Silence is Golden

Silence and the Notion of the Commons

Summary: In this article the author, Ursula Franklin, talks about how technology has come to affect the soundscape. She mainly talks about how silence is being privatized and manipulated for profit. She talks about how businesses constantly surround their customers with noise (music) aimed at getting them to buy something, or feel a particular emotion. She argues that silence used to be common to all, and how now, silence is something that can be privately manipulated.

Quotes:
"The distinctive character of this domain of silence is that it is an enabling condition that opens up the possibility of unprogrammed, unplanned, and unprogrammable happenings."(Franklin643)

This quote is interesting because it is a central part of her claim for silence. This is why we need silence: because it enables for these amazing, thoughtful things to occur.

"But in many cases silence is not taken on voluntarily and it is this false silence f which I am afraid. It is not the silence only of the padded cell, or of solitary confinement; it is the silence that is enforced by the megaphone, the boom box, the PA system, and any other device that stifles other sounds and voices in order that a planned event can take place."(Franklin163-165)

This quote is interesting because the author is claiming that forced silence is bad. She later goes on to claim that forced noise is also bad. Because of this, she seems to claim that any private manipulation of the sound scape is a bad thing.

"I wonder if music will soon be piped into the voter's booth, maybe an upbeat, slightly military tune: '  Get on with it. Get the votes in.'"(Franklin644)

This is very interesting considering we already see this happening with political propaganda. If it is an attack ad, the music will be very dark and dramatic. If it is a campaign ad, it will be hopeful, soaring, patriotic. I wouldn't be surprised if this were to happen.

Questions:

"The kid is programmed. We are programmed. And we don't even ask for a quiet space anymore."(Franklin646)

I don't really know what she means by "programmed". What is it that we are programmed to do?

"Is not our sanity at least as important as the safety of our cars? One should begin to think: are there places, even in conferences like this, that are hassle-free, quiet spaces, where people can go?"(Franklin,645)

I understand her argument here: silence allows for sanity. There is a character on Doctor Who called "The Master". Ever since he was eight, The Master has been able to hear a constant drumming sound in his head. This sound drove him insane. My question is: Is this what is happening in real life? Has a lack of silence contributed to the increase in school shootings and the like?

The Bird and The Machine

The Bird and the Machine by Loren Eisley

"The Bird and the Machine" is an essay by Loren Eisley about the inhuman nature of technology. He makes a claim that, even if we can get a machine to replicate the human body- or any other body- exactly, it will not be quite human. It won't be alive. It lacks the necessary emotions and thoughts that make up a living creature. He says that, even if we can manufacture a machine that is exactly like a living creature, it won't be the same. He claims that technology is inferior to biology.

Quotes:
 "This is the great age, make no mistake about it; the robot has been born somewhat appropriately along with the atomic bomb, and the brain they say is just another type of more complicated feedback system."(Eisley601)

This quote is very interesting because it illustrates how the "great age" has come at the price of devaluing organic, human life.

 "I have no doubt it can be done, though a mouse harvesting seeds on an autumn thistle is to me a more fine sight and more complicated, I think, in his multiform activity, than a machine "mouse" running a maze."(Eisley602)

This is interesting because the author makes the claim that it is far more complicated for a living mouse to get seeds than a machine mouse. Most of the time, we look at it as being the other way around.

"Ah, my mind takes up, on the other hand the machine does not bleed, ache, hang for hours in the empty sky in a torment of hope to learn the fate of another machine, nor does it cry out with joy nor dance in the air with the fierce passion of a bird. Far off, over a distance greater than space, that remote cry from the heart of heaven makes a faint buzzing among my breakfast dishes and passes on and away."(Eisley607)

This is the passage Eisley ends his article on. I found it very interesting because it tied his claim to his story of the birds in a very powerful way.

Questions:

"I had all the information I needed just like any skilled assassin... I had a professional assassin's reputation to keep up...An assassin has to get used to these things. I had a professional reputation to keep up."(Eisley605-606)

What does he mean by "assassin"? Why does he keep referring to himself as an assassin?

"I quit looking into that eye and managed to get my huge carcass with its fist full of prey back down the ladder."(Eisley605)

Why does he refer to his body as a "huge carcass"?

Eisley, Loren. "The Bird and the Machine". The Immense Journey. 1957

Personal Narrative

Personal Narrative

My experience with technology has always been a strange one. I have always felt like there was a disconnect between my interactions with technology and other people's interactions with technology. Other people have always seemed to be more obsessed and addicted to technology than I ever have been. People act like technology- specifically social media- is an important, and even necessary part of life. If you weren't on a social network, you obviously didn't have a social life.
I started to notice people's obsession with technology early on in life- starting with my dad. My dad is an engineer who works on the GPS and tracking systems for buses. He has a work issued laptop. My dad always brought that work-issued laptop with him whenever we went on vacation. Because of the laptop's frequent appearances during our vacations, my mother facetiously decided that it must be part of the family and decided that it needed a name. So she called it Larry. Each time my dad got a new laptop from work, we would just rename the laptop to Larry the 2nd, then Larry the 3rd, then Larry the 4th, and so on and so forth. I am not quite sure which Larry we are on now, but he still remains my father's constant companion. Every morning, the first thing my dad does is go on his laptop and check up on the buses. He and his technology are practically inseparable.
It wasn't really until middle school that I started to notice that me fellow students were having a similar obsession. Instead of buses, though, they were obsessed with checking their Facebook, MySpace, and Twitter. It seemed like everyone had a Facebook. I didn't get one until maybe 7th grade, but when I got it, I didn't actually use it very often. In fact, it wasn't until very recently that I started to use it with any consistency. I would go years at a time without using it and it never bothered me. Meanwhile, other people couldn't go an hour without checking their feed.
For the longest time it confused me as to how other people could become so addicted to their social media. It wasn't until this past Christmas that I finally figured it out. Their social media was so addictive because it was so easily available- it wasn't a hassle for them to access it. What changed at Christmas was that I got a new iPod Touch. Before, I had an iPod Classic Video (which I had lovingly nicknamed "the dinosaur" whenever I was around middle school students). I had been quite content with my old iPod, and for years I never thought of getting it replaced. That was, until I had bought some Doctor Who HD episodes on iTunes and found that I could not load them onto my iPod because its old systems did not support the glossy HD-ness of my Doctor Who episodes. That was enough to motivate my nerdy butt to ask for a new one. That Christmas, I got exactly that- a new iPod Touch. However, my new iPod touch did more than play Doctor Who episodes and music- I could also link up to my house's Wi-Fi and log onto Facebook via my iPod! This meant that I didn't have to get onto my computer in order to access my Facebook account- which completely changed how easily I could access Facebook. Using my computer to update Facebook was a bit of a hassle. During my middle school years, my computer was so behind on its OS that I couldn't even see the pictures or images on Facebook. When that finally got updated, I found even more problems. Sometimes, my computer would log me out as soon as I logged on to my computer, so even getting on my computer was a problem. Then, when I actually got on my computer I had to be sure to save whatever I was doing every few minutes because my computer screen had a habit of shutting off whenever it felt like it- leaving only the backlight on. Then, I would have to turn my computer off and back on again, because there was no other possible way to continue to operate the machine. I also had multiple internet problems where my computer would decide to not connect up with the internet for no reason. To top it off, my computer was extremely sluggish. All of these factors made logging onto Facebook more trouble than it was worth. My new iPod touch meant that I could bypass all of those problems completely and get onto Facebook easily. Suddenly, I found myself using Facebook more and more often. I also used YouTube more often because of the YouTube app. That is when I realized that the reason why I wasn't as addicted to Facebook was because I didn't have an easy way of accessing it. I'm still not as addicted to Facebook as other people- I think that is because I learned to live without it.
I have also noticed that I am not as addicted to texting as other people. I have easy access to texting- so that is not the issue there. I think part of it may be the fact that I am actually a fairly private person. That could also contribute to the fact that I don't use Facebook as often. I like to have time exclusively to myself, and I prefer to communicate in person. So maybe people's personalities can have an effect on their use of technology. Maybe that is a good thing. I don't think the world needs everyone to be loudly voicing their opinion to the rest of the world. Sometimes the world needs some peace and quiet.

The Interface is the Message

TED Talks

Aaron Koblin: Artfully visualizing our humanity

Summary:
Aaron Koblin's talk on TED Talks was about how technology can make us more human. He talked about how people can be connected together through technology, and they can actually express themselves through interface technology. He showed several projects that he was working on, using primarily sites such as the Mechanical Turk. In each of these projects, he had people do a simple task- such as drawing a picture, and every picture drawn would be put together to make a piece of art. In some cases the people knew the context of why they were doing a particular task, in others no context was given at all.

"19th Century culture was defined by the novel, 20th century culture by cinema, the culture of the 21st century will be defined by the interface."

This was a tweet that was shared by Aaron Koblin at the beginning of his talk. It was interesting because it really summarized everything he was going to talk about. It was also very interesting because the quote itself was a tweet- it was a product of interface itself.

"The interface is the message."

This was the phrase that Koblin ended on. It was very interesting because it was a play on the "medium is the message", this time he was saying that the specific type of interface had a message of its own.

The Mechanical Turk.

This was a site that Koblin talked about quite a bit. He used it to get people to do a specific task- without giving them any context for that task. It was a site created by Google, and it was named after the story of the amazing chess machine that wasn't actually a machine- just a legless man playing chess.

Questions:

Interface

I didn't exactly know what he meant by interface- I had a vague idea, but was still a little confused.

Sheep.

How did the sheep portray anything about humanity being increased by technology, was it the individuality?

Koblin, Aaron. Artfully Visualizing Our Humanity. Making Sense of Too Much Data. TED. 4/7/13. Web. http://www.ted.com/playlists/56/making_sense_of_too_much_data.html.

Technopoly by Neil Postman

Technopoly

Summary:
Technopoly is about assessing technology for both its good and bad consequences. In this particular chapter, "The Judgment of Thamus", Postman stresses that one cannot only look at just the bad side or just the good side of technology. He also stresses that technology may have unforeseen consequences. He talks about how technology changes the balance of society and shifts the way people communicate.

Interesting Quotes:
 "I have brought Freud into the conversation only to show that a wise man- even one of such woeful countenance- must begin his critique of technology by acknowledging its successes."(Postman7)

This is interesting because this sentence characterizes the way Postman advocates looking at technology- that one must look at both the bad and the good. It is also very interesting that he brings in Freud as an example of someone who has critiqued technology well because he first talks about the positive effects of technology, then goes on to talk about its negative effects.

"No manuals have been written to explain what is happening, and the schools are oblivious to it. The old words still look the same, are still used in the same kinds of sentences. But they do not have the same meanings; in some cases, they have opposite meanings."(Postman8)

This is a very interesting quote because Postman assumes that no one is talking about the way technology has changed speech, and no one notices the difference when it has, in fact, been noticed. Last year we read an article on how words have changed to either mean "good" or "bad". It wasn't exactly addressed as to whether or not technology had a hand in this, but it was addressed. Also, Postman doesn't actually give any specific examples of which words have changed and how they have changed. Sure, later on, he gives a list of words who's meanings have been supposedly changed- but he only says that they have changed. He never takes any of those words and says that its meaning has changed from this one specific thing to this other specific thing. This is where Postman's argument is weakened. He assumes that the reader will just blindly agree with his argument that those words have changed in meaning. The article we read last year in Modern Western Thought gave specific examples of words that changed in meaning and how they changed in meaning. For example, the author of the article we read last year said that the word "gentleman" went from a land-owning noble ( a member of the gentry)  to any man who was chivalrous.

"He means to say that those who cultivate competence in the use of a new technology become an elite group that are granted undeserved authority and prestige by those who have no such competence."(Postman9)

This is an interesting quote because it puts into view a different way of looking at the digital natives and the digital immigrants. This is a far more negative way of looking at the whole concept of digital immigrants and digital natives- that the digital natives have an unearned advantage over the digital immigrants.

Confusing Quotes:
"But we may learn from Thamus the following: once a technology is admitted, it plays out its hand, it does what it is designed to do. Our task is to understand what that design is- that is to say, when we admit a new technology to the culture, we must do so with our eyes wide open."(Postman7)

I thought Postman was trying to argue that technology does things that weren't in its original design or intention, not that they do whatever their design intends. Also, are we to only watch and point out all of technology's effects? What is his call to action? What do we do in response to all of these affects?

"For one thing, in cultures that have a democratic ethos, relatively weak traditions, and a high receptivity to new technologies, everyone is inclined to be enthusiastic about technological change, believing that its benefits will eventually spread evenly among the entire population. Especially in the United States, where lust for what is new has no bounds, do we find this childlike conviction most widely held."(Postman11)

What other countries is he talking about besides the United States? He only seems to point out the United States, and it sounds like he has a bias against that particular country. Especially because it doesn't seem like he has actually done any research on what everyone in the United States is thinking. We just read two articles by people in the United States about how a lot of people in the United States are concerned about the negative effects technology may be having on the population. Where has he done his research?

Postman, Neil."Technopoly: The Surrender of Culture to Technology". 1993. New York, USA. Vintage Books.

The Touchscreen Generation

The Touchscreen Generation
 "The Touchscreen Generation" is an article about the affects of technology- specifically touchscreen technology- on young children. It mainly looks to answer the question "Is technology good or bad for young children to use?" The author primarily talks about the whole debate surrounding technology and young children. He addresses the paranoia parents experience over letting their young children use technology. He ultimately comes to the conclusion that technology can be beneficial, but should be limited if it begins to cause problems in a child's behavior and development.

Quotes:
"By their pinched reactions, these parents illuminated for me the neurosis of our age: as technology becomes ubiquitous in our lives, American parents are becoming more, not less, wary of what it might be doing to their children. Technological competence and sophistication have not, for parents, translated into comfort and ease. They have merely created yet another sphere that parents feel they have to navigate in exactly the right way. On the one hand, parents want their children to swim expertly in the digital stream that they will have to navigate all their lives; on the other hand, they fear that too much digital media, too early, will sink them. Parents end up treating tablets like precision surgical instruments, gadgets that might perform miracles for their child’s IQ and help him win some nifty robotics competition—but only if they are used just so. Otherwise, their child could end up one of those sad, pale creatures who can’t make eye contact and has an avatar for a girlfriend."(Rosin1).

This quote is interesting because it sheds light on a reason for limitation of technology that I hadn't considered. It points out that parents limit technology to children because they are made nervous by its increased accessibility.

"Previously, young children had to be shown by their parents how to use a mouse or a remote, and the connection between what they were doing with their hand and what was happening on the screen took some time to grasp. But with the iPad, the connection is obvious, even to toddlers. Touch technology follows the same logic as shaking a rattle or knocking down a pile of blocks: the child swipes, and something immediately happens. A “rattle on steroids,” is what Buckleitner calls it. “All of a sudden a finger could move a bus or smush an insect or turn into a big wet gloopy paintbrush.” To a toddler, this is less magic than intuition. At a very young age, children become capable of what the psychologist Jerome Bruner called “enactive representation”; they classify objects in the world not by using words or symbols but by making gestures—say, holding an imaginary cup to their lips to signify that they want a drink. Their hands are a natural extension of their thoughts."(Rosin2).

This quote was interesting because it points out why iPads and iPad games are so appealing to young children. The touchscreen technology makes the games much more intuitive to young children than other games may be.

"Technically I was the owner of the iPad, but in some ontological way it felt much more his than mine."(Rosin2).

Its very interesting how the author feels alienated from her own possession due to the ease at which her child uses the author's iPad. This is interesting in light of the whole concept of "digital immigrants". She is the digital immigrant, her toddler is the digital native.

Questions on Quotes
"A longitudinal study of children older than 2 and a half showed that the ones who watched Blue’s Clues made measurably larger gains in flexible thinking and problem solving over two years of watching the show."(Rosin3)

How does this connect to the banking concept? Is it not an effective means of teaching because it is not interactive?

" People fret about television and ADHD, although that concern is largely based on a single study that has been roundly criticized and doesn’t jibe with anything we know about the disorder."(Rosin4)

Why do people think that ADHD is connected to TV use? I thought it was largely genetic. My dad grew up only being allowed to watch one TV show, one time a week- The Adventures of Batman and Robin, and yet he has ADHD. Most of his sisters also have ADHD. My brother and I also have ADHD. We inherited from our father, not from the television screen.

Rosin, Hanna. "The Touchscreen Generation" The Atlantic. 20 March, 2013. Web. http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2013/04/the-touch-screen-generation/309250/4/

Is Stupid Making Us Google?

"Is Stupid Making Us Google?"

What is the argument of the reading?
The argument of "Is Stupid Making Us Google?" is that people use the Internet and Google because the way people think and have been educated has changed. The author of the article argues that the way we think has changed in such a way that discourages deeper reading and thinking. He argues that the reason why people use the information for quick fact finding and skimming as opposed to close reading is because that is the way we think now. He argues that politics have caused educators to teach that history and the old way of doing things were both steeped in racism, sexism, homophobia, etc- as opposed to the correct open thinking of today. He argues that education has been dumbed down, and therefore, our thinking has been dumbed down.

How does this connect to other things we have read or discussed?
 "Is Stupid Making Us Google?" is a response to "Is Google Making Us Stupid?". "Is Google Making Us Stupid?" argued that the structure of the Internet has changed the way that we think and consequently has made it harder for us to do deep reading and thinking. "Is Stupid Making Us Google?" argues the opposite- that the way that we think has changed the way the we use and shape the Internet- not the other way around. The author of "Is Stupid Making Us Google" blames politics and poor education for the lack of deep reading found in people today- which is similar to the article on the banking concept that we read at the beginning of the year. It also relates to our discussions surrounding the banking concept. The author of the article that we read at the beginning of the year wrote that the banking concept serves as a way for the higher classes to keep the lower classes from thinking independently- in short, for political reasons. In our discussions we watched a video in which a man explained that the banking concept education that children were getting was scientifically proven to decrease their creative thinking skills over the years. This is similar to  the argument the author of "Is Stupid Making Us Google?" makes. He argues that education is the cause of people's lack of critical thinking- not the Internet.

Question:
If education was the reason why people stopped thinking and reading deeply, then why is it only affecting older people (who graduated years ago) now? Why is it that they have only stopped reading deeply now? Wouldn't it have kept them from reading deeply in the first place?

Is Google Making us Stupid?

Is Google Making Us Stupid?

What is the argument of the reading?
 The argument of "Is Google Making Us Stupid?" is that the internet has shaped our intelligence in a way that prevents us from deep reading. He argues that the way the internet is structrured- with hyperlinks, pop-ups, ads, and summaries- changes the way people read. He argues that the internet's design encourages people to jump from article to article, and skim for information, as opposed to thinking deeply about what they are reading.

How does the reading connect to other things we have read or discussed?
 This reading connects to most of the articles we read at the beginning of the year, particularily with the article we read on the banking concept vs. the problem posing method. In "Is Google Making Us Stupid?" the author argues that deep thinking has been hindered by an internet that encourages skimming through and looking purely for the facts, as opposed to thinking deeply into the text. This is similar to the banking concept, which merely presents facts without the implication that one should think any further into the information presented. "Is Google Making Us Stupid?" also relates to the Lewis article that we read at the beginning of the year about reading with and against the grain. This article encourages reading and re-reading, interacting with the text, and challenging the ideas within the text that you disagree with. This is, as "Is Google Making Us Stupid?" argues, exactly what the internet has stopped us from doing. The author argue that the internet amkes people less inclined to re-read articles, or look into them for deeper meaning.

Question:
Is the internet the only thing responsible for the stoppage of deep reading in people?

Open Access Websites

Ch. 19 #2

Site #1:

http://www.berkeley.edu/news/berkeleyan/2007/02/14_open_access.shtml

The entire site isn't all about open access and free information, but it does have an article that argues for the use of open access in the realm of research and science. The website itself is the official website for Berkeley University, and the article is written about a couple of the proffesors at the school and their arguements for the use of open access. A good thing about this article is that it presents not only the pro-open access arguments, but also the anti-open access arguments. It then presents reasons for why the anti-open access arguments are invalid. This site makes two strong points about the fiscal need for open access. They argue that in order for other researchers and scientists to see the results of another person's research, they have to pay for an expensive scientific journal- which makes it more difficult to obtain information that they might use to help their own research, which hinders their ability to make discoveries and come up with new innovations. Their second fiscal point is that university libraries and scientists in third world countries can't afford to buy scientific journals and are, therefore, not up-to-date on information and advancements in science. It also presents the counter-arguments to open access. The main counter-arguement is that open access doesn't provide enough revenue, and isn't fiscally sound. In order to combat that arguement, the article states that open access journals will make their information free for use 6 months after the particular journal is published.

Site #2:

http://www.arl.org/sparc/openaccess/why-oa.shtml

This site makes many strong arguments for the use of open- access. This site is an open-access publishing site that actually employes the use of open-access. It first tells the reader why open-acces should be used, saying that it benefits investors, reasearchers, and the general public who can enjoy the benefits of a broader access to research. The site also explains what open- access actually is. It also highlights the specific benefits that researchers, educational institutions, businesses, the public, and research funders would each recieve via the use of open-access. Namely, that more useful research will be done, that jobs will be created, and that money will not be misused or wasted.

To Be Free, or Not To Be Free?

Ch. 18 # 1

The claims made by authors of sites and articles advocating free information (or "open access") often argue that the free access of information will produce massive benefits for society at large. Most of them present the benefits it will have for education and research- particularily in the context of scientific findings and articles. They also appeal to pathos, arguing that open access benefits scientists in third world countries, where they can't afford to buy expensive journals, and are therefore, out of the loop on new advancements in the scientific field. They also appeal to pathos by arguing that, because of open access, the public will be able to see the results of the research their tax-dollars paid for. The sites also appeal to ethos, having been created by proffesors from acredited institutions. The articles also create ethos by being featured on the official websites for several accredited institutions. I found their arguments very persuasive. Their arguements were all very logical, and they showed the problems people had when articles weren't published via open-access. They also stated many of the counter-arguements against open access, and then provided logical reasons for why the counter-arguements were invalid. Because of the logic of their reasoning, I have come to the conclusion that open-access, at least for scientific research, should be used.

Transcendentalist Journal Entry #4

Transcendentalist Journal Entry #4
Today is a beautiful day. The sun is shining brightly and the air smells sweet. It is a little bit chilly, but the sun makes it warm enough that one would only need a light jacket on. The wind is blowing softly, making the bare branches of the trees sway slightly. It adds to the chill, but still doesn't make it too cold. The way that the sun filters through the trees is very pretty, and it does much to lift my spirits. I can hear my neighbor's dog barking, but that doesn't bother me as much as it used to. Everything seems very fresh-like spring is right around the corner, waiting to come out. The sky is very blue with very few clouds, and everything is very bright. I can hear the wind whistle through the trees and the dead leaves. All of the plants are starting to look green again. I can't wait for spring to come.
Today Nature lifted my spirits. Tech Week starts tomorrow, and so I have to get my Presidential Report and many other pieces of homework done today- which is a bummer. Getting to take a quick break outside made me feel happy. It readied me to spend the rest of the afternoon at my computer getting to know more about FDR than I have ever wanted to know in my entire life.
Nature can make people feel better. It can act to lift people out of sadness, and give them something to be happy about. It can also make people feel renewed- especially during the spring.

Transcendentalist Journal Entry #3

Transcendentalist Journal Entry #3
 It was very foggy today when I went outside to retrieve my wayward dog, Jimi. The ground was quite wet. It was drizzling lightly, as though the world was getting a misting from the sprinklers that keep produce fresh at the supermarket. It was chilly outside, though it felt colder because of all the drizzle. Everything was soaked as though a thunder storm occurred the night before, even though one had never occurred- probably because of the ever-present drizzle. My dog doesn't like the wet, so it was suprising that I could get him to go outside at all. I called out for him, and looked around the outside of the house-he was shaking himself off underneath the cover by my garage. I went back inside and let him in through the side door.
When I called for him, and he didn't come, I became worried. It was cold, wet, miserable day so he would usually come back as soon as I called. The fog was very ominous and foreboding.
Sometimes nature can worry you. It can make you feel uncomfortable and upset- just by being cold and wet.

Transcendentalist Journal Entry #1

Transcendentalist Blog #1

Today, I went outside. It was cold. It was snowing lightly. The clouds were very dark, and it had looked like it was going to precipitate at some point. The snow started very softly, and I could barely see it at first. Then the snow picked up and started snowing faster. It was very quiet. The ground was very wet and soggy, and some parts of the ground were immersed in puddles of water. I was at AACS High school. The ground was covered in patches of half-dead grass. The snow didn't stick to the ground I was only outside very briefly because I was merely taking a short break from Hairspray practice.
The break from the hard work of Hairspray practice gave me time to relax. My time outside in Nature was very calming and exciting at the same time- mostly because it was snowing. Snow- even on the weekends- still excites me because my snow day have conditioned me to view the frozen precipitation as a blessing that would bring extra sleep and more time to eat food. The air outside felt brisk and refreshing. It was a great way for me to gather my thoughts. I was glad that I was able to go out, while also glad that it wasn't a very long excursion outside- it was very cold after all. the solitude and the silence of nature during the winter was very restful.
Nature can give one a much needed break from over-interaction with other human beings, which is something I value as an introvert. It allows one to take a short breather before diving back into the toils and stress of everyday human life. It also allows for longer, more substantial breaks in the case of heavy snow. In a sense, Nature provides people with a much needed break both mentally and physically.

Transcendentalist Journal #2

Transcendentalist Journal #2
Today when I went outside it was sunny. The fact that it was sunny was contrasted by that fact that it was also snowing. The rate at which it was snowing wasn't very hard to start with, and it became lighter and lighter until the snow eventually stopped falling. It was colder today than it was yesterday. It was also very windy, so the snow swirled around and all over the place as it fell. There wasn't many clouds overhead, but the ones that were there were fairly dark. Were there wasn't any clouds, the sky was a solid, brilliant blue. The branches of the trees were bare, and the ground was covered in more moss and acorns than grass. I could hear the branches of the trees sway in the wind. I could also hear the leaves on the ground be lifted up and begin to swirl around.
The fact that it was sunny outside while it was also snowing struck me as very odd. I have seen the sky raining while being sunny, but I have never seen it be sunny while snowing. It left me in a state of wonder.
Nature can bring new surprises into one's life. It allows one to experience something that they may have never experienced before.

"Open Letter"

1. The argument of "Open Letter" is that it is a teacher's duty to love and respect his or her students, regardless of how annoying or frustrating they might be. The author of "Open Letter", Chris Lehmann, argues this through a critique of a teacher who was in the news for posting mean comments about her students on her blog. Lehmann argues that a teachers job is to teach kids- not only about a certain subject, but also about what it means to be a responsible adult. By acting in a way that was mean and childish, the teacher in question was failing to show children the proper way to act in situatiations that are tiresome or frustrating. Lehmann also argues that, by loving and respecting one's students, a teacher nurtures their growth and earns their respect. By insulting her students, the teacher who made the comments on her blog seriously hurt her student's self-esteem- especially because some of those students may have been working really hard on certain assignments, and were striving to acheive at something. By insulting those students, Lehmann argues, the teacher shot down those children's aspirations and goals. Lehmann argues that it is the teacher's duty to encourage aspirations and goals within children-to teach the children, not just the subject. By neglecting to do so, the teacher who posted those mean comments failed her students.

2. Lehmann argues from pathos quite often in his "Open Letter". He does this by appealing to a sense of duty that teachers have, and by using the phrase that teachers don't "teach subjects- they teach kids". He also talks about how the teacher who insulted her students let them down, and how her students had aspirations of their own, and had worked hard on things. Lehmann also uses syntax to emphasize certain points in his arguement. He does this by putting only a single sentence on one line when talking about certain points. He also does this by using hyphenes to seperate certain descriptions- such as the descriptions of the fallable nature of kids. Lehmann also argues from ethos by putting down that he is the principle at a high school, and by relating some of the frustration he and other teachers have felt towards kids. He does this in order to make him looked like an informed person who has been in the same situation as the teacher he is writing about. This also makes him sound less preachy, and more mentoring. This is to make people more reseptive to his arguement.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fmj1ITl3dZg
The images that appear in this video are ones of people who have become become addicted to meth. Each person has at least two pictures-one of them before their meth addiction, and one of them after their meth addiction. The video argues against the use of meth by showing people exactly what they could turn into if they were to use meth. It uses the emotions of horror, pity, and disgust in order to convince people that one shouldn't use meth. The comment below the video helps to further the arguement by explaining that the people in the video are real meth addicts who had been arrested on multiple occasions for possesing drugs. This means that the effects of drugs on those people was real, and not fake. This prevents someone from ignoring the pictures as fakes. The description also explains how the people pictured became so grotesquely mutilated by informing the viewer that the hillucinatory side-effects of meth sometimes cause people to feel the sensation of bugs crawling under their skin, and how, because of this, people will try to tear away at their skin. This scientific exlanation further pushes the truth of what happens to meth abusers into the viewers mind. Some of the people in the video don't even resemble human beings after their addiction to meth. This shocks the viewer into not wanting to try meth. This ad works to persuade people away from meth use by showing people the shokingly disgusting, real-life affects meth has had on people.

Why do Internet Newsgroups seem to encourage angry outbursts?

Why do Internet Newsgroups seem to encourage angry outbursts?

Internet Newsgroups encourage angry outbursts because they are on the internet where anyone can see, and anyone can respond anonymously. Whenever Internet Newsgroups report on something, they report only "the story" from a third-person view. They report facts, information- not response.The comments to the letter were much more reasonable because the letter was much more reasonable. It didn't dramatize things, but it was still heartfelt. It was a calm, well thought out, reasonable response to the actions reported in a story on the internet. Because of its calm, well thought out, heartfelt nature, the comments made to the letter itself were calm and reasonable. This is because the deep thought found in the letter promotes deep thought from the reader, so their response is more thoughtful. However with a news story on the internet, you are only getting what happened. It is impersonal and brief- only detailing the story itself. Because of this, most people won't think deeply about the story, and will comment with their immediate emotions. This is also why the comments to the news story were shorter- people weren't thinking deeply about the story. Another reason why Internet Newsgroups encourage angry outbursts is because they only report on controversial issues. The teacher story was a controversial issue that provoked an immediate strong emotion to either support the teacher, or be appalled by her behavior. The letter, however, wasn't focused on the controversy. It was written directly to the teacher herself, detailing in a calm reasonable way as to why and how she was in the wrong with a recommendation as to what her next actions should be. It didn't focus on what the teacher did wrong, it focused on how the teacher should have acted.

The Fall of the House of Usher.
Question: How does The Fall of The House of Usher connect to other things we have read or discussed?

The Fall of the House of Usher is a short story by Edgar Allen Poe. It connects to the short story Rip Van Winkle by Washington Irving, as well as to another work by Poe- The Raven. Rip Van Winkle is a whimsical American fairy tale about a man who goes into the forest, meets some strange men, drinks an odd brew, falls asleep, and wakes up twenty years later. The tale of Rip Van Winkle has many illogical, unrealistic elements within it that aren't explained by the author- they are just elements that one has to accept. These elemants include Rip Van Winkle hearing his name being called, even though no one is calling it, odd looking men who do not speak, Rip Van Winkle's ability to survive sleeping for twenty years without any food or drink, and a dog that is over twenty years old. The Fall of the House of Usher also has many elements that are similarily unexplainable. For example, the dismal feeling that the narrator gets when he looks at the house, the narrator's ability to hear the sounds he is reading about, and a blood-red moon that appears suddenly out of nowhere. These elements are in opposition to the enlightenment- which is a movement we discussed in class. The enlightenment was all about man being able to reason through anything, and be able to explain everything. The unexplained elements found within Rip Van Winkle and The Fall of the House of Usher argue against man's ability to understand everything, claiming that there are some things that man isn't able to comprehend.
The Raven also connects with The Fall of the House of  Usher. Both were written by Edgar Allen Poe, but that isn't the only thing that connects them. Both deal with internal struggle or strife. In The Raven the narrator is mourning the loss of his beloved, this causes him to read to far into the raven's message of "Nevermore". The narrator's imagination also plays a part in this, as well as in his fear of the tapping at his chamber door. Meanwhile, in The Fall of the House of Usher, the internal struggle is found within Roderick Usher, who becomes terminally depressed in light of his twin sister's illness. His internal struggle is so intense that he becomes physically ill. His condition worsens after he prematuraly buries his sister in the family tomb before she even dies. This element of internal strife has to do with Romantisism- which focuses on the personal strife of an individual, rather then on the strife of a greater community or humanity in general.

Question:
On page 690 of The Fall of the House of Usher the first paragraph talks about the pecularities of the Usher Family. "I had learned, too, the very remarkable fact, that the stem of the Usher race, all time-honored as it was, had put forth, at no period, any enduring branch; in other words that the entire famly lay in the direct line of descent, and had always, with very trifling and very temporary variation, so lain."
What exactly is meant by this?
Does this mean that the family only ever had one child, or does it mean that the other offspring were never married?
If it is that the family only ever had one child, does this have anything to do with the decay of the House of Usher occuring in this particular generation- given that there was a set of twins born as opposed to a single child?