Why did the girl throw her Clock out the window? Because she wanted to see time fly! You have probably heard a lot of jokes and sayings about time, but how deeply have you thought about them? There are many different categories of time we use to organize the moments of our life. There is clock time, calendar time, solar time, etc. When we think of time we think about years, months, weeks, days, hours, minutes, seconds, etc. Now are these things really considered “time”, or are they just our way of organizing it? What is time? According to dictionary.com, time is “a limited period or interval, as between two successive events.” (Time) However, time is a concept with many meanings. We can understand some of these meanings through the traditional sayings about time.

One example of a saying that involves the concept of time is: “Time waits for no man” (Proverb Quotes). Time is constantly moving. It never goes backwards and never stops. Even if you were the President of the United States you still only have 24 hours in a day. You might think that this means that time is always the same for everyone, but that is not always right.

Another saying about time is: “Time is Relative.” (Time is Relative) In Albert Einstein’s theory of relativity he said that, “Moving clocks run slow.” (Einstein – Time) This actually means that time is different, depending on who is watching it. The faster someone goes, the slower time goes for that person. Even though it is not quite the same as Einstein’s theory, I have noticed that as I grow older time seems to move faster for me. When I was younger, time dragged itself along more often. However, as I got older and began to have more due dates I noticed that time passed by more quickly for me.

“Time Heals All Wounds.” (Proverb Quotes) This saying helps us think of the concept of time as something that gives us the chance to learn and grow. It helps us heal when we get hurt. It allows us to learn from our mistakes and grow stronger. This is not to say that time alone can heal all wounds. We have to put an effort into changing. However, if we do, over a certain period, our wounds will mend.

Time affects us in many ways. It makes us equal in some ways but also can mean different things to different people. One thing for sure is that time is precious and should not be wasted. “Time is free, but it’s priceless. You can’t own it, but you can use it. You can’t keep it, but you can spend it. Once you’ve lost it you can never get it back.” (Harvey Mackay Quotes)

Works Cited
“Einstein – Time.” American Museum of Natural History. Web. 19 Mar. 2010. .
“Harvey MacKay Quotes.” ThinkExist.com Quotations. Web. 19 Mar. 2010. .
“Proverb Quotes.” WorldOfQuotes.com – Quotes and Proverb Archive. Web. 19 Mar. 2010. .
“Time.” Dictionary.com. Web. 19 Mar. 2010. .
“Time Is Relative.” Ramblings. Web. 19 Mar. 2010. .

I’m sure all of you are familiar with the infamous “NO! I want the drumstick!” “Why?” “Because it’s the BEST part!” argument, correct? Well, I am. Trust me.

I’m in a family of five, meaning three kids, and an odd number. Which means two chicken legs for three kids—do the math.

For years of our childhood my brothers and I would fight over who got the drumstick, and which one of us would have to eat the chicken breast. Usually ending with tears and a tantrum, my younger brother got the best of us, and ended up with the drumstick-but that’s beside the point.

Now, as a T.O.K student, I look back on our (ridiculous) arguments, and I think to myself, “Hey…that’s an invalid claim!” Who says that one part of the chicken is any better than the part right next to it? Chicken is chicken.

After doing some research I’ve come across certain theories which helped support my thoughts. Researchers from “BBC Food” claim that we have certain sense preceptors in our brain that trigger something called “sensory dominance”. BBC Food suggest that “Our brains use the most accurate of our senses when trying to figure out what is out there in the world around us, and this ‘cognitive-shortcut’ even applies when we are trying to decide what exactly is that we are eating/drinking” thus, suggesting that we subconsciously prefer parts of food-in this case-chicken, by our dominant senses and preconceived judgments.

Professor Francis Aylward explains that preferred foods may correlate with where we are from. Organolepsis and Nutrition “The Sensory Perception of Food” found evidence in the 1970’s about certain areas of the world preferring certain foods, like most Asian Cultures prefer vegetables over meat, and in European cultures they prefer margarine over butter.

But not all studies support this, one cannot claim that we simply prefer food depending on where we are from; this is simply one explanation of why certain cultures prefer certain foods, because they were more exposed to it as children.

These claims also help support the “invalid claim” that vegetables are “bad”, what is it that makes children hate vegetables, is it because they taste bad or simply because all their friends don’t eat them? Children have always much rather eaten the newest brand of Cheetos than broccoli.  Certain dominating triggers within children’s heads clearly must go off when being offered vegetables, or else, we’d never have unhealthy children, right?

Now, back to the chicken. I still question today why is it that we like the chicken leg? A perfect example actually happened recently. I was in psychology class, discussing with Charlotte Moeyens about this blog post, I went on about how people always assume the chicken leg tastes better than the breast- when essentially it’s the same exact thing. When Max Wang overheard and said “No, but it IS better!” I smiled, and asked him why he thought so, to which he simply replied “I don’t know, it just IS, everyone knows it”.

On a T.O.K level, this topic can get very complex, and I’m sure that everyone will have different reasoning and opinions; personally, I also prefer the drumstick. Why? I can’t really answer that, possibly the easy way of holding it, or just because everyone claims that it’s the best part? There is no thorough answer on why children like it, or why, even still as teens, enjoy it the most. But I do think that the way that we preconceive food and preconceive ANYTHING for that matter truly does alter your mindset, whether it being food, or anything else.

But at the end of the day, chicken will always be chicken. Now, I don’t know about you, but I’m hungry!

Works Cited

1. Alyward, Francis, and J. TREMOLIRES. ORGANOLEPSIS AND NUTRITION: THE SENSORY PERCEPTION OF FOOD. Vol. 1. Paris: ES, Laboratoire de Nutrition Humaine, 1970. Print.

2. “BBC – Food – TV and radio – Perfection – Experimental Kitchen – Sensory             perception.” BBC – Homepage. Sept. 2009. Web. 28 Feb. 2010.             <http://www.bbc.co.uk/food/tv_and_radio/perfection/experimental_kitchen_sensory.shtml>.

3. Sokab. Grumpy Kid. 2007. Photograph. “Intro to Photography Class”

4. The Five Senses. 2003. Photograph. Education World, America.

5. Boy Eating Fried Chicken. 2006. Photograph. Stock Photo Collection, America

Yes, I am here to give you advice on how keeping your refrigerator full with a variety of drinks will help you get girls.

Refrigerator stocked

No, of course not. (If you really want to watch the video, it’s on Youtube. Just type in the same title as I have for my blog post. WARNING: EXPLICIT CONTENT)

However, the title has a direct relationship with what I am about to write about.

We hear about acts of racism all over the world; maybe not as frequently as before, but unfortunately racism has been a problem ever since Africans were shipped off to North America and Europe as slaves. Great men like Martin Luther King Jr., whose “I Have a Dream” speech is still studied today, and Abraham Lincoln, who signed the Emancipation Proclamation, devoted their lives to abolishing slavery and outlawing racism. And although lynching cases have pretty much disappeared, racism exists in other forms not so extreme, such as stereotyping.

Martin Luther King Jr.

But I’m not here to write about racism actually. Nor stereotyping. I’m here to write about the boundaries of stereotyping and what is considered to be stereotyping. That’s why I am referring to the Youtube video that Mr. Chi-city3 kindly made for us. If you watched then video then you should know what the content is like. For those who did not, well, to sum it up, in each sentence he at least says “nigga” one time. For example, for no reason he pops out and says “Oh yeah, nigga made a pizza.” And he laughs about it. Now, Mr. Chi-City3 is an African-American. But does that mean he’s allowed to call other black people “nigger”?

Through my experience with African-Americans, I found that “nigger” seems to be a common term among them. They say it to each other very frequently. Does that mean they hate each other so much they always use derogatory language to address one another? Nope, because “nigger/nigga” is just another term for “bro/friend/buddy” among themselves. I have always believed that this is how black people acted, however through some further investigation, I find that “nigger” has many meanings in the African-American community. In Gloria Naylor’s “A Word’s Meaning Can Often Depend on Who says It,” she explains that there are five main definitions of the word “nigger”: “a man who had distinguished himself in some situation that brought their approval for his strength, intelligence or drive,” “a term of endearment for her husband or boyfriend,”"the pure essence of manhood,” and “in the plural, it became a description of some group within the community that had overstepped the bounds of decency,” and a word that “always involved some element of communal disapproval.”

Even celebrities such as Nas use the word "Nigger" to describe themselves

Interestingly enough, four out of the five meanings mentioned are positive. The fifth not being negative, but used in a way to build each other up. The community mentioned in this piece of work seems to have altered the meaning of “nigger” and transformed it into a term that is a compliment to most. For Naylor, she didn’t “agree with the argument that use of the word nigger at this social stratum of the black community was an internalization of racism. The dynamics were the exact opposite.” Her opinion on the use of the word directly correlates to my understanding of the word’s usage among my black friends.

I realized that black peoples’ connotation of “nigger” is different when they say it to each other. Instead of the negative connotation the word “nigger” has when spoken by somebody not black, the word “nigger” among the black community is more of a compliment. The usage of the word is a rebellion to the old meaning of the word, the slavery background that “nigger” used to have. Using the word “nigger” to address each other is a direct opposition to the racial prejudice that their ancestors suffered, and to celebrate that suffering because only through suffering did the African-Americans gain their freedom. However, there is an opposite view on the word within the greater African-American community.

One of our TOK teachers, Mrs. Rosen, mentioned that she had an African-American student whose father disliked the word “nigger.” If the student was ever caught using the word “nigger” by his/her father, it would’ve meant trouble for the student, Mrs. Rosen had said. So this student was brought up taught never to use the word “nigger.” And although I do not know this family, I assume that they believe using this word “nigger” is exactly the opposite view Naylor talks about. That the use of the word is “an internalization of racism.” So I was wrong in assuming that all black people see the word “nigger” as a positive connotation, because there are some well-respected families that view the word as derogatory even when coming out of the mouth of a black man.

Internalization of racism?

Although some might think using the word “nigger” as hypocritical, I realized that in reality African-Americans are transforming the word and developing the word to mean something new, something positive. Just as Gloria Naylor said in her writing, “the people…took a word that whites used to signify worthlessness or degradation and rendered it impotent…They transformed nigger to signify the varied and complex human beings they knew themselves to be.”

Works Cited:

African American Registry–Your Source for African American History. African American Registry, Web. 28 Feb 2010. <http://www.aaregistry.com/african_american_history/2420/Nigger_the_word_a_brief_history>.

King Jr., Martin Luther. “Martin Luther King Jr..” American Rhetoric: Martin Luther King, Jr.- I have a dream. American Rhetoric, Web. 28 Feb 2010. <http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/mlkihaveadream.htm>.

Naylor, Gloria. “A Word’s Meaning Can Often Depend on Who Says It.” The New York Times, “Hers” Column sec. Print.

“Negro.” Wikipedia. Wikipedia.org, Web. 28 Feb 2010. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negro>.

Yes of course Chinese New Year is a great time to celebrate and every reason to make a lot of noise, because according to the Chinese New Year Legend of Nian, the colour red and the loud noise wards of the evil spirits, in order to start off with a positive new year. And I completely respect that because I am imagining that these 15 days to the people celebrating it in China, is like what New Years eve and New Years day (31st of December, and 1st of January) is like for my family, me, and all those who celebrate it on those days.

Fire Crackers in China

However, having stayed here during Chinese New Year last year, I thought that this year I wouldn’t be as shocked or irritated by the fireworks and firecrackers at 3 in the morning on some nights. But I was wrong, and found out by not being able to sleep. So I thought that this would go well into TOK because of how it has, i think, now become a Chinese cultural paradigm, as it has been practiced since ancient times. During this time was when I felt most alienated from China and its people, and I guess this was why i found it very irritating, because I wasn’t able to join in the celebration, seeing as I am not really part of, or know much on, the Chinese Culture. But I also know that it is not only in China, where fireworks are used in time of Celebration. However, does it balance out, the positive aspects of fireworks versus the negative aspects? When I am not part of the celebration, I feel that my perception on fireworks changes from when I am part of the celebration, for example, I am able to enjoy them when I am with my whole family in Argentina, on our great grandmothers balcony and looking at the fireworks at a 360 degree angle, all around us, but i get irritated when I am in a foreign environment, and when it isn’t part of my culture or religion, and therefore is not a tradition within my family. The fireworks and firecrackers are also a combination between art and chemistry, however the issue with these scientific works of art is wether or not they are too dangerous, and therefore unethical. They could either be misused, if people don’t know how to handle them or are just ‘jokingly throwing them around’, or there could be an accident. For example, there have been many accidents where people have been injured or killed because of an explosion with fireworks. One specific story is told here in China Daily.

Red Fireworks

People’s emotion, the admiration and awe of the fireworks, gets in the way of the logic, of which it is proven that they contribute to having toxins in the air, and therefore contributing to environmental pollution. Most of people’s perception is that they are beautiful, so is it right to take away this universal way of expressing joy? I think that because it is in the sky, something that is shared, it seems like we are communicating even though we do not speak the same language, we can interpret it as happiness or joy. According to an article called, “Eco-Friendly Pyrotechnics” from TerraDaily, “When a firework or other pyrotechnic is set off, it releases a whole cocktail of poisons damaging to humans and the environment: heavy metals like lead, barium and chromium, chlorates, dioxins, smoke and particulates, carbon monoxide, and nitrogen and sulfur oxides.”

Fireworks Pollution in Beijing

So maybe the reason that people set off a mass amount of fireworks could be because of the ignorance, they just are not aware of the dangers to humans, including themselves? Or I believe that maybe because it has become a sort of tradition in light of celebrating, it would be too difficult to ban and be made illegal. There is also the issue about people’s jobs, it seems like it would be unethical to ban this, since there are so many local people and companies that are benefiting, earning money helping them live. When I search on a Chinese Manufacturing Website, about 246 results came up with companies that make and sell fireworks in China, that is a lot of employees and a lot of families who would loose jobs, if it were to be made illegal. I can see, after quite some research, how this would be a hard decision to make. Wether to ban or not to ban, I get the feeling that it would still be around, and be sold illegally. But since the Expo is coming up, I do not think that they would ban it just yet. After seeing the impressive fireworks display during the Beijing Olympics, maybe they will try to go above and beyond with the 2010 Expo?

Works Cited
“Legend of Nian.” Thats Qingdao. QingDao China Travel and Living Guide, 2010.
Web. 28 Feb. 2010. .

“Kaleidoscope Science and Invention: The Pyrotechnics of Liuyang.” China

Culture. Cultural China, 2010. Web. 28 Feb. 2010.
.

Kulkarni, Teresa. “The Main Problems with Fireworks.” The Main Problems with
Fireworks. www.stop-fireworks.org. Stop Fireworks.org, 25 Jan. 2010.
Web. 28 Feb. 2010. .

“Fireworks, Fireworks Directory, China Suppliers.” Made-in-China. Focus
Technology Co, 2010. Web. 28 Feb. 2010. .

“Four killed in fireworks factory blast in E. China .” China Daily [Xinhua] 3
Feb. 2010: n. pag. China Daily. Web. 28 Feb. 2010.
.

Halford, Bethany. “Pyrotechnics For The Planet .” Chemical and Engineering News
30 June 2008, Volume 86 Number 26 ed.: pg14-18. American Chemical Society.
Web. 28 Feb. 2010. .

Hill, Graham. “Beijing’s New Year’s Fireworks Tripled Pollution Levels
Overnight: Tree Hugger.” TreeHugger. Discovery Communications, 10 Jan.
2010. Web. 28 Feb. 2010. .

“Eco-Freindly Pyrotechnics.” Terra Daily [Munich] 18 Mar. 2008: n. pag. Terra
Daily. Web. 28 Feb. 2010. .

Digital Rights Management is a type of software usually embedded in music files or was embedded. The software was put in the music files so that the person who purchased the piece of music could only have one copy of that file. Meaning that another person could not have a copy of the same music on their iPod and the computer at the same time unless they purchased another copy of it. However DRM music was banned in several music stores several years ago and now is only used in computer games and videos.

However several ethical/moral problems is- Do we truly own the computer file (such as the piece of music)?

Digital files are quite versatile. We can take one file and make as many exact copies of it as we want- something we can’t in the physical world. We buy a bottle of orange juice, we can’t copy it again. That is the argument to many cooperate executives who promote the use of DRM. To them music files are orange juice. For every copy they need to buy another one.

Hilariously the same argument can be used against them. The cost of a consumer downloading their song is almost nil for them- while to produce another orange juice still costs for its producer.

The unique nature of the digital world is this: it exists on a different plane. You can copy digital files almost exactly from one another. Although in sci-fi several examples of transferring real world objects to a digital world and vice versa most prominently in Star Trek where replicators can create objects like water by using data on its mainframe and where holograms are so real that they can actually kill (As seen on Star Trek First Contact).  Perhaps one day through advance cloning methods and Brain-Flash tech we could make exact copies of ourselves.  To some the digital world may be detrimental to their profits while to others it is seen as a boon where they can’t loose anything. The dog eats the homework- doesn’t matter its backed up. However it does raise a issue in Information Technology in the Global society- should the digital world be treated today the same as the physical world where once you use it, its gone, or make as many copies as you want. My opinion- welcome to the digital world.  Why do I care? Because I’m part of the Digital World- the next generation.  I honestly don’t want my freedoms to be stomped upon in this world because some Corporate Executive feels like he’s gonna lose money if we have this freedom.

Sources

DefectiveByDesign.org | The Campaign to Eliminate DRM. Web. 28 Feb. 2010. <http://www.defectivebydesign.org/>.

Menta, Richard. “DRM is Like Paying for Ice.” Web log post. MP3newswire.net. Web. <http://www.mp3newswire.net/stories/6002/drm.html>.

Being half French from my father’s side and half Malaysian from my mother’s side, I have grown up in a bilingual lifestyle, learning and speaking French and English from birth. I am often asked which language I consider my “mother tongue” but never know how to answer because I consider myself fluent in both English and French. Growing up I have spoken and listened in both languages, read books and watched movies in both languages, as well as written in both languages. But am I considered fluent in both languages? Although I have never had major difficulties with either language, I have definitely stumbled upon situations where I would know how to say something in French but not in English and vice-versa. As well as sometimes not knowing what certain words mean in each language. So am I fluent? Even with having trouble understanding both languages at times?

I know I am not the only bilingual person out there who asks themselves the same question. How de we know we are fluent in a language?  You see according to the definition of “fluent,” someone who is fluent is able to speak or write ease in the particular language (Collins 324). Personally I can hold conversation and write in both languages with great ease, so am I considered fluent? Yes according to the dictionary. However, having spoken French and English my whole life, I still cannot say I have never had difficulties understanding certain words, in fact there have been numerous times throughout my life where I have had trouble either with grammar or with vocabulary in both languages.

In everyday conversation, when someone states there are fluent in a language we assume they know every word and phrase of that language. Whenever people ask about my fluency in French I always reply saying that I am 100% fluent because I easily communicate, write and understand French. However, after studying TOK my perception over the word ‘fluent’ has changed a lot. I find it difficult to use the word “fluent.” How is it that I am fluent if I am still learning new words all the time?

In TOK language is a way of knowing that allows us to communicate and understand one another.  So in conclusion, one can be fluent in a language by dictionary definition however that does not mean they can completely communicate fully with someone else in that language. This is because communication annotates understanding and comprehension but understanding each other is very different from speaking the same language.

Works cited:

< Lawless, Laura K. “Am I Fluent?” About.com. The New York Times Company. Web. 7 Feb. 2010. >

< Alexander, Sam. “What is Fluency?” Xamuel.com. 18 Sept. 2009. Web. 5 Feb. 2010. >

< “Fluent.” Colins Dictiionary and Thesaurus. BishopBriggs, Glasgow: Harper Collins Publishers, 2005 >

Pretty much.

One official definition of the word ‘guilt’ is, according to the Miriam-Webster Dictionary:

a. the feeling of culpability for offenses.

If you’re like me, and I know I am, you probably feel guilt all the time. It’s dramatic and constant, the offense here being simply existing the way we do. I guess it’s a sort of survivor guilt that applies to all of humanity. We always feel obligated to compare ourselves to that other half of the world. The suffering one. Seemingly distant countries in Africa and Asia, concurrently right next door to us and infinitely far away. We feel and somehow are immediately culpable for world hunger. Our lifestyles are based on principles of wastefulness, consumerism, and instant gratification, but this is okay so long as we acknowledge it. To some extent that fact is true, if only because there really is nothing we can do to make even the slightest dent in prominent problems facing humanity on our own considering how truly immaterial our brief spans of existence on this planet are. Even so, considering the resources we have at our disposal, there must be something small we can do.

Instantly, donating comes to mind: charities and organizations and initiatives like the 30 hour famine collect money from people like us and send it somewhere it might be useful. This is the basic idea. Prior to researching for the 30 hour famine video, I had never really given much thought to the whole process. I had never considered what it might do to breed dependencies between governments and these organizations, or to promote widespread and venal corruption within administrations, or to contribute to the endless cycle of donating and receiving. There are small grassroots movements who harbor the intention of building functioning and self-sufficient economies within nations facing poverty. Most organizations, however, are acting upon the requests of governments. They portray these areas in a heartbreaking light, appealing predominantly to the emotional aspect of the issue. We feel a blindly selfish need to rid ourselves of this unutterable feeling of culpability by giving away some small piece of what sets us apart to a cause. 

The cause, however, has severe implications on the regions it provides for. Termed “dead aid” by economist and author Dambisa Moyo, this constant supply of insufficient monetary relief is creating what is called an “aid culture”. Its most lasting effects include minimum debt repayments of $20 billion per annum for most African nations, billions of dollars worth of embezzled money, cases like Ethiopia wherein aid eventually constitutes for over 90% of the country’s GDP. Nations so severely incapable of providing for their people need a foundation for growth and empowerment, not a basis from which an addiction to “free money” has stemmed. 

According to economist George Ayittey, who has significant insight into this situation due to the experience of having lived and worked in Uganda for most of his life, believes that this aid is not without a moral imperative. He agrees that aid is failing, but differs from Moyo in his conviction that completely cutting off aid to poor areas in five years is too extreme a solution. He states that many opportunities have arisen in the past few decades to develop stable economies in these regions, but surprisingly little has been done to alleviate poverty in the long-term. Basic institutions like a neutral and independent media, civil service, central bank, and army are necessary to begin development. These critical organizations have yet to be established as independent and functioning in most poverty-stricken nations. 

An opposing view may be that charity organizations do jump in when they are needed, and have arguably alleviated suffering greatly in their collective reduction of the death count of hunger victims under 5 by nearly half, but that improvement is barely adequate considering the number still stands at 26,000 children per day according to UNICEF. It should also be accounted for that while the rate of survival has risen, the per-capita income is on average much lower. The number of people starving, sick, and completely helpless to act on their basic instincts of self-preservation has doubled over the past twenty years, arriving at a figure of over 350 million people who are surviving on less than a dollar a day, based on Moyo’s article published in 2009.

A ridiculous amount of people have said this exact same thing before me, read the same books I’ve read, and probably preached it in a more people-friendly fashion. I just wanted to say it again, though, because so little has been done about it that it feels new. We’re not giving money to feed these people. We’re giving money to feed a cyclical process of guilt and relief so that we might live with the reality that we’re not really helping anyone.

I guess that for now, though, all we can really do is grow out of this mentality of selfish altruism and keep giving for the simple sake of helping out another human being, despite the full knowledge that it’s not going to be enough. 

Works Cited

“George Ayittey on “Dead Aid“” TED Blog. Web. 07 Feb. 2010. <http://blog.ted.com/2009/04/ayittey_on_dead_aid.php>.

“Guilt – Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary.” Dictionary and Thesaurus – Merriam-Webster Online. Web. 07 Feb. 2010. <http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/guilt>.

“Why Foreign Aid Is Hurting Africa – WSJ.com.” Business News & Financial News – The Wall Street Journal – WSJ.com. Web. 07 Feb. 2010. <http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123758895999200083.html>.

Tags: economics, Emotions, personal perspectives

I recently watched an episode of one of my favorite shows of all time, Scrubs. In this particular episode, the main character, JD, finds out he has an appendicitis and has to have emergency surgery. During surgery, JD talks about how he has an out of body experience while he watches his best friend operate on him. After watching that one section of the episode, I thought about coma patients and if they had out of body experiences. When I delved into it more, I realized the cultural paradigms of two nations in the world today that treat the topic of being brain-dead extremely differently.

In May of 2009, a South Korean woman was considered brain-dead and thus the hospital was forced to pull the plug on the patient. Though the hospital plugged the plug on the woman, doctors did not want to in hope that she would revive from her year long coma. The case reached such controversy, that it was taken to the Supreme Court and was ruled that the hospital would be forced to take the woman off the machine. Her right-to-die was negated when the court ruled that keeping her alive violated her dignity.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8060832.stm

On November 23, 2009, a case study was published about a man, who was trapped in a coma for 23 years, was able to hear and process everything that he heard throughout the entire period of his unconsciousness. “I screamed, but there was nothing to hear” (Hall) is how he described his torment during his declared state of coma. Rom Houben now communicates through a computer and is talking regularly with his family. Though his physical appearance is paralyzed, his brain is functioning as any other would. The right-to-die was greatly discussed because, though in an apparent coma, Houben was conscious during the entire time.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1230092/Rom-Houben-Patient-trapped-23-year-coma-conscious-along.html

Both governments of Korea and America held different views on the issue of the “right-to-die” because of their beliefs on the matter. First of all, the right to die refers to the decision if a person should be kept alive using life support if he or she is in a state of coma. In Korea, the court concluded, “If it is obvious that the patient in question will soon die judging from her conditions, we can conclude that she has already entered a phase of death. In this case, continued hospital treatment only serves to hurt her human dignity.” (South Korea grants ‘right to die’). This decision comes from the origins of honor in asian cultures. If a person is unable to keep their own body alive and needs to kept alive by a machine, then that person has lost his/her dignity as a person. Whereas in America, people’s lives are kept as a highest priority. After several conclusions that Houben was indeed brain-dead were brought to question, he was found to have functioning brain activity for the entirety of his coma through a high density brain scan. Not to say that one is right or wrong, but the cultures of Korea and America have lead each one to make the decisions that have control over human lives, whether they be conscious or not. “It is as much an outrage…to force a person to live as it is to force a person to die.” (Sirius 1-2). The previous statement sums up that though life is something precious, it can be tampered with under the given conditions that culture allows for it; the fragility of life is an outrage to a society as a whole.

Works Cited:

Hall, Allan. “Rom Houben: Patient trapped in a 23-year ‘coma’ was conscious all along.” Mail Online. 23 Nov 2009. Associated Newspapers Ltd, Web. 7 Feb 2010. <http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1230092/Rom-Houben-Patient-trapped-23-year-coma-conscious-along.html>.

Sirius, RU. “Our Right to Death.” Reason Magazine Feb. 2007: 1-2. Web. 7 Feb 2010. <http://reason.com/archives/2007/01/18/our-right-to-death/1>.

“South Korea grants ‘right to die’.” BBC NEWS l Asia-Pacific. 21 May 2009. BBC News, Web. 7 Feb 2010.

In his critic, David Denby commented that “no one should ignore how lovely Avatar looks”, yet how “the movie’s story may be a little trite”. People mostly focused on the 3-D graphic effects of Avatar and yes- it was not the first time a movie has tried to show the relationship between human beings and nature as critics are already listing movies that resemble Avatar such as Dances With Wolves and The Last Samural.

Yet, this overused story pattern has brought some unexpected reactions in one country. The Chinese government has recently eliminated all 2-D theaters that can show Avatar, claiming that because of fears that the enormously popular movie will cause political unrest. The first reaction I had when I first heard this was “they are overreacting-again!” As I reflected upon my own Avatar experience- yes, it did contain some collective resistances against an oppressive power, but can it be really be a motivator for Chinese people to be against the Chinese government? Well, considering that even in China, people seem to have become big fans of the movie, which earned $1.1 billion in China as of 15th January, people seem to be angry and are considering a boycott for the next Chinese movie Confucius, yes, this may be an unexpected move against the government that was raised by Avatar- but really?

What I found out, however, is that not only Chinese government, but also some Chinese also felt the parallel between the story of Avatar and property developers’ routine evictions of households and farmers in China to make way for new buildings.

For example, one blog uploaded a photo of a building under construction in the Southern part of Guangdong draped with banners proclaiming “We are innocent Na’vis on the planet Pandora” and “The Avatar reality show is on.”

Other comments about Avatar online included “Strongly condemn the Western director for using Avatar to allude to China’s current situation!”, “Avatar is the story of violent eviction and demolition [of people's homes] in China” and “This film is too reactionary, encouraging China’s ordinary common people to use violence to resist demolition! [It is an] attempt to subvert the great China!”

While the director tried to come up with a common theme that everyone could relate to- environment as the movie would be world widely shown, this is an interesting reaction. This difference in perception and interpretation is greatly influenced by cultural background and controlled media exposure. Information is not free flowing, in terms of cultural information in China that it is heavily censored. When they see something, it is more precious than for us, international students. They yearn for free flow of information so when exposed to uncensored media it is emotional and can stir personal agendas and discontent with government issues that are not discussed. Avatar was more than just an entertainment movie for the Chinese folk but a dangerous media outlet the government felt uneasy about and chose to set controls over. However, once information, like Avatar, a foreign movie that is not censored, is released it is like trying to recover water spilt on the ground.

Works Cited
Damian Grammaticas. China to pull 2D version of Avatar. BBC. 2010. Web.
Yu Deqing. Lessons from Avatar for Chinese directors. China Daily. 2010. Web.
Carl Kozlowski. ‘Dances With Wolves’ In Space: Cameron’s ‘Avatar’ Gets Visuals Right, Everything Else Wrong. Big Hollywood. 2009. Web
Andy Wong. China yanks ‘Avatar’ for homegrown film. The Christian Science Monitor. 2009. Web.
Fauna. ‘Avatar’ Movie, Chinese Reactions & Long Lines in Shanghai. China Smack. 2010. Web.

What is truth? What do we believe as truth? Truth basically means true for all (Truth). Astoundingly, the author of “The Things They Carried”, Tim O’Brien distinguish truths into two kinds in his book; there are factual truth and emotional truth. Factual truth is logical and can be proven by reasonable evidence while emotional truth is illogical and cannot be proven (O’Brien). Nevertheless, O’Brien still believes emotional truth is more truthful and powerful than factual truth.

He says:

All you can do is tell it one more time, patiently, adding and subtracting, making up a few things to get at the real truth…Beginning to end, you tell her, it’s all made up…It wasn’t a question of deceit. Just the opposite: he wanted to heat up the truth, to make it burn so hot that you would feel exactly what he felt…facts were formed by sensation. (O’Brien 85-89)

O’Brien believes that transmitting the same emotion that he had, to the audience is much more important than just telling the true story objectively. Thereby, he sometimes makes up or exaggerates stories in his books so that audience can feel what he exactly felt at that moment.

Is it possible to convey more realistic truth than the factual truth via lying? Ancient Greeks like Plato would argue against O’Brien’ perspective on truth since they believe when people accept truths, they see how factually accurate the truths are; however, emotional truth is not logical and factually accurate at all (Truth). The ancient Greeks support factual truth; they think that  truth is something eternal and independent of anyone’s belief such as scientific and mathematical truth (Truth). For example, a mathematical equation like “10+10=20” is true for everyone.

However, not only O’Brien uses overstatement and lying as rhetorical devices in his literatures but also we exaggerate and lie to convey more realistic truth in our daily lives. For example, we often say “I am bored to death” though we are not actually dying. We just exaggerate to deliver our feeling more efficiently and exactly…

All things considered….

Isn’t it interesting that we sometimes lie to convey real truths more truthfully? Then, is lying really one way to convey real truths to audience?

Works Cited

O’Brien, Tim. The Things They Carried. New York: Special Markets Department, Random House, Inc, 1998. 85-89. Print.

Truth, Mrs. Jordan’s class lecture, 24 Nov, 2009