Response Choice: Respond on an emotional level
Something that I should have included in my introduction is that I have a firm belief in God. I also have some conflicting ideas due to what I have learned in school. However, at the end of the day, I am still a believer.
I'll be the first to admit that I get frustrated when I hear somebody say that they don't believe, or that they are not sure about religion. Just to clarify, I don't get mad at that person, I just have trouble understanding why they feel that way. For me it is so clear and sound, that I often overlook the imperfections that people dwell on.
The essay at first was frustrating. It was saying that creationism does not belong in science class. It is better suited for mythology. This got me thinking a little more aggressively. I see the Bible, or Genesis to be more specific, to be open to interpretation. If one looks at the words of the Bible with strict adherence, he/she will be lost. I believe that it is necessary to have an open mind to understand religion. Therefore, creationism belongs in philosophy, not the clearly false pagan realm of mythology.
I have to level with the author when he/she writes that it flat out can't be taught in school. Creationism is a quick way of saying the Adam and Eve story. That would be sufficient for Judaism and Christianity. However, Islam, Buddhism, and many other religions would be left out. Public schools would be violating the first amendment, because it is showing favoritism and not equality to other religions. Keep in mind that there are many other creation stories. The Adam and Eve story is just the most common in America.
At the end of the article I was relieved to read that there was a neutral conclusion. I am so used to hearing that religion is false and that it doesn't belong in society that I am always tense about it. The conclusion stated that creationism does not belong in school; however, it does belong at home. It should be up to the parents to what extent their child knows about the origins of life.
Monday, August 31, 2009
Found Essay: Cruelty of Animal Testing
Choice: Agree or Disagree with the author's major arguments
I am the kind of person who is always itching to get out of my comfort zone and try something new. Likewise with this essay I also wanted to try something new. Animal rights are not included in my everyday thoughts. I thought that the essay, "Cruelty of Animal Testing," would be appropriate to become a little bit more knowledgeable.
First off, this is without a doubt a persuasion essay. It starts off by showing the ugly side of animal testing. I do not consider it necessary to touch base on the specifics, but there are lethal dose tests, skin irritancy tests, and eye irritancy tests to name a few.
The first point that the author makes is that tests performed on animals are not consistent with human results. How many lawsuit commercials have we seen on TV asking about deaths or illnesses? A lot. With that given, who can't agree that animal testing is counter productive?
I would like to make an informative addition to this blog. Dogs, rats, and pigeons all have much greater tolerances to nicotine than humans. Since it really is not humane to do lethal dose testing on humans, tobacco companies use animal results to support there products.
There are alternative testing methods to animal testing. The EYTEX SYSTEM, for example, uses prediction methods that are ten times cheaper and 88% more effective than current animal torture methods. Also the attrition route is very common. Animal activists refuse to buy certain products that have been tested on animals. I agree with that fact that it is very feasible to find an alternative to a product that kills.
No one can get away from the fact that animal cruelty will exist forever. However, I completely agree with the arguments brought up in this essay. I think that the current "torture" method is inefficient and is replaceable. This particular generation has earned the title, Generation Kill (no I am not talking about the series on HBO), due to our everyday numbness to violence. Just as easily as we created the title, we can pick up the bottle of shampoo that does not kill innocent animals.
I am the kind of person who is always itching to get out of my comfort zone and try something new. Likewise with this essay I also wanted to try something new. Animal rights are not included in my everyday thoughts. I thought that the essay, "Cruelty of Animal Testing," would be appropriate to become a little bit more knowledgeable.
First off, this is without a doubt a persuasion essay. It starts off by showing the ugly side of animal testing. I do not consider it necessary to touch base on the specifics, but there are lethal dose tests, skin irritancy tests, and eye irritancy tests to name a few.
The first point that the author makes is that tests performed on animals are not consistent with human results. How many lawsuit commercials have we seen on TV asking about deaths or illnesses? A lot. With that given, who can't agree that animal testing is counter productive?
I would like to make an informative addition to this blog. Dogs, rats, and pigeons all have much greater tolerances to nicotine than humans. Since it really is not humane to do lethal dose testing on humans, tobacco companies use animal results to support there products.
There are alternative testing methods to animal testing. The EYTEX SYSTEM, for example, uses prediction methods that are ten times cheaper and 88% more effective than current animal torture methods. Also the attrition route is very common. Animal activists refuse to buy certain products that have been tested on animals. I agree with that fact that it is very feasible to find an alternative to a product that kills.
No one can get away from the fact that animal cruelty will exist forever. However, I completely agree with the arguments brought up in this essay. I think that the current "torture" method is inefficient and is replaceable. This particular generation has earned the title, Generation Kill (no I am not talking about the series on HBO), due to our everyday numbness to violence. Just as easily as we created the title, we can pick up the bottle of shampoo that does not kill innocent animals.
Friday, August 28, 2009
Book Blog "A World Lit Only By Fire"
After reading, "Is Google Making Us Stupid," and coming to terms with my own second grade reading level, I decided to challenge myself by reading an actual book. "A World Lit Only By Fire" surprisingly pulled me in within the first few pages.
Just so everyone knows what I am talking about, "A World Lit Only By Fire," by William Manchester, is basically a history text-book, but without the thrill. It is broken down into three main sections: The Medieval Mind, The Shattering, and One Man Alone. The copy that I picked up is 292 pages. It covers the Medieval Period as well as the Renaissance with good detail.
The first section, The Medieval Mind, gives a solid base and understanding of medieval life. The times were greatly chaotic. People had no sense of direction, time, or self-identity. Death was as common as a student falling asleep during first block. Manchester wrote that for every 100 murders only one was brought to justice.
Something that I didn't expect out of this book was attention to the everyday medieval man. This surprised me because there really isn't much to say about him. The average man stood a little of over five feet tall at about 135 lbs. He lived in a tiny hut with his family where they all shared the same bedroom. Rarely would he travel more than a half-mile from his home/birthplace. According to Manchester, this led to inbreeding.
Within the pages of The Shattering, I gained a better understanding of what The Church WAS like as well as some famous figures of the age.
There is no doubt about it that the The Church was a major light in the Renaissance. However, as bright as it was, its leadership "flickered" quite a bit. There were popes with children and scandalous love affairs, and children as young as eight were appointed to the College of Cardinals. For those of you who are not up on the structure of the Catholic Church, the Pope and the Cardinals are supposed to be roll-models for good Catholic morals and leadership. That was not the case. Manchester put an emphasis on the former corruption of the Church. I could go on for quite a bit on the points that Manchester made, but I believe that would take up way too much time.
One Man Alone was a section that was largely devoted to Ferdinand Magellan. Manchester was especially descriptive in these 70 pages. For some reason this section was a little difficult to grasp. Maybe it was due to the late night or the fact that I was really excited to get done. Manchester basically writes on how much of an immortal hero Magellan is.
A comment that I have to make is about the writer. I will congratulate him on writing a book that I actually enjoyed, but I have to denounce him for being so negative. He made the times seem like hell. Most people were apparently stupid, greedy, a murderer or unlawful. This book seemed to be 90% of what was wrong with society, and 10% of what they stumbled upon to be correct.
In the end I was just happy that I read a challenging book. I would also like to say, step-off Google, I can read long pieces of literature.
Just so everyone knows what I am talking about, "A World Lit Only By Fire," by William Manchester, is basically a history text-book, but without the thrill. It is broken down into three main sections: The Medieval Mind, The Shattering, and One Man Alone. The copy that I picked up is 292 pages. It covers the Medieval Period as well as the Renaissance with good detail.
The first section, The Medieval Mind, gives a solid base and understanding of medieval life. The times were greatly chaotic. People had no sense of direction, time, or self-identity. Death was as common as a student falling asleep during first block. Manchester wrote that for every 100 murders only one was brought to justice.
Something that I didn't expect out of this book was attention to the everyday medieval man. This surprised me because there really isn't much to say about him. The average man stood a little of over five feet tall at about 135 lbs. He lived in a tiny hut with his family where they all shared the same bedroom. Rarely would he travel more than a half-mile from his home/birthplace. According to Manchester, this led to inbreeding.
Within the pages of The Shattering, I gained a better understanding of what The Church WAS like as well as some famous figures of the age.
There is no doubt about it that the The Church was a major light in the Renaissance. However, as bright as it was, its leadership "flickered" quite a bit. There were popes with children and scandalous love affairs, and children as young as eight were appointed to the College of Cardinals. For those of you who are not up on the structure of the Catholic Church, the Pope and the Cardinals are supposed to be roll-models for good Catholic morals and leadership. That was not the case. Manchester put an emphasis on the former corruption of the Church. I could go on for quite a bit on the points that Manchester made, but I believe that would take up way too much time.
One Man Alone was a section that was largely devoted to Ferdinand Magellan. Manchester was especially descriptive in these 70 pages. For some reason this section was a little difficult to grasp. Maybe it was due to the late night or the fact that I was really excited to get done. Manchester basically writes on how much of an immortal hero Magellan is.
A comment that I have to make is about the writer. I will congratulate him on writing a book that I actually enjoyed, but I have to denounce him for being so negative. He made the times seem like hell. Most people were apparently stupid, greedy, a murderer or unlawful. This book seemed to be 90% of what was wrong with society, and 10% of what they stumbled upon to be correct.
In the end I was just happy that I read a challenging book. I would also like to say, step-off Google, I can read long pieces of literature.
Friday, August 14, 2009
Reply to: The Prevailing Opinion of a Sexual Character Discussed
Today, it goes without saying that men and women should be treated as equals. That isn't always the case, but that's the common belief. However, in the 18th century, that statement couldn't be farther from the truth. Mary Wollstonecraft, one of the first active voices of feminism, was a very well educated woman who made some very excellent points about the development and treatment of women.
When I first printed this assignment off, I had the worst attitude thinking that this excerpt was going to be on how women are superior to men. I was impressed when I read the first five pages, because it was about how women are being held back by society. I actually agree with the majority of she wrote.
The biggest thing that stood out for me personally was that society paints this picture on how a woman should be. The image that I picked up from her writing was that society says that a woman should be uneducated and dependent on men. It in no way encourages equal behavior either.
I believe that women are just as capable in everyday life as men. The societies of yesterday, as well as today (not so much today) fail to see that. I am in favor of being polite and voluntarily holding a door open once in a while, but when it is expected of me because that's what society says, I get a little mad. If one wants equality, then one should accept the fact that he/she will have to pull on a door handle.
Personally, I greatly respect Wollstonecraft. At the time that this was written, there must have been an outrageous amount of controversy. In the 18th century, there was little room for female opinion and insight, and just the fact that she wrote whole books astounds me. She was a very educated woman for her time, as well as ours. The points that she brought up put my thoughts into words.
When I first printed this assignment off, I had the worst attitude thinking that this excerpt was going to be on how women are superior to men. I was impressed when I read the first five pages, because it was about how women are being held back by society. I actually agree with the majority of she wrote.
The biggest thing that stood out for me personally was that society paints this picture on how a woman should be. The image that I picked up from her writing was that society says that a woman should be uneducated and dependent on men. It in no way encourages equal behavior either.
I believe that women are just as capable in everyday life as men. The societies of yesterday, as well as today (not so much today) fail to see that. I am in favor of being polite and voluntarily holding a door open once in a while, but when it is expected of me because that's what society says, I get a little mad. If one wants equality, then one should accept the fact that he/she will have to pull on a door handle.
Personally, I greatly respect Wollstonecraft. At the time that this was written, there must have been an outrageous amount of controversy. In the 18th century, there was little room for female opinion and insight, and just the fact that she wrote whole books astounds me. She was a very educated woman for her time, as well as ours. The points that she brought up put my thoughts into words.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
