial. But how can we define consciousness? I am convinced that there is a scientific component to consciousness, yet there remains a certain sense of individuality that is difficult to explain simply through the scientific method.
     We have “discovered” that specific neurons firing and receiving specific neurotransmitters (in specific neuro-receptors) in various regions of the brain (also specific) cause thought processes, memories, actions and possibly emotions. That our brain (neurons) makes decisions ten-seconds before we are aware (Smith, 2008) and that a vital component of memory includes long term potentiation of neurons. We are learning (slowly) about the inner-workings of the human brain; functioning and how that may influence how we feel and what we do. Yet there is little research concerning the reasons behind why we are conscious. It is even somewhat difficult to find a concurrent definition of human consciousness. What is it that gives us the desire to learn about the physiology of our minds and bodies? Personally, I do not know if we will ever know, although we may get close.
     What I mean is that I do not believe that humans can ever “know” what consciousness is. I believe that we can theorize and support findings concerning consciousness, but science is based upon previous findings, meaning that each new day scientists discover something new or prove a new mechanism. Yet a day, a month, a year after, another scientist may find that another mechanism is actually what is happening (or what retains more convincing evidence). Essentially, the majority of research concerning consciousness seems to be permeable to the scientific method (i.e. the mechanisms of brain function), yet the question as to why we are conscious and how we became so are slightly out of reach (at least for science as it remains presently). The notion of individual experience is also an extremely complex query that may also be difficult for science to explain, yet I do believe that we will try. Science is currently the most common mechanism of viewing the biological world and I believe that we will continue to attempt to explain the “unexplainable” with science. So what am I? Possibly three-quarters reductionist and one quarter mysterian; I am positive my opinions will change as new ideas and theories come to light.

Citation
Smith, Kerri. Brain makes decisions before you even know it. Nature News. April 11, 2008. http://www.nature.com/news/2008/080411/full/news.2008.751.html 

Religion and Moral Identity

Can we be good without God?


     The question of human morality or lack thereof in relation to organized religion is convoluted at best. It is nearly impossible to create a study to determine whether or not an individual’s involvement in organized religion is the factor causing them to practice moral or immoral behavior. However, the article lists numerous studies attempting to establish that religion is indeed a barrier to crime (as shown by Beetles pages 61-92) including those by William Bainbridge, Rodney Stark and Glenn Tinder among others. The article also mentioned several studies attempting to illustrate the lack of connection between organized religion and crime rates. One study by Alfie Kohn included 700 city dwellers and found that people religious people were no more likely than those not affiliated to participate in altruistic behavior. The article also cites a study in which students were asked to identify their religious preference and then asked them questions regarding cheating and helping injured individuals. The study found that the only individuals in which the majority was least likely to cheat were non-religious individuals.
     The argument stating that humans are more likely to commit crime when not affiliated with an organized religion suggested by some early studies was refuted by several studies/arguments by Alfie Kohn and Lee Ellis. Kohn suggests that there is no connection between participating in organized religion and crime rates, while Ellis suggests a number of theories utilized by those in support of organized religion as a barrier to crime. The four most common explanations (as described by Ellis) are as follows: group solidarity, coincidental factors, the “Hell Fire” explanation, the “obedience to authority” explanation and the arousal theory. With some background in psychology, it would make sense that group solidarity would be a barrier to crime, but only if that group was behaviorally against crime. Another compelling theory states that humans are willing to submit to being told what to do and what not to/what is right and wrong. Religious institutions would denounce crime and therefore the followers would be obedient. Ellis refutes these explanations as faulty and I am in agreement. Human morals are inherited through parental, community and peer education. An individual’s values are influenced by his parents, his friends, his socio-economic status (Bainbridge’s studies show that transience is a factor influencing the probability of criminal behavior) among a myriad of other things. While church atmosphere would be a potent influence upon an individual’s moral compass, it is far from remaining the only factor.

     However, as I have made my agreement that human beings indeed can ‘be good without God’ it is important to acknowledge other viewpoints. Glenn Tinder, a professor of Political Science endeavors (in 20 pages) to illustrate the positive correlation between Christianity and human morals/values. While much of the article explains varying aspects of (his version of) Christianity, such as Christian love (agape), the exalted individual and the fallen individual, Tinder does make an interesting point when explaining the ambiguity of “being good.” He brings up the issue that while (some) Christians have a unified idea of ‘being good,’ the ideology as recognized across the human race is rather variable. Each culture and religion may retain their own viewings of ‘right’ and ‘wrong,’although many cultures/religions share values. Overall, I am as of yet unconvinced that religion is the most influential factor impeding individuals from criminal behavior. I do not think that there is enough evidence to support the claim of religion as a barrier to crime. Also, many friends and acquaintances retain no affiliation to an organized religion and I have not yet learned of any criminal behavior. Before I end the post, I would also like to add that the article by Tinder made me slightly uncomfortable, even as a Christian myself. There are many denominations of Christianity and many of his points I found unconvincing. The central theme I gleaned from his article was that Christianity is the right path to a moral life, not precisely the political meaning of Christianity.

Post 2: The Self

     Is it possible to know an individual without actually meeting them? In the electronic age of online dating and facebook it is a particularly potent issue; yet, I feel that quite possibly, people in this class may come to know each other better than if they had simply attended a traditional class together. I feel that the internet provides a sense of security in which people may share ideas, feelings or facts about themselves that they otherwise would not in a traditional class setting or even in person. When students first enter a traditional classroom, the first impression is always based upon physical appearance firstly, and alters slightly once the person speaks. In an online course, students must learn about one another solely through speech mannerisms and possibly pictures (although pictures seem to add an element similar to the traditional classroom by allowing the students to base opinions upon physical appearance as well as based upon what the person says (writes).

     However, Goffman makes an interesting point when explaining the expressiveness of the individual. He states that ‘the expressiveness of an individual involves the expression that the individual gives and the expression that the individual gives off’ (Goffman, 1959). Essentially, Goffman states that the verbal symbols he uses to convey ideas and information is one type of expression and a range of actions (mannerisms) that may or may not support the first form of expression is the second. In an online class setting, the students cannot receive expressions that the individual ‘gives’ or ‘gives off.’ I believe that it is subconsciously important for a person to understand the vibe that another individual gives off. Humans are susceptible to the moods of others and the feelings they can project; those of a unique individual are inherent to the persons personality and therefore vital in the conveying of an individual’s ‘self.’ In an online class, this is nearly impossible. While a student may glean tone and voice from another student’s blog posts, it is more difficult to do so. Humans are biologically proficient at reading other human’s facial expressions (unless the person has a disorder such as Aspergers syndrome) and gleaning information from it. With the absence of face to face contact, it would be more challenging to discern the tone or expression of the individual.
      Although I agree with this point, the argument holds that students in this class may complete the course knowing more about one another than they otherwise would have. Students may not have the ability to glean information through reading individual expression (facial and bodily), but with the added sense of security and guided prompts of the course’s organization, I believe that if the students were to meet outside of the class, it would not seem a meeting of strangers.

Introduction

      Hello class of ENG215:). My name is Darien and I am a Global Health Junior. I recently transferred from Florida State University as a Biology major and am thrilled to be here; ASU is a much more open and friendly institution filled with incredible opportunities for research and travel.
     I am studying to become a general physician with a specialty in either Infectious Disease or Parisitology. I wish to work in underserved areas in Arizona (public hospitals/clinics) and in third world countries; particularly in Latin America. I am especially interested in working for an organization called Partners In Health which provides free services for those in need. They also retain a particular focus on Tuberculosis control (of which I am fascinated by). They were a large part of the aid effort in Haiti – you should check out their website! www.PIH.org
     This summer I spent 8 weeks in Central America; 6 in Guatemala participating in a Medical Anthropology Internship and 2 in Costa Rica. Traveling is one of my most loved activities. For my freshman year of university I lived in the Republic of Panama and worked in an oncological Hospital. I have also spent many summers in Costa Rica studying Spanish and sea turtles.

     I am still a kid; I love board games and being silly. My favorite time of the day (other than HPA lab) is when I see the kids at my work; acting silly with them is very freeing. I have labor-intensive goals and I want to achieve them to my very core, but I firmly believe that it is the journey, not the destination that is paramount and I try to live my life as such.