Tuesday, October 27, 2009

The Truman Show

As far as I know the real world is the world I am living in right now. Everything I see and believe is real to me, even though they may not be real. I just believe in this world, because if I can't trust my own existence, then there would be nothing to trust. I have to believe in this world or I would not feel secure or have the will to pursue anything. The world I live in right now seems very natural; nothing has happened to me to make me believe that my surroundings are artificial.
Christof said that everything is fine because Truman is content with his life, but it was obvious that Truman was not content at all. He could not get what he wanted, such as his true love; he had no privacy, and he hated being deceived by everyone. His world was insincere; and his true He let his guard down and saw the world as it was presented. The flaw with Christof's speech is that real happiness can never be legitimate without any truth.
Christof also said that Truman would seek the outside world if he really wanted to. Truman accepted the world as it is until he saw his father was alive. At that moment he realized that the things he really wanted was being purposely taken away from him, and he had hope that if he tried hard enough he could find them. As a human, he sought out the truth and to be liberated from all the restrictions. People can be content with an artificial world until they realize that they are being deceived. Truman had no idea he was being deceived until he saw his father (who he thought was dead) being dragged away from him.
Living in a world that has no substance or truth is pointless. Even if Truman's world offered everything to Truman, he probably would have chosen the real world over the false world. I don't think his world was better in any way. He didn't even get what he wanted. People and the TV directors controlled him like a puppet. They used propaganda and people he trusted to convince him to do things the TV crew wanted him to do. They even raised hydrophobia in him and "killed" his father in the process. He had no sense of freedom literally and figuratively. He was being controlled by the people, and he could not even leave the town.
I think that the show was trying to create a parallel with our world and the Truman Show World. The government would be our TV crew. The world we live in may be real, but we might be fighting for something with no substance, such as money. We might just be wasting our time and restricting ourselves from accomplishing anything that we should.

Sunday, October 25, 2009

Absolute Truth

I believe that there is a fixed truth in this world. This truth is absolute, and unaffected by bias. It conflicts with opinions and perspective, so these concepts must be seperate. Opinions, bias, perspective, and anything that pertains to this category should not be considered the truth, because they are not consistent. They are just products of our senses, memories, emotions, which is never 100 percent reliable, unlike the truth. Our senses, and relating aspects, are not impervious to deception. Keen perception and discretion may see some parts of the absolute truth, but never everything, nobody is omniscient. If we state that subjective or relative truth is correct than we are saying that everything can be the truth. Lies can be considered the truth, or mind games can be considered the truth. I don't think that anything can be the truth and right. But I am not 100% confident about the absolute truth. The concept that diverts me from the absolute truth is morals. I can not confidently state that the world was created with a certain set of morals. Humans are never sure what is right or wrong, so they rely on their religion to guide them. Our transgressions might be a part of life and is just a natural process that can't be avoided. Morals may be absolute, but if it is, is it Christianity, Buddhist, Muslim, or can it be subjective? I can not fully support absolute truth with a subjective perspective. But I am sure that there is an absolute truth in the world that pertains to "what happened" and "how it happened".
Subjective truth is a belief that whatever an individual believes or thinks is right. It is saying that every ounce of imagination processing in the trillions of people living on this planet is true, and that any lie can be considered the truth. I don't believe that anything can be the truth. At a party, a girl may unknowingly spill a drink on her shirt, but thinks that the boy next to her spilled it. Everybody at the party saw that she spilled the drink, but the girl might refuse to accept what really happened and say that the boy did it. And an example of how it happened, could be gravity. Some people would believe in the theory of relativity, or people could traditionally believe in just Newton's theory, and some may believe something they came up with their own mind. We can't say everything is right. Maybe gravity works partly from the idea of theory of relativity and partly about Newton's theory; maybe it is none of these; the truth of gravity may be a knowledge in the universe that humans have not acquired or established.
Relative truth is the truth that relies on the generation. The concept is similar to subjective, but it relies on a broader perspective. I can not fully believe in the relative truth because of periods of slavery and feminist restraints. Before the 1900s women were not allowed to vote, because men was still seen as our superiors. I can not agree that as a truth it was a justifiable thing to do.
It is difficult for people to decide what is the real truth, because we have been taught countless fallacies and multifolds of opinions. I believe there is an absolute truth in a certain area. I still can not fathom how it can work in every angle, but I am trying to understand what is the truth.

Wednesday, October 21, 2009

Second-Hand Knowledge

Knowledge is aquired, significantly through communication. The five primary sources are cultural tradition, school, the internet, expert opinion, and the news media. These knowledge sources are achieved through a portal called language, and are second-hand sources. All five of these sources allow us to view the world in a broader perspective, and restrains us from stifling ourselves with only our bias. Although people must be cautious not to fall in to authority worship. We must use our own keen perceptions, and practical judgement to tackle what we choose to accept as true. The things we hear should be backed up with authentic proof.
Cultural tradition is what people are first exposed to when they are infants. Our family, home, and setting influence how we grow up, in our most vulnerable time of our life. When we are babies we are pursuing to create a gateway of communication. Culture is our first foundation, and as we get older we are exposed to it more. It is the key difference between a baby born in Africa, and a baby born in America. Next there is a greater difference between an African baby born in Africa, and a Chinese baby born in America. Then the religion of the family. It is necessary for people to have some culture, and understanding their own roots.
The bad thing about culture is that there are many cultures and each one is built up with biased beliefs and different perspectives. It is easy for people to blindly follow their familie's opinions and habits. People must use their discretion and not allow discrimination from influencing the culture that we live by.
School is also a major source of our knowledge. Everybody is expected to get an education in the majority of the countries. The schools in each area are required to follow a single curricula, making student's education universal. It is good in a way that everybody has the same foundation, and that is fair by giving everyone a chance to be well-informed, and given the opportunity to succeed.
Unfortunately, school is very biased. The textbook is taught by a teacher; both of which are biased. The government also gets involved and has the power to control what is taught in the school; essentially public school. A controversial topic is Darwinism. Evolution is taught as true, but Christianity, and other religions are just taught as ideologies. To avoid getting bad grades, we are forced to comply with something that does not have enough evidence to convice. We are taught supporting evidences of Darwinism, but not taught about the countless evidences that disprove it.
The internet is something that has been influencing our lives very recently. It wasn't decades after 1950 when individuals were introduced to one of the most significant factors of globalization. School may be limited to teaching a specific area, but the internet has the power to teach everybody from around the world. It is a great invention because communication became much simpler, and nearly every answer to our burning questions are at our fingertips.
People with a PhD seem to have more credibility than a person who barely finished high school. People rely on people who had more education because they are tagged to have a broader knowledge of the world. They may have gotten more formal education but these people are biased and make mistakes too. An example was when the Senator Joseph R. McCarthy convinced people that a certain person was a communist spy. He didn't even have authentic evidence, but people believed him and completely ruined the man who was (later found) wrongly accused. We must not quickly believe people with educational degrees or a self-claimed professional because even these people are people. They have selfish desires, wrong intentions, and gain wrong information.
News Media is usually accepted as true. Reporters and news journalists broadcasts things that seem to be controversial or scandalous, to gain viewers. They have the power to hype a certain topic, that may be false or not even important. They could also lessen the importance of something that could hurt their reputation or a person or group the news station supports. A news station may also support a certain political idea, such as liberalism and conseratism. They also limit us because they typically broadcast news in the area. It does have its positive points, such that people are informed on what is going on (even though it may be limited).
Another form of cultural tradion is societal conventions: things we are taught to be true. Because people are social creatures, we are easily influenced by what is constantly taught to us. These societal traditions may not be reasonable, hence it is our duty to utilize our civil rights to change bad traditions. Many people do their best to conform to social-norms and the government. There are many historical evidences of faulty ideologies that people were convinced to believe, such as rascism towards colored people, and women being the subordinates of men. Many people complained about it but still conformed to it, but there were the many advocates, and few innovators that actually took a stand and made the world a more just place.

Wednesday, October 14, 2009

"Is Google Really Making Us Stupid?"

It is true that Google, and other search engines have made the 21st Centurians lazier. It is another question to ask if it made people stupider. The question that Carr made me think was if convenience correlates with stupidity.
From my experience, I think that the web has made me stupider, in the sense that I can't concentrate anymore. I'm sure that this problem relates to almost all of my peers. We still have our childhood to rely on our concentration, but it is likely that the next generation would be exposed to internet much earlier.
People are highly influenced by what they see or read. Many people believe in what they read, whether it is a book, or a web article. But it much easier for deceivers to put a lie on the internet. The internet gives up-to-date knowledge to the individuals, but there are also many fallacies circulating on the internet. Information on sites like WIkipedia can be completely wrong, but people are vulnerable to believe them. People are gullible, and the web is lurking with predators who want trick them.
The two obvious problems derived from internet, is lack of concentration and being prone to misleading information. I am still very hesitant in believing that Google has made me stupider, because it has introduced me to many things I would have never known or read, if it wasn't for the internet. Because of the internet, I am partially aware of what is going on, because of Yahoo News headlines. And all the correct information given on the internet has really helped me. When I am concerned of my health I read several articles on how to stay healthy and lose weight. If I have a burning question that is bugging me, I can later look it up on the internet. It is hard to say that this information station has made me stupider. It just made me lazier. I do read full-length articles online, and reading online makes me love reading books more. Although I can hardly get to reading, because I'm on the internet, the internet has made me learn to aprecciate books. I go back to a book, feeling that it is more hands-on then the internet. Sites like dictionary.com has taught me a substantial amount of vocabulary words, and I know I that it has not misleaded me.
Overall, I can't agree with Carr's statement, but I do agree with him on the idea that Google has made the world so much lazier.

Wednesday, October 7, 2009

Things We Think We Know Reflection

Stereotypying is in our blood. It is nearly impossible to go a day without judging something or someone. It is almost essential, because everybody really enjoys sterotyping and people tend to bond through criticism. This article talks about illogical conclusions derived from being prejudice, it also specifies the rascism of people in the country. Many countries stereotype Americans to be fat, classless simpletons, but that is slightly true. America may win an award for breeding the most obese people, but these people make up less than 1/3 of the country. It is evident that almost every other caucasion country views America very lowly, stereotyping but technically true.
Many Europeans who haven't been to America see Americans as either cowboys or fat people. These people hear from outside sources about America and they believe everything they hear. They haven't been to America for themselves, so they base their thoughts on the media, school, and communication. The idea that Americans are all cowboys, or fat, is a well-known myth. It is a myth that became the truth to the majority of the Europeans. I've gained the bias that Europeans and Australians don't like Americans, because of different factors. One of the determining factors was the article: "Think We Think We Know" and another was my interaction with an Australian. I've had an Australian penpal named Toby since I was in middle school. He complained to me about Americans like I wasn't an American. It was very interesting that he got those biases when I was the first American person he talked to and the fact that he had never left his country.
The last sentence of the article says that the man did not know anything about Germany, after he came back from touring the country. It is hard to imagine a world where all answers were like that. That answer killed the mood where the conversation was headed towards. Without discrimination, there would be a lot more awkward silences. But I think exchanging discrimation for peace and unity is a good deal (it is just an ideal).
As I was reading the article, I started to remember my many encounters with discrimination. In public school there were a group of students (of Mexican descent) who sat around me. I never talked to them but they would always joke about how I was Asian. Before they heard me talk they assumed that I would be nerdy, shy, and lame. I was annoyed by them but it was hypocritical of me because I quickly assumed that they were crude and ghetto. People are typically shallow and have the problem of easily accepting popular belief. People can also gain a bias through experiences and emotions. The kids who sat around me may have been prejudiced against me because they may have had a bad experience with a certain Asian person. Those bad emotions can carry onto further encounters with other Asian people.

Truth v Truth

I believe that to a certain extent there is truth. The two truths that I am aware of is The Truth and my truth. The Truth is everything that can be logically justified. The Truth is not anything emotional, and is not made up of any biasses. However my truth is different; it can be partial and it is different for each individual. The Truth may be pristine but my truth is consisted of countless fallacies. My truth is in the complete possession of the individual and it is built up with what the person knows and believes. My truth is very ambiguous and also has many errors. People easily believe what they hear, and it becomes part of their my truth. The fallacies that they hold true can not be the Truth. The problem with truth is that it has a domino effect. If somebody lies and it becomes a rumor that everyone believes, everyone will hold a faulty my truth. Parts of my truth can also be considered the Truth. Many truths can be lost in time, if they aren't recorded. Some of my truth can be the Truth but the majority is biased so it can't be considered the Truth. The reason why biasses can not be considered the truth is because it can not be factual.
The catch of Truth is that nobody really knows what is the Truth. Nobody is 100% sure of anything they haven't experienced. The people who claim to wholeheartedly hold onto a belief can easily feel doubts, if adequately convinced by another. Because people are not omniscient, we must rely on our faith and outside sources to decide what is considered their my truth.
The Truth is truly complex and the knowledge that people have acquired of all truths is very infinitesimal. There are many truths that haven't been discovered, or not accepted to be true. People can only know the truth that is taught to us, or that we have seen. But the things we have seen is an insignificant amount.
These two types of truths are easily confused. It is important to differentiate the Truth and a faulty my truth. Many times we have no access to the real truth but we are given the ability to deliberate and rationalize. There are complications between people; everybody has their own set of my truths. If everybody knew the Truth, disagreement would surely be ceased.