In the movie Matrix, the main character Neo had to make some important choices for his life.
1. When his acquaintance invited him to join with them for the night, at first he refused to go but when he saw the white rabbit tattoo from the women' s back he made up his mind and joined them.
2. When he was caught and interogated by the agent, he chose not to tell them anything instead he asked for a phone call.
3. Morpheus called, and ask him if he want to meet up with or not. He chose to meet up with him thats when he hump in the car with trinity and the other lady.
4. Neo chose to to stay in the car and let the ladies use their initiative than to go back to highway.
5. Neo had to choose between the red pill and the blue pill. He chose the red pill.
6. He then chose to save morpheus life.
I would say that the most important decision that he made was saving morpheus life. By saving Morpheus' life he gained more confidence. His confidence encourage him to face and defeat the agent. And he developed more skills that he is capable.
Thursday, March 31, 2011
Tuesday, March 29, 2011
Blog 6: Response to " I Know The Truth, So Dont Bother Me With Facts"
Opinions and beliefs are an integral part of every individual.Combined with knowledge, they play a pivotal role in shaping us and helping us in our decision making. What comes in mind whenever the topic of one' s beliefs is discussed is how easily it is corrupted. The manipulation of our one' s mind through various facts is indeed possible.
An article that i read entitled "I Know The Truth, So Dont Bother Me With Facts" discussed how geniunely concievable one' s thinking may be altered. It was demonstrated through a research study done by professors at Ohio State University trying to prove "how sticky such false beliefs are and what it takes to dis abuse people of them." The study centers on the ongoing debate over a purposed planned cultural center that will feature a culinary school, an auditorium, a restaurant, a library, a fitness center, a 9/11 memorial and most importantly, a mosque. There are a lot of mixed feelings towards the building of such center especially so because the one spear heading the project is Feisal Abdul Rauf, a muslim leader who raised eyebrows when he said that American involvement in wars in the Arab world made the U.S an accessory to the terrorist attacks. In the study, researchers recruited 750 people who have knowledge of the proposed cultural center and believing at least one of the rumors about it. Their main purpose is to find out wether differentiating evidence would change their opinion. The participants were exposed to different scenarios in the study. They were presented with rebuttals, contradictory information and new evidence. Also a picture of Feisal Abdul Rauf for visual aid inorder to affect where they stand on the issue. Even with contradictory information, fewer than a third of the subjects were willing to change where they stand.
I have a life changing experience to shrae as an example regarding the topic. I always believe that a family prays together stays together. My parents raised me to believe that families stay together no matter what happens as long as they love one another and go to church every sunday. Through most of my childhood this was the case until one day my sisters told me that my parents will be divorcing. I was shocked at first to hear that news because i do not notice any changes. We still go to sunday mass, we still pray every night and im sure my parents love one another. As time pass by, im beginning to observe that my parents are always fighting. My sisters even showed me letters confirming that my parents are soon separating. Even with all these new information, i refused to believe that my parents will be divorcing. We soon moved out from my father' s house. My mother, my sisters and myself all moved to my grandmother' s house. My sisters even confronted me in saying "see, we' ve been telling you all along that mom and dad are divorcing." It was so hard for me to accept that even with the truth, i still hang onto to the idea that my parents are together.
This experience of mine further demonstrates what R. Kelly Garrett one of the assistant professor who conducted the research, was trying to prove. He noted that according to some studies, "when subject are presented with data that contradicts their beliefs, they often paradoxically respond by cleaving to their biases even more tightly."
In conclusion, Jeffrey Kluger reminded the reader that it is up to us to make our decisions and opinions when we are faced with valid facts. I strongly agree with Mr. Kluger in saying that, facts are truth and that they mean more than fantasy - it is a reality.
An article that i read entitled "I Know The Truth, So Dont Bother Me With Facts" discussed how geniunely concievable one' s thinking may be altered. It was demonstrated through a research study done by professors at Ohio State University trying to prove "how sticky such false beliefs are and what it takes to dis abuse people of them." The study centers on the ongoing debate over a purposed planned cultural center that will feature a culinary school, an auditorium, a restaurant, a library, a fitness center, a 9/11 memorial and most importantly, a mosque. There are a lot of mixed feelings towards the building of such center especially so because the one spear heading the project is Feisal Abdul Rauf, a muslim leader who raised eyebrows when he said that American involvement in wars in the Arab world made the U.S an accessory to the terrorist attacks. In the study, researchers recruited 750 people who have knowledge of the proposed cultural center and believing at least one of the rumors about it. Their main purpose is to find out wether differentiating evidence would change their opinion. The participants were exposed to different scenarios in the study. They were presented with rebuttals, contradictory information and new evidence. Also a picture of Feisal Abdul Rauf for visual aid inorder to affect where they stand on the issue. Even with contradictory information, fewer than a third of the subjects were willing to change where they stand.
I have a life changing experience to shrae as an example regarding the topic. I always believe that a family prays together stays together. My parents raised me to believe that families stay together no matter what happens as long as they love one another and go to church every sunday. Through most of my childhood this was the case until one day my sisters told me that my parents will be divorcing. I was shocked at first to hear that news because i do not notice any changes. We still go to sunday mass, we still pray every night and im sure my parents love one another. As time pass by, im beginning to observe that my parents are always fighting. My sisters even showed me letters confirming that my parents are soon separating. Even with all these new information, i refused to believe that my parents will be divorcing. We soon moved out from my father' s house. My mother, my sisters and myself all moved to my grandmother' s house. My sisters even confronted me in saying "see, we' ve been telling you all along that mom and dad are divorcing." It was so hard for me to accept that even with the truth, i still hang onto to the idea that my parents are together.
This experience of mine further demonstrates what R. Kelly Garrett one of the assistant professor who conducted the research, was trying to prove. He noted that according to some studies, "when subject are presented with data that contradicts their beliefs, they often paradoxically respond by cleaving to their biases even more tightly."
In conclusion, Jeffrey Kluger reminded the reader that it is up to us to make our decisions and opinions when we are faced with valid facts. I strongly agree with Mr. Kluger in saying that, facts are truth and that they mean more than fantasy - it is a reality.
blog 5: The Allegory of the Cave (response to comment)
Plato's Allegory of the Cave is a hypothetical scenario portrayed by a conversation between Socrates and his brother Glaucon. Socrates asks Glaucon to visualized a cave inhabited by people. These people are the prisoners of the cave. Their hands and legs are band by chains. They are also restricted in the movement of their head. All they see is the wall in front of them. Because of this restriction, their visibility is also limited. Behind the prisoners burns a fire. Between the fire and the prisoners, there are puppeteers who are casting shadows on the wall for the prisoners to see. These shadows that they see and the echoes that they hear are treated by the prisoners as part of their real world. Socrates pointed out that the prisoners view these shadows as real objects which should not be the case. He noted that prisoners would mistake appearance for reality. They don't know any better. With their limitations inside the cave, they are also limited in what they grasp as the real thing.
The conversation between Socrates and his brother continued on with the description of a prisoner climbing out of his dwelling place. As soon as he emerges out to the outside world, he was mesmerize in what he saw. It was a totally different environment. He was enlightened with everything that surrounds him. The prisoner now know what real objects are like. He now understand the difference between what he was accustom inside the cave and what is out there. The discovery of true reality hits him. He now have a clearer vision and knowledge of what is real having experienced a new found world.
Socrates further described how the prisoner was ridiculed and condemned by the others upon returning to the cave. They do not understand what he has experienced outside. The other prisoners are confined to the fact as to say that any beliefs outside the boundaries of the cave are considered unethical. No matter how hard the other prisoner tried lead them into thinking otherwise, they resist of knowing what is the truth. They refused to believe that they are indeed living in an imaginary world - a world full of illusions.
In my opinion, the " The Allegory of the Cave" represents the road one travels through his/her experiences and changes to accept the world around us and to better understand reality and how it plays an important part in our existence.
The conversation between Socrates and his brother continued on with the description of a prisoner climbing out of his dwelling place. As soon as he emerges out to the outside world, he was mesmerize in what he saw. It was a totally different environment. He was enlightened with everything that surrounds him. The prisoner now know what real objects are like. He now understand the difference between what he was accustom inside the cave and what is out there. The discovery of true reality hits him. He now have a clearer vision and knowledge of what is real having experienced a new found world.
Socrates further described how the prisoner was ridiculed and condemned by the others upon returning to the cave. They do not understand what he has experienced outside. The other prisoners are confined to the fact as to say that any beliefs outside the boundaries of the cave are considered unethical. No matter how hard the other prisoner tried lead them into thinking otherwise, they resist of knowing what is the truth. They refused to believe that they are indeed living in an imaginary world - a world full of illusions.
In my opinion, the " The Allegory of the Cave" represents the road one travels through his/her experiences and changes to accept the world around us and to better understand reality and how it plays an important part in our existence.
Monday, March 21, 2011
Blog 4: The Allegory of the Cave
Plato's Allegory of the Cave is a hypothetical scenario portrayed by a conversation between Socrates and his brother Glaucon. Socrates asks Glaucon to visualized a cave inhabited by people. These people are the prisoners of the cave. Their hands and legs are band by chains. They are also restricted in the movement of their head. All they see is the wall in front of them. Because of this restriction, their visibility is also limited. Behind the prisoners burns a fire. Between the fire and the prisoners, there are puppeteers who are casting shadows on the wall for the prisoners to see. These shadows that they see and the echoes that they hear are treated by the prisoners as part of their real world. Socrates pointed out that the prisoners view these shadows as real objects which should not be the case. He noted that prisoners would mistake appearance for reality. They don't know any better. With their limitations inside the cave, they are also limited in what they grasp as the real thing.
The conversation between Socrates and his brother continued on with the description of a prisoner climbing out of his dwelling place. As soon as he emerges out to the outside world, he was mesmerize in what he saw. It was a totally different environment. He was enlightened with everything that surrounds him. The prisoner now know what real objects are like. He now understand the difference between what he was accustom inside the cave and what is out there. The discovery of true reality hits him. He now have a clearer vision and knowledge of what is real having experienced a new found world.
Socrates further described how the prisoner was ridiculed and condemned by the others upon returning to the cave. They do not understand what he has experienced outside. The other prisoners are confined to the fact as to say that any beliefs outside the boundaries of the cave are considered unethical. No matter how hard the other prisoner tried lead them into thinking otherwise, they resist of knowing what is the truth. They refused to believe that they are indeed living in an imaginary world - a world full of illusions.
In my opinion, the " The Allegory of the Cave" represents the road one travels through his/her experiences and changes to accept the world around us and to better understand reality and how it plays an important part in our existence.
The conversation between Socrates and his brother continued on with the description of a prisoner climbing out of his dwelling place. As soon as he emerges out to the outside world, he was mesmerize in what he saw. It was a totally different environment. He was enlightened with everything that surrounds him. The prisoner now know what real objects are like. He now understand the difference between what he was accustom inside the cave and what is out there. The discovery of true reality hits him. He now have a clearer vision and knowledge of what is real having experienced a new found world.
Socrates further described how the prisoner was ridiculed and condemned by the others upon returning to the cave. They do not understand what he has experienced outside. The other prisoners are confined to the fact as to say that any beliefs outside the boundaries of the cave are considered unethical. No matter how hard the other prisoner tried lead them into thinking otherwise, they resist of knowing what is the truth. They refused to believe that they are indeed living in an imaginary world - a world full of illusions.
In my opinion, the " The Allegory of the Cave" represents the road one travels through his/her experiences and changes to accept the world around us and to better understand reality and how it plays an important part in our existence.
Tuesday, March 15, 2011
Blog 3: "I Know The Truth, So Don' t Bother Me With Facts"
"Humans are long been dupes, easily gulled by rumors and flat out lies." This statement from Jeffrey Kluger' s article tittled " I know the truth, So don' t bother me with facts" is very true. It was clearly demonstrated through a study done by researchers at Ohio State University. They wanted to prove "how sticky such false beliefs are and what it takes to disabuse people of them."
The study centers on the ongoing debate over a proposed planned cultural center that will feature a culinary school, an auditorium, a restaurant, a library, a fitness center, a 9/11 memorial and most importantlly a mosque. There are a lot of mixed feelings towards the building of such center specially so because the one spear heading the project is Feisal Abdul Rauf, a muslim leader who raised eyebrows when he said that american involvement in wars in the arab world made the U.S. an accesory to the terrorist attack.
In the new study, researchers recruited 750 people who have knowledge of the proposed cultural center and believing at least one of the rumors about it. Their main purpose is to find out wether differentiating evidence would change their opinion.
The research starts of with all of the participants reading a written rebuttals of the rumors provided by Pulitzer Price winner St. Petersburg Time' s Politifact and Annenberg Public Policy Center' s FactCheck.org. But even after reading the material only 28 percent of the participants shunned the rumors compared to 35 percent who at least recognized that ther was some weight to the new facts.
More so , different scenarious conclude the studies. The subject were also shown a picture of Feisal Abdul Rauf alongside peolple in western style clothing. It was deemed that the participants "were likelier to reject the rumors than people who merely read the rebuttals." Garrett concluded that the picture "provided visual corroboration for the idea that Rauf is an american, just like the rest of us."
In contrast, the subjects who read the rebuttals and were shown the picture of Feisal Abdul Rauf in the midst of people wearing arab style dress "were less likely to reject the rumors." It is also true for the participants who read the rebuttals, and knew of Rauf' s insinuation that america is partially responsible for the 9/11 attacks.
According to the study even with contradictory information, fewer than a third of the subject were willing to change where they stand on the issue. Researchers concluded that due to insinuating pictures or inflammatory quotes, the subjects opinion were easily compromised.
"R. Kelly Garrett, one of the assistant professor who conducted the research further added that according to some studies, when subject are presented with data that contradicts their beliefs, they often paraduxically respond by clearing to their biases even mere tightly." It is simply saying that ego got in the way. More so, some researches are trying to see how the pre-frontal cortex, the seat of reason, and the amygdala. The seat of fear and other primal emotions, reacts in such situations.
In conclusion, Jeffrey Kluger reminded the readers that it is up to us to make our decisions and opinions when we are faced with valid facts. He proceeded in saying "we may not always agree on what those facts mean, but at a minimum we need to agree that they mean more than fantasy."
The study centers on the ongoing debate over a proposed planned cultural center that will feature a culinary school, an auditorium, a restaurant, a library, a fitness center, a 9/11 memorial and most importantlly a mosque. There are a lot of mixed feelings towards the building of such center specially so because the one spear heading the project is Feisal Abdul Rauf, a muslim leader who raised eyebrows when he said that american involvement in wars in the arab world made the U.S. an accesory to the terrorist attack.
In the new study, researchers recruited 750 people who have knowledge of the proposed cultural center and believing at least one of the rumors about it. Their main purpose is to find out wether differentiating evidence would change their opinion.
The research starts of with all of the participants reading a written rebuttals of the rumors provided by Pulitzer Price winner St. Petersburg Time' s Politifact and Annenberg Public Policy Center' s FactCheck.org. But even after reading the material only 28 percent of the participants shunned the rumors compared to 35 percent who at least recognized that ther was some weight to the new facts.
More so , different scenarious conclude the studies. The subject were also shown a picture of Feisal Abdul Rauf alongside peolple in western style clothing. It was deemed that the participants "were likelier to reject the rumors than people who merely read the rebuttals." Garrett concluded that the picture "provided visual corroboration for the idea that Rauf is an american, just like the rest of us."
In contrast, the subjects who read the rebuttals and were shown the picture of Feisal Abdul Rauf in the midst of people wearing arab style dress "were less likely to reject the rumors." It is also true for the participants who read the rebuttals, and knew of Rauf' s insinuation that america is partially responsible for the 9/11 attacks.
According to the study even with contradictory information, fewer than a third of the subject were willing to change where they stand on the issue. Researchers concluded that due to insinuating pictures or inflammatory quotes, the subjects opinion were easily compromised.
"R. Kelly Garrett, one of the assistant professor who conducted the research further added that according to some studies, when subject are presented with data that contradicts their beliefs, they often paraduxically respond by clearing to their biases even mere tightly." It is simply saying that ego got in the way. More so, some researches are trying to see how the pre-frontal cortex, the seat of reason, and the amygdala. The seat of fear and other primal emotions, reacts in such situations.
In conclusion, Jeffrey Kluger reminded the readers that it is up to us to make our decisions and opinions when we are faced with valid facts. He proceeded in saying "we may not always agree on what those facts mean, but at a minimum we need to agree that they mean more than fantasy."
Friday, March 11, 2011
blog 2: "HYPE"
Time has definitely changed wether we like it or not. We are living in a different time now. Our everyday life is now compounded with a lot of changes. Break throughs in technology, fashion sense and way of life to name a few.
One particulaar changes that i would like to discuss is the rise of advertisement. This was possible because of many reasons but mainly because of the advancement in technology.
According to the reading tittled "HYPE", "from the moment your alarm sounds in the morning to the wee hours of the late night TV, commercial pollution floods your brain at the rate of about three thousand marketing messages per day. Everyday an estimated 12 billion display ads, 3 million radio commercials, and more than 200,000 TV commercials are dumped into North America' s collective unconcious." The passage is very true. We are very much exposed to commercial advertisements every single day. From the moment we take our first sip of coffee in the morning until we turn off the TV at night, we are constantly seeing and hearing advertisements. We may not realize it but if we look closer, everything we touch reminds us of what product we are using. Our coffee cups are filled with logo and product information. How many commercials are shown while watching our favorite show on TV? We used to see all these product messages only in billboards, buses and stadiums. Now, they are everywhere. One cannot help but notice the beautiful scrolling ads at buses stops. More so, cars and SUV' s are adorned with stock on paint jobs for some new company. Even at the beach, private planes fly across the sky with banners featuring some premium beer.
Phone lines are even marketed to have advertisements in them. Cellular phones are targeted to have a lot of product messages. With the internet readily available in your handheld devive, the explosion of advertisement flashes before your eyes.
No one can really escape the many million ads we encounter. It is now in conclusion that i say that advertisements are now part of our everyday existence.
One particulaar changes that i would like to discuss is the rise of advertisement. This was possible because of many reasons but mainly because of the advancement in technology.
According to the reading tittled "HYPE", "from the moment your alarm sounds in the morning to the wee hours of the late night TV, commercial pollution floods your brain at the rate of about three thousand marketing messages per day. Everyday an estimated 12 billion display ads, 3 million radio commercials, and more than 200,000 TV commercials are dumped into North America' s collective unconcious." The passage is very true. We are very much exposed to commercial advertisements every single day. From the moment we take our first sip of coffee in the morning until we turn off the TV at night, we are constantly seeing and hearing advertisements. We may not realize it but if we look closer, everything we touch reminds us of what product we are using. Our coffee cups are filled with logo and product information. How many commercials are shown while watching our favorite show on TV? We used to see all these product messages only in billboards, buses and stadiums. Now, they are everywhere. One cannot help but notice the beautiful scrolling ads at buses stops. More so, cars and SUV' s are adorned with stock on paint jobs for some new company. Even at the beach, private planes fly across the sky with banners featuring some premium beer.
Phone lines are even marketed to have advertisements in them. Cellular phones are targeted to have a lot of product messages. With the internet readily available in your handheld devive, the explosion of advertisement flashes before your eyes.
No one can really escape the many million ads we encounter. It is now in conclusion that i say that advertisements are now part of our everyday existence.
Thursday, March 10, 2011
Blog 1: "How to do one thing at a time"
The passage from Womens Health Magazine "How to do one thing at a time", is an article about multi-taskers and single-takers. According to the experiment of the group from Stanford University, single-tasker performed better tasks than multi-taskers.
I believe that multi-tasking and single-tasking have both advantages and disadvantages. As we go to the website to look for jobs or cl;assified adds of the news paper, companies that are hiring are always searching for a multi-tasker. One advantage of the multi-taskers is having some extra time for their own intersts. By finishing all tasks or more than one tasks at the same time is equal to gaining free time. A multi-tasker could do paper works, filing, preparing some out going mails, answer 2 to 3 lines of telephone calls and face booking at the same time. By performing all these tasks at the same time, i don' t even think that they could remember to double check all the tasks that have been done. To sum it up, sometimes multi-taskers are not aware of their own error and mistakes while performing the compiled tasks. It is because their brain and attention is not focusing on one thing only. Not being focus on one thing is one of the disadvantages of multi-tasking. On the other hand, single tasker could perform well tasks by devoting their own time and focusing on one single task at a certain time.
There are some instances in our lives that we are multi-tasking. Like walking or running to the bus station while on the cell phone or washing the dishes while cooking. As i was typing my resume, i reached for my cup of coffee, at the same time my cell phone rang. I answered the call and placed my cell phone in between my neck and shoulder. While i was talking on the phone i decided to sip some coffee while my left hand was typing, i took a sip of my coffee and my cell phone slide down to the floor from my shoulder. And my cell phone broke in to pieces.
Therefore i conclude that focusing on one thing at a time could make athe task easier and certain.
I believe that multi-tasking and single-tasking have both advantages and disadvantages. As we go to the website to look for jobs or cl;assified adds of the news paper, companies that are hiring are always searching for a multi-tasker. One advantage of the multi-taskers is having some extra time for their own intersts. By finishing all tasks or more than one tasks at the same time is equal to gaining free time. A multi-tasker could do paper works, filing, preparing some out going mails, answer 2 to 3 lines of telephone calls and face booking at the same time. By performing all these tasks at the same time, i don' t even think that they could remember to double check all the tasks that have been done. To sum it up, sometimes multi-taskers are not aware of their own error and mistakes while performing the compiled tasks. It is because their brain and attention is not focusing on one thing only. Not being focus on one thing is one of the disadvantages of multi-tasking. On the other hand, single tasker could perform well tasks by devoting their own time and focusing on one single task at a certain time.
There are some instances in our lives that we are multi-tasking. Like walking or running to the bus station while on the cell phone or washing the dishes while cooking. As i was typing my resume, i reached for my cup of coffee, at the same time my cell phone rang. I answered the call and placed my cell phone in between my neck and shoulder. While i was talking on the phone i decided to sip some coffee while my left hand was typing, i took a sip of my coffee and my cell phone slide down to the floor from my shoulder. And my cell phone broke in to pieces.
Therefore i conclude that focusing on one thing at a time could make athe task easier and certain.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)