35 Million or Bust?

And the 35 million dollar question is, do we give money to a radio station sponsored by the school, and how do we decide if we should. I said we should get a say in how the school spends the money, since, after all, we pay the school the money. However, Joe brought up to me that this is not exactly how it works, because each student pays different amounts based on scholarships, finical aid, ect. However, I don’t think that plays a big factor in my idea. In the end, it equals the same amount. The students on scholarship often have to work much harder to keep their money. At the same time, the same could be said about the students with finical aid. My point is that the students should each be given the same vote, but, their vote should be the deciding factor in the school. After all, if we dislike what the school is doing, can’t we tell the prospective freshman, and in doing so keep an entirely new group of freshman away from American University? We deserve some kind of say. As for communities, wouldn’t students voting for what occurred in the school be an act of community? I would think so. This whole system that the president and the board of trustees chose what to do with the money paid by students is almost individualistic, as it seems selfish that only they get to decide. Community can decide together, and work together. This system is not like the government of the United States, because the people of the US get to vote for their president, their senator, and their congressman, but here, the college does not give students the ability to even pick their Board of Trustees or the President. Power is kept in a select few, and leaves the ones paying, the students out of any control of power. For like the United States, those that have the power of the purse have power over almost all.

I Know I've Already Mentioned This, But It Needs to be Said Again

In class today, the discussion was about all about costs versus benefits. The discussion started with whether or not AU should support WAMU and then it turn to what tuition should be spent on. Answers to both of these questions were very similar. All of the responses to questions about how we should evaluate costs vs. benefits were the same. The logic of the responses directly lead to utilitarianism. Everyone was saying that you should get direct benefits from anything that AU spends money on; that everything that AU does should be only about them. This is the logical conclusions of answers like "We're paying for it, so we should get to choose" ( the idea that you're entitled to certain rights because you can pay for it and do pay for it) and "How does this benefit us?" ( the idea that everything AU does should directly benefit you). These responses lead directly to the language of utilitarianism and selfishness. Do people realize what they are saying when they say these things or are they really oblivious to what their words mean? Do they realize that they are being selfish? Should you really get more rights simply because you can and are willing to pay for them? Are not rights inherent, and not bought? I've noticed that most people do not realize where the logic of their answers lead and that this language of utilitarianism and selfishness is deeply ingrained in modern America.

Individualism

I definitely agree with the second half of the Bellah quote. Our idealized (more communal) past society was sustained by sexism, racism, classism, etc. We definitely shouldn't go back to that. On the other hand, the individualistic society with a "pull-yourself up by the bootstraps" mentality isn't any better. It is based on the premise that everyone is equal and gains wealth, power, and status based on merit, when actually the circumstances that one is born into makes a huge difference. An individualistic society would be possibly only if everyone could actually be born equal. Since the gap between the rich and poor in many countries (America in particular) is actually increasing, individualism simply doesn't work. Most people are forced to rely on friends and family even if they'd prefer to be individualistic.

Individualism v Bad

The individual is the identity of a person. So far so good, I like being my own person. Modern individualism can definitely be a good thing, telling us we are all different. It breaks down the barriers of stereotypes and racism. That’s a good thing too! But now people are saying it isn’t possible. Well to that I say I believe it is. Why not? Why can’t it be possible to be our own person? Modern identity may be that we break away from our friends and families, but I don’t think that makes use selfish. We go away to college, but most people go back to their families. And then, there is the fact that just because we break away from our families doesn’t mean we are selfish. I’m away from my family now, and I still try to be very nice to people. Whether or not I am, the fact is I am trying. So I think individualism is what you make it. It is possible; it just requires little more effort. In the same way, a switch back to the old traditional society would not bring us back to racism as long as people chose not to let it. The second one society starts becoming racist, this would break down, as people start to identify with their community as a manner of personal defense. So in the end, we probably would switch back to that bad manner of thinking, but we can dream it wouldn't, right?

Okay, I Won't Burn the Book

Okay, I promise I won't burn the book. Yes, I was considering a book burning after I finished the book, but I have reconsidered after our discussion in class today. I find the book hard to read because it brings up so many things about American culture that I hate. It talks about how selfish Americans are and I makes me wonder about myself. The book just brings up a lot of things that make me angry.

Okay, now on to the question....so "Modern individualism seems to be producing a way of life that is neither individually nor socially viable, yet a return to traditional forms would be to return to intolerable discrimination and oppression." This is basically the dilemma of American culture today. We all want to be individual, independent, and self-reliant, but this is now way to create a society let alone sustain a society. Then at the same time we want connection with others, to form bonds, but this is contradictory to being individual. So basically American are stuck in between these things. And time has brought out the worst aspects of the individualistic side of American culture. The individualistic side of Americans has show up so many times as selfishness, and it is wrong. In the healthcare debate, people ask why they should pay for some one else's medical care, this is even beyond selfish-- it's cold-hearted. Individualism does not give people an excuse to be selfish. Individualism is not a free pass to being selfish, and America is an extremely selfish nation. It's true that we may give the most to charity in the world, but we live in a selfish nation that values self-gratification. But then on the filp-side of individualism there is society, and no society can survive if the main focus is individualism. Americans imagine that we live in a united society, but in reality were are so fragmented because we are looking out for the number 1. Maybe this would be a good time to take a page from the doctrine Catholic Church, even if I don't believe in the faith or agree with a great of its teachings. When I went to my Catholic high school, one thing that I still remember is how people need to care for others. I don't agree that you have to always be sacrificing yourself , but you do need to care about those around you and take an active role in making the world a better place. Americans are torn between a need for individualism and society, but the two don't really fit together that well, as we can observe by our very messed up culture.

Parent's Weekend

I think the rest of you have President Kerwin's talk pretty well covered, so I'm instead going to write about how this weekend a whole lot of people's parents, including mine, came to visit. This was my first time seeing my parents since I went home for a Jewish holiday over a month ago, and I actually felt like my relationship with them changed a bit more then it did when I went home after being at college a month. Maybe it's because I've been a way a bit longer now, or perhaps because we were at school (essentially my home) instead of in my parent's house, but I felt like for at least some of the I was relating to them much more as an adult than I ever have before. This wasn't consistently the case (sitting in the back seat of the car made me feel quite childlike) but I do feel like there was a shift, and that's interesting.

In every family, I think parents and children struggle to figure out how their relationship is supposed to change once the "child" is an adult. I'm the oldest sibling in my family, so for us this is new territory. I was actually a technical (legal) adult for most of the last year I spent living at home, but I didn't really feel like one. Now I think I've actually started the process, and it's kind of scary. I don't think my parents will be coming for parent's weekend next year...it seems like that would be kind of unnecessary.

El Presidente

I really liked meeting with President Kerwin. However, I would like to complain that I got dressed up and even shaved my "beard"; but there was no film crew nor was their anyone taking pictures of this event.

He seemed like a really fun guy and seemed to really like his postion. I felt slightly bad for him in that I honestly felt that he knew that being president meant a change in what he must spealize in, but I beleive that he really did wish that he could still focus on the academics. Not to sound corny, but I think being able to help direcetly educate a young mind, seems vasitly more noble then going to meetings and making long term plans. (Even though it is these meetings and plans that ultimately make sure there is still a University and funding avaialable so that we can have an education).

I would enjoy being president, but I think from what he describes being the provost is a much more involved job that deals much more with the students and controlling what and how they learn.

President Kerwin Yet Again

I thought it was great that President Kerwin came to class on Friday. I was glad that we were able to speak to the president of AU. I feel that it is good to hear what is going to happen to our university from the person with the most power in the university. I also felt that many of the things he said were very insightful and interesting. When President Kerwin talked about college being abrasive, I found that I felt the same way. College should not be easy; it should be a huge shock that rocks your world. It was interesting that he put into words exactly how my college experience has been so far and it made me feel much better that I'm not quite comfortable at AU. I also found that his life experiences were interesting and more realistic than any of the other speakers' experiences. I admired President Kerwin for how he never regrets things that he has done, that is a great way to live your life.

In contrast to the things I found interesting about President Kerwin, there was on thing that I found really frustrating. Everything he said was a front and carefully calculated. His speech was very measured and constant. His tone was also very calm. Basically, everything he said was pre-planned and constructed for his audience. I really wished that he would have been genuine or at least say one thing that was off the cuff. It was also very annoying how he used veiled references to past presidents and scandal. I really wish President Kerwin had been honest and open.

President Kerwin, I Thank Thee

Out of all of the speakers we have had throughout the course of Explorations so far, President Kerwin’s was most inspiring to me. A lot of other speakers we had didn’t really leave much of a lasting impression on me and simply reiterated a lot of “advice” that I frankly already was aware of. Being undecided, I’ve been hearing the phrases like “Get involved!” “Take as many classes as you can!” “Explore everything and find what you love and what you dislike – they’re both valuable!” since my junior year of high school. Being force fed these “words of wisdom” over and over has weighed down upon me and in no way helped me actually feel better about my college experience so far and what I’ve accomplished already.

President Kerwin changed that. His discussion about how college is meant to feel abrasive and create an uncomfortable feeling for its students actually was the most comforting piece of advice that I have heard. Knowing that I should feel overwhelmed, that I should feel scared and alone at times, that I should be feeling challenged with every aspect of college, allowed me to take a deep breath and realize that everything that has been happening is right on track. His argument that college, if every aspect of it essentially does its job well, will change the person who I am over the next four years was inspiring. I don’t exactly know why because I like to think that I knew that after four years I’d be changed. But, I don’t think I understood it in terms or to the effect of how President Kerwin said it. He stated that it will not be a major change and that I will most likely be a completely different person in many ways. It then made sense to me that college should feel abrasive because I have started this process of intense change. This is the beginning of the traumatic experiences I will undergo within the next four years. And while that sounds like it should induce more fear, it has actually been one of the few things that has alleviated my fears about college.

Strategically Talking About The Strategic Plan.

So today the president of AU joined our class for a lovely class of discussion in the Leonard Chancery, because, you know, Leonard Hall flooded. But the fact we had our very own water fall is an entirely different story. I want to talk about something I noticed that the President likes to always bring the discussion of the strategic plan back to the thing that has been successful in it. That is of course, the caliber of the students and the caliber of the faculty. Of course, this is to be expected. When you are doing a very large project, the best way to describe it is based on what was done right, not what has yet to be done. You want people to think that the plan is going, well according to plan. However, I have to admit, I could have asked the question, “What part of the plan do you think is not going well?” Yet, I believe that he couldn’t truly answer that question. The main reason being is that many of the parts of the plan revolve around the two main first ones. So maybe he is following the plan to letter, and that would probably have been his argument. By asking what has been accomplished in the strategic plan, I was able to verify the reason why he kept linking his answers to those two goals.
The best example of this may be the star wars Family Guy video. I am going to post it here, so you all may enjoy the funny, yet revealing episode. The Stewie/Vader is asking about the new Death Star. The Captain gives all the good parts of the new station, and only after much persuasion does Stewie/Vader find out the truth. Anyway, I am not saying the president is that bad. Obviously not. He was right to do that, especially since everybody needs reassurance about the executive branch. I believe he is trying his hardest, and I actually have more respect for him now than I had for him before. He did the right thing, and the thing I would have done. It was respectable. So anyway, my summary is that he glossed over some of the strategic plan strategically. That’s respectable in my opinion.

I'll save you time.. AU is a community

American University is defiantly a community. As we discussed in class there are certain characteristics needed to be a community. American has a set group of leaders, the students here all share a common location and a common set of goals. The students also have local pride in their community and share in tasks around the area to make the location better.

All of these ideas make me believe that American is a great community.

I love walking around the quad and seeing tons of students wearing sweatpants and sweatshirts with American University logos covering every part of them. In a round about way, I am glad to see the students pride because I know that I have the same pride. AU is a place where people come together and I do believe that a very large majority of students are very glad that they can not only call AU their community but also their home.

American Community

I feel American University is a community, but more than that, I feel all colleges are communities. The reason is that colleges can be used to identify what type of person you are. When I say I am from American University, people generally either say, “Where is that?” or “Oh wow that’s a good school.” If it is the second question, than they just took all stereotypes from American University that is known about the college and applied them to me. What I am trying to say is that the college is a community because of how people define it. I feel that any place that can be defined by people is a community. For instance, I mentioned in class that Ben said he was from Boston, and the first thing I asked was whether he was a Red Sox fan. Unfortunately he was, but that is beside the point, which is that I could identify something about him from his community. So in away, a community defines who you are. So American University generally means to people what? Well I guess it means that most people there are at least vaguely interested in politics. It probably also means that you are of a decent IQ, because American university is a pretty smart college. American University describes some of us because of these traits, and some of us through other ways. In the end, we are a community because we create these traits. It is a cycle. A community of people creates traits in their community, and then other people come to the community because they like those traits. American University has created their traits, and now students such as myself, came here to be a part of the community with these traits.
Secondly, a community works together to accomplish goals. This happens at American University all the time! Ecosense works with the rest of AU to help us go green. At the same time, the SUB supplies entertainment, and the RHA keeps us all comfortable. The professors teach us, while we maintain decorum and participate to make the class better. In the end, this working together unites the college, making it a community. We all help each other through clubs and activities, and this maintains a decorum that allows AU to function as a community.

Community?

I think that American University is a community, but like most large communities it contains many smaller communities that are more intimate. It's odd for me to think of American University as a community since I still don't know the majority of people, but I realized that was the case in my hometown as well. Still, UC or the clubs I'm in (well, some of them anyway) feel a lot more like communities because I actually know people, plus we have something in common (even if in the case of UC it's "being somewhat undecided.") I'm not sure what everyone in American University has in common, besides being college students with good enough statistics to get into AU (and of course that only applies to the students.) Basically, I think that American University is a community but not a very tight knit one.

Americommunity!

In my opinion I do think that American University is a community, at least in the general sense of the word. I witnessed it the first time I stepped foot on the campus and it is a prominent quality of AU that, to me, set it apart from other colleges I visited. I saw people I didn’t know smile at me or ask me how I was doing, I saw peers exchange waves and greetings, I saw people helping others, and I saw clubs whose mission was to do good things for the AU campus. All of these qualities of friendliness care for each other and the shared environment, and politeness, are to me vital characteristics that define how a community interacts. When I envision a community I summon up an image of the idealized “leave it to beaver” concept: a group of people who share a value of family and education, who are friendly to their neighbors whom which they know well, as well as form tight knit relationships with those around them. However, in my personal neighborhood, this is far from true. I know about a quarter of the people I live near in my suburban town, and those who I do know I have some form of conversation with at most once a week. For me, a community is more simply a group of people who live near each other due to some shared factor whether it is their economic status or desire for good public schools.

While thinking about whether AU is a community or not, I thought about community colleges. I mean it says it in the name, c-o-m-m-u-n-i-t-y college. So it must be a community right? I just might have to disagree. From my experiences, AU exemplifies more of the community aspects I associate with the word in comparison to my experiences taking classes at the community college in my town. While Howard County Community College is known for its renowned educational programs, when stepping foot on its campus I felt isolated and cold as opposed to AU’s immediate sense of warmth and sociability. I can be sure that someone will smile at me or say hello when walking on AU’s campus while I got the complete opposite impression while attending the community college back at home. It is this feeling rather than specific components that I use to define a community.

Lucy, I'm Homeee

I went home again this week. Not really because I felt like being home, and defiantly not because I did not want to be at American, but really because I had nothing better to do.

Its amazing how fast I felt like I lost my independence. My mom made me do chores while I was watching tv, bring up laundry and help her with the computer. All of which were at times inconvenient for me. I guess what I am complaining about, is not doing these chores but feeling like I lost control of how I do it. I got back on the bus and felt like I was back in control. It was interesting how quickly I was back to feeling in charge.

What is also funny is my personality changes when I go home. I might be untidy in college, but I do keep my room reasonably clean, but I basically become a slob when I got home. I left my clothes where ever I wanted to.

Basically I feel like I revert to how I was when I was in high school when I go back home... it's odd.

Reflection

So...I'm honestly a little bit unsure about what to write about this week. Unlike everyone else in this blogging group (and most of the floor) I didn't go home this weekend, nor did I do much else thanks to the weather. I mostly spent the weekend either writing my ethnography or finding ways to procrastinate on writing my ethnography. I ultimately finished it with time to spare, but the fact that it took me longer than it should have worries me a bit. The second week of November, I have a major paper due on Monday, a test on Tuesday, and a second major paper due on Thursday. I can't procrastinate that weekend the way I did this weekend. Since this was actually my first large writing assignment (which I guess is what happens when you AP out of college writing) I'm hoping it's not an omen of things to home. My hope is that my procrastination was mainly caused by the fact that there really wasn't all that much motivation to get my work done, since it's not as though there's much else to do. I do know that conquering my procrastination will be necessary to suceed in college.

Moving on

Reflection time! So this weekend I went home for the so called fall break. So here I am. Old friends, old teachers, the works. Yet, something feels different this time. Although my house and family still felt familiar and homey, my friends still at high school felt differently. At the school I felt as though I shouldn’t be there, like I had outgrown my time there. It is definitely time to move on. And I want too. Every day I feel more and more at home at AU. I am just not at the point where I feel completely transitioned in yet. I know its coming. It took awhile for me to transition before, though I am not sure why. However, I am going to try. And when I finally do, then I can start truly putting my best effort into my life here. So it’s time to move one. Just have to actually do it now. Sorry for the down and out reflection everybody.

No Title

I'm trying to think of something smart and intellectual to write about, but I have nothing. I'm sitting at the dinning room table at home, while my dad takes my great aunt and her friends for the grand tour of Jefferson County and my mom watches Notre Dame play USC. My house is freezing and wearing about 6 layers of clothing trying to get warm. It's horrible outside as it continues to rain for the 60th hour straight. My dog Gwen is sitting at my feet asleep and I'm glad to be home. It may be absolutely freezing and raining and I really want to watch the game, but I still really glad to be home. So far I've done nothing that would be truly note worthy-- I've helped my mom do laundry and switch out her wardrobe; I've played with the dogs; I've stayed up too late and I really want a nap; and I've spent way too much time playing with my new palm pre. (Yes, it's my new toy and it's really dangerous.) So far it's been a pretty normal weekend at home and I'm loving it. Paloma is sitting in my lap-- nope, she's changed her mind and gotten down :(. I guess my great aunt's friends (they're Spanish) think that drive-throughs are crazy and that we devote so much to the Civil War. I guess its because not many people in Spain even talk about the Spanish Civil War and it was only 80 years ago. I guess my weekend sounds pretty boring, but I really just love being at home, not matter if I just am hanging out, or working, or helping with construction.

College Oh College

Oh college…

Somehow, I didn’t realize that this crazy mid semester time would come so soon. All of a sudden paper after paper after project after reading assignment seemed to bombard me like an ever growing snowball rolling down a slipper hill with no way to stop it! Although, I think not knowing that everything would happen all at once was better for me in the end. If I had been expecting this busy time from the beginning, I would have stressed myself out even more anticipating these couple weeks of tumultuousness. It doesn’t really help that I still don’t know how to properly study and that I’m still considered a novice in how to write a well written, “A” quality college paper.

With the preexisting stresses of being away from home for the first time and trying to find my place in college, the midterm season could easily have been completely overwhelming. While at times I did feel weighed down by it all, it was extremely satisfying to overcome. I’m done with my first half of a semester of college! This probably wouldn’t sound like a major accomplishment to many, but to me it’s a big deal. At the end of the summer before I began my freshman year at AU, I was bombarded with fears that have since been alleviated. I have already learned so many things compared to my four years in high school. The care and knowledge of the professors at AU motivates me more than I would have realized especially again when I compare it to my high school where I felt maybe two of the teachers I had in all of the four years expressed genuine care for their students.

So far so good!

I might just want to be a professional learner

I know I really really want to be in the Secret Service, but I have absolutely no idea how to do it. Some people say learning a language is what they want, or be a lawyer, or try accounting, or for that matter learn anything well and they will be impressed. The general idea is that you need to come to the Secret Service with a skill and they can teach you the rest.

So the question is: which skill do I want to come to them with. I sit in my Justice class and am positive I could be a really good criminologist. I think go to psychology and think I should go to school and be a physiologist. But then people come into my Explorations class, and everytime I think "hmm well that sounds coool too". I thought I hated economics, but the guest speaker who came in on Friday spoke to the class for about 10 minutes on straight up economics, and I now am positive I will be taking an economics class (hopefully hers) next semister.

I was on the American website a few days ago and I saw something for the school of education. I thought we did not have a school of education so I clicked the link and realized it is just what they called their education dept. But I then spend 15 minutes looking at the list of classes and thought I would like to take half of them.

The problem with college for me is not getting 120 credits. Its figuring out not to have 220 credits. With 4 majors and 6 minors. My point is, I know what I want, but how do I get there?

Invisible Man Take Two

This is the second time I have read Invisible Man by Ralph Ellison. I read Invisible Man two years ago for my American Lit class in high school. While rereading the novel, I realized that I was looking at the novel in an entirely new way. Two years ago when I was reading, I was looking at literary elements and trying to remember important quotes so I could recognize them on the test. This time around, I actually was able to move beyond what I had learned in my lit class and really understand the novel. My lit class did help me a lot when I looked at the odd incidents in the novel, but in my lit class I never really understood the point of the novel. In that class, we looked at the novel in terms of race and it was fascinating (we also watched American History X and Crash). But for this class I found the novel much more interesting as portrait of identity. At the time race seemed to be the most important element to the novel, but in rereading it I discovered that it is about the narrator's identity or lack of for almost the entire novel. My blog post from this week talks about the narrator's invisibility in terms of his identity. The novel is so much more than a commentary on racism in America. It is about a search for identity in a crazy and pretty screwed up world.
This time around I realized that the novel actually connected with me. As a reread the last two pages, I found myself think about how universal Ellison's novel is. Anyone can be invisible and in the last page and a half Ellison sums up the entire novel and the meaning of invisibility. The last line of the novels says "Who knows but that,on the lower frequencies, I speak for you?". The first time around, this line made no sense to me, but this time it was as if I had an epiphany (almost as if I'd been hit on the head with a ton of bricks). I realized that Ellison is speaking for all those who are invisible. The novel is just not a semi-autobiographical account of a black man from the South living in Harlem; it is a description of the journey to identity and how you can be invisible. I realized that the narrator was speaking directly to me, not because I happened to be dealing with ethnic discrimination (as I was when I read the novel the first time), but because I understood the sense of invisibility that the narrator was experiencing because I too have felt and still sometimes feel invisible.

Do what you enjoy?

The main point that I got from Mary Hansen's visit to our class was that we might not enjoy the first career field we choose as much as we think, and if that happens we should just try to discover what we actually enjoy and switch to that. The problem is that while this sounds good in theory even some parts of her own lecture made it clear that this doesn't already work out so well. One thing that really stood out for me was the economic majors who had to cram in math classes at the last minute after realizing they wanted to go to grad school. Since Prof. Hansen said that going to grad school for economics pretty much requires a math minor, it seems like if someone decided in their senior year that they wanted to go on to grad school they'd have to spend an extra year in undergrad taking math classes first. If grad school for economics is so specific as to require a certain minor, it seems like it would be very difficult for someone to go to grad school in something not very related to their undergrad major.

On one level, this kind of makes sense. It would be rather difficult to do graduate level work in a subject without a good foundation from undergrad study. On the other hand, this makes me kind of anxious because I think there's a good chance I want to go to graduate school and I'd like to think even if I choose the "wrong" undergraduate major things will work out ok. I might only be a first semester freshman at this point but I really only have one more semester that will be mostly gen ed classes before I start taking almost entirely major related classes and it becomes more difficult to switch. As I've recently learned, if I want to double major (although I think I've decided against it), I have to decide very soon because all of my subsequent classes have to be quite carefully planned out. So despite what Prof. Hansen said I'm just not sure how much of a chance I'm going to have to figure out what I enjoy. One thing that I decided after her lecture is that I really should get an internship related to politics as soon as possible so I can figure out if it is in fact what I enjoy. If I do it next summer or fall of sophomore year, I should still have time to change my major.

Mary Hansen

Last Friday we had yet another speaker come in and talk to us about how we should decide what to do with our lives. What I found interesting about Mary Hansen’s approach to her presentation was that it was very informal and casual which I was a fan of. Multiple times, she would say what she could talk about, but further stressed the idea that she wanted to conform the discussion to what would be most helpful for us. I guess it was for this reason that her talk began to merge with something resembling a macroeconomics course. While this was to answer a student’s question, it was distracting for me as I spent the whole time wondering how this related back to our earlier discussions of doing what you love to do as a profession. This divergence simply showed me that she is living proof of that and that she loves teaches economics so much that at any time she is willing to give a brief lesson.


For me, Mary Hansen’s discussion didn’t inspire too much with new ideas that will help my undecided self any further than have the other speakers so far. This may be because I’ve already accepted the fact that I don’t know what I want to do with my life and that I’m ok with that at this point. This is probably because my parents support this fact at this point and encourage me to just explore everything at this stage of my college career. The main points that Mary Hansen stressed were to do something you love, explore your options in college now while you can, and that you learn something about yourself and your likes and dislikes at the conclusion of every course you take. However, for me this was knowledge I already had coming into college. Therefore, this presentation didn’t do a whole lot for me especially following the other speakers we’ve had in class. Nonetheless, I value her advice and find comfort in the fact that she is successful and happy in her career which proves that not knowing what I want to do at this stage in my life can lead to achievement and contentment as well.

Happiness v Money

Today we had another guest speaker. Her name was Mary Hansen, and she was a very energetic speaker. Out of the many points she made to us today, the one that I was the most expected by was the point that you must always do what you love. It goes hand in hand with the fact that you can only decide your life, not some MBTI test. She pointed out that she changed her major several times. Wouldn’t that imply she changed her MBTI results several times in her young life? I would think so. So what are we looking at? The key to life is happiness. Happiness in what you do, not in just money. For instance, I enjoy starting something, and taking it to new and exciting heights. Like a new club that gains power and members through the years. Well, this is the first time I actually said that, and the first time I really thought about how I enjoy making something out of…well nothingness. But, maybe that’s just one thing. Maybe I can find something I enjoy doing that I can bring up from the ground. Who knows? I’m just ranting on what I may want to do to be happy. Anyway, seeing how excited she was about her job really got through to me that being happy is more important than just money.

Invisible

I beleive that the narrator is invisible because of his circumstances. He is a young black man at the bottom of the racial hierarchy. People tend to not take the narrator seriously and put him in sitatutions that make it difficult for him to suceede.

The scene in the begginging of the novel where the narrator plans to give a speech about equality to the group of men, but winds up being forced to fight and then get electruced for the humor or others shows the unfairness of the situtation. The narrator is just another "dumb black boy" to them and one that they can make fun of and take advantage of.

The majority of what is being portayed in this story is very specific to to specific time and place in American Society. If these sort of events were to occur in America today, Reverend Al Sharpton and a bunch of other people would be leading a protest down the middle of the street. People would be up in arms. But when the narrator lived, no one else cared. He was alone and invisible in a white man's world.

Anyone Could Be Invisible

During class yesterday, we kept bouncing ideas back and forth about the origins/causes of the narrator's invisibility. Basically there are two possible arguments as to the origins/ causes of his invisibility: his race or a more general occurrence. Either of these origins/causes could lead to the state of invisibility that the narrator experiences. I think the origin/cause of the narrator's invisibility is a more general phenomenon that could happen to anyone.

Many would argue that the narrator's invisibility is caused by his race, but I think that his race only contributes to his sense of invisibility. I guess to begin I need to define how I see the narrator's invisibility; for me the narrator's invisibility is something that originates from within. The narrator is invisible because he has a certain attitude toward the world and his life and he acts accordingly. The narrator has never been able to define himself in terms of himself; he is constantly looking out towards the world to discover who he is. He needs to look inwards to discover who he is. It is this lack of self-knowledge that makes him invisible.

His race contributes to how the narrator is confused about his identity. The narrator is told how to act as a black man, but it does not fit him and he becomes more lost and invisible. When Bledsoe says "You're black and living in the South-- did you forget how to lie?", it shows how the narrator does not internalize the image of the black man from the South and therefore becomes invisible. The narrator does not know who he is and he is invisible.

The second point of the novel that is a great example of the narrator's invisibility is when he gives his first speech for the Brotherhood. The narrator is extremely visible as he stands on the stage in the spotlight with an audience hanging on his every word. How could the narrator be invisible at this point? The narrator is invisible because the audience and everyone around him really do not know who he is. He is invisible because he is not sure of his identity and even the small part that he is sure of, he never shares; and this renders him invisible. In this sense he can control his invisibility by letting his identity be known. It is also interesting how the Brotherhood has manufactured the narrator a brand new identity and in doing so they have made him more invisible.

The narrator's invisibility shows that anyone can be invisible.

The MBTI doesn't seem to believe people can change

So I'm not exactly surprised by my MBTI results (gussed 3/4 right), but not thrilled by them either. In particular, I'm not a big fan of most of the career options that the test have me. Most of them are math and science related, and while I really wish I had my aptitude for those subjects (and think that more girls/women should go into them) I'm not very skilled or interested in math or science. Actually, the test kind of made me wonder if the reason why people with a certain personality type seem to dominate certain professions isn't because people with that personality type aren't steered toward that profession. Why couldn't a boisterous, outgoing person be a computer programmer or engineer? Why can't a introverted person (particularly if they are only introverted in certain situations) be a social worker? Also, maybe being in those professions would actually shape the person's personality to "fit" them better, at least to some degree.

I'm rather introverted. That isn't a surprise to me. However, I really feel like I've grown as a person over the last several years and I'm more social than I used to be. I still don't always do very well, particularly in unstructured large groups, but I think there's still room for improvement. I'm not going to pursue a career that doesn't sound interesting to me just because the MBTI doesn't think I'm extroverted enough for the ones that are.

Children of Men

I know that just about everyone else decided to write about the MBTI test this week, but what I can't seem to get out of my head is Children of Men. It has been several days since we watched the movie, but I still keep replaying pieces of it in my head. For me, Children of Men is a great movie, but at the same time it is a serious warning to all of us. All of the politics and fears in the movie have their roots in our world today. The only difference between the reality of the movie and the world we live in is how extreme the politics and fears are. Children of Men shows how if we keep on this track of fear of others and extreme security concerns that one day we could end up losing all of our compassion and become the extremists we fear. Even though this was the second time I had seen the film, it still had a very sobering effect. For me, the movie is almost a prediction of our future if we all don't begin to wake up and stop reacting to the world solely based on fear. Today so many people are afraid of the world. Differences among people do not inspire curiosity and interest, but fear. We live in a world where so many of our actions are based on the idea of "us vs. them". The media dehumanizes those who are not understood or even simply different. This in turn creates a population that continues to become less compassionate and caring because of what they see in the media. Our culture in so many ways has become disconnected from reality. This reality is the one in which all humans have dignity and immeasurable value. People are losing their dignity and value everyday because of the way others are afraid and react accordingly. You could even say that we are lossing the compassion that makes us human because so many of our actions are fueled by fear. It's very scary to think that the key elements that changed the world in Children of Men exist today. It is very dangerous when we only begin to think in terms of "us vs. them". What happens if this continues and never stops? Will we end up in a world like in Children of Men, where we hate those who are different and kill them or deny them a better life? Is it possible that we really could close our borders completely and close ourselves off from the rest of the world? Would we allow the world to fall apart as long as we were safely tucked behind our walls? I really wonder if humans are capable of being so cold and losing all compassion. There are elements of this today, but hopefully it will never go to the extremes shown in Children of Men. Hopefully people will realize that the world should not be viewed in terms of "us vs. them", but that everyone is human.

MBTI

I really was excited to get my MBTI results. And while I did think they were really cool and intersting when I got them, I also realized they did not tell me much.

It turns out, that anyone can become any other type of personality if they put their mind to it, and while people might excel at doing one task or another based on their personality, they can learn to do just about anything.

On the other hand, I find it absolutly fascinating which jobs the MBTI thought I would excel at. Half of the jobs it lists are some type of goverment/ high stress emergency work. It includes Emergency medical technician (EMT), which I am, and lists the very first job as intelligence agent. Which some day, I truely hope to be.

I am not sure if this is the proper forum for this, but I just also wanted to mention that I love Washington DC and this university. It has to do with my personality, so I am going to try to make it sound like it connects. It is amazing to be this close to Homeland Secuirty and I feel like everytime I venture into DC I have a good possibility of walking into a Secret Service agent, which is just beyond cool for me.

MBTI v Free Will

The MBTI test was both revealing and unnerving. To me, at first it resembled one of those little quizzes you see on the internet. However, if you ask me, the MBTI test is so much more. Because it categorizes you and picks jobs for you. To me, it is almost wrong. I don’t want a test telling me what I should do with my life. I want to be a lawyer, or a politician. I like helping to make decisions impacting the world, and fighting for what I believe in. But then, this test only mentioned on type of attorney I should be. Maybe that’s because I have a certain stance on fighting. I don’t like debating when it could lead to conflict beyond the main point. I have seen countless fights about politics break down into small squabbles, so I avoid them. Maybe that why I put up a front that I have a moderate view of politics. Yet, I could tell you, I know who I am, and I will give you my view on any political issue if asked. Sometimes it leans to the right, sometimes to the left. But when confronted about my views I will debate them. However, at the end of the debate, I don’t judge you, and I would probably consider you more of a friend that if we didn’t debate. The MBTI test didn’t pick up that I like debating political issues. It just picked up I don’t like arguments. But as I said, there is a difference between debates and arguments. Arguments tear people apart, while a debate focuses on one issue, but in the end, friendship remains, or is strengthened.
Anyway, it is my opinion that the MBTI test doesn’t take many things into account. It never can. That’s why humanity can’t be tested with accurate results. That’s why polls predicting different things can be wrong. Mathematically speaking, humans are the unsolvable problem, because each event in our lives adds a new variable, and just changes the equation completely. There is no formula to solve that, and there never will be. Free will at its finest. No test will be able to beat it. So, I like that the quiz told me a lot of things about myself. That great. But by the end of this year, something will probably have changed. Because humans can change themselves. It is an amazing thing. We can do anything we want, and become what we want to be. So, I don’t take this test to seriously, and will follow my dream of becoming what I want to become regardless of a test. I bet the MBTI test didn’t see that coming.

MBTI Reflection

The results of the MBTI test was just as I’d suspected. I am introverted person who takes in information in terms of the big picture, makes decisions based on how I feel, and judges the outer world in an organized manner. Cool, so what does that mean? It means I know myself and my tendencies in terms of how I interact with others and make important decisions in my life. But now what? How will this help me figure out what I want to do with my oh so undecided life?

I guess there’s no real answer. I could take this personality test strictly and come to terms with the fact that I am best suited for a career as playwright, social scientist, or even monk. Clearly, the world is my horizon. Perhaps I just don’t like being told what to do or what I would be best at based on a series of questions. The most important thing I got out of taking the MBTI was finding out that I know myself well in terms of the four areas it tested. I feel that it’s very important people don’t take the results of these types of tests as fact, but instead as a gauge or indicator of what one’s tendencies are in general. After all, if I took these results as certain, my dream of being a scientific researcher would not be possible since my results suggested I pay closer attention to detail along with not including this career in my possible job choices section.

I am glad we had the opportunity to take this test though because I had always wanted to see what my potential strengths and weaknesses are. The information was valuable, but I feel like I would need to take it again closer to when I would be starting my career since who I am and how I act will probably change by then.