Critical Thinking Post #8 - Final Course Reflection

I believe this course I have taken (LIB200) has changed my thinking of science and the humanities drastically. I used to view these topics in a passive way, not believing that they have a large influence in our lives but they do. Everything deals with them and the texts that we have read and analyzed in the class have shown me that. I believe if I had to be one I be more of a science person. With the increase in science there is an increase in technological advancement. I have always been into technology but this course has made me appreciative of the technology we have been given today, from cell phones to prosthetic limbs, science is an ever expanding process, with no end. With this being said though, this course has also opened my eyes in the sense that I can see more connections between science and humanities. Just a very thin line separates the two and can easily be crossed. This has been shown countless times from the atomic bomb to science fiction stories involving run away clones. To be really honest I am more optimistic about science and technology because it has grown along with us, and it has shown great promise to the human race as a whole. Science and humanities correlate with each other and can help the other improve.

Critical Thinking Post #7 - Scientist's Life and Work

One of the most recent Scientists we look at in class was Robert Oppenheimer. Now Oppenheimer played a huge significant role in the way we live today. Thanks to him the United states has thousands of atomic weapons underground for special events. Oppenheimer faced many obstacles in the pursuit of science and I believe we can all learn from him. Internally he was stuck between a fine line, of morality and success. It wasn't easy, the decisions he had to make denoting the atomic bomb. He was a man of secrets which lead to his exclusion of job. His work shows us a sense of threat, as that single bomb took hundreds of thousands of lives in an instant. It left the area uninhabitable and scared the rest of the world by its destructive nature. By splitting a single atom the destructive force unleashed was unimaginable. This man was recognized, but by infamy. It shows us that science can always be taken to new heights, to an unimaginable extreme, but at a deadly cost. Its effects can be everlasting, shown to us by Oppenheimer, and the pursuit of science can sometimes go against a person morality.

Critical Thinking Post #6 - Altruism and Selfishness

So my topic is on altruism, and I will be arguing on how Ian McEwans short story of "Us or Me" argues for selfishness than altruism based on current ideas drawn from evolutionary theory and the Neo-Darwinism of Richard Dawkins. I will be using "Us or Me' and "The Selfish Gene" as both my main sources. Of course though i will use other sources, such as one being "Altruism: It Characteristics and Evolution" by P.J. Darlington. I found this source on JSTOR and thought it would be useful for my topic. Darlington goes into evolutionary traits of altruism saying that it is a slow, complex problem, opposed by competition,  evolves on individual selection and says that altruism in humans are based on a human's altruistic emotion. He believes there are four evolutionary traits of altruism that all living things abide by, with the exception of humans. He uses an example of a group of birds. Another source I will use is called "The Biology Of Human Altruism" by Mark N. Wexler. This source was also found on JSTOR and I figure it would be useful for my topic as well. Wexler analyzes the sociobiology of human altruism and argues that science cannot explain altruistic values such love and kindness. This paper would be a perfect example to go against the selfishness displayed in McEwans short story.

Critical Thinking Post # 5 - Promise and Peril of Robots in Film, TV, and Real Life

                “The Touch Bionics I-limb hand” showed the most promise of robotics. It was also the most appealing to me. The clip shows the most advance robotic arm the modern age has developed. In it a man with a lost limb uses it and shows the advantages and disadvantages of what this arm can do. It’s positive to know what robotics can do for people with lost limbs. The arm even has its own brain within its circuits! However, is it possible for this “brain” to evolve? In the trailer for “I, Robot” it revolves around a futuristic world where robots are an everyday thing. The protagonist has a grudge towards them and suspects a robot to be plotting against mankind which it does. This seems like a threatening view of what is to come with the advancement of robotics. It’s terrifying thinking that robots will become a common use just for them to band together against you. It’s threatening just because they can be physically superior to the common day man. I believe robots have become acceptable to most people because of the media. There has been a surge of these robotic films and shows that appeal to most people. In turn they view these showings and expect for some type of technological advancement for the future. They have become aware of what robots can be capable of and probably expect others to solve it. By others I mean the government or scientists. People know that advance robots with thoughts or emotions won’t happens anytime soon, but it will be inevitable. It is only a matter of time and the media pushes these ideas into the peoples mind. Robots in the modern day seem to be not as threatening because of their capabilities, but perhaps someday they will. 

Bionic Hand

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nXH9vgS47YY

I, Robot trailer

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s0f3JeDVeEo

Critical Thinking Post #4 - Midterm Practice

                The theory of Evolution is a fact and personally, I agree that Darwinism opposes humanistic values like altruism. I say this for a variety of reasons. For example, let’s uses Richard Dawkins “The Selfish Gene”. In this work Dawkin believes that altruism lies within a person’s genes, and that person’s gene tends to be altruistic towards other related genes. For example if there was a burning building with a child inside, the child’s father would go in to save that person because the genes in the child match the fathers to a certain extent. This is flawed though because if that was true, those genes would become extinct over time. That lifesaving gene would die out in Darwin’s theory of evolution yet somehow still exist in the modern era. This is shown in Ian McEwans short story “Us or Me”. In it a runaway balloon with a child still inside tries to be stop by a band of people working together. The balloon files up and immediately all of the people let go except for a doctor. The child’s own grandfather let go so that deed alone contrasts with Dawkins view. The grandfather should have been the last one to hold on due to his genes, yet he wasn't. This also contrasts with survival of the fittest because the doctor was the last one to hold on. They both show that altruism has lasted till today, and still plays an important role. Everyone has a hint of it because in McEwan’s story these random people can first to help the little boy (didn't last but it was shown). It should have died out a long time ago, but for some reason it hasn't and that is why I believe that Darwinism opposes humanistic values. 

Critical Thinking Post #3 - Research Paper Topic Brainstorming

            I love science fiction movies. They give me a mixture of action and adventure with good story telling. Technology is an ever expanding idea and the stuff portrayed in those science fiction films is bound to happen eventually. Not everything would happen but a fair amount would with progression. With this being said I have chosen to go with research paper idea #6: Portraying Robots (or Human Clones) in film. Science fiction is always challenging our understanding of what it means to be human by applying the attributes of them onto robots. Hollywood’s view of robots does not mean it is an accurate one but it gives us an idea of what might come with our advancement of technology. It can be debatable between whether filmmakers believe the advancement of robots to be optimistic or pessimistic. Within my essay I will side with just one of those ideas and revolve around it.  For the first film I will be analyzing is “I, Robot”. I believe that to be an amazing film portraying the advancement of a Robot and A.I. and how they can be (or are) equivalent to a human. The second film I have chosen is undecided. I’m stuck between “The Matrix” and “The Terminator”. Both have robots as antagonists and are both compelling. They have scenes showing how the filmmakers believe robots to be and display what we are currently able to do and not do. Choosing between them will be difficult but abstracting ideas from these movies will not. 

Critical Thinking Post #2 - Popular Science Today

So, I just recently saw the pilot episode for Cosmos: A Spacetime Odyssey and for starters I must admit that the visuals for the show is striking. The show's animation is visually striking and leaves a lasting impression on the viewer. It leaves the viewer with a craving to gain more knowledge. The "tone" of the show is optimistic. Neil deGrasse Tyson makes the viewer feel small compared to the vast space of the cosmos. It's an ever expanding universe and leaves room for more exploration by mankind. The show argues the value of both science and humanism by explaining how the cosmos first began by the big bang through the last seconds on the cosmos calendar where humans start to develop in nature. The value of science is shown by a detailed history of what the cosmos is comprised of, which is the local group, Virgo superstructure, and mutiverse. They show what it offers to human through evolution and what we do with the knowledge gained by it. I believe Americans like this scientifically aware show because the visuals is quite amazing and deep down they would like to know more about what science has to offer us. What I learned from watching this show is the amount of time humans undergo on the cosmic calender. According to the cosmic calender humans came into existence within the last few seconds. That means the history of humans is only but a tiny spot to an infinite amount of space.