arm twisting

in the situation about arm twisting i think it really comes down to if you believe in the ends justifying the means. Im not really sure if i believe in doing something wrong to someone even if it does end up helping other people. What do you think?

puppy punting

although puppy punting obviously seems wrong to you and I, I don't really believe that it is morally wrong just because we believe that it is. I don't think that any one person can truly know what is morally wrong or right.

morality

In the example from the discussion board i believe that most people would be stopped from torturing a child by their morality. Most people have this sense of wrongdoing when they do something that they know isn't right. I think this is what makes us different from special cases where people do something really wrong like a serial killer, in most cases they know that what they are doing is wrong but they just don't feel bad about it and have no remorse.

milgram

the milgram experiment makes me think that the reason all of these people keep shocking the other person is because we have all been trained to listen to authority figures since we were little. Because this is definitly true in places like the military, why do some soldiers get in trouble for commiting war crimes if they were just following orders? is it really their fault when weve all been trained like this since we were born? Even if what they have been ordered to do is wrong is it really thier own fault and do they really have a choice??

Freedom

This week in class we talked about what it is to be free and if we really do have control over our lives. I think this is one of those questions that will never be able to be answered because there is no way to tell if for sure if someone makes a decision freely or if it has been predetermined by outside factors. Id like to think that i have control over my own life, but theres really no way to know for sure.

teltransportation is impossible

When we first started talking about the teletransporter, i thought that it definitely would be possible for someone to be transported to another planet, after being dissentegrated, and still be the same person. But after thinking about it a little longer i think that it would be impossible for someone using this teletransporter to be the same person on another planet. If the person using the teletransporter presses the button, but is dissentegrated only after the new body is made on the other planet it would be impossible for the "real" person to be embodied in the "new" body because then the person would have to be at 2 places at the same time. This is exactly the same thing that happens in the teletransporter example except only that the dissentegration is delayed. So therefore tele-transportation must be impossible. (except in Jumper , Willy Wonka, Star Trek, Heroes, and Back to the Future, )

The Mind vs. The Machine

This week in class we talked a lot about the difference between the mind and the brain and what things actually have a mind. I believe that if something has a mind the most basic characteristic of this is to be able to properly display emotions. This is what separates us from super computers, even with all the advancements in technology over the past decades no one has been able to replicate a machine that can display emotions quite like something with a mind. I'm really not sure if anyone will ever be able to do this either.

Descartes on God

Descartes says in his meditations that all truth depends on God. He even goes as far to say that it would be possible for God to change the principles of mathematics and make 2 + 2 not equal 4. This seems strange to me and im sure no modern philosopher would tie so much of their theories of truth and knowledge with religion but its still interesting to see how closely tied knowledge and religion once was. Now it could b e explained that Descartes did this only so that his work would not cause him to be excommunicated from the church, but he seems genuine in his beliefs. Its interesting to think about though.

Framing

The discussion post this week talked about the subject of "Framing" and how certain frames shape the way we perceive information or how the information is being presented to us. I agree that this is true, and it can also be very difficult to remove these frames when we are receiving new information. I'm really not sure that it always comes down to people just being lazy and taking their news or information from one source either. Like we discussed in class earlier this week there are really only 5 major corporations that own 90% of the media. We these companies put their own frames or spin on information that they put out for the public it creates only a few viewpoints that the general public has to get their information from in the first place. Information has been framed for us since our childhood and i think that where we are at today its nearly impossible to find news that has not been spun in any way and that is dangerous.

War on ....wait... what?

in class on Friday we talked about the "war on terror" and if it was really necessary or not. That got me thinking, how is it possible to win a "war" when you don't have a clear enemy? How do you beat terror? how can you win against drugs? I think the term "war" is often used as propaganda justify the use of military force or to justify using billions of dollars into something that may otherwise look questionable to the public. The war on drugs has been considered by some as a huge waste of money that has yielded little results. In 2003 alone the U.S. federal government spent 19 billion dollars on the war on drugs and jails have become over crowded from its zero tolerance policy. But who can argue that drugs aren't bad?? and who can be against the WAR on DRUGS? Who can be against a WAR on TERRORISM? Once we found out that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction, we were never actually looking for them we were beginning operation IRAQI FREEDOM....seriously???? These kinds of labels that the government puts on misguided programs and military intervention makes it seem un-american to criticize them. This is smart for the government who would want little criticism of their plans but, i don't know sounds like propaganda to me.

Links:
http://www.drugsense.org/wodclock.htm

Propaganda in America

I think its sort of hypocritical of America in general to always point out other countries (such as China and Russia) as having a completely bias systems of news and media. Dont get me wrong governmental censorship of information available to people is scary and everyone should have access to all the information that is available. But the bottom line is that the driving force behind every major news outlet in America is to make money. So if these news outlets have stories that they know their viewers don't want to hear or would make the corporations that own them look bad, then they aren't going to tell people about it. For example, once people began getting sick of hearing how bad things were in New Orleans after hurricane Katrina the story just went away, even though many parts of the city are still under water today. This type of censorship happens in America all the time and i really don't think that censorship by corporation is a whole lot better than censorship by government.

Other Stories that got little attention:
Top Stories of 2007
Global Warming