24: Whoo!

The film we started last week really got me thinking about the argument over cochlear implants and why there is even an argument. If we had disabilities and there was a cure for them, wouldn't we want the cure? Wouldn't we want to be able to blend in with society? I got thinking about it, and the rest of the video helped me look at both sides as well.

Originally, I assumed that everyone would want this cochlear implant or would support those who were getting the surgery. When we learned that most deaf people were opposed to it, I couldn't exactly understand why they wouldn't want a treatment for their disability, and I was really confused why they would go through the trouble of hindering others going through the procedure, shunning them even. The deaf community seemed really close-minded at first, but it's for good reason. The implant is a threat to the life they know. I don't know about you, but if a procedure was going to change the way I've been living my entire life and make me adapt and completely start from scratch, I'd be very hesitant. However, that example still doesn't explain why their so hesitant to others going through the procedure. The reason is simple, they're scared. The deaf community is afraid that their children are going to grow up without having any understanding or knowledge of the deaf way of life, sign language will die out, and there won't be any more traces of deaf culture. Sure the idea seems a little far-fetched, but if something were slowly destroying everything you loved, would you let things run their course?

I don't necessarily agree with this point of view, but it's important to understand the deaf side of the story, rather than dismissing them as a bunch of crazy, close-minded people that are jealous of their children and don't want the best for them. Sure, they were very un-open to discussion, and there's no excuse for that. They needed to respect the opinions of the hearing few, instead of just ganging up on them and attacking them verbally (which they did repeatedly). However, none of us will fully be able to comprehend what it's like to be deaf, since none of us are. Therefore, we have no right to tell them what's right for their children or themselves. We can't force a life-altering procedure on a mass group of people, it just can't be done and shouldn't be done.

The other side of the argument makes plenty of valid points as well, which makes it difficult to pick sides in the argument. The grandmother explains that people will have a better standard of living and more opportunities in the world if they receive cochlear implants. They will have more job opportunities because there's no "hindrance" from a lack of hearing. There's a lot that deaf people miss out on in life; sound is beautiful, and they can't experience music or any other beautiful sounds that hearing people have the privilege of experiences everyday.

The documentary was frustrating to me because both sides had valid arguments, but there was such a large cultural gap between them that they couldn't comprehend that the opposing argument was valid. Each side was very close-minded and absolutely convinced that they were 100% right and there was no room for discussion. It was irritating when one side would come up with a very good point, and when the other side didn't have a rebuttal, they would just dismiss it.

For next week, I'd like to just look more into where everything stands right now. The documentary left everything open and unresolved. Is there more of a story out there? We shall see.

Sources:

Cochlear Implant. Photograph. Hearing Pocket. Web. http://www.hearingpocket.com/images/childrens_cochlear_implant_clothing.jpg.

Sound and Fury. Photograph. DisThis! Web. http://disthis.org/images/sound-n-fury.jpg.

Week 23: Friendships

The questioned I wanted answered before this past week was over was whether or not there have been extreme cases of video game addiction in the U.S. like what was seen in South Korea in the video. The documentary discussed the death of man from a gaming marathon, and I was interested in seeing if these take place in the US. If so has anyone actually died on American soil from it? From what I could find, no. In fact, the story of the South Korean is the only story I could find of someone actually dying from too much videogames, and the story changed throughout the sources. Some sources claim it was a 50 hour marathan, others an 86. Either way, it was a ridiculous amount of time that I'm the vast majority of Americans wouldn't devote their lives to.

This week has been interesting because we shifted gears entirely into a new direction. Abandoning the technology unit almost entirely, we started a discussion on relationships and the different forms of mutual encounters with other humans. I found it interesting that Aristotle's findings so many years ago are still relevant today. Humans may evolve, but human interaction never changes. We have the same principles of friendship that Aristotle described over 2000 years ago. We still have friends that only share on common interest. We still have friends that are friends solely for business. We still have the "friendships of the good," or real friends. Cicero even described traits of friends that are still important to look for today, like his idea that honesty is the most important trait.

We shifted gears a little more midway through week to start the documentary "Sound and Fury". The film looks at life from the perspective of a deaf American family and their daughter who wants to undergo a cochlear implant surgery. What's so interesting is that most deaf people are actually highly opposed to this kind of surgery. It's hard for people who can hear to wrap their minds around why someone wouldn't want to be able to hear if they had the opportunity. Some would argue that because they don't know what they're missing, they don't really have a huge desire to become just like everyone else, which I believe is the case. If I've lived my whole life one certain way and someone comes along telling me that their way is better, I wouldn't believe them. Even if hearing is so much better (which no one can say that it is, because none of us have been deaf), I wouldn't want to change my way of life and step outside of the community that I've become a part of. I actually had no idea that there was this "deaf culture" among those who can't hear or are hard of hearing. The common language, interests, and "disability" bonds this huge of group of people that is quick to shun those that don't agree with their way of life. Now I don't know about you, but if I was part of this community for such a long time, I would do what I could to remain part of it.

Over this next week, I'd like to look a little deeper into the arguement over deaf culture. What are some other opinions on it? What makes it a culture compared to a community? Is it even a culture? Why do they hate those who have cochlear implants?

Sources:

Cochlear Implant. Photograph. Dizziness-and-balance. Web. http://www.dizziness-and-balance.com/disorders/hearing/hearing-aids/images/cochlear-implant-small.jpg.

Aristotle. Photograph. Wikipedia. Web.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/ae/Aristotle_Altemps_Inv8575.jpg/448px-Aristotle_Altemps_Inv8575.jpg.

Week 22: Life Outside Information Super Highway

Last week I decided that I would take the initiative to finally "disconnect" like what we had been talking about for the past week. Throughout the week, I went day to day limiting my technology usage to as little as possible. I honestly don't use my cell phone much at all, so I wasn't worried about giving that up as much the Internet and television. Because it is pretty much impossible to cut the computer out of my life completely. I decided early on that it would strictly be used only for e-mail and homework (if I couldn't avoid using it for homework). I was actually able to go the course of the week only using the computer once, and it was solely for an e-mail that I knew was coming. However, I found myself during the first half of the week very antsy and on-edge, kind of like withdrawal symptoms. Actually, I think it was withdrawal symptoms. On the other hand, without the computer I found myself free to do so many things that I would tell myself "I didn't have time for." I went running. I'm supposed to be training for the Monument Avenue 10K, but I hadn't found time to go run in almost a month. I read a book, for fun. The last book I read for fun took me the entire summer, but I finished this within the week because I actually took the time to sit down and become engrossed in it. The outdoors felt like something so alien to me after such a long absence from them, and I began to notice how so many front yards go uninhabited these days. It felt refreshing to interact with friends on a sunny day down at the river instead of otherwise sitting in front of a computer screen waiting for someone to respond to my Facebook. By the end of the week, I didn't miss Facebook or failblog or any of those time-wasters that have been absorbing my life. I hope that this recent change in lifestyle will eventually become a permanent change.

This week was a lot like last, but the documentary added adults into the mix. Granted, I still feel like it was geared towards bashing high-schoolers and college kids for spending so much time on the Internet and with technology, instead of focusing on technology in the workplace. The first thing that stuck out immediately during the film was the segment on multi-tasking. That's one thing that I find myself doing a lot, typically with two to three browsers pulled up that I constantly juggle. What stuck out though, was the claim that multi-tasking is less efficient than focusing on one thing at a time. On the one hand, it makes sense because I don't have one constant train-of-thought that I can focus on when I'm multi-tasking. I have to keep jumping around to different ideas, which takes more time often leaves out many things that I wanted to say. However, it would appear that accomplishing multiple things at the same time would be a huger time saver, not waster.

What I found most interesting was this somewhat new adaptation of the MMOG to the workplace. I've been familiarized with the multiplayer online games because I live with two addicts. My brother and German student have both at one point in their lives played WoW or something similar to it, and tried to get me hooked as well. I don't care if someone gets enjoyment out of it, but I have a hard time grasping the relevance of bringing it to the office. It just doesn't seem very efficient to have employees focused on these fake "avatars" during conferences rather than the business at hand. Not to mention the fact that online games like Second Life really limit what can be accomplished in business meetings. Presentations can't be accompanied by PowerPoints or any other kind of visual, and employees will face constant distractions from the fantasy world around them. Whenever my dad is on a conference call, he seems more focused than I have ever seen him before. Yet, when companies use programs like Second Life, it doesn't seem to convey that similar necessity of being at full attention because when the boss can see your avatar, they have more than your voice to acknowledge your existance.

The film mentioned that some kids in Korea have actually died from spending too much time with modern technology, but I haven't heard of any national stories like that. Has it happened on U.S. soil? I'd like to do a little investigation to find out.

Sources:

Secondlife. Photograph. Secondlife.com. Web. http://www.blogger.com/Secondlife.%20Photograph.%20Secondlife.com.%20Web.%20%3Chttp://paulineoliveros.us/images/secondlife_1.jpg%3E..

World of Warcraft. Photograph. 1Up. Web. http://www.blogger.com/World%20of%20Warcraft.%20Photograph.%201Up.%20Web.%20%3Chttp://i.zdnet.com/blogs/world-of-warcraft-logo.jpg%3E..

Week 21: Growing Up Online

Last week I wanted to get another perspective on the whole steroids debate, so I started a long conversation with my German exchange student. He doesn't necessarily condone the usage of illegal steroids, but because he assumes that the majority of athletes use performance-enhancing drugs, we should just accept it and move on. He went on to say that there is going to be drug usage in sports whether we test or not, and plenty of athletes are just trying to keep up with the competition. Fans just want to see broken records, whether the athlete was juicing or not.

I have to admit, I disagree with almost all of this. First of all, though I don't deny some athletes uses illegal drugs, to say it's the majority is a brave assumption. To just accept it is as bad as the crime itself. We shouldn't just make exceptions and allow people to break the law; we need to take the best steps we can to prevent cheating in sports. Yes, athletes are trying to keep up with the competition, but that is all the more reason we need to crack down on drug usage. It'll prevent the pressure to juice up and feel the need to cheat to be able to keep your job. Fans do like to see record-breaking feats, but when they're accomplished through cheating, it completely destroys the excitement. When a record is broken honestly is when it's exciting and what the fans really want to see.

This week, we looked at growing up online, and what the pros and cons of living a life in front of a computer screen really are. With a large emphasis based in technology in today's society, lifestyle changes have been directly based on technological advancements. My parents' generation spent most of their childhood outside, interacting with others. When I look outside, all the front lawns in my neighborhood are typically empty. When I am outside, typically I'm isolated between a pair of iPod headphones as I enjoy nature, alone. Nowadays, most kids prefer all of their interactions to be anything but physical. Cyber relationships with God knows who is much easier than sparking conversation with someone face-to-face. And that's what society is constantly looking for, easier ways of doing things. I no longer have to call a friend from my house and hope he's at home to have a conversation. Instead, i can just shoot him a text while keeping up with five other simultaneous conversations. Want to see grandma but don't want to travel half way across the country? Teach her how to use Skype, problem solved. We used to look down on others for this addiction, citing them as nerds. Now it's the norm.

Most of us probably don't realize it, but there are certain important aspects of life that we miss out on when we choose to talk to a friend over AIM instead of meeting them at a coffeeshop to reconnect. I'm just as guilty as the next guy, but not a day goes by that I don't regret wasting my life in front of this stupid computer screen instead of going out and interacting. Sure, the internet provides us with plenty of information that we most likely wouldn't have found without page surfing, but what's not completely false is typically pointless anyways. I used to be able to give up stuff like the internet for the Lenten season, now I see kids struggling to give up Facebook for more than a week. Hell, I couldn't even type this blog up without checking my Facebook. The internet is a terrible, terrible addicon that most of us in class wouldn't admit that they have fallen victim to, yet the majority of us have. I lied about how long I'm on the internet a day during the class discussion. There were some other kids in class that I know did too, because I see them online everyday.

Next week, the only time I'm going to be on the internet is for homework purposes. Let's see how well I do. Hopefully, I'll be able to limit myself to e-Mail and Edline, but I doubt it. It'll be a struggle, but I'm interested in seeing what I do instead in my free time...

Sources:

Juicin' Photograph. Dangers of Steroid Abuse. Web. http://www.freewebs.com/ronat007/steroids-in-baseball.jpg.

Nerd Alert. Photograph. MJ On the Move. Web. https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi6yAtpK1cnUcTIPhgIU_hyphenhyphen46MKO0jUOoSg8PsHPqlwOnH6t26iCyn73XNLtIrMpToGtD5Nrlw2HpzDTnDkglYB_Yo8lBlSSEDDJwgGFLocZ4ntLltxJH9Nqarl9kCWBxQhKgVO6uXg7Gc/s400/nerd.GIF.

The Batcomputer. Photograph. Gamespot. Web. http://ui11.gamespot.com/1450/batcave_2.jpg.

Week 20: Cheater!

Last week I wanted to try to find some examples of proof that honor codes at school were either working or a waste of time. From what I could find, most statistics claimed that the Honor Code hinders cheating. However, there aren't any clear-cut statistics out there that show exactly how efficient it is in cutting back the amount of cheaters in schools. In my opinion, being forced to write the Honor Code on assignments makes it more difficult for me to want to cheat on them, however, students that have low enough morals to cheat have low enough morals to lie about it. The most effective aspect of the Honor Code is the fact that the idea of punishment is implied for any violation. With no punishment, it would most likely be zero percent effective. This article does a nice job at going more in depth into what seems to work at what doesn't.

So this week we focused mainly on cheating, the different forms of cheating, and why it's wrong. One of the main topics we looked at was cheating in sports using performance enhancing drugs. Should an athlete be able to get away with using drugs to make themselves better than the competition? After all, it is their job and they're just trying to keep up with the Joneses. No. An athlete cannot use the excuse that they were just "keeping pace with their competition," when caught with illegal drugs. When someone earns a trophy or medal, they should do exactly that; EARN it. Rankings are all about someone's natural skill level along with the amount of time they put into practice and working out. When someone deviates from this to unnaturally enhance their body, their cheating the system, their coworkers, and themselves. If I were to have a cheat sheet for a test, and the only one in the class who had one, it would give me an unfair advantage over all the students in the class, including the naturally smart ones and the ones who spent hours studying. The same goes for performance enhancing drugs. It's not leveling the playing field, it's manipulating it for personal gain.

Another discussion we delved into was about the case studies we looked over in chapter 2. It looked into various scenarios students might experience in college and provided a dilemma for each situation. Every scenario gave the reader in decisions that couldn't really result in the greatest good, because someone was always left unhappy, no matter what the decision was. The scenarios were more opinionated like who was right and who was wrong in the situation, and didn't have a clear answer.

Lastly, we started looking at the internet and how it's had a major role in the lives of kids these days. When our parents were growing up, private lives were actually private, and nobody knew what everyone else was doing every second of every day. However, with technology continuously changing at an alarming rate, society is forced to keep up. Now, kids can talk to their friends any time and anywhere, and even scarier, people can change their identities online. The video we watched interviewed one girl who hid herself behind lingerie and make-up online as to not expose who she really was. She looked like a 20-year-old at age 14. With increasing technological advances, social aspects of life have become less personal as people prefer to interact through technology rather than in person. Information can also be accessed at the snap of a finger, which also intertwines with the aforementioned topic of Honor Code violations.

So this upcoming week, I'd like to look more at the steroids debate and see what the other side has to say, if there even is another side.

Sources:

Computer Nerd. Photograph. 108 Red Stitches. Web. http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_vG4-JXzlYeU/R1C9-0bWeoI/AAAAAAAAAHM/hO1LcWOWRzE/s1600-R/computer%2Bnerd%2B%2B%2BLimpet%2B2%5B1%5D.JPG.

Got Juice? Photograph. Tony Sports. Web. http://tonysports.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/mcgwire.jpg.

"Honor Code Hinders classroom Cheating." The Reflector [Mississppi State University]. Print.

Week 19: On My Honor...

So last week I wanted to find out if there was any more evidence out there that support Zimbardo's theory that good people could be turned evil. Because experimenting with human interactions became illegal after Zimbardo's Stanford Prison Experiment, there wasn't really any other way people could test his theory. However, it does explain many current events and how so many people deemed "the nicest guy" were able to commit murder.



This week we discussed the importance of honor codes at schools and analyzed the codes of a few colleges. Most schools had the same basic codes and typically a breach in the code was similar across the board. The most common was the violations based on cheating, stealing, and plagiarizing work. Basically, if it isn't 100% yours, it's against the school's honor code.

Penalties for breaking the code ranged from academic probation to expulsion. Universities hold their students and falculty to the highest expectations, and when someone doesn't live up to the expectations or hinders the community's experience, serious reprocusions occur. Because the campus works much like any other society, falculty and students are expected to hold the honor code to the highest regard in order to keep it functioning efficiently.

I found Liberty University's Honor Code particularly interesting and far different from all the others. Liberty bases its code solely off of morals, so any unethical violation of Christian morality is dealt with through punishment. Also, any students witnessing the breach in the Code are expected to report their classmate to authorities, or they will receive the same punishment. The college places most of the responsibility on the students to govern themselves.

We also discussed the internet's newly found role in cheating and loopholes. The internet serves as a great, convenient resource of information, but also makes cheating easier and provides less chances of getting caught. It scews the lines of what's acceptable and what's not and makes it more difficult to create a fitting honor code. Many students might not even realize the credibility (or lack thereof) of their sources and don't notice that their breaking the Honor Code.

In the coming weeks, I'd like see how effective the Honor Code really is. Does writing the code on quizes and tests really stop kids from cheating?

Sources:

Cadet Honor Code. Photograph. Over-thinking It. Web. http://www.blogger.com/Cadet%20Honor%20Code.%20Photograph.%20Over-thinking%20It.%20Web.%20%3Chttp://www.overthinkingit.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/honorcode.jpg%3E.

Liberty University Logo. Photograph. Liberty University. Web. http://www.blogger.com/Liberty%20University%20Logo.%20Photograph.%20Liberty%20University.%20Web.%20%3Chttp://api.ning.com/files/NJlPIT6QVsx3PIwiUvQscKNObAq-zt-lYy95DmVWQl2snzQvfISOJCeN6l5AcEpsEP6UgOGsJLMv70innOfgJnY*XLgRNFwW/libertymonogramstda_cmyk.jpg%3E..

Week 18: More Experimentation!

Last week I asked myself why during the experiments, most people deviated from what we would consider the norm and found themselves conforming to the pressures set by the experimenters. There are plenty of in-depth studies that look into this, but what I found most interesting was the fact that the participants in the Asche experiment were comfortable performing their duties after the experimenter explained that he would assume all the blame. It seems like that wouldn't be enough to sway one's moral convictions, but history shows us that this is not the case. If we look at something like the Nuremberg trials, we see that most of the higher ranking Nazi officers claimed that they were just following orders. The experiment shows that conforming to an authority figure is not only the easier way, but the preferred way. As long as we aren't the ones to be held accountable, we can find ourselves doing things that we would never expect from ourselves. In the end, we really are the ones to be held accountable, but as the situation presents itself, we aren't aware of this until the consequences make themselves apparent.

This week, we took a deeper look into the psycological experiments we had been introduced to in the previous last week, focusing on the Asche and Stanford experiments. We watched a video where Primetime repeated the Asche experiment to see if the results would differ from its initial run. I found it interesting that they weren't, proving that a change in society hasn't affected human nature over the course of a few decades. It was also interesting that those interviewed afterwords were so quick to lay the blame on the experimenters, claiming that they were just following orders. Others claimed that they could tell the man in the other room was faking it. No one came forward and said that they handled themselves poorly in the difficult situation.

We also watched a speech given by Philip Zimbardo, the mastermind behind the Stanford Prison Experiment. His lecture looked deeply into the behavior of people and what classifies someone as good or evil. The experiment showed that good people can be driven to do bad things based on the situation they are placed in. In other words, the situation can show a person's true nature. The experiment also showed that authority can easily be abused. When Zimbardo placed the prison guards in the "prison" he gave them no instruction, yet they pursued the roles of violent, malicious guards. Zimbardo went on to explain the different ways people can be turned evil, but summarized it into three categories, either a person is naturally evil, they were persuaded by others, or they were persuaded by the environment they grew up in. He also explained what it meant to truly be a hero, which means someone that deviates from the norm for the betterment of others. The fallacies of superheroes and martyrs were exposed, and Zimbardo explained that these are horrible role models for children because their not realistic role models.

Zimbardo made a lot of good points. This week I'd like to look to see if there's anymore evidence out there that supports his theories as well as the Stanford Prison Experiment. Can good people really be turned evil?

Sources:

Escher, M. C. Angels and Demons. HNorthop.com. Web. http://www.blogger.com/Escher,%20M.%20C.%20Angels%20and%20Demons.%20HNorthop.com.%20Web.%20%3Chttp://www.hnorthrop.com/escher.jpg%3E.

Philip Zimbardo. Photograph. Altervista.org. Web. http://www.blogger.com/Philip%20Zimbardo.%20Photograph.%20Altervista.org.%20Web.%20%3Chttp://baw2008.altervista.org/DOCUMENTS/images/Zimbardo.gif%3E.