The New Literacy

So I was reading this article today, and it was talking about literacy and how it has changed. The old literacy use to deal with just reading and understanding what you are reading. Today, there is new type of literacy, more modern version. Such new literacies include visual, computer, video, media, multimedia, television, and technological. This new literacy causes us to see "reading and writing as generic, the intellectual equivalent to all-purpose flour" as the article said. It really made me think of how times have changed. Just a few 20-30 years ago, there were no cell phones or computers to confuse us. All people had to worry about was how to read and write, just the words on paper. Today, though, there are so many new technologies that it is hard to keep up. I think about my parents and grandparents and how I have to help them every time they want to get on the computer or just change the ringer on there cell phone. Their generations have a hard time with all the new technology partly because they didn't grow up with it. When they were younger, they didn't need computers or ipods. Is this what's going to happen to your generation when we get older? Our we going to become "outdated" along with all the technology we have grown up with? It's just something that I was thinking about today. What are your thoughts?

Putting Disability in its Place

So I was thinking a little more about this essay/article.

I want to start with a quote of a quote in the essay.
"To know who you are is to be oriented in moral space, a space in which questions arise about what is good or bad, what is worth doing and what not, what has meaning and importance for you, and what is trivial and secondary."

As I mentioned before, who are we? That is a very deep question. Now that I think about it, I would prefer to identify myself with my morals and beliefs as opposed to my surroundings. I mean although I may feel most comfortable at my literal home (vs figurative like life in a book), my family may not make the best choices and thus I would not want to label myself based on other people. I would like to label myself based on the "moral space".

The really big question is, though, do we ever get a full grasp of who we are truly? As times change and passes, we as human beings change, our literal home and figurative homes change, our morals and beliefs can and do change, nothing is forever sure in life. How can we associate ourselves with anything solid enough to grasp who we are as a person? Can we? Is it ever truly possible? Or can we just know who we are for a period of time (until things change)?

Any thoughts are welcome... :)

Universal Healthcare: is america just behind the curve

Michael Moore's work usually doesn't appeal to me all that much but as i watched his documentary "Sicko" I really started to think about many of the ideas put forth. Mr. Moore would certainly be considered to be more on the liberal side, but in this documentary he really does put forth a well thought out argument against the United States health care system.

As it currently stands it is quite difficult to get the necessary health care needed when one is in need and doesn't have the means to pay for their health care without insurance. Insurance companies are run as businesses. When they have to pay out to a customer then they lose money. technically every time they deny some one's claim they are running their business efficiently. The problem is that no one ends up getting the service they have been paying for.

From what Michael Moore shows of many other countries like Canada, France, and the UK, the people in those countries are actually really well off due to the national health care systems. Even if their taxes are higher so that the government can cover these expenses the people get so much back. no matter what the ailment, it is covered by the government.

All of this information makes me think. If the US government managed it's budget a little bit better, and changed it's priorities, couldn't Americans have the same benefits as these other foreign countries.

Ashley... On My Mind

So, there's something about the story of the young Ashley that has been on my mind all day. I can't help but keep wondering what is wrong and what is right. Before reading this story I had never heard of static encephalopathy, so I did some research. This "condition" as they so fondly refer to it as, are seen in those infants that are diagnosed with Fetal Alcohol Syndrome (FAS). If Ashley's mother had consumed alcohol when she was pregnant, what are her motives behind the surgeries for Ashley? Does she feel guilt, is she trying to keep her alive, because she feels remorse for causing her daughter to have static encephalopathy? Now, I'm not trying to point any fingers and I don't want to accuse Ashley's mother of anything if that is not the case, but it's just so sad that this little girl will never be able to lead a normal life, and it's not just because of her static encephalopathy. I know that it is extremely hard for a child with the brain development of a 3-month old to give her consent for the surgeries and it must be left in the hands of her parents and her doctors, but I can't help but wonder if they made these decisions so it would be easier for them to handle and more convenient for her parents?

Ashley's story has opened my eyes to others with disabilities. Other cases that are not as hefty as hers, but they are still viable in everyday life. People that have physical or mental disablities are not given the same chances or opportunities as people that are seen as "normal" and healthy. I see it everyday on campus, people that have physical disabilities are unable to get into buildings, the sidewalks make it hard for them to get around, there are not elevators that are available for their use. And I find this sad, sad on the universities part for not making sure that their students, and even their employees, have equal opportunities and they are able to get around campus and into buildings.

Ashley's story has allowed me to look at disabilities in different lights. I feel for that little girl and wish that there was an easier answer to all this. I wish that she would be able to have the same opportunities as everyone else. I know that that is very far fetched, but by not allowing their daughter to develop normally, I believe that Ashley's parents have in a way cheated her out of life and the little life that she was able to experience, she won't have the chance to any longer.

-P

Putting Disability in Its Place: It's Not a Joking Matter

I read this article today concerning disabilities and how a handicap is a "misfortune" not an "injustice." I guess I can agree with that statement. The way society perceives the "uncommon"(disabilities) starts a chain reaction of bad responses (discrimination) that makes the common appear very uncommon. This article seemed very philosophical in its appealing subject. It speaks of how a place is what identifies our true character. "Who we are, our self-definition, is a matter that is inexorably tied to our orientation to the place in which we find ourselves - to our orientation to the place we find ready-made for us," and who we are is defined by our place in this community. It's a really deep thought - how do we know who we are? How can we really define ourselves? This article presents the place that we feel most comfortable should be the one that provides answers not pose questions. How we feel in a certain environment is the reflection of our identity. When we question "belonging" to this certain area, our identity is questioned as well. I guess this does make sense. When I'm home, I feel comforted and I know everything: my environment, my family, my friends, and the way the community perceives me, aka my identity. At college I question my identity all the time. I wonder if I actually belong and if I will ever make something of myself and be truly comfortable in my skin. It's scary to think of how we feel when we are in a specific place is a reflection of our identity. Looking at college, I wonder what it says about me. Another point the author made was "Questions of self and of identity are framed not only within the spatial terms of where one stands but also within the moral space of where one ought to stand." 

I'm pretty sure I will be thinking about this article for a few days, any thoughts? How do you perceive yourself? Do you agree with what the article said? 

Penelope 

the Pillow Angel

Strolling in around 7 tonight, I thought I’d instigate a little productivity before indulging in the cinema of Tarintino. An abundance of light reading material has amassed on my closet floor, the culmination of my English endeavors while at college. I was hoping to sink in to a tranquil short story, hopefully forget my academic pressures, and learn a little something about anything; I stumbled on to a short story about Ashley. Ashley was a nine year old suffering from a rare case of static encephalopathy, a mental retardation that maintains the fundamental capabilities of a 3- month- infant without mental progress or evolution. Although this CLEARLY was not the short fiction I was hoping to gravitate towards, it provoked a few thoughts worthy to voice. Ashley’s parents have been subjects of tumultuous prosecution during recent years when in 2004 they resolved to have Ashley undergo a controversial procedure that entailed the removal of Ashley’s appendix, breast buds, and uterus. They then introduced high levels of concentrated estrogen in Ashley’s bloodstream, this manipulated her bone growth and significantly impeded bone growth later in life, keeping Ashley about the size of a 9 year old the rest of her life. The medical benefits (improved digestion, mitigated menstruation, improved circulation) sufficed for many observers, but for many skeptics it offered no solace, tenaciously criticizing in what is now referred to as “The Ashley Treatment”. They claim a surgery of this magnitude without any conceit dehumanizes the handicapped and robs them of their rights as a human. It is this conflict from which the question to my readers stems. Ashley only has the mental capacity of a 3-month infant, with negligible chances for mental growth. What then makes her, or anyone for that matter, human? This is an incredibly crude and apathetic sounding question and case for application… I know. But does a physical representation constitute a human, or is it our mental perception and capabilities that partition us and define us as a species. Isn’t humanity defined by intelligence, subjectivity, volition, self-awareness, and ingenuity, or is it simply a material manifestation synonymous with our visual concept of a “human”, with only the universal obligation of sustenance and air to convey life? I’ve been thinking about it for a while and could use a more perceptive insight. Thanks! Penelope
	Paging and Bottom Toolbar
Connected to Microsoft Exchange