Thursday, April 21, 2011
Waiting
Waiting is the hardest thing to do. It's the whole psychological aspect of it which makes it so tough and stressful. When we are waiting for what we want, it's the anticipation of obtaining what was sought after that makes us wish that time would go by more quickly. And so we look upon the passing hours, minutes, and seconds with great angst but the more attention that we focus upon the passage of time the longer it seems to drag on. This same concept is applicable for when we are waiting for something that we don't want as well such as a big test or anything along those lines.
Saturday, March 5, 2011
Practice Essay #15: History Record of Struggling Ideologies
Question: History is a record of the struggle between opposing ideologies. Describe a specific situation in which history might not be a record for the struggle between opposing ideologies. Discuss what you think determines when history is a record of the struggle between opposing ideologies and when it is not.
Answer:
Answer:
When people think of history, the first thing that usually comes to mind is of war and the conflict or struggle between opposing ideologies. This is often the case because war and conflict have a profound, long-lasting, and more widespread impact compared to anything else making it quite significant and more likely to be remembered. Take for example World War I or II. When those terms are mentioned as opposed to someone’s name from history, it is almost definite that people will know more about World War I or II than the historical person mentioned.
History is more than just a record of war and the struggles between different ideologies. It is a record of our past achievements, of important people who made a difference in the world and of discoveries and inventions that have changed our perception and understanding of the world. History is in essence a record of the significant things that existed in the past whether it is a person, place, thing or event. It is written and preserved so that future generation can look upon it and possibly learn from it. They can learn how the invention of cars came about by looking at the Ford Model T or learn who invented peanut butter.
History is often thought of as just a record of war and struggles between different ideologies. This is because such events have profound, long-lasting, and more widespread impact than anything else. History, however, is more than that. It is a record of all the important people, place, thing or events that we want to remember. That which seems to determine what is to be recorded in history comes down to the significance and importance of the person, place, thing or event and the impact that it has on the course of our history.
History is more than just a record of war and the struggles between different ideologies. It is a record of our past achievements, of important people who made a difference in the world and of discoveries and inventions that have changed our perception and understanding of the world. History is in essence a record of the significant things that existed in the past whether it is a person, place, thing or event. It is written and preserved so that future generation can look upon it and possibly learn from it. They can learn how the invention of cars came about by looking at the Ford Model T or learn who invented peanut butter.
History is often thought of as just a record of war and struggles between different ideologies. This is because such events have profound, long-lasting, and more widespread impact than anything else. History, however, is more than that. It is a record of all the important people, place, thing or events that we want to remember. That which seems to determine what is to be recorded in history comes down to the significance and importance of the person, place, thing or event and the impact that it has on the course of our history.
Practice Essay #14: Regulation of Internet
Question: The government should have the right to regulate the content of web sites on the internet. Describe a specific situation in which the government should not have the right to regulate the content of web sites on the internet. Discuss what you think determines whether or not the government should have the right to regulate the content of web sites on the internet.
Answer:
The amount of information and data that is available through the internet and the World Wide Web is astronomical. Due to the accessibility of it nowadays, it is nearly impossible to keep track of all the content that is posted online since almost everybody have access to a computer and the internet. And given the fact that the internet allows for anybody to post up almost anything they like, it is almost certain that not all the content being uploaded is appropriate or legal. The statement, therefore, suggests that the government should have the right to regulate the content of web sites on the internet. This seems especially necessary when the content being posted seems to pose a threat to national security, is an invasion of privacy of someone, or promotes illegal activities such as child pornography.
The amount of regulation that the government should have on the content of web sites should be limited such that it serves to protect the population as a whole but does not unnecessarily interfere with the freedom of speech. When contents posted on web sites does not seem to pose any risk or endanger anybody and does not promote any illegal activities, regulations of such contents would not be appropriate. Take for example, the contents of a personal blog where somebody is simply posting up their opinions on a certain topic. If the posting did not contain any contents that are illegal or inappropriate as previous discussed then such contents should not be regulated.
The internet is a rich source for information and data. Not all of the contents posted on it, however, are legal or appropriate for public viewing. This is when government regulation of those contents is needed to ensure the safety of the public. Government regulation should be limited in its extent so that it does not unnecessarily interfere with freedom of speech. As seen in the example of a blogger, regulation of such contents would be unwarranted and probably a waste of time. What seems to determine whether or not the government should have the right to regulate the content of web sites would be the level of legality or appropriateness of such contents and the amount of danger it poses to the public.
Answer:
The amount of information and data that is available through the internet and the World Wide Web is astronomical. Due to the accessibility of it nowadays, it is nearly impossible to keep track of all the content that is posted online since almost everybody have access to a computer and the internet. And given the fact that the internet allows for anybody to post up almost anything they like, it is almost certain that not all the content being uploaded is appropriate or legal. The statement, therefore, suggests that the government should have the right to regulate the content of web sites on the internet. This seems especially necessary when the content being posted seems to pose a threat to national security, is an invasion of privacy of someone, or promotes illegal activities such as child pornography.
The amount of regulation that the government should have on the content of web sites should be limited such that it serves to protect the population as a whole but does not unnecessarily interfere with the freedom of speech. When contents posted on web sites does not seem to pose any risk or endanger anybody and does not promote any illegal activities, regulations of such contents would not be appropriate. Take for example, the contents of a personal blog where somebody is simply posting up their opinions on a certain topic. If the posting did not contain any contents that are illegal or inappropriate as previous discussed then such contents should not be regulated.
The internet is a rich source for information and data. Not all of the contents posted on it, however, are legal or appropriate for public viewing. This is when government regulation of those contents is needed to ensure the safety of the public. Government regulation should be limited in its extent so that it does not unnecessarily interfere with freedom of speech. As seen in the example of a blogger, regulation of such contents would be unwarranted and probably a waste of time. What seems to determine whether or not the government should have the right to regulate the content of web sites would be the level of legality or appropriateness of such contents and the amount of danger it poses to the public.
Practice Essay #13: Globalization and Elimination of Cultural Differences
Question: Globalization eliminates important cultural differences. Describe a specific situation in which globalization might not eliminate important cultural differences. Discuss what you think determines whether or not globalization eliminates cultural differences.
Answer:
With the advancement in technology, the means of traveling from one place to another have become fairly convenient and fast. This has lead to increased interactions amongst countries and increased the impact that each country has on one another or simply put globalization. The statement suggests as a country become more globalized or more connected with other nations some of the important culture differences that exist between the countries are eliminated or are lost as a result of the integration and assimilation of the cultures.
Although integration and assimilation of cultures do occur with increased interactions amongst nations, not all cultural differences are eliminated in the process. Certain cultural differences are retained by the people of those countries or are taken up by the people of the interacting country. A good example to look at when considering the effects of globalization would be the United States. The US is considered a melting pot of cultures since the population is tremendously diverse with people from almost every country and culture. Although with such a diverse population, the people of this country are able to coexist with one another without any troubles while still maintaining their individual culture. It can also been seen that certain cultural differences are assimilated into the “main” culture through certain holiday celebrations such as St. Patrick’s Day.
Globalization has lead to increased interaction amongst nations and the impact that they have on one another. Cultural differences can be eliminated in the process of globalization through integration and assimilation. Integration and assimilation does not always lead to the complete elimination of cultural differences. The people can come to integrate into the main culture while still retaining their own individual culture. Another scenario would be that the cultural difference is embraced and picked up by the main culture. So what seems to determine whether cultural differences are eliminated or not in the process of globalization revolves around whether or not people of that culture choose to retain their differences and to pass it on to their children or whether or not the cultural differences are embraced.
Answer:
With the advancement in technology, the means of traveling from one place to another have become fairly convenient and fast. This has lead to increased interactions amongst countries and increased the impact that each country has on one another or simply put globalization. The statement suggests as a country become more globalized or more connected with other nations some of the important culture differences that exist between the countries are eliminated or are lost as a result of the integration and assimilation of the cultures.
Although integration and assimilation of cultures do occur with increased interactions amongst nations, not all cultural differences are eliminated in the process. Certain cultural differences are retained by the people of those countries or are taken up by the people of the interacting country. A good example to look at when considering the effects of globalization would be the United States. The US is considered a melting pot of cultures since the population is tremendously diverse with people from almost every country and culture. Although with such a diverse population, the people of this country are able to coexist with one another without any troubles while still maintaining their individual culture. It can also been seen that certain cultural differences are assimilated into the “main” culture through certain holiday celebrations such as St. Patrick’s Day.
Globalization has lead to increased interaction amongst nations and the impact that they have on one another. Cultural differences can be eliminated in the process of globalization through integration and assimilation. Integration and assimilation does not always lead to the complete elimination of cultural differences. The people can come to integrate into the main culture while still retaining their own individual culture. Another scenario would be that the cultural difference is embraced and picked up by the main culture. So what seems to determine whether cultural differences are eliminated or not in the process of globalization revolves around whether or not people of that culture choose to retain their differences and to pass it on to their children or whether or not the cultural differences are embraced.
Practice Essay #12: Mistakes vs Successes
Question: We are educated more by our mistakes than by our successes. Describe a specific situation in which someone might be educated more by success than by mistakes. Discuss what you think determines whether or not one learns more from mistakes than from successes.
Answer:
Answer:
This statement suggests that we are able to learn from our mistakes as opposed to our successes. By making mistakes, it causes us to scrutinize the situation more in order to figure out what went wrong, the things to avoid to prevent repeating the mistake, and the things that can be improved upon in order to achieve success. It is comparable to designing a new invention. With the first model, there will most likely be some sort of bug or flaw which will be present. It is through the analysis of those flaws in the design that more can be learned about the nature of the invention and further improvements can be made.
Mistakes are not more educational than success when those mistakes that are being made are hard to recognize or identify. Continuous attempts can be made to try and achieve success but if the mistakes are not known then it is most likely that those mistakes would be repeated. Take for example someone practicing a dance routine. If that person thinks they are doing the right moves, when they are in fact not doing it correctly, and are unaware of it, by practicing over and over again that will just reinforce what they are doing wrong and they will not learn anything from it.
Mistakes are better educators than success in most situations. It causes us to stop and consider the situation more careful and analyze what was done wrong in order to be improved on. There are certain situations where success is better at educating us than mistakes. This is especially true when the mistakes are not known. It would require us to achieve success or recognize what success means in order to figure out what was done wrong. In determining whether mistakes or successes are better educator, it is important to consider the awareness of the mistakes being made and what it means to achieve success. It is also important to consider whether such awareness leads to a careful reflection or analysis of the situation.
Mistakes are not more educational than success when those mistakes that are being made are hard to recognize or identify. Continuous attempts can be made to try and achieve success but if the mistakes are not known then it is most likely that those mistakes would be repeated. Take for example someone practicing a dance routine. If that person thinks they are doing the right moves, when they are in fact not doing it correctly, and are unaware of it, by practicing over and over again that will just reinforce what they are doing wrong and they will not learn anything from it.
Mistakes are better educators than success in most situations. It causes us to stop and consider the situation more careful and analyze what was done wrong in order to be improved on. There are certain situations where success is better at educating us than mistakes. This is especially true when the mistakes are not known. It would require us to achieve success or recognize what success means in order to figure out what was done wrong. In determining whether mistakes or successes are better educator, it is important to consider the awareness of the mistakes being made and what it means to achieve success. It is also important to consider whether such awareness leads to a careful reflection or analysis of the situation.
Practice Essay #11: Healthcare for All
Question: Health care for all is a realistic goal. Describe a specific situation in which health care for all might not be a realistic goal. Discuss what you think determines whether or not health care for all is a realistic goal.
Answer:
Answer:
Even with such a developed nation such as ours, it is surprising to look at the amount of people that are medically uninsured. There has been a lot of discussion about health care reform lately and the push toward “universal” health care or health care access to all here in the US. The statement here suggests that such a goal is realistic and attainable. Universal health care is not a new concept and have been implemented in some other countries such as Canada and several other European countries. If such a system is able to be implemented in other countries, it is definitely feasible in our country.
In order for universal health care to be attainable, however, there are various issues which will have to be dealt with either before the implementation or during course of which the system is in place to prevent the eventually collapse of it. The first thing to consider is whether the health care system can handle and can pace with such an increase in the number of patients due to increase accessibility. If it is unable to do so, this could lead to an overload of the system prolonging the time that patients will have to wait before getting the medical attention that they need. Another thing to consider with the increase in accessibility is whether that would lead to an abuse of the system and to the increased number of patients who seek medical attention for minor problems. Looking at the Medicare and Medicaid system, some of these problems are quite apparent already. With the implementation of universal health care, these issues will be greatly magnified.
In order for universal health care to be attainable, however, there are various issues which will have to be dealt with either before the implementation or during course of which the system is in place to prevent the eventually collapse of it. The first thing to consider is whether the health care system can handle and can pace with such an increase in the number of patients due to increase accessibility. If it is unable to do so, this could lead to an overload of the system prolonging the time that patients will have to wait before getting the medical attention that they need. Another thing to consider with the increase in accessibility is whether that would lead to an abuse of the system and to the increased number of patients who seek medical attention for minor problems. Looking at the Medicare and Medicaid system, some of these problems are quite apparent already. With the implementation of universal health care, these issues will be greatly magnified.
Health care for all is a realistic and attainable goal. Several countries have already been using such a system already. Their systems are by all means not perfect but are a step toward such a goal. Before universal health care is achievable, however, there are a few issues which would need to be addressed. Those are also the determining factors in whether or not universal health care or health care for all is feasible. The issues to be looked at are whether the health care system can handle such an increase in the number of patients due to increase accessibility or not and whether there are guidelines set up to prevent abuse or misuse of the health care system.
Thursday, February 17, 2011
Practice Essay #10: TV Distortion of the World
Question: Television almost always distorts the way we see the world. Describe a specific situation in which television might not distort the way we see the world. Discuss what you think determines when television distorts our perception of the world.
Answer:
Answer:
The way we view the world or our perception of it is greatly influenced by number of things including our upbringing, the experiences that we go through, and also the portrayal of it by the media including television. The statement suggests that television almost always distort our perception of the world and of reality. Seeing as to how television has become such a daily part of everyday life, it is not difficult to image the dramatic impact that it can have on the way we see the world. The more we watch television and the more we continually see something repeated over and over, the more it becomes accepted as normal and part of reality. An example of this would be commercials of cleaning products. Taking out the influence of society as a whole, it is interesting to note that a majority of these commercials have a female figure using the product.
Television, however, does not always shape how we view the world. One of the purposes that television serves is as a source of entertainment. There are things that are shown on it that are fiction and/or quite absurd that we can quickly and easily separate it from reality and view it solely for its entertainment values. This is the case when we are watching some sort of science fiction show. The types of science and technology shown on these shows are extraordinary, imaginative and might someday be possible in the future but for the time being they are viewed as a cure of our everyday boredom and escape from reality.
The way we view the world is affected by numerous things. One of which being television and the media in general. Television has firmly established itself in our society that what we see upon it comes to distort our perception of the world. Not everything that we see upon it, however, gets accepted and interpreted as being normal and a part of reality. When we can differentiate what we see as purely for entertainment, its effects on our view of the world is greatly diminished. Therefore, what seems to determine whether television affect or distort our perception of the world is whether what is shown is rooted in reality and is relevant or relatable to the viewer.
Television, however, does not always shape how we view the world. One of the purposes that television serves is as a source of entertainment. There are things that are shown on it that are fiction and/or quite absurd that we can quickly and easily separate it from reality and view it solely for its entertainment values. This is the case when we are watching some sort of science fiction show. The types of science and technology shown on these shows are extraordinary, imaginative and might someday be possible in the future but for the time being they are viewed as a cure of our everyday boredom and escape from reality.
The way we view the world is affected by numerous things. One of which being television and the media in general. Television has firmly established itself in our society that what we see upon it comes to distort our perception of the world. Not everything that we see upon it, however, gets accepted and interpreted as being normal and a part of reality. When we can differentiate what we see as purely for entertainment, its effects on our view of the world is greatly diminished. Therefore, what seems to determine whether television affect or distort our perception of the world is whether what is shown is rooted in reality and is relevant or relatable to the viewer.
Practice Essay #9: Aid to Underdeveloped Nations
Question: Developed nations have an obligation to provide aid to the underdeveloped nations of the world. Describe a specific situation in which a developed nation might not be obligated to provide aid to an underdeveloped nation. Discuss what you think determines when developed nations have an obligation to provide aid to underdeveloped nations.
Answer:
The statement suggests that it is the duty of developed nations to help those nations that are less fortunate or underdeveloped. This is assuming that the developed nations are indeed better off than the underdeveloped nations. It is only natural for us as humans to want to help out those who do not have what we have and to help those who are less fortunate. It is comparable to the feeling that we get when we pass a beggar on the street. Although it is not always possible for everybody to provide aid to the beggar due to various reasons, there is a natural tendency that compels us to help the beggar out when possible or at least have pity for them.
Providing constant aid, however, does not always lead to the improvement of an underdeveloped nation. As the saying goes, “Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man how to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.” If a helping hand is always available, the underdeveloped nations can become dependent upon the aids and not learn how to survive on its own. In such a case, the developed nations are in fact helping those underdeveloped nations but are only doing so in the short term. A good example of this would be the situation in Africa. For the most part, it can be said that the country remains as a whole pretty much underdeveloped even though it has received a fair amount of aid from other nations over the years.
Answer:
The statement suggests that it is the duty of developed nations to help those nations that are less fortunate or underdeveloped. This is assuming that the developed nations are indeed better off than the underdeveloped nations. It is only natural for us as humans to want to help out those who do not have what we have and to help those who are less fortunate. It is comparable to the feeling that we get when we pass a beggar on the street. Although it is not always possible for everybody to provide aid to the beggar due to various reasons, there is a natural tendency that compels us to help the beggar out when possible or at least have pity for them.
Providing constant aid, however, does not always lead to the improvement of an underdeveloped nation. As the saying goes, “Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man how to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.” If a helping hand is always available, the underdeveloped nations can become dependent upon the aids and not learn how to survive on its own. In such a case, the developed nations are in fact helping those underdeveloped nations but are only doing so in the short term. A good example of this would be the situation in Africa. For the most part, it can be said that the country remains as a whole pretty much underdeveloped even though it has received a fair amount of aid from other nations over the years.
It only seems right for developed nations to provide aid to underdeveloped nations. It is part of human nature to want to help those who are less fortunate. There are certain situations, however, where providing such a helping hand does not lead to the improvement of those underdeveloped nations. In the short-term sense, the aid does temporarily alleviate the conditions of the nation but in the long-term sense conditions might return back to normal or become worst. So when deciding whether developed nations should be providing aid to underdeveloped nations, it should be determined whether providing such aid would help the underdeveloped nations truly improve, become independent, and be able to survive on its own afterwards. It should address the underlying problems and not just be a temporary bandage.
Friday, February 11, 2011
What IFs
Life is full of choices. Every day we are constantly faced with countless decisions that we have to make; from the time we wake up in the morning to the time that we go to bed at night. We have to decide what kind of clothes we want to wear for the day or not to wear anything at all. Then we have to decide what we want to eat for breakfast (if you wake up late, then you have to think of what to eat for lunch). This pattern continues throughout the whole day. With every decision that we make and every action that we carry out, there are consequences which can be seen or unforeseen and that are immediate or far off in the future. Often times, we don't give much thought to them since those are unimportant and/or irrelevant and so can be ignored.
There are various choices that are more significant, either considered so at the time or in retrospect, that it leaves us with a linger question of what if no matter what we have decided upon. It is with those kind of choices that seems to haunt me the most. I tend to over analyze the situation and think too much about all the other available options and possible outcomes associated with each option. I know that not everything will turn out as planned or expected. I know that sometimes the many paths that you choose will end up at the same destination. Even though I keep these things in mind, the what ifs still constantly pops up in my mind. It is like an annoying alarm that won't seem to shut off.
So how do I turn off such a nuisance? I really don't have a clear answer for this question. I guess all I can really do is accept that which has already been decided. You can't live life by dwelling on the past. The past is the past, don't let it consume your present and future. If the outcome wasn't the one you were looking for either set about to correcting it or learn to not repeat it again.
Wednesday, February 9, 2011
Practice Essay #8: Technology
Question: Technology solves many problems, but in the process often creates new problems. Describe a specific situation in which a technology might not create a new problem. Discuss what you think determines when a technology’s benefits outweigh its potential problems.
Answer:
Technology is often times a double-edged sword for it is the solution to many problems but at the same time the creator of other new problems. A prime example of this would be the invention of cars. The development of cars revolutionized the way we travel making it more quick and efficient to get from one place to another. In the process of doing so, it also helped to increase the sanitary conditions of city living associated with horses and horse-drawn buggies. An unforeseen consequence of cars, however, is the pollution generated from the emission of byproducts from the use of fossil fuels in the combustion engine. While this problem is not as great as it was before due to other advancement in technology, the problem still remains a big concern.
This, however, should not make us fearful of and deter us from technology in general. There are certain situations in which technology is solely the solution to the problem and not the creator of any new problems. In such instances, it is quite advantageous to utilize that technology to our benefit. Technology that comes to mind and fits into such a category would be those used in the medical field to aid in the detection of diseases or to be used in surgery. It is through the continuous advancement of the technology that is used that improvement in accuracy and precision is obtained. And it is through those advancements that countless lives have been saved.
Answer:
Technology is often times a double-edged sword for it is the solution to many problems but at the same time the creator of other new problems. A prime example of this would be the invention of cars. The development of cars revolutionized the way we travel making it more quick and efficient to get from one place to another. In the process of doing so, it also helped to increase the sanitary conditions of city living associated with horses and horse-drawn buggies. An unforeseen consequence of cars, however, is the pollution generated from the emission of byproducts from the use of fossil fuels in the combustion engine. While this problem is not as great as it was before due to other advancement in technology, the problem still remains a big concern.
This, however, should not make us fearful of and deter us from technology in general. There are certain situations in which technology is solely the solution to the problem and not the creator of any new problems. In such instances, it is quite advantageous to utilize that technology to our benefit. Technology that comes to mind and fits into such a category would be those used in the medical field to aid in the detection of diseases or to be used in surgery. It is through the continuous advancement of the technology that is used that improvement in accuracy and precision is obtained. And it is through those advancements that countless lives have been saved.
Technology solves many problems but in the process often give rise to new problems. Not all technology, however, give rise to new problems or only give rise to problems that are minute or minor that it could be neglected. When evaluating the use of technology, it is best to weigh the benefits versus the potential problems created by such use. It is vital to look at the importance of both the problems that technology seeks to answer and the importance of the potential problems that can be created through the use of technology. This can be done by examining whether such solutions offered or created by technology are temporary or long-term, minor or major issues to be addressed, reversible or irreversible, and/or life threatening or not.
Practice Essay #7: Violent Revolution
Question: No matter how oppressive a government, violent revolution is never justified. Describe a specific situation in which violent revolution might be justified. Discuss what you think determines whether or not violent revolution is justified.
Answer:
Answer:
The statement suggests that a violent revolution is never the answer to bringing about the end of a government no matter how oppressive that government may be. After the collapse of a government, a state of anarchy often times ensue which leaves the country in worst shape than it was under the oppressive government. Another possible outcome is that the government that is established right after the collapse of the first one is sometimes equal to or even more oppressive in nature than the one before it.
Not every violent revolution have a bleak outcome likes those mentioned earlier. There have been various examples throughout history where a violent revolution was a stepping stone that was necessary for the establishment of a better government. A good example that comes to mind is the American Revolution which freed America from the oppressive rules of Britain. Over taxation and under representation in the running of the government were two reasons, amongst a few other reasons, why Americans wanted to break away from British control. The American Revolution did not start out as a violent revolution, however, but ended up as such. Other means were sought first to bring about changes in the ways in which the British govern America such as voicing their opinions in Parliament and through boycotts of various items such as tea.
Not every violent revolution have a bleak outcome likes those mentioned earlier. There have been various examples throughout history where a violent revolution was a stepping stone that was necessary for the establishment of a better government. A good example that comes to mind is the American Revolution which freed America from the oppressive rules of Britain. Over taxation and under representation in the running of the government were two reasons, amongst a few other reasons, why Americans wanted to break away from British control. The American Revolution did not start out as a violent revolution, however, but ended up as such. Other means were sought first to bring about changes in the ways in which the British govern America such as voicing their opinions in Parliament and through boycotts of various items such as tea.
There is various times where violent revolution is not justified no matter how oppressive the government may be. A violent revolution often will leave the country in a more chaotic and a worst state than when it was under the oppressive government. There are certain situations, however, where a violent revolution is justified. This could be seen by just looking at the history of our own country. What seems to determine whether or not a violent revolution is justified then is if the revolution is a way to permanently end an oppressive government and to bring about the establishment of a better government. While it is not necessary to consider, looking at whether or not other means (not through the use of violence) to bring about a revolution were sought after first before resorting to the use of violence might help in the determination of whether the revolution is justified or not.
Friday, February 4, 2011
Practice Essay #6: Books vs Practical Experience
Question: Education comes not from books but from practical experience. Explain what you think the above statement means. Describe a specific situation in which books might educate students better than practical experience. Discuss what you think determines when practical experience provides a better education than books do.
Answer:
A lot of the information and facts that we obtain through school and the countless number of books that was used during those school years are soon forgotten in a matter of months or years. Retention of all those materials is nearly impossible. Practical experience, on the other hand, is a better educator or teacher than books as suggested by the statement. It is when we get first-hand experience that the importance of the information presented can be seen and reinforced. Education through practical experience, thus, would carry more weight and will be remembered more long-term. Practical experience is also a better educator because the information in books might not be all inclusive and might be outdated.
There are, however, many situations in which books are better at providing an education as opposed to practical experience. This is especially true when practical experience is not applicable or when the information presented is only theoretical. In such case, getting hands-on experience would be either impossible or impractical. Some examples of such situations include astronomy, physic concepts, and microbiology. While it might be possible for some to actually go into space to study things on a more up-close and personal experience, the majority of people, however, will never have that opportunity and so must rely on books for their source of information.
Practical experience is usually a better educator than books. When information is merely obtained from reading books, the retention of all that material that was presented will soon be forgotten. It is when that information is seen through practical experience does it get reinforced and the importance of it seen which allows for better learning and retention. There are certain situations where practical experience is not applicable or is impractical. In such cases, books would be a better source for the information. The determining factors to be looked at in deciding whether practical experience is a better at providing an education than books would be whether practical experience is feasible.
Answer:
A lot of the information and facts that we obtain through school and the countless number of books that was used during those school years are soon forgotten in a matter of months or years. Retention of all those materials is nearly impossible. Practical experience, on the other hand, is a better educator or teacher than books as suggested by the statement. It is when we get first-hand experience that the importance of the information presented can be seen and reinforced. Education through practical experience, thus, would carry more weight and will be remembered more long-term. Practical experience is also a better educator because the information in books might not be all inclusive and might be outdated.
There are, however, many situations in which books are better at providing an education as opposed to practical experience. This is especially true when practical experience is not applicable or when the information presented is only theoretical. In such case, getting hands-on experience would be either impossible or impractical. Some examples of such situations include astronomy, physic concepts, and microbiology. While it might be possible for some to actually go into space to study things on a more up-close and personal experience, the majority of people, however, will never have that opportunity and so must rely on books for their source of information.
Practical experience is usually a better educator than books. When information is merely obtained from reading books, the retention of all that material that was presented will soon be forgotten. It is when that information is seen through practical experience does it get reinforced and the importance of it seen which allows for better learning and retention. There are certain situations where practical experience is not applicable or is impractical. In such cases, books would be a better source for the information. The determining factors to be looked at in deciding whether practical experience is a better at providing an education than books would be whether practical experience is feasible.
Thursday, February 3, 2011
Practice Essay #5: Scientific Inquiry
Question: Scientific inquiry is rooted in the desire to discover, but there is no discovery so important that in its pursuit a threat to human life can be tolerated. Explain what you think the above statements means. Describe a specific situation in which a threat to human life might be tolerated in the pursuit of scientific discovery. Discuss what you think determines when the pursuit of scientific discovery is more important than the protection of human life.
Answer:
The thirst for knowledge and scientific discovery compel numerous scientists and scholars to go to great length in order to obtain it. The statement brings into question the moral aspect of such a pursuit for scientific discovery. What is the extent or the limit to which the discovery should be pursued to? The statement above suggests that no discovery is to be considered important enough when a human life is threaten in the pursuit of it.
The world, however, is not as black and white or clear cut as the statement makes it out to be. There have been many experiments and researches throughout history that involved human subjects with their lives potentially at risk. Results obtained from these experiments and researches have led to countless discoveries that helped to improve the understanding of the human body, how it functions and the disease/disorders that can impact our body and to advance the medical treatment of such disease/disorders. A good example would be the use of vaccines. Before its discovery, countless lives would be lost every year due to such diseases as smallpox, diphtheria, mumps, or the flu. It is, thus, hard to deny the benefits of such a discovery.
There are certain times where the pursuit of scientific knowledge pushes the envelope and are brought into question whether such a pursuit is warranted especially when it puts a human life at risk. A moral question such as this is quite a tough call to make. The thing that should be looked at in such a dilemma is the risks versus benefits, both short-term and long-term, of the scientific discovery and the pursuit of it being questioned. Only when the benefits greatly outweigh the risks should its undertaking be considered.
Answer:
The thirst for knowledge and scientific discovery compel numerous scientists and scholars to go to great length in order to obtain it. The statement brings into question the moral aspect of such a pursuit for scientific discovery. What is the extent or the limit to which the discovery should be pursued to? The statement above suggests that no discovery is to be considered important enough when a human life is threaten in the pursuit of it.
The world, however, is not as black and white or clear cut as the statement makes it out to be. There have been many experiments and researches throughout history that involved human subjects with their lives potentially at risk. Results obtained from these experiments and researches have led to countless discoveries that helped to improve the understanding of the human body, how it functions and the disease/disorders that can impact our body and to advance the medical treatment of such disease/disorders. A good example would be the use of vaccines. Before its discovery, countless lives would be lost every year due to such diseases as smallpox, diphtheria, mumps, or the flu. It is, thus, hard to deny the benefits of such a discovery.
There are certain times where the pursuit of scientific knowledge pushes the envelope and are brought into question whether such a pursuit is warranted especially when it puts a human life at risk. A moral question such as this is quite a tough call to make. The thing that should be looked at in such a dilemma is the risks versus benefits, both short-term and long-term, of the scientific discovery and the pursuit of it being questioned. Only when the benefits greatly outweigh the risks should its undertaking be considered.
Friday, January 28, 2011
Practice Essay #4: Laws in Free Society
Question: In a free society, laws must be subject to change. Explain what you think the above statement means. Describe a specific situation in which a law should not be subject to change in a free society. Discuss what you think determines whether or not a law in a free society should be subject to change.
Answer:
People’s values and beliefs are ever changing. The world as we know it today is completely different from what it was in the past. Laws, like people, must be flexible and be subject to change to fit the time and the will of the people. The above statement uses the words “free society”, which implies that the citizens of the society have rights to voice their needs and contribute to the law making process.
Laws should not be subject to change in a free society when doing so would compromise what it means to be a free society. Take for example the Bill of Rights in the US Constitution which serves to protect basic human rights granted to US citizens. In a free society such as the US, extensive personal freedoms are given to its citizens to ensure the prosperous coexistence of a diverse population. The Bill of Rights cover an array of laws such freedom of speech, religion, to bear arms, and etc. These laws serve as the basic notion for what it means to be a free society. Seeking to change the Bill of Rights would, thus, be compromising what it means to be a free society.
Answer:
People’s values and beliefs are ever changing. The world as we know it today is completely different from what it was in the past. Laws, like people, must be flexible and be subject to change to fit the time and the will of the people. The above statement uses the words “free society”, which implies that the citizens of the society have rights to voice their needs and contribute to the law making process.
Laws should not be subject to change in a free society when doing so would compromise what it means to be a free society. Take for example the Bill of Rights in the US Constitution which serves to protect basic human rights granted to US citizens. In a free society such as the US, extensive personal freedoms are given to its citizens to ensure the prosperous coexistence of a diverse population. The Bill of Rights cover an array of laws such freedom of speech, religion, to bear arms, and etc. These laws serve as the basic notion for what it means to be a free society. Seeking to change the Bill of Rights would, thus, be compromising what it means to be a free society.
In determining whether or not a law should be subject to change in a free society, the grounds upon which the law stands must be looked at. If the laws serve as the foundation for what it means to be a free society and gives the people their basic human rights then it is best for these to be stable and left untouched. The laws, however, must be made to ensure that it is fitting of the time and to the values and beliefs of the majority of the citizens as to not warrant it unjust.
Thursday, January 27, 2011
Practice Essay #3: Understanding the Past
Question: An understanding of the past is necessary for solving the problems of the present. Explain what you think the above statement means. Describe a specific situation in which solving a current problem might not require an understanding of the past. Discuss what you think determines whether or not the past should be considered in solving the problems of the present.
Answer:
As the saying goes history is bound to repeat itself. With this in mind, the statement suggests that it is important to learn from the past and use it as a learning experience to ensure that the same mistake is not repeated. Taking this a step further, it can be said that further improvements can be made as well upon the approach taken in the past when seeking to solve the problems of the present. A simple example of this would be trying to solve a complicated puzzle given that there is no prior knowledge of it. During the early stages, a fair amount of errors and trials will need to be undertaken. It is through these errors and trials that learning takes place and is to be avoided in the present or future for it does not give the desired results.
Some current problems, however, might not require an understanding of the past in order to be solved. An instance in which this is true is when the situation is unique from those experienced in the past due to difference in circumstances or various other reasons. Take for example the possible energy crisis which the world might soon have to face. As we continue to use up the supply of energy resources such as coal, oil, and etc, new resources will need to be sought after to replace that which we are using up. While there are various lessons that we can learn from the past concerning the use of the supply of energy resources, an understanding of the past is not quite necessary for solving the problems of the present.
Answer:
As the saying goes history is bound to repeat itself. With this in mind, the statement suggests that it is important to learn from the past and use it as a learning experience to ensure that the same mistake is not repeated. Taking this a step further, it can be said that further improvements can be made as well upon the approach taken in the past when seeking to solve the problems of the present. A simple example of this would be trying to solve a complicated puzzle given that there is no prior knowledge of it. During the early stages, a fair amount of errors and trials will need to be undertaken. It is through these errors and trials that learning takes place and is to be avoided in the present or future for it does not give the desired results.
Some current problems, however, might not require an understanding of the past in order to be solved. An instance in which this is true is when the situation is unique from those experienced in the past due to difference in circumstances or various other reasons. Take for example the possible energy crisis which the world might soon have to face. As we continue to use up the supply of energy resources such as coal, oil, and etc, new resources will need to be sought after to replace that which we are using up. While there are various lessons that we can learn from the past concerning the use of the supply of energy resources, an understanding of the past is not quite necessary for solving the problems of the present.
There are certain situations where an understanding of the past is necessary for solving problems of the present. For when we don’t learn from our mistakes, they are often times repeated. However, there are also certain situations in which the current problems can be solved without an understanding of the past. So, the thing that seems to determine whether the past should or should not be considered in solving the problems of the present come down to applicability of the past to the current problems and the lessons that can be learned from those experiences.
Practice Essay #2: Student Learning
Question: Students should be more interested in the process of learning than in the facts learned. Describe a specific situation in which students might be more interested in the facts learned than in the process of learning. Discuss what you think determines when students should be interested in the process of learning and when they should be interested in the facts learned.
Answer:
The amount of information presented to students can often times be quite overwhelming for them. And when this information are tested over, students become more interested and focused on memorizing the facts learned than in the process of learning. This, however, is not a good way of learning for the facts/information learned will eventually be forgotten or becomes irrelevant. It is better for students to be more interested in the process of learning and the acquisition of new knowledge for there are numerous resources available that are updated regularly so that students can remain current and up-to-date.
Students might be more interested in the facts learned not only for testing purposes but when the information presented seem to be just random facts or stand alone facts that are not applicable to anything else. As such, the students might view this information as additional trivial things to be memorized. Take for example a student who is not a history major but is taking a history course and is given a list of names of people from the past to learn about. To this student, the information that he/she learned might or might not be interesting but is probably not useful to the student outside of the course.
Applicability of the facts/information would, thus, be a good determinant for whether the student should be more interested in the facts learned as opposed to the process of learning. When students are able to see the applicability and usefulness of the information presented, they are more likely to take the learning process more seriously and not be so focused on just merely memorizing.
Tuesday, January 25, 2011
Practice Essay #1: Political Freedom
Question: Political freedoms are best appreciated in those countries where they do not exist. Describe a specific situation in which political freedoms might be appreciated in a country where such freedoms do exist. Discuss what you think determines whether political freedoms are best appreciated in countries where such freedoms are denied or where they exist.
Answer:
As human, we tend to take for granted what we are accustomed to may it be our family, technology, or political freedom. When it is a part of our daily life, it is often overlooked and becomes unappreciated. In other words, we do not give much thought to those things for it is so readily available.
Political freedoms, just like anything else, are often unappreciated in those countries where they do exist. It is when those political freedoms are challenged and people are faced with the possibilities of losing those rights and privileges with which they have lived with most of or all of their lives will they become truly aware of those political freedoms and appreciate those more. A political freedom which often times get challenged and is often prevalent in the news is the freedom of speech. This is best exemplify by wikileaks release of government and other confidential documents. Due to the sensitive nature of these documents, censorship of these documents have been sought after by numerous organizations and countries including the US. The vast amount of news articles and people’s discussions regarding wikileaks in a way demonstrate their awareness if not appreciation for the freedom of speech.
Political freedoms are best appreciated in those countries where, whether those freedoms do exist or are denied, the people of those countries have a sense of global awareness. That the people know that such political freedoms do not exist in other countries as opposed to their country or that such political freedoms do exist elsewhere as opposed to their country. It is also vital for the people to know that such political freedoms are not always guaranteed and can be taken away.
Answer:
As human, we tend to take for granted what we are accustomed to may it be our family, technology, or political freedom. When it is a part of our daily life, it is often overlooked and becomes unappreciated. In other words, we do not give much thought to those things for it is so readily available.
Political freedoms, just like anything else, are often unappreciated in those countries where they do exist. It is when those political freedoms are challenged and people are faced with the possibilities of losing those rights and privileges with which they have lived with most of or all of their lives will they become truly aware of those political freedoms and appreciate those more. A political freedom which often times get challenged and is often prevalent in the news is the freedom of speech. This is best exemplify by wikileaks release of government and other confidential documents. Due to the sensitive nature of these documents, censorship of these documents have been sought after by numerous organizations and countries including the US. The vast amount of news articles and people’s discussions regarding wikileaks in a way demonstrate their awareness if not appreciation for the freedom of speech.
Political freedoms are best appreciated in those countries where, whether those freedoms do exist or are denied, the people of those countries have a sense of global awareness. That the people know that such political freedoms do not exist in other countries as opposed to their country or that such political freedoms do exist elsewhere as opposed to their country. It is also vital for the people to know that such political freedoms are not always guaranteed and can be taken away.
Friday, January 21, 2011
The Road Thus Far
It has been quite awhile since my last entry in this blog. A lot of things have happened in that time. I'm not exactly sure where to pick up. I won't go into any details though. With this entry, I want to reflect on my progress so far. About three months ago, I started on a "quest" for self-improvement due to various reasons. My life wasn't perfect but it wasn't horrible. It was sort of an ordinary life. I guess some people would be content with it but to me it didn't feel right. I felt like I was living for the sake of living and just going through the daily routines of life. It just didn't feel like I had much control over what happened and where I was going. I was taking a backseat position in this Game of Life.
What has changed?
The biggest change I have noticed is my shift in attitude and perspectives on things. This is quite broad in a sense but I can't seem to find a better way of expressing it. I find that I have more of a positive outlook on life somewhere along the lines of the glass is half full as opposed to half empty. In fact, to me, that doesn't really matter anymore. It's more about making the most of what is given to you. You can choose to spend your time complaining and whining about something, but that would be time wasted. It is better to invest that time elsewhere. I, also, find that I'm not the approval-seeking person that I once was. I do things simply for the satisfaction that I get from doing it without feeling like I have to prove anything to anybody. The only person I really need to prove anything to is myself.
I have come a long way to get to where I am today. All the events of the past either good or bad have contributed to who I am. It does not, however, define me. Who I truly am and what I choose to do with my life is up to me.
Word of the Day
Totemic (adjective) - Relating to a representation of such an object serving as the distinctive mark of the clan or group
The amber necklace that she often wears has totemic values for it has been passed down her family for centuries.
I have come a long way to get to where I am today. All the events of the past either good or bad have contributed to who I am. It does not, however, define me. Who I truly am and what I choose to do with my life is up to me.
Word of the Day
Totemic (adjective) - Relating to a representation of such an object serving as the distinctive mark of the clan or group
The amber necklace that she often wears has totemic values for it has been passed down her family for centuries.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)