Me
Friday, September 30, 2011
Love me for me, or don't love me!
I honestly would not live a live a life of solitude in the secluded woods! Also to be honest I wouldn't nee to find myself because I like who I am. Life lessons have helped me devolp into who I am today, so I would say iI know myself. Another aspect is that I don't think i would be able to handle not using technology. Not only is technology for enjoyment but its a way of life. My life is evolved around technology, for work, school, contacting... etc. In order to remain sane I need human envolvment. Being disconnected could actually create many anxiety issues for me. I am actaully pretty satisfied with the way I live and don't need to live in solutude to change anything. Why should I worry about experiencing solitude when I live only one life I might as well enjoy it. There are connections between Thoreau, Emerson, Lasn, and Anderson's texts and I feel that they believe that you have no interation with technology or anything in order to be "you"! Why do they have the right to tell people what they can and can not do.I am satisfied with my life and I love who I am.
Friday, September 23, 2011
individually intelligent!
I personal think Mark Baurelien is very judgmental! What does he mean by dumb? How does he classify dumb? Everyone is smart in their own different ways! Every year there is a dumb generation I believe, so he is stereotyping the present generation.
Aspects of what is to be considereed "smart" can be determined through environment. For instance, some people might be street smart opposed to book smart due to their lives atmosphere. Also we may not know as much about some of the education he was exposed to but we do distinguish other varieties of education.
Technology has been an influence as Bauerlein calls "go-go-go digital age" but I don't feel it is disastrous as he declares. In some ways he is correct that we don't use technology for complete education. But as his statement says "social life is powerful temptation". But this is our way of connecting with people.
I feel technology doesn’t influence everyone like he thinks, there are still intelligent people I know and it has to do with nature and nurture (how your raised and your genetics). Also I believe children are getting even smarter in this generation because learning is becoming fun! For instance, Dora the explorer teaches children Spanish and is interesting to them.
Intelligence is measured in multiple perspectives just because people do now EVERYTHING doesn't mean they are not intelligent; it just means that some things are not interesting to them so they don't bother to learn the material. For example, I hate math so therefore I am terrible in math and it simple doesn’t interest me. But on the other hand I find anatomy interesting and excel in the subject.
He states that we want to find the easy way out, the environment we are subjected to show us that we can find ways to make things easy to please us and achieve things easy more and more. By being shown these things teaches us through performing model or repeating the behavior we are shown.
If he thinks our generation is lazy where did it come from, who taught us to be that way? We learn from others behaviors. If they wonder why we don't know some stuff it is because we were never taught to retain info, or that it is necessary to know certain things in order to be considered "smart".
I feel as if he is saying you’re only smart if we know everything, and it is rare to do so considering not everyone is a genus!
Very educational episode!
Aspects of what is to be considereed "smart" can be determined through environment. For instance, some people might be street smart opposed to book smart due to their lives atmosphere. Also we may not know as much about some of the education he was exposed to but we do distinguish other varieties of education.
Technology has been an influence as Bauerlein calls "go-go-go digital age" but I don't feel it is disastrous as he declares. In some ways he is correct that we don't use technology for complete education. But as his statement says "social life is powerful temptation". But this is our way of connecting with people.
I feel technology doesn’t influence everyone like he thinks, there are still intelligent people I know and it has to do with nature and nurture (how your raised and your genetics). Also I believe children are getting even smarter in this generation because learning is becoming fun! For instance, Dora the explorer teaches children Spanish and is interesting to them.
Intelligence is measured in multiple perspectives just because people do now EVERYTHING doesn't mean they are not intelligent; it just means that some things are not interesting to them so they don't bother to learn the material. For example, I hate math so therefore I am terrible in math and it simple doesn’t interest me. But on the other hand I find anatomy interesting and excel in the subject.
He states that we want to find the easy way out, the environment we are subjected to show us that we can find ways to make things easy to please us and achieve things easy more and more. By being shown these things teaches us through performing model or repeating the behavior we are shown.
If he thinks our generation is lazy where did it come from, who taught us to be that way? We learn from others behaviors. If they wonder why we don't know some stuff it is because we were never taught to retain info, or that it is necessary to know certain things in order to be considered "smart".
I feel as if he is saying you’re only smart if we know everything, and it is rare to do so considering not everyone is a genus!
Friday, September 16, 2011
fake
Authentic: not false or copied; genuine; real
In Culture Jams he ponders about the subject of whether our authenticity has become fractured into a "multitude" of identities. Are we really who we say we are? What really is being individual? Do we really know who we are? Why do we act the way we do?
So many questions could be asked referring this subject. There seems to be various aspects of fake, from our environment to personalities.
Is the environment we live in fake?
It seems Classical conditioning of the environment that surrounds us seems to impact out behavior and personalities. This is stated in Culture Jams is started that people are trained. An example he uses is that we are laugh on queue when a board lights up at a studio. Why do we do the things we do? It is simple because nurture from our culture has shown us to do so. He says we are like a cult and I simply agree. We may be seeking to be individual be we do and act the same. We act accordingly with prevailing social standards as well as practices. Our society has adapted a sense of conformity. We are unknown to the source of how to behave on our own and to where originated. However, it was learned somewhere and we are hardly understand how to be our own person. The way people act is not in any way authentic because it seems that ever one behavior is adapted from the way others due (everyone is copycats).
Are our personalities considered fake?
Another subject that may be considered fake because of today’s technology is their personalities. Everyone as their own personality and some may be authentic so don't take this as everyone is being fake! For instance, my personality is real because I am saying some people fit this profile! Since are environment seems to be fake so does some personalities. "Multiple" identities are provided from online time games and social networks! Are people really who they are? For instance people seem to be fake because they are seeking aspiration they can’t achieve in reality. For instance, in virtual games they can have fake personality of being outgoing when in reality they are shy. Like in the movie second skins people went in “synthetic worlds” to try and achieve this desires. You don’t know who people are in the internet giving them fake identities!
Is anything authentic anymore?
It seems to be rare more and more in todays society!
Where is originality!
In Culture Jams he ponders about the subject of whether our authenticity has become fractured into a "multitude" of identities. Are we really who we say we are? What really is being individual? Do we really know who we are? Why do we act the way we do?
So many questions could be asked referring this subject. There seems to be various aspects of fake, from our environment to personalities.
Is the environment we live in fake?
It seems Classical conditioning of the environment that surrounds us seems to impact out behavior and personalities. This is stated in Culture Jams is started that people are trained. An example he uses is that we are laugh on queue when a board lights up at a studio. Why do we do the things we do? It is simple because nurture from our culture has shown us to do so. He says we are like a cult and I simply agree. We may be seeking to be individual be we do and act the same. We act accordingly with prevailing social standards as well as practices. Our society has adapted a sense of conformity. We are unknown to the source of how to behave on our own and to where originated. However, it was learned somewhere and we are hardly understand how to be our own person. The way people act is not in any way authentic because it seems that ever one behavior is adapted from the way others due (everyone is copycats).
Are our personalities considered fake?
Another subject that may be considered fake because of today’s technology is their personalities. Everyone as their own personality and some may be authentic so don't take this as everyone is being fake! For instance, my personality is real because I am saying some people fit this profile! Since are environment seems to be fake so does some personalities. "Multiple" identities are provided from online time games and social networks! Are people really who they are? For instance people seem to be fake because they are seeking aspiration they can’t achieve in reality. For instance, in virtual games they can have fake personality of being outgoing when in reality they are shy. Like in the movie second skins people went in “synthetic worlds” to try and achieve this desires. You don’t know who people are in the internet giving them fake identities!
Is anything authentic anymore?
It seems to be rare more and more in todays society!
Where is originality!
(fake identity) -Superbad
Friday, September 9, 2011
"Typical" blog # 2
"What is typical" How do we define that words typical and how is the defination determined. The a various ways of being typical considering the variety of veiws of different people. Typical:Of the nature of or serving as a type or representative specimen conforming to a particular type. Also,characteristic or distinctive: He has the mannerisms typical of his class. These are both defination found in the dictionary under the word typical.The word seems to adapt at the world changes. For instance, in the 70's in was "typical for hippies to be around. But it is not typical for hippies to be around in the 2000's now is it? What I believe that supports "typical" is populartity. What is poular amongist the average population, once popularity is deteremined then typical can be discribed. But who do things become popular? Also what infulences that popularity decision? Adveritizing through multimedia is supportive to populartiy. Through the computer, magizes, billboards, newspapers, etc. you see advertisements are products everywhere.
This concept of "typical" is discussed in various wasys and established that advertisments are the structure of popularity.As for in Kadosh's poem Ameria, It's Gotta Be the Cheese states, "an immaculately wrapped unbelieveably orange package of American Pasteurized Processed Cheese Food. my interetation is America has taken advantage of the resources that are avaliable today, " wraped up in new things".
The source of all this toxins of advertisements is the economic system, which is willing to do anything that is benifical to their system. Whever if its lieing or any other stratigies in order to make products popular.
This way popular demand overcomes and influences the society. Once this popular demand is found the "typical" aspect is established.
Did you ever stop and wonder would this world would be like with out advertisments?
If we didn't have a variety of clotinge or popular clothing what would be all wear?
Theses "what if's could go on forever. I honestly admit I where the popular clothe and use the popular cell phone, I definatly label myself as "typical".
"I was not typical. Whatever typical or normal is, I was somehow separated and different." -John C. Hawkes
" we gone from living in a nautral world to living in a manufactured one".
" This detachment from the nature may not seem like much of a problem, but it is. in fact , it's a disaster."
-Kalle LasnThe enviroment is full of consumers craving the next big thing! I find finds saying " I'm board with the iphone 4 I need the iphone 5," and they just purcased this phone not to long ago. Adversitement has a way of reaching out to consumers in order to make there product popular. I bet you know one would but a perfume if they new it was tested on dogs or anyother example similar. Adversiments are to grab attention of consumers and tell them what they want to hear. This mental pollution is, "nonchalantly absorbing massive daily doses of it without a second thought," stated by Kalle Lasn.
This concept of "typical" is discussed in various wasys and established that advertisments are the structure of popularity.As for in Kadosh's poem Ameria, It's Gotta Be the Cheese states, "an immaculately wrapped unbelieveably orange package of American Pasteurized Processed Cheese Food. my interetation is America has taken advantage of the resources that are avaliable today, " wraped up in new things".
The source of all this toxins of advertisements is the economic system, which is willing to do anything that is benifical to their system. Whever if its lieing or any other stratigies in order to make products popular.
This way popular demand overcomes and influences the society. Once this popular demand is found the "typical" aspect is established.
Did you ever stop and wonder would this world would be like with out advertisments?
If we didn't have a variety of clotinge or popular clothing what would be all wear?
Theses "what if's could go on forever. I honestly admit I where the popular clothe and use the popular cell phone, I definatly label myself as "typical".
THIS IS ONE OF MY FAVORITE COMMERCIALS
"I was not typical. Whatever typical or normal is, I was somehow separated and different." -John C. Hawkes
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)