Wikipedophiles Of The World Unite

I want to talk about the New York Times article, "Seeing Corporate Fingerprints in Wikipedia Edits."

I really don't understand why there is so much controversy about Wikipedia and it's users ability to change it's content. I think most of the people who spend any amount of time on the Internet know what Wikipedia is all about. If you know that a site's content can be changed at any time by anyone, why would you be so surprised when someone makes changes? If I found fictitious information on me, I would want to change it...wouldn't you?

Nevertheless, corporations changing negative facts on their Wiki-Page is a whole different issue. The fact that Corporate America wants to slant it's Wikipedia information to better their public image is only a testament to their own corrupt nature.

Personally, I've never considered Wikipedia a credible source of information. However, I have done enough research of my own to know that most of the information on the sciences can be trusted. I've been to http://www.encyclopedia.com/ and http://www.nationalgeographic.com/ (two sites considered to be credible sources of data) and have found that people copy and paste their information onto Wikipedia.

Week 6 Muddiest Point

For this weeks muddiest point I wanted to talk about the article, "(White) Women We Love." I understand the general idea the writer, Eugene Robinson, is getting at. The fact that so much suffering and hardship permeates our world, our media seems to focus on the tragic stories of beautiful people. What I don't understand is why he chooses to label these women as damsels. Despite being right about our media's fixation on our comeliest citizens, he comes across a callous and unfeeling towards the plight of these victims. After all, most of these so-called damsels were raped, beaten, and in many cases murdered. I find it extremely offensive that he would degrade their suffering by referencing them in this way. I wonder how he would feel if a white man wrote an article entitled, "(Black) Women We Love," and referred to them in the same insensitive manner.

Abortion, an argument of fact or values

Although the argument for or against abortion is decades old, it is being argued as much now as it ever has been. Despite being zealously debated, the argument is one of values and belief systems and not one of facts (at least not enough to consider it an argument of facts). There are distinct differences between facts and values. Values are a part of an individual’s personal beliefs and can change from person to person. Facts on the other hand, are true statements that do not deviate from the data that comprise them. For example, an argument of facts would be one like Climate Change and an argument of values is one like Assisted Suicide. In order to persuade someone in an argument, you must be able to win them over with facts. However, if they are arguing with their beliefs, than you inevitably come to an impasse.  

Norman Shultz of beyondintractability.org has the following to say about such arguments:

“Because of the nature of their differences, factual issues and value issues will contribute different kinds of problems to a conflict. Parties must be able to sort these out, handling each type appropriately, in order to be able to address a conflict constructively.”

http://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/facts_values/.

Because abortion is an argument of values and beliefs and not one of facts, it will most likely go on with little to no change. Even though it is now legal, it doesn't change the fact that it is still hotly debated. No matter how I personally feel about it though, I just can’t see the end to this particular argument.

Week 5 Muddiest Point

For this weeks muddiest point, I wanted to talk about our conversations in class for week four. We reviewed Stephen Kings article about "Why We Love Horror Movies." He wrote that we love to see horror films so we can feel a sense of normality and we have the advantage of going to see acts of horror, but get to leave the theater safely. Some people in the class agreed with this idea...I didn't though. I wanted to say something, but when so many people have so much to say and only an hour to say it...I felt that it would be better to save what I had to say for this weeks muddiest point.

I don't think that most people go to see horror movies to feel normal. On the contrary, most people go to see horror movies because they love seeing human flesh hacked apart. They love to see blood squirting all over the place and to hear people begging for their lives. All one has to do is think of ancient Rome. The Gladiator games were the Roman version of horror films, but to greater scale. The Romans loved their Gladiator games and the spectacle of horror they saw.

You might think the Romans got to see tremendous acts of horror, but they had the advantage of leaving the Colosseum in safety...this was not true! Caligula, Nero, and Commodus were just a few of the Emperor's to randomly pull citizens out of stands and make them fight Gladiators to the death.

So why do people love horror films? I'll tell you why, it's because people love death and judgement. It's in our nature and if history has taught me anything about people it's this:

 "People are the same wherever you go." -Paul McCartney and Stevie Wonder