Humanities-1100
Signature Assignment
By: Michael Barela
Submitted to: Dr. Jennifer M. Bouman
Your country is threatened with an invasion by another country. You possess a powerful weapon that has never been used before. You know that if you are to unleash this weapon you'll stop the threat of invasion. However, since this weapon has never been used before, no one knows the ultimate consequences of using it. In fact, through simulations there is an 85% chance that using the weapon could potentially backfire and kill off over 40% of your own population while annihilating your opponent. You are the president of your country and it is up to you to decide what to do.
The first thing is what country is trying to invade us and is it possible to invade them before they reach America. If peace negotiations with the foreign leaders fail we must contemplate all avenues of military forces before we consider using our most powerful weapon which has never been used before. Each country has a dominant religion that reflects on its culture. Hinduism, Buddhism, Taoism, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam all play a factor in a war. So one must ask oneself if a certain foreign invader were to take prisoners how would they be treated. Foreign war hasn't been fought on American soil before and we certainly don't want it to ever happen.
I am reminded of a reading by Mine’ Okubo entitled “Citizen 13660” from unit #2 “Freedom and Responsibility”. She was an American citizen transferred to a prison camp in Topaz Utah in 1942. She became one of the 110,000 people of Japanese descent forced into” protective custody” by the US government. The conditions were horrible at best; however the government tried to treat the prisoners as humane as possible. Something foreign invaders would not have the time or resources for.
If there is time perhaps we could use media outlets to inform the citizens of the invading country and the world what is in store for their troops and possibly through civil movements the foreign citizens themselves could coerce the government to cease invading military operations. That would certainly take more than just sending threatening messages we would have to appeal to the culture of that particular country. Suppose the invasion was from an Islamic country meaning most soldiers are Muslim if not all of them. In Death Unit #3 a reading entitled “Death and Burial of a Muslim” from (The Teaching of Truth) we see this Muslim ritual is quite complicated not only in preparation of the body but also in who will perform the task. Some families might consider the soldiers are martyrs in the war but most people may not. The total destruction of all those in the way of the weapon would destroy the soldiers leaving nothing to bury and they would have to know that it would not end here and we would be forced to invade their country in retaliation against this attack.
At this point we would see Americans protesting against the use of such a weapon especially if it involves killing over 40% of our own citizens. Is it the right of an American president to decide the fate of so many people or is it the fate of the people who give the president this right. I am reminded of another reading from unit #2” Freedom and Responsibility” entitled”Second Treatise of Government” by John Locke. He says that the state of nature has a law of nature to govern it, which obliges everyone: and reason, which is that law, teaches all mankind, who will but consult it, that being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty, or possessions: for men being all the workmanship of one omnipotent, and infinitely wise maker; all the servants of one sovereign master, sent into the world by his order, and about his business; they are his property, whose workmanship they are, made to last during his, not one another's pleasure: and being furnished with like faculties, sharing all in one community of nature, there cannot be supposed any such subordination among us, that may authorize us to destroy one another, as if we were made for one another's uses, as the inferior ranks of creatures are for ours. Everyone, as he is bound to preserve himself, and not to quit his station willfully, so by the like reason, when his own preservation comes not in competition, ought he, as much as he can, to preserve the rest of mankind, and may not, unless it be to do justice on an offender, take away, or impair the life, or what tends to the preservation of the life, the liberty, health, limb, or goods of another.
John Locke speaks of the law of nature in that state of perfect equality were naturally there is no superiority or jurisdiction for one over another in that people are capable of governing themselves and their government has no natural rights or license to the fate of free and honest citizens. It is inconceivable that one man or men have the right to decide the fate of innocent people.
However we must consider the thoughts and actions that must be going through the mind of the American president as well as the human inside himself. Surely she wants no harm to come to American citizens or our troops. This reminds me of a reading from ”Bhagavad Gita” the “Sacred Texts” unit #4 whose author is anonymous. Krishna says, consider your own code of honor as a warrior, you should not hesitate. For a warrior there is no greater good than a lawful war. Happy are the warriors who find such a war coming to them unsought, like an open door to paradise. But if you will not wage this lawful battle, then you will fail your personal law and code of honor, and will sin. Furthermore, men will tell the story of your steadfast dishonor; and to a man of repute dishonors more than death. Your commitment is to action alone, not to the fruits of action. That must never be: you must not be motivated by the fruits of your actions. Yet you must not become attached to inaction. Perform your duties as a warrior and cast off attachment, indifferent alike whether you gain or gain not. This indifference is called yoga. Action is far lower than the rule of understanding. Seek refuge in wisdom. They are unworthy who are moved only by gain.
The warrior says, if you consider understanding more excellent than action, O Troubler of People, why do you assign me this grim mission? You appear to contradict yourself, and puzzle my mind.
Krishna says, in this world I have declared a two-fold division of men: one contemplative, the other men of action. But abstaining from work does not mean that a man is free from action; nor does mere renunciation of action enable him to attain perfection. For no man can ever, even for a moment, be free of action; everyone is made to act by the inborn impulses of his nature. True, a man may refrain from acting to satisfy his sensory desires but if he dwells on them in his mind he is deluded and engaged in deceitful conduct. But the superior man keeps his sensory desires under control, and engages himself in his work free from attachment.
Men who always follow my teaching, in full faith without reservation, become free from the bondage of actions. But know that those who dispute my teaching and do not carry it out are confounded in all understanding, becoming mindless and lost. Therefore, pledge all your actions to me, fix your mind on the eternal self, be without any thought of mine, put away your agitation, and flight.
What this reading is saying is that everyone has a role in life whether it is good or bad there is a balance in the natural world. The role of the American president is part of that balance. He cannot think about his family and friends, mentors or neighbors while carrying out his job. His obligation to his country is more than politics or economics. He must defend the freedom and liberty of the United States which we are so great for at all cost while minimizing human casualty. This is a far cry from trying to balance the deficit or win an election but it is part of the role of the American president.
Wars have been fought do to politics and economics and usually ended when one or the other ran out of gas and money but the holy war has never stopped and those carrying it on have pledged to continue until victory brings peace. How can we stop this? What can we do to bring together the people that are so full of hate that they are willing to live without peace throughout all of their lives? What is it inside of them that make them do it? I don't believe it's all about property. This reminds me of a small passage from unit #1 “Marginalized Voices” by Gloria Anzaldua entitled “How to Tame a Wild Tongue”. Yet the struggle of identities continues, the struggle of borders is our reality still. One day the inner struggle will cease and a true integration take place. In the meantime, tenemos que hacer la lucha .Quien esta protegiendo los ranchos de mi gente? Quien esta tratando de cerrar la fisura entra la india y el blanco en nuestra sangre? El Chicano, si el Chicano que anda como un ladron en su propia casa.
In conclusion a small piece from The Gettysburg Address by Abraham Lincoln. The world will little note nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living rather to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus so far nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us-that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion-that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain, that this nation under God shall have a new birth of freedom, and that the government of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from the earth.
Reflection: The international film critique was interesting because I have never picked a movie apart piece by piece by analyzing its culture and dialogue. I think I enjoyed and appreciated it much more than I would have and I will certainly use this technique in viewing future films. The Museum of Fine Arts critique was absolutely fun to write. It was my first time there and I spent hours collecting information. By the end of the day I was so tired that I didn't realize how much culture I had experienced. Looking back the experience was wonderful and I can't wait to return with a friend or family.
Obviously the critical thinking assignments were a challenge. I was not used to thinking that way before this Humanities course. Other courses require you to critique some assignments but not as much as Humanities 1100. I thought all of the units were of great value, Marginalized Voices showed me the insides of personal culture, Freedom and Responsibility gave me more civil strength, Sacred Texts opened my mind to more meaning of life and the Death Unit made me realize there's no time to waste.
I chose to write my essay around the most meaningful writings that I've read throughout the semester. At least for me they were. There were others but it was very difficult given the two scenarios I had to choose from. I hope that I wrote the paper in such a way that you don't know for sure what my decision was. I wanted people to contemplate heavily on both sides of the decision. One would have to know me personally to determine whether or not I would use the weapon after reading the paper.
I’m not sure how this course will affect my future desires to gain knowledge however I will forever approach text, art and culture with the skills I’ve acquired in this class.
Here is a quote by Gotthold Ephraim Lessing, What education is to the individual man, revelation is to the human race. Education is revelation coming to the individual man, and revelation is education that has come, and is still coming to the human race.
Sources: Critical Thinking About The Human Condition-Fifth Edition, except for the end quote by Gotthold Ephraim Lessing
Signature Assignment
By: Michael Barela
Submitted to: Dr. Jennifer M. Bouman
Your country is threatened with an invasion by another country. You possess a powerful weapon that has never been used before. You know that if you are to unleash this weapon you'll stop the threat of invasion. However, since this weapon has never been used before, no one knows the ultimate consequences of using it. In fact, through simulations there is an 85% chance that using the weapon could potentially backfire and kill off over 40% of your own population while annihilating your opponent. You are the president of your country and it is up to you to decide what to do.
The first thing is what country is trying to invade us and is it possible to invade them before they reach America. If peace negotiations with the foreign leaders fail we must contemplate all avenues of military forces before we consider using our most powerful weapon which has never been used before. Each country has a dominant religion that reflects on its culture. Hinduism, Buddhism, Taoism, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam all play a factor in a war. So one must ask oneself if a certain foreign invader were to take prisoners how would they be treated. Foreign war hasn't been fought on American soil before and we certainly don't want it to ever happen.
I am reminded of a reading by Mine’ Okubo entitled “Citizen 13660” from unit #2 “Freedom and Responsibility”. She was an American citizen transferred to a prison camp in Topaz Utah in 1942. She became one of the 110,000 people of Japanese descent forced into” protective custody” by the US government. The conditions were horrible at best; however the government tried to treat the prisoners as humane as possible. Something foreign invaders would not have the time or resources for.
If there is time perhaps we could use media outlets to inform the citizens of the invading country and the world what is in store for their troops and possibly through civil movements the foreign citizens themselves could coerce the government to cease invading military operations. That would certainly take more than just sending threatening messages we would have to appeal to the culture of that particular country. Suppose the invasion was from an Islamic country meaning most soldiers are Muslim if not all of them. In Death Unit #3 a reading entitled “Death and Burial of a Muslim” from (The Teaching of Truth) we see this Muslim ritual is quite complicated not only in preparation of the body but also in who will perform the task. Some families might consider the soldiers are martyrs in the war but most people may not. The total destruction of all those in the way of the weapon would destroy the soldiers leaving nothing to bury and they would have to know that it would not end here and we would be forced to invade their country in retaliation against this attack.
At this point we would see Americans protesting against the use of such a weapon especially if it involves killing over 40% of our own citizens. Is it the right of an American president to decide the fate of so many people or is it the fate of the people who give the president this right. I am reminded of another reading from unit #2” Freedom and Responsibility” entitled”Second Treatise of Government” by John Locke. He says that the state of nature has a law of nature to govern it, which obliges everyone: and reason, which is that law, teaches all mankind, who will but consult it, that being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty, or possessions: for men being all the workmanship of one omnipotent, and infinitely wise maker; all the servants of one sovereign master, sent into the world by his order, and about his business; they are his property, whose workmanship they are, made to last during his, not one another's pleasure: and being furnished with like faculties, sharing all in one community of nature, there cannot be supposed any such subordination among us, that may authorize us to destroy one another, as if we were made for one another's uses, as the inferior ranks of creatures are for ours. Everyone, as he is bound to preserve himself, and not to quit his station willfully, so by the like reason, when his own preservation comes not in competition, ought he, as much as he can, to preserve the rest of mankind, and may not, unless it be to do justice on an offender, take away, or impair the life, or what tends to the preservation of the life, the liberty, health, limb, or goods of another.
John Locke speaks of the law of nature in that state of perfect equality were naturally there is no superiority or jurisdiction for one over another in that people are capable of governing themselves and their government has no natural rights or license to the fate of free and honest citizens. It is inconceivable that one man or men have the right to decide the fate of innocent people.
However we must consider the thoughts and actions that must be going through the mind of the American president as well as the human inside himself. Surely she wants no harm to come to American citizens or our troops. This reminds me of a reading from ”Bhagavad Gita” the “Sacred Texts” unit #4 whose author is anonymous. Krishna says, consider your own code of honor as a warrior, you should not hesitate. For a warrior there is no greater good than a lawful war. Happy are the warriors who find such a war coming to them unsought, like an open door to paradise. But if you will not wage this lawful battle, then you will fail your personal law and code of honor, and will sin. Furthermore, men will tell the story of your steadfast dishonor; and to a man of repute dishonors more than death. Your commitment is to action alone, not to the fruits of action. That must never be: you must not be motivated by the fruits of your actions. Yet you must not become attached to inaction. Perform your duties as a warrior and cast off attachment, indifferent alike whether you gain or gain not. This indifference is called yoga. Action is far lower than the rule of understanding. Seek refuge in wisdom. They are unworthy who are moved only by gain.
The warrior says, if you consider understanding more excellent than action, O Troubler of People, why do you assign me this grim mission? You appear to contradict yourself, and puzzle my mind.
Krishna says, in this world I have declared a two-fold division of men: one contemplative, the other men of action. But abstaining from work does not mean that a man is free from action; nor does mere renunciation of action enable him to attain perfection. For no man can ever, even for a moment, be free of action; everyone is made to act by the inborn impulses of his nature. True, a man may refrain from acting to satisfy his sensory desires but if he dwells on them in his mind he is deluded and engaged in deceitful conduct. But the superior man keeps his sensory desires under control, and engages himself in his work free from attachment.
Men who always follow my teaching, in full faith without reservation, become free from the bondage of actions. But know that those who dispute my teaching and do not carry it out are confounded in all understanding, becoming mindless and lost. Therefore, pledge all your actions to me, fix your mind on the eternal self, be without any thought of mine, put away your agitation, and flight.
What this reading is saying is that everyone has a role in life whether it is good or bad there is a balance in the natural world. The role of the American president is part of that balance. He cannot think about his family and friends, mentors or neighbors while carrying out his job. His obligation to his country is more than politics or economics. He must defend the freedom and liberty of the United States which we are so great for at all cost while minimizing human casualty. This is a far cry from trying to balance the deficit or win an election but it is part of the role of the American president.
Wars have been fought do to politics and economics and usually ended when one or the other ran out of gas and money but the holy war has never stopped and those carrying it on have pledged to continue until victory brings peace. How can we stop this? What can we do to bring together the people that are so full of hate that they are willing to live without peace throughout all of their lives? What is it inside of them that make them do it? I don't believe it's all about property. This reminds me of a small passage from unit #1 “Marginalized Voices” by Gloria Anzaldua entitled “How to Tame a Wild Tongue”. Yet the struggle of identities continues, the struggle of borders is our reality still. One day the inner struggle will cease and a true integration take place. In the meantime, tenemos que hacer la lucha .Quien esta protegiendo los ranchos de mi gente? Quien esta tratando de cerrar la fisura entra la india y el blanco en nuestra sangre? El Chicano, si el Chicano que anda como un ladron en su propia casa.
In conclusion a small piece from The Gettysburg Address by Abraham Lincoln. The world will little note nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living rather to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus so far nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us-that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion-that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain, that this nation under God shall have a new birth of freedom, and that the government of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from the earth.
Reflection: The international film critique was interesting because I have never picked a movie apart piece by piece by analyzing its culture and dialogue. I think I enjoyed and appreciated it much more than I would have and I will certainly use this technique in viewing future films. The Museum of Fine Arts critique was absolutely fun to write. It was my first time there and I spent hours collecting information. By the end of the day I was so tired that I didn't realize how much culture I had experienced. Looking back the experience was wonderful and I can't wait to return with a friend or family.
Obviously the critical thinking assignments were a challenge. I was not used to thinking that way before this Humanities course. Other courses require you to critique some assignments but not as much as Humanities 1100. I thought all of the units were of great value, Marginalized Voices showed me the insides of personal culture, Freedom and Responsibility gave me more civil strength, Sacred Texts opened my mind to more meaning of life and the Death Unit made me realize there's no time to waste.
I chose to write my essay around the most meaningful writings that I've read throughout the semester. At least for me they were. There were others but it was very difficult given the two scenarios I had to choose from. I hope that I wrote the paper in such a way that you don't know for sure what my decision was. I wanted people to contemplate heavily on both sides of the decision. One would have to know me personally to determine whether or not I would use the weapon after reading the paper.
I’m not sure how this course will affect my future desires to gain knowledge however I will forever approach text, art and culture with the skills I’ve acquired in this class.
Here is a quote by Gotthold Ephraim Lessing, What education is to the individual man, revelation is to the human race. Education is revelation coming to the individual man, and revelation is education that has come, and is still coming to the human race.
Sources: Critical Thinking About The Human Condition-Fifth Edition, except for the end quote by Gotthold Ephraim Lessing