When I first checked out the schedule of deliberation events to see which one I would like to attend, I realized that I had already missed an entire week of them, and that there only a few days left to catch one. After looking at the times of each event, there was only one that I could possibly attend, and that was after cancelling an important adviser meeting. Even worse -- it was at 9:30 am. Because of this chain of events, I went into the deliberation already annoyed at it. However, the event itself was surprisingly pleasant and very interesting.
The topic of deliberation was PA's energy options for the coming years. Now, I would consider myself somewhat of an environmentalist, so this topic intrigued me. I was very ready to discuss it; even with people I had never met before. Coincidentally (or maybe not), the event was held in a place called "New Leaf Initiative". I had been in this facility before and, as Kevin quoted me in his blog, would describe it as an Internet startup waiting to happen. There are images of lightbulbs on each wall, with bright colors and modern furniture popping out at you every which way you look. It is the perfect place for someone like me to spew liberal ideas about what we put in our cars.
The event started off talking about peak oil, which many people believe to be an imminent threat to our energy supply. The first attendee to respond initiated the discussion by talking about how the free market would ensure that peak oil would not be as tragic as we think. I countered by saying that peak oil is not the biggest problem on our hands at the moment, but rather carbon emissions, and that the free market would not respond to the growing threat of climate change -- which is, in my understanding, facilitated by the use of fossil fuels. I wasn't surprised that I ended up being the second attendee to speak. I actually assumed I would kick things off, so I was doing better than expected at this point in the deliberation.
The first option that was presented was natural gas, mostly focusing on hydraulic fracturing, or as it is commonly known, "fracking". Fracking seems to be a very powerful buzzword inmost people's heads, and many people have formed opinions about it without really knowing what it is. Luckily, the deliberators seemed to have a good understanding of the process of fracking and what it entails. Many expressed the sentiment that, although fracking's safety is questionable, it is one of the best options we have in terms of finding more ways to fuel our busy lives. For one, it would not require a massive infrastructure change, since natural gas is a fossil fuel just like petroleum. However, environmental concerns were raised, and not just by me either. One thing that slightly irked me during this section was the fact that the professor seemed to have a lot to say. I felt like she was going out of place whenever she brought forward a new point, since it was technically her students' assignment.
The next two points were talked about much less due to the time we spent deliberating natural gas and fracking. These two options were nuclear energy and other sources of renewable energy, such as solar power and biofuels. The two students who presented the nuclear option were surprisingly knowledgeable about the topic, and I wouldn't be surprised if they turned out to be nuclear engineering majors. With this option, we concluded that nuclear could be a good bet, but the prospect of a meltdown, however unlikely, is too scary for many people, and the startup cost is also very high. High startup costs were also brought up in the discussion on renewable energy, although we all agreed that the human race should eventually end up with a completely renewable energy source at some point -- most likely the sun.
In conclusion, this was a surprisingly enthralling deliberation, despite the early timing of the event. It helped that this is a topic that I'm passionate about, but,then again, which topic am I not passionate about?
Wednesday, March 18, 2015
Wednesday, November 12, 2014
How Do We Get People To Vote?
And now, I present to you, a case of society failing to engage its citizens civically.
As most of us know, last Tuesday was Election Day. This was a very important election for the state of Pennsylvania, where a gubernatorial race occurred that saw the incumbent governor, Tom Corbett, deposed by newcomer Tom Wolf. This Battle of the Toms was not the only important political event that happened on Tuesday, though. The GOP took control over the U.S. Senate, and kept its hold over the House of Representatives. This is sure to change the way that the remaining two years of President Obama's final term play out.
With momentous occasions such as these occurring, you would expect many people to get out and vote to support their favored party or candidate. Sadly, you would be wrong. In fact, the voter turnout last Tuesday was the lowest it has been since WWII. While the linked article makes the argument that this may be due to recent voting restrictions passed in certain states (which I could write an entirely new article about), most of the lack of turnout can safely be attributed to political apathy. Apathy, especially with young people, is strong--even moreso during midterm elections such as this year's. Not only do younger people vote less than older age brackets, they also tend to not care about politics in general. I know that I experienced a lot of political apathy on Election Day. I heard people complaining about any sort of political talk happening at all.
This apathy is obviously a problem; how can our population be accurately represented if not even half of us go out and vote in early November? This is a problem that many campaigns try--and fail--to solve every year. Obviously, there needs to be some rhetorical change made in our strategies. Maybe teachers can help kids register to vote in their high school government classes? How about adding direct incentives? If you guys have any thoughts, let me know in the comments.
As most of us know, last Tuesday was Election Day. This was a very important election for the state of Pennsylvania, where a gubernatorial race occurred that saw the incumbent governor, Tom Corbett, deposed by newcomer Tom Wolf. This Battle of the Toms was not the only important political event that happened on Tuesday, though. The GOP took control over the U.S. Senate, and kept its hold over the House of Representatives. This is sure to change the way that the remaining two years of President Obama's final term play out.
With momentous occasions such as these occurring, you would expect many people to get out and vote to support their favored party or candidate. Sadly, you would be wrong. In fact, the voter turnout last Tuesday was the lowest it has been since WWII. While the linked article makes the argument that this may be due to recent voting restrictions passed in certain states (which I could write an entirely new article about), most of the lack of turnout can safely be attributed to political apathy. Apathy, especially with young people, is strong--even moreso during midterm elections such as this year's. Not only do younger people vote less than older age brackets, they also tend to not care about politics in general. I know that I experienced a lot of political apathy on Election Day. I heard people complaining about any sort of political talk happening at all.
This apathy is obviously a problem; how can our population be accurately represented if not even half of us go out and vote in early November? This is a problem that many campaigns try--and fail--to solve every year. Obviously, there needs to be some rhetorical change made in our strategies. Maybe teachers can help kids register to vote in their high school government classes? How about adding direct incentives? If you guys have any thoughts, let me know in the comments.
Wednesday, November 5, 2014
The Danger Of A Single Story: My Response
Here is a link to the video if you haven't watched it yet:
In this talk, Adichie talks about how most people seem to fit those of other demographic groups into a single, one-size-fits-all mold. She used very good examples about her experience at an American university, where Adichie herself broke this mold many times over. Many of the students--and even professors--had only one image of an African person that they would accept: poor, uneducated, probably starving, and so on. Adichie was very intelligent, in good health, and, for all intents and purposes, very "un-African". One example of this simple story that Americans are subscribed to is when her professor critiqued a novel of hers set in Africa for the characters not being "African" enough. In his mind, they should have all been impoverished and hungry; in her book, Adichie made the characters relatively middle class, driving cars and conducting business.
When she referenced this single story, I realized that--while I would like to think that it is not to the extent of most Americans--I am subscribed to this same story as well. I like to consider myself open-minded, but I still often find myself passing judgement on someone just because of some social group that they fall into. This is especially apparent when I think about entire countries. It is hard as an outsider to not think of them as a singular entity. I often forget to wrap my head around the fact that, no, they aren't just "Canadians", but 35 million living and breathing individuals--each with their own thoughts, ideas, emotions and values. I feel like the reason we blanket large groups under one single story is because being completely open-minded is HARD. Stereotyping people is easy, and you can skip the huge step of actually analyzing a person by subscribing to a single story that represents everyone in their group.
From now on, I will make sure to remember that no matter how much truth there is to a stereotype or story, there will always be little quirks and outliers that I need to take into account. Not every McDonald's employee is unskilled or unintelligent. Not every Brazilian is a crazy party-animal. Not every computer programmer is a socially-incapable geek. Not every story is the sole story you should believe.
In this talk, Adichie talks about how most people seem to fit those of other demographic groups into a single, one-size-fits-all mold. She used very good examples about her experience at an American university, where Adichie herself broke this mold many times over. Many of the students--and even professors--had only one image of an African person that they would accept: poor, uneducated, probably starving, and so on. Adichie was very intelligent, in good health, and, for all intents and purposes, very "un-African". One example of this simple story that Americans are subscribed to is when her professor critiqued a novel of hers set in Africa for the characters not being "African" enough. In his mind, they should have all been impoverished and hungry; in her book, Adichie made the characters relatively middle class, driving cars and conducting business.
When she referenced this single story, I realized that--while I would like to think that it is not to the extent of most Americans--I am subscribed to this same story as well. I like to consider myself open-minded, but I still often find myself passing judgement on someone just because of some social group that they fall into. This is especially apparent when I think about entire countries. It is hard as an outsider to not think of them as a singular entity. I often forget to wrap my head around the fact that, no, they aren't just "Canadians", but 35 million living and breathing individuals--each with their own thoughts, ideas, emotions and values. I feel like the reason we blanket large groups under one single story is because being completely open-minded is HARD. Stereotyping people is easy, and you can skip the huge step of actually analyzing a person by subscribing to a single story that represents everyone in their group.
From now on, I will make sure to remember that no matter how much truth there is to a stereotype or story, there will always be little quirks and outliers that I need to take into account. Not every McDonald's employee is unskilled or unintelligent. Not every Brazilian is a crazy party-animal. Not every computer programmer is a socially-incapable geek. Not every story is the sole story you should believe.
Thursday, October 30, 2014
Remaining Mindful
All of this talk about TED Talks in class made me look back on the many that I have watched over the years. I was reminded of my favorite TED Talk--one that has been pretty influential in my life. It is a lecture by Andy Puddicombe on the nature of mindfulness meditation.
In middle and high school, I was your typical attentionally-challenged kid. I was lost in thought for most, if not all, of the day, and my grades suffered. I didn't know that this was somewhat of a bad thing until, one day, I got a 0 out of 16 on an algebra quiz because I didn't pay one bit of attention to the lecture. After that, I made it a point to pay attention in class more often, but telling myself to pay attention wasn't going to make it happen immediately.
Coincidentally, my friend and I started becoming interested in Buddhism and its many facets around the same time period. He and I would always have phases of interest, and this was one of those phases. However, in my research of Buddhism, I found out about mindfulness meditation. While mainly helping with those that are stressed and anxious, it also addresses the problem of wandering thoughts. Seeing this, I definitely wanted to start trying it. My friend and I would tell our cross-country coach that we were going on a run, head to the woods, and meditate for a while. Each time after these sessions, I noticed that I was much calmer. Also, my senses seemed to be heightened, Of course, since I was only a beginner, I wasn't using the most efficient meditative techniques possible, but even these baby steps had a noticeable effect. The mindfulness meditation sort of wrenched my focus away from my wandering mind and toward the real world.
Nowadays, when I have the time, or if I feel that I especially need it, I will sit down and meditate--sit upright, take deep, regular breaths, and practice my focus. Whenever a distracting thought pops up, you aren't supposed to freak out and try to suppress it--this will stress you out more. Calmly acknowledge all of your thoughts and emotions, take note of them, and then let them pass. Stress is a reactive state of mind; things don't stress you out, you stress yourself out over things by reacting in a negative way.
All in all, this talk had about as much an effect on my life as a TED talk could. It only lasts around ten minutes, but in it, Andy Puddicombe covers a very intriguing and influential topic. I would recommend anyone to watch this video and, if you have the time, to try out mindfulness meditation. I still find myself lost in thought much of the time, as this isn't some sort of miracle cure that works after a week or two, but there is no question of its positive effects.
In middle and high school, I was your typical attentionally-challenged kid. I was lost in thought for most, if not all, of the day, and my grades suffered. I didn't know that this was somewhat of a bad thing until, one day, I got a 0 out of 16 on an algebra quiz because I didn't pay one bit of attention to the lecture. After that, I made it a point to pay attention in class more often, but telling myself to pay attention wasn't going to make it happen immediately.
Coincidentally, my friend and I started becoming interested in Buddhism and its many facets around the same time period. He and I would always have phases of interest, and this was one of those phases. However, in my research of Buddhism, I found out about mindfulness meditation. While mainly helping with those that are stressed and anxious, it also addresses the problem of wandering thoughts. Seeing this, I definitely wanted to start trying it. My friend and I would tell our cross-country coach that we were going on a run, head to the woods, and meditate for a while. Each time after these sessions, I noticed that I was much calmer. Also, my senses seemed to be heightened, Of course, since I was only a beginner, I wasn't using the most efficient meditative techniques possible, but even these baby steps had a noticeable effect. The mindfulness meditation sort of wrenched my focus away from my wandering mind and toward the real world.
Nowadays, when I have the time, or if I feel that I especially need it, I will sit down and meditate--sit upright, take deep, regular breaths, and practice my focus. Whenever a distracting thought pops up, you aren't supposed to freak out and try to suppress it--this will stress you out more. Calmly acknowledge all of your thoughts and emotions, take note of them, and then let them pass. Stress is a reactive state of mind; things don't stress you out, you stress yourself out over things by reacting in a negative way.
All in all, this talk had about as much an effect on my life as a TED talk could. It only lasts around ten minutes, but in it, Andy Puddicombe covers a very intriguing and influential topic. I would recommend anyone to watch this video and, if you have the time, to try out mindfulness meditation. I still find myself lost in thought much of the time, as this isn't some sort of miracle cure that works after a week or two, but there is no question of its positive effects.
Thursday, October 23, 2014
Intro to Paradigm Shift Essay
Mental illness has always been one of the more controversial aspects of health and healthcare research. For a very long time, ancient peoples thought that mental illnesses were the products of demonic possessions, angry gods, or even witches. Even after they were understood to have actual health problems, the mentally ill were often times just shoved into an asylum and institutionalized; they rarely received any therapeutic care, unless you count electric shocks or bloodletting as "therapeutic". It wasn't until the Civil War that the general public started showing great interest in mental care--soldiers were coming home with what we now know as PTSD. Now, obviously, we know much more about mental illness than we did in the 19th century. We've named many more disorders, and have developed therapeutic techniques and pharmaceuticals to help treat them.
As our knowledge of these diseases progressed, as did the number of those diagnosed. Of those diagnosed, over half have started taking medication--either coupled with talk therapy or instead of it. A question that many have been asking is: why are more people getting diagnosed with mental disorders? Could it be that our knowledge is progressing, and therefore we know more about the symptoms of these diseases, or could it be something more? There has been some research that suggests something more. Societal changes, as well as environmental, could have an impact on our mental health as a whole. This notable and sudden increase in the diagnosis of mental illnesses can possibly be ascribed to changes in our way of lives, such as occupations, environment, and technology.
As our knowledge of these diseases progressed, as did the number of those diagnosed. Of those diagnosed, over half have started taking medication--either coupled with talk therapy or instead of it. A question that many have been asking is: why are more people getting diagnosed with mental disorders? Could it be that our knowledge is progressing, and therefore we know more about the symptoms of these diseases, or could it be something more? There has been some research that suggests something more. Societal changes, as well as environmental, could have an impact on our mental health as a whole. This notable and sudden increase in the diagnosis of mental illnesses can possibly be ascribed to changes in our way of lives, such as occupations, environment, and technology.
Wednesday, October 15, 2014
PSU Commonplaces Pt. II
Time to riff on another set of commonplaces that I have noticed in Happy Valley. As I have noted countless times in my blogs, Penn State is a school noted for its strong sense of tradition. Here are three more of these traditional views/commonplaces that I have noticed throughout my short time here:
1. BIGGER is better
This one is huge (no pun intended) on our campus. This may be a commonplace of American culture in general, but I feel that it especially holds true here in State College. Here are some examples of typical conversation at Penn State :
"Bro, that party that we threw last night was HUGE"
"Dude, I drank, like, about a million beers last night haha"
"Oh my god, bruh, I hooked up with so many girls this weekend, they could fill a LECTURE HALL"
"Yo Dylan, you'll never believe how much I just squatted....wait, how did you know it was 700 pounds? Were you watching me, bro?.......... You were at the gym with me? Oh well I drank an entire handle of Jack right before so I was probably too WASTED to remember huhuhu"
"Our frat house is bigger than yours"
You probably get my point by now. This extra-large commonplace is especially common among males, where every dude feels like he has to out-dude all of his bros in order to gain acceptance within his group of dude-bros. Even our university supports this cause. We have one of the biggest stadiums in the entire country, as well as one of the largest student bodies. Overall, this is one of the most prominent commonplaces out there.
2. Don't be a try-hard, but make sure you try hard
I remember getting called a try-hard in middle school. Back then, it was the worst insult anyone could throw your way. Nobody wanted to seem like they cared about anything; apparently the ideal human being to these middle-school pseudo-bullies was an unresponsive sack of meat. I was surprised when I found this commonplace here at Penn State as well, but now it comes with a new clause: don't ever become a try-hard, but make sure you get all of your work done. succeed, get good grades and land internships every summer, plus a job in your field of choice after school. This Catch-22 of a commonplace leaves most people no choice but to be ridiculed by at least someone. Some people can find great success without doing any work, however, and to those people I say, "I admire you very much as a human being. Do you want to get married". For the rest of us mortals, we need to subject ourselves to a little stigmatization in order to get what we want.
Again, if you have any ideas, if you disagree with me, or if you want to comment on the style of this disconnected rant, hit me up in the comment section.
1. BIGGER is better
This one is huge (no pun intended) on our campus. This may be a commonplace of American culture in general, but I feel that it especially holds true here in State College. Here are some examples of typical conversation at Penn State :
"Bro, that party that we threw last night was HUGE"
"Dude, I drank, like, about a million beers last night haha"
"Oh my god, bruh, I hooked up with so many girls this weekend, they could fill a LECTURE HALL"
"Yo Dylan, you'll never believe how much I just squatted....wait, how did you know it was 700 pounds? Were you watching me, bro?.......... You were at the gym with me? Oh well I drank an entire handle of Jack right before so I was probably too WASTED to remember huhuhu"
"Our frat house is bigger than yours"
You probably get my point by now. This extra-large commonplace is especially common among males, where every dude feels like he has to out-dude all of his bros in order to gain acceptance within his group of dude-bros. Even our university supports this cause. We have one of the biggest stadiums in the entire country, as well as one of the largest student bodies. Overall, this is one of the most prominent commonplaces out there.
2. Don't be a try-hard, but make sure you try hard
I remember getting called a try-hard in middle school. Back then, it was the worst insult anyone could throw your way. Nobody wanted to seem like they cared about anything; apparently the ideal human being to these middle-school pseudo-bullies was an unresponsive sack of meat. I was surprised when I found this commonplace here at Penn State as well, but now it comes with a new clause: don't ever become a try-hard, but make sure you get all of your work done. succeed, get good grades and land internships every summer, plus a job in your field of choice after school. This Catch-22 of a commonplace leaves most people no choice but to be ridiculed by at least someone. Some people can find great success without doing any work, however, and to those people I say, "I admire you very much as a human being. Do you want to get married". For the rest of us mortals, we need to subject ourselves to a little stigmatization in order to get what we want.
Again, if you have any ideas, if you disagree with me, or if you want to comment on the style of this disconnected rant, hit me up in the comment section.
Thursday, October 9, 2014
I'm Shifting Between These Two Topics
So, for this assignment we are doing in this class, we have to discuss a paradigm shift that has happened over time in society. There are many, many options to choose from, since society is so free-flowing and ever-changing. Society hasn't remained at a standstill for a very long time; there are always aspects of our culture that are changing as we learn and progress. There are two paradigm shifts, however that stick out to me:
1) Today's youth are obviously very different from past generations. One thing that is different about today's youth, in my opinion, is that we are less rebellious. Past generations of teens actively went against anything their parents said, going out and getting in fights, getting drunker than today's kids, and getting pregnant at MUCH higher rates than our generation. Today's kids obviously rebel, but at lower rates than other decades and generations. Just look at social movements: the 60s had the hippie counterculture, the 70s had punks and anti-war activists, the 80s were notorious for casual cocaine use, and the 90s had the grunge and alt-rock movements. Often coinciding with music movements, countercultures such as those haven't sprung up among millenials. While radical social changes are happening in our lifetime, they are being facilitated by business leaders and politicians of our parents' generation and older. We haven't really done anything as a youth that has changed anything on a large scale, nor have we really had large movements of rebelling against society, or our parents. This idea would need more work, but it is something I could go on about.
2) This is one that I talked about in class. The advent of the Internet has caused many things, but one that I have noticed is the proliferation of underground culture among anyone and everyone. Anyone nowadays can research and experience any part of an "underground" culture in our country. In past generations, you would have to find the right people or stumble upon the right clubs in order to find people as weird as you and create culture. Nowadays, anyone can let out their inner "weird" and listen to alternative music, watch hipster movies, and read bohemian literature. This allowed for "hipster" things to become cool in mainstream culture. This is a very interesting paradigm shift to me because I like things that are traditionally underground.
1) Today's youth are obviously very different from past generations. One thing that is different about today's youth, in my opinion, is that we are less rebellious. Past generations of teens actively went against anything their parents said, going out and getting in fights, getting drunker than today's kids, and getting pregnant at MUCH higher rates than our generation. Today's kids obviously rebel, but at lower rates than other decades and generations. Just look at social movements: the 60s had the hippie counterculture, the 70s had punks and anti-war activists, the 80s were notorious for casual cocaine use, and the 90s had the grunge and alt-rock movements. Often coinciding with music movements, countercultures such as those haven't sprung up among millenials. While radical social changes are happening in our lifetime, they are being facilitated by business leaders and politicians of our parents' generation and older. We haven't really done anything as a youth that has changed anything on a large scale, nor have we really had large movements of rebelling against society, or our parents. This idea would need more work, but it is something I could go on about.
2) This is one that I talked about in class. The advent of the Internet has caused many things, but one that I have noticed is the proliferation of underground culture among anyone and everyone. Anyone nowadays can research and experience any part of an "underground" culture in our country. In past generations, you would have to find the right people or stumble upon the right clubs in order to find people as weird as you and create culture. Nowadays, anyone can let out their inner "weird" and listen to alternative music, watch hipster movies, and read bohemian literature. This allowed for "hipster" things to become cool in mainstream culture. This is a very interesting paradigm shift to me because I like things that are traditionally underground.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)