"They Say/I Say"

This reading was very useful. “They Say/I Say” has a lot of good information on how to write. It provides templates and exercises on how to become a better writer. I particularly enjoyed the examples they use to explain the wide range of uses for this model.

The authors talk about how to take an opinion or piece of conversation and set it up so that you can later refute it. It is also important on how to respond to the opposing opinion. You don’t necessarily need to strictly agree or disagree with the opinion. There are templates where you can agree with some points and disagree with others. They even use this model while explaining it. There are those who say that the “They Say/I Say” model is too restrictive and stifles creativity. However, they give plenty of evidence as to why it is helpful to follow such a model, and how it can still allow the user plenty of free reign. Another important aspect is that you can’t just state how you feel about a certain issue: you must state why you think so. Even if a viewpoint seems obvious, you must state your rationale behind your thinking.

The templates and instructions that the authors give in this reading are extremely useful in writing a paper. I will definitely use some of these templates when writing papers in the future. 

Group Update 4/9/13

My group is on our way to finishing the rough draft. We are all writing separate sections, but we are going to put them together by the weekend. Everything is coming along quite well. There have not been any major problems with the group yet. Everyone is working on their individual sections diligently, and I am happy with the progress we have made. At this pace, we should have no problem finishing the paper and presentation on time. I am excited to see the fruits of our labor. This has been a very interesting topic that I enjoy researching and writing about. Similarly, I like my group members and appreciate the interests and work ethics we share. 

Group Update 4/1/13

This week, we finished up the project proposal and we are almost done with our research. We will continue searching and reading for another week or so, and then we will create an outline for the paper based on the research. So far, everyone in the group seems dedicated and excited about the project. It is a very interesting topic and I am glad to be working with people who share my enthusiasm for artificial intelligence.

The official topic of our research paper will cover the ethics of artificial intelligence. We will discuss the different implications “strong AI” may have on our society. “Strong AI” is a term used to define artificial intelligence that has gained a consciousness or personality. The moral, and possibly even political, issues that may arise from the construction of “strong AI” may be something that humans will have to deal with in the nearby future. 

Group Meeting Post

Our group met online, via Facebook, during class on Thursday. We had decided beforehand that we were all interested in the Robots, Computing, and Artificial Intelligence topic. When we met, we first tried to find an issue that we could center our project around. After searching different online resources, we found many articles relating to the ethical debate surrounding artificial intelligence. Investigating further, we found many sources that we could use, including a few books. We all agreed that this was a fascinating and thought-provoking subject that we could learn and write about.

Qing took a leadership role that started things off. Shan provided tons of extremely useful information for the group. I tried to help guide the conversation with Qing and I found a few of my own sources, but I mostly negotiated with the group to lead them towards a common goal. For some reason, Damian was not present for the conversation, even though we added him to the Facebook chat and previously discussed it. Nonetheless, it was a productive conversation and we got a good start on our research. 

Week 7 Blog Post

Part 1:

The topics that I choose are:

Robots, Computing, Artificial Intelligence:

            Being a computer science major, I am very interested in how computers work. Artificial intelligence is a subject that intrigues me very much, and although I know quite a bit about it, I would always love to learn more about it.

The End of the World:

            The end of the world is another fascinating topic that has always captivated me. There are so many different ways the world may end, and there are just many scientific and religious implications that tie into this subject.

Psychology and Neuropsychology:

            The human mind is the most powerful and amazing computer the world has ever seen. The billions of billions of neural connections allow the brain to receive, analyze, and store an incredible amount of information. Analyzing the human brain can be a lot like examining a computer, so this topic is another that peaks my interest.

Part 2:

These are the articles I found relating to the topics above:

Robots, Computing, Artificial Intelligence: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/26/technology/in-a-big-network-of-computers-evidence-of-machine-learning.html?ref=artificialintelligence

This NY Times article discusses a Google project that linked 16,000 computer processors to simulate the human brain. This vast network was turned to the internet, and from there, it taught itself to recognize cats. The main achievement of this was that at no point, did anyone from the research team define what a cat is for this network; it created its own definition by studying images pulled from millions of YouTube videos. This project was a giant step for the machine learning community.

The End of the World: http://www.convergingzone.com/technology/12-ways-the-world-could-really-end-in-2012-by-jeff-wise/

This article talks about some of the different ways the world might possibly end. Some of the listed apocalypses are well known ones, such as asteroid impact, nuclear war, and pandemic. Tons of movies, books, and other forms of media have been published using these forms of disaster as plot devices. Other less familiar scenarios are ocean acidification, an artificial black hole, and the X factor, which can be anything that scientists simply don’t know about the universe. For anyone who’s interested in the many theories, and how they work, this article is a great read.

Psychology and Neuropsychology: http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/199501/its-magical-its-malleable-its-memory

In this article, Jill Neimark writes about how memory may not be as reliable as we may think. We rely on memory so much through-out the day, but we never really think about whether it may be right or not. Over time, memories get fuzzy and unclear. Even if an event has just occurred, people will remember that event differently because everyone has a different point of view. Memories can be changed or altered depending on their review, as in the case of Elizabeth Loftus in this article. 

John Slaughter revisits the changing face of engineering

As a computer science major, I do not deny the importance of STEM majors. Slaughter made a very good argument as to why diversity in the engineering field needs to continue growing. Getting people from all different backgrounds helps broaden the collective viewpoint of everyone in the field of study.  When more observations or points of view are considered, people can make better decisions when trying to solve problems. More importantly, they will be able to understand which problems need addressing. That way, more people can be helped through the scientific progress brought by the new, diverse generation of engineers and scientists.

Later in the article, Slaughter mentions the importance of the humanities, and how engineers and scientists need to be refined in social, ethical, and cultural aspects. Again, I agree with many of the points that he made. People working in the scientific field cannot only have a scientific understanding. They need to be able to apply this understanding to how their scientific progress affects the world. If they do think about the implications their work can have on humanity, disastrous consequences may arise. For example, the Manhattan Project was a giant step in the world of physics. Scientifically, it was a major success in harnessing the power of the atom. However, the way it was used to end World War II is still morally unclear today. The Cold War was another unseen side-effect of the development of nuclear weapons. No one is sure whether it could have been avoided, but we can learn from history and make sure that our current engineers and scientists are more knowledgeable in the humanities, so that they may bring the world into a more hopeful future. 

Letter from Birmingham Jail

King’s eloquent writing certainly has the ability to captivate his audience, much like his speaking. Many of the ideas King presented in his “Letter from Birmingham Jail” echoed the philosophies of Gandhi wrote of in “Satyagraha.” King wrote to his fellow clergymen about the civil rights movement he was participating in and the injustice of segregation going on in Birmingham at the time. He said that he was disappointed that the church did not support the civil rights movement. King also explained the power of non-violent resistance and why it was so important that they follow it. This flowed very well with other Gandhi ideas, such as suffering punishment for disobeying an unjust law. However, there were a few factors that separated King from Gandhi. Aside from the two different tasks they tried to achieve, King was a devout Christian and reverend. He spoke of many Biblical scenarios and applied them to the current day. King was also a much better presenter than Gandhi. His writing is more intriguing and King was well known for his powerful and moving speeches. Although Gandhi was a revolutionary in the idea of non-violent resistance, he was not as charismatic as the African-American activist. 

Satyagraha

I really enjoyed reading Gandhi’s Satyagraha. I agree with a lot of the points he made. Passive resistance, or the use of the soul-force, is a powerful tool against those who rely on brute force. If you are facing a much stronger enemy, then there is no point in trying to use physical strength against him. However, soul-force is an unexpected tactic that confuses opponents and makes a strong message.

            The reader/editor parts were especially interesting. I’m not sure if Gandhi actually took those reader comments from people he’s dealt with, or if he made up those counter-arguments. Either way, they were very effective in proving his point. Though the reader seemed to know what he was talking about, the editor used many different examples to prove him wrong. Not to sound like a hippy, but peace, love, and positive emotions are always stronger and healthier than war, hate, and negative emotions. 

The Concept of Discourse Communities

            This was a very tough read. The language was very dense and I had to sometimes read over certain passages several times just to get the gist of it. However, once I got through it, I enjoyed several aspects of discourse communities. I also appreciated the introductory “Framing the Reading” part, because it helped explain and prepare most of the reading for me. It defined some of the terms Swales used, which helped when trying to decipher the piece.

            The six criteria Swales outlined made it a bit easier to understand what exactly a discourse community is. These six characteristics: goals, mechanisms, transfer of information, genres, lexis, and changing membership, define what can be a discourse community. It was interesting to read about the different groups that Swales classified. The Hong Kong Study Circle and café owners are discourse communities, but political parties and people who work at a certain university, are not discourse communities.

            Now I wonder what groups I may be involved in that are considered discourse communities. One example that I can think of may be musical composers. I write music for my band, but I have written music for all types of instruments, so I consider myself a composer. The goal of all composers is to write and share music. We use mechanisms of intercommunication like different musical terminology. The music that we write could be considered the information that we try to communicate with these mechanisms. When I first read genre, I immediately thought of musical genres, but composers have their own genre (in Swales' definition) that they understand rhetorical situations with. There are many lexis and terms specifically created for the composition of music. Last but not least, there are always new and upcoming composers, such as myself, slowly replacing the modern and experienced composers, such as Eric Whitacre (I could only dream). Going through the six requirements, I believe I have correctly established musical composers as a discourse community. 

Writing Assignment 1: Introduction

            My brother, my father, and I used to watch a show called “Deadliest Warrior”, where scientists, historians, and weapons specialists, tried to see which two historical warriors, or groups of warriors, would win in combat. The matches ranged from Viking vs. Samurai to Green Berets vs. Spetsnaz. This historical “versus” situation could be applied to other questions, such as “who was the best leader?” One particular example is the comparison between Lao- Tzu and Niccolo Machiavelli.  Both have written works concerning the topic of leadership, although they are dramatically different. They could both be applied to modern society and analyzed to see who would better run a country in the Western world.

            Lao Tzu’s style of leadership incorporated Taoist ideals. Many of these ideals could be useful to the modern government, especially with the financial crisis we are currently in. However, ideals are not always applicable to the real world. Lao Tzu endorses a lot of passive leadership, which can be difficult to enact in a large Western government with many factions. Machiavelli’s style of leadership is much more centralized and requires a strong ruler. His Prince is an expert of war and would put the protection of his people as his number one priority. This exceptional familiarity with wartime history and strategy would be helpful in the current times of our nation sending soldiers to places that may hardly concern us. On the other hand, Machiavelli’s rule comes with a complete lack of morality that, although would be hidden from the general public, makes him unfit to lead a nation into a future of social and technological progress. Even though the versus situation calls for a winner, this question is not so simple. Both Lao Tzu’s Master and Machiavelli’s Prince have definite flaws that would hinder them from becoming successful leaders in a modern Western country. 

Lao-tzu and Machiavelli

Lao-tzu’s “Thoughts from the Tao’te Ching” spoke mostly about how a Master should lead, or better yet, not lead, his people. Lao-tzu stresses the importance of several ideas. One of them is that government should play a small to non-existent role in society. He believes that humans are peace loving creatures that work best under no restrictions. If you try to tell people to do something, if it is something good, then those people will go astray. To do this, Lao-tzu says that a good leader must rely on the Tao: in other words, go with the flow. Do not try to control the situation; just let things happen naturally and everything will turn out alright. Another idea that Lao-tzu mentions often is that of non-violence. He says that nothing good comes from violence. Violence only erupts in fear, so a strong leader must rely on peace and hope, rather than war, to resolve conflicts.

Machiavelli’s “The Qualities of the Prince” was a completely different read. He had many different points to make as to what qualifies a good leader. He says a prince, or a successful ruler, should be a military man who is always ready for war. He also lists other qualities a prince should have, such as knowledge of history, charisma, power, reputation, etc. Overall, a prince should be someone who is thought of as very charming and good, while they should always be ready to make difficult choices that may seem evil. This embodies Machiavelli’s most famous idea, “the ends justify the means.”

After reading these two works, I was not sure which one I agreed with more. Even though Lao-tzu paints humanity in a positive light, I am not sure that the simple mindset of a Taoist leader would actually be successful, especially in this day and age. On the other hand, Machiavelli’s prince seemed like a two-headed snake that would thrive in the modern world of government conspiracies, mass media conglomerates, and multi-billion corporations. However, there seems to be little moral or ethical guidance in this prince. All actions are taken out of necessity to stay in power. Even though it may seem like they are acting for the good of the people, the prince is actually acting just so they stay “happy” and won’t overthrow him. The people that he rules over aren’t actually free or truly happy. As interesting and pondering as both leaders were, neither the Master nor the Prince seemed to fulfill my requirements as a righteous and successful leader. 

Globalization: The Super Story

"Globalization: The Super-Story", by Thomas L. Friedman, discusses how everything is connected in today’s society. I find his organization of the global system very interesting. The balance between superpowers, supermarkets, and super-empowered individuals, shows how humanity has developed technologically and ideologically into the 21^st Century. With the advances of the internet and mass media, people have been able to find a voice to spread their thoughts. Along with technology, we now consider the idea that one person can make a difference in the world. Hundreds of years ago, people could only consider royalty of such importance. The everyday human would not feel like they were of much significance to the world. Nowadays, most people think that everyone is important and anyone can make a difference.

          The super-empowered individuals that Friedman talks about are on par with nation-states. Osama Bin Laden organized the largest terrorist attack in American history. Jody Williams won the Nobel Peace Prize by organizing an international coalition against land mines. However, most people are not on par with Nobel Prize winners or superpowers. Still, we like to think that everyone makes a difference in their own way. Whether it’s helping society progress or actually hindering progress, every person has the potential to make the world a radically different place. I like to think that my pursuit of an education towards computer science will help me be able to change the way computers work and innovate our technology so that it may become more useful or more relevant in the future. On a different note, I am also a musician and a writer because I enjoy communicating my feelings into words and sounds that other people can relate to. I feel that this other contribution towards the arts is just as important as advancing our technology.

          The concept of super-empowered individuals is what really caught my interest in this reading. Although I understand that the main point is about globalization, and I comprehend the impact that everything has upon everything else, I feel like sometimes we forget that we are all connected into the grand scheme of life. Every day that we spend, every moment that we live, every decision that we make: it all matters.