Why we like what we like

“Why We Like What We Like” by Alva Noë

Central Argument: We like what we like not because of our senses but because of the idea and concept of it.

I agree with Alva Noë with her opinion on why we like what we like. There are many time when I realized that I ate something that I don’t really like without even realizing it. When we see things we think back to the experiences we had with that thing and therefore we form an opinion about it relating it to the taste of it. We think we don’t like certain foods because of the taste of it, however, this has nothing to do with taste. It is to do with the idea and the concept of it. We like what we like based not on our senses but rather the idea and concept of it and the experiences we have with it.

            When I was in Elementary school, my teacher for some reason told me to go home and slice a tomato and eat it with pepper sprinkled on top. The way she described it made me do it.  Although the tomato tasted fine, that night I threw up that entire tomato and I got really sick. Since then I have despised tomatoes. Although when my mom feeds me while I am watching the television I eat everything she feeds me. I am too engaged with what is happening in the television that I don’t even realize that she fed me tomatoes. This proves that the taste of tomatoes don’t really matter for me. It is because I threw up once right after eating tomatoes that I hate tomatoes for good. I hate the idea of tomatoes not the taste of it.

            My uncle told me a very amusing story about a Brahmin. Brahmins are all strict vegetarians but they eat eggs. So my uncle went with his Brahmin friend to a restaurant. My uncle ate non vegetarian dished and was desperately trying to get the Brahmin to eat it and just try it once. He obviously said no. So my uncle decided to play dirty. He ordered goat brains which tasted like scrambled eggs. He ordered that dish for his friend without him knowing what it really was. The Brahmin ate everything. He even praised the dish when he was asked how it was. After they left the restaurant my uncle told him what he really ate. He was shocked, and he immediately started finding faults with that dish which didn’t exist when he didn’t know what it really was. This proves the fact that we like what we like not because our senses tell us so but because of the idea of it. The Brahmin like the dish when he thought it was scrambled eggs, but as soon as he found out it wasn’t he disliked. This dislike had nothing to do with the taste of the dish; it had to do with the idea of the dish.

            When we like the idea of a dish we immediately like the dish itself. This is not only with food. This can be case with names as well. The book Thank You For Arguing, by Jay Hienrichs, has Homer Simpsons, Aristotle, and Eminem’s names on the cover. When I saw these names I judged the book and thought it will be really cool. After I started reading I was convincing myself that the book was good when I clearly knew that I was getting tired and bored of it. What Alva Noë says in her article is true. We don’t realize the real reason we like what we like because it is never said out loud.

Manners

“Please Read This Story, Thank You” by Linton Weeks

Central Argument: The current world has forgotten basic etiquettes and manners however the one thing they haven’t forgotten is the “importance of acknowledging appreciation expressed.”

I disagree with Linton Weeks on his story about manners amongst people today. I think that people have changed their way of acknowledging appreciation expressed by someone, and that those new ways are not wrong or bad. There are many things that have changed since when our grandparents or even our parents lived. They lived in a different generation than what we are living in now, therefore they will not relate to many phrases that we use today. However, this does not mean that we are wrong or rude. People like to acknowledge appreciation in different ways with different people.

            When I meet people for the first time I usually say “hello.” However, if I am really close to you and know you are a more personal level, I am more comfortable saying “wazzup” “hey” or “hi.” I prefer it because it is more colloquial therefore I am more comfortable with it. I am never going to ask my cousins “would you like some soda?” I am just going to say “yo, you want some?” They are my cousins; there is no need for me to speak formally with them. Formal language is exhausting for my generation. It is hard for us to speak that way because we are not used to it. My parents are used to it, and so are my grandparents, therefore they find it normal and easy to speak like that. Our language shows the same acknowledgement as my parents or my grandparents’ generation does.

            In European history at one point manners became really important. If people didn’t go to church, they were seen as bad and rude people. Church was no longer attended by people to go and worship and pray; people went because they wanted to have good manners. The entire purpose of a church vanished. Manners change over time, therefore it is wrong to call big groups of people “rude” if you are not from their generation. For my generation now just smiling at a person and listening to a person shows that you have good manners. Even if we just nod at someone who just said “hi” it is okay, and considered as good manners. We haven’t forgotten basic manners, manners just changed over time. Mixing with the “untouchables” in India was considered as a bad manner too. This changed over time because the British came and changed the ways of India.

            Our environment contributes to the way we behave. We are in a digital era now. I remember telling my mom that my friend broke up with her boyfriend today while they were chatting. She was shocked that they broke up over the internet, even though they were going to see each other that same evening for a social activity. It is really common now to break up on internet by just simply changing your relationship status on Facebook. It is okay to do that now. Some people mind it, and prefer to do it in person, however, that is because this concept is still new and fresh to many people. Once this becomes more common and popular everyone will be comfortable doing important things over the internet. My mom told me that the boy had no manners breaking up with my friend like that. Now I realize that this will soon change. My mom only said this because she is not very familiar with the digital era, because she doesn’t encounter it as much. It will no longer be a bad manner for people to break up like that, because Facebook is widely used, and it will become easy to break up through it.

            Manners change over time; however, they don’t forget the importance of acknowledging appreciation expressed. Manners change because of change in environment and situations. Therefore I strongly believe calling huge groups of people, who are not part of you generation, is wrong and ignorant. The way people talk to other people shows who they are comfortable with and who they are not very comfortable with, therefore the way they speak should be entirely up to them to decide, not the world.  

Submit with swag!

“What Does It Mean To Be Cool?” by Thorsten Botz-Bornstein

Central Argument: The definition of “cool” is a “paradoxical fusion of submission and subversion” because you cannot be considered cool only if you are constantly submitting to someone, you have to somehow have to break the rule and do something unexpected.

I agree with Thorsten Botz-Bornstein in his definition of “cool”. He says that the definition of “cool” is a “paradoxical fusion of submission and subversion” because you cannot be considered cool only if you are constantly submitting to someone, you have to somehow have to break the rule and do something unexpected. Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, Jesus Christ, and African-American slaves are example of “cool.”

When the British took over India, they made Indians pay for salt and cotton which Indians made. Mahatma Gandhi was the Father of the Nation in India. He was a man who overpowered the British without the use of violence. He used many tactics and one of them was, ‘The Dandi March’ or also known as, ‘The salt march’. It was a long march about three hundred and twenty kilometers to a remote seaside village named Dandi. This march was a one of the greatest non-violent battles and it broke no rules. He travelled all the way to Dandi, to protest against the British salt monopoly in colonial India. The british taxed Indians for their own cotton and salt. Gandhi opposed this. He told people to make their own salt and cotton. No rules broken, no violence used, yet made a difference.

Gandhi Ji didn’t break any rules but he was cool because he made the oppressor look stupid and powerless. His solution was very different and unexpected. He didn’t tell the British to stop what they were doing; instead he submitted to the British but reacted with a completely different and unexpected way. Therefore he was “cool.”

In the Bible Jesus tells his disciples about the concept of turning the other cheek. He tells them that if someone slaps them, they should turn the other cheek for them to slap them again. He tells them that if someone wants them to carry their backpack for a mile, they should carry it for them for two miles. This practice takes away the power from the oppressor and makes them look stupid in a way. This practice is also an unexpected reaction. If someone slapped me, I would have beaten him up, because that is the kind of reaction which is expected. However this is not cool because I am doing the same thing as before. If I told them to slap me again I am doing something unexpected and therefore I am taking my opponent’s steam away from him, leaving him dumbstruck.

In the movie Lage Raho Munnabhai, Sanjay Dutt practices this and tells other people to practice it as well. In one case of this movie, a man is pissed because his neighbor spits Pan at his door after chewing it. Sanjay Dutt tells him to smile at him every morning and clean it in front of him. This shames the neighbor, and eventually he apologizes. By cleaning the pan of the door, the man is doing something unexpected and therefore he is “cool.” He is submitting to the neighbor, but he is tweaking the system in an unexpected way.

            African American slaves are another example of the definition of “cool.” When the whites in America bullied them and were racist they kept their cool. For example when a white person were harassing a black man, the black responded by submitting to the white man. He didn’t resist. This made the white man look stupid, because what he was expected didn’t happen. This is another example of turning the other cheek. African Americans were “cool” because they reacted differently to oppression from the whites in America.

            The definition of “cool” is when a person submits to someone else with attitude and swag. Mahatma Gandhi and African Americal slaves are examples of this. By turning the other cheek, like Jesus suggests, a person submits with attitude and swag. By doing this they are cool. However these unexpected behaviors change over time because what was considered unexpected in the 1600’s will not be considered unexpected in the current world.

Change

“The Rise of ‘Awesome’” by Robert Lane Greene

Central Argument: “Over a period of time the meanings of words change because it is used too frequently, like “awesome” for example.

In his article “The Rise of ‘Awesome’’ Robert Lane Greene says that the meaning of words changes over time because it is used too much. Although this is true, I think that everything including words also change over a period of time because of an excess of something. I agree with Greene because humans, Morals, and fashion are existing evidence of his theory. It is always because of an excess of something which causes change.

Human evolution is a great example of what Greene was saying in his article. Decades ago human structure was like a monkey’s structure, but over time this changed and humans started having a more straight back. However, due to too much sitting and working, watching television, and using laptops, our backs are becoming more bent. This is going back to what it was. All this luxury items are being used too much, therefore it is changing our postures. Similarly, like Greene said, the meaning of the word “awesome” changed over time because it was used to frequently.

During the Renaissance period in Europe, women being raped was allowed and accepted by the public. However over time this changed, because a lot of diseases were spreading due to this.  This again shows that change happened because of an excess of problems that were created. Another example from European history is that having an open attitude of making money was not accepted. It wasn’t morally right for a person to openly claim that he is doing something to make money. This too changed over time because slowly people realized that their attitude towards making money was not making them rich. Now it is okay for people to say that they are doing something to make money. People even brag about the salaries. Change in morals shows that over time people’s judgment about certain things changes because of events that occurred.

Another big example of change overtime is fashion. The only time I see Bell-Bottomed jeans now is in pictures. It is highly unlikely that you will see anyone wearing Bell-Bottomed jeans now. In the past men wore really tight pants. This changed over time to wearing really baggy jeans. However now you will again notice that because of baggy jeans being so common the latest trend for boys is skinny jeans. When something becomes too common, people change their ways. Korean boys in my school wear skinny jeans. Many other boys in my school were pink. Pink was considered a girly color, however, as time passed by this mindset changed. It is okay for boys to wear pink now. It is actually a fashion trend now.

Change happens because of many different reasons. Greene said that change in the meaning of words happened because certain words were becoming too common, therefore they were used in a different context with a tweaked meaning. However, change doesn’t only happen in meaning of words, because as time passes by everything around us changes, like dressing style, morals and values, and the physical features of our body. Change is unstoppable because everything becomes common over time.

Studies

Sir Francis Bacon’s essay on “Of studies”

Central Argument: A true wise person is someone who applies his knowledge to his everyday life and one that knows how to use it appropriately.

I agree with Sir Francis Bacon idea of a wise man being someone who actually applies his knowledge to his life. There is no point in someone learning something and then forgetting to apply it and make the most out of it. We see examples of people who do this everywhere, especially in school. They study for a test and then forget everything they studied. I agree with him because all the well rounded students apply their knowledge in all aspects of their lives.

            There are many students in school, including me, who learn for grades. We do everything in school to get good grades. We cram everything in our heads right before the exams and flush it out immediately after the exam is over. I often don’t even remember the questions on the test. Therefore I am not a well-rounded student. I cannot be. When I chuck everything out of my brain I cannot use that knowledge in my everyday life. Math is one example of this. I could have used most of my math skill which I had acquired throughout my schooling so far if only I remembered it. It would have made my life easier. Therefore, only the student who learns and remembers their knowledge is a well-rounded student. Only well-rounded students can apply their knowledge in the lives, because they actually remember it.

            Wise people don’t show off their knowledge. They use it appropriately; they use it when they need to. Diary of a wimpy kid is a really good example of this. This book talks about two boys who are in middle school. One of the boys is really desperate to be popular. He is the more smart kid. However, this is what causes him to be disliked by his very own best friend. He shows off his knowledge and judges his best friend works. He thinks he is smarter than his best friend. His best friend gets in to a huge fight with him because of this. This shows that even though you may be smart and intelligent you still are not wise if you are showing it off.   Being wise does not mean showing your talents at any given point or manner. That too is a skill required to be a wise person.

            Mark Zucherberg, the founder of Facebook has used his intelligence to provide the world a better source of communication. He was extremely intelligent and he used this to create Facebook, a social networking site that has connected people all over the world. A man, who is known for his skills with technology and he knows how to use his intelligence for the betterment of the world.  If people do not have a Facebook account they are usually not as sociable as people who do. Many people might say that Facebook has actually decreased the communication skills amongst people, well; I believe that there are only a few that have been affected by this. People all around the world use Facebook to share ideas, make pages for their company to promote it. This is the way a student from Harvard made his name renowned.

            Wise people can resist the temptation of showing off and acting superior. Wise people don’t really have to act superior people automatically make them superior. Therefore people who are show offs are not wise and people who can control themselves and are well-round students who apply their knowledge to the real world are indeed the true wise people.

 

Marriage and Single life

Sir Francis Bacon’s essay on “Of Marriage and Single Life”

Central Argument: A single life has benefits such as more money, however, it also makes people more cruel and hardhearted.

I disagree with Sir Francis Bacon about single life making men more hard hearted and cruel. There are many people who are single and happy with their lives. Single people have relationships with girlfriends or boyfriends and yes, like Sir Francis Bacon said they have more money for themselves. I think single people have more money, which allows them to have more fun because they have fewer limitations.

            The people who are married are usually stressed and in some cases depressed. They have limitations with fun. Married couples with children cannot go out at night and come home late. They have to deal with the child’s schooling, health, behavior etc. This is a tiring life. It makes people more shut out to the real world, because of so much responsibility at home. Therefore people who are single and can go out whenever they want, and do whatever they want. This freedom makes people happy and more content with life. If people are happy they are usually kinder to other people. When married couples get old too they are still shut out from doing a lot of things. Firstly, they are too old to do certain things. Secondly, they might have a wife who is sick and old. My grandfather took care of my grandmother when she was really sick and in her last stage of life. He did everything, because he thought it was her responsibility. My grandfather loves to party, but he was restricted to do this because of his responsibilities. So age really make a difference to the benefits of a married life.

The people who are married are usually stressed and in some cases depressed. They fight constantly over small things. When they live under the same roof, even though they are brought together they are separated by differences. This is somewhat like in England in the 19^th Century. Industrialization brought English people together, but as they came together they became conscious of their status wither being rich or poor. This created a gap between the rich and the poor. Similarly, when married couples live together they grow distant with each other, thus making them angry and cruel to everyone besides their spouse. A single life on the other hand gives individuals their space and freedom, and helps keep their emotions controlled and positive. Married life doesn’t always make young people disciplined. Married couples get so mad at each other that the word discipline stops existing in their mind.

A single life is a life with no worries and a lot of money. When you are single you spend your earnings only on yourself and your needs. In a married life you have to worry about your spouse’s needs as well as yours. If they have a child, it is worse. They have to share their earning with two people. Money makes people happy because it allows them to do a lot of things that they want to. If people cannot do what they want they will be happy. Therefore a single life makes people happy. In the movie, The Pursuit of Happiness we can see this. Will Smith struggle economically because he has to provide for his wife and his son when he gets his job and gets promoted he is happy. If he never had a son he probably wouldn’t have had to suffer as much. A single life gives you pleasure regardless of age and it does not make people cruel because they are already happy with the benefits of a single life to impose any kind of hatred towards anyone.

Is television good?

Central Argument: T.V is good for the women who are not very educated and live in rural areas because it helps them get in touch with the new way of life and the new values and morals of life, and this helps them better their lives.

Joel Waldfogel’s statement about television being good for women who live in rural areas is absolutely right. Television shows us the definition of ‘success’ through its very own portrayal of it. When we see their interpretation of ‘success,’ we work towards reaching it.  The rural women in India have lived a very conservative life, for a very long time. This kind of conservatism is too harsh on certain people that some of these actions are against the Indian law. Some of the actions that Joel Waldfogel states are men beating up their wives and finding out the sex of the baby before it is born to make sure it is not a girl. The get the baby aborted if the baby is a girl. These actions are against the law now. The Television shows them the new morals of society.

When rural women who have lived a life based on ancient traditions see how the urban world has changed, they respond by accepting this change. The values of life change. The Urban world portrays radical changes in society. These changes appeal the women who have lived a life with a lot of limitations. These values make the women aware of their rights. Then all of a sudden baby boys aren’t so special, and beating a woman is dishonorable and unaccepted. These were radical changes for the women living in rural communities. However, changes like this gave them confidence to work upon it. When they see on television that even the rich people in the urban areas, who were smarter than others, were against beating a woman, it became unacceptable for them too, as shown in the statistics Waldfogel provides. People living in rural areas have very high respect for people who live in the cities. They fall at their feet instantly. So when the rich life is shown on television, villagers almost immediately assume everything the rich say and do is right, hence they start adopting new morals and values made by the rich.

The obstacle in between the cities and the villages is the distance. Therefore not all villagers know what the modern world is like. Television brings the modern world to them. It connects the urban and the rural areas in a fast and cheaper manner. The only way of knowing what the modern world is like was by going to the city or by rumors. The men would come back and tell the other villagers about what the city life is like. However, the television has brought the city life to them. Since the modern life has new values. They value education for boys and girls and they look down on child marriage and caste system. Even though the mind set of caste system still exists in India, it is usually amongst the older generations, who are few in number. These new values are shown in the soap operas in televisions; therefore the values of villagers will change as well and improve the life of women especially.

Television helps women become aware of their rights, and their freedom. It helps them understand and relate to the rich life more easily. The television shows them the new values and morals of life, which they immediately respond to by adopting them in their daily lives. This is proven in the statistics Walfogel provides. He states in his article that “After a village got cable, women's preference for male children fell by 12 percentage points” and “The average number of situations in which women said that wife beating is acceptable fell by about 10 percent.” This proves that the rich have a lot of influence on the rural life in general, and that television is a good and effective way of helping and improving life in the rural areas.

Should abortion be legal or not?

Central Argument: Abortion should be legal because it can save a life of misery for the baby and the parent.

Emily Rapp talks about the other side of abortion. She says that abortion should be legal. I completely agree with her. There are many reasons for this, one being the fact that I am a girl, and I strongly believe that every girl should have a right to her own body, and decisions regarding her body shouldn’t be made by the government.

When I heard about the number of teenage girls who were pregnant in United States of America, I was shocked. Going through pregnancy is not an easy thing to accomplish. Teenagers are very gullible, and they get carried away. The next thing they know is that they are pregnant. If they are not allowed to abort their baby, their life will not be normal. They will face a lot of difficulties. Instead of focusing on studies they will be raising a child. There will be more financial problems, which lead to really bad choices. The child will be born into a family which is having financial problems. The environment he is born in will also be bad. This is really unhealthy for the child. The bad environment might just influence him on doing drugs. There is no real benefit for the child even if he is not aborted. In fact it is better. Just like Emily Rapp’s son. It would have been better for her to abort the baby before he was born. He wouldn’t have suffered so much more when he is alive with all sorts of health problems.

Another reason for making abortion legal is population growth. The population just recently became 7 billion. This is not a small number. Population growth has a lot of problems that come along with it. There is a shortage of food, because of over consumption. Shortage of food leads to an increase in food prices. The poor people wouldn’t be able to afford expensive food, therefore there will be extreme poverty and malnutrition problems. Instead of going through all that it is better to just make abortion legal and keep it up to the people to decide if they want a child or not. Abortion directly has to do with the body of the girl or woman who is pregnant. Everyone’s body is their own private property. It is not fair for the government to decide what a person can do with his or her body. Even if the country is catholic they still do not have the right to tell others what they can do with their bodies. USA has a lot of freedom for it’s citizens. If they have had this kind of freedom from the very beginning, be banning abortion they are contradicting themselves. Also, there are many atheists who have absolutely nothing to do with religion, but a lot to do with abortion.

There are many reasons for making abortion legal. The biggest reason is protecting the child itself.  People should be practical about these laws. Religion shouldn’t be playing a huge role in something like this because the outcomes are not religious outcomes, they are social and economic outcomes. Abortion disrupts the life of human beings. It is a very personal issue, therefore the decision of abortion should be a personal decision not a state decision.