When i was in the 7th grade in Sudan. i was in my science exam and i was stuck on a certain question, my science teacher saw i was struggling and quickly told me the right answer. i wrote it down but felt guilty afterwards i knew it was cheating but i tried to convince my self that it wasn't that bad because my teacher was the one who told me the answer. i moved on and finished my exam, but before handing in my exam i scratched out the answer. i had decided that it was wrong and that even though the teacher was the one who told me the answer i would still have an unfair advantage. i still don't understand why the teacher did that, on one hand it was empathetic of her and i felt that it was coming from a good place, but it has put me in an awkward situation. in terms of morals it is hard to tell where the teacher was coming from and it is hard to tell weather what she was doing was wrong or not. cheating is always wrong but it made me wonder about a grey area. i wondered if anything could be 100% wrong. i feel like everything is circumstantial. there are things that are just inhumane and unarguably "WRONG". but there are somethings that need to be looked at with a bit of an open heart, and people need to learn to be more sympathetic and understanding of peoples situations, because in times of desperation you may find yourself doing something that is morally questionable in order to survive, your going to have to push someone down in order to get ahead, your going to take shortcuts and do things that will make you unhappy with yourself at times but you do them anyway because life is a series of difficult decisions and in order for one to be successful in life sometimes the ugly path must be taken, i am in no way saying that you should kill or steal or do anything like that because what i am talking about is very different. i am just saying that as people we must not be ignorant, we must not judge others based o past mistakes they have made and we should be able to differentiate between acts of disparity and acts of immorals or cruelty and we need to stop seeing things as being completely black and white because in reality thats just not the way they are. i chose not to use the answer that day and i am proud of myself, but im sure someone else who was allot more desperate and unprepared would have, and if they did, would it really be that wrong......?
Tuesday, 26 November 2013
Sunday, 17 November 2013
views on craverns argument.
I think that the argument presented by Cravern is valid because the premises on which he presented his argument is true. if we do not act in order to prevent global warming it will end in either catastrophe or minimum losses. and if we do act on it, it will result in economic losses but will ultimately protect us from a potential disaster.
Thursday, 10 October 2013
language thoughts......
Defining language:
You cant really define it at all, i see it as a way of communicating with another person and having a sort of mutual understanding between the sender and the receiver so in my my mind even things like hand gestures or winks or smiles are considered as language because they communicate a message, a sigh or a frown can indicate your mood and other people will be able to pick up on what your giving out because frowns and sighs are know in "language" as things that define sadness, just like the actual word "sadness" would. So i do not think it makes sense to say that language is some diversified complex idea that was developed or created by intelligent and superior beings. I see it as being the most basic thing in the world. A frown has the same effect as a descriptive paragraph talking about how sad someone is, they both communicate emotions and are a form of expression.
In my opinion stating that language has some sort of set of rules and that it is conspired or created is ignorant of us as humans.....
If there is a different between language and communication then what is it? It would make no sense to me if someone told me that language was somehow grammatical and was written and that sign language wasn't a real language. People have said that language is a form of communication but what other forms of communication are there? to me it seems like whenever we want to express our selves we use some form of language. Weather it be body language or text or sign language they all fall under the same category which is language.
So if someone wanted to talk to me about how language was a form of communication then i challenge them to tell me exactly what form of communication does not classify as language? People are narcissistic by nature and like to believe in the idea that they have created or developed something that once never was. We like to think that we somehow created language when in fact there is nothing more simple. You cannot say that the languages that the most early and basic humans spoke does not classify as "language" you cannot say that because they did not have text or writing that the way in which they communicated was not language.
In conclusion i believe that people have the need to specify language and make it seem more specific and critical because we want to believe that we have somehow created some sort of evolution and also because we want ownership over the entire idea of language. I personally think that language is ETERNAL. It is something that has always been here and something that will always be here because people and anything living for that matter need to communicate in order to survive. We have evolved and created the languages that we speak today from ancient languages, and those ancient languages evolved from even older languages, and i'm sure those languages originated from even older forms of communication. Basically what i'm saying is that language and communication are the same, and that communication is a necessity to be able to maintain life on this planet.
You cant really define it at all, i see it as a way of communicating with another person and having a sort of mutual understanding between the sender and the receiver so in my my mind even things like hand gestures or winks or smiles are considered as language because they communicate a message, a sigh or a frown can indicate your mood and other people will be able to pick up on what your giving out because frowns and sighs are know in "language" as things that define sadness, just like the actual word "sadness" would. So i do not think it makes sense to say that language is some diversified complex idea that was developed or created by intelligent and superior beings. I see it as being the most basic thing in the world. A frown has the same effect as a descriptive paragraph talking about how sad someone is, they both communicate emotions and are a form of expression.
In my opinion stating that language has some sort of set of rules and that it is conspired or created is ignorant of us as humans.....
If there is a different between language and communication then what is it? It would make no sense to me if someone told me that language was somehow grammatical and was written and that sign language wasn't a real language. People have said that language is a form of communication but what other forms of communication are there? to me it seems like whenever we want to express our selves we use some form of language. Weather it be body language or text or sign language they all fall under the same category which is language.
So if someone wanted to talk to me about how language was a form of communication then i challenge them to tell me exactly what form of communication does not classify as language? People are narcissistic by nature and like to believe in the idea that they have created or developed something that once never was. We like to think that we somehow created language when in fact there is nothing more simple. You cannot say that the languages that the most early and basic humans spoke does not classify as "language" you cannot say that because they did not have text or writing that the way in which they communicated was not language.
In conclusion i believe that people have the need to specify language and make it seem more specific and critical because we want to believe that we have somehow created some sort of evolution and also because we want ownership over the entire idea of language. I personally think that language is ETERNAL. It is something that has always been here and something that will always be here because people and anything living for that matter need to communicate in order to survive. We have evolved and created the languages that we speak today from ancient languages, and those ancient languages evolved from even older languages, and i'm sure those languages originated from even older forms of communication. Basically what i'm saying is that language and communication are the same, and that communication is a necessity to be able to maintain life on this planet.
Is seeing believing?
Is seeing believing?
This question can be perceived in a variety of different ways, seeing is not believing in the sense that sometimes you can be fooled by your senses for example seeing a mirage in an empty desert.
In another sense seeing is believing because it creates justification. For example atheists do not believe in a higher power because in their minds there is no proof of one existing. People are always seeking knowledge and are always trying to answer questions, seeing is believing in the sense that when you see something you believe in its existence because it has been proved to you, because you have seen it you now know it exists. Another example is if you were to lie about the grade you got on a test your parents might not believe you have done so well until they see the grade for themselves, this goes back to the idea that sight is a form of justification or (proof) of somethings existence.
In my opinion seeing is believing because when you see something you know it is genuine and that it exists in real life, taking into account that sometimes we tend to twist or wrongly interpret what we see, we still believe what we believe because we have seen it.
This question can be perceived in a variety of different ways, seeing is not believing in the sense that sometimes you can be fooled by your senses for example seeing a mirage in an empty desert.
In another sense seeing is believing because it creates justification. For example atheists do not believe in a higher power because in their minds there is no proof of one existing. People are always seeking knowledge and are always trying to answer questions, seeing is believing in the sense that when you see something you believe in its existence because it has been proved to you, because you have seen it you now know it exists. Another example is if you were to lie about the grade you got on a test your parents might not believe you have done so well until they see the grade for themselves, this goes back to the idea that sight is a form of justification or (proof) of somethings existence.
In my opinion seeing is believing because when you see something you know it is genuine and that it exists in real life, taking into account that sometimes we tend to twist or wrongly interpret what we see, we still believe what we believe because we have seen it.
Saturday, 28 September 2013
ladder of abstraction
Ladder of abstraction:
knowledge claim: Fruits are getting riper due to global warming.
Poor knowledge question:
Why do you think fruits are getting riper due to global warming?
Good knowledge question:
How could we use our knowledge of the way in which climate effects plant growth to create a relationship between the rising temperature and the ripening of fruit?
knowledge claim: Fruits are getting riper due to global warming.
Poor knowledge question:
Why do you think fruits are getting riper due to global warming?
Good knowledge question:
How could we use our knowledge of the way in which climate effects plant growth to create a relationship between the rising temperature and the ripening of fruit?
knowledge claims
knowledge claim: women who live in sub Saharan African are more likely to contract malaria than women who live in more economically developed countries.
Good knowledge question:
how can we use the geography and climate of the region to justify the abundance of malaria?
Bad knowledge question:
Why do you think there are more cases of malaria in the sub Saharan African region than there are in MEDC'S.
Good knowledge question:
how can we use the geography and climate of the region to justify the abundance of malaria?
Bad knowledge question:
Why do you think there are more cases of malaria in the sub Saharan African region than there are in MEDC'S.
what assumptions are being made about the relationship between language and thought? (Orwell)
Why is the ruthless totalitarian regime described in Orwell's novel purging Oldspeak and imposing new speak? What assumptions are being made about the relationship between language and thought?
New speak was created as a form of control. By limiting a persons vocabulary your ultimately limiting the way they think because we think in the language that we speak, so by narrowing down the amount of words that people are able to use you are making it harder for people to think outside the box or be innovative or curious, because they are unable to communicate anything outside the little language they know their thought are controlled.
an example of this are the ways in which they are allowed to express positive and negative. they are given 2 key words; (good, bad) there are only 6 words to describe good and bad things. by controlling a persons vocabulary they are also controlling their expression. For example if something horrific were to happen the word bad would ultimately be used even though the word is insensitive to the situation. Also if something amazing were to happen something along the lines of the word good would also be used.
What i am trying to express is that not only does it limit a persons thoughts it also effect their emotions because if something were to happen that would cause you great sadness you would be forced to think of it as being bad because its all you know even though it is completely inappropriate for the situation but because you wouldn't be able to think of it as being something tragic or horrendous you wouldn't feel that way either.
What i am trying to say is that language is almost directly parallel to thought! and everything we think, we think using words and language so by limiting our language you limit our thoughts and by limiting our thoughts you ultimately limit out emotions and expression.
I think the effect that language has on us as human beings is so interesting, the idea that we think what we feel through the language we speak and that limiting that language could go as far as changing the way we feel is remarkable.
New speak was created as a form of control. By limiting a persons vocabulary your ultimately limiting the way they think because we think in the language that we speak, so by narrowing down the amount of words that people are able to use you are making it harder for people to think outside the box or be innovative or curious, because they are unable to communicate anything outside the little language they know their thought are controlled.
an example of this are the ways in which they are allowed to express positive and negative. they are given 2 key words; (good, bad) there are only 6 words to describe good and bad things. by controlling a persons vocabulary they are also controlling their expression. For example if something horrific were to happen the word bad would ultimately be used even though the word is insensitive to the situation. Also if something amazing were to happen something along the lines of the word good would also be used.
What i am trying to express is that not only does it limit a persons thoughts it also effect their emotions because if something were to happen that would cause you great sadness you would be forced to think of it as being bad because its all you know even though it is completely inappropriate for the situation but because you wouldn't be able to think of it as being something tragic or horrendous you wouldn't feel that way either.
What i am trying to say is that language is almost directly parallel to thought! and everything we think, we think using words and language so by limiting our language you limit our thoughts and by limiting our thoughts you ultimately limit out emotions and expression.
I think the effect that language has on us as human beings is so interesting, the idea that we think what we feel through the language we speak and that limiting that language could go as far as changing the way we feel is remarkable.
Monday, 26 August 2013
my subjects!
Geography:
My favorite and most beneficial subject in my opinion is geography. mostly because i enjoy learning about the world. Geography is a combination of many important subjects such as economics, political sciences and history and it is just something i have always been interested in. I like understanding the things happening around me and geography creates insight into the world around you.
English literature:
My second favorite subject is definitely English lit. I like stories and have always been interested in literature because of the freedom i have as a reader to create my own interpretation of a text. I am really creative and like the idea of there not being a right answer or fixed set of ideas that apply to everyone, that's why i like literature so much, because it gives me freedom to express my opinion.
biology:
biology is by far my favorite science. i like it because it talks about things i can relate to like people and animals, that's why its so interesting because so much of it applies to me and my surroundings. i like learning about animals and whats makes people what they are. also i like it because its the easiest science for me to understand iv never been very good at subjects like math and physics. and i am better at biology than other sciences because it requires more understanding unlike physics that evolves around math and has allot to do with memorizing formulas and theorems.
french:
I like french because its always interesting to learn a new language. I am not amazing at it but i try and iv lived in Canada so its somehow more familiar to me than other languages like Spanish.
chemistry:
i like chemistry because it has allot in common with biology which i am okay at so its not as hard to understand as physics and allot of the the topics are in close relation with biology so it makes sense for me to be taking it. I'm not really passionate about it but i don't mind it either, if i work really hard i can cope with the concepts and i managed to pass it in my IGCSE's so i just stuck with it because i thought it was something i could get an okay grade in.
MATHS -.-
I am awful at math to be honest. Its just something iv always struggled with ever since i was a kid. I don't understand it and i can do it on a really basic level, that's why i chose to do math studies in ib. I knew i wouldn't be able to cope with higher level or standard level so i decided to be realistic and stick to something i thought i could get a good grade in. I was told that if i excel in studies i could then move up to math standard level but i am fine where i am for now and the chance of moving up is pretty low for me, i am quite happy with my current class.
My favorite and most beneficial subject in my opinion is geography. mostly because i enjoy learning about the world. Geography is a combination of many important subjects such as economics, political sciences and history and it is just something i have always been interested in. I like understanding the things happening around me and geography creates insight into the world around you.
English literature:
My second favorite subject is definitely English lit. I like stories and have always been interested in literature because of the freedom i have as a reader to create my own interpretation of a text. I am really creative and like the idea of there not being a right answer or fixed set of ideas that apply to everyone, that's why i like literature so much, because it gives me freedom to express my opinion.
biology:
biology is by far my favorite science. i like it because it talks about things i can relate to like people and animals, that's why its so interesting because so much of it applies to me and my surroundings. i like learning about animals and whats makes people what they are. also i like it because its the easiest science for me to understand iv never been very good at subjects like math and physics. and i am better at biology than other sciences because it requires more understanding unlike physics that evolves around math and has allot to do with memorizing formulas and theorems.
french:
I like french because its always interesting to learn a new language. I am not amazing at it but i try and iv lived in Canada so its somehow more familiar to me than other languages like Spanish.
chemistry:
i like chemistry because it has allot in common with biology which i am okay at so its not as hard to understand as physics and allot of the the topics are in close relation with biology so it makes sense for me to be taking it. I'm not really passionate about it but i don't mind it either, if i work really hard i can cope with the concepts and i managed to pass it in my IGCSE's so i just stuck with it because i thought it was something i could get an okay grade in.
MATHS -.-
I am awful at math to be honest. Its just something iv always struggled with ever since i was a kid. I don't understand it and i can do it on a really basic level, that's why i chose to do math studies in ib. I knew i wouldn't be able to cope with higher level or standard level so i decided to be realistic and stick to something i thought i could get a good grade in. I was told that if i excel in studies i could then move up to math standard level but i am fine where i am for now and the chance of moving up is pretty low for me, i am quite happy with my current class.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)