Furman Engaged

Furman Engaged was interesting, I suppose. I'd say it was pretty much what I was expecting, but then I really wasn't expecting much of anything. People had been mentioning it for a while, and most teachers included it in the syllabus-schedule. Still, I don't think anyone ever bothered to explain in depth what it was, so I actually had no clue leading into it. All I knew was that there was no class, and who could object to that?

I'd heard from a few friends that they were going to be giving presentations, and I also came across a couple that I hadn't expected to see—including my good friend Jocelyn, a sustainability/biology major, who was showing off her research on urban gardens. She explained to me the variety of reasons why urban gardens were important, and how she had looked at their distribution throughout the Greenville area using GoogleMaps data. Basically, with data from a few year span she sought to determine what factors led to the survival of an urban garden, in hopes that this information could then be used to plan future gardening initiatives. Apparently they were still analyzing their data or something, so they only had preliminary sort of findings to show. It was shown that gardens next to schools are significantly more likely to survive, and those next to churches even more so, suggesting the important of community engagement.

I also stopped by a couple other presenters. One girl who I listened to for awhile had been a part of a study that looked at prospective memory and the effect of multitasking on spontaneous retrieval. It's hard to recall exactly, but there was something about a deep semantic task and a shallow semantic task, and there was a processing theory and a threshold theory, and there was particular focus paid to the differences between younger and older adults. It was pretty interesting, and I was actually quite impressed with how official it all seemed; they had a surprisingly high sample size for the experiments, both of old and young participants.

Truth be told, the highlight of the day was probably going to the International Food Festival in Watkins. On top of getting to talk with some good friends (and briefly trying to make eye-contact across the room with Dr. Shane Herron), I got to eat lots of delicious food. Several of the cooking groups didn't have their food all out and ready right off the bat, so the appearance of dishes was actually a pretty gradual one—I had to keep going back as new things appeared. In the end I'm sure I tried everything, from the Korean to the Chinese to the Japanese to the Indian to the Mexican to the Russian, and probably ate more of it than anyone else. Not that I didn't somewhat earn this though, by driving some FUISA members to Publix the day before to buy ingredients.

It's all Greek to me

I think I should probably admit right of the bat that, frankly, I have absolutely no interest in the Greek system. At all. I didn't feel any desire to join a fraternity and I don't really have any desire to talk about them now. As a target for ridicule, Greek life is a bit stale; chastising them is too obvious. Why bother to waste your breathe making an argument that makes itself? Well, that's part of it. Also, in all honestly, I may not know enough to make any definitive judgments. All those letters people are always throwing around sound like some kind of foreign language. I'm pretty sure (though not positive) that the number of sororities and fraternities on campus could be counted on two hands; even still, I couldn't name half of them. Still, I guess I know a little bit... and since when does blogging demand anything more than that?

Fraternities are what they are. Surely everyone knows this. There really isn't all that much to be confused about, and we shouldn't suddenly act surprised whenever we hear about a hazing incident or come across some sign of group conformity and close-mindedness. Any kind of close-knit group is going to encouragement group mentality, especially when its set up as this exclusive brotherhood with its traditions and rituals. Brady is right, of course, to suggest that people will inevitably fall into this very Orwellian state of mindless "groupthink." And to some extent this is alright; usually it's all pretty benign and no one has to get particularly hurt. People are giving up part of their individuality--and, yes, some of their money--when they join a fraternity, but we all barter those things away on a daily basis. No one is immune to social pressure or free from the influence of others. But unless things are reaching a very dark, cultish level of zombie-obedience I think it'll be fine. I permit frat bros and sorority girls to go right on ahead doing what they're doing, including going through a thoroughly miserable pledge process. They have that right. They also have the right to be racist and sexist and homophobic and whatever else. So long as they realize they're living in an age of increased consequences, where ever is keeping a wary eye on them.

P.S. I would just say that if the worst thing about rushing is having to stay up until 2 in the morning, I don't see what all the fuss is about. That's earlier than I normally go sleep. Six hours of sleep may not be all that great but it's more than enough to be able to function like a normal person...

Racism

As someone from South Carolina, which is nearly 30% black, it's hard to imagine being from a state that is 97% white. Then again, I don't suppose the size of a racial minority says too much about the inclusivity it will find. In fact, greater numbers can probably impede assimilation to the whole and led to the formation of a separate community. Honestly, I think it's fair to say that most white and black South Carolinians interact primarily with white and black persons, respectively. Is this such a bad thing? Well... maybe it's not a good thing. I mean, personally I enjoy hanging out with international or non-white American friends.  I think it's good to get outside your comfort zone and challenge your world views and have meaningful interactions with those from different backgrounds. But I'm not out to force some diversity on everyone's interpersonal relationships. People may naturally tend to drift towards those they consider most similar, and who am I to try and tell everyone they can't have their best friends and significant others be of the same ethnicity?

On the topic of the n-word, I'm not sure how much I have to say. It's one of those arguments that's been going on for so long and has so often devolved into such nonsense that I've become pretty apathetic towards it. On one hand, a single word can only have as much power as you choose to give it--I think that's the whole idea of re-appropriating the word. Of course that doesn't mean there aren't certain words you should be sensitive enough to avoid using, sure, and it's not illegitimate to be upset by the use of hateful language. But the whole "nigga" versus "nigger" distinction is so vague and pointless to me; all that's changed is the pronunciation. AAVE is largely non-rhotic, so the difference isn't more significant than between "better" and "betta", or "after" and "afta."

And as our good friend Huey (in reference to a controversy surrounding the n-word) wonders above: when making these arbitrary standards, who really gets to decide when a word is and isn't acceptable to use? Who gets that right? How can you tell people they can't use a word because it offends you, while you continue to use it in spite of other black people  (i.e. Oprah, the NAACP) having made it perfectly clear they find the word just as despicable when you use it? How is that fair or logical? That being said, I don't understand, nor will I ever understand, the white people who feel personally victimized by the fact that they don't "get" to say the word. Is the status-quo hypocritical? Sure. Is not being able to address random black guys on the street as "nigga" impairing your quality of life? Probably not. So get over it.

As for the whole SAE video... yeah, sadly there's really nothing shocking about it. It's pretty damn racist, but nothing new when it comes to southern fraternities. It's probably only fair to acknowledge that none of these boys, in all likelihood, endorse lynching. Not saying much, I know. It isn't an excuse to say they're normal college guys being idiots, falling into mob mentality, thoughtlessly singing a racist chant that seems relatively harmless within the particularly insulating community of which they're a part. They should face consequences for their actions, starting with the ridicule of their peers and the national fraternity. A public university expelling the students may a little troubling in terms of freedom of speech, but we can always ignore those wider implications for the sake of conveniency. 

Probably about time to abort this conversation

We've talked about a lot of controversial topics and talked a lot about "controversial topics," but I think abortion might still be the most controversial thing out there. It also tends to spawn some of the least productive conversations. You can occasionally alter someone's opinion on gun control policy or immigration laws, and maybe even berate them into admitting they don't have a good reason to oppose gay marriage. Changing someone's opinion on abortion? Forget about it. I told Daniel I thought he did a good job handing the topic, and I think the class actually managed to keep things surprisingly civil. But I don't think anyone did any big 180's.

Probably a lot of it has to due with simply irreconcilable feelings about sexuality. Some people hold very stigmatized views of sex and don't want anyone doing it for fun; anyone who breaks their rules of what constitutes "proper conduct" needs to be shamed for their licentiousness. Most people aren't so extreme about it, but I don't think we can fail to acknowledge that this stigmatization underlies this entire debate in a big way. Any talk of women facing the consequences of their actions tends to be laced with slut-shaming judgment.

There's also the partially distinct matter of opposing ideas over how to conceptualize a newly conceived embryo; some say its a life, some say it isn't (yet). It's all very subjective... But at the very least, I don't think you can claim it's alive in the same sense as you or me. It doesn't truly have consciousness until birth, and hasn't even formed much of a brain by the time an abortion would likely be occurring. We should probably stop going overboard with the anthropomorphizing

As I said (twice, somehow?) in my comment on Tucker blog: Personally, I feel like this discussion of what the child would want, while well-intended, is a bit absurd in all its abstractness. We're talking about the retrospective will of a theoretical person that doesn't even exist and may never exist. Of course most currently living people aren't going to wish they were never born, regardless of the adversity they may have faced. But that's a big different than this, which is essentially a debate over the desires of an imaginary individual.

With all the suffering in the world, do we really have time to be worrying about imaginary individuals? Yes, sure, every time a women gets an abortion that's a child that could have been. It's a potential child. But every time a guy and a girl are in a room together there's a potential child about nine months out on the horizon; are they murdering a child if they don't do it right then and there, in whatever space available?  Every time a woman's ovaries release an egg she could be making a baby; is that baby's blood on her hands when she's ovulating and doesn't take the opportunity to have unprotected sex? Are condoms actually the most lethal weapon man has ever created?

Look, babies are all good and fine, but I'm skeptical of the suggestion that we share a moral responsibility to create as many of them as possible. Putting aside the technical difficulties of maximizing productivity, I don't know what we'd do with them once we had them. The planet is already passing carrying capacity, particularly given our consumption patterns, and I'm not sure as a nation we're prepared to properly support these millions of people some want to force into existence. We already neglect a lot of the ones we do have. I don't know... Honestly, sometimes it seems that those most interested in life prior to birth are not nearly as concerned as they could be with helping actual, living, breathing human beings with feelings and consciousness.

I won't pretend I like abortions--they aren't fun and cheery. But they serve a legitimate function and I don't think we should be trying to limit access to them.

Interesting Education

I'm not really sure what to say on the idea of making sure teachers are more interesting. While I agree with Isaac on the big impact that feeling engaged and having a good relationship with the teacher can have on a student's learning, I don't really know that teachers need to be particularly exciting. I mean it may be a nice bonus if a teacher has an especially friendly and energetic disposition― I think we've probably all had at least one ancient math teacher devoid of all humor and emotion, and it does makes 5th period pretty dry. But I don't think being fun necessarily means being a good teacher, or vis versa. The pretty much universally acknowledged "coolest" teacher at my high school didn't teach her students a thing; her class was a joke. If she weren't funny and you weren't happy to be having no homework, you'd probably question where your tax dollars were going.

Anyway, "personality" is too vague and arbitrary to be used as a criterion for hiring teachers, much less firing them. Every teacher, just like anyone else, is going to seem likable to some people and not others. The most important thing is simply that they know the material and are willing to work with students..

I do think that today's education system isn't as conducive to creativity as it could be. Basics like literacy and arithmetic aside, it may not be a bad idea to allow kids more freedom in pursuing their personal educational interests, or at least more intellectual freedom with the way they're working and the pace. We shouldn't throw all standards out the window, nor do I think we can really do away with tests (despite what some people may say), but there could be room for more flexibility and specialization. I'll leave the exact plan of action to someone else. Obviously we have a compelling interest in having kids who have a reasonable foundation in scientific ideas, and learning to read and write is  fairly essential to living as a full member of society. Kids may not like it, but then few students are ever going to report to liking schoolwork―not even your valedictorians and salutatorians, most likely.

You can bend over backwards trying to get kids to learn, but ultimately the ball is in their court. And really, I'm not sure classwork is supposed to be entirely enjoyable at all times. We've talked about schools teaching kids relevant life skills, and learning to meet your responsibilities and do things you don't necessarily want to be doing is as important as anything. Life is full of boring or bothersome things that you have to do; kids need to learn to suck it up and improve their outlook. After all, to a large extent things will be as interesting as you choose to make them be.

To Spank or Not to Spank

So, corporal punishment. Or, maybe more specifically, spanking. It’s not actually something I feel so strongly on, just because I don't think it's going to have a big impact on a kid either way—assuming it doesn’t reach the level of serious abuse (whatever that means). So long as there aren’t any bruises, and it’s used sparingly, and there’s plenty of “You know I don’t want to do this, but here’s why I have to…” talk, then whatever. I recognize that there really is a distinction to be made between spanking your child and actually beating them, though I would still say I’m against the use of physical punishment in general. Obviously Hana and her brothers weren’t traumatized from occasionally being spanked, nor were Daniel or RJ, nor were my siblings and I, but did it really have such a positive effect? Not likely, I don’t think. Maybe with younger kids, in the short term, spanking can keep them from doing a particular thing. But I don’t buy that it has any lasting effect on moral character or one’s respect for authority. Having the threat of being spanked didn’t make me more respectful. If anything it made me more belligerent, as I was offended by how belittling and pointless it was. Plus it almost makes it more of a personal challenge to push the envelope and see what you can get away with. Really, it would be more effective to just level with the kid and explain to them why something is wrong or right. You can’t hope to get respect from someone if you can’t show them any, even if they’re not an adult.

Still, I’m not about to make it my mission to stop people from spanking they’re kids if they so choose; if it makes you feel better as a parent, go for it. I’m just surprised that Daniel was ever paddled in public school—even in Alabama! I wonder how prevalent it is nowadays. Apparently it’s legal in the state of South Carolina as well, though I’ve never heard of it happening. It may vary by school district, but I’m sure it used to happen way back when. Looks like it's on its way out.

再来年日本の大学に留学したい。（でも、いつかイギリスに行きます）

I would agree with Kat on studying abroad being a great opportunity that everyone should pursue, assuming there isn’t some personal complication making it unfeasible. Rarely will there ever be as ready a chance, with so many options, as when you’re in university. I mean, hey, why not? The prospect of getting to travel to and live in another country seems so amazing that I shouldn’t even have to bother selling it; being able to travel across the seas, meet new people, learn new language, try new foods, experience all sorts of culture and history you’d never find at home… Truth be told, as a white, nth generation American where n is too high a number to call to mind, it’s easy to feel as though I don’t even have much of a culture, that the United States is this modern, consumeristic, assimilating global power absent of genuine culture of its own. This widely (if vaguely) held assessment maybe isn’t quite fair, but even putting aside the age of buildings or numbers of historical artifacts, there is something inherently different about the sense of shared culture and identity you’ll find in many of the more nation-state-like countries of the world—varying in degree and precise character, of course, between each of them.

Personally, I never had any doubt that I’d study away as a college student, even as far back as elementary school. As someone who spent the better part of their childhood wishing they were British, I think I generally assumed the UK would be my destination—maybe Oxford or Cambridge or Edinburgh, if Hogwarts was off the table. I guess partially it was an ancestral decent thing, but mostly I think it was a matter of shared language and all the British books, music, TV shows and movies I loved. Perhaps the idea of me learning another language seemed too far-fetched. Later I started giving more consideration to other countries, namely in Western Europe, where I could always get by with English as I work on my German or French or Dutch or Swedish. There’s no shortage of places I’d like to go; the problem is picking one. Well, that was the problem anyway. Now I’m pretty sure that I want to spend my junior year at Waseda University, in Tokyo. 

This plan would probably come as a surprise to the me of a year or two ago, who despite some interest in Japan had never placed it foremost on the list of places I wanted to go. But I chose Furman and got to go on a free, two-week trip to Japan, which was awesome, and now I may even be getting a major in Japanese Studies. So given that, and that I really want to reach a high level of foreign language fluency, this particular exchange program is hard to pass by. An entire year in the world’s largest city, at one of the nation’s most prestigious universities, with plenty of time-off to interact with locals and explore the rest of the country—maybe even take a trip to Korea. Plus one of my best friends (who’s half-Japanese) wants to go, so I’ll have benefit of having a familiar face who’s already pretty proficient. Though with only two spots available let’s hope we don’t face too much competition.

I can’t say I see myself ever moving to Japan permanently. It’s a friendly place for gaijin (foreigners), especially Americans, but not exactly known for readily accepting immigrants as full members of society. If I end up an expat it’ll still probably be somewhere in Great Britain, as I’ve always wanted. And I haven’t given up my dream of properly traveling Europe!