For my 50 Facts presentation, I chose fact 45: “American discard 2.5 million plastic bottles every hour. That’s enough bottles to reach all the way to the moon every three weeks.” I thought it would be interesting to not only talk about the difference in recycling mentalities that each of us holds, but also to see what everyone thought about the view of America as being a wasteful society. Obviously, this last statement is really not debatable, we waste more than any other country, but the different views of how wasteful and what implications this has upon the rest of the world (if any), both today and in the future, are debatable.
In my topic talk (calling it a presentation seems a bit of a misnomer as it was so laid-back), I also chose to include a story from Wired Magazine’s November 2008 issue. The story first talked about the latest agricultural technology, but it went on to focus on actual eating habits, preferences and statistics of different countries, continents around the world. I spoke of how the United States having the largest caloric intake per person, per day, was a bad thing because it showed what a truly wasteful society we have become. If we don’t need all of these calories to survive, then any extra are being wasted. My argument that decreasing the United States’ average daily caloric intake would create less demand for food imports, thus decreasing world demand. Principles of the concept of supply and demand indicate that it was a correct assumption on my part to think that lowering demand would then also lower the price. Supply and demand works on the idea of a system that when demand is high, supply is lower than demand and price is high. When demand is low, supply is greater than demand and price us low. So, if the United States did stop purchasing certain food products, then it would subsequently make those food products cheaper to other countries.
I thought the discussion went well, but I am kind of sad that there wasn’t more time left for my topic. I feel like there was still a lot to be said about this topic and not even everyone in the class had a chance to express their opinions. Also, had I not been so stressed abut the test I was taking immediately following the lunch meeting, I feel like my topic talk might have gone much more smoothly and I would have been able to slow myself down and articulate my ideas and concepts in a clearer manner. It was one of those times where you have everything in your head that you want to say, but you only end up focusing on about one-quarter of those things. I definitely would like to see if anyone has any ideas about our wasteful society and how we might be forced to change due to our current economic situation. Some people skimp in certain areas of spending during times of economic hardship. This time, however, it seems that more and more people are looking to fast food and stores like Wal-Mart to supply them with cheap food and other items. Both of these businesses operate within the upper echelon of most wasteful companies. So, even though we may be looking to cheaper places to fulfill necessities, we are increasingly looking to them even for clothes.
I just wanted to talk about waste in general, in relation to the United States specifically. I feel like the issue of waste doesn’t just extend to recycling, so bringing in more was essential to my viewpoint of the issue.
That's all folks,
Brady
Friday, November 21, 2008
Thursday, November 20, 2008
On-Campus/Off-Campus Event
On-Campus Event
My on-campus event sort of just fell into my lap. One of my friends is a member of Student Foundation and the group wanted each member to bring one friend to the Faculty Talkback (not 100% on this name). As I needed an on-campus event that I normally wouldn’t attend, it seemed as if we would both be fulfilling our requirements (the table of deserts didn’t hurt either). This was a cool event in which students get a chance to talk to a faculty member about topics of concern. The topics are set before hand and then all those in attendance, including the members of the Foundation, rotate through the six different tables.
My favorite topic table was the Honor Code table. During the previous table switches, my group had only consisted of another student, a Foundation member, a professor and me. Once we arrived at the Honor Code table, however, our group received the addition of President Schrum, the visiting president of the American University in London and the president of the Student Judiciary. Not to mention the fact that Dr. Leese was leading the table. So, my slightly different-than-most take on the Honor Code was definitely a conversation starter at that table. I can still remember the look on President Schrum’s face when I said that I didn’t think the Honor Code accomplished anything that the threat of getting caught cheating or plagiarizing didn’t already accomplish. Dr. Leese knows me pretty well, so he didn’t seem too surprised when I expressed my concern with the Honor Code, but it seemed that everyone else at the table, say for my original tablemates, was attempting to get me to admit to cheating so that they could place the reason my indifference on some concrete example.
This event was something I hadn’t ever heard of, but I will definitely continue to attend in the future. I am pretty sure that they happen every semester, but you can ask a Student Foundation member to find out for sure (you probably know at least five members and don’t even know it).
Off-Campus Event
Have you ever walked into a building and been expecting to see one thing only to have your expectations turned upside down? This happened to me recently as I ventured off campus to play bingo at Creekside Charity Bingo in Round Rock. I was accompanied on this eye-opening experience by my fellow cohort members Cait and Megan. Just so you know, if you think this sounds like a way to relax and have some fun, this is not your slow, elementary-school bingo.
We walked into the building, after taking several wrong turns and having to call the business’ phone number in order to find it, and went to the counter to purchase some tickets. I remember playing bingo with when I was younger, but the game cards here each contained 12 different BINGO games. We sat down late and the first game was already in progress. A lady sitting near took pity on us and helped catch us up during the game. She assisted us in the rest of the games as well, as we required frequent explanations. She did all of this while she was playing three cards of 12 BINGO games! I was having trouble keeping up with just my one card.
All the players are required to use ink-blotters to cover up numbers that have been called. Some people had several bottles of ink and we even saw some who carried around tote bags with spots around the outside for 20 ink-blotters. It was intense. The numbers were being called blazingly-fast and if one looked down to say, answer a text, it would put them behind. The closest any of us came to winning was in the second to last game in which Cait only needed O63 to win and the next ball called was O64. Win or lose, it was a fun experience. The people in the building were not people that I would normally have spoken to, but they were nice, willing to help and liked to chat.
My on-campus event sort of just fell into my lap. One of my friends is a member of Student Foundation and the group wanted each member to bring one friend to the Faculty Talkback (not 100% on this name). As I needed an on-campus event that I normally wouldn’t attend, it seemed as if we would both be fulfilling our requirements (the table of deserts didn’t hurt either). This was a cool event in which students get a chance to talk to a faculty member about topics of concern. The topics are set before hand and then all those in attendance, including the members of the Foundation, rotate through the six different tables.
My favorite topic table was the Honor Code table. During the previous table switches, my group had only consisted of another student, a Foundation member, a professor and me. Once we arrived at the Honor Code table, however, our group received the addition of President Schrum, the visiting president of the American University in London and the president of the Student Judiciary. Not to mention the fact that Dr. Leese was leading the table. So, my slightly different-than-most take on the Honor Code was definitely a conversation starter at that table. I can still remember the look on President Schrum’s face when I said that I didn’t think the Honor Code accomplished anything that the threat of getting caught cheating or plagiarizing didn’t already accomplish. Dr. Leese knows me pretty well, so he didn’t seem too surprised when I expressed my concern with the Honor Code, but it seemed that everyone else at the table, say for my original tablemates, was attempting to get me to admit to cheating so that they could place the reason my indifference on some concrete example.
This event was something I hadn’t ever heard of, but I will definitely continue to attend in the future. I am pretty sure that they happen every semester, but you can ask a Student Foundation member to find out for sure (you probably know at least five members and don’t even know it).
Off-Campus Event
Have you ever walked into a building and been expecting to see one thing only to have your expectations turned upside down? This happened to me recently as I ventured off campus to play bingo at Creekside Charity Bingo in Round Rock. I was accompanied on this eye-opening experience by my fellow cohort members Cait and Megan. Just so you know, if you think this sounds like a way to relax and have some fun, this is not your slow, elementary-school bingo.
We walked into the building, after taking several wrong turns and having to call the business’ phone number in order to find it, and went to the counter to purchase some tickets. I remember playing bingo with when I was younger, but the game cards here each contained 12 different BINGO games. We sat down late and the first game was already in progress. A lady sitting near took pity on us and helped catch us up during the game. She assisted us in the rest of the games as well, as we required frequent explanations. She did all of this while she was playing three cards of 12 BINGO games! I was having trouble keeping up with just my one card.
All the players are required to use ink-blotters to cover up numbers that have been called. Some people had several bottles of ink and we even saw some who carried around tote bags with spots around the outside for 20 ink-blotters. It was intense. The numbers were being called blazingly-fast and if one looked down to say, answer a text, it would put them behind. The closest any of us came to winning was in the second to last game in which Cait only needed O63 to win and the next ball called was O64. Win or lose, it was a fun experience. The people in the building were not people that I would normally have spoken to, but they were nice, willing to help and liked to chat.
Friday, November 7, 2008
Civic Engagement Redux
So I have been thinking,
Second chances don’t come around very often, so when they do it is necessary to take advantage of the situation. This is a second chance at articulating my thoughts on the subject of civic engagement and I hope by the end of this blog, my perception of civic engagement is clear not only to whoever might be reading this, but to me.
One of the reasons I elected to become part of the Paideia program was for the civic engagement aspect of it. I am not really into extracurricular activities, though I have become more active on campus this semester, so I liked the idea of helping the community through some sort of class project. I also thought that the civic engagement project would push me through the door of being actively engaged not only on campus, but also in the Georgetown community.
For our group meeting on November 4, 2008, we were assigned to read a transcript of a speech given by Ivan Illich. A large part of this speech is no longer relevant, as the speech was given in 1968, but when he says that volunteers in Mexico can only offer Mexicans their “middle-class ‘American Way of Life,’ since that is really the only life [they] know,” I would have to say that thinks this is still relevant. How ridiculous is it that someone who was born to a Sephardic-Jewish mother and a Croatian father would clump an entire segment of the American population into one group, effectively homogenizing them as closed-off, self-righteous individuals who had no connection to the world outside the United States (Wikipedia)? Of course, I acknowledge that many of the volunteers that Illich came into contact with did indeed fit into the self-righteous stereotype he had observed so many times. But like so many stereotypes, does the person fit into the group if they are similar to the others in just one aspect? So if the volunteer was a white, middle-class student, they were automatically clumped with the others, unable to change his perception of the American volunteer.
I am in extreme disagreement with anyone who says that people volunteer only for self-righteous reasons. I don’t believe that there exists in this world a truly selfless volunteer, but I don’t think that getting a good feeling from donating one’s time to a good cause shows self-righteousness. There is a spectrum, and on one end of that spectrum lies truly selfless volunteerism and on the other end lies completely self-righteous volunteerism, somewhere in the middle of the two is where I believe the majority of volunteering occurs.
As I expressed in our class meeting, I feel that we should interact with people and I feel strongly that the topic of our Cohort necessitates more than one opportunity for interaction. If we are truly to “Understand Human Behavior,” then we must meet with people, be they children or others, and interact with them more than once so that there is a chance for relationships to be formed. My hope is that we choose the children project, with a focus on underprivileged children if possible. Children in schools and communities that are more affluent are usually offered more opportunities for after-school activities that stimulate their minds and bodies, rather than just sending them home. I feel that we can have a large impact not just on the lives on these children, but hopefully on the way they choose to go about their lives in the future. I like the idea of a sports/arts/activities program possibly in a Boys and Girls Club. I think this offers all of us, regardless of specialty or area or expertise, a way to utilize our liberal arts education and show ourselves that we are probably a little bit better at certain things than we might think we are. I also think that these children will be teaching all of us more about ourselves through the course of this program than we could ever hope to teach them. After hearing Dr. G and Suzy talk about the merits of one group or two groups in class and hearing everyone express their opinions, I have been swayed to the one group side because I just don’t think that splitting the group would do much for the dynamic and it doesn’t really create that sense of unity that we were aiming to find with this project.
This is our opportunity to make a difference in the world, to show that we aren’t pompous, self-righteous college students who would rather just get our civic engagement project done in one Saturday without having to have much contact with any real people. Let’s choose to at least attempt to change something in someone’s life for the better, because if one person’s life is better because of what we do, that is good enough for me. Science and research statistics would argue that our project was not effective, but they also don’t consider the human element. That one person could change the lives of many other people in a positive manner (not to assume our project would affect such a change). I feel that we can make the most difference working with kids and I hope that I have articulated my point well enough that you might consider the merits of my argument.
Brady
Second chances don’t come around very often, so when they do it is necessary to take advantage of the situation. This is a second chance at articulating my thoughts on the subject of civic engagement and I hope by the end of this blog, my perception of civic engagement is clear not only to whoever might be reading this, but to me.
One of the reasons I elected to become part of the Paideia program was for the civic engagement aspect of it. I am not really into extracurricular activities, though I have become more active on campus this semester, so I liked the idea of helping the community through some sort of class project. I also thought that the civic engagement project would push me through the door of being actively engaged not only on campus, but also in the Georgetown community.
For our group meeting on November 4, 2008, we were assigned to read a transcript of a speech given by Ivan Illich. A large part of this speech is no longer relevant, as the speech was given in 1968, but when he says that volunteers in Mexico can only offer Mexicans their “middle-class ‘American Way of Life,’ since that is really the only life [they] know,” I would have to say that thinks this is still relevant. How ridiculous is it that someone who was born to a Sephardic-Jewish mother and a Croatian father would clump an entire segment of the American population into one group, effectively homogenizing them as closed-off, self-righteous individuals who had no connection to the world outside the United States (Wikipedia)? Of course, I acknowledge that many of the volunteers that Illich came into contact with did indeed fit into the self-righteous stereotype he had observed so many times. But like so many stereotypes, does the person fit into the group if they are similar to the others in just one aspect? So if the volunteer was a white, middle-class student, they were automatically clumped with the others, unable to change his perception of the American volunteer.
I am in extreme disagreement with anyone who says that people volunteer only for self-righteous reasons. I don’t believe that there exists in this world a truly selfless volunteer, but I don’t think that getting a good feeling from donating one’s time to a good cause shows self-righteousness. There is a spectrum, and on one end of that spectrum lies truly selfless volunteerism and on the other end lies completely self-righteous volunteerism, somewhere in the middle of the two is where I believe the majority of volunteering occurs.
As I expressed in our class meeting, I feel that we should interact with people and I feel strongly that the topic of our Cohort necessitates more than one opportunity for interaction. If we are truly to “Understand Human Behavior,” then we must meet with people, be they children or others, and interact with them more than once so that there is a chance for relationships to be formed. My hope is that we choose the children project, with a focus on underprivileged children if possible. Children in schools and communities that are more affluent are usually offered more opportunities for after-school activities that stimulate their minds and bodies, rather than just sending them home. I feel that we can have a large impact not just on the lives on these children, but hopefully on the way they choose to go about their lives in the future. I like the idea of a sports/arts/activities program possibly in a Boys and Girls Club. I think this offers all of us, regardless of specialty or area or expertise, a way to utilize our liberal arts education and show ourselves that we are probably a little bit better at certain things than we might think we are. I also think that these children will be teaching all of us more about ourselves through the course of this program than we could ever hope to teach them. After hearing Dr. G and Suzy talk about the merits of one group or two groups in class and hearing everyone express their opinions, I have been swayed to the one group side because I just don’t think that splitting the group would do much for the dynamic and it doesn’t really create that sense of unity that we were aiming to find with this project.
This is our opportunity to make a difference in the world, to show that we aren’t pompous, self-righteous college students who would rather just get our civic engagement project done in one Saturday without having to have much contact with any real people. Let’s choose to at least attempt to change something in someone’s life for the better, because if one person’s life is better because of what we do, that is good enough for me. Science and research statistics would argue that our project was not effective, but they also don’t consider the human element. That one person could change the lives of many other people in a positive manner (not to assume our project would affect such a change). I feel that we can make the most difference working with kids and I hope that I have articulated my point well enough that you might consider the merits of my argument.
Brady
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
