Humanities
In this class we learn about what has happened through time the conflict that we shroud each other in all the time, examples of this would be the wars and the genocide that have occurred. Through this we learn the truth about these objects and how they affect people all the time and all over.
Seminars
Omelas
Omelas Reflection
Part One:
If someone were to try and rescue the child and failed or even succeeded then I believe that both ways would disrupt the flow of the town. This is because in the book the narrator was saying that without the child the whole town would collapse. This I believe is because the child is the only person that takes all of the bad things in life and therefore is the only one who has to suffer. So both ways would majorly affect the lifestyle and the emotions of the townspeople in the story.
So if the child were to be rescued by someone who succeeded and actually cared then things would be affected more heavily. By this I meant that the towns’ people would no longer have an object that would contain and have to deal with all of the pain and suffering. Therefore they would have nothing to feel good about or to learn from so they would therefore be the ones who must suffer. However this is not the only con, even if the child was successfully rescued then it would still be very depressed for it had been living in that horrible area for so long that it had accustomed itself to that living style. It would therefore not be able to enjoy itself and be happy with its life. So the only conclusion is that no one would be happy in the end.
Now if someone were to attempt and rescue the child but failed because of some reason, most likely they were caught, it would still have an effect on the town. This is because the person who would be caught would most likely be punished. By doing this it may cause the citizens feel guilt for once because not it is not the child that is being punished but one of their own people who they actually cared for. This would eventually affect the whole town because then one person would try to help the other and guilt will spread through the town like a virus and eventually terminate and destroy the whole purpose of the town.
Part Two:
I believe that the citizens of the town are shown the child because it teaches them a very important lesson and because the child is what makes them who they are. By this I mean that the child is what makes them happy for many reasons. Some of the reasons would be that he is the object that takes all of the bad things in life and he must deal with them, another reason is that when they are shown the child it shows them that they should be very happy for they are lucky that they are not the ones who must endure the burden of having to take that position and role in their society. These would be the main reasons why the citizens of the town are shown the poor boy in the closet for he is who teaches them the cruelty in life.
Part One:
If someone were to try and rescue the child and failed or even succeeded then I believe that both ways would disrupt the flow of the town. This is because in the book the narrator was saying that without the child the whole town would collapse. This I believe is because the child is the only person that takes all of the bad things in life and therefore is the only one who has to suffer. So both ways would majorly affect the lifestyle and the emotions of the townspeople in the story.
So if the child were to be rescued by someone who succeeded and actually cared then things would be affected more heavily. By this I meant that the towns’ people would no longer have an object that would contain and have to deal with all of the pain and suffering. Therefore they would have nothing to feel good about or to learn from so they would therefore be the ones who must suffer. However this is not the only con, even if the child was successfully rescued then it would still be very depressed for it had been living in that horrible area for so long that it had accustomed itself to that living style. It would therefore not be able to enjoy itself and be happy with its life. So the only conclusion is that no one would be happy in the end.
Now if someone were to attempt and rescue the child but failed because of some reason, most likely they were caught, it would still have an effect on the town. This is because the person who would be caught would most likely be punished. By doing this it may cause the citizens feel guilt for once because not it is not the child that is being punished but one of their own people who they actually cared for. This would eventually affect the whole town because then one person would try to help the other and guilt will spread through the town like a virus and eventually terminate and destroy the whole purpose of the town.
Part Two:
I believe that the citizens of the town are shown the child because it teaches them a very important lesson and because the child is what makes them who they are. By this I mean that the child is what makes them happy for many reasons. Some of the reasons would be that he is the object that takes all of the bad things in life and he must deal with them, another reason is that when they are shown the child it shows them that they should be very happy for they are lucky that they are not the ones who must endure the burden of having to take that position and role in their society. These would be the main reasons why the citizens of the town are shown the poor boy in the closet for he is who teaches them the cruelty in life.
The Global Village
Globalization Reflection
1. One of the comments that I found the most intriguing during the seminar was when Marley talked about if we think that the combining is a good idea or a very bad idea. From my perspective I truly believe that the combining of communities would be a very bad idea. The reason for this conclusion that I have made is that if we were to combine countries and break borders people would lose a piece of their individual specialness. Evidence from this would be in the paper that we read in class that Ayer had written he noticed that countries were losing their certain individuality that made them special, and that they were inheriting traits from the US. Such traits would be having Mc. Donald’s and also dressing like Americans and following their religion. This could only lead to violence jealousy and conflict which would not bring any good to the world.
2. In the globalized world that Pico describes I do not believe that our identity would be very strong. I say this for many reasons, one reason would be that if all communities are combined then we all would have come from the same origin and there would not be anything interesting to learn from one another. Another factor that would make the globalization of the world a bad thing is how all of the artifacts in the world are not important; neither are history important because all are related and the same.
3. All of my conclusions are also supported by Pico for when he is realizing that the mixing of the whole world would be unstable. An example of this would be in paragraph 2 “ the whole planet, you might say, is going global.” He is realizing that the world was going to combine itself, then he realized that this was not a good thing. This is shown in paragraph 1 “ Who am I, I sometimes wonder.” He is starting to lose himself in the world because it is moving so fast that people lose themselves. In the end there is only one conclusion to this and that is that the global village happening will only be bad.
4. This type of global village concept has become visible to me during a personal experience. This was when I went on a trip with my father to England and Kenya. During this trip I saw similar traits to the world that is described be Pico. For example when we went to England there were a few American things such as Mc. Donald’s, this was a sign that communities were forming together and that they were losing their individuality and specialness. However when I traveled to Kenya their culture was still intact and they did not have the same restraints but their original uniqueness. This was showing me that they would have a better chance of staying the same and not falling into the global village trap.
5. In this cartoon I am trying to express how people would not be very happy in the end. By this I mean that after a while people will eventually realize that they want to be their individual self and not like everyone else. In the drawing that I made it shows how after the years pass people will become bored and will then eventually badly desire the need for differentially. This desire will eventually lead to the inevitable violence that it will cause. That is what my poster is trying to communicate, that the global village will lead to disaster.
1. One of the comments that I found the most intriguing during the seminar was when Marley talked about if we think that the combining is a good idea or a very bad idea. From my perspective I truly believe that the combining of communities would be a very bad idea. The reason for this conclusion that I have made is that if we were to combine countries and break borders people would lose a piece of their individual specialness. Evidence from this would be in the paper that we read in class that Ayer had written he noticed that countries were losing their certain individuality that made them special, and that they were inheriting traits from the US. Such traits would be having Mc. Donald’s and also dressing like Americans and following their religion. This could only lead to violence jealousy and conflict which would not bring any good to the world.
2. In the globalized world that Pico describes I do not believe that our identity would be very strong. I say this for many reasons, one reason would be that if all communities are combined then we all would have come from the same origin and there would not be anything interesting to learn from one another. Another factor that would make the globalization of the world a bad thing is how all of the artifacts in the world are not important; neither are history important because all are related and the same.
3. All of my conclusions are also supported by Pico for when he is realizing that the mixing of the whole world would be unstable. An example of this would be in paragraph 2 “ the whole planet, you might say, is going global.” He is realizing that the world was going to combine itself, then he realized that this was not a good thing. This is shown in paragraph 1 “ Who am I, I sometimes wonder.” He is starting to lose himself in the world because it is moving so fast that people lose themselves. In the end there is only one conclusion to this and that is that the global village happening will only be bad.
4. This type of global village concept has become visible to me during a personal experience. This was when I went on a trip with my father to England and Kenya. During this trip I saw similar traits to the world that is described be Pico. For example when we went to England there were a few American things such as Mc. Donald’s, this was a sign that communities were forming together and that they were losing their individuality and specialness. However when I traveled to Kenya their culture was still intact and they did not have the same restraints but their original uniqueness. This was showing me that they would have a better chance of staying the same and not falling into the global village trap.
5. In this cartoon I am trying to express how people would not be very happy in the end. By this I mean that after a while people will eventually realize that they want to be their individual self and not like everyone else. In the drawing that I made it shows how after the years pass people will become bored and will then eventually badly desire the need for differentially. This desire will eventually lead to the inevitable violence that it will cause. That is what my poster is trying to communicate, that the global village will lead to disaster.