Honors

i just wanted to mention how interesting i found the discussion in class today about what makes an honors student. the fact that many of the different things we said related to each other was not surprising and infact made alot of sense because many of the characteristics are commonly found together with many of the other ones we noted. i wanted to add that i think honors students need to be adventurous which kind of related to some of those mentioned but was not even mentioned on its own. honors students need to be willing to look at things that might not normally be looked at and to discuss them rationally and critically. they must be willing to think outside the box on issues which have been long debated, maybe they will see somthing new that has not been thought of before. over all i think we did a pretty good job of describing what hte ideal qualities of an honors student are.

a side note being i also enjoyed Professor Sillimans sense of humor and straighforward answers to the classes questions. i'm pleased that i got to interact with him some as i'm going to be taking a course with him next semester and i had never met him.

Negative imagery

today in class we watched most of a movie called faces of the enemy. i just wanted to point out a few things that i thought very interesting.

• The murderer was talking about how the country did not get the way it was without someone working toward it. does anyone think that is one of the parts which relates to the current day?
• the notion of all the artists studying at the same school of art makes some sense in that they are all thinking along the same lines of dehumanizing the enemy. plus they all see each others images and are probably affected by them in terms of their art.
• the idea that the images make it really hard to pull back and try for peace makes sense because each side by that point veiws the other by the images they have produced and not as humans.

these are just a few things i wanted to comment on that the movie mentions.

educational movie

last friday in class we watched some of a very disturbing movie. owever at the same time i found it quite educational. i think it to be very important that we be exposed to visual education like that movie. as we discussed in class today somtimes the shock of being visually exposed to such things is much more effective than reading about somthing. a perfect example being the anti smoking commercial that has been on tv about how smoking is bad for children which shows small kids with smoke coming out of their noses and mouths. the commercial is especially effective because we can picture our younger siblings, cousins, etc as the child in the commercial. i totally understand the negative reaction that many of my classmates had to some parts of the movie. it relates back to the commercial. we all sat there imagining the horro of our cats and dogs being treated as those in the movie were. that is called shock value and it is somtimes the most effective way to get information across.
personally i would be interested in seeing the rest of the movie. i think it is quite well done withthe intent of educating people about what is going on in the world. it is most definatly disturbing at parts but as i've said perhaps that is what it takes to get through to people the horrific things that humans do to animals all over the world in the name of sport, religion, and tradition.

Animal Morals?

today in class we had a long and very interesting talk about if animals have morals as we think of them. I'm inclined to think that they don't, at least not as we think of morals. i was pleased with the different levels of cognition that professor Johnson was explaining. i do think that animals have cognition in that they can feel and react and respond to things. however i don't really think they have much of the meta-cognition he spoke of or the moral reflection which falls along the same lines. i believe that for example when we are sick and our pets seem to get closer and be 'comforting' us is mainly the natural animal instinct to protect their own from what ever may be bugging them. when we have pets for example dogs, we become part of their 'pack' and the natural instinct of dogs as with their relatives the wolves is to protect and care for their pack members to the best of their abilities. if that means sharing warmth when we have the chills or in some cases hunting for food if we are incapacitated then that's what they do. i don't really think they spend a lot of time thinking about why they do things for us beyond perhaps 'this will get be a biscuit' or 'this will get me thrown out in the yard'.
over all i think there is potential especially in dolphins, elephants and the great apes say. there may come a time when we know more about how the brains of these animals work and if they really are capable of higher thoughts than we think they are. until then I will continue to appreciate the love and affection they give us and not question it.

Naturalism and Supernaturalism

Can the coexist peacefully?
as i stated in my q&a 3 answer i think that they could if people were willing to think about what they say and how they say it before they actually say anything. i was quite intrigued by the conversation we had in class Monday. i thought a lot of good points were made. one huge one that was made involved the idea of even the factions of supernaturalism needing to work on getting along better within that group never mind getting along with followers of naturalism. what would it take for that to happen when there are so many differences within the group of suernaturalism itself?

THEME FOR ENGLISH B
By Langston Hughes
The instructor said,
Go home and write a page tonight. And let that page come out of you--- Then, it will be true.
I wonder if it's that simple? I am twenty-two, colored, born in Winston-Salem. I went to school there, then Durham, then here to this college on the hill above Harlem. I am the only colored student in my class. The steps from the hill lead down into Harlem through a park, then I cross St. Nicholas, Eighth Avenue, Seventh, and I come to the Y, the Harlem Branch Y, where I take the elevator up to my room, sit down, and write this page:
It's not easy to know what is true for you or me at twenty-two, my age. But I guess I'm what I feel and see and hear, Harlem, I hear you: hear you, hear me---we two---you, me, talk on this page. (I hear New York too.) Me---who? Well, I like to eat, sleep, drink, and be in love. I like to work, read, learn, and understand life. I like a pipe for a Christmas present, or records---Bessie, bop, or Bach. I guess being colored doesn't make me NOT like the same things other folks like who are other races. So will my page be colored that I write? Being me, it will not be white. But it will be a part of you, instructor. You are white--- yet a part of me, as I am a part of you. That's American. Sometimes perhaps you don't want to be a part of me. Nor do I often want to be a part of you. But we are, that's true! As I learn from you,I guess you learn from me--- although you're older---and white--- and somewhat more free.
This is my page for English B.

I found this poem very interesting not only because it speaks of an experience that is universal for us all the writing of a paper but also because i think it relates to our topic because it is about Hughes trying to find out the nature of himself. How often is this the process used to discover things about the human race and the nature of our existence?