Nature v. Nurture

As far as Nature versus Nurture goes, I believe that we are all born with a blank slate and the environment impacts us in a variety of ways which cause us to see in the world in a particular way or another. When I use the word "environment" I mean the surrounding world around a person including family members, peers, and the physical location, etc. Although genetics has to play a part since many diseases are hereditary but I think that for the most part tabula rasa is the point to begin at in order to figure out the personality of an individual. I lean more towards nurture than nature, although I am not ignorant enough to think that nature does not play a part as well. Homosexuality is a nature occurance, it is not a choice. But what you find attractive in a person I believe is through experience and nurture.

Brain-Washed...Just like the rest of you

Someone in class said something about the religious radicals as being brain washed. I wanted to ask her, "Aren't we all?" To some degree that is. This was shown throughout the film that we watched. We are given, over and over again, images of the enemy as a monster, or a demon, or an animal that we give very little morality to, a rat, or a snake. These images in themselves has made their way into our society as bad and evil, but to place stereotypical characteristics on them as well, to emphasize that the Arab is bad, or the Jap must be stopped in order to protect our country, in order to protect our families is outrageous. By what we are taught by our parents, and teachers, and presidents we are subjected to images and themes that provide us with morals that are not necissarily our own. If a person was to grow up in a home saying that homosexuals are bad and if teachers told us that homosexuals are contagious and if the presidents insists that homosexuals are going to Hell, so steer clear of "their kind" of course we would consider that a kind of brain-wash. But the fact that propaganda that has been going on for years that has been telling us that we need to save the Iraqis, they need us to help them, to save them has not been thought about as brain washing at all. Instead we call ourselves heroes and cheer when we torture men and women without just cause. No one sees our rights being taken away under our noses. But that's not being brain-washed, no, that's just America.

Country Girls and Boys

"Chest Thumping Patriotism"
I know these kinds of people. Coming from a very small country-bumpkin town, you are introduced to the men and women who do not have to think twice about stoning a person's house who has decided to support flag burning as a form of protest, or think that we should not be at war, since it is pointless to so many different extremes. And the women who have had an American Flag tattooed on her arm and on the side of her house. America, I think, is not about the symbols but about the people. So I don't have a problem supporting flag burning as a form of protest, but I have felt the reprecussions of believing as I do. But the idea that these radical patriots are only found in small country towns is a stereotype. The idea that country music is all about supporting the war, and that all people who like country music are republicans who are narrow-minded nationalists. These are all wrong.
Some country lovers are pig-headed, are quick to judge, and are infantile members of society who have never used a rational thought in their lives. But.....you can find these men and women in businesses, the city, and especially in politics.

Information Changes Everything

I have always agreed with the death sentence, I figured that the pediphiles and rapists, the murderers and psychopaths should be killed. I always thought that it was too easy for them in prisons, and that we had to pay more to keep them in there than it was to kill the suckers. After last class I was dumbfounded by the statistics and informations that was brand new to me. That it is cheaper to keep the prisoners in prison than to kill them. I know that the system is absolutely flawed in the sense that innocent men and women are put in jail and killed, but the men and women who are guilty and are "rehibilitated" then sent back into the world and do the same disgusting things are ridiculous. You can't judge which is better, innocence being wrongfully accused, or letting the guilty go free to corrupt the world even more. Neither should be happening. But there is no way of knowing the truth, is there? Nothing can be proven without doubt, unless the enrtire act is taped, and even then, perhaps it is not 100% certain. All evidence can be corrupted. So where does that leave us? Torture is not a means to get anything done. Honestly if I was tortured because I was thought to have done something, I would admit it, just to escape the torture part. It is not reliable at all. But I think that it has to be an option in the most extreme cases. But then again it doesn't make much sense either. I am torn, I would want to use any means possible in order to save an innocent but torturing another innocent is not the way to get there. Is there even an answer?

Disgusted by Humanity

Alright, this blog may make quite a few people angry with me, but I think my message is more important. What makes me more sick than watching the animals in the video that we watched on Friday (and only on friday) is the fact that no one was willing to see the movie through to the end. Literally, the really disturbing part (or at least the part which should be most disturbing since it was focused on animals we consider beloved pets) was over. No more cats crying from being boiled and still be alive. What America is doing to the other animals, the ones that we eat for breakfast, lunch, and dinner, the ones that we pay money to have slaughtered, the ones that really affect us, those are the ones that no one in class wanted to watch. I don't think it was because everyone felt like they were going to be sick. Maybe that was part of it. But how can someone not want to see this film through? To "bury our heads in the sand" as Professor Johnson said. To deny the fact that pigs are slit open, still alive, in order for you to have bacon in the morning, a ham sandwich for lunch and pork roast for dinner is ridiculous, in my eyes. I am not going to say that I have decided to become a vegetarian, because I haven't. But at least I don't want to deny that the way these animals are killed for my fulfillment is inhumane to say in the least. It sickens me to hear the cries, but the cries are real. The suffering is real. I do not think that I was the only one who looked at the hamburger that I was given for dinner in a different light. The video gave more to the experience than words ever could have. I would have read an essay on animal abuse said, "Wow, that's sad" and moved on to cooking my roast beef. It doesn't stick with you the way that visuals and oral presentations do. Why are people so scared of living a truth since after all that is how we can change things in this world. Not just by getting the statistics and reading about the different cases, but by feeling the hatred, pain, and suffering of exploition around the world. I am very upset that we could not finish the movie, and now as a class we will never be able to go into how horrible and inhumane primate testing is, no matter what it is for. We are not the ultimate species, we can't even look a kitten in the eye while it is crying out for our help.

Aesthetics: The Nerve

The idea that all living things, because they are alive are equally valuable is simply ridiculous in my mind. To have to question whether to run over a squirrel or a human child is not much of a question at least to me. A cat is not an ant, a puppy is not a porcupine and they all have different values to human kind. In theory it sounds great that all living things would be seen as equals. That protecting ant eaters is as important as protecting horses is a great idea in theory, but in all reality a person is going to first protect the animal that they find most appealing.
This idea of aethetic pleasures gives me the idea of Hitler in a sense. He wanted to have only one kind of human being in the world. The Aryans who were blond haired, blue eyed, etc. And that was obviously ridiculous. But it feels sometimes that that is exactly what we are doing when we pick to protect the "pretty" animals and let the "ugly" ones die off. Okay maybe that's not a very good analogy but I do have a problems as to how we categorize what animals we place upon pedastals and the ones that fall by the wayside.

We are Fish

We are failing our world. Along with pollution, cutting down forests and completely destroying our ecosystem. Traditions mean more to many people than morals do. Many have the idea that as long as we keep a species alive then we are doing our job as human kind. But we can't even do that! Day after day species are becoming endangered and extinct and it is because of us. Global climate changes, excess pollutant, and this is all because of our "advanced" technologies and sciences. Someone in class said that we have evolved since cavemen-times. Is that a good thing?
At least then we were hunting to survive, now we are hunting to destroy. Our world is not going to last and there may be no way to stop the domino effect, the chain reaction, that our parents and grandparents were part of, that we still are a part of. Human beings, being of a "superior" race don't seem too superior to me. Sure we can reflect and ask why we are destroying our one and only world but if we don't do anything about it what is the point?
Sometimes I think we are as simple as goldfish. One moment we are told that the world is going to end so we freak out, swim around in circles and make plenty of bubbles. The next moment we are looking at the perdy yellow fish that is looking back at us from the other side of the glass.

All Dogs Go to Heaven

I have a science class and we went out to find wood turtles. We found one and I hated it when everyone was passing him around, prodding and poking him. I felt awful. Today we went looking for spotted salamanders and didn't find any. But we did find worms and centipedes, misquitos and caterpillars. The thing is that I cared most about making sure the caterpillar was safe. I could have cared less about the others. The caterpillar doesn't reflect humans in any way, it was not cute and I could not see any intelligence in its eyes. So why did I care about it more than say the worm?
I wonder why people think that we are protecting creatures by trapping them in zoos or searching them out in the wilderness. Why can't everyone just let everyone be. I guess that is my take on religion and beliefs as well. As long as it doesn't hurt anyone else, what is the big issue?
Animals can make decisions, they can think as far as consequences go (as they have been trained) but the reason we do not put a cat or rabbit on the witness stand is because they don't understand good versus bad, no matter how many times we say "Awww, you are such a good puppy!" If a person believed in souls, would they consider animals to have souls as well. Since they have morals I wonder if it goes hand in hand. Or it is all different? What would be the corralation between animals, humans, and souls if humans can reflect on their choices but animals can't? Is it possible that because of this reason all dogs really do go to heaven???

Animal Morals

No. I don't think that animals can think about thinking. Who knows? Maybe they can and we have no way of knowing but at far as our reality goes in this world at this moment I do not believe that animals contemplate peeing in the house in order to seek revenge for their owner leaving them for a weekend (with pleanty of food and water and someone to look on them from time to time, of course!). I think that animals are cognitive as far as feelings and emotions are concerned. When you are sad, yes, they come to comfort you, but they will also tear you to shreds if they get hungry enough and you are lost in the wilderness.
It is interesting that we don't have a problem killing cows for beef but throw a fit when the topic of horses and glue comes up. There is an obvious level in which we place horses and it is above the cows. I think that it is because we have been taught and trained to think of the cow as food and the horse as companion or at least a form of transportation. Do we judge all animals in the way they benefit us the most? The more beneficial they are, on a human emotional level, the higher they rate on our scale of importance?