Blogging Around

For my first comment, I read Chris' blog. In his iMedia post, he shared a video in which a man is forced to, with a push of a button, kill a man but earn $10 million, or leave with no money. I responded by saying, "

This is a great insight Chris. It reminds me of the Immanuel Kant chapter in Sophie's World. When Alberto is talking about ethics, he talks about Kant's moral law. He goes on to mention that you are only truly following this law when you do it not for personal gain, but rather because it is the right thing to do. If your video's situation were to be switched so that Mr. Roberts would save someone with the click of a button, and earn a million dollars for it, then Kant would argue this action isn't out of respect for the moral law. I can't say I agree with him 100% however, because the action is still the same regardless of one's incentives. Just because you are earning a million dollars for saving a life, doesn't make it a bad act. That being said, Kant does address this argument saying we are only acting with free will if we are respecting the moral law."

My second comment was on Ryan's blog. He talked about how the media can create stereotypes, even if they are untrue. The example he used was sharks.

This was a really interesting point. It brought some questions to mind. What else does the media embellish, and what are their motives for doing so? An example I can think of politically, was George Bush's intellect. The media definitely overplayed how stupid he was, and because of that, the first thing you think of when you hear Bush's name is his IQ. Even my six year old brother follows this stereotype. The Democratic media had plenty of motivation to do so, but in the case of sharks, why? What gain does anyone get by making people afraid of sharks? Most people would be content with the simple answer, money. Sure Jaws brought in a lot of revenue, but why lie in the first place?

Metacognition: Organization

For my Aristotelian project, I went a little over the 45 minute guideline. I organized my room, desk, closet, and binder. Since I enjoy being organized, this assignment gave me motivation to use the break to create a better environment.

When I went in to my room to embark on the 'journey' that lay ahead, I dreaded it. I did not want to start. Before today, I had been putting it off for a few weeks, telling myself I was too busy. That excuse was not valid this morning. Once I started, I realized it wasn't as bad as I thought it'd be. I was listening to music and took a few breaks, but even when working the cleaning was not that unenjoyable. I was finding things I had been missing. My mind paralleled my room as it became more and more organized. Once finished, I felt much better. I was relieved, proud, and accomplished. Although not as big of a deal as I am pretending it is for this blog, the clean room definitely did influence my newfound positive attitude and relaxation.

Going back to homework in a clean room is infinitely better than doing the same in a disorganized one. Every time I looked at the clothes on the floor or unmade bed or junk drawers in my desk it reminded me of the job that loomed, as well as stressed me out. Looking around my room now, I feel calm and in control of the situation. I am more capable of sitting down and focusing in an organized environment. I guess there are some people who work better in disarray, but I am definitely not one of them. This might sound extreme and made up, but I actually had a headache that went away as I was cleaning up. From this i can conclude, at least for me, an organized environment leads to an organized mind.

Asides from the obvious unearthings of objects not seen in months, I learned a few other things thorugh this project. I've always known I work better in a clean environment, but I learned that it isn't as difficult as it seems to get there. Also, cleaning a small mess once a week is a lot easier and less stressful than cleaning a huge one once a month. Finally, I discovered the correlation between one's environment and their mind.

iMedia: Theme Song

(Sorry it isn't the best video...the only one I could find)

"Theme Song," by the small, Chicago based band Down the Line, speaks volumes to me. Last year this band visited GBS and played a concert for those involved in the music department. I appreciated their music and performance so much that I attended another of their concerts in Evanston last summer. I think this personal connection of seeing them live creates a more individual link with their songs. This one in particular speaks to me.

"Theme Song" starts by pointing out how 'you' have been pushed around, taken down, and broken by other people. Basically, you aren't standing up for yourself. I've been in situations before where I am hesitant to support myself either out of fear, seniority, or I just don't care enough to; my reasoning being either: they probably know more than me, or I recognize the fact that my offenders are being jerks so I internally ignore everything they say. These probably aren't the most productive methods in facing an intimidating person.

The song emphasizes that you are important and deserve respect with no exceptions. The chorus exemplifies this:

"Everybody ought to have a theme song,

You hear it in their heart beat drumming along."

Your theme song is who you are, and what you stand for. All people have earned the right to have their own, and no one can take that from them. It's in their heart. I think Down the Line is using music metaphorically to symbolize a person's identity. You are who you are and even if other people try and hurt you, they can't change you.

What's interesting about the metaphor, however, is that a song is written. Who writes the song? A medeivalist might say God does, but this song, for example, was written by four human beings. By following a Renaissance point of view, I can interpret the lyrics as meaning you write your own song, through your actions, beliefs, and values. Only you have the power to 'change the key' or 'add a measure.' I believe the latter standpoint is more comforting and beneficial, as you are in control.

Later in the song the following point is mentioned: if you are going through a tough time, whether it be physical, emotional, or social, the one thing you can always revert back to is yourself. Staying true to yourself, and what you believe in, will only yield positive benefits. If I am ever faced with a situation where I would be going against my values, I will remember this song and what it means. And I will decline, saying, "This isn't me."

The final thing I would like to bring up regarding this piece is the mood. The song is upbeat, fast-paced, and overall cheery. I interpret this as showing how happy you can be just by being yourself. Imitating others to fit in drains your energy, makes you self-conscious, and is a waste of time. If you ever saw this band perform live, you would realize they have plenty of energy. They may be quirky and do funny things (jumping around, screaming, etc.) on stage, but they are enjoying themselves, by being themselves.

Connection: King Lear and Michael Scott

What do you get when you put two completely clueless people in charge of something? In 1605 you got King Lear, but nowadays you get Michael Scott. In class we decided the driving force of comedy is the audience knowing something the characters themselves do not. A show like The Office is so funny because Michael is so naive and easily taken advantage of. Lear displays many similar characteristics to the manager of Dunder Mifflin Paper Company.

King Lear is at a difficult time in his life when he is beginning to lose many things. His daughters, his mind, and his power. He just doesn't realize it yet. That is why it comes as such a shock to him when anybody tells him he is wrong or asks him to change his behavior. He is not used to anyone questioning his authority. If he was able to realize his position and not blind to his social deterioration, he would be more willing to accept the attempts of generosity from Goneril and Regan. However, he remains as stubborn as his contemporary counterpart, Michael Scott.

Michael is in an analogous situation to Lear. He was once the sole administrator for his branch of the company. In recent years, however, several new characters have begun to undermine his "rule." First there were the few months in which Jim became a "co-manager," but since neither one of them enjoyed that position, things returned to normal. Nevertheless, when the company is bought by Sabre, things are shaken up once again. Michael now reports to a CEO, who also has her own representative working in the office with them. Since both newcomers are higher on the chain of command than Michael, he comes up with countless ways to try to ensure his own power. In a recent episode, when an employee took an idea straight to the CEO rather than through Michael, he became infuriated and tried to force all ideas through himself.

Were you to look at the two side by side, you would see two extremely different men. But on the inside, it would be hard to find more than a handful of differences. It is important to relate the two characters because it shows it shows what a situation can do to people. It doesn't say how Lear was before his old age (I'm assuming he was fine), but, at least in Michael's case, he was a strong leader before all these changes occurred. If you read The Tragedy of King Lear with that in mind, you will find yourself empathizing more with Lear, because you see how his situation is making life miserable for him. It isn't his fault his mind, plagued with too many years, is not letting him see the reality of what is going on; he is just trying to do what is right.

Dialectics: Learning and Grades

In my opinion, grades are not adequate reflections of our learning experiences. To me, the grading system and the education system represent two separate entities. Unfortunately, today's society connects the two concepts and uses them interchangeably. Everybody learns differently, so it isn't fair to hand out scores for learning a certain way.

The main distinction to be made between learning and grades is understanding. An advocate for the "learning technique" has several key arguments. First of all, there is no way to grade a student given our current guidelines, because all students are different. Also, a student can be brilliant, but not care about his grades, which results in a altered future because of how much emphasis is placed on scores. Who knows how many great minds have been denied the ability to thrive because of this system? Finally, grades can cause students to lose motivation, rather than creating it. Some kids, upon receiving an unwanted grade, decide that their best effort isn't good enough for an A, and stop trying. It can be argued that all students should be able to get an A if they try their hardest, but when in practice this is not always the case.

However, one who supports grading also has logic on his side. Without grading, what motivation do students have to even attempt their schoolwork? Although there are students in it for the learning experience, there are also those who hate absolutely every minute of it and would gladly not do any work at all. Also, colleges need a standard in order to sift through the millions of potential applicants. This system is more strict and organized, as opposed to the more relaxed one mentioned previously.

I see these two systems having the potential to form a very logical and efficient structure of education. Aspects from both can be salvaged; it isn't a complete remodeling. The prospect of individualistic grading is the obvious fusion of the two. Since everyone is unique, why do schools hold everyone to the same standards? Though it may be more costly and time consuming, in the long run I feel it is best to find out where each individual stands academically and base their grades on their own criteria. Even within the various class levels (honors, regular, team) there are still several tiers of students with different strengths and weaknesses.

Metacognition: Kite Runner Essay

The Kite Runner essay informed me some of the intricacies of my brain's inner workings. I found these both interesting and informative, as I can use my thinking to my advantage in future assignments. If I know what works best for me, I am able to harness this knowledge and work in a more efficient and effective way. Two things I noticed while writing the Kite Runner essay are: I tend to think backwards, and I am quick to incorporate constructive criticism.

I didn't actually realize this until it was brought to my attention in this blog, but my brain reaches a conclusion before it does anything else. In regards to this essay, my thesis was something along the lines of the book having two levels of closure because of the two genres. I thought of that long before I thought of any evidence to back it up, and thus was forced to locate textual support after the fact. This idea progression can be viewed in both a positive and negative way. On one hand, I do not rely solely on the text in order to form ideas, and I can use my own personal experiences and opinions to generate a thought. There is a downside, however. It is possible (and has happened) for me to form an idea, only for it to fall through due to a lack of evidence supporting it. If I had placed all my eggs in that thesis' basket, I am left without any other alternatives. If I can continue this thinking process while still including the text, it can be a very helpful procedure.

The second thing I learned from writing this essay was my ability to integrate help from additional sources. I love conferencing with other people, as it gives me a chance to see points of view other than my own. Also, the conferences with Mr. Allen really boosted my confidence in writing the paper because I knew I was going down the right track. Without his approval, I would've been constantly second guessing myself, and thus would've turned in a much weaker and 'safer' paper. With Mr. Allen's support I was able to take a complicated thesis and run with it, knowing in the back of my mind it made sense. I wouldn't say I like my dependence on feedback, however. When feedback is available, I am capable of utilizing it to the fullest. However, when I am on my own (which I will be at some point), I tend to doubt myself and my ideas, even if I shouldn't.

While my style of thinking has both positive and negative aspects to it, my brain is my brain, and I must learn how to consciously recognize these processes and use them to my advantage.

Blogging Around

For this prompt, I took a look at Rohan's first post, "What If?: World Peace," and Ryan's "An Inconvenient Truth: Standardized Tests Test Little."

Rohan was wondering whether a Utopian society would be all it is cracked up to be, and if human's would reach a point where there is no way to progress any further.

"This post reminded me a lot of John Lennon's "Imagine." This song talks a lot about sacrificing all we have done as a society, and reverting to pre-civilized times in order to achieve peace. I am as close as possible to 100% sure that won't happen, but Rohan brings up a good question. If we were able to create a Utopian society, would we even be satisfied by it?

If you look at life like you would a novel or movie, then the answer is no. No one would read a book where the character grows up in a wealthy family, loves life, is never sad, has a perfect family, and lives into his 90's. That would be incredibly boring. But even the most realistic books and films are far from actual life, so I can't make my judgment solely on that basis. No one knows how a Utopian society would be, because it has never been accomplished, but everyone will have to make that decision on their own."

In Ryan's post, he pointed out the many flaws in our standardized testing system. I agreed with him for the most part, but wondered if we had any other alternatives and pointed out some positive points about the system.

As I was reading your post I found myself agreeing with many things being said. But I also found myself questioning. Although these tests are not perfect, what alternatives do we have? With the SAT and ACT, colleges need to know how the deep the knowledge is of their potential students. These tests also act as a sort of filter, they reveal the kids with intelligence but not the grades, and/or kids with the grades but not the intelligence.

As for the middle school tests, I agree with (your) view on ISATS, but I think differently about Terra Novas. I believe the Terra Nova tests are an accurate "decider" for your high school classes, especially because it is not by any means the only factor that goes into the decision. It isn't fair to put a kid who isn't ready for honors in honors, or a kid who is ready in regular. These tests help eliminate problems like those.

This post reminded me a lot of John Lennon's "Imagine." This song talks a lot about sacrificing all we have done ed, but everyone will have to make that decision on their own.

Connection: Amir and Charlie Brown

Charlie Brown. I'm having trouble thinking of a kinder, more thoughtful, well-intentioned person. The emphasis on "well-intentioned" is due to his ability to botch all attempts of being helpful. He coaches the baseball team, kicks the football, loves the "little red haired girl," and tries to remain cheerful. He loses, misses, yearns, and fails, respectively. But it's hard not to like him.

Similarly, Amir wants only the best for Sohrab when attempting his adoption. But was bringing the boy to America the best for Hassan's son?

Obviously, living conditions in America are infinitely better than those in Afghanistan, so chances are Sohrab will live a much longer life after the move. Soraya also benefits from Sohrab, as she finally has the son that had evaded her all these years. By the time her husband had returned home, she had ever so generously created a bedroom for Sohrab, complete with toys, puzzles, games, and more. She was clearly thrilled by the prospect of a child. Lastly, and ostensibly the most important to this memoir, taking Sohrab home, along with rescuing him from Assef, clears Amir's conscience. Years after wronging Hassan, Amir seems to have forgiven himself for past actions, which is the purpose of Kite Runner.

On the other hand, although Sohrab is living longer in America, I don't think he is living better. In America, he is mopey, miserable, and mute. Afghanistan wasn't much better for him, but the happiest we ever saw the boy was while living in Afghanistan with Amir; before the suicide attempt at least. As for filling the hole in Soraya's heart, it must be very painful for her to watch her child suffer, undoubtedly blaming herself at least a little. If you believe the saying "It is better to have loved and (figuratively) lost, than to never have loved at all," then this might not be considered as much of a harmful aspect after all. As for Amir, one could argue he is adopting Sohrab out of his own selfish needs to eliminate his guilt. He didn't even want to pick him up and transfer him to another orphanage! It is a very weak and flawed argument since he came to love Sohrab, but it is there none the less.

The final aspect of the adoption process was its execution. Regardless of whether you think bringing Sohrab to America was a good idea, I think we can all agree the execution of the plan was not perfect. If Amir had only waited a few hours to tell Sohrab he was going back to an orphanage, he would've known of the alternative plan. But because he didn't, Sohrab only heard he was going back to the orphanage and proceeded to attempt suicide. This twist could not have come at a more terrible time, as Sohrab was finally beginning to warm up to his step-uncle. This ordeal makes the reader wonder what could have been, if only he had waited.

Revisiting the connection, Charlie Brown can't seem to get anything right , so why is he still a loved character? The answer is simple. It is human nature to forgive someone for their miscues, as long as they are trying their hardest. It is evident that Amir thinks he is doing the best he can for Sohrab. If you extend the metaphor, you realize that you can't blame Amir, even for the Sohrab's attempted suicide, because he's making an effort.

Best of the Week: Facts of Life

Earlier this week, Tim brought up a point that really hit home with me. On page 200 we learned that the Alliance had destroyed Baba's orphanage. Hosseini goes on to describe how hard Baba worked to make that orphanage a reality. "All the money he had spent, all those nights he'd sweated over the blueprints, all the visits to the construction site to make sure every brick, every beam, and every block was laid just right..." When asked why it was destroyed, Rahim quickly responded, "collateral damage." After reading the passage, Tim mentioned how things can take a great deal of time or energy to create or build, but only an instant to destroy...like Amir and Hassan's relationship. Amir had been working very diligently to construct his "brotherly" bond with Hassan. However, one moment's hesitation shattered the friendship.

Since I heard the idea, I have been trying to think of examples of "Unfair and Unproportional (the name I have given it)" in my own life, and I was surprised how many came up. I too, like Amir, have lost some friends over the years because of decisions I (or they) made. Another great example is the concept of finals. A student can work very hard all semester, only to lose their A because of one test taken in an hour and a half. Another memory that comes to mind was saving up for an iPod, only to have it fall in the sink after a year of use. On a more shallow note all of my preparation for fantasy football seems to have gone out the window so far because of one bad week. I have adopted the Cubs slogan of "Wait 'til Next Year."

Hearing Tim speak, I remember wishing I could use the "Inconvenient Truth" prompt this week. Loss and defeat are a natural part of life, but it just does not seem fair to me that one negative action can make more of a difference than ten positive ones. The best example I can think of is dating. If you are 29 and you meet a girl you think is great and the two of you decide to date, that's a positive action. But if after a long relationship, say five years, she decides to cut it off, where does that leave you? You are 34 and are no closer to a family then you were when you set off five years previous. That just doesn't seem right to me, especially when the breakup isn't necessarily anyone's fault. However, since this "U and U" is uncontrollable, one just has to do their best to prevent situations like these from occurring, and make the best of whatever does happen.

I'm sure everyone hopes situations like the orphanage being destroyed or Amir losing Hassan or my iPod getting water damage do not become a part of their lives, but as I previously said, this "U and U" is irrepressable. Even if you've spent a lot of time and energy on something, it is still prone to an attack. The successful people in this world are the ones who can accept defeat and move forward. I hope to be one of those people in the future.

Carry it Forward: Kite Runner

The purpose of a memoir is to discover something. Based on what we've read so far in Kite Runner by Khaleid Husseini, Amir's most vital discovery so far has been not to run away. Although the novel portrays this breakthrough in a very literal sense, I can envision it being drawn on in numerous ways. "Not running away"- from friends in need, troubles, challenges, or opportunities- is a standard I hope to carry forward from English class and into my everyday life.

I don't want to go through life a fugitive, constantly looking for a way to escape from problems that arise. If my goal truly is to take Amir's lesson to heart, I must confront whatever surfaces, because that way, I will never need to look back. "Why didn't I stand up for my friend? He would do and has done the same for me." "What if I had taken that job?" Questions like these can lead to terrible and chronic guilt like Amir, or an undying curiosity for what could have been. Both are feelings I have experienced in the past, and I would prefer not to head back down those roads.

Of the four examples I listed in the opening paragraph of this blog, I find the latter having the most value in my life. My mom's most adamant piece of advice to me through my high school years to date has been to be proactive. Being proactive, or not running away from opportunity, in my opinion, can only lead to positive things. Even if the initial outcome is negative, not knowing what the outcome would be is even worse. Plus, there is a high possibility the outcome is positive. By following this simple suggestion I have: joined band, gone to two dances, been in V-Show, participated in Key Club, and even tried out for Academy, enabling me to write this blog. None of that would have happened if I let the world come to me; I had to go out and get it.

Not only have I used this lesson in the past, but I plan to utilize it even more in the future. The college application process is a great example, and even further ahead is the job hunt. In both instances, I will not end up where I want to be unless I am hands-on in the process. I also aim to be a good friend, spouse, and father in the future, standing up for those I love.

I used to believe everything would work itself out in the end, but I now realize that is not how our world works. Those who want something work hard for it, and are rewarded for being proactive, not passive. In addition, the people who stand up in the face of adversity are the true heroes of our society, not those who wither when the going gets tough. I hope I can live my life following those two standards, because not all things will come easy.