BNW Chapter 13

1. What does Lenina mean when she says, "For Ford's sake John, talk sense. I can't understand a word you say. First it is vacuum cleaners; then its knots. You're driving me crazy." (p. 191)?

Lenina means that she does not understand what he is talking about, because he wants to grow old with her and is quoting romantic Shakespeare at her. She doesn't understand that he wants more than just sex, that he wants to have a life with her, because those concepts don't exist in the World State.

2. How does John react when Lenina makes advances towards him?

John reacts very badly when Lenina makes advances towards him. He becomes very angry, slaps her and calls her a whore, and when she locks herself in the bathroom, he starts reciting King Lear's speech on the evilness of women.

BNW Chapter 12

1. In what ways does Bernard remind you of Dr. Treves or the nightwatchman in The Elephant Man?

Bernard reminds me of Dr. Treves because he is trying to introduce John, a savage, a freak (like John Merrick), into conventional society. He is also like Dr. Treves because he believes that what he is doing is the best for John. However, Bernard is also like the nightwatchman, in that he wants to show John off for his own benefit, to make him more successful and popular.

2. Why does John have to use Zuni to express how he feels?
John has to use Zuni to express how he feels because there are no adequate words in English to describe how he feels.

3. Why does Lenina feel "a sense of dreadful emptiness, a breathless apprehension, a nausea." (p. 174)?
Lenina feels a"sense of dreadful emptiness, a breathless apprehension, a nausea," because she is worried that John doesn't like her, because he is not coming to the Party. It is evident that Lenina has strong feelings for John.

4. Why doesn't Mustapaha Mond want "A New theory of Biology" not to be published? Does the work remind you of anything that we have studied recently?
Mustapha Mond doesn't want "A New theory of Biology" to be published because it is "heretical," and "dangerous and potentially subversive " to the social order. The work reminds me of the idea of Creationism and the messages of the Bible, that what we do on Earth is determines what our afterlives will be like.

5. Do you agree with Bernard's belief in the "principal functions of a friend" as described on p. 179? Why does he feel this way toward John and Helmholtz?

I do not agree with Bernard's belief in the "principal functions of a friend," because although it is nice to have a friend to vent and rant to, that should not be a main reason why you have a friend, but simply a bonus. Also, it seems to me, cruel that one would inflict symbolic punishment on a friend instead of an enemy. Bernard feels this way towards John and Helmholtz because they are accessible to him, and they give him superiority over others, or at least John does. Both Helmhotz and John "forgive and forget," as friends would do.

6. What does Helmholtz think of Shakespeare?

Helmholtz is delighted at Shakespeare, because it presents such foreign concepts to him, in a way which makes him laugh. He does not understand some of the social commentary that Shakespeare is making.

BNW Chapter 11

1. Why is Dr. Shaw glad "to have had this opportunity to see an example of senility in a human being." (p. 155)?

Dr. Shaw is glad "to have had this opportunity to see an example senility in a human being," because he can study the a human who was born into the World State, but was forced to abandon the ways of the World State for those on the reservation, and he can study the way this has affected her, but also the way returning to the World State and it's standards, affects her, which he can see through the amount of soma she is taking, will kill her within two months.

2. Why are people saying behind Bernard's back that, "He won't find another Savage to help him out a second time." (p. 157)?

People are saying behind Bernard's back that, "He won't find another Savage to help him out a second time," meaning that his success at finding a Savage will not last, and he will go back to being odd, and depressed, unlike everyone else around him. His success with John, and the excitement to from Society to study the oddity who proclaimed the ex-Director to be "my father!," will eventually end, as John is either returned to the reservation or integrated into the World State.

3. Why do the Eton students in the Beta-Minus Geography room laugh at the religious activities of "savages"? Why do you think it significant that there are no twins at Eton? Do you think that is still true today?

The Eton students in the Beta-Minus Geography room laugh at the religious activities of the "savages," because it seems so ridiculous and foreign to them that they can not take it seriously, or understand it at all. I think it is significant that there are no twins at Eton, because there must be individual thinking, not thinking as a whole group. This is so that Etonians can react separate of each other in unexpected emergencies. I think that today, everyone thinks individually, whethe s/he is a twin or not. Twins may have similar ideas, however, in this day and age, everyone is there own person, and completely different from those around them.

4. How do children in the World State learn about Death?

Children in the World State learn about Death starting at eighteen months old, and spends two days a week at the Hospital for the Dying. They keep all the best toys there, and they are given chocolate ice cream on death days. This way "they learn to take dying as a matter of course"

5. Why do lower-caste workers receive daily Soma rations? Do we do this today?
Lower-caste workers receive daily Soma rations for completing their day's work. Today, this is like giving a child a snack of cookies everyday after s/he gets home from school as a sort of reward for going to school.

6. Why does John tell Lenina that, "I don't think you ought to see things like that." (p. 169)?

John tells Lenina that "I don't think you ought to see things like that," because he thinks the film was "base," and "ignoble." He finds the film horrible because of the Beta-blonde's becoming a mistress to all of her rescuers, and the perhaps because of the racial allegations the film presented.

BNW Chapter 10

1. Why does the director feel that Unorthodoxy is worse than Murder? What does the Director want to do with Bernard Marx?

The Director feels that Unorthodoxy is worse than Murder because Murder kills only the individual, and individuality is an almost non-existent concept in the World Order. However, Unorthodoxy, "strikes at Society itself," meaning that Unorthodoxy affects many, and changes the, which affects the goal of uniformity of the World Order.

2. What surprise does Bernard bring to the Director?

The surprise that Bernard brings to the Director is Linda. Grown old, "deformed," and ugly, living on the reservation, the Director does not recognize her and calls her a "monstrous practical joke." Bernard also brings John, who calls the Director "my father," to his great humiliation.

Jared Diamond Questions

1. Please describe the background of the dispute between Dr. Samuel Huntington and Dr. Serge Lang.
Dr. Samuel Huntington was nominated to join the NAS,a nd was unlikely to be unchallenged in joining the society. Dr. Serge Lang had only joined NAS the year before, but had assumed ''the role of a sheriff of scholarship"


2.How did Lang respond to Huntington’s “pseudo mathematics?”
Lang was " Disturbed by what he saw as the use of 'pseudo mathematics' by Huntington," and sent subsequent letters and information attacking Huntington.

3. What aspects of the dispute between Lang and Huntington are “political?” How does the author, Jared Diamond, feel about “Academic Freedom?”
Some of Huntington's research was done for the State Department in 1967 and was said to be an early supporter of the "Vietnam War." Diamond feels that academic freedom should be that anyone can raise the issue of a scholar's politics, not just scholars. He implies this with a sarcastic tone, in his statement, "evidently,academic freedom means that outsiders can't raise the issue of a scholar's politics but other scholars can."

4. Why does the NAS exist? Why does this make that attacks against Huntington seem peculiar?
NAS exists to advise the Congress on questions of science and technology. This makes the attacks on Huntington seem peculiar because he was willing to advise Congress, yet he was condemned for it by some NAS members.

5. Why does Diamond find fault in the traditional perceptions of the hard sciences?
Diamond finds fault in the traditional perceptions of the hard sciences because there are some "phenomena that are intellectually challenging and important to understand, but that can't be measured to several decimal places in labs."

6. Why are soft sciences difficult to study?
The soft sciences are difficult to study because"You can't start it and stop it whenever you choose. You can't control all the variables; perhaps you can't control any variable. You may even find it hard to decide what a variable is. You can still use empirical tests to gain knowledge, but the types of tests used in the hard sciences must be modified."

7. How did the NAS need to change in the early 1970s?
NAS was "confronted with the need to offer the government competent advice about social problems, [to] began to admit social scientists at all."

8. What are the problems in “operationalizing” a concept?
Problems in "operationalizing" a concept are that, "to compare evidence with theory requires that you measure the ingredients of your theory," so "you would have to design a series of actual operations that yield a suitable measurement."

9. Briefly describe how Diamond illustrates operationalizing in:
· Mathematics-it is necessary to quantify a general term, such as "many," otherwise the concepts such as "more" or "less" would be irrelevant.
· Chemistry-speculation about ingrediants, then one "proceeds by identifying some property of a substance of interest, or of a related substance into which the first can be converted."
· Ecology-comparative "differences among habitats, which at first seemed to resist having a number put on them, proved to explain a big part of the habitats' differences."
· Psychology-using a questionnaire, defined people into general clusters based on their answers, "the responses were then employed to define attitude scales, which were further validated in other ways."

10. What were Huntington’s operationalized concepts that provoked the wrath of Lang?
"economic well-being, political instability, and social and economic modernization."

11. Why is the task of operationalizing more difficult and less exact in the soft sciences? Why does it lead to the ridicule of the soft sciences?
Operationalizations are more difficult in the soft sciences because of the large amount of uncontrolled variables. It leads to the ridicule of the soft sciences because they deal with familiar concepts, which "all of us fancy we're experts on."

12.Why does Diamond believe that Lang might be ignorant of the measurements taken by social scientists like Huntington?
Diamond believes that Lang must be ignorant of the measurements taken by social scientists like Huntington becausehe does not know anything about the social sciences.

13.Does Diamond believe the labels associated with the sciences be replaced? Explain.
Diamond does believe that the labels should be replaced because "hard" and "soft" denote that all the "soft sciences" are easy, while, in realitythey are "much more difficult and, to some of us, intellectually more challenging than mathematics and chemistry."

14. Does Diamond believe the soft sciences to be more valuable than hard sciences? Do you agree? Explain.
Diamond believes the soft sciences to be more valuable than hard sciences because "our survival depends on whether we progress with understanding how people behave." I disagree, in that i think that all of the sciences, hard and soft are valuable because the soft sciences allow us to understand people's behavior, and predict patterns and such, while the hard sciences allow us to understand the world those people are behaving in. Both elements are essential to beginning to understand the complexities of human life.

BNW Chapter 9

1. What did Lenina do when she got back to the rest-house?
When Lenina gets back to the rest-house she took six half-grammes of soma tablets, lay down on her bed and hallucinates for 18 hours.

2. What does Bernard ask his Fordship, Mustapha Mond?
Bernard asks his Forship, Mustapha Mond, for a special permit to take Linda and John off the Reservation and into London.

3. What does John say when he is by Lenina's bedside? Why is this significant?
John recites lines from Shakespeare's Romeo & Juliet. This is significant because the relationship from Romeo & Juliet is foreshadowing for what John and Lenina's relationship in the future.

BNW Chapter 8

1. How would you describe John's upbringing? Why do you think he says that he is "Alone, always alone." (p. 137). How does Bernard feel about John?
John had a horrible upbringing. He was neglected and lonely. This was because Linda slept with many men on the reservation, because that was what she was conditioned to do. Popé also brought her mescal which is like soma but it "made you feel ill afterwards" (like alcohol), and because many of the women were angry with Linda, John wasn't accepted by the Indians, so he was left alone a lot. He was abused by Linda, who didn't want him because he was the result of he failed contraceptive, and he's the reason she can't leave the reservation. She often forgot to feed him or wash him. I think he says that he is "Alone, always alone," because he is rejected by everyone around him except for the old Indian Mitsima. Bernard feels a kinship John, because he always feels alone as well. He is "rather different from most people," just like John.

2. Why does John say at the end of the chapter, "O brave new world!" (p. 139)?
John say, "O brave new world!" because he is going to get to experience life off the reservation, a world he has never known, and a world where things like monogamy and mending are horrifying concepts, which excites John greatly.

Abel Questions Chapter 10: Scientific Explanations

1. How does Science explain a fact? Please use the entire explanation on. p. 91 and 92.
Science explains a fact by putting it in a general law from which, along with the particular conditions involved, the fact to be explained may be logically deduced. Therefore:
-the pond froze because the water temperature dropped below 32˚F, and water freezes at 32˚F or less.
-The pipe rusted because it was made of iron, which chemically combines with the oxygen in the air.
-The water pipes burst last winter because water expands when it freezes.
-Bert caught malaria because he was bitten by an anopheles mosquito which is a carrier for malaria.
-There was an eclipse of the sun because of the laws of gravitation and the orbits of the planets.
In each if the above listed, the fact is explained by being comprehended under, and derived from, a general law. The scientist explains what happens by devising concepts to describe a particular experience, and supplying a framework of covering laws from which, in conjunction with the specific conditions involved, we may make inferences about what it is that we want explained.

2. What are some common misconceptions about scientific explanations? How does Abel refute each one?
The common misconceptions about scientific explanations Abel gives, and refutes are:
- "science describes rather than explains." Abel says that there is no fine line between description or explanation, but he asks that if the scientific explanation is only really a description, then what is an explanation?
-"science explains the strange by the familiar." Abel says that actually the reverse is true. Familiar phenomena like rust and family resemblance are caused by unfamiliar concepts like oxidation or genes.
-"scientific explanation is not the same as 'understanding.'" Abel says that the understanding is more like knowledge by acquaintance or like knowing how, rather than science.
-"a scientific explanation need not be a casual law." Abel says that is may be a law of simultaneous existence, rather succession.

3. What does Abel mean when he says: "a law in turn may be explained by another law of wider scope; the greater the generality, the better the explanation." (p. 93)?
What Abel means is that the more general the law, the more specific laws it can encompass, so there is a more depth to the explanation that is being provided.

4. What does Abel mean when he says: "Explanation is always relative to a given knowledge situation; you must stop somewhere." (p. 94)?
What Abel means is that the information in the explanation is relative to the situation, because you can't possibly give all the information in that explanation, and not all of the information is necessary. For example, if you were in New York City, and you asked someone where the Empire State Building, they're not going to tell you it's in NYC, because it's not relevant in the situation.

5. Why are explanatory reductions "economical ways of describing phenomena." (p. 95)?
They are "economical ways of describing phenomena," because they are not actually reducing processes, but combining some processes with others in order to have a more succinct term for the compunds, and save time on explanations.

6. Why does scientific explanation require the concept of system?
Scientific explanation requires the concept of system because a concept may be describe in terms of another concept, but those concepts do not always add up to the overall ideal. In order to understand the overall ideal, one must sometimes understand the other concepts which make up the system of the overall ideal.

Order Through Chaos

The claim that “people need to believe that order can be glimpsed in the chaos of events,” is strongly represented in the Natural Sciences and Religion. In each of the areas of knowledge, but particularly these two, there is a strong base for this idea, especially when one considers the perceptions and emotions, and occasional reason that play into why people “need to believe” that order is found in chaos.
People who “need to believe” that order can be seen amidst chaos may use knowledge of the Natural Sciences, here, more specifically: Biology, to cite examples for their claim. Using Reason, one might suggest that in examining any animal’s body and/or its function, amongst all the working parts of the body all, only one organ runs the entire body, and so this must be some sort of order. I do not think that this claim applies a to a great extent in Biology simply because there is no real chaos in the body, unless the body is malfunctioning. While some might argue that there are so many different working parts of the body with different functions that inside our skin, that it is all chaos, yet there is order because one single part controls the function of every other body part. However, I would disagree with this argument, because I know, through both authority and empirical evidence, that the body is split up into different systems, all of which, while being overall controlled by the brain, work together in each system to perform different jobs. To me, this is not chaos, simply a well-organized sort of machine. In ninth grade we had to study the different systems of the bodies. One group of between 2-4 people would each do a presentation on a different system from the human body. My group’s system was the Respiratory system, and while reading my textbook for information I gained knowledge by authority that allowed me to better understand the how the Respiratory system worked. I decided to trust this authority because it those involved in publishing would have researched their topic well, so as not to misinform thousands of students. I also have empirical knowledge of how a Respiratory system works, in two ways. One is my own Respiratory system, I understand the basics, in that when I breathe in, my lungs inflate with oxygen, and that when I breathe out, carbon dioxide leaves my lungs, and this is how I stay alive. I have also seen the same process with a pig’s lungs, when I was showed the difference between the lung of a “smoker” and that of “non-smoker,” because pigs’ lungs are extremely similar to human lungs. I understand that each system works together to keep the human, or animal body going, and is controlled overall by the brain. This to me does not seem to be order in chaos, in the way that our bodies work. However, when one considers that the body is doing all of this internally, while doing many other things externally, such as driving, reading, speaking, etc., that would seem to me to fit the claim of “glimpsing order in the chaos of events.” The chaos of events is everything the human body does externally; all while the order is functioning in an organized organism made up of many systems working together, perfectly, or near to perfectly. In this second way, the claim works to a better extent, than to the first way one might use the Natural Sciences to argue the point.
Religion also has a very strong base, with which the claim that people need to find order in the chaos of events, works. I find that emotion plays very strongly into religion. For example, it seems to me that many people believe in God and Heaven, and Hell, because they are afraid that after we die, there is nothing. I find that this may be entirely possible, however, sometimes I see beauty in nature, or an event will happen that just seems senseless, but will then connect to another event that occurs later, and it just seems to me like there must be a higher power, perhaps who is orchestrating the life that goes on all around me. An experience from my childhood which helps me perceive and believe in a higher power, was the death of my maternal grandmother when I was six years old. She died of a stroke on the morning of her sixtieth birthday. At the time, her death seemed irrational and so out of place in my six-year-old world. I saw how it devastated my mother and my grandfather. About a month after her death, my aunt (my mother’s sister) announced that after trying for some time, she was finally pregnant, yet sad that she had not shared the news while my grandmother was still alive. Yet, again, to my six-year-old mind, it made sense. My unborn cousin was joining our world, because my grandmother had left it. The baby was not a replacement, in any way, shape, or form, she was just the newest addition. This event is probably the most signifying event to me of the idea of God and that everything happens for a reason, which would be the order in the chaos of events. However this is simply my perception, the way I view the world, based on the way that I was brought up, in two religions, although it was primarily Judaism and secondarily Catholicism (both very reformed), and my perception is completely different, not only from someone who has a different upbringing than I had, as well as a different belief system, such as Atheism, but also different than my sister, who is agnostic, and her views on religion and ideas about God. In this way, related to my experience, religion and the idea that there is order, or God, in the chaos of our lives and events, is something that some people “need to believe.”
One of the best examples of this claim is in the religion of Hinduism. The claim works to a great extent in this particular religion because of the concept of dharma, as well as the caste system. Both of these concepts, one may argue, are the order in the chaos, in that by performing your dharma, and reliving through the caste system, you will eventually reach enlightenment, which is the true order in the midst of chaos of one’s many lives. The dharma, is the concept that one has to do their duty, not only to one’s family, but also to the expectations of the caste one is in, in order to eventually move up into the next caste, to become closer to enlightenment. This concept provides a sort of order for which Hindis may base their lives around. Just as in Biology, dharma seems to be sort of the internal order, around which everything else is based, no matter how complicated the external chaos becomes. A Hindi puts his dharma before everything else, because of his perception that if he follows his dharma, he will move up into the next caste, whether it be from a Vaisya (merchant) to a Khasatrya (warrior), or a Brahimn (priest) onto enlightenment. He may also be fueled by the fear of the wrath of one of the gods/goddesses, such as Kali or Shiva, or by his devotion them, like to Ganesh or Vishnu.
In conclusion, the claim that “people need to believe that order can be glimpsed in the chaos of events,” applies a good extent to Natural Science, as well as to Religion, although they are not the only two areas of knowledge to which this claim applies to. The ways of knowing to which this claim apply, are mostly through perception and emotion, but particularly in the Natural Sciences, reason as well.

BNW Chapter 7

Please read Chapter 7 and answer the following questions. Answers must be posted by November 17th for full credit.

1. How does Lenina feel about their appointed guide?
Lenina does not like their appointed Indian guide. She thinks he smells, as well.

2. How does Lenina react to "naked Indian"(p. 110)? Does it remind you of anyone else we have studied?
Lenina is very shocked at the old naked Indian. She stares at him in "horror and amazement." She has never seen a truly old person, because the World Order doesn't allow them to look old, and they usually die around 60. She finds it "terrible," and "awful."

3. How does Bernard react to the pueblo of Malpais?
Bernard is ashamed of "the weakness he had displayed that morning at the hotel, so he is trying to show Lenina that he is "strong and unorthodox." He does this by being "deliberately outrageous," and talking about the "wonderful" relationship between the Indian mothers breast-feeding their babies, to purposefully freak Lenina out.

4. Who is Linda? What is her relationship to Tomakin?
Linda is Tomakin's mother. She had come from the "Other Place" before Tomakin was born, with Tomakin's father, who, it is implied, is the DHC. This means that she is the girl who went on a walk during the thunderstorm, and couldn't be found, and so was assumed dead.

5. Why does Linda believe that "everything they do is mad"(p. 121)? Please be specific.
Linda believes that, "everything they do is mad" because "it's all different here." It's mad because they mend their clothes instead of buying new ones, and are monogamous, and the women are "cruel," and they don't use birth control.

BNW Chapter 6

Part I
1. Why does Lenina think Bernard Marx "odd" - please use specific references from this chapter in your answer.
Lenina thinks Bernard Marx is "odd" because he didn't "respond properly to conditioning" (pg 88), his "mania for doing things in private" (pg 88), he did not think that time should be wasted (pg 89), wanting to spend the afternoon walking and talking, (pg.89), not wanting to take soma (pg 89), "not wanting to be a part of the social body" (pg 91), and not wanting to end their day in bed (pg 93).

2. Please provide more lines from Lenina that she learned from hypnopedia (there are some great ones in this chapter!). Do any of them remind you of sayings that we may use - please don't use commercial jingles. i.e. "1-800-54-Giant!"
- "A gramme in time saves nine". (pg 89)
This is very similar to our "A stitch in time saves nine." They both mean that if you do soemthing now you can prevent having to do much more later. (Like doing your blogs when they're due, not all at the same time...oops.)
-"Remember on cubic centimetre cures ten gloomy sentiments." (pg 89)
-"A gramme is always better than a damn." (pg 90)
I think we have a saying that says to do something instead of just complaining.
-"Every one works for every one else. We can't do without any one. Even Epsilons...are useful!" (pg 91)
-"Everyone's happy nowadays." (pg 91)
-"Never put off till to-morrow the fun you can have today."(pg 93)
We also have a saying like this, but it refers more to doing work today so you can have fun tomorrow.
-When the individual feels, the community reels." (pg 94)

All in all, what hypnopedia sayings are to BNW, so cliches are to (American?) Society 2009.

3. What is Fanny's explanation for Bernard's behavior?
Fanny's explanation for Bernard's behavior is that there was too much alcohol in his blood surrogate.


Part II
4. What did the Director tell Bernard about his own trip to the Reservation? Why did it initially make Bernard feel uncomfortable?
The Director told Bernard that he had been to the Reservation "Twenty years, I suppose. Nearer twenty-five. I must have been your age..." (pg 96). This initally makes Bernard feel "extremely uncomfortable" because the Director is "so scrupulously correct," and he "commit[s] so gross a solecism!" by talking about the remote past.
The Director also tells Bernard that he also "wanted to have a look at the savages," and got a permit to the Reservation for his summer holiday. He took a girl who was "particularly pneumatic," and on the almost the last day, she got lost, by going out on a walk by herself while he was sleeping. Then there was a thunderstorm, and the horses they had been riding broke free and he hurt his knee, and could not find her. He eventually made it back to the rest-house hoping he'd find her there, but she wasn't, and when they conducted the search they couldn't find her. It made the Director almost too upset.

5. What does the Director threaten Bernard with if he doesn't change his behavior? Why does it elate Bernard?
The Director threatens Bernard with transference to a Sub-Centre, like Iceland, if he does not make an effort to conform and lapses again "from a proper standard of infantile decorum." This elates Bernard because he believes that he now stood alone, and has "consciousness of his individual significance and importance." He feels s"strong enough to meet and overcome affliction."

Part III
6. How does the Warden describe the Reservation?
The Warden describes the Reservation as very large (560,000 sq km), but divided into four Sub-reservations, which are surrounded by "a high-tension wire fence." There's 5,000 km of fencing at 60,000 volts, supplied from the Grand Canyon hydro-electric station. Therefore "there is no escape from a Savage Reservation." The children who are actually born on the Reservation, must not leave, and die on the Reservation.

BNW Chapter 5

1. What would Michael Pollan (Remember? The Omnivore's Dilemma) say about the first paragraph in Chapter 5?
Michael Pollan would say that if the hormones and milk were the raw materials for the factory, then everything the factory produced would, at it's base, be from corn, as the cows eat the corn and in turn, everything they produce is made from corn.

2. Do you see any similarities with how the World State views death as compared to the Hindus? How does Lenina's remembrance of hypopedia compare with what is discussed in Plato's Republic?
There is a strong similarity between Hinduism and World State views on death, because they both believe that their bodies are recycled and returned to the Earth, and their energy is used to continue life on earth. Lenina's remembrance of hypnopaedia is also very similar to what is discussed in Plato's Republic in that at each level, everyone is conditioned to be happy where they are. "Epsilons don't really mind being Epsilons," in the same way that warriors, of silver, don't mind being warriors. However, one difference between the two is that in the World State, your heredity matters, as Henry mentions on page 74. In the Republic, Socrates argues that golden children can come from bronze or silver parents and vice versa.

3. What do you think of Lenina's and Henry night out on the town?
To me it's fascinating that in order for not only them, but everyone else to have a good night, they need to get high. They call it being "happy," and they say that "everyone is happy now," but it seems almost sad that they need several does of a drug to enjoy themselves, and that their own positive emotions are not enough to produce that effect for them. I do like the way that the music seems to fill them, although that too could be because they're high, but Huxley uses such wonderful adjectives and details in describing the music, that one can almost enjoy it, simply by reading about it.

4. Why do you think Huxley uses the word "pneumatic" to refer to some female characters?
I think Huxley uses the word "pneumatic" to refer to some female characters because they don't really have any substance to them. The word "pneumatic" means "containg or operated by air or gas under pressure." This seems to fit the girls that Huxley is describing, at least through Bernard's eyes, on page 80. He finds Clara Deterding "really too pneumatic." She is not "plump, blonde, not too large," the qualities Huxley has Bernard use to describe Fifi and Joanna who "were absolutely right."

5. What is Solidarity Service and what are Bernard's feelings towards it?
Solidarity Service is an orgy, meant for those at the service to achieve "rapture," and "calm ecstasy," and to come together. However, Bernard does not feel this way. Again he feels isolated, empty, "separate and atoned."

Connections

Cave and Grendel:

-Grendel is being enlightened, steeping out of the cave, and trying to find a higher power

BNW and Hinduism:

-The Caste system, in which there is a hierarchy of the most enlightened and intelligent at the top, and the "stupidest" lowest echelons of society at the bottom in both societies.

18 w/ a bullet and Hinduism:

-everyone has there place and everyone has a responsibility. A gang member has a duty to protect the gang and serve the gang, which they consider to be their family, which is similar to the Hindu concept of Dharma, which is responsibility to their family.

For all:

Society has created a prison, they are all trapped by the standards of that society. Also, everyone is a prisoner to their own Dharma.

Grendel and 18 w/ a bullet:

Both are struggling with the concept of monster. Both can be defined as monsters, they are both very savage, and do bad things, but they both have their humanistic sides, which reveal characteristics which makes it hard to completely classify them as monsters.

BNW, Nacirema and 18 w/ a bullet:

focus strongly on materialism.

Gangs in el Salvador

Why does Slappy act this way?

can't measure human experience

-too many human variables, everyone has different experiences

-different points of view

-different opinions

-people aren't numbers

-it's hard to find qualitative conclusions

On the other hand, these things can be measured:

-crime stats

-unemployment stats

-poverty census

-Dysfunctional family

-Gang has replaced family/church--they look out for each other, live by their own rules & morals, belonging, protection, structure, school, community--contribute to 'cause', jobs:extortion & drugs, initiation (beating), tattoos, shaved head, participate in democracy.

Idea of Crime: Causes and Effects

-no other options

-no job opportunities--not hiring, added expenses

-addiction

-need for money

-no advancement (stuck at the bottom of the food-chain)

-need for structure

-poverty

"The gang structure is a lot like Wal-Mart."

Nacirema

1. What happened yesterday? Why couldn't we recognize our own culture?

Yesterday we read about a tribe, called the Nacirema located between Canada and Mexico, who, we decided were barbarians, savage, and uncivilized. However, at the end of the class, we found out that the tribe being described were actually Americans, and the word "american" had simply been spelled backwards. I think that we couldn't recognize our own culture because of the terms in which it was describe to us. The language of the article altered our perception, and so they way it was presented, as if by an outsider was observing our culture.
2. What does your answer say about the the strengths and weaknesses of the Social Sciences like Psychology, Sociology and Anthropology?

My answer shows both the strengths and weaknesses of the social sciences. On one hand, the article allowed us a look at the psychology, not only of our own culture, but also of how an insider might view American culture, which is a strength, to have the two different view points. At the same time, there is the weakness in the bias opinion one takes of anyone who is different. In the article, many words describing "rituals" not only had negative connotations, like "witch-doctor," but also had a condescending tone when describing a "magical," tool or supply. This shows the weakness of social sciences, in that we are condescending towards other cultures, and we look down on other cultures and ideas about what is "normal."

Abel Questions Chapter 15

1. Why is history being rewritten constantly?
History is being rewritten constantly because is "always written wrong." Abel says that the past is a "steady process of imaginative reinterpretation and reconstruction; we want it to be meaningful to us in the present."

2. What factors influence the process by which the historian picks and chooses his/her "facts"? Please provide a specific example for each factor.
-our interests change:example-In 50 years, will will probably care less about Miley Cyrus's "scandalous" photos, than her impact on popular music.
-our conceptual apparatus changes: example-we now have access to confidential documents from the Soviet Union about the Cold War, which we did not have before the collapse.
-our view for basic historical segment changes:example-"Toynbee holds the most intelligent unit not to be the nation, but the 'society.'"
-the interests and idiosyncrasies of the historian change:example-after WWII, Hitler was a very popular subject of study. Today, it might be Obama.
-the audience for whom the historian writes changes:example-a change in political party rule:republicans vs. democrats->the majority of the house changes.

3. What is the "Baconian fallacy?"What would the Positivists think? Would Carr agree with Namier?
The "Baconian fallacy" is the idea that "all the historians have to do is collect the facts." The Positivits would completely agree with this view, and say that the facts speak for themselves. Carr would agree with Namier, because Naimer believes that historians have to "single-out and stress" the most important parts, like a painter, and not like a photographer, who can capture everything at once.

4. How does History differ from Geology?
History differs from Geology in that historians "attribute meaning to [the] data." Whereas the geologists focus more on the present aspects of the rock they are examining and how the past could have affected it to look as it does.

5. According to Abel: "The patterns to be found in past events are selected by the historian; like the hypothesis of the scientist, they may be suggested, but are neither imposed nor dictated, by "the facts (p. 166-7)." Based on your experience with the Cheques Lab, how far do you agree with this explanation of history?
Based on my experience with the Cheques Lab, I agree to a decent extent with this explanation of history. Sometimes in History, the historian has to be able to see patterns to establish them as relevant, but the patterns are not necessarily the most important or even actual patterns vs. coincidences.

6. In your opinion, "how will future historians so elect to describe what is going on now(p. 167)?"
In my opinion, future historians will focus on the biggest issues facing our society today. In the future, historians will elect to discuss whether or not the first black American president was a good president, they will discuss the state of the economy, as well as the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.

7. What is historical pluralism?
Historical pluralism is the historical process made up of the enumerable components which don't "form a completely inter-related set...[Historiacl pluralism] denies that every event is related to every other event."

8. The list of events (or non-events) listed on p. 168 makes Abel ask the question: "Is there, then, no hard core or bed-rock of indisputable facts that the historian must recognize." Does it matter if there ever was a man named Trotsky?
I think that based on perception, there is no hard-core of indisputable fact; in history everything is disputable. There are generally accepted facts, such as the Holocaust happened. Yet there are people who don't believe that the Holocaust happened. It matters that the Holocaust happened, and that there was a man named Trotsky, so that humans can keep a generally accepted record of what happened. This way, we become better at preventing things like mass genocide of a people, or the establishment of a cruel dictatorship.

9. How is a historian like a physicist?
A historian is like a physicist in that they both go "beyond the evidence," select their facts and how to describe them.

10. What are the Five Frameworks or Hypotheses of History? Please provide an example from your HL or SL history class of each.
-I:Cyclical:Repetition is likely.-The Jewish-Arab fight. Both sides feel so strongly that there are only a limitd amount of solution to the problem, and history, like the 1929 Riots and the Hebron Massacre are likely to repeat themselves until the problem is solved.
-II:foundational:they isolate and stress certain factors.
-a) History of civilization depends on "climate, soil, and geography."-The majority of land in the Middle East is not particularly arable, so Arabs have a hard time cultivating certain types of plants, which are part of a huge trading industry. Also, the Middle East is geographically located farther away from a major ocean, and therefore their history of civilization may be said to be slowed in comparison to lands such as England and America, which are located on arable lands near major trading routes.
-b)Race is stressed by historians as ancient-Jews, who have been considered to be a race, have been suppressed for millennia. They were the ones who had to handle money in the MIddle Ages when that was considered "dirty," and their control over banks because of that, which caused discrimination against them in the modern world (1920s-WWII, specifically).
-c)Heredity ability is paramount in historical interpretations-In the the Middle East, Prince Faisal was expected to be a good leader of Syria, and help establish a independent Arab state, just as his father did with the McMahon-Hussein correspondence.
-d)Psychological factors are identified by many as the moving force in history.-Hitler's campaign against the Jews worked in part because the people of Germany were downtrodden by the Treaty of Versailles, and were in the psychological condition to blame a scapegoat for their troubles.
-e)The motive of History to be the appearance of superior individuals.-Winston Churchill, who talked about making allies with the Russians before the end of the war, has eventually come to be known as one of England's most accomplished Prime Ministers.
-III:Progress:change in the direction of human interests-In Germany, HItler believed he was making progress for the betterment of Germans, by extinguishing Jews, homosexuals, and those who were disabled.
-IV:Christian:History is a great drama of sin and redemption.-Part of the Lebanese National Pact is that Lebanon will be an independent Arab state with special ties to the west (They are Christian) and are therefore mostly peaceful and not enter alliance against any other Arab state.
-V:Organismic:all civilizations grow, from infancy to death.-The Nazi ideals, which grew from anti-Semitism and from infancy after WWI, and the treaty of Versailles, and blossomed into frull growth, hence WWII, have nearly reached the death stage, although Neo-Nazism still exists today.

11. Do you believe in Historical Inevitability?
I do not believe in Historical Inevitability because I do not believe that future is predictable because of some overall "plot." I believe that history is continuing series of events that are interconnected, and may help us prevent certain diasters and calamities in the future, but will not hepl us predict the future.

12. What does Abel mean when he says: "No crucial experiment can test the validity of a theory of history, any more than than it can the truth of a metaphysical theory (p. 174)."?
Abel means that there is no way to test a theory of history, because the future is unknown. you can uses a theory to predict what will happen, and then, only after it has happened, use those results from history to verify your theory insofar. However, there is always the chance that something will happen which completely contradicts your theory, and there is simply no way to prepare for that.

13. Abel writes: "Macaulay regards history as a branch of literature (p. 174)." How would Jill Lepore of Just the Facts, Ma'am respond? Please provide to specific quote from the article to justify your claim.
JIll Lepore would agree, for the same reason that Abel states: "the historian, like the novelist, tells a story: this is how things happened." She would agree by saying that the historian looks at the facts and interprets them to tell a general story of what happened, while the novleist looks at the facts and interprets them to tell a story about human nature.

14. How does the footnote at the bottom of page 175 relate to the Shaper from Grendel?
The footnote at the bottom of page 175 relates to the Shaper from Grendel, because the Shaper takes the commonly acknowledged history, and changes it so that is the most falttering and reflective view, which is what each culture/race mentioned in the footnote is doing.

Prescribed Title #7

“We see and understand things not as they are but as we are.” Discuss this claim in relation to at least

two ways of knowing.

They way we see and understand things are not actually based on the way they are, but we see and understand things based on the way we are. This means that we use two of our ways of knowing, perception and emotion, to see things differently than they might actually be.

Sometimes, when we perceive an event, our own personal biased comes into what we believe to be happening, and takes precedence on how we interpret this event. Often past behaviors are a reason why our perception in influenced. For example, I have a lot of guy friends, and I'm used to them like pushing me playfully, or punching me on the shoulder, just in a friendly, platonic, non-romantic sort of way. This means that if I made a new guy friend, and he had feelings for me, and tried to express his feelings for me by touching me more than he normally would, such as pushing me playfully, or punching me lightly on the shoulder, I would not be able to understand the way he was expressing himself, because of my own biased, perceiving something differently than what was actually there. I understood, or rather misunderstood, something based on the way I am, rather on the way it actually is.

Emotion can often play into the way we see or understand things based on who we are rather, than the way things actually are. I am usually a pretty happy person. This does not mean that I always see things through rose-colored glasses, but I am more likely to assume that people appear happier than they actually are, because of my own emotion. Unless I have Apriori knowledge, where maybe Person X is a generally grumpy person, I might have difficulty distinguishing between someone who is actually happy, and someone who is only pretending to be happy This would be if I didn't know them and saw them in the hallway at school, or in some other public forum, because I generally consider myself to be a perceptive person. Therefore if my own emotion, of general happiness, changes the way I understand and see some things, because of the way I am, not because of the way they are.

BNW Chapter 4

Part 1
1. What puzzles Lenina about Bernard Marx's behavior?

She is puzzled by him flushing when she mentions their New Mexico plan, saying that he had reacted as if she had made a dirty joke.

2. Please provide examples of Lenina using what she learned from hypnopaedia.

She voices her dislike of khaki, which Huxley says she is "voicing the hypnopaedic prejudices of her caste." She also says the phrase "I'm glad I'm not a Gamma," which is the exact phrasing from the hypnopaedia.
3. Where are Lenina and Henry going?

They are going to play Obstacle Golf at Stoke Poges.
Part 2:
1. What makes Bernard Marx distressed? Why?

Bernard Marx is distressed because Lenina thought it was a perfect afternoon for Obstacle Golf and went off to play with Henry Foster. This distresses him because he spent so much time and took his courage to ask her to go to New Mexico, which he considers to be "their most private affairs," which she openly wants to discuss in public.

Also, contact with members of the lower castes distresses him because it "always reminded him painfully of [his] physical inadequacy." His self-conciousness is distressing.
2. Where does Helmholtz Watson work? What is his job?

Helmhotz Watson works as a lecturer at the College of Emotional Engineering (Department of Writing), and he is an Emotional Engineer as well. Also, "he wrote regularly for The Hourly Radio, composed feely scenarios, and had the happinest knack for slogans and hypnopaedic rhymes.

3. What does Bernard have in common with Helmholtz Watson?
Bernard and Helmhotlz have similar knowledge that "they were individuals." Bernard knows this because he has "too little bone and brawn," whereas Helmholtz knows he ahs too much ability. Both men have a "mental excess."

4. What is troubling Helmholtz?

Helmholtz is troubled by a feeling he has, a feeling that he has this power inside himself to do something, which is waiting to come out of he gives it a chance. A "sort of extra power that [he isn't] using." He feels like he has the potential to do something greater than what he is doing now.

Cheques Lab vs. How History is written

Similar to History

- we don't have all the information

- we weren't there, so we don't get little details

- when finding new information, we have to find a way to include it in our previous interpretation, for the most accuracy.

Dissimilar to History:

- we don't know how it's relevant

- we don't have different accounts to back it up

- we don't have someone who may have been there or lived during that time time to corraborate our interpretation.

What is History?

http://home.comcast.net/~cphenlymbk2006/ibnapresentation.htm

CARR Link, at the bottom of the page.

The Positivists: (19th century-1830s) (counter-claim to Abel)

-obssessed with facts.

-"Cult of Facts"

-They saw history as a science.

-Empirical strain of studying history.

-objective-->concerned with the facts only. when a bias come inot it, it's not history, it's just opinion.

-"The process of p/reception is passive: having received the data, he then acts in them."

- Common-sense view of history

"here are certain basic facts which are the same for all historians and which form, so to speak, the backbone of history."

Carr:

- history are major events.

-if an event happened, but it was not recorded, not analysed as important, then it is not a historical fact.

-it's not history until someone has deemed it important, and has written it down.

-"A historian is necessarily selective."

-"The belief in a hard core of historical facts existing objectively and independently of the interpretation of the historian is a preposterous fallacy."

- a selection, of a selection of a selection of facts.