Sunday, November 13, 2011
ARW Autumn
I coulg enjoy ARW Autum, and it was very effective and exciting for me, especially 20×20 presentation and essay. 20×20 presentation was very hard, but I could push myself to prepare for doing my best, so I could make good one. Also, I could learn the techniques for presentation. I could make use of them in the final presentation in AASP later. On the other hand, essay writing was also very enjoyable for me because my topic was what I had wanted to know in detail for a long time. In the process of researching for it, I read lots of articles related to my topic, so I could not only improve my reading ability but also expend my vocablary. Of couse, I could confirm the way of writing academic essay in the course of writing my essay thanks to Mark's effective guidance. Thus, I will continue to make effort to improve my English ability in winter term with keeping in mind what I have learned in ARW fall. Thank you.
Thursday, November 10, 2011
Answer for the main questions of "Race without Color"
What's Diamond mainly arguing? What's your reaction to it? Is he persuasive?
What Diamond mainly argues is that the traditional classifications of races, which largely depended on skin color, isnot absolute. Also, race classifications are changeable because what traits someone choose for classifying race is not fixed.Therefore, the continous codifying all various appearance into an dogmatic system of racial classification is required now, as Diamond said. However, he didn't show the specific ways for achieving this requiremant, so it's a little weak conclusion, I thought. Also, he put away the explanationof the reasonwhy skin color, eye color,and hair color and form are used for classifyingrace only by "after all". So, I wanted to explain more about is. Also, I couldn't find out the reason why he stuck to dispassion. At any rate, his insight for racial classifications was interesting for me.
What Diamond mainly argues is that the traditional classifications of races, which largely depended on skin color, isnot absolute. Also, race classifications are changeable because what traits someone choose for classifying race is not fixed.Therefore, the continous codifying all various appearance into an dogmatic system of racial classification is required now, as Diamond said. However, he didn't show the specific ways for achieving this requiremant, so it's a little weak conclusion, I thought. Also, he put away the explanationof the reasonwhy skin color, eye color,and hair color and form are used for classifyingrace only by "after all". So, I wanted to explain more about is. Also, I couldn't find out the reason why he stuck to dispassion. At any rate, his insight for racial classifications was interesting for me.
Tuesday, November 8, 2011
Answer for the main questions of "Term of Estrangement"
a) Should the term race be used by scientists? Is it biological?
As Shreeve and Smouse imply in the last part of this text, the classification of race is changeable which depend on the individual perspective. So, if the term race is used by scientists, the way of using it would be not consistent. Also, because of its changeableness, the person who was responsible for it is very unclear. Therefore, I think that the term race should not be used by scientists and it is not biological.
b)In what case should it be used? Police work? Medical research?
Sauer said that what he wanted to do was to match the police form when he wrote some reports of the results of identifying unknown human remains. I interpreted it that he is ready to use the term race if he required by police to use it. However, I think it is irresponsibility. It only seems that he tries to blame the responsibility on police. So, I think it shoud not be used in Police work. Also, it ought not to be used in medcal research, too.This is because I think it is possible to make a wrong doagnosis if the term race is used owing to its unstable classification. Therefore,the use of the term race shouldbe avoided, especially when the rights and life of human beings are related.
As Shreeve and Smouse imply in the last part of this text, the classification of race is changeable which depend on the individual perspective. So, if the term race is used by scientists, the way of using it would be not consistent. Also, because of its changeableness, the person who was responsible for it is very unclear. Therefore, I think that the term race should not be used by scientists and it is not biological.
b)In what case should it be used? Police work? Medical research?
Sauer said that what he wanted to do was to match the police form when he wrote some reports of the results of identifying unknown human remains. I interpreted it that he is ready to use the term race if he required by police to use it. However, I think it is irresponsibility. It only seems that he tries to blame the responsibility on police. So, I think it shoud not be used in Police work. Also, it ought not to be used in medcal research, too.This is because I think it is possible to make a wrong doagnosis if the term race is used owing to its unstable classification. Therefore,the use of the term race shouldbe avoided, especially when the rights and life of human beings are related.
Friday, November 4, 2011
Answer for the main questions of "The Geometer of Race"
a) What is Gould mainly trying to say through Blumenbach's example?
In my opinion, what the author wanted to say by using Blumenbach's example is that whatever significant, innovative or good-intended ideas are greatly influenced by social background.
Also, he wanted to say that the interpretation of ideas depends on the attitude of the interpreter, which are also influenced by social background and may lead to misunderstanding. (In this text, the interpreters are the scientists, who adopted the myth that theories arise only be observation, are unaware of their own mental impositions, and cannot understand the deep mental shift included in the Blumenbach's theory.)
b)What do you think about his argument? What parts are useful or meaningful?What parts are weak or need development?
Almost all his argument was interesting for me, especially the explanation of the concept "degeneration". Also, the explanation of the attitude of old science seems very significant not only for today's science but also for ourselves However, I think it is a little illogical that most beautiful people should live closest to human's primal home, which is told in Blumenbach's theory.
So, I think that the reason why Blumenbach reached to think so should be explained more in detail.
In my opinion, what the author wanted to say by using Blumenbach's example is that whatever significant, innovative or good-intended ideas are greatly influenced by social background.
Also, he wanted to say that the interpretation of ideas depends on the attitude of the interpreter, which are also influenced by social background and may lead to misunderstanding. (In this text, the interpreters are the scientists, who adopted the myth that theories arise only be observation, are unaware of their own mental impositions, and cannot understand the deep mental shift included in the Blumenbach's theory.)
b)What do you think about his argument? What parts are useful or meaningful?What parts are weak or need development?
Almost all his argument was interesting for me, especially the explanation of the concept "degeneration". Also, the explanation of the attitude of old science seems very significant not only for today's science but also for ourselves However, I think it is a little illogical that most beautiful people should live closest to human's primal home, which is told in Blumenbach's theory.
So, I think that the reason why Blumenbach reached to think so should be explained more in detail.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)