HACKING MY EDUCATION

Funny this should be the assignment tonight since I recently watched this morning this TEDTALK about a 13 year old boy who hacked his own education.
This school year I believed Ive taken a step in the right direction. I stumbled into the world of autodidacticism in which I've started to venture out from the confines of public school system and have started to teach myself things. For instance I've been reading, a lot. In the past 3 weeks I have read seven books, everywhere from Utopian to nonfiction to philosophy. I have also been watching a lot of documentaries and although the opinions are skewed I do learn a lot of new things, I watched one the other day (A State of Mind) which completely opened my mind to a society and culture I knew very little of. Also with the recent addition of creating the website inlocopolitico I feel the obligation to keep up with current events which has turned out to be very helpful.

Lit Terms #2

exposition: The setting of the story
expressionism: creating work through use of nature and it's elements
fable: Short story using animals to teach morals
fallacy: misleading argument
falling action: The series of events that occur after the climax
farce: a short play focusing on situations
figurative language: language that contains figures of speech
flashback: to recall a lifelike memory from the past
foil: to keep someone from succeeding
folk tale: A story passed on traditionally from generation to generation
foreshadowing: A technique author's use to allude to upcoming scenes
free verse: verse that does not have any pattern
genre: category which a story is placed under
gothic tale: A story usually told under the genre of gothism
hyperbole: This literary terms list is taking FOREVER.
imagery: To vividly describe setting, people, objects etc. in a story
implication: Something usually implied by the story
incongruity: does not follow set path
inference: The act of inferring
irony: To state a meaning completely opposite of what was given.
I used dictionary.com for my definitions

Women's Rights in 2013 (As seen by Mia Levy)

Women gained a lot of rights for their gender during the Civil rights movement. They altered the way America was run from redesigning the constitution to allow women the right to vote to persuading the military to allow women to join them. Yet after those few rights were won over the boycotting and petitions have slowed down. Which makes sense, women are allowed to do almost anything they aspire but there are still an alarming amount of things underground that our society simply overlooks.

If you have the time and interest please spend the next three minutes and forty seconds of your life watching this video,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NswJ4kO9uHc

This gender debate is considered a huge quagmire which is understandable. If we choose to completely eradicate gender stereotypes then we get rid of not only the bad but the good too. Men should be allowed to hit women for example even though the stigma is that this is forbidden because of the evident strength difference. This strength difference is something controlled by genetics, there is nothing we can do to make that equal. Take for example how women are not allowed to fight in the armed forces and the reason for this is that they simply do not have the strength or stamina that a man does, combined with the problems sexual tension could cause during attacks (Its instinct for a man to protect a women before another man). There’s a very thin line between getting rid of gender roles and getting rid of the difference between the x and y chromosome.  We can’t forcefully alter one of those, but there are a lot of stigmas we can. 

Why haven’t we ever had a women president? Just think about that for a little. Because no women has run before that possesses the capabilities? Or because the comfort of a man in an authority position is what America gravitates too? As seen in the video I do think it boils down to the way the media portrays them, for example in recent years using sex to advertise has burgeoned in America.

Take for example this song:
http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/2013/09/17/from-the-mouths-of-rapists-the-lyrics-of-robin-thickes-blurred-lines-and-real-life-rape/
or this one:
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/newslocal/the-hills/girls-education-campaigner-calls-for-ban-on-sexualised-bruno-mars-song-8216gorilla8217/story-fngr8i1f-1226717666010
or the criticism said to this newscaster:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rUOpqd0rQSo

Yes these references we all know are considered morally wrong, but the upsetting thing is not enough people take physical action. Why haven’t people stopped going to Jack in the Box or buying AXE body spray as a way of telling them their commercials are offensive? Why doesn’t society stop listening to artists such as Bruno Mars or Robin Thicke as a way of telling them their work is disrespectful? 

I believe the stigmas starts at young age where we subconsciously ingrain these roles into our children. The princess needs to be rescued, a man needs to provide. “You’re a man, stop crying.” “You’re a lady, cross your legs” and as a child gets older it only becomes worse. A man should pay for his date, a women should wear makeup to make her face flawless to attract a man.
Take a look at this article for more information:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lisa-bloom/how-to-talk-to-little-gir_b_882510.html
or take a look as to why girls are undervalued:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michaela-haas/oh-boy-the-antigirl-bias-_b_884399.html

Yet it’s not just men who undervalue women, but we do as well. Take for example the certain craze adolescent girls partake in, which they stalk male celebrities such as Justin Bieber or One Direction. There are plenty of instances where young girls say extremely sexual things towards these men, where the spend hours trying to get one of these boys to follow them on twitter. They ignore the dignity and respect they’re entitled to. You do not need a man to feel whole. The first step in earning respect from others is to respect yourself

We have the power, now let’s just make the change."

To find more articles like this one please checkout:
http://inlocopolitico.wordpress.com/

Fight or Flight

             Plato's Allegory of the Cave and Sartre's No Exit both deal with major character flaws in the human race that have transcended from generation to generation. Both author's use humans placed in unsatisfactory situations. One being stuck in a cave for eternity and the other stuck in a hotel room. The interesting thing about these two stories are the characters themselves. When placed in their unsuitable enviorment a denizen from the cave reacts much differently then Garcin in the hotel room, the two different outlooks further along their specific author's theme, tone, and philosophy.
               Take for example a slave witnesses one of his fellow slaves defy their metaphysical situation and venture out of the cave. Now this is unheard of, the slave will retreat into a state of shock. The instant reaction will be to flee to the humans placed next to them. Even if the freed slave is happy the other slaves have such an addiction to codependency that they lack the skill set to leave the comfortable cave. It all leads back to the human tendency to fear change. This ultimately proves another point Plato is saying through his allegory, that we do not know the reality of the world we live in until we have seen others. So does this prove the point that maybe our reality is completely different then the man next to us is? This also settles the continuous tone of uncertainty carried out by all the slaves. 
                Now Garcin would take a much different approach. Watching a counterpart exit the "hell" he is placed into would almost anger him. He would take the 'fight' approach and demand to know why he would not be allowed to leave as well after his certain try to follow. This is the difference between Sartre and Plato. Sartre's characters describe a completely different flaw, that their independency does not provide them with the skills to live comfortably with others. Even to the point where they are so arrogant that being forced to spend 24 hours a day with themselves almost makes things unbearable, their so disgusted with the human race that they are unable to be around it. This provides evidence to the point that, "Hell is other people."
This also adds onto the vainglorious tone carried throughout the entire story.
               When analyzed it seems as though Plato and Sartre told completely different stories that showcased different flaws in ourselves. Yet this by itself is another flaw we have. The ability to over think. Sartre and Plato told the same story, a story about a tragic human flaw. A flaw that makes us less of a person. Even though these flaws are different, does it really even matter?

THINKING OUTSIDE THE BOX

Questions in Text:
Think about the place you have chosen as your hell. Does it look ordinary and bourgeois,
like Sartre's drawing room, or is it equipped with literal instruments of torture like
Dante's Inferno? Can the mind be in hell in a beautiful place? Is there a way to find peace
in a hellish physical environment? Enter Sartre's space more fully and imagine how it
would feel to live there endlessly, night and day:

My hell is very close to Satre's . The most powerful torture instrument is the human mind, going insane is the quickest way to desingrate a person's mentality. Although the human mind is also our biggest allie. If you can harvest the power of the mind such as Monk's do then you have the ability to reach enlightenment and therefore you are not in hell at all.

How does Sartre create a sense of place through dialogue? Can you imagine what it feels 

like to stay awake all the time with the lights on with no hope of leaving a specific place? 

How does GARCIN react to this hell? How could you twist your daily activities around 

so that everyday habits become hell? Is there a pattern of circumstances that reinforces 

the experience of hell? 

Through his dialogue he uses imagery in the character's language and the stage directions to convey the setting. Garcin takes almost a pompus approach to the whole situation. It's as if he has no fear of hell and he has lived through this all already, he almost expects more then what he is placed in. Doing the SAME thing everyday with the same results quickly becomes hell. School, Work, Repeat. 

Both Satre and Plato describe humans as almost a dumb and ignorant race. Take for example Satre's use of placing these people in a room and these people don't even realize their in hell. Plato shows a group of humans so fearful of the outside that they refuse to even look at it. Not the main difference here is in Satre's story his group does eventually realize where they are and how terrible it is.

BRAIN WITH [x] LEGS

My group (so far) consists of Kevin, Sam, Javier, and myself. We are reading Great Expectations.

Our plan is to finish the story in 14 days.
Taken into consideration if we read at least 4 chapters a day we will be able to accomplish our goal.
Our main form of communication will be through facebook and in person, mainly to discuss what we had previously read and what questions we may have had.
We will discuss the story at least two days a week through this forum to ensure everyone is on the right track.

Plato's Study Questions

1. According to Socrates, what does the Allegory of the Cave represent?
It's the transitioning of ignorance in ones life to seeing and understanding knowledge and the truth. An example would be when the prisoners are not allowed to see reality because they are chained up. so the only "reality" that they perceive to be "reality" would be what they know from being inside the cave all there life.

2. What are the key elements in the imagery used in the allegory?
The raging fire that stands behind them is the representation of the natural "sun". The shadows present themselves to be the images of or figures of animals, people, any outside living. The shackles/ chains represent the restriction of life that prevents us from seeing and knowing what is real. Darkness is the lack of truth/Knowledge that the prisoners know.

3. What are some things the allegory suggests about the process of enlightenment or education?
Shouldn't people accept the truth when they are exposed to it? The thing is that ignorance isn't so wrong when reality hasn't really been available to them. People should go and put themselves out there in order to seek the education, so they will become informed and have the knowledge of the truth rather than metaphorically living in darkness without the knowledge that is being given so close.

4. What do the imagery of "shackles" and the "cave" suggest about the perspective of the cave dwellers or prisoners?
The shackles represent that the prisoners are not completely ignorant, because the prisoners were born into  the darkness. They were just simply physically unable to seek the outside knowledge because of the restraint they were in. The cave is dark with a muggy feel to it, and  is very closed off. It personifies the ignorance as something unpleasant because of its dark feel to it. Turns out to be complete opposite of the feeling towards light and brilliance.

5. In society today or in your own life, what sorts of things shackle the mind?
Technology plays a key role in our lives today. Ever since the invention of electronics we have relied on its advancements more and more. I would say that we are slowly loosing the rich knowledge of knowing how to depend on natural resources, learning how to work with nature to benefit ourselves or others, compared to the dependency of technology. Our minds are becoming shackled because you can see little babies playing with toys that are filled with technology to enhance the play for the kids. There are video games that will "enhance" the learning at an even earlier age. Children are being born into the "cave"  and are slowly shying away from the works of life.

6. Compare the perspective of the freed prisoner with the cave prisoners?
The perspective of the cave prisoner was much more closed minded because they haven't had the chance to be enlightened like the freed prisoner. The cave prisoners are much more likely to shy away from the opportunity because it is out of their norm. That are already accustomed to what is comfortable for them and if it comes to adjusting to something new, then they'd feel outside of there "reality". For the freed prisoner who feels enlightened by what new world there is out there compared to being inside the cave. He feels that there is something new outside and is willing to learn about the reality outside the cave in order to enhance his knowledge of what the world has to offer.

7. According to the allegory, lack of clarity or intellectual confusion can occur in two distinct ways or contexts. What are they?
You can either choose to accept the truth and enhance your knowledge about such things. Or you can also shy away from the truth and choose to now accept the truth. But by not accepting and learning from the truth then you will not become enlightened with knowledge.

8. According to the allegory, how do cave prisoners get free? What does this suggest about intellectual freedom?
Someone lead a prisoner outside in showing them reality. He was able to learn and adjust to something new. By learning from others he is able to teach others and share the knowledge he now holds. It is just like a teacher student relationship. The teacher shows his ways to the student and he learns off of them to soon lead for himself, and then lead others in teaching what he has learned. It is like a cycle.

9. The allegory presupposes that there is a distinction between appearances and reality. Do you agree? Why or why not?
Yes I do agree. For instance many fail to see the reality in many common things. When getting to know somebody first impressions are almost ALWAYS judged on appearance.

10. If Socrates is incorrect in his assumption that there is a distinction between reality and appearances, what are the two alternative metaphysical assumptions?