Monday, August 25, 2008
Monday, August 18, 2008
Monday, August 11, 2008
Thursday, August 7, 2008
He smells like
Fresh linens and lilacs
Comfort and calm
Relaxing my soul
The fight for freedom ceases
Finally
I am home.
Comfort and calm
Relaxing my soul
The fight for freedom ceases
Finally
I am home.
Wednesday, August 6, 2008
Reality: Congitive Perceptions or Absolute?
I am going to start out this blog with a few Webster’s definitions. I am doing this because I do not have my own working definitions and I plan on using these to help jump start my understanding and base for my argument…ahem…discussion.
Winning- 1successful or victorious, as in a contest. 2charming; engaging; pleasing
Reality- the state or quality of being real
I was watching television the other day when my dad came in the room. I think the last line the person said on the show was, “And thank you all for telling the truth.” My dad then promptly replies, “How does she know who was telling the truth and who was lying.” I said, “well I guess only they will know that.” He says, “Well I know how to always tell when someone is lying or being truthful.” This starts the, ahem, discussion.
Continuing, he says, “You start out with a series of questions. In that series state one question that you know the absolute truth. Watch their face as they answer, and if they are lying then you have their lying face. You will then know every time they lie. You will consequently know if they are lying to you currently or being truthful”
Well maybe this starts the discussion. My comment, “So do you ask a question that you know how they are going to answer as truth to them, or do you look for the answer that is truth to you?”
“No, Jenni, you ask a question that has an absolute answer.”
“Like what, because I could probably argue any answer.”
“That’s because you are argumentative (ouch to me by the way). No, like for an example…two guys get into a fist fight. One guy knocks the other guy out. He’s down for the count. Who wins? The guy that knocked the other one out.”
“ummm, well I don’t really agree. I think some people could say that the other one could have won, or that neither of them did.”
“Okay, I would LOVE to hear the dispute on that one. It would seem someone is wanting to engage in a battle of wits.”
That wasn’t the end, but instead of boring you with our otherwise heated conversation, I am bringing my argumentative ass here to type about it.
I am going to start with the first part of the situation that bothers me. It is the easiest for me to communicate my misunderstanding. I have a picture in my mind of two men fighting. I have no idea why they are fighting. I don’t need to. In my opinion neither of them are winners. Back to the Webster’s definition, winning is “charming, engaging and pleasing.” Fighting is in no way charming or pleasing. Although it could be considered engaging, I don’t think this is what Webster’s had in mind. Fighting is an animalistic show of aggression and dominance. Being domineering and aggressive is NOT charming. Think back to a time when you were being picked on or told you could not do something you wanted to do. Were you pleased? Charmed? Egh…no. I think my mom put it best when she said, “Well, what did they win?”
Moving on…The idea of absolutes.
In a world where reality is just a cognitive state of perception, how can there ever be one real absolute?
In Jean Piaget theory of learning, a person only truly sees what they know. To extend this example, I think about my car. I have the most obnoxious car in the world. It is bright pinky/purple. When I bought it my exact thoughts were, “well everyone will see me coming and know where I’ve been.” I have had the car for a year now. I have seen more than 20 of my same car on the west side of Indy. One even is owned by a person that works out at my gym. I never saw it before, but I never knew it existed. How could I have really seen something that I didn’t know was there to begin with? If someone is asking me random questions and I am not aware there is an absolute truth to any of the answers, then can I answer them absolutely truthful?
In a similar theory, William Ayers (and other elementary education researchers) believe that everything you learn is based upon previous knowledge. I say the word ball. You automatically see something that has a round shape. It can bounce, and is full of air. I say ball to a baby, is hears, “blakdofidlfk.” When you produce an object and call it ball, they baby says, “oooh, ball.” The baby still does not know it can bounce, or that it is full of air, or even that this shape is a round shape. These things the baby will come to know over time, through experience with the ball. Some of you might say, “Hold on a minute, not all balls are round.” Oh, yes, I know this. You have just helped me prove a point. In my reality all balls are round. In your reality not all balls are round. What, you want me to prove it? Okay…Football.
So I guess my true question is, can there ever be a true, absolute reality? If we ever could exist in this reality, would we have an opinion?
Right now, as it stands for me, there can’t be a true reality. There is a reality for me, one for you, and one for your neighbor. Maybe I live in a world of gray. Maybe that is my absolute. I would like to think I’m open to ideas and might change my mind. I guess it would have to depend on how it fits with my previous knowledge on the subject.
Winning- 1successful or victorious, as in a contest. 2charming; engaging; pleasing
Reality- the state or quality of being real
I was watching television the other day when my dad came in the room. I think the last line the person said on the show was, “And thank you all for telling the truth.” My dad then promptly replies, “How does she know who was telling the truth and who was lying.” I said, “well I guess only they will know that.” He says, “Well I know how to always tell when someone is lying or being truthful.” This starts the, ahem, discussion.
Continuing, he says, “You start out with a series of questions. In that series state one question that you know the absolute truth. Watch their face as they answer, and if they are lying then you have their lying face. You will then know every time they lie. You will consequently know if they are lying to you currently or being truthful”
Well maybe this starts the discussion. My comment, “So do you ask a question that you know how they are going to answer as truth to them, or do you look for the answer that is truth to you?”
“No, Jenni, you ask a question that has an absolute answer.”
“Like what, because I could probably argue any answer.”
“That’s because you are argumentative (ouch to me by the way). No, like for an example…two guys get into a fist fight. One guy knocks the other guy out. He’s down for the count. Who wins? The guy that knocked the other one out.”
“ummm, well I don’t really agree. I think some people could say that the other one could have won, or that neither of them did.”
“Okay, I would LOVE to hear the dispute on that one. It would seem someone is wanting to engage in a battle of wits.”
That wasn’t the end, but instead of boring you with our otherwise heated conversation, I am bringing my argumentative ass here to type about it.
I am going to start with the first part of the situation that bothers me. It is the easiest for me to communicate my misunderstanding. I have a picture in my mind of two men fighting. I have no idea why they are fighting. I don’t need to. In my opinion neither of them are winners. Back to the Webster’s definition, winning is “charming, engaging and pleasing.” Fighting is in no way charming or pleasing. Although it could be considered engaging, I don’t think this is what Webster’s had in mind. Fighting is an animalistic show of aggression and dominance. Being domineering and aggressive is NOT charming. Think back to a time when you were being picked on or told you could not do something you wanted to do. Were you pleased? Charmed? Egh…no. I think my mom put it best when she said, “Well, what did they win?”
Moving on…The idea of absolutes.
In a world where reality is just a cognitive state of perception, how can there ever be one real absolute?
In Jean Piaget theory of learning, a person only truly sees what they know. To extend this example, I think about my car. I have the most obnoxious car in the world. It is bright pinky/purple. When I bought it my exact thoughts were, “well everyone will see me coming and know where I’ve been.” I have had the car for a year now. I have seen more than 20 of my same car on the west side of Indy. One even is owned by a person that works out at my gym. I never saw it before, but I never knew it existed. How could I have really seen something that I didn’t know was there to begin with? If someone is asking me random questions and I am not aware there is an absolute truth to any of the answers, then can I answer them absolutely truthful?
In a similar theory, William Ayers (and other elementary education researchers) believe that everything you learn is based upon previous knowledge. I say the word ball. You automatically see something that has a round shape. It can bounce, and is full of air. I say ball to a baby, is hears, “blakdofidlfk.” When you produce an object and call it ball, they baby says, “oooh, ball.” The baby still does not know it can bounce, or that it is full of air, or even that this shape is a round shape. These things the baby will come to know over time, through experience with the ball. Some of you might say, “Hold on a minute, not all balls are round.” Oh, yes, I know this. You have just helped me prove a point. In my reality all balls are round. In your reality not all balls are round. What, you want me to prove it? Okay…Football.
So I guess my true question is, can there ever be a true, absolute reality? If we ever could exist in this reality, would we have an opinion?
Right now, as it stands for me, there can’t be a true reality. There is a reality for me, one for you, and one for your neighbor. Maybe I live in a world of gray. Maybe that is my absolute. I would like to think I’m open to ideas and might change my mind. I guess it would have to depend on how it fits with my previous knowledge on the subject.
Tuesday, August 5, 2008
Update on Alec
I know you all have been waiting patiently on an update on Alec. We just came back from a visit to Riley and his orthopedic surgeon. They took the temporary off, took some x-rays, and came back to tell us he is perfect (not that I didn’t already know this). Joking aside, his bones look solid and healthy. Even though they said they would probably cast him, they decided to leave him alone for now. I just have to keep an ever close eye on his activity to make sure he isn’t favoring his arm too much. If he does, then it is back to the drawing board. Thanks everyone for the prayers and well wishes…it meant the world to me.
Monday, August 4, 2008
Saturday, August 2, 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)