Evolution

I found the evolution articles to be very interesting because although I've always believed in evolution as the way humans were created, I'd never really known much about it. I enjoyed reading about the adaptations of the different hominids. I hadn't known before that there had been other species that had come from primates but hadn't survived. I had always thought before that it was only the line that humans had evolved from although it definitely makes sense that there would have been others. I thought that it was strange that they could trace the ancestry back to one woman and it's weird to think that she could have caused so many people to be created and that her great great great great great great great...[you get where I'm going with this] grandchildren have become so different from her. I enjoyed thinking about and hearing other people's thoughts on how we might possibly evolve in the future. It seems like everything has become so easy for us that there's not really any reason to evolve since there aren't many predators to have to outrun or prey to hunt down. It really left me wondering what other ways we can possibly change to better our chances of survival.
-Jenny S.

Can you or Kai please send me the web address for Kai's portfolio? I'd like to finish it before Weds. There is a hold on my account and I'd like to get something other than an "Incomplete" or a failing grade if I can register in case $3300.00 should somehow fall from the sky before the due date of 12-13. Thanks, Bill and enjoy your break.
billythomp@hotmail.com or
wmt@pdx.edu

The Lives of Others

I thought this was a brilliant movie. I usually don’t like foreign movies with English subtitles and I wasn’t too open minded when watching this film. Afterwards I felt it really stood out to me. The movie gave me a better vision of what East Germany was really like before the Berlin Wall was torn down. Saying the movie did not put into exaggeration the amount of surveillance and repression the Stasi had made. It showed what German citizens that had certain gifts like acting or poetry had to go through being under the total surveillance. Some, like the main characters in the movie, did not even know the actions they were doing were putting their freedoms at risk. But we’ll never know how bad this repression was because most filed records were by the Stasi. Who knows how much they could of not put into record. But overall I thought it was a great movie. I recommend using it for other future classes.

-Garret Kelly

Lives of Others

When watching a foreign film I was at first confused, then later throughout the movie it all came together. I was unsure about the motives of the characters but as the movie continued the more and more I understood the general concept the director was trying to portray. The first day the class began watching the movie I was not that interested to be truthful until the second day the movie was continued. It seemed insane to me on how someone could live that long and never know their whole life was being recorded by complete strangers who were suspicious of the actions.
In the movie Lives of Others it was extremely interesting seeing how the roles of the characters changed over time. At first I believed Christa Maria was going to leave Dreyman for the other man. Seeing how much her life was devoted to her boyfriend after all these negative influences attacking their life shows that everyone can make it, as long as you put in all potential effort. The subtitles made me pay more attention to the different scenes and caused me to be intrigued in the movie. Overall I believe the movie was very powerful and should be showed to other classes.

Noelle Melberg

Lives of Others

When viewing a foreign film it's really hard to keep track of the story line and follow what is going on, plus with having to read the subtitles and viewing the movie makes things more difficult. I will admit I really didn't get into the movie until the second day. The thing that I noticed the most was the change of Wiesler. Throughout the second half of the movie you could tell he was changing for the better. By his facial expressions and body language. It's something you don't see much in movies, so to see it in a foreign film was surprising. Overall I enjoyed the movie but I want to watch it again with a little more focus.

Lives of Others

So I'm not going to lie Alan, when you first told us about this movie, I thought it would be lame. But surprisingly enough, I really really loved the movie. It was so intersesting. It showed some actually realistic history and also had an appealing plot to it. Obviously not based on a true story, it had true element, which I love. I hate those movies that you can tell are totally made up and fake. Even though most of the stuff that was reflected realistically to the separation of Berlin I already knew, I was rather intrigued. Most people don't realize how it was such a hardship. People really were blacklisted to never ever work again with no reason behind it, such as the director Jerska. His most memorable line in the movie being so honest, "If a director cannot direct, what is he?" The truth is that this movie only showed a small effect that this movement had on all of Germany, let alone Eastern Berlin at the time. I didn't really understand why the Stasi were watching Dreyman in the first place. It kind of was not really fair how they began surveillance for no reason and then could use something that they weren't for in the first place, against Dreyman. Overall, I feel like everybody got what they deserved except for, Jerska and that nasty Minister Hempf. I feel like Dreyman deserved to put out the ideas he believed and still be able to use his talent of directing. However, it was so wrong that Wiesler, the Stasi captain, although never proved guilty, was still blacklisted for supposedly being an accomplice. In the end he was recognized for his good, not just punished for his "wrong."

Zimmer Chp 5 & 6

When reading chapters 5 and 6 of Zimmer's Origin of the Mind, it gave me an insight how many types of human classifications lead up to the homo-sapiens that we know today. Classification lead from the way the thumb was positioned on the hand to how straight the hominid walked during his time. Zimmer also showed pictures in how long and different skeletal bones were during those times. That lead Zimmer to talk about how mother nurtured there youngs and how chimpanzees seemed similar in nurturing there offspring. The tools that were used in that time were found all over continents making it show that these hominids were able to travel in groups to capture the food resources that they needed to survive. Also over time their bodies show that they changed to accommodate the harsh climate changes.

Paleoanthropologists also today rely on "reconstruction" to continue the study of these hominids. They collect unburied skulls and use tools take continue building whats missing from the facial features on the skull. The mentor session, I think, that taught this group led discussion did great in teaching what needed to be learned from these articles; made everything come together.

The Lives of Others

I really liked the movie, The Lives of Others. I missed the first class but I think I still understood what happened and the transformation that Wiesler went through (the recap at the beginning of the class helped). I think that it was really interesting to see a world in which people seem to have the everyday problems that we have, but they also have so much more to worry about on top of that. What I first saw of the movie was the part where the apartment was being bugged and Wiesler threatened Dreyman's neighbor about her daughter's education. I think that the transformation that Wiesler went through shows a lot about human nature and how it can change due to circumstance and the environment around you. When I was watching to movie I wondered if the transformation still would have happened if he had had a different, less corrupt and cruel boss showing him first hand how messed up and in the wrong the governnment was. I think that Christa-Maria's situation was relevant to our human nature course because although she loved Dreyman enough to stop seeing Hempf, in the end she still turned him in to save herself which shows the dog eat dog mentality of the world. I think that it was a good movie to show and I've already been able to relate it to other courses that I'm taking and ones that I've taken previously.

Jenny S.

Lives of Others

I enjoyed the movie very much. The movie allowed the viewer to see how absolutely crazy that system was. What I find interesting is that they didn't accept failure when trying to catch someone for whatever they found to be a crime. The reward for catching someone for being unloyal, especially if that person were a high ranking person, was a great one. The society lost a very essential thing in life, trust. They could no longer believe in the good will of human beings because everyone, men, women, and children, could not be trusted. The environment is a good example of how peoples lives can be shaped by what is around them. A lot of people really enjoyed reporting people because the society viewed it as a good thing if you caught someone, guilty or not. Once the Berlin wall fell, I am sure a lot of people snapped back to their normal selves and could hardly believe what they had done. This ties in well with the subject of nature or nurture. Some people were subject to their surrounding, and some people were subject to their nature. I believe it's a possibility that both nature and nurture help develope people. It's not absolutely one or the other, but a combination.

Andrew VanHorn

Lives of Others redux

Hey, I know you guys are focused on turkey, the Saints and that looming Chem final.... but one entry on the movie from two classes? I don't see a lot of movies in the future in this class unless I see some evidence of cognitive engagement

Conundrums of Culture

"It was he who most forcibly planted the idea that culture is what sets people free from their nature."

I found this article very interesting because it controdicted my research I had done for my research paper. In multiple books by Jane Goodall it was stated that chimpanzees, depending on where they are living, actually have differeing cultural customs. For instance one group of chimpanzees may make sitting cushions out of large leaves, but another cultural group have not been observed doing the same. This may show us that culture is just not a human behavior, but may have been around far longer than humans existed.

Courtney Timms

Language

The language readings were all very interesting. The video in class tried to explain the similarities in languages. It showed that most languages had words or spellings in common,eventhough the countries are not close together.
One of the readings explained the way we classify words. In english, a chair is associated with a piece of furnature. In African languages it would go with power, such as a throne.Animals are classified by their funtion and in english they are classified by age.Language is classified in the way we look at things.

The Lives of Others

Entry from "WMT" copied to Blog

Hello, My blog "expired". I enjoyed the film very much. As I told Kai it ties in nicely with human/nature course. The spy, whose name eludes me, could well have been nurtured to be an a**hole, but when he fell in love with the girl who was in love with the playwright, who was viewed as the enemy, had a change of heart, He became his true self. In other words; his true nature was to be the person he was after the change of heart. The film was a beautiful work of art. I enjoy foreign films, however I find them sometimes hard to follow as I am always listening as force of habit. I try to see how many words I can recognize and I always enjoy set design, such as clothing, cityscapes (I did notice all the graffiti on the walls of mid 18th. century period buildings, it looked fresh and I wonder if it was staged or real.) I took personal note of the flats. One was very posh but homey and the other was very rudimentary and ugly. These things are easy to pay attention to in English films but more difficult in other languages so perhaps I missed a few things.

The Lives of Others

I'd like to encourage commentary and discussion of the film "The Lives of Others." I have thoughts and opinions of course, but I'll keep them to myself for the moment so as not to take up too much of the oxygen. If you weren't able to see it or missed parts or want to share, it should be in the video rental stores, the public library as well as PSU's.
A reminder of the names of the characters for you to refer to.

Gerd Wiesler- the Stasi man in grey who listens and watches
Anton Grubitz: Wiesler's boss
Georg Dreyman: the writer
Christina Maria Sieland: the actress
Minister Bruno Hempf: the sleazeball
Albert Jerska: blacklisted director, committed suicide
Paul Hauser: the journalist friend of Dreyman who berated him for being "in bed with the bosses."

How to Talk about the World

Reading response

While reading How to Talk about the World, by Peter Farb, I though that it was interesting that our brain automatically categorizes things. Because we have a limited space for obtaining knowledge it makes me wonder how large our capacity to learn is. And if their was no limit on the information we could retain how would that affect humans and our environment. Cultures generalize information differently all over the world, making exact translations from one language to another pretty much impossible. If we had a more standardized knowledge of basic information communication from one culture to the next could be much smoother. Because their is such a wide range of cultural groups around the world that is pretty much impossible. 

Muriel Smith 

Aitchison- Language

The article about language and how there are many biological clues on how we are pre-programmed to learn and deal with language and how such traits have evolved to get to our current point, was something that I found very interesting. The author went on to discuss many of our biological human aspects and how they may relate and have an influence on our ability to learn, sustain and advance something as complicated and important as language. The part that talked about how it isn't surprising if we only could speak in a few word bursts, but the fact that we can plan and change what we are about to say while we are already saying something is an aspect to our language capabilities that puzzles many researchers in the field but is undoubtedly one of the defining characteristics when it comes to our use of language as a tool of verbal communication.

-Chris L.

Farb and Lakoff

I thought it was interesting how Lakoff’s article was discussing how we all use metaphors in everyday life and they affect more than just language after I had just read about the Yokutz language that didn’t use any metaphors and all meanings are literal. After reading Lakoff stress the importance of metaphor, I wondered how the speakers of Yokutz got along with their simple, literal language. It made it hard to take Lakoff seriously since Yokutz pretty much proved his main point obsolete. Although, I think it would be hard to communicate without metaphors, because I doubt that an absolutely literal vocabulary would allow us to express all of our abstract thought. Metaphors allow us to interpret others’ thoughts internally and compare them with our experiences so that we understand their thoughts that they wouldn’t be able to express through literal vocabulary. The articles also made me wonder how someone would think without any language. I wondered if it would even be possible, or if maybe it would make it simpler since you didn’t have to worry about finding the right vocabulary for your thoughts.

Language

I was really excited to start the language unit, I thought all of the material sounded really interesting, I even ended up writing my research paper on it. I think one of the most interesting pieces of material for this section would have to be the movie we watched on languages and how they think there might be one language that all the others branch off from. That seems really interesting to me, and makes a lot of sense. People are always saying how a lot of languages steam from Latin, but I never thought about there being one central language that everything else branches off from.
It links really well with the ideas of evolution. If all humans and their language originated in one general area the language they had would have been standard throughout groups of people, until they separated and scattered throughout the world creating the other languages and dialects we hear and speak today. The movie started an interesting discussion about when a new language or dialect is formed, how much must change before it is considered a new language. It was interesting to see how the changes can start from a simple accent or a slight carelessness in the pronunciation of a word or phrase. Slang terms can also affect language a lot as well, in different areas that speak the same language they can have different meanings for the same words. Like the pants example that Professor MacCormack brought up. Overall I think the general topic of language is interesting and studying its origins and the effects on the people that speak it seems like a good way to spend a few weeks.

Demonic Males

This reading by Richard Wrangham and Dale Peterson struck my attention because it made me think about the power of genders. As it said, throughout history most societies would ban women from having anything to do with participating in war. The men wanted to feel as if they had the strength the women did not. This made me think that maybe it was the men who were weak and insecure with themselves. If they truly were as strong as they claimed why would they be threatened fighting amongst women? The women referred to endure being discriminated against, beaten, raped, and many other horrific things. It makes me wonder, if gender roles were switched would men be able to endure such things?

-Molly Hilken

Reading Response: Nature Via Nurture

This article covered a topic that I am very familiar with, the idea of nature vs. nurture, but the title alone made me think of a new way of thinking: not vs. but via. Many anthropologists have toyed with the idea that perhaps our cultures are not separate from our true nature, that when we go against our culture we are actually going against our nature instead of with it. This idea appeals to me because we have too many social constructs that prevent the idea of us being bestial without cultures to shape us, as even animals have culture. The famous addage "raised by wolves" no longer means that they have no culture, simply a different one if we adopt the idea that human nature requires cultural nurture. Our moral structures and systems of belief aren't necssarily unique to humans, just different from an animal culture. Wolves, for example, have a distinct and elaborate social order where there are those who are in positions of higher command, but all among the group nare important to the pack's survival. As for their beliefs, we cannot speak to them to answer that question, so it will have to remain unanswered.

how to talk about the world

How to talk about the world

I found this article about language very interesting for many reasons. One reason is that it had never occurred to me how much of an impact your culture has on your language. For instance, the categorizing of a chair in English would be with furniture while in some African speech communities they would categorize it with a spear because they are both emblems of a rulers authority. Another interesting thing that was pointed out in the article was that there are some sentences in a language that simply can’t be translated to another depending on how that language was developed in it’s culture. Which is why becoming a translator is a form of art itself.

Corbin B.

Geertz

I agree with what it says how common sense has a relatively organized body of considered thought because common sense it something you are nurtured throughout
your life. Due the experiences in life, it should be easily understood that its "common sense." When it qoutes "coping with everyday problems in an everday way with some effectiveness"
it a powerful thing said because when we execute the issue or not, we learn to fix it the next time it comes around. I have actually never thought of how
common sense it defined. Common sense is actually really hard to define and there is so much to it like how it says it can be common sense in nature. For
example, it says that in a culture, there are things that are common sense like covering your mouth when yawning is a common sense in the American
culture. So I found this article really interesting to encounter.

Are We Born Moral?

Are We Born Moral?

The article Are We Born Moral really made me think about morals in general. Each culture has differing morals, which leads me to believe that we are not born moral. It seems as though we are born into society and basically shaped by our family and surroundings. Looking back in my life I know that I was taught my values and morals by the people I looked up to; such as my family and teachers. If we were born with our morals wouldn’t every society/culture have the same values? Differing families and people share different morals and values so it seems to me we are taught them. I had seen a documentary focusing on children who had been neglected. A young girl was thrown out of her house at 3 years old to live with the animals in a barn behind her house. The child was given food but had very little human interaction. When she was found she was living like a dog; barking, growling, and couldn’t speak like a normal human being. Now she is in a mental hospital being rehabilitated to speak and live a more normal life. This documentary made me believe that what we are put into after we are born shapes not only our actions but our whole perception on living. In all I definitely take the side that we are born a clean slate and our taught our morals.

Courtney Timms

Metaphors We Live By/ Lakoff

Living by metaphors is an idea expressed by this author. I believe it is merely an opinion that has enough evidence to support it. Therefore, stating that the way we think, what we experience and what we do every day is very much a matter of metaphor, isn't out of the ball park.

Argument is War
It is amazing that when speaking of these two subjects, similar phrases and words can be used to describe the process or situation of them. At war, physically, in combat, it can be easy to describe the weaker link, as indefensible and caught off guard. When arguing one can also say, that when confronting the other individual, they caught them off guard and in turn caused them to be defenseless. You can describe an argument as a war. There are similarities in how these two topics are approached. You are opposing the person you are in disagreement with. And thus it can be stated you are also opposing another country for several reasons I will purposely omit for the sake of time. There are many other instances, in life in general, were we also use analogies to describe a situation so that we can convey it more effectively. Maybe it can be said too , we live by poetry.
Metaphors are concepts. The way a person conveys their thoughts is parallel to how they perceive their environment. I would say it is likely that a person is more linguistic and articulate depending on their environment. How can we explain things without linking it to something else that makes more sense? If I am having a hard time explaining a math problem to a student, I find one of the best ways to explain it is to link it to something happening in real life so that they can associate it better and implement that same process in order to get their answer.
Interesting topic.

Hauser Evolution

I found that Hauser's article called "Origin of the Minds" was very interesting because it mentions how the shuman mind works differently than that of the chimpanzee by "degree and not of kind." He states that researchers have noted that cognition in some species are blocked but as for humans we are able to use that in our lives to do several things. Hauser then goes to name four traits that humans can show through out human lineage: (1) generative computation, which then can be sub categorized into two others: recursion and combinatorial, (2) promiscuous combination, (3) mental symbols, and (4) abstract thought. The ones that seemed more interesting and important to me were the use of mental symbols and abstract thought. The use of mental symbols can encode sensory experiences (both real and imaginative) forming the base of a rich and complex system. It then can be expressed to others through words or pictures. We humans use this constantly in language such as poetry and art and music. Now, abstract thought lets us contemplate things beyond what we can see, hear, touch, taste or smell. Unlike animal thoughts, which are largely anchored on sensory and perceptual experience, many of our thoughts have no such connections. We tend to think about whats beyond the universe (imaginative ideas) using words, art and language.We also tend to figure away around difficulties that tend to show up in our way to communicate.

Are we born moral?

Out of the articles we have read in the past couple of weeks, I found the article, “Are We Born Moral?” to be really interesting. I think that we are taught what is wrong and right, rather than being born that way. I learned what is right and wrong from my parents, teachers, and friends. I never really thought about the topic. A good example was when we were asked whether or not we would keep money that we saw someone had dropped on the ground. My first reaction was that I would want to keep it. Bit after I thought about what to do for a short amount of time, I realized that I would have to give it back because that was what I was taught is right. The outcome of this situation also depends on who you were raised by and who you associate with, though there are also exceptions.

-Katie C.

Demonic Males

The article that i really enjoyed was Demonic Males. Besides the fact that it was full of interesting information a lot of it was open to interpretation. I think that the author obviously had many valid points but she seemed a little reluctant, to when women were portrayed in a dominant way, to accept that. I think women kind of live in a double standard. In one way they want to be treated equally as men but on the other hand they do not want to go to war and they want the fairy tale relationship where a man is dominant and provides for the female. Im not saying this is how it is for everyone, their are plenty of women brave enough to go to war and their are women who are the dominant ones in a relationship. I just thing we should stop being so hypocritical. I think no matter what happens men and women are always going to be viewed differently and that is neither a positive or a negative, its just the way it is. I would hardly say men are Demonic, at least not all of them. 

Muriel Smith 

Are we born moral?

In the class discussion, there was a lot of controversy whether species are born with morality instilled in them or if it is something they acquire over their years from personal experience. Another discussion which I was a main part of was, can instincts be separate from morals, when the story of the gorilla came up. I don't believe that people were understading what I was saying. What I was trying to say was that there are instances where people can react based on just an instinctual standpoint without it being based on their sense of morality. People can act on instinct without a concern of morality. What they were trying to say is that all of our actions (instincts) are based on a moral calculator or that what we do is based on our morals. For example, an alcoholic may start to drink when they are depressed, that does not make it right, even by their own stand point necessarily. There are many things that humans do without morality in mind, but instinct. How many people break traffic laws when they know someone isn't looking, to get to where they need to be faster? A lot of people. The thing about morals is that they are corrupt. It is true that most people only abide by what is right or wrong if other people are there to see.

Unfair Compensation

Some of the thoughts and ideas in the Demonic Males article seemed off to me. I could see how they were all rooted in fact and different ideas but it was hard for me to wrap my head around how these things could be considered okay. American society has changed over the years growing more excepting of everyone over time, laws have been set up to fight age, ethnic, and gender discrimination for jobs, woman have the right to vote and be seen as equal. But in other countries woman are still considered property, a slave in a way. I knew that this was true but hadn’t seen the extent of it all until reading this excerpt.

I was shocked when I read the story about the !Kung woman and what had happened to her daughter. It’s bad enough that she was married off at such a young age but to die at the hand of her husband over the given matter does not seem right to me at all. Shouldn’t everyone be far passed a woman’s life being worth five goats? Five goats are not going to replace a daughter, a sister or a friend it is a poor attempt at compensation, one that could seem insulting in away.

To me this idea is morally wrong, maybe the question shouldn’t be over if only humans possess morality but if every human does. Its matters like these that make me think that Morality is at least somewhat based on social surroundings, what you are taught are right and wrong. Because to these people that was a fair price to pay but it me it is not.

Ariel M.

Human Origins

I found Human origins by Carl Zimmer to be quite interesting. It’s weird to think about how far the human race has come. We started with nothing but the materials we could find in our environment now I’m typing this homework from home on a computer when my television is on commercials. Ha ha try to explain that one to Homo ergaster. Though the reading was interesting I found it hard for me to remember the names and eras of these early hominids. Then just the other day I was thinking that we will probably never get the real answer about where we came from with the huge increase of the world population and urban sprawl researchers won’t be able to dig up bones when there are housing developments and mini malls covering the land.

Devon DeCamp

are we born moral?

While reading the article are we born moral it talked about possibilities of morality being developed in humans and other animals. Which made me think about what exactly are morals. Moral is just a word after all.

When a group of animals are working together it’s beneficial to their survival most of the time rather than if they start to eat each other or do whatever they want which wouldn’t be. To me morality is cooperating with your peers enough to further your existence.

In class we talked about how morals differentiate around the world pretty drastically, which is very interesting because it shows to me that there is no real right and wrong. Only your society’s standard of what is right or wrong.

Corbin B.

Are we born moral?

The reading discussed many theories on how moralities in humans have been passed. Is it through natural born instinct or taught through the parameters of society that we learn the difference between right and wrong. They also raise the question of morality in the animal kingdom. Some have the opinions that with in animals they have learned their own form of morality. While I wouldn’t class it as having the same rules as humans do animals have certainly shown behavior that is not completely selfish and immoral. Personally I take the side of being born with moralities as instincts and then developing how to use them throughout life. I feel like if the question “are we born moral” was rephrased as “are we born evil,” more people would share the view. When you use stronger language people tend to have different opinions then they normally would, and in this case they would not want to consider themselves as evil from the beginning.

Kyle Eggers

Are We Born Moral?

I was thinking about the example someone made in class today, "when you find twenty dollars on the ground, what do you do?" And I preceded to tell how that happened to me once and I gave it back to the person who dropped it. But, my initial instinct was to keep it. It only lasted for a few seconds, but it was still there. So, does that make my first instinct immoral? Does the fact that I almost immediately gave it back cancel that out? Do my morals conflict with one another? Or, was it just the natural thing to do? If the latter is true, then society has indeed played its part in shaping our ideas of morality.
I remembered this quote though, "moral life was a struggle to combat nature-- a view that left morality hanging in mid-air, without any evolutionary explanation, as a kind of human protest against the cosmos." I just can't bring myself to believe that morality just came out of nowhere. That doesn't necessarily mean it's solely biological, but I don't think society is the only reason either.

Kelly Dickens

Are we born moral?

I feel that in order to understand this article more fully, one has to understand its purpose is to explore whether or not humans are moral naturally or through the influence of our culture and if that morality is a human only characteristic or if it is shared with the rest of the animal kingdom. The article then is only a series of arguments from different big name philosophers and biologists and such that seem to dispute each other in smaller and smaller aspects of what it means to be moral; for example, though Hauser believes morality is an unconscious process (found in all animals?), he argues that the "part of the moral faculty that is unique to humans is that which they use 'to create judgements of permissible, obligatory, and forbidden actions,'" which connects with the monotheistic views that morality is a set of guidelines in becoming an ideal citizen. Maybe that is how morality should be viewed: not all moral choices come from teachings from outside sources (intuition rather) but a large influence from the outside world solidifies that particular "system of morality" we obey, which varies from culture to culture.

RR- Dog Unwelt

After reading this article, there was a lot of interesting things that I had never considered before. It’s very intriguing to try to emphasize the perspective of a dog, and how due to their biological make-up act the way they do, and why they do the things that they do. The way they process smell and how time relates to their sense of smell was very fascinating. The way they can inhale more air before having to exhale was something I had never considered before, however it makes more sense when I see my dog sniffing everything in the park while constantly moving. Also it was very interesting to read how the dog’s sense of time is related to how they perceive human facial expressions. But it makes a lot of sense when I reflect how playing catch with my dog, affected the way he acted as well as his own facial expressions. Once I picked up the ball, his ears would raise up and eyes would widen, and as soon as I released the ball and threw, it his ears would down again, and he would already be moving towards the direction of where the ball was thrown. I really enjoyed this article because it provided a lot of good insight into the minds and anatomical make-up of dogs and how it relates with how they interact with the environment and other organisms around them.

-Chris L.

Demonic Males

Because the Mentor session I am a part of we chose Demonic Males as one of our articles to do our presentation on. My thoughts on this article are fairly simple. Patriarchy is the leader in most cultures and seems like it always will be. To some cultures, killing a woman can be cleaned off your plate by exchanging 5 goats. How is that morally correct? It can't be, but it is in the !Kung civilization. See, woman are expendable in this Patriarchy it seems. Men go to war and woman go if men wish but most societies restrict woman from any form of fighting. There have been some successful female war heroes in some fights but they are not talked about. Compared to men, woman are just another "tool" that we can use to survive. I don't think this is true or should be in any way. If anything, woman should be in charge, because after all they are the nurturers of our offspring.

In the article, the authors ask the question "When women become as strong as men, in other words, will they be inclined to be as violent?" I'm sure they will be as inclined to be violent but I doubtfully they will use violence to express them selves in such a way. Even some of the larger woman today aren't violent one bit. As a gender? I don't think woman could be as violent as men, not because they don't have it in them, but because men have been violent since the beginning and it'd be hard for woman to catch up.

-Spencer

Evolution!

The Evolution readings are also meant to draw a line between humans and every other species. A lot of them have been challenging common ideas we have on humanity. I think we often think that we are an alien species compared to the other animals, like Hauser suggests in “Origins of the Mind”, but the readings have led me to understand that we are earthling animals like the others and are subject to evolution just as much everyone else. At first I thought that this view would be dehumanizing, but I realized it actually might have an opposite effect. I think that if we understood our common human condition- that we have evolved to our current complex form from a common ancestry and we are basically at the whim of this natural law- I think we might understand each other better and realize we are in it together and don’t have to compete??? :^S Although natural selection is based on this competition within a species, I think we, at our current state of consciousness, may find it beneficial to cooperate. I think at this state in our evolution, the regular natural selection is mostly irrelevant, and an evolution in society and consciousness is more probable, which would be better helped by cooperation rather than competition. Jeff F.

Dog's umvelt, Elephant Crackup, Le Guin

The last readings: Le Guin’s Buffalo Gals, Dog’s Umwelt, Elephant Crackup, and the Secrets of the Mind video we watched were connected by the idea that perspectives are taken for granted by humans (and for all we know, raccoons and/or chimpanzees have the same problem) and by understanding our unique perspective, we could have a better idea of what makes us human. This was also emphasized by the observation assignment as we slowed down to examine our own perceptions closer. This lesson has helped me to understand my perspective better by realizing first of all, that other people may have different perspectives, and by understanding where mine differ greatly from other species and where I may share some with others. This helps me see the bigger picture of the universe, by helping me realize that others may see a different bigger picture….maybe… Overall, I think the lesson was very informative and eye-opening.

Jeff F.

dog's umvelt

One of my favorite articles so far has been the dog’s umvelt. As it does with me, it should interest most people to be able to get a grasp on what it’s like to be something alive and not human. Things that could be seen as valued by us mean as little as a piece of paper to us. I myself have a Boston terrier, and it takes these deep breaths and they sound like sighs sometimes, but now I realize that he could be breathing in and out at the same time and getting those deeper breaths the article talked about. I can’t even fathom how he feels when he catches wind of something pungent, because he pulls in much more of the air he breathes than we do. The topic of time in the article was also informing. They tell time using their smell, for example the freshness of a dog turd or urine determines how long it has been there by how much it smells. The most interesting thing was that dogs have this better “flicker vision” than even humans. Dogs were the last animal I would expect to be able to see better than me. I can move just a little bit around my dog and he will react in crazy head nods and now I know it’s because they process the incoming light faster than we can. But at least i had something to fall back on now that I know we see better in a focused path that we look at and they can only see better up close.

Quinn P.

Inside of a Dog

The article Inside of a Dog, I was curious as to what I would be reading. Would the author take us on a journey through the day in life of a dog? How was the story going to be told? Would it be like Buffalo Gals where the animals have human traits? As I read on, I discovered that it was more of an informative and scientific piece. The senses of a dog are astounding. Their sight and sense of smell are much more advanced than a humans. The article also talked about how animals can read our emotions; which I find to be very true. Whenever I was upset my favorite dog would always jump on my lap and lick my face to cheer me up. Dogs know what their masters want and need from them. There is no need to dominate them in training. The dog will learn by observing the behaviors of other dogs and by their owner’s reaction. The reading was really positive and told the reader why dogs are so special. It also gave many scientific facts and information. The author had clearly researched the topic and had passion for animals. I was both interested and more informed about dogs after reading the article.

Cody Hein

professor Roger's trial

“Professor Roger's Trial”

I think this kind of behaver happens all the time in group projects. I couldn't agree more with the grade the professor gave the group. The purpose for the trial was the establish team skills. That clearly didn't happen. Silvie suppressed her feelings about being bossed around by Anthony. Donald didn't try at all he is the kind of person that leaves everything to the last second. Silvie and Anthony are both worried about who does what they get to busy arguing with each other they forgot to work hard on the trial.

I have had this happen to me a few times. I am the kind of person that gets stuck with people that wont do anything or they say they will but don't end up doing anything so I do it all. When that happens I let the professor know who did work and who didn't do work. When I was in the visual arts and technology academy V.A.T.A in San Diego I was often the leader of whatever group/team project assigned. After all the teams were done with their project and presented it to the class all of the leaders would go into a back room with the teacher and tell them how the group worked together and if everyone did their job. I like being the leader of the group I feel like I can be the level head of the group and tie things together to make a good product.

Raven P.

Our reading still has not given us a clue whether we have been born moral or not. There doesn't seem to be a definitive answer. It depends on who you ask.
It is pretty convincing that we evolved from something other than what the current day man looks like.

The Mind / Genetic Hyping

It is always interesting to read these types of articles because it introduces me to another aspect. The new perspective not only allows me to see that there are more critical thinkers than I expected, but it entertains me and challenges me to think critically myself. Marc Hauser introduces the Key Ingredients of the Human Mind being, Generative Computation, promiscuous combination of ideas, mental symbols and abstract thought. Each and every one of them have their own meaning and correlation to the article but it amazes me how one individual could take the time to process these perspectives. He states that recursion is the repeated use of a rule to create new expressions. With that one statement, it was then easy to wonder off and ponder about what kinds of recursive thinking humans do on an everyday basis. He also mentions that how these four ingredients are implemented and used vary from group to group. This reminds me of cultural myths and how every ones thought processes can be altered depending on how they were raised, their environment and their culture itself.

When reading Genetic Hyping I was interested and put more thought into how genes play an important role in our every day lives. There are so many factors that affect behaviors but when you realize your fathers side of the family is completely temperamental and have more of a tendency of being stricken with nerve disorders, you no longer have the tendency of asking yourself why you are the way you are. This goes along with him saying that genes and the environment affect behavior. Being introduced to my biological father and spending time with that side of the family brought out characteristics that I knew lied within me, figuratively speaking, but enabled me to be more comfortable with them.
One random thought is that experiments are always done with lab rats, or in this case, mice; I am now wondering if it will ever take place with a human.

Evolution responses

I don't mean to offend anyone who may read this, but I'm gonna play Devil's Advocate for a bit.
Some people have put out posts on the evolution readings that I would like to challenge.
As far as natural selection goes, wouldn't "survival of the fittest" refer to everything and anything that makes it easier for your species to survive? Just because it says "fittest" doesn't mean that it refers to strength or size, it refers to how "fit" you are in a given situation. One mutation could cause a physically strong organism to develop something that makes it more "fit" in social interactions with the opposite gender, thereby making it the "fittest" to survive and pass on genetic material. In short, both strength (or agility, hardiness, etc...) and sexual attraction play equal parts in the scheme of natural selection.
Next, while no one has posted about this yet but I know someone will, a "mutation" is not bad. That word has recieved very bad press in recent years and nowadays we take it as meaning something that makes us a freak or grow a third arm, etc... A mutation is any genetic change, good or bad. Whether or not it halps us survive determines the "good" or "bad" part.
Third, as far as the native american children going to schools and losing awareness of the "natural" world, that is a cultural change and has nothing to do with genetics. Cultures adapt, like genetics, in order to meet new challenges of life, but they are not caused by anything genetic; though it can be argued that a cultural change has brought a genetic change. As a nice little side note, the perception of what is a "freak" is determined by your culture.
Finally, I do not support prolonging life through medical advances in certain situations. For example cancer, mental diseases, brain damage, or certain diseases like down syndrome or most forms of mental retardation. Remember, I don't mean to offend, I just don't think it's a good idea. Allowing our weak, diseased members of the species survive is not an efficient system for survival, even in an urban world. It wastes resources and money keeping people alive when they should by all natural means be dead. People may say "that's not fair," because that person "didn't get a chance to live," but that isn't the way the world works. It isn't fair. It isnt right. It doesn't care if you loved them or hated them. It doesn't care if you "didnt get a chance". Sometimes it doesn't give you a chance to begin with. But we have to move on and accept that thats the way it is, changing it won't necessarily make it better and if we allow the weak and stupid (not necessarily retarded, just stupid) to breed then we will lose what evolutionary progress we have managed to gain.
If anyone would like to discuss any of these issues further, I would be happy to respond.

Ryan Casto

Plato; The Allegory of the Cave

This was the first time I had been exposed to Plato's Allegory of the Cave. While the reading was rich I felt that my time spent on this piece of literature was well worth it. The greatest thing I took form this article was the idea that the blessed individuals, already aware of reality, had a duty and a responsibility to expose the less fortunate to this reality. As the article said, every person has the capabilities within them to understand, they just need to be turned on. Turning this switch on is the responsibility of those already aware of reality. This process won't be easy either. "At first, when any of them is liberated and compelled suddenly to stand up and turn his neck round and walk and look towards the light, he will suffer sharp pains; the glare will distress him." This sentence exemplifies the struggle to free a fellow oppressed human and transform them over into reality. At first it's going to seem ridiculous but, step by step one can start to comprehend the bigger picture. "He will require to grow accustomed to the sight of the upper world."

While everyone has their own version of reality, many people today don''t want to take the time to understand each other's stance. It is hard work, as said in this allegory. It is much easier to stick to your own way of thinking rather than take time to wrap your mind around an idea that may seem so far out there. This allegory provides a solution to some greater misunderstandings of life but it is one of those concepts that is much easier said than done.

Stephanie S.

Evolution

The readings on evolution were very interesting to me. It informed the reader of the real meaning of the term evolution. It is not trying to explain the creation of human life. Religion is not a factor. Evolution and Natural Selection were explained in detail to the reader. An example was a type of white moths that lived in a city in New York. The city had many factories that released soot. The white moths were easily spotted amongst the blackened trees. Predators got many of the moths. As time went on, the species of moths turned dark. They were'nt as easily seen. Now the majority of the moths in New York City are dark to better match their surroundings. There was also the difference between microevolution and macroevolution. One is the creation of a new species. The other is a change in the genetics of a species.
Cody H

Reading Response: Freire and Gatto on the Public Education System.

While reading the Freire and Gatto, I enjoyed and agreed with the most of their discussion about the Public education system in America. In their article they criticized the public education system which is trying to make every individual a good citizen, but at the same time dull students. Somehow, If I think about the present system, It is true to some extent that our school’s are designed to teach the education as mandatory for every individual, but there real purpose is to make them servants for the society. Our teachers teach us the education which is already organized by the scholars and students are spouse to fill up all of that information which he considers as a true knowledge for them. Somehow, they are making students as a product, but not intelligent. The students should be taught beyond to the pre-designed education, they should not only given lectures, but also communicate with them, this could help them to establish good understanding and enhance their social skills because most of the individuals lack the social skills which are really important in their practical life. However, there should be a close relationship between a students and the teacher, by which they feel free to talk each other, so that the students can think creative and feel the independence. Meanwhile reading the Freire and Gatto, I came to the conclusion that education is the most important thing for every individual. They should not be made as a dull student, who goes to school, finish up with his studies and run for the job, but don’t know his aim in the life.

The Definition of Evolution

When reading the article What is Evolution?, I found myself being a little uninterested. I realized that evolution is the genetic changes that take place within a species over generations, having taken a biology class that taught me that several years ago. I did find one part a bit interesting and worth writing about however, however small it may be. I really liked how the author explains that when a species evolves, that does not mean that it becomes more advanced or better than what it was before the change. The author brings that point up frequently, almost to the point of irritation to the reader, but the point really is an important one. Although it may seem obvious and simple when thinking about it, as Moran went through several “incorrect” definitions of evolution extracted from several different dictionaries, a few even being dictionaries of science, it was made clear this was a crucial piece of the definition to clarify. Evolution is what happens when populations need to adapt to their environment. Those specific adaptations may be completely successful at one point, and completely unsuccessful at another, making the idea that the more species evolve, the better and more specialized they become very inaccurate. Chris Colby I feel explained this much clearer in his Introduction to Evolutionary Biology when he stated, “Evolution is not progress.” Although I am a firm believer that the definition of evolution is not yet perfect, since it has been constantly revised over several years, I do believe this is a large and significant part that must not be overlooked.

WhitneyS

Grr, Sniff, Arf

What I found most interesting in this article was how the different breeds are here to bring different things to our life. A pug is here to be "more companionable" while a dog with a long nose is here to hunt or herd. It was interesting to here that the pug is "more companionable" because they have retinas that are linked closer to humans, helping them see images closer to them. The observations that the author made were truly fascinating, I enjoyed reading the article "Dog Unwelt."

Courtney Timms.

Plato

I have read “The Allegory of the Cave” by Plato many times now, but it is one piece of literature that I never get tired of reading. I love the set up being in dialogue it almost makes it easier to follow then it would if it were in a continues one speaker set up. The dialogue also allows the things being disgusted to be questions and analyzed further which really helps with grasping this complex concept. I love the scene that Plato lays out for us, the men chained up never seeing the real would only those that are being played in front of them by the players, and they're only see shadows. That whole concept of never seeing anything real and with substance just sounds terrible and not a way to live a life, the enlightenment that one man receives, the real world, just seems like what everyone should have. I understand what Plato is getting at the being enlightened part, but I don't think that others shouldn't get to experience the world and the truth. Plato said himself “the upper world where they desire to dwell; which desire of theirs is very natural”, it is natural we're supposed to be exposed to all that there is to offer outside “holes” and “caves”.
Kylee w.