Brave New World Chapter 9

1. What did Lenina do when she got back to the rest-house?

Took 6.5 g of soma and went on an eighteen hour holiday.

2. What does Bernard ask his fordship, Mustapha Mond?

Wanted to know if he could bring John and Lenina back with him.

3. What does John say when he is by Lenina's bedside? Why is this significant?

"Her eyes, her hair, her cheek, her gait, her voice; Handiest in thy discourse O! that her hand, In whose comparison all whites are ink. Writing their own reproach; to whose soft seizure." From Shakespeares comedy's called "Troilius and Cressida". Describing the love that John feels to Lenina. "On the white wonder of dear Juliet's hand, may seize And steal immortal blessing from her lips, Who, even in pure and vestal modesty, Still blush, as thinking their own kisses sin." From Shakespeare's tragedy "Romeo and Juliet", more lovely words for Lenina from John.

Brave New World Chapter 8

1. How would you describe John's upbringing? Why do you think that he says he is, "Alone, always alone"? How does Bernard feel about John?

He was very alone in the world. He did not have anyone to look up too and thus was learned by himself. Thus the reason why he is considered "savage." His mother didn't teach him much so he was not civilized or a pure savage. He thought he was odd be cause of the differences between the two cultures.

2. Why does John say at the end of the chapter, "O brave new world!"

It was like he was being shown the Holy Grail of hidden truths. It was the complete opposite of what his entire life has been up to that point.

Brave New World Chapter 7

1. How does Lenina feel about their appointed guide?

Doesn't like him, he smells bad.

2. How does Lenina react to "naked Indian"(p. 110)? Does it remind you of anyone else we have studied?

Doesn't like to see people aging and sick. She fears death.

3. How does Bernard react to the pueblo of Malpais?

He is entranced by it.

4. Who is Linda? What is her relationship to Tomakin?

Linda is the woman that was left behind by the Director Thomas. She was presumed to be dead.

5. Why does Linda believe that "everything they do is mad"(p. 121)? Please be specific.

Linda doesn't understand because she outside of her everyday, same old same old, world and this is the "real" world.

Jared Diamond

1. Please describe the background of the dispute between Dr. Samuel Huntington and Dr. Serge Lang: Dr.Samuel Huntington was an academic scholar who was trying to get membership of the National Academy of Sciences. However, Dr. Serge Lang complained about his membership calling his statistics "opinion" and not valid.
2. How did Lang respond to Huntington’s “pseudo mathematics?” He sent out large packages of photocopied documents ad homenen attacks against Huntington.
3. What aspects of the dispute between Lang and Huntington are “political?” How does the author, Jared Diamond, feel about “Academic Freedom?” Diamond feels that this is wrong upon Huntinton's political liberty.
4. Why does the NAS exist? Why does this make that attacks against Huntington seem peculiar? The US government wanted to have a group to consult on problems. Huntington did as they asked and they was criticized by them for it.
5. Why does Diamond find fault in the traditional perceptions of the hard sciences? Its "the enterprise of explaining and predicting -- gaining knowledge of -- natural phenomena, by continually testing one's theories against empirical evidence."
6. Why are soft sciences difficult to study? Cannot control the social aspect.
7. How did the NAS need to change in the early 1970s? In order to stay in business so that the government can talk to people who are expert in that field.
8. What are the problems in “operationalizing” a concept? Too many uncontrollable variables.
9. Briefly describe how Diamond illustrates operationalizing in:

10. · Mathematics- Able to count the number of bananas to prove which tree has more
    

    · Chemistry- To measure the concentration of sugars

    · Ecology- To find a foliage height diversity index

    Psychology- Questionnaires can be used to measure moods.

    
    

    What were Huntington’s operationalized concepts that provoked the wrath of Lang? Frustrations and problems.

11. Why is the task of operationalizing more difficult and less exact in the soft sciences? Why does it lead to the ridicule of the soft sciences? Too many uncontrollable variables leads to problems with other "scientists"
12. Why does Diamond believe that Lang might be ignorant of the measurements taken by social scientists like Huntington? Because there is no true way to measure either science.
13. Does Diamond believe the labels associated with the sciences be replaced? Explain. Yes because it gives the wrong impression.
14. Does Diamond believe the soft sciences to be more valuable than hard sciences? Do you agree? Explain. Diamond thinks that to understands people is more important. Yes because to understand oneself and thus another helps us move forward as a society yet without hard science we would still be trying to figure out the wheel or fire.

Brave New World Chapter 6

Part I
1. Why does Lenina think Bernard Marx "odd" - please use specific references from this chapter in your answer.

She is surprised that Bernard thinks "Electro-magnetic Golf was a waste of time". Secondly she does not know why he just wants to be alone with her and not even talk to her friends.

2. Please provide more lines from Lenina that she learned from hypnopedia (there are some great ones in this chapter!). Do any of them remind you of sayings that we may use?

"A gramme is always better than a damn"

3. What is Fanny's explanation for Bernard's behavior?

That alcohol is effecting him.

Part II

4. What did the Director tell Bernard about his own trip to the Reservation? Why did it initially make Bernard feel uncomfortable?

The director lost the girl and could not find her. This mad Bernard feel uncomfortable because he the director could not disprove it.

5. What does the Director threaten Bernard with if he doesn't change his behavior? Why does it elate Bernard?

To a different center but it is only a threat not an actual threat.

Part III

6. How does the Warden describe the Reservation?

First only about its physical appearances then he goes on to describe it as a prison.

Ways of Knowing Essay

Jason Peterson

December 4, 2009

Theory of Knowledge 2

“People need to believe that order can be glimpsed in the chaos of events (adapted from John Gray, Heresies, 2004).” In what way and to what extent would you say this claim is relevant in at least two areas of knowledge?

The statement is relevant to the natural sciences and history. People have a need to find an “order” because people, as stated in Grendel, are “patternmakers.” We must find a way to make sense of the world around us and by doing so we find ourselves in a state of believed truth. Chaos has no order and thus we cannot grasp the concept of disorder. By finding patterns within things we find that there is “order” within “disorder.” The problem lies with that people need to have an “order.” We cannot simple function without it. I must wake up everyday at 6:45am, take a shower, shave, put on clothes and shoes, tie shoes, and then drive to school. If someone were to disruption our “order” then it is almost seen as taboo. Take example of the first day of school. Everyone goes to their first class and sits where ever they choose and go on throughout their school day, assuming that there are no assigned seats. If this “order” goes on for an extended amount of time then it’s safe to say that close to all of those students are still sitting in their seats in the same way they were on the first day of school. I see it everyday in school; where if one student sits in the seat of another student who sat there the previous day then the second student become enraged at the first student for disrupting the second student’s “order.” One tiny, almost insignificant occurrence (well I think its little), caused the disruption of an entire classroom just because one student interfered with another’s “order.” The same effect goes when parking a car. When I drive to work or to school I park in the same spot every single day. I admit I get mad when I see someone else in “my” parking spot as well. So technically what right do I have to write a paper on the people needs for order where as I myself have my own personal biases? It is because that I experience them as well that enables me to comprehend and understand what I am describing as a way of defining people’s necessity for order.

The sciences have the most chaos than any other area of knowledge. The sciences are the area of knowledge that has, to some degree, the least amount of knowledge obtained so far. Science enables us to put definitions onto things that which we do not comprehend. For instance the basic of the atom is a fundamental theory that has been created so that we can understand what makes up the world and all the objects around us. Physicists tell us that our bodies have millions and millions of molecules that have more space between them and that no molecule is ever “touching” another molecule. Without these basic theories produced by “patternmakers” other pattern makers would not be able to understand what was happening to them amongst the chaos of the world. The natural sciences are based on the chaos of the world and when we try to apply order to thing pre-described disorder can actually cause more harm than good. For example, a few months ago three fellow students and I participated in the “Group 4” project which is common throughout the I.B. programme. We had to learn how to use a pH detector for our experiment; however, we only learned how to use the tool the day prior to the actual field test. This was a problem for us for we were trying to put and “order” to the data that we were collecting however the chaos that was needed in order to attempt to find order caused more problems than solutions. The quick learning of the tools and instruments could not have produced a valid test result and thus not a valid order to the chaos. Natural sciences have theories that are based off the repetitive recreation of a law. A theory is not the same as an idea or belief, yet can a theory not be? A theory in raw form is just the collection of “assumed to be correct” information that we ourselves created in order to find order. Is that not what a belief is? Is that not what religion is? Should we rather consider “science” to be more of a “religion” than a method to attempting to unravel the chaos? Chaos is not a tangible thing that we can comprehend and thus we fear it. Through fear we find comfort in order and thus when our order is disrupted we become fearful. All in all the natural sciences have a way for us to define the order amongst the chaos, but it short there is no way for us to completely understand disorder or order. There are no truths in science just laws and proven theories that we will continue to assume are correct, for we are not capable of knowing that we do not know.

Historians throughout the ages have recorded the past and present knowledge so that we can understand what the past was like. However there is a great downfall to this. If a historian is too write about the 18^th century, should not the author live in the time period to accurately describe it? Also the phrase “the winner of war writes the history” which in short means that history is mainly based on that of a one sided opinion. When reading a history book how do we truly “know” (assuming that there is a thing as “knowing”) that the author is not some washed-up math teacher putting his or her spin on what they think is history? However some exceptions would be that yes many history books go through rigorous processing by other “credited” historians. Yet for a history book to be acknowledged in short means that the information that is within the pages of the book coincides with what the historian believes to be “history.” Reading a book about WWII form an American History text book would be a lot different than that of a Japanese WWII text book. We truly can never know about history because we “pick and choose” what to learn about. We “choose” what we deem to be “relevant” on the topic being learnt. Every “historical” text book on the subject being taught is literally equivalent to that of a grain of sand amongst the Sahara Desert. How do we choose what is relevant or not? What is more important: the goal or the means to reach that goal? There are no “true” answers for these questions just like there are no truths in science or history.

In conclusion the belief that people need order when dealing with chaos is the only “true” information that can be stated. Natural sciences provided us with the ability to see things beyond our own visual spectrum and history teaches valuable lessons from leaders from the past yet we should assume that none of it is “true.” We must live out our lives being naïve so much so that we do not go insane by the sheer vastness of implication of what chaos is and the desperate things we humans have done, are doing, and will be doing in order to find our “order.”

Brave New World Chapter 5

1. What would Michael Pollan (Remember? The Omnivore's Dilemma) say about the first paragraph in Chapter 5?

Michael Pollan would see this a the most realistic future.

2. Do you see any similarities with World State views death as compared to the Hindus? How does Lenina's remembrance of hypnopedia compare with Plato's Republic?

They both see death as a natural process. In Hinduism you can come back as a better person but in the World State you just have to except what you have. In Plato's Republic everyone has a place.

3. What do you think of Lenina's and Henry night out on the town?

It was boring. There was no "new change" for either of them.

4. Why do you think Huxley uses the word "pneumatic" to refer to some female characters?

So that the reader can see that sex is more open in the book that as we perceive it to be in our lives.

5. What is Solitary Service and what are Bernard's feelings towards it?

Its an orgy. He doesn't like it.

Abel Chapter 15 Questions

1. Why is history being rewritten constantly?

We are always writing them wrong.

2. What factors influence the process by which the historian picks and chooses his/her "facts"? Please provide a specific example for each factor.

Are Interest Change: We are more interested in the peasants rather than the kings!

Conceptual Apparatus Changes: We have more materials to look at!

A Review of our Basic Historical Segment Changes: Toynbee holds the most intelligent unit to be not the nation but the "society!"

The "Personal Equation" of the Historian Changes: Before the Historians only wanted to talk about the beheading of Queens. Now the Historians only want to talk about sex!

The Audience for whom he writes Changes: The reading material goes from scholars to kids.

3. What is the "Baconian fallacy?" What would the Positivists think? Would Carr agree with Namier?

"Baconian fallacy?"- A historian only has to collect the facts. That this is true. Yes he would.

4. How does History differ from Geology?

Historian attribute meaning to their data.

5. According to Abel: "The patterns to be found in past events are selected by the historian; like the hypothesis of the scientist, they may be suggested, but are neither imposed nor dictated, by "the facts (p. 166-7)." Based on your experience with the Cheques Lab, how far do you agree with this explanation of history?

I believe it is true because there is no cohesive way to know history.

6. In your opinion, "how will future historians so elect to describe what is going on now(p. 167)?"

They will only pick major events that happened, i.e. 9-11 and Obama. They would talk about the environmentalist with the weather and effecting the world around us. They would also talk about the "age-of-terror" where we are fighting in foreign counties.

7. What is historical pluralism?

Not every event is interrelated.

8. The list of events (or non-events) listed on p. 168 makes Abel ask the question: "Is there, then, no hard core or bed-rock of indisputable facts that the historian must recognize." Does it matter if there ever was a man named Trotsky?

No there is no importance.

9. How is a historian like a physicist

Neither never knows all there is to be known about an event. Both go beyond the evidence, both select their facts and use them, both subjects are self correcting.

10. What are the Five Frameworks or Hypotheses of History? Please provide an example from your HL or SL history class of each.

1. History is Cyclical:
2. Historians have selected a certain factor that he attribute to past events
3. Progress is a philosophy is History
4. History is a great drama of Sin and Redemption
5. Society is a type of living organism

11. Do you believe in Historical Inevitability?

No and yes. There that is the best answer.

12. What does Abel mean when he says: "No crucial experiment can test the validity of a theory of history, any more than than it can the truth of a metaphysical theory (p. 174)."?

Historical theories succeed if they fructify ourself understanding.

13. Abel writes: "Macaulay regards history as a branch of literature (p. 174)." How would Jill Lepore of Just the Facts, Ma'am respond? Please provide to specific quote from the article to justify your claim.

She would agree. She says that Historians and Novelist are brothers.

14. How does the footnote at the bottom of page 175 relate to the Shaper from Grendel?

It talks about things that use to be glorious and the shaper talks about those.

Nacirema

After the Nacirema exercise, please answer the following:

1. What happened yesterday? Why couldn't we recognize our own culture?

Yesterday we found out that we could not recognize our own culture. We could not recognize it because we had been distracted by the music, our eyes saw images and connected them to other things and the personal bais of the writer altered our thoughts.

2. What does your answer say about the the strengths and weaknesses of the Social Sciences like Psychology, Sociology and Anthropology?

The weaknesses are that there are no difinitive answer for the what is real or not in the social world and the sciences have no real merit behind them.

Brave New World Chapter 4

Part 1
1. What puzzles Lenina about Bernard Marx's behavior?

The fact that he seems uncomfortable confuses her, as in this world it is commonplace to discuss their relationships in public, whereas Bernard feels uncomfortable doing this, as he is different than the normal person in that world, and in many ways is more like us.

2. Please provide examples of Lenina using what she learned from hypnopaedia.

Lenina uses various examples of her hypnopaedia "learning" throughout this chapter. On page 63 Lenina says "My word, I'm glad I'm not gamma." which was driven into her through hypnopaedia, and earlier on page 62 says "What a hideous color khaki is." which is the color of Deltas and another and demonstrates further evidence of hypnopaedia.

3. Where are Lenina and Henry going?

They are going to Stoke Poges, an obstacle golf course.

Part 2:
1. What makes Bernard Marx distressed? Why?

He is made distressed by the fact that Lenina is just like everyone else and isn't "special" like him. He is distressed by the fact that she discussed thier relationship in public like the rest of the people in the Brave New World.

2. Where does Helmholtz Watson work? What is his job?

He works in the Propaganda House, the center for propaganda distribution in the Brave New World.

3. What does Bernard have in common with Helmholtz Watson?

He lives in the same appartment as him; they are roommates.

4. What is troubling Helmholtz?

Bernard's behavoir; he does not seem to be acting normally, like the rest of the world, he seems a bit off.

Brave New World Chapter 3

A) Sex, Monogamy & Romance: The idea of Romance, sex and monogamy in the book a Brave New World is completely different than in our own. It is discouraged to have only one sexual partner at a time, and that you should have a relationship with more than one person at a time, as this keeps people from forming to close a bond with one another. The idea of Romance is completely discouraged, and is considered an abomination. It is widely considered unthinkable, to give yourself to one person, instead, as it is put, they are supposed to give themselves to everyone.

B) Sports: In our world, sports are a form of entertainment and enjoyment, while in their world, it is merely a method to create more jobs; it must be complex in order to increase the society's production.

C) Entertainment: Entertainment takes the form of porn and sex. They do not engage in other types of entertainment, games or anything other than sex and porn.

D) Parenthood: The society from A Brave New World also believes that Parenthood is up to the state and children staying with "parents" is absurd.

E) Materialism: There seems to no real materialism in this world, as they lack the freedoms that created materialism. Everything is for the state; there is no time to worry about their material possessions.

F) Religion: There is absolutely no religion, and is viewed as utterly ridiculous, where as in our world, religion is the most important thing in billions of peoples lives.

G) Intoxicants: Also the view of intoxicants is completely different. While most here think they are negative and decode your mind, in their world it is perfectly acceptable to use it, in fact it is encouraged.

Essay- “We see and understand things not as they are but as we are.”

7.) “We see and understand things not as they are but as we are.” Discuss this claim in relation to at least two ways of knowing.

The claim of “we see and understand things not as they are but as we are” is a true statement based on the usage of perception and emotion to discover what are believed truths are. Perception’s downfall is that we do not know what other people see and fell and thus it is hard for us to come to the same underlining truths between each other. I know what the color red is yet someone else may see the red as something else. Emotion’s downfall is that it affects our known judgments. Judgment is our raw believed truth on what is morally right and wrong based on the influenced we gained through our life. These ways of knowing are seen as a way to describe how we “belief” what are the “truths” in life.

Perception is based off our past and present biases. We start off as small young children who are unknowledgeable. The most common example of how a child learns through perception is when the child would accidently touch a hot pan or cooking pot and learns that touching this pot is hot and dangerous. This can be related to Plato’s Cave. The people sitting on the chairs can only see the shadows on the cave’s wall. In connecting this to the burning of the child’s hand, the hot pot resembles the shadows on the wall and the child becomes enlightened when he touches the pot and thus the child essentially leaves the cave. Another tie to Plato’s Cave is in the reading of Brave New World. In the book the children go through shock treatments when they are first trying to learn new things in the world. This new things they are trying to learn are books and flowers but when the go over to look at them the floor would electrocute them. They “learn” that the books and flowers are bad and thus they stay away from them.

Brave New World Chapter 2

1. How do babies sent to the Neo-Pavlovian Conditioning Rooms develop an "instinctive hatred of books and flowers?" Why were Deltas exposed to such treatment?

Babies develop a hatred of flowers and books through shock and horror treatments. The doctor would bring the babies into the room with flowers and books, the babies would go to the flowers and books and the operator to press a lever which would set of sirens and cause the babies to cry and become scared and confused. After crying they would then continue and electrically shock the babies. Therefore when they turned the shocking off and the books and flowers re-appeared, the babies would not go towards them because of they were scared and did not want to go through what they had already previously.

2. What is a State Conditioning Center? Does it remind you of anything from Plato's Republic?

"Central London Hatchery and Conditioning Centre." Conditioning in this term basically means brainwashing babies to believe things that are false and not believe in the truth. This is connected to Plato's republic because in the cave they were their believed truths, the shadows, were not the truth and the only reason they thought it was the truth was because they did not know any better. The conditioning is basically the same thing because they are brainwashing the babies to believe that flowers and books are bad and associated with terror and shock.

3. What is hypnopaedia? Why wasn't it used for Science? What was it used for? Does it remind you of anything from Plato's Republic?

Hypnopedia is the principle of sleep teaching. It was not used for science because after the experiment with Tommy it was proven that it could not be used as an instrument of intellectual education. It was proven false because although they forced the phrase about the nile river into Tommy's head, he could not use any intellect from. He could repeat the phrase over and over again if someone hinted at it but he could not deduce information from it. For example when he was asked "what is longest river in Africa" he replied, "I don't know." even though the sentence that was brainwashed into his head clearly states the answer. Plato's Republic plays into this because the shadows on the wall were representations of everyday objects and if asked what they were the person could say anything but if they were asked about the things on the walls they could describe them in perfect detail.

4. How does the Caste system work in the World State? What are the similarities and differences between this

and the Hindu Caste system?

Alpha (work the hardest and wear grey)
Beta (work hard)
Gammas (stupid and wear green)
Delta (wear khaki)
Epilson (stupidest)

Hindu Caste System:

Brahmins (priests)
Kasatrayas (landowners/warriors)
Vaisyas (merchants)
Sudras (farmers)
Hrijan (untouchables)

They both have the "higher ups" and the lowest class.
In Hinduism, if you have good dharma and fulfill your civic duty in society you can move up in the caste system but in Brave New World, you are stuck as what you were made and there is no escaping it.

5. What does the Director mean when he says, "Not so much like drops of water....rather, drops of liquid sealing wax."?

He is talking about a child's mind and the adult mind. In this conditioning centre they are teaching the babies how to live, not only in childhood but also as an adult. They are teaching them not to mix with others and to stay with their caste of people who were created like them. In the hatchery, the different caste's do not mix with one another and that is not only in the centre. That is how the rest of their lives will be because that is how they have been taught, they will remain with their caste and that is the way it will be because they do not know of anything else.

Brave New World Chapter 1

1. What is the World State's Motto?

Community, Identity, Stability

2. Please describe Bokanovsky's Process. Why does The Director call it the "major instrument of social stability?"

1. Bokanovskified egg will bud and divide
2. 8 buds to 96 buds
3. Bud will grow into a perfect embryo
4. Series of arrested development: check the normal growth and then the egg buds
5. Responds by budding

"The major instruments of social stability:" The factory could have one egg and all the embryo's would bud from it. The stability of the factory would depend on the work being all done the same way.

3. Why did the doctor wish to keep the Epsilon "embryo below par?"

He lowers the oxygen and causes them to stay under par so that they do not bud and create more.

4. What does Mr. Foster mean when he says: "We condition them to thrive in heat...that is the secret of happiness of virtue - liking what you've got to do. All conditioning aims at that: making people like their unescapable social destiny."? How does this connect to what is happening in Rack 10?

The director means that they train the embryos to thrive and live in things that are miserable and unhappy so when they experience the real world, they will always be happy because they have been through worse and are able to tolerate it. This connects to what is happening in rack 10 because in rack 10 they are training the embryo's to tolerate lead, caustic soda and tar-chlorine so that they can work as the next generation chemical workers and not be unhappy with their lives.

The Republic of Plato

The Republic of Plato

Chapter 1

Chapter 2- Introducing the idea of a “city” (pg. 45-46; 369a, b)

“Guardian”- How will they be reared* and educated*?

o Philosopher King

o Spirited

o Swift

o Strong

*Educated: Teach Music and Gym (Health) – Logos/ (Speech) Logic

-Creates a Just City: Just Soul-

Guardians- Super Ego

· Gold

· Wisdom

· Calculating

Auxiliaries/ Soldiers- Id

· Silver

· Courage

· Irrationals: Led by Desire

Farmers- Ego

· Iron and Bronze

· Moderation

· Spirit

Brahma- One of the Three main Gods
Vishnu- Recreates the world after it is destroyed by Shiva. One of the Three main Gods
Shiva- "The Destroyer"- Natural Evolutionary Process. Snakes. One of the Three main Gods
Dota
Krishna-
Ganesh- Shiva's Son- Removal of Obstacles- Art God. Elephant Head. Lots of Sweets and Candy.
Parvati-
Saraswati-
Kali- God of Time and Death. Destruction in order to Recreate. Drinks the blood of demons in order to prevent the creation of more demons. One drop of demon blood makes 1000 more demons.
Hanuman- God of the Monkeys; famous for the Army of Monkey to help Ram and Sita
Ram- Tribal Chief- Follower of Shiva; Lived by Darma; Exiled for 14 years and rescued his wife
Sita- Ideal Women Figure and Morals
Lakshmi
Maya- God of Illusion, the "Shadows on the Wall"
Garuda- Half bird half man. Symbol of Speed.
Saraswati

Hindu Gods and Goddess

Maya or Mayasura

Litteral translation: Illusion, veiling power of illuision is able to create the difference between "me" and "mine" or "thee" and "thine."

Maya creates the ingnorance of individual self.

Group 4 Reflection

What was your Hypothesis?
To examine the pH of the soil and compare it to that of the denisty of the crap life living there.

Explain your experience in gaining and testing evidence. Any issues? -Samples? -Equipment?
We got to work together and had to collaborte with our group members in order to succed in gaining information retaining to our Group 4 project.

How was working in a group? What went well? What did not?
It was interesting because each of us had a fair amount of knowlegde in each of our science fields and some of us had more than one area of knowlegde about a science, e.i. took two sciences. Thus the project went fairly well and we were done collecting our data rather quickly and accurately.

How do you KNOW that you gained Scientific Knowledge?
I cannot say that thus I truely don't know...

How can the different ways of knowing help us to distinguish between something that is true and something that is believed to be true?

By using different ways of knowing, we can distinguish between something that is true and something that is believed to be true. In order to express these distinctions, personal experiences, their implications, and their counterclaims are needed to be stated. For something to be “true” it must be public, eternal, and independent. If the “truth” does not follow these guidelines then it can not be “true.” The ways of knowing that something is “true” is comprehended by one’s own perception, language, reason and emotion. With these “ways of knowing” than the “truth” can, in theory, be understood.
Perception is one of the most broad and vague ways of knowing. It is hard for someone and another to have the same “perception” of an object or event. Take example that Jimmy, a young yet intellectual boy who wears glasses, has just seen the biggest bully Bob assault the youngest and smallest kid in school Fred. Their teacher comes over and asks the three boys what happened. According to Bob, Fred fell and received the bruises that way; Fred says that he was attacked by Bob; and Jimmy states that, due to his glasses fogging up, that Bob had inflicted the pain to himself. This vagueness is why the judicial system takes so much time to resolve problems between one party and another. This has implication due our ability to not ever “know” the whole “truth”. The cause of not “knowing,” due to inability to not see “everything,” leads to the effect of problems between us and our kin based solely on our perception of the events that took place. According to the definition of “truth” is that it must be public, eternal and independent and thus begins the problems of “knowing” between Jimmy, Bob, and Fred. The fact that there was a fight and Jimmy watch is public and everyone “knows” thus the first part of “truth” is correct. Eternal works as well due to that point in time there was an incident between those three boys. Lastly it was independent from all outside sources, however the problem arises with what is “true” and who believes that their story is “true.” Bob believes it was not his fault; Fred believes that he was attacked by Bob; and Jimmy believes that Fred did it all to himself. This causes the problem of who “knows” the “truth.” The teacher, being unbiased of course, has no real way of “knowing” who the culprit is based off what the children believe to be “true”. This has global implications as well for cultures perceive things differently than that of another culture. Take example the United States and Japan; the United States shakes each other hands when greeting someone politely were as in Japan they would bow to each other first. This could cause a massive global conflict if for example the United States offends the Japanese Councilor at the United Nations due to not bowing when greeting. As a counterclaim, someone could say that just using perception as a tool for “knowing” is simple not enough. Also perception just is not solely based off the ability of someone to see something but the usage of all five senses. The ability to use the five senses would be the correct way in order to learn the “true.” There is no real way of “knowing” something solely off the assumption of our perception and there is no real “truth,” rather just a collection of “believed truths” that we choose to be the “truth.” Vladimir Lenin stated that “a lie told often enough become the truth.” We want to believe that we have found the “truth” and we will not stop look for that “truth.” Yet how can we communicate this “knowledge?” Thus we need the usage of language and its imprecations in “truth.”
Language plays an important role in our lives. We created this tool to pass on the “knowledge” of others, empirical, and thru this we “learn.” With Vladimir Lenin’s previous quote can be applied to language as well. The winners of wars are the one’s that create the history. It happens to every culture and every civilization that every existed with the ability to record their history. This has global implications that can be recognized off the fact that if a war were to be started and ended than the victory most like would right about how “morally righteous” their country was and how their opposition, the losing country, was. Now as a counter argument to that claim would be that maybe the country was “telling the truth” but then we are right back to the beginning in where “how do we really know what we know?” Can that country account for every action that each one of its civilians, and, or army infantry did during the course of the war? Most likely neither county could. Therefore they can not “truly know” based off their beliefs or their “truths.” This in conjecture with perception is adequate but not 100 per cent sufficient in “knowing” something. We add a third way of knowing: reason.
Reasoning skills are a hard thing to explain about it terms of how we “know” something. Some things can be taught and thus learned by reasoning: putting your hand down on a hot pan thus teaches us to not do it again because it hurts. However when it comes to reasoning skills with moral can be hard to comprehend. One person may see that killing a human is wrong, were as a military general may see the killing of a human a necessity. Bishop Beilby Porteus states that “one murder made a villain; millions a hero.” Is he telling the “truth?” Do we glorify war? The implication of reasoning is of the greatest importance because it literally comes down to our inner instincts. In contrast how should we let our animalistic emotions control us or should we have a higher level of “knowledge?” Can any creature or object ever obtain such a thing? Do we or will we ever “know?” In my option, I believe not; then again what do I “know?”
Emotion is the final piece to the puzzle of knowledge. With the raw passion with what emotion is cannot be simply summed up or described with words along. How can we describe what an emotion is between people? Take for example the emotion of “love.” One passionate couple may explain there definition of what “love” is, however if a restaurant owner was asked the same question he or she may say that their “love” is their restaurant. Hence this gives us the emotion of sympathy towards dictionary writers. Describing such a raw and passionate feeling is incredible. Globally how can one culture translate the emotion of “love” from one culture to another? Our love could not possibly be the same as someone in Russia or India. Is emotion something that we are born with, or grow into? We will never “know,” yet this is the final piece of ways of knowing and thus while using all four pieces of “knowledge” stills leaves us with the belief that we will never “truly know.”
The difference between truth and believed truth can only be answered thru the ways of knowing. The problem is that there is more than one answer. By assuming that there is a finite answer undermines the whole idea of our “ways of knowing.” The age old question of the creation of life has been the greatest battle between science and religion. Who is to say that one side is “right” and one side is “wrong” when we ourselves do not even “know.” There is no “obtainable truth”, only the “truth” that we “believe to be true.”

“Everything we hear is an opinion, not a fact.
Everything we see is a perspective, not the truth.” -Marcus Aurelius

The Elephant Man

Please consider the David Lynch film, The Elephant Man, to answer the following questions.

1. (A) Is John Merrick a Monster? In your answer, consider how you could use the following Areas of Knowledge to justify your claims.
a) History- The past has many monters that can be aquainted to. John Merrick is not a monster but because he is abnormal everyone assumes that he is evil and thus a monster. However this does not make him a monsters because of what he looks like, people just assume that he is a monster.

b) Natural Science- His diformaty is the reason why people assume that he is a monster. Just because his physical features are different does not mean that he is evil. People are afriad of what they don't know or assume to know.

c) Social Science- John Merrick never talks to anyone and only "understands" basic forms of commands even though he is very intelligient and chooses to ignore what people say about him.

d) The Arts- It would be said that John is a Monster because he is not like a human. Yet he is capable of creating a miniature church and thus has the human ability of "the Arts." This is why he is human and not a monster rather than being a monster.

1. (B) What is the counter-claim for each Area of Knowledge?
a- The past shows that monsters are abnormal and clearly John is abonormal thus he is a monster.
b- Because his is diformed people assume that he is not human and as our species thrived basically by the survival of the fitest enables people to assume that he is a monster.
c-John's choice of not talking gives people the sence that he is not human and thus a monster due to his lack of communication.
d-The Arts can be a good thing for a human but people would see his arts as a way to become part of the human society and they would exile him as a monster.'

2. John Merrick claimed, "I am not an animal, I am a human being?" What does he mean? How does he know?
He is human by birth and has human blood in him. His mother was human and so was his father. Therefore he is human. Due to his physical features though buts him as an animal in other people's minds. He knows that he is human because he had a picture of his mother who is human.

3. Dr. Treves claimed, "Am I a good man, or am I a bad man?" What does he mean? How does he know?
He means that he is reminded by the other man who had John as a circus freak who only used him to gain money and fame. Dr. Treves feels the same way because he is helping John but at the same time feels like he is using John as a way to become famous, just like the circus man.

4. What role does the herd mentality play in the film? Please be specific in your answers.
It shows that animals and mankind like to stay together in groups. Everything that has a group can stay in that group and feel like they have a purpose. However John is by himselp with no group to accociate with.

5. How did the community react to the different Monsters in the film? Please explain your answer.
They liked the man who used John as a way to make a living by entering John's home and showing him off to othre people. The man who was at the circus was treated differently because some people enjoyed seeing the elephant man and some didn't. The one's that didn't were mad at the circus man for keeping John in captivity.

6. John Merrick claims, "We are afraid of what we don't understand." Do you agree? Does this statement apply to the modern world or have we learned to treat perceived Monsters with dignity? Please be specific in your answer.
Yes this is true. Mankind has a way of always wanting to find the answer and when they are givin a problem that they do not know about they become afraid and thus is the case with John. They believe his is a monster. This applies to the modern world too because its basic human nature.

Justification

Plato believed that there are 4 ways to Justify:

A) Empiricism
B) Reason (Both Inductive and Deductive)
C) Authority
D) Memory

Questions:

1. After learning about how the Bosnian War began and the role ofKaradzic and Milosovic, was it fair for the Independent to use the word "Monster".

Yes due to Karadzic and Milosivic slaughtered all those people in order to "cleans" the country of Yugoslavia.

2. How do you think this phrase would be justified, according to Plato? Use specific examples from the reading and the documentary, The Death of Yugoslavia, to justify your claims.
The calling of them as being "Monsters" is justified through Empirical Reasoning skills because we clearly saw the video of his in Yugoslavia talking to the nationalist and defending them. Unless the movie was created with digital effects than there is a good chance that it is valid source of knowledge.

3. When the term Monster is used, what do you think it means. (You can look it up in the dictionary, but as you know, that has limitations).
A destructive object, either a person or object, that soul person is to cause harm. My definition.

It will be important to skim both articles again, in light of what you now know.

4. Has your answer changed since your first entry? Why or why not?

No because the evidence produced not only backs up what I believed before but it emphases what was already previously mentioned.