Unfair

In John Broome's article "The Ethics of Climate Change" I read the line: "By emitting greenhouse gases, are the rich perpetrating an injustice on the world's poor?" This line really got to me. I completely agree with this statement because it really is the rich that are contributing to global warming. The poor do not have the money to use anything (cars, machines) that could contribute to global warming. And the rich really are committing an injustice because the lives of the children of the poor and their children's children will be different and there is nothing the poor can do about it. They can not stop the rich from emitting greenhouse gases and they can not do antyhing to help reverse global warming.
America's capitalist society is partly to blame not just for global warming but for the fact that we do not seem to care that we are also effecting the poorer nations of the world. Capitalism has taught people to worry only about themselves and the profit they are gaining. Ethics plays a limited roll in capitalism and it is unfortunate that these are the values that Americans are teaching their children. Even if people see the negatives of capitalism, these values come into play in all parts of life.

Music

Animalcules

I can not describe Smith's keen pleasure in observing the animalcules because I myself would never find pleasure in such a thing. I also have no interest in writing about this article, but I can however discuss what I would fine pleasure in, my number one being music. I have always loved music, as I have been playing the piano since the second grade. Music was what got me through high school when I was unhappy with the people I was surrounded with, and it has even helped me through my rough days of college. This semester, I picked up another instrument: the guitar. I've been having my friend teach me how to play things, looking up chords and tabs, as well as writing my own songs. It really is amazing how much of an outlet writing music can be, and I had never realized until this past week.

Are we evolving?

Perhaps I did not read the article closely enough, but the whole article did not seem to be about self-inflicted extinction, but just about the ways that humans are evolving... even if it is a sort of backwards way of evolving. Phelan made a great point about why we are not evolving the way we used to: "We nurse our sick back to health, and mating is no longer a privilege that males beat each other senseless to secure. As a result, even the less fit get to pass on their genes. Promiscuity and sperm competition have given way to spiritual love; the fittest and the unfit are treated as equals, and equally flourish." These days we do not need to marry people who will produce children with the best chance of living because it is hard to find a child who does not have a good chance of living.
It is funny that we had to read this article because just the other day I was thinking about this and wondering if we evolve. Our environments are so easily customizable that I can not think of any traits that actually hinder someone from living. For example, if it is too hot, we turn on the air conditioner. My father suggested that people of the future will need longer fingers because of things such as blackberries where people have to text very fast, but it's not as if having stubbier fingers hinders someone from texting and makes it harder for them to live.

Food Miles - "Big Foot" by Michael Specter

Michael Specter makes a valid point when he says "Possessing an excessive carbon footprint is rapidly becoming the modern equivalent of wearing a scarlet letter." Although I think this is an exaggeration, because nobody knows the exact carbon footprint of anyone else, I still think it holds true. It is hard to find a person who does not contribute to the problem of excessive greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, but some do more to decrease their emissions than others. And those who do nothing to decrease their emissions, or even contribute to the problems excessively (I'm looking at you Hummer drivers) are definitely judged their peers. However, in terms of food miles, unless the subject is being followed in the supermarket, nobody will know their footprint. I do not even know where any of the food I buy comes from. When I first read John Elkington's claim, "We are in an era of creative destruction," (292) I was unsure of what he meant, but the way I translate it is that although we (human beings) are unable to stop destructing our planet, we are finding 'creative' ways to attempt to reverse the effects.
There is no question that I contribute to global warming, because as a consumer in a capitalist nation it is impossible not to. I do not think I excessively contribute, but I am sure I could do more to be more conscious of staying green. I should unplug my phone charger when I am not using it, but unfortunately I never think about this. After reading this article though, my eyes have been opened and I will try to walk more places and be more conscious of my actions.

Phelan comments that humanity is self extincting. How does G. Carlin’s routine reinforce this notion?

- George Carlin does a very good job of making a mockery of all the people who say we need to go green or the earth will die. While I do think we should be conscious of our actions and how they affect the earth, after watching Carlin’s routine, I am almost convinced that maybe everyone is going crazy over nothing.

What emblem/image/symbol best exemplifies the film “just add water”

I am unsure how to answer this question, and I do not see the point. It is probably going to contribute to the next paper we have due, but I am not even sure when that is due or what the premise of that is. I will surely find out before I have to hand it in. It is hard for me to focus on this question right now because I am so tired and all I want to do is jump in my bed and sleep.

Examples people are giving:
Football field
Sand
Stevo the turtle
Chevron station
Rite Value
Lightning
Love seat
Tin box
Rotting flower
Tumbleweed
Poster from the movie "holes"
Grandma's secret recipe

What is a writer? Am I a writer?

I would label someone as a writer if they enjoy writing and do it in their free time. However, if someone labeled themselves as a writer, I would not ask them if they met this criteria. In most cases, I think if someone labels themselves as something, we have to accept it. We can disagree behind their back, but who are we to say what labels another person fits? While I do enjoy writing poems in my free time, I do not think I would label myself a writer.

Just Add Water

I’m really not sure what is meant by a free write on the term ‘just add water.’ Just add water to put the fire out? Just add water to dilute the mixture? What does just add water mean? Unless I zoned out and missed something essential to decoding this phrase.

The Writing Center

Although my writing center experience was not the most helpful, it was at least interesting. I pulled an all nighter the night before I had my writing center appointment because I had a huge load of homework to do. Unfortunately, due to this I was extremely tired and unfocused during my appointment. My writing center tutor realized how tired I was, but we worked on the paper nonetheless. Before the writing center appointment, I had a page written, but was having an extremely hard time thinking of anything else to write. My tutor told me to analyze every line of the sonnet, and I followed her advice.
Unfortunately, I do not have my first draft saved, but the way that my essay changed is instead of just writing about what the characters of the Twelfth Night were like and the general theme of the sonnet, I analyzed every single line of the sonnet and applied it to the Twelfth Night.

“Do we create what we observe through the act of our observations?”

“Do we create what we observe through the act of our observations?”

I do not agree with the statement that we create what we observe through the act of our observations. How can we create something that already exists? If multiple people observe the same thing, are they all creating the same thing? It makes no sense to me. I can barely even understand this entire article just because it uses so many words I do not understand. Also, I never took a physics class, let alone quantum mechanics. When we observe something, we are creating our perception of it, but we are not creating the actual existence of it.
The strength of Roebke's thesis is that it is something that makes the reader stop and think. Any time someone poses a deeply philosophical question, the reader or listener almost always takes a second to think about it, so atleast Roebke is engaging his audience and creating a means for which them to use their brains. However, this is the only strength that I find in it.

What is waste?

Although the word ‘waste’ can be used in different respects, when I hear the word, I think of anything that could serve a purpose, but is either thrown away or disregarded. The prime example of this would be uneaten food. I rarely throw out my food. If I am finished eating it and there is more left, I put it in the refrigerator and eat it later. However, this is not the only form of waste. If I am finished with my clothing, I donate them to charity. I hate to see people wasting things that could be used by another, because there are so many people in the world who do not have either the money or the opportunity for such things. I always wonder why people just throw out things they no longer want instead of giving them to someone who does, but I am unable to arrive at an answer.