An Addition to my humble blog :D

When reading over my blog, I realized that (horrors!) I had not posted answers to questions from the essay, "Beware of Drug Sales." I aim to fix this grievous error below:

1) Identify any concessions Cherry makes in this essay. That is, where does she acknowledge the validity of a differing viewpoint?
Right off in the opening paragraph, Cherry says that she understands that businesses make money by marketing a product so that the consumer knows about it. The way that she words this concession implies that she agrees that pharmaceutical companies are indeed business and have a right to make a profit. In fact, she makes this implication clear by implictly stating it in the final paragraph. So, she qualifies her argument at her introduction and conclusion, while stating her case in the body of her essay.

2) Why do American's take so many prescription drugs?
Well, first of all, I think that American's are generally pretty well off and therefore worry more about little problems. Sure there are people suffering who really need the drug, but since we have a small case of those symptoms, shouldn't we be helped too? Also, we are more likely to want an easy solution than one that requires more work. For instance, those with a weight problem would like a pill versus exercise or diet.

Response to Rethinking Divorce

Divorce is a major problem in our society today. Most people would agree that the well-being of children has declined in recent decades, yet very few want to point the finger at the big word "divorce". The writer points this out when she talks about how politicians avoid the topic and how easy it is to make it into an economic issue.
One of the writer's main point seems to be a lament of the selfishness in our society, and that it is not good for marriage, not good for children and also not good for society. Contrary to popular opinion, if personal happiness is pursued as ultimate, the end result is not always what is best for that individual person or for everyone else.
I think an issue implied in the essay that could be better developed is, "What is the solution to unhappiness in a marriage?" Our society likes to take the easy road, and say divorce will solve the problem. However, if a person is unhappy before they are married, getting married will not make them happy. Also, if a person is unhappy in a marriage, getting divorced will not automatically make them happy. When one is unhappy, it is easy to point the finger at others, or circumstances, but the answer is usually more personal than that.
I think that there are two things that would make a big difference in lowering the divorce rate. First of all, our society needs to value committed relationships more. When relationships are formed for purely physical, psychological, financial and other superficial reasons, it is not surprising when they fail. Sex complicates a relationship and makes a bond that often has no basis, and when sexual interest declines, it becomes obvious that these two people have nothing in common. However, if more people sought to get to know someone better, and determine if they would be someone that they could spend the rest of the their life with before they entered into a romantic relationship, it would greatly improve the success rate of relationships and ultimately marriages.
Assuming that two people have common beliefs and goals, then it is only logical to encourage selflessness in a relationship. If both people seek to put the other person first, it solves a great many problems, and enables a couple to get through the disagreements, crises, and pains of life. This will give stability to a couple's relationship, and build the basis for a loving and nurturing family.

Rethinking Divorce Text Questions

What is Whitehead claiming about divorce? That is, what is her overall judgment? And what criteria - or standards of judgment - does Whitehead use to evaluate divorce?
Whitehead is claiming that divorce not only destroys the commitment between a man and a woman, but also the commitment to raise the next generation to succeed. The standard that she uses is a child-centered one - she views the child as the most important element of society, and evaluates if the current attitude toward divorce benefits children more that it harms them.
How might you participate in this discussion about divorce? Consider expanding on a point, clarifying a point, redirection the discussion, and so on.
One of the major issues in the essay that I would like to expand on is the rationale that "a child's happiness depend[s] on the the happiness of the individual parent, especially the mother, rather than on the marriage itself." Some research points might help the author refute this point. I also think that the essay would benefit from commenting on how we can fix this problem - encourage people to be more careful before they get married, and to seek to motivate both parties to exert every effort to make the marriage work.

Believe it! or Doubt it! My Response to Entitlement Education

I thought that it would be interesting to write my response to this essay in a believe it or doubt it format. First of all, I believe that all students are entitled to an education. Well, I don't really agree, but for the sake of argument, here are some ideas: First of all, we all pay for education, whether in taxes or in enrollment costs. It only makes sense, then, that no one who pays should be excluded. Also, if real and conscious effects aren't made to reach the failing students at their level, then they will continue to fail. Everyone has been the situation where they did not understand something, and it seemed as though no one was around to help. Furthermore, a focus on high standards only benefits those self motivated to be high-achievers, and everyone else will always feel that they will never be good enough.
Second of all, I believe that students are entitled to an education only if they are willing to work hard. Now this is easier! While one usually pays for an education, one should be paying for quality, just like they would want with any other product. Furthermore, the best thing for failing students is for them to realize that its up to them, not the school, whether they win or lose. While schools should do everything in their power to assist every single student with the specific help they need, the ultimate responsibility should be with the parents and the students, and not with the schools. Furthermore, a focus on high standards challenges and benefits everyone. Once in a math class I was very frustrated when a teacher stopped giving me credit when I made stupid errors. However, setting the standard higher forced me to be more careful with my work, something I wouldn't have done if the teacher hadn't made me be more cautious. Furthermore, if the standards are higher, even the students who are determined to only do the minimum will still learn more than if the standards are lower, simply because minimum amount has been set higher.
Therefore, I think that higher standards in education is the only way to go; this will benefit everyone!

Answers to Questions in the Book regarding "Entitlement Education"

1. Bruno defines "intelligence" in his essay. How is this definition important? Might he have deleted this definition without damaging his essay?
The definition is crucial to understanding Bruno's point. He defines intelligence not as the knowledge of and ability to retain a great many facts, but the ability to think with them and use them effectively. This type of intelligence is something that anyone can develop, regardless of how many IQ points they have. If he had not made his definition clear, than it would have been easy to assume that the quality of one's life was majorly influenced by the "smarts" one is born with; this is completely contradictory to his point and would have seriously damaged one's understanding of his essay.
2. What do you think is Bruno's purpose in writing?
This is one thing that I wish had been more clear in the essay. While it is an effective discussion of the issue, I feel that the essay would have been stronger if it had a clear audience. Is he addressing teachers, students or the general public? Picking one might have encouraged him to go after a solution as well - should the general public demand higher standards, should students be more dedicated and allow themselves to be challenged, or should teachers expect more out of their students? All are possible directions that Bruno could have gone in, and as a result made for a clearer essay.

Beware of Drug Sales - yes or no?

Cherry's essay is both timely and provocative; more than ever before, Americans are looking to the drug industry for quick solutions to every conceivable problem. The problem is, are they paying a bigger price than just the dollars it takes to get the medicine?
Cherry does a good job of bringing up an important issue - Americans are taking too many drugs and it is harming their health. This brings up another issue: exactly who is ultimately responsible for a person's health - the drug companies, the doctor or the individual patient? Ultimately, the patient must be responsible for his own health. It is not healthy or wise for him to be passive about his own health.
An idea also not found in the essay is the question of why drug companies are so successful in their marketing campaigns. One reason is because our society is so obsessed with quick fixes to everything and does not tolerate any discomfort or lack of perfection.
Now, I do not think that drug companies should be unable to spread awareness of their product through advertising. The drug companies cannot educate everyone on the risks of their drug in 30 seconds and cannot be expected to do so. Also, there are some limits to whether or not a doctor can tell if a patient is genuinely experiencing symptoms or if it is all in his head.
Here are the responsibilities I think each party has. The drug companies should provide accurate information about their product to doctors and also to patients who ask for more information. Doctors should be educated on the benefits and risks of drugs so that they can provide their patients with accurate information, and should know exactly what a drug is designed to treat. They should be honest with their patients about the dangers of any drug, and seek to determine if the benefit would outweigh the risks. However, as long as accurate information is made available to the patient, and doctors are not prescribing drugs to people without symptoms, I believe that the patient should have the ultimate decision and responsibility for what is put into their own body.

My response to "In Search of... Something"

Well, first of all, I liked this essay because I live in a college town but decided not to go to college right away after high school. Even though I was working hard and making good money, people tended to label me as an underachiever or act as though I was missing out on something because I wasn't in school. To most of the town of Pullman, I think that "school" definitely equals "success". This was a major theme in the essay, "College students constantly hear the praises of education as if it were the blueprint to receiving our desires."

However, I have never felt that one must have a college education to be successful in life. Most certainly I do not think that it is the most important or essential element for success. I think that qualities like integrity, hard work and a positive attitude are the most important issues, and education alone isn't going to affect these things. The essay touches on this when it says, "They expect to be propelled into a lifestyle where all of their dreams come true without effort."

I think that the author is really trying to say though that success isn't truly the goal of education, at least not success defined as having money, popularity and fame. Therefore, she isn't just taking on the idea of education but also the idea of success. A broad definition of success would be achieving what is most important to us, and the challenge for us all to try and figure out what IS most important and why. I think that essay writer believes that thinking deeply about the issues of life, as one often does in college, helps one to realize the truly important things of life and adjust your priorities accordingly.

Another thing I appreciate is that the author doesn't say meaning comes from education itself. She implies that a "glamoros" life will not give meaning, and she says that education helps one desire a meaningful life over an effortless life by opening one's mind to all the issues. But meaning itself has to come from more than just knowledge, because you can always ask yourself what does that knowledge mean? Why is that knowledge important? As a Christian, I believe that meaning comes from God, and knowledge has meaning because we are learning about God's design and why He did things the way He did. Our lives have meaning because God has a purpose for our lives.

Anyway, those are my thoughts for today.