In my opinion an idea is something that comes from a thought. It’s also something that can have more than one part. I think it’s really just a thought that caught our interest. Ideas can come in many forms, it can be something you see in your mind, such as the thought of a new invention. I also believe it could be something that is just words. Actually It doesn’t have to be a picture of something or word it could be a decision that one makes such as deciding what they want to do when they are finished with school.
In my opinion a thought is a little bit different than an idea as it isn’t something that a person really has to run with. It’s really whatever someone is thinking about at one time. These can be very simple such as reading the titles of textbooks. More often they only exist for a few seconds, but I think if someone is intrigued enough with their thought they can do more with it and this is where it eventually becomes an idea.
I think that these things come from our mind. Our minds develop them from anything we experience whether it because we saw something that we thought was amazing or just because we put something in our mouth that didn’t taste good. I believe this is where a thought stops and an idea goes a little bit further. A person spends a little bit more time on idea, because they see something in it, whether they find it entertaining or they just think something could be done with it.
I believe just because something that comes from a thought becomes an idea does not make it legitimate. But, to question whether something is an idea or not is in fact just an idea itself. So what makes one idea better than the other? Also the person who originally had an idea will defend why they come up with it if there is indeed a confrontation. I think this a good example of ideas coming off one another even though it is rather negative. I would normally picture ideas coming off of one another in more of a positive way. This is how inventions today often come about. An example of an idea coming from another idea is the typewriter and how it has managed to develop into the computers that we have today. There is also the concept of the wheel. The wheel as we know it today has been the same for decades. Specifically how it helps in transportation. But, this idea has been around for thousands of years and was regularly improved upon as time went on. I think this shows how idea building even off other people’s ideas has been around for while.
Tuesday, August 31, 2010
Week 2 Blog Reviews
Sandra Barocio- I really like the way you formatted your answer in the post about whether or not we can be good without god. You didn’t give a direct answer of yes or no until the end of the last paragraph, this helped you keep me intrigued throughout the entire post. It was also interesting because of how you explained different theories of why people act the way they do. Especially when you explained how even though someone could do something bad, in your example it was someone stealing bread, they could always be doing it to help someone or something that isn’t themselves this case it’s their family.
Amity Connolly- In your blog from the 24th I really liked your analogy of how there were layers of how you acted and they came out in different social situations. I think it is a very good way of explaining it and I believe your right in the idea that we act differently depending on the social setting. I also thought asking the reader a question was interesting and a good idea as it really made me think about what the difference would be between seeing you in person and how it would be different than just seeing your blog. In the blog from the 26th, I was interested in how you proved your idea because you did it well buy using your own knowledge of Catholicism and you were able to connect this with the statistic of Catholicism being the most criminal group.
Amara Villa-Rodriguez- I thought your blog from the 26th was interesting as you questioned a lot of things and it really read like a blog. There was no straight answer of yes or no until the end. Instead you questioned whether it was really a religious issue instead you found it was more of circumstantial one. In your blog from the 24th I liked your idea of knowing someone online as only knowing a piece of them. I was able to understand what you meant by this because of how you explained both meeting someone online and in person in the paragraphs that followed.
Amity Connolly- In your blog from the 24th I really liked your analogy of how there were layers of how you acted and they came out in different social situations. I think it is a very good way of explaining it and I believe your right in the idea that we act differently depending on the social setting. I also thought asking the reader a question was interesting and a good idea as it really made me think about what the difference would be between seeing you in person and how it would be different than just seeing your blog. In the blog from the 26th, I was interested in how you proved your idea because you did it well buy using your own knowledge of Catholicism and you were able to connect this with the statistic of Catholicism being the most criminal group.
Amara Villa-Rodriguez- I thought your blog from the 26th was interesting as you questioned a lot of things and it really read like a blog. There was no straight answer of yes or no until the end. Instead you questioned whether it was really a religious issue instead you found it was more of circumstantial one. In your blog from the 24th I liked your idea of knowing someone online as only knowing a piece of them. I was able to understand what you meant by this because of how you explained both meeting someone online and in person in the paragraphs that followed.
Thursday, August 26, 2010
Do We Need God to Keep Us in Line?
I don’t believe it is necessary to have God in order to be good. I think this because all really God is the idea that there is something bigger than us and that it has the power to control our eternal fate. There is no physical presence that is stopping anyone from doing anything. I think people who aren’t religious are still able to realize there are laws and there are people who will physically enforce these laws if they were to be broken. I think if you took someone who believed in some form of God, and they wanted something that didn’t belong to them and had no way of getting it legally, their reason for eventually not taking it would either be the fear of punishment from the law or having an idea for how the other person would feel once they realized what belonged to them was missing. There would probably be very little thinking of “how would God think of me if I did that?”. I think the person would end up thinking about God if they did steal something because they started to feel guilty for what they did. If this is true for most people I think that’s very selfish. I think that’s very selfish because there reason for feeling bad now, is because they are afraid they will be punished by someone they are trying impress and has authority over them. Of course there would be some who do think of God first, but I believe that number isn’t very many. I believe this statement because I’m religious and have been guilty of fearing punishment or hurting others before wondering what God would think.
I think Lisa Conyers and Phillip D. Harvey in their article “Religion and Crime: Do They Go Together” gives good data to back up the fact that someone does not necessarily need God to be good. Especially after they use entire countries and compare things such as the percentage of people who consider themselves religious and how many murders occur for every 100,000 people. (65)The United States seems to be the major country that is most religious with the exception of Ireland and Italy. Yet it has higher murder rate per 100,000 people than any other.(65) I don’t think this is telling us that people who are religious are bad people who murder, but instead it is telling us that a lot people in our country become religious because their afraid of what is going to happen to them . I think it is telling us this because even though people are joining religious groups they aren’t acting the same as what has been thought of as the behavior for someone who believes in God.
I also think that it is the meaning of being good differs between people who believe in different things. The average person who does not believe in a God will really only have the laws to tell him what to do. Those who are religious will have to look at both the laws and what their religion is telling them to do. Unfortunately when it comes to religion those in a religion believe they are right and everyone else is only partially right or wrong completely. Unfortunately because people often fear what is different, they fear those who are different religion and those who aren’t religious at all. That isn’t to say that non-religious people don’t ever think that religious people are weird or something along those lines, but it just seems to me that it’s the religious groups that go to extremes against others. Overall, I think those who are non-religious can be good and more so than those who do believe in God.
I think Lisa Conyers and Phillip D. Harvey in their article “Religion and Crime: Do They Go Together” gives good data to back up the fact that someone does not necessarily need God to be good. Especially after they use entire countries and compare things such as the percentage of people who consider themselves religious and how many murders occur for every 100,000 people. (65)The United States seems to be the major country that is most religious with the exception of Ireland and Italy. Yet it has higher murder rate per 100,000 people than any other.(65) I don’t think this is telling us that people who are religious are bad people who murder, but instead it is telling us that a lot people in our country become religious because their afraid of what is going to happen to them . I think it is telling us this because even though people are joining religious groups they aren’t acting the same as what has been thought of as the behavior for someone who believes in God.
I also think that it is the meaning of being good differs between people who believe in different things. The average person who does not believe in a God will really only have the laws to tell him what to do. Those who are religious will have to look at both the laws and what their religion is telling them to do. Unfortunately when it comes to religion those in a religion believe they are right and everyone else is only partially right or wrong completely. Unfortunately because people often fear what is different, they fear those who are different religion and those who aren’t religious at all. That isn’t to say that non-religious people don’t ever think that religious people are weird or something along those lines, but it just seems to me that it’s the religious groups that go to extremes against others. Overall, I think those who are non-religious can be good and more so than those who do believe in God.
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
The Real Difference
The first impression I make in a traditional format class is explained well by Erving Goffman in his article “The Presentation of Self”. He explains how people have “carriers” this is how someone looks and how the act. This gives a lot of information to a person whether this information is true or not remains to be seen .(42,43) For me personally I’m rather quiet and have a hard time talking to strangers and I know there are others like that too so most of the information people get from me in traditional format classes is from my carriers. Also in classes really the most important thing is listing to the instructor it’s hard to find time to really get to know someone unless you sit near them the entire semester. In a class like our English class you get to see what other people tell you about themselves in writing and there are less carriers to go from because it’s really only pictures that a another student can see. Also I had the opportunity to really take time and go through what I did want to let others know about me and what I didn’t want others to know about me, as I think most people would because they want to give off the best impression possible.
Even though there’s is no physical interaction between students who are in online classes, impressions are still made either way. I think the impression someone gets from in a traditional format class is more accurate though as there really is no chance for some to come off exactly as they want to unlike online classes where you have the ability to edit what you are going to show others thoroughly before you allow them to see what your wrote and form an opinion about you. Goffman backs this up when he declares that the “real attitudes, beliefs and attitudes “ are shown when someone gives off “avowels” . This is what someone gives off that isn’t thought out and they probably didn’t even realize that there giving this off. (43) I think these signs are important as you can you really tell if a certain person is someone who you would want to interact with. There are plenty of people who like the same things as you and have similar stories, but this does not automatically mean there will be a real connection and that is really the only thing you have to go off when you first look at someone else’s blog.
I don’t think that you can truly know someone without meeting them is person. Although I do think that the interaction that people have over the internet allows them to be more than strangers. Charles Horton Cooley in his article “Primary Groups” wrote a quote I really like “one lives in the feeling of the whole and finds the chief aims of his will in that feeling.” (38) In this quote the whole is referring to a primary group which is a group where people meet in person. (38) I think referring to it as the whole puts it in good perspective. When it comes to online interaction there could be any range of how much you know someone or don’t know them, but I don’t believe you will ever have the entire picture of who someone his without meeting them in person. I think this can be seen when you meet someone online whether it be our blog, Facebook or any other social networking tool and then meet them in person, I’ve had experiences where after meeting someone online first and then meeting them in person they turn out to be a lot different than I thought they would be and I’m confident other people have had similar experiences.
Even though there’s is no physical interaction between students who are in online classes, impressions are still made either way. I think the impression someone gets from in a traditional format class is more accurate though as there really is no chance for some to come off exactly as they want to unlike online classes where you have the ability to edit what you are going to show others thoroughly before you allow them to see what your wrote and form an opinion about you. Goffman backs this up when he declares that the “real attitudes, beliefs and attitudes “ are shown when someone gives off “avowels” . This is what someone gives off that isn’t thought out and they probably didn’t even realize that there giving this off. (43) I think these signs are important as you can you really tell if a certain person is someone who you would want to interact with. There are plenty of people who like the same things as you and have similar stories, but this does not automatically mean there will be a real connection and that is really the only thing you have to go off when you first look at someone else’s blog.
I don’t think that you can truly know someone without meeting them is person. Although I do think that the interaction that people have over the internet allows them to be more than strangers. Charles Horton Cooley in his article “Primary Groups” wrote a quote I really like “one lives in the feeling of the whole and finds the chief aims of his will in that feeling.” (38) In this quote the whole is referring to a primary group which is a group where people meet in person. (38) I think referring to it as the whole puts it in good perspective. When it comes to online interaction there could be any range of how much you know someone or don’t know them, but I don’t believe you will ever have the entire picture of who someone his without meeting them in person. I think this can be seen when you meet someone online whether it be our blog, Facebook or any other social networking tool and then meet them in person, I’ve had experiences where after meeting someone online first and then meeting them in person they turn out to be a lot different than I thought they would be and I’m confident other people have had similar experiences.
Thursday, August 19, 2010
More about the Man
My name is Richard Kriebel. I'm from Souderton, Pennsylvania it is a suburb of Philadelphia. I'm majoring in Speech and Hearing and intend on going into Audiology. I've enjoyed my time at Arizona State very much, but I hope to transfer back to school closer to home preferably Temple
I enjoy sports very much I ran both track and cross country in high school, and enjoy other sports such as baseball and basketball. I've like hanging with friends and watching TV during my down time specifically Top Chef and Project Runway believe it or not.
If you met me you would notice right away that I'm shy and it would take me a little while to open up to you. I've noticed that shyness sometimes comes of as someone being snob and rude. Please do not think that of me I apologize if I come off as being a snob or being rude..
I also love dogs and cats with a slight edge towards cats. My love for them can be made seebny the fact that I have four cats and three dogs..
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)