en-us https://www.intensedebate.com/users/2416974 Comments by mike1567 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/04/05/after-this-class-do-you-still-blame-terrorism-119-blog/#IDComment141158894 It is interesting what you say. This is because after we had a whole lecture on Christian Invaders, my opinion on the middle east and terrorists changed a little. This is because when you take it from their respective, it feels like how we felt when the British would not grant us our freedom. When looked on by the middle east, It feels like there are random people trying to change everything they fundamentally agree. This is wrong and should never happen. However, when they take it as far as to bomb and injure Americans, here is where I say: “what the hell.” You can never harm an American and get away with it. We are in the fight trying to help them, and they return by preaching in their mosques about killing Americans. Shame on them for thinking this way. They represent all of the wrong ways to go about solving problems. Trying to compete with the number one military in the world is just stupid. It is like how in World War Two when the Germans were winning until America came in. The Americans not only changed the whole momentum of the war but they also rained down hell to the Axis. This is what will happen to the Middle East if they do not knock it off. It is logically okay to disagree with some of our policies. This is the same as it is logically acceptable for you to dislike laws imposed on you. However, the Middle East is going about this whole problem the wrong way. The way to win this battle is to fight with words. Some mean hard compromise will do the trick. Throwing down with violence is just the wrong way to go. This can be witnessed by such events as the Bombing of 911 and the Israli War. Jihad is a ridiculous belief that just does not make sense. This is because it tells you to destroy everyone who is not like you. This is the exact opposite of what America was built upon. In America, everyone is free to believe whatever they want and they should and will not be limited to the beliefs of the national government. For example, Obama is a Christian, but there are many, many Muslims and Jews in America. Do we hate on them? No we do not. This is because America is civilized and we know how to handle situations. Surely there are certain times when certain members of our society act out of line but as a whole we generally behave. As for Middle Eastern society, their government not only condones but also promotes the killings of Americans. This is not right. For real. Sat, 9 Apr 2011 03:44:19 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/04/05/after-this-class-do-you-still-blame-terrorism-119-blog/#IDComment141158894 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/03/29/do-you-ever-feel-uncomfortable-around-two-or-more-people-speaking-another-language-119-blog/#IDComment139266858 This question you ask is very valid. The answer I have to give is yes. No matter how politically correct I try to sound, the truth is that sometimes I do feel uncomfortable while other people converse in a different language around me. This is for several reasons. It makes me feel awkward when they are speaking and I can not understand them and at any moment they could be talking about me and I would never even know it. I don’t really think it is acceptable to have these feelings because I know to accept everyone for who they are, but I can not help feeling uncomfortable. However, there is good that comes from people speaking in different languages. It shows how unique and diverse our country is. The United States Of America is one of, if not the most, diverse places in the country. Our country is known as the melting pot of the world because we have this mass diversity. I feel like when people talk, for example, in Indian, they make me feel uncomfortable just because I do not know what they are saying. It has been said that fear of the unknown is one of the most prevalent fears. In fact, it is the cause of most disagreements. People are scared of different people because they do not know them. In turn they may end up suppressing these people simply because they do not know what they are saying. For example, if two middle eastern people are speaking a different language on an airplane, it will raise a great amount of suspicion. People will clearly be scared because they will automatically assume that they are terrorists just because they can not understand what they are saying. It is very possible that they are talking about how they want to desecrate America. However, it is more possible that they are just having a typical conversation in their native tongue. This fear is why people feel uncomfortable when people talk in different or differing languages around you. What if a person was conversing with you in English, and then moves and says a line to his friend in a different language and then turns back around to you and continues in English. Clearly whatever that person said was too personal to say in English because it was clearly about you. This is very uncomfortable because you automatically start to wonder what they said and why it could not be said in English. All of these reasons are why it makes people uncomfortable to hear others talk in a different language around you. I am not saying that any of these reasons are right, I am just saying that this is reality and how things are. Sat, 2 Apr 2011 02:21:32 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/03/29/do-you-ever-feel-uncomfortable-around-two-or-more-people-speaking-another-language-119-blog/#IDComment139266858 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/03/24/how-have-you-acted-when-involved-in-racist-or-discriminating-events-119-blog/#IDComment137615341 This question is difficult to respond to for different people. This is because every one responds in different ways. For example, a person who is colored and in a gang for example, could react very violently whereas a person who is colored and in a different situation could just shrug it off. Personally, for me I find it hard to answer because I was one of the 50 percent who has not encountered a situation such as this. This, to me, is actually surprising because I feel like that as sad as it is, racism is quite prevalent. I can answer this question in one way though. If I do ever encounter an act of racism my response now would be different from my response before taking soc 119. It is strange that I say this. This is because my opinion of race has not changed too much from this class. I have always considered myself some one who acknowledges differences in people. Whether it be skin color, religion or anything else. However, I have never used this knowledge as a reason to treat people differently or discriminate. I feel as if when I would encounter a situation before this class, I may not have intervened. I am very sad to admit this now, but I could possibly just have walked the other way. No matter which race was the victim or which race was the assaulter. Also, I feel as if this is very wrong. It is unacceptable now to think that I would have let this happen when I consider how important standing up against acts of racism are. I understand how important showing the differences between different people are as well. For example, Muslims need to express the fact that they are Muslim in the same way that Christians need to express their beliefs. This does not mean that it has to be in a negative connotation however. In an ideal world, people of different skin colors or faiths can openly express their differences without ridicule. This would actually make everyone closer by understanding how different they are. Also, when finding out how different they are, they will discover similarities that they never knew they had. This is why being different and being able to express it is so important. If it were not for differences, people would never know how similar they actually are. Thinking over all of this, if I were to encounter an open act of racism today I would without doubt step in. No matter which race was on either side. This shows the true signs of becoming a humanitarian. I understand that differences are necessary but I also understand that twisting those differences into negative feelings is unacceptable. Sat, 26 Mar 2011 02:06:33 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/03/24/how-have-you-acted-when-involved-in-racist-or-discriminating-events-119-blog/#IDComment137615341 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/03/02/do-people-feel-guilt-about-their-current-positions-when-knowing-about-the-disadvantages-of-the-freed-slaves-119-blog/#IDComment132150874 The question you asked is a very good one. Especially when a person takes into consideration the fact that freed slaves were promised acres of land after the Civil War and after slavery was banned. This ordinance ended up getting removed and the land just went back to the white slave owners. So when you think about it, the slaves got nothing out of the ending of slavery except a so called title of being free. Slaves had no money, no land, or pretty much anything. They were, therefore, required to return to their master and ask for work. What ended up happening is that the white plantation owner would allow them to work on his or her land but there was a catch. The catch was that the plantation owner would provide food, housing, and in return for letting the “freed” slave use the land, they would give them a percentage of the profit they made. However, the profit was never enough to alleviate the debt that the slave had incurred so after each year they owed more and more debt. As a result of this, they were never paid because of the money they owed. So… what do you think? Working for no pay, horrible hours, being in debt to a rich white man. Sounds like slavery to me. So pretty much, even though the title of slave was gone, the rich white plantation owners still found a way to exploit young African Americans into working for free and having no rights. In fact, since it cost so much to buy a slave, the plantation owners never wanted to kill them, only harm them. But now since they paid nothing for their labor, conditions for African Americans actually got much, much worse. So when you ask if we can feel guilt about treating freed people worse than we treated people in slavery… of course the answer would have to be yes. It is not fair to them to be promised a better life and receive just the opposite. Yet this is what happened and every white person was okay with it as long as the process was called something other than slavery. What does this say about our ancestors? What does it say that racism still exists? Things need to change and one thing that needs to happen is that people, especially the white population, need to feel guilt for what happened to the African Americans who were freed from slavery. We learned in the video that African Americans returning from protecting America in the war got lynched one per week. They risk their lives to protect a country that lynches and murders them when they return? This is not okay and I feel guilt for the actions my ancestors committed. Thu, 3 Mar 2011 17:57:15 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/03/02/do-people-feel-guilt-about-their-current-positions-when-knowing-about-the-disadvantages-of-the-freed-slaves-119-blog/#IDComment132150874 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/02/24/is-it-selfish-for-people-in-poverty-to-have-more-kids-because-of-their-lower-income-119-blog/#IDComment130750918 This question you bring up is a very valid question. On one hand, one would say that it is actually quite selfish because an intelligent person can say that they can barely provide and supply for themselves, let alone, for example, twenty two children. This is a very valid point because they cannot provide for themselves. They live in a trailer and have to walk ten miles in the rain to go to work. Is this any environment to raise a child in? If you ask me, personally I would say no. Think of putting yourself into that situation. Would you want to be raised in a trailer with trailer trash parents? I definitely would not. So it could very well be considered selfish to keep producing children and offspring into the world. However, there could be many other factors that can possibly avert the blame from the “selfish” parents that have so many kids. For example, you could say that they cannot afford proper protection to avoid these pregnancies. Is it viable to say that just because you cannot afford to buy protection, that you cannot have sex? No that is not valid so it is possible to avert the blame from selfishness to just inability to prevent. You cannot blame someone for doing something that they have no ability to prevent. So there could clearly be different reasons for these huge families. Another factor that could in fact play a key role is education. First off, they do not know any better than to have children because they do not have proper education. It is statistically proven that families with more education have smaller families than families with fewer education. This being said, it is possible that they just do not know any better and cannot help it that they have bigger families because they just do not know any better. Taking factors like this into account tend to push the blame away from being selfish. Also, these families are not as technologically advanced and people can say that they are behind. Historically, as history has progressed, families have gotten smaller and smaller. These trailer families need more children so they can work and provide income for the family. In upper class families, there is no need for more children because they are not needed to work in the fields or provide income for the family so that the family can receive enough money to survive. You can factor survival of the fittest into the fact that they have more children as well. You can say that they need more children to survive, and that is why they have so many. Therefore, after all this consideration, I believe that it is not selfish to have more children. Sat, 26 Feb 2011 02:58:23 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/02/24/is-it-selfish-for-people-in-poverty-to-have-more-kids-because-of-their-lower-income-119-blog/#IDComment130750918 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/02/16/why-with-more-education-do-people-believe-that-success-is-mostly-a-result-of-hard-work-119-blog/#IDComment128999193 As people become more and more educated, they tend to be thrown into reality that hard work alone is not the only contributing factor that determines whether or not a person is successful. As people become more and more educated, they tend to have less belief in the fairy tale mind set that says that people who work the hardest get the success. This simple reality is because people become more educated on the fact that not only hard work is a factor to success. They learn that many other factors play a key role as to whether or not a person who is trying to be successful succeeds. These opposing factors may include, but are not limited to, the hands you shake, the color of your skin, or how much money you have. The age old saying goes like this: it’s not about the grades you make, but the hands you shake. This basically means that the grades you get in school are not important. Pretty much, the amount of work that a person puts into college does not really matter. It is more along the lines of what people you know. For example, if your dad owns a multi billion dollar corporation, then he will probably get you a successful job there without you having to do much work. In fact, you could probably just coast your way through college, get C’s and earn a degree and land a fortune 100 job right out of college just because your dad owns a multi billion dollar corporation. So, when a person becomes more educated, they learn of these facts and realize that all the education does not really pay off that much because there is probably a person applying for the same job that you are that knows the person hiring and will get the job before you no matter of your grades. Race and gender also have significant roles in success. When applying for a big business job, employers are more likely to hire a white person than a person from any other race. This is just because racism used to be very prevalent in America and there is still a lingering of some racism in business. Also, when applying for a job in construction, a male dominated occupation, males are more likely to get hired than women just because of stereotypes. It’s a shame but it is what it is. If a man and a woman had equal grades in college and are equally qualified, the man would get the job because of the stereotypes that construction is a male dominated occupation and that women do not have a place in that profession. Therefore, as people get more educated, they learn that just hard work alone does not lead to success. Sat, 19 Feb 2011 02:35:47 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/02/16/why-with-more-education-do-people-believe-that-success-is-mostly-a-result-of-hard-work-119-blog/#IDComment128999193 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/02/08/how-have-the-choices-youve-made-and-determinism-affected-your-life-119-blog/#IDComment127040732 Clearly, it is easy to see how a person just like you or me could come out and say that their life has been one hundred percent their own choices and no environmental factors were involved on how his or her life has panned out. Just as obvious, we can see how just the opposite can be true. People can feel like they have had absolutely no say in how they have gotten to where they are today. One can feel as if his or her parents have put them to where they are, or forced them to play that sport that got them a scholarship. Through my own personal experiences, I’ve noticed that neither statement listed above is wholly true. No matter what people want to think, determinism and free will are both responsible as to how a person has progressed along his or her life. It is possible; however, that either determinism or free will has played a bigger role than the other, but it is not possible to have one without the other. In my life, free will and determinism have played an equal role. For example, I knew that I wanted to come to the Pennsylvania State University pretty much my whole life; however, if it had not been for my parents influence on me to always do my best, I may not have excelled enough academically to be accepted. Both free will and determinism affected how I got to Penn State but one played a bigger role. For me, it would be free will. This simple fact is quite easy. Free will played a bigger role in my decision to come to Penn State because I could have chosen any school in the world, and my parents would have still encouraged me and forced me to work hard to get in. This being said, it was all up to me as to where I would attend, and I picked Penn State. Not only have free will and determinism played a role in my decision to come to the Pennsylvania State University, but they have also played a role since I have been in State College. With the lack of parental supervision, my experiences since I have been at college have been predominantly based on free will. One situation, however, was based purely in determinism. When I got my underage, even though I had not been drinking, I had absolutely no free will at all. I was forced to pay five hundred and forty dollars to the school or I would be sent to jail. Having no other choice, determinism showed me the way to go. Besides that one incident however, my life has been driven by free will since I have gone to college. Thu, 10 Feb 2011 03:20:19 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/02/08/how-have-the-choices-youve-made-and-determinism-affected-your-life-119-blog/#IDComment127040732 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/02/03/why-dont-we-live-like-the-monkeys-119-blog/#IDComment125969890 The question you ask seems quite simple. However, when you stop and take a minute or two to think about the answer to this question, you realize that both sides have solid arguments. On one end, the subtraction and elimination of pain, suffering, and ridicule would be superb. Why wouldn’t you want to live in a world without these emotions and jeers? On the other hand, a world bereft of pain is also a world bereft of joy and love. So, your question goes deeper than just asking if it would be better to live as monkeys live. Your question makes you choose between emotions or no emotions. On one end you have no bad, but no good and on the other you do have bad, but you also have good. In my opinion, when you break the question down in this manner, the question becomes quite simple. In my opinion I would prefer, personally, a world with good even if it has to include the bad. This is because the good always outweighs the bad. This is simply because without the bad, the goodness in life would not feel so special. With nothing to compare the good of life to, the goodness in life loses its significance and joy that it brings us. If we lived purely just to live and just went through life’s daily routine day in and day out, then is that even really living at all? To me, living life is all about the experiences that one has, good or bad, and how those experiences impact his or her life. So, in my personal opinion, living life like monkeys do, aka living life just for the routine and not taking joy in it, is not really even living at all. Without aspects of life such as love, music, or entertainment, life would just be a big routine. Without the joys in life, life would not be worth the routine of the same events day in and day out without any emotion attached to those experiences. I know you can argue that if life was always emotionless, then would we really know that we were missing out on actually living? But still I think the answer is that it would be better to have emotions in life. This is because people do the job at hand more passionately when they have an emotional connection to that task. If life was all just daily routine with no emotion, then people would not put nearly as much effort into their tasks. All of the world’s tasks would just be done half-assed because no one would feel an emotional push and people would have no motivation to improve their life. Therefore, life like monkeys is not the way to go. Fri, 4 Feb 2011 19:07:14 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/02/03/why-dont-we-live-like-the-monkeys-119-blog/#IDComment125969890 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/01/26/why-do-we-associate-with-people-of-the-same-race-and-ethnicity-as-ourselves-119-blog/#IDComment124463908 Okay so you bring up a great question. I have to say I do agree to an extent, but I feel like today’s society is making strides against your claim. First off, I strongly believe that the reason people traditionally stick to friendships within their own race and/or ethnicity because they already have a fundamental common place amongst each other without having to dig deeper than the surface. For example, when an international student from China comes to The Pennsylvania State University, they will look for another similar student who is international from China. This creates a connection right away. Humans are social by nature, yes, but they are also instinctively more apt to place their roots in a familiar setting instead of reaching out into the unknown. Inherently, people are fearful of the unknown, so being in a group of people similar to you makes you feel more comfortable and safer. This, to be simple, is why historically people of the same race and ethnicity have gathered together. Another reason of intra-racial friendship is because not only do these people share similarities, but they also share same dislikes. For example, Israel and Palestine do not flirt with the idea of friendship not because they aren’t similar, but for the opposite reason: they have fundamental differences that they cannot agree on. Israelis and Palestinians do not get along because their belief in religion is so different that it makes them believe that they cannot be friends. In this case, it is not fear of the unknown, but it is actually knowledge of the other group’s beliefs that one does not agree with and cannot accept. I do not agree fully with your statement however. In a world where people’s races are getting more and more mixed together, this gap of communication between different groups is slowly diminishing. Also, different factors other than race and ethnicity can pull people together. For example, sports and organizations bring people together that normally may not hangout. People in the past only stick to their race for friendship because of the fundamental similarity. As communities are becoming more and more diverse, there are several activities within the community that can create another connection other than race. For example, a white kid, a black kid, and an Asian kid can all be on the same soccer team. They could be on the same soccer team for years and create a fundamental similarity that is completely separate from race. This is why in today’s society characteristics such as race and ethnicity are playing a smaller role in friendships. There are activities that unite people on their likes and dislikes rather than just the color of their skin. Therefore, people are starting to affiliate more and more with people other than their own race and ethnicities now more than ever before. Sat, 29 Jan 2011 03:16:42 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/01/26/why-do-we-associate-with-people-of-the-same-race-and-ethnicity-as-ourselves-119-blog/#IDComment124463908 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/01/18/what-do-you-think-blog-2/#IDComment122854813 I completely agree with your two points. First off, the exercise interested me a great deal. Personally, I am very into race and how people decide to classify people. As I have learned from this class, just because a person has certain characteristics such as dark skin or a certain color hair does not mean that you can give an accurate guess as to what ancestry they might have. There is no doubt in my mind that the “4.0’s” of the class had a very difficult task. The fact that the Mr. Richards chose so many students that appeared to look similar but in reality were quite different really fascinated me. I did not know that there were such subtle differences such as nose shape or narrowness of the head that could hint to where a person is from. In my opinion, this exercise was essential and greatly needed because the viewpoint of many Americans that there are only several races of either black, Asian, Indian, etc. needs to be changed. The fact that one girl who is from Mexican descent was mistaken for Middle Eastern demonstrates the intolerance and ignorance of American people. For example, people see that girl and automatically assume she is a terrorist sent to hijack American planes or to bomb a building but when in reality, she is from the country right below us and in the same continent. Classes related to race and ethic relations such as the one taught at Penn State should be required for all students take because it really educates students about issues around the world and it enlightens us to the privilege of knowing that just because a person has dark skin does not mean that they are from a certain area. For example, a point Mr. Richards used in class was to say that many Black skinned people in America today have a bunch of white blood. Also, the remark about how some Italians are racist but in reality their skin is just as dark shows that people are intolerant and this exercise did a good job in acknowledging this. I also agree to your second point about how the exercise we did in class was provocative. I’m sure that being thrown into a line and being told that people are going to categorize you based on skin color and facial features is anything but acceptable at first; however, as class went on and the exercise progressed, people realized that there was a greater purpose to the demonstration. That being said, I could see how people could still be uneasy about the whole class. It is not typical to have open conversations about race or for a teacher to yell out racial stereotypes. The fact that this happens is why this class is so great though. It takes race away from its politically correct place (out of public conversation) and into a place that it needs to be if the issue of race is ever going to be resolved (out in the open). Therefore, I agree with both of your statements regarding the exercise as both interesting and provocative; furthermore, I also add that this exercise was essential to establishing an open opinion about race. Fri, 21 Jan 2011 21:51:54 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/01/18/what-do-you-think-blog-2/#IDComment122854813