Topic: Hijack!
Terrorism is an intolerable act of carnage against humanity. Suppose terrorists hijack an airliner full of passengers. In exchange for the passengers’ safe release, they want specific convicted criminals to be released from the custody of the United States government. Government policy states that terrorists will not be negotiated with, and the acts they afflict on a minority would be acceptable to prevent a greater massacre. It would pain me greatly to have even one of our citizen’s die from terrorists, if the decision were in my hands, but there is no other reasonable option. I would not be able to allow their demands to be met, because their actions of destruction are not livable and making deals goes against policy, however, every effort would be made to have the safe return of the hostages.
Living with terrorism every day means the injury or death of those we love, or those we do not even know. This is not bearable for most that are in the situation where a friend or loved one has been lost to a terrorist act. When you look at the bigger picture though, it would be better for those loved ones to die in that airliner than for an entire city to be wiped out. A close example of this would be the 9-11 attacks, especially in the case of Flight 93. According to reports, the passengers on that flight knew that if they allowed the hijackers to complete their objective, then more lives than their own would be lost. They acknowledged minority and majority comparison, and its consequences.
The effects of terrorism, and the damage caused, is why there are policies in the United States specifically made for preventing the continuance of terrorist activity. This nation does not and will not make deals with terrorists. It will do everything it can to keep the people in our country safe, and take necessary steps towards our protection. Some of those steps entail financial assets being frozen to known terrorist organizations, discontinuing material support from allies of the terrorists, waging battles against them, and informing and getting support from other countries who need to help in the implementation of these steps. When planes are hijacked, the government can only try very hard to find a way to bring hostages home safely. The only reasonable choice available is for our country to never give in to terrorism, because after that, it will be expected that we will always give in. We cannot concede to terror.
In my decision, it was more calculated than morally based. When it comes to the protection of a nation from terrorism, the greater good must come before personal values. Terrorists need to be stopped in anyway possible, so massacres like 9-11 will not occur again. We, as a country, should not have to live in terror, but we have to make the sacrifices needed to live safer lives. The policies have been made, and if those policies are followed, then our country will be better off in the long run. With this, the demands of terrorists’ nation wide will not be met.
Tuesday, January 30, 2007
Tuesday, January 23, 2007
Factors
Topic: Right or Wrong?
Deciding whether something is right or wrong can sometimes be difficult for me, because I see shades of grey. I believe there are absolute rights and wrongs, however, some wrongs may be justified depending on the factors involved. This is where I see the shades of grey, when wrong and right are black and white, being the absolutes; and the grey is the wrongs for the right reasons and the rights for the wrong reasons, relative to the person making the decisions. A moral relativist believes that there are no absolutes, and the person making the choice has the right to decide within their own morals and cultural values. A moral absolutist believes in universal absolutes, and rights and wrongs should not be decided upon by the limitations of their own morals or cultural values. I am twisted between both. So to decide which I am more like, moral relativist or moral absolutist, I need to examine the process by which I come to my conclusion of rightness or wrongness.
For example, I do not agree with abortion because it is murder, unless the moral circumstances permit a substantial reason for it. So, suppose a 17 year old female, who is a senior in high school and has a weekend job, is raped and becomes pregnant. She is the middle child of 5 and her parents are barely making ends meet in the home. She makes the decision to get an abortion, even though her family said they would disown her if she did. To her family, abortion was an absolute wrong, a crime. When I look on this situation, I see grey. I think, since she was raped, and she has no money to properly care for a child, and she is still in school, she should have the abortion, if that is her choice. It was not her fault she was raped and became pregnant. Her situation would be a wrong doing but for the right reasons. Now suppose another 17 year old female, who was also a senior in high school but did not have a job, decided to go out, have some fun, and get pregnant from not using protection. Her family was wealthy and she was an only child. She makes the decision to get an abortion, without her family knowing about it. When I look on this instance, I see no grey. Her decision would be unjustified and immoral because it was her fault. I would disagree completely with her having an abortion since she has the money of her family to properly raise the child, and she needs to understand the consequences of her mistake. Her situation would be an absolute wrong.
My process for looking at an activity, to determine if what’s right or wrong, is first saying if I agree or disagree, and for what reason. Then, I look at the different circumstances that occur, and the decision a person makes about it. Finally, I decide if their decision was right or wrong based on how significant or severe the factors were. I see more shades of grey than black and white, and I believe more in how the situation’s severity being a key factor in the decision of rightness or wrongness. I would say that I am more of a “moral relativist” than a “moral absolutist” after looking at my process of deciding between right and wrong.
Deciding whether something is right or wrong can sometimes be difficult for me, because I see shades of grey. I believe there are absolute rights and wrongs, however, some wrongs may be justified depending on the factors involved. This is where I see the shades of grey, when wrong and right are black and white, being the absolutes; and the grey is the wrongs for the right reasons and the rights for the wrong reasons, relative to the person making the decisions. A moral relativist believes that there are no absolutes, and the person making the choice has the right to decide within their own morals and cultural values. A moral absolutist believes in universal absolutes, and rights and wrongs should not be decided upon by the limitations of their own morals or cultural values. I am twisted between both. So to decide which I am more like, moral relativist or moral absolutist, I need to examine the process by which I come to my conclusion of rightness or wrongness.
For example, I do not agree with abortion because it is murder, unless the moral circumstances permit a substantial reason for it. So, suppose a 17 year old female, who is a senior in high school and has a weekend job, is raped and becomes pregnant. She is the middle child of 5 and her parents are barely making ends meet in the home. She makes the decision to get an abortion, even though her family said they would disown her if she did. To her family, abortion was an absolute wrong, a crime. When I look on this situation, I see grey. I think, since she was raped, and she has no money to properly care for a child, and she is still in school, she should have the abortion, if that is her choice. It was not her fault she was raped and became pregnant. Her situation would be a wrong doing but for the right reasons. Now suppose another 17 year old female, who was also a senior in high school but did not have a job, decided to go out, have some fun, and get pregnant from not using protection. Her family was wealthy and she was an only child. She makes the decision to get an abortion, without her family knowing about it. When I look on this instance, I see no grey. Her decision would be unjustified and immoral because it was her fault. I would disagree completely with her having an abortion since she has the money of her family to properly raise the child, and she needs to understand the consequences of her mistake. Her situation would be an absolute wrong.
My process for looking at an activity, to determine if what’s right or wrong, is first saying if I agree or disagree, and for what reason. Then, I look at the different circumstances that occur, and the decision a person makes about it. Finally, I decide if their decision was right or wrong based on how significant or severe the factors were. I see more shades of grey than black and white, and I believe more in how the situation’s severity being a key factor in the decision of rightness or wrongness. I would say that I am more of a “moral relativist” than a “moral absolutist” after looking at my process of deciding between right and wrong.
Tuesday, January 16, 2007
Seeing Better
Topic: Perception
I believe perception is an individual's understanding or insight. Gorgias said that objective perception is impossible. For me, this means a person cannot have any subjectivity. To be subjective is completely opposite of being objective; perception in itself is a person’s subjectivities, biases, or tastes. Socrates said it is highly unlikely, not impossible. My view of what he argued on this topic is, if a person understands his or her subjectivities, and how they might interfere with what he or she sees as truth and reality, then one may come closer than another to perceiving what is true and false.
Everyone in this world is an individual. They have their own perceptions on what is truth, and everyone has that right as a human being. I have too many subjectivities, biases, or tastes to state in one sitting. I will only name a few, especially those that relate to major topics in today’s society. Something important to me is the war in Iraq. I disagree with the way the war has taken shape, and some of the events that have occurred because of it. A big distaste with it is all the people who have died on both sides, but that is war; I know that. Another thing I know is that I am more biased to not having a war period, because my boyfriend is in the army and he will be deploying to Iraq sometime in March. With this in mind, I can set aside my biases and look at the war at hand. I think, in this case, to help reduce the threat of terrorism and their control over others, we must do all that we can; if war and helping a civilization of people form a government are those means, then it must be done.
Another topic of importance is the schools in the United States. It is my understanding that teachers’ opinions are not heeded as often as parents’ opinions are. The teachers in our school are the ones who have a better idea of what kind of curriculums should be administered in each school. Would the parents be better suited for this? I believe not, because they are not the teachers who have to watch many of their students have trouble learning in one area or excelling in another. From what I see, some, not all, of our parents agree to issues or corrections on school teaching methods without gathering information to make a well informed decision. They should not only gather information from students, or other parents, but also from the teachers themselves or other administrators. In doing this, since they seem to have more power in these issues than what teachers have, they would actually help their children and not hinder them in the long run. I could be biased about this, however, because my Grandma is a teacher and I hear many of her complaints that might have become my own issues also. I do not know all of the facts; therefore, this topic is purely a perception and not an objective perception, while my first topic may be more objectively understood.
Irresponsible parents and the affect they have on their children is something that lies very close to home for me. I see too many parents divorcing for all the wrong reasons, and too many parents depending on their teenagers too often to take care of the younger kids. I do not see enough responsibility coming from a good percentage of parents these days. I am biased to believing this because I was in a similar situation over a year and a half ago when I was my sisters and brother’s stability, not their parents. I had the responsibility that no teenager should ever have to endure; the responsibility that is supposed to fall to the parents to take care of. I had to act somewhat like a parent to my siblings when I was in high school. My mother, during all this time, had to go to work early in the morning before anyone got up, and then get home in the evening to plop her lazy butt on the couch while I did the work of a parent (I was only the eldest sister). Then, my step-father would almost always be out on the road, since he was a truck driver. I might be biased in saying that a good number of parents are irresponsible, but I have a good reason in being that way; it affected my development. I did not want them to be in a bad situation without stability. If I put aside this experience and look at all the good I have seen in families and how my new family is, I would make a more objective perception; I would say that there is a good majority of parents who are responsible and do take care of the responsibilities bestowed on them when they became a parent. This example would have the greatest possibility of distorting my perceptions, because parents are the key to my world and making it what it is today.
Perception is what we see in life that may be sometimes more subjective than objective due to some of our experiences; the things we have seen or encountered or even learned in our lifetime. We view this as our own realities, but figuring out what is actually true or false in those realities is the challenge. When we gather information that can be shown or proven as true, only then can we understand or make decisions wisely. Wisdom comes through our own lifetime of experiences and also from what many have come to understand over the centuries that impact us personally such as Gorgias and Socrates.
I believe perception is an individual's understanding or insight. Gorgias said that objective perception is impossible. For me, this means a person cannot have any subjectivity. To be subjective is completely opposite of being objective; perception in itself is a person’s subjectivities, biases, or tastes. Socrates said it is highly unlikely, not impossible. My view of what he argued on this topic is, if a person understands his or her subjectivities, and how they might interfere with what he or she sees as truth and reality, then one may come closer than another to perceiving what is true and false.
Everyone in this world is an individual. They have their own perceptions on what is truth, and everyone has that right as a human being. I have too many subjectivities, biases, or tastes to state in one sitting. I will only name a few, especially those that relate to major topics in today’s society. Something important to me is the war in Iraq. I disagree with the way the war has taken shape, and some of the events that have occurred because of it. A big distaste with it is all the people who have died on both sides, but that is war; I know that. Another thing I know is that I am more biased to not having a war period, because my boyfriend is in the army and he will be deploying to Iraq sometime in March. With this in mind, I can set aside my biases and look at the war at hand. I think, in this case, to help reduce the threat of terrorism and their control over others, we must do all that we can; if war and helping a civilization of people form a government are those means, then it must be done.
Another topic of importance is the schools in the United States. It is my understanding that teachers’ opinions are not heeded as often as parents’ opinions are. The teachers in our school are the ones who have a better idea of what kind of curriculums should be administered in each school. Would the parents be better suited for this? I believe not, because they are not the teachers who have to watch many of their students have trouble learning in one area or excelling in another. From what I see, some, not all, of our parents agree to issues or corrections on school teaching methods without gathering information to make a well informed decision. They should not only gather information from students, or other parents, but also from the teachers themselves or other administrators. In doing this, since they seem to have more power in these issues than what teachers have, they would actually help their children and not hinder them in the long run. I could be biased about this, however, because my Grandma is a teacher and I hear many of her complaints that might have become my own issues also. I do not know all of the facts; therefore, this topic is purely a perception and not an objective perception, while my first topic may be more objectively understood.
Irresponsible parents and the affect they have on their children is something that lies very close to home for me. I see too many parents divorcing for all the wrong reasons, and too many parents depending on their teenagers too often to take care of the younger kids. I do not see enough responsibility coming from a good percentage of parents these days. I am biased to believing this because I was in a similar situation over a year and a half ago when I was my sisters and brother’s stability, not their parents. I had the responsibility that no teenager should ever have to endure; the responsibility that is supposed to fall to the parents to take care of. I had to act somewhat like a parent to my siblings when I was in high school. My mother, during all this time, had to go to work early in the morning before anyone got up, and then get home in the evening to plop her lazy butt on the couch while I did the work of a parent (I was only the eldest sister). Then, my step-father would almost always be out on the road, since he was a truck driver. I might be biased in saying that a good number of parents are irresponsible, but I have a good reason in being that way; it affected my development. I did not want them to be in a bad situation without stability. If I put aside this experience and look at all the good I have seen in families and how my new family is, I would make a more objective perception; I would say that there is a good majority of parents who are responsible and do take care of the responsibilities bestowed on them when they became a parent. This example would have the greatest possibility of distorting my perceptions, because parents are the key to my world and making it what it is today.
Perception is what we see in life that may be sometimes more subjective than objective due to some of our experiences; the things we have seen or encountered or even learned in our lifetime. We view this as our own realities, but figuring out what is actually true or false in those realities is the challenge. When we gather information that can be shown or proven as true, only then can we understand or make decisions wisely. Wisdom comes through our own lifetime of experiences and also from what many have come to understand over the centuries that impact us personally such as Gorgias and Socrates.
Monday, January 8, 2007
Something New
I am a little new to the blog world. I used to own an account with xanga, but after a while became bored with it. I am not a person who likes to comment about my life everyday. Now, I have to write a blog telling about me, so I hope it turns out good. Today was my first day back in a school in what seems like forever; it was surprisingly fairly good. I think I will end up doing pretty good in all my classes, even though I am going to be working two part-time jobs also. I have always liked going to school, and college is school, only with more freedom and a lot more homework. My favorite subjects in primary school were English, Math, and Science. I am currently going to school to get a Bachelor's Degree of Arts for Game Art & Design. I want to design games because I love to draw; I have been doing it ever since I could pick up a crayon. If you gave me a choice, as a child, to play with animals and friends or to draw, I would choose the latter. It's a passion for me like writing is for authors. I like math a bunch and I am a quick learner with computers, which also comes into play in the game designing field. I also love to read, spend time with my boyfriend and family, and play video games like Eve Online or Ace Combat 5 on the PS2. I like to play soccer, hang out with my friends, watch television and movies, and fly my XPV Racer and too many other things to name at this time, because I should really get some rest for another long day tomorrow.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
