Chapter 4 Question 2

In all three perspectives of the existence of Unidentified Flying Objects, each author has a very different way of interpreting how they think of UFOs. First off, in Paynter's argument, he shows that there is no single object that can 100% show that aliens have visited the world. He says that we could believe that crop circles and cattle mutations might be aliens interacting, but shows no full-proof evidence of extraterrestrials. Next off in Hynek's argument of UFOs he tells his audience that we need to do psychological studies to those who say that they have seen UFOs. He says that it would really help to find out if these people were really "awake" and if their stories were true, what basis do they all have. He next goes into science, and how science can find a comparison with those who have seen UFOs. Lastly, in Condon's argument, he shows his reader that UFO reports have been made repetitively throughout the last 21 years and if these reports tell the truth about aliens and out of this world people. He goes into detail about if the reports are ligament and if they are worthy of being published and being used at a federal level. Truthfully, I like Paynter's argument the best because it doesn't knock out the idea of UFOs, but it shows hard evidence that I need. 

Chapter 4 Question 1

After reading this section, I can honestly say that knowledge makes you both wiser and dumber at the same time. For example, in school, we learn about so many different subjects- aka math, English, history, business, arts, act. Accumulating a little information from each subject makes us knowledgable, but at the same time wiser. As my grandfather once said, in which he quoted Aldous Huxley, "Experience is not what happens to you; it's what you do with what happens to you." Wisdom comes from both information and real life experiences. In college we are always acquiring both wisdom and knowledge. We learn our knowledgable stuff from all the subjects we learn, but at the same time get to gain wisdom from those subjects and the experiences we have on and off campus. Everyday I learn something new in college, making a little but more knowledgable, but at the same time I am also getting a bit wiser from all of the stuff I go through in college. In the end, I think the information has made us both more knowledgable and wiser. 

Chapter 3 Question 3

One concept that I really enjoyed reading about this week had to be the concept of nonverbal language.  In the book it talked about animals, and how they can talk without actually speaking. Bees use a type of dance to show what they are speaking about, stingrays use sonic rays to speak to one another, fish swim together in order to protect one another, and so on. My family also has a way with kind of telepathically speaking to one another. We can read each other's body language and eye language to know if something is wrong or if we are happy, or any type of situation as a matter of fact. I think that nonverbal language has a connection to safety- just like speaking a foreign language in front of others that don't like that language. When people do this, it means that they don't want that individual to know what they are talking about- thus keeping them feeling safe. 

Chapter 3 Question 2

In the last week, I have used so many different rhetorical devices. Last Thursday, I went to my volleyball practice at church. There is five teams practicing in one gym, so it is put into a rotation that two teams get to play one game, then rotate to the next two teams after the game is done. Anyways, it was my team's turn to play on the court, and out of no where the team that had already played wanted to take our turn in line. One thing lead to the other and then that team some how got their way. I simply used sarcasm and said, "Wow, you guys are so sportsman like. Give yourself a round of applause." Another volleyball story occurred this week, and I used a hyperbole. I fell on the floor and sprained my finger. When I hurt my finger I said, "Ow, my finger feels like it is going to fall off". I just said this to over dramatize the situation, but I know that politics use it distort facts about very important information. Overall, this week- and everyday- I use rhetoric devices, even though they are all usually to make fun of something or to over dramatize something. 

Chapter 3 Question 1

After reading the story of Sally Ride, she really encouraged me to become more proactive with my education and critical thinking in my own life. Sally ride was always an achiever, from a young age to college she loved education and made it her passion in life. While getting her PHD in Stanford University, she applied to become an astronaut. Out of 8,000 people, she was the only woman and not to mention youngest of the 35 chosen. Going back to chapter one, Sally fits into most of the qualities of a critical thinker. She was an analytical thinker, she was effective in communication, she was definitely one who would like to research, she was a curious one, and the list goes on. She was just a woman who wanted to learn and say to others that women can do anything that a man can do. Overall, she seems like a cool person, and I would like to meet her. 

Chapter 2 Question 3

One concept that I really enjoyed this week was the whole concept of empathy. This concept basically means that a person has a keen ability to interpret emotions of others. When empathy is used, it really helps one use more critical thinking. They want to channel into the person they are feeling empathy for, and critically think the way that the other person is thinking. I really know that I use empathy, which is really why it hits home with me. When I am with my friends, I can easily spot out that one of them are having an off day. So, I like to talk it out with them, interpret their emotions, and make an action plan off of what is wrong. For some reason it gives me a high, knowing that I helped another person with their problems. It is not only just with friends though, I can easily tell when people are not having a good day by both their actions and body language. This really helps with the whole concept of empathy, because being able to tell people's emotions is a huge part of it. 

Chapter 2 Question 2

From my prospective, Dawkins does not think that God and evolution mix. Dawkins contradicts all of Aquinas "5  Proofs of God" and makes the whole piece that Aquinas wrote sound like a mockery. I think that it is too much to mix religion and people- it is a battle that will never end. In both cases, sometimes people just have to agree to disagree. It is more psychological and spiritual to those who think that evolution and God mix together. These type of people like to put a name on the supernatural and everything that has happened and will happen. Those who don't like to put a name on evolution, are more scientific and logical thinkers. They need a science reason behind everything that happens, and will do everything they can to find a reason why. When you mix an emotional thinker with a scientific thinker, they will just fight. It will never work- a mutual decision will never be made.