The 1st Film

1. The images are that exact of how Plato describes them in The Allegory of the Cave. The music in the background is mysterious scary, depressing, gloomy, just as Plato's ideas.
2. I suppose they use som of his own words in the way that he describes the half wall but there was no mention of the light but it did mention the chains and the shadows and the unknown.
3. Regardless of the fact that the video left out the sun peeking through and the great escape it describe it perfectly. The meaning was not there, it seem to just be focused on the cave physically and not the menaing behind it.
4. The modern meanings i suppose would be the way the peole looked in it, they looked modern and not old fashioned or like hairy cave monsters.

the fifth film - plato's allegory of the cave

1. During this film, there was dialouge and music. i dont think that this film relates to plato as well as others could but i think that the concept that the cave man who was curious does. this is shown through out the dialouge.
2. This film does not use any of Plato's own word however he uses the same concept. I think that this film realy has focused on the curiosity of the people that were in the cave, or that one cave man that escaped. In this film, there were two men. One man was very curious while the other didnt really seemed phase by anything. The man that was curious stated that he was very bored. I think that this relates to the curious man in Plato's original Allegory of the Cave.
3. I think that the people that made this video could have done a better job in terms of making it more like the original Allegory of the Cave but i think that they did a very good job diplaying the "curiosity" the one person that was in the cave seeking a way to get out.
4. I think that the laungage in this vilm is very modern. I thought that it made the video more entertaining to watch because i could relate to it. Also the clicks of our modern time were displayed out side the cave like "the goth kid"

Response to the fifth film

The fifth film
1.The images are two cavemen-like people and the cave is represented as an actual cave. There are shadows of the animals and there is a small introduction in the beginning.
2.The film doesn’t use Plato’s own words. The film uses the idea of the cave but not any exact phrases.
3.This video is obviously a comical version of Plato’s Allegory of the Cave and it is not meant to represent it seriously. The video leaves out how the person who leaves the cave gets inspired and comes back to the cave to tell the people about it. The meaning doesn’t seem as strong because it uses swears and the guy touching a girls boobs, so it does get the basic point across but it is not that meaningful.

Response to the fifth film

1. In the fifth video the house was used to represent the cave. There were cave-looking men in the video. As far as images and sounds, the music and the some of the dialogue, represented some of the different aspects of Plato’s allegory

2. The creator of this video had the basic concept of Plato’s allegory, but the creator did not use any of Plato’s own specific words. The creator of the video did use similar concepts of Plato’s allegory. The author of the video incorporated the fact that one man escaped, out of two. The supposedly bored man in the video was curious and that relates to the curious man in Plato’s allegory.

3. The video does not directly relate to the allegory; a sufficient amount of ideas were left out of the video that was in the real allegory. The creator could have done a better job of illustrating the “curiosity” of the man

4. The way the creator, of this video, made the characters speaks in was very modern. This was probably because these days you have to impress people and relate to them, so they can understand the type of entertainment.

How well does the video interpret Plato's theory of the cave? Are there any aspects of the allegory that the video leaves out? How does this affect the meaning?

this is for video five. This video did not fully interpret the meaning of Plato's allegories. It focused mainly on the light and was not a "Platoish" interpretation. It was more of a literal interpretation. the video is a comedy and does not depict the theory well because it is more literal than illusory. Many aspects of the video are left out, only the prisoners and the light allegories are truly shown.

"The Red Pill" scene from The Matrix: An addendum to the Plato film series

The Matrix is a film that has inspired a great deal of philosophical dialogue, especially for a Hollywood movie. Below, you will see the "red pill" scene in which Neo learns about his real life outside of the matrix. There are many philosophical parallels between this film and Plato's "The Allegory of the Cave," most obviously, the dual nature of reality, including the existence of a true world and a false or "lower" one. There are also some distinctive differences. For example, the "real" world outside of the matrix is a dystopian nightmare, while Plato's upper world is one of pure philosophy and light. But the messages of both works are similar: the sensory world is an illusion to be overcome through the discipline of the mind.

Film Series: Plato's Allegory of the Cave

Underneath this post, I have gathered seven different You Tube videos on the topic of Plato's cave. Most, if not all, are student creations. Some are short and pithy; some are loaded with social commentary; others are just a bit silly. In your groups, I'd like you to watch one of the videos and respond to the following questions. You may post your answers as a comment to the video.

1. What images/sounds are used to represent the different aspects of Plato's allegory?
2. Does the film use any of Plato's own words? Comment on how these passages are incorporated into the video.
3. How well does the video interpret Plato's theory of the cave? Are there any aspects of the allegory that the video leaves out? How does this affect the meaning?
4. What kinds of modern meanings are represented?

Have fun watching t.v. for class!

Plato's Allegory of the Cave: The seventh film

The Allegory of the Cave: Sixth film in series

Plato's Allegory of the Cave: The fifth film

Plato's Cave: The fourth film, an oldie

Plato's Analogy of the Cave: Third film in series

Plato's Cave: The second film in the series

Plato's Allegory of the Cave: The first of a series of you-tube videos

Response to "There is no fool like an old fool"

I agree with Carlags opinion to Machiavelli's quote about leaders. Machiavelli stated that "A man who wishes to make a vocation of being good at all times will come to ruin among so many who are not so good"(Machiavelli 37). I do respect the fact that a person lives his or her life in a positive way all the time and sees everything in a optimistic way. This way of life is not made for leaders of groups and large organizations. This is not to be taken in a way that leaders will sacrifice their own beliefs for the livelyhood of the organization but they might have to get their hands dirty and do what they must do in order to keep the group or organization alive. This does not apply to every leader because Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. made his point a great number of times even though he did not immediately succeed he kept trying and doing so by using his beliefs.

Response to #2

I feel that Politicians should be skilled in war, more mental awareness than physically skilled. I say this because if they are going to start a war with someone, they should have knowledge about the pros and cons. Apparently we were missing this when we decided to go into the war in w/ Iraq. If they were trained to understand war and its outcomes, a religious point would have been brought up. They started more than just a fight over terrorism; it has become so much deeper than that. According to Mach., he says, "the prince must read histories and in them study the deeds of great men; he must see how they conducted themselves in wars; he must examine the reasons for their victories and for their defeats in order to avoid the latter and to imitate the former". Basically what he says here is what our politicians of the U.S do not do. I don't feel that modern war is similar to wars in Machiavelli's era. The wars today are over different issues and President Bush seems to be oblivious to everything going on around him. In Machiavelli's era, war was the only way of settling things but today there are other options to go to.
The fact that President Bush was reading Machiavelli's book does not surprise me. Bush is probably trying to make himself feel better because Mach. States that, "It is wiser to live with the reputation of a miser, which produces reproach without hatred, than to be forced to incur the reputation of rapacity, which produces reproach along with hatred,.." President Bush is just trying to justify his stupid decisions.

"There is no fool like an old fool."

According to Machiavelli, "A man who wishes to make a vocation of being good at all times will come to ruin among so many who are not so good" (Machiavelli 37)." I sort of agree with the fact that if someone is set out to do all the good things, they will eventually set themselves up for failure. I agree with the fact that everything in this world is not going to be perfect and we all need to make some sort of mistake. This is the way we live and learn. It reminds me of the saying, "you can't teach an old dog new tricks." Once that dog is old he then becomes lazy and there is nothing the owner could do. The similarity is that Machiavelli is stating that if one goes on to think that they are going to live the perfect life, they need to reevaluate themselves because there is more to it than just learning, it's also about living. No one is perfect and you have to lose some in order to win some.

Response to question #2

Modern heads of state should only show skill in war when it is absolutely necessary. Most of the time nowadays leaders show there skill in war just to show who is more powerful. This is not right. War is a last resort and should only happen if all else has failed. Modern war is not similar to war in Machiavelli's time. War back then was fought to conquer to have more resources. Wars now are fought to show that one country is superior to another country. A modern politician who follows Machiavelli's recommendations are not likely to succeed. They will cause more problems in the would, which will cause them to fail. If they were to invade a country whenever they felt like it, they will run out of troops before long. Also, countries would align themselves to stop the invading country.

Agreeing with Machiavelli

Although Prince Machiavelli proposes many ideas in “The Qualities of a Prince,” that some people see as unruly and unjust, I believe that some politicians may actually benefit from Prince Machiavelli’s concerns on military matters. If deciding to go to war (which shouldn’t be created in the first place,) there are a few things that Machiavelli thinks can benefit your chances. “It is evident that when princes have given more thought to personal luxuries than to arms, they have lost their state.” (38) In this era, politicians are constantly being the objects of the media. The scandals in the white house concerning Bill Clinton is an example of a head of state giving more thought to his personal matters than to the more important issues, his responsibility. Machiavelli’s strategy also includes knowing everything about his country from the terrain, to the nature of the rivers and swamps, to the weather of each area. “Such knowledge is useful in two ways: first, one learns to know one’s country and can better understand how to defend it: second, with the knowledge and experience of the terrain, one can easily comprehend the characteristics of any other terrain.” (38) This I believe would be useful today in our combat in Iraq because we are fighting in a place that is very different from the United States. Perhaps, if our politicians where more educated of the terrain in other countries we would have a better shot at succeeding in battle. Machiavelli may have been a savage leader, but he still was devoted to his job as a Prince. He would hear others opinions, express his own, back everything with arguments, so that, “When leading his troops no unforeseen incident could arise for which he did not have the remedy.”(39) Lately it seems that our political system has gotten lost in what is right and wrong. Many people are unhappy with the way our country is being handled and believe that our president is not fulfilling his job. The 9/11 tragedies should have been prevented, but instead thousands of people lost their lives. Few years’ later conspiracy theories are spreading and no one knows the truth as to if our political system is corrupt. I believe that if we listened to some of Machiavelli’s ideas our country may have been more successful in the prolonging Iraq war and on many other issues. Not all of Machiavelli’s ideas should be upheld, but I believe some of his strategies are beneficial. I feel that if I knew our leader was doing everything in his power to keep his country from being destroyed, I would feel safe and guarded from harm. He was a man that was devoted to his duty and let nothing take advantage of him.

response to #2

In Machiavelli’s The Qualities of a Prince, one of the qualities that Machiavelli states a prince should maintain is “generosity.” Though Machiavelli’s idea of “generosity” is “burden the people with excessive taxes and to do everything possible to raise funds” (41) he felt this would make the prince a “miser” and to him it was considered better to be dubbed as a miser than a generous person because past experiences have shown him that your generosity can become the cause of your downfall “a prince must guard himself against being despised and…”(43) So, in response to the idea of modern politician succeeding using Machiavelli recommendation I’d say no. Let’s take a look at Bush for an example, he has been “generous,” juicing the people for their money, cutting back on certain necessities, and also raising gas prices all to benefit the success of the war, which has done nothing to help our country. We are now trying to rebuild Iraq, have lost an abundant amount money, not including all the pain that we have cause Iraqian civilians and American soldiers and their families including the shame it has brought this country.

respons to

In Machiavelli’s The Qualities of a Prince, one of the qualities that Machiavelli states a prince should maintain is “generosity.” Though Machiavelli’s idea of “generosity” is “burden the people with excessive taxes and to do everything possible to raise funds” (41) he felt this would make the prince a “miser” and to him it was considered better to be dubbed as a miser than a generous person because past experiences have shown him that your generosity can become the cause of your downfall “a prince must guard himself against being despised and…”(43) So, in response to the idea of modern politician succeeding using Machiavelli recommendation I’d say no. Let’s take a look at Bush for an example, he has been “generous,” juicing the people for their money, cutting back on certain necessities, and also raising gas prices all to benefit the success of the war, which has done nothing to help our country. We are now trying to rebuild Iraq, have lost an abundant amount money, not including all the pain that we have cause Iraqian civilians and American soldiers and their families including the shame it has brought this country.

Ruler

I believe that a ruler should be fear but also loved. If a ruler is only feared it will spark a rebellion driven by hatred. There is no reason why a ruler needs to kill people to keep their reign. I think that there needs to be enough fear to have respect. Although, I believe that it is also important to be loved. If the people love you and believe that you are doing a good job as ruler they will want to continue. It's important to know the surrounding land, and it's advantages and disadvantages. This is because in case of war you will have the upper hand on your opponent and you will be able to insure better protection to the country. I don't think it is necessary to carry around a weapon. People should see their ruler as a stern, and strong person but not violent. You have guards and security to protect you.

Should a leader be skilled?

I have noticed that in many other countries the way that you earn a high political position, or considered for something like that is to be acknowledged in war. Years ago, our leaders were generals leading brigades in and out a serious situations. Now though, our leaders sit at a desk, and have the help of other people to write and think for them. I believe that the heads of state should show skill in war because that would make the citizens of the chosen country feel better because they know that if they were in a serious situation, that the person they are relying on would be able to help defend the country they are leading. In England, they are sending the two princes off to fight in the British army for a certain amount of time because the parliament believes that their possible future leaders should understand what each soldier goes through. In the future if there is a war the leaders should take lead of group of soldiers and take on the job they should be assigned. I know a few soldiers that are fighting in Iraq, and while they are happy to be fighting for their country, they are angry that the president does not understand the conditions that they are living in because he is so many thousands of miles away, safe from the harm of what is happening. The war we are experiencing in this era is not similar to the war’s in Machiavelli’s era because the kings of their era would be living in the tents, and getting wounds while in battle. Every captain or general would respond to the head of state, and that way the country would know that their leader is helping with the problem of war. I also agree that a leader should be able to discuss the possibility of not having the option of war because of how many people we are losing everyday. Our head of state should have the power to mend the problems fighting a verbal war rather than a physical war.

alainna

i dont think that politicians should take everything in Machievelli's essay literally because we are living in modern times with a different form of government meaning that we cant assume that war is the consequence for every little discreptincies between other countries and our selves because that would only result in even more choas within the country especially, since we concider ourselves free people with opinions that matter. i think if one was to summarize the basic idea of Machievelli's essay and understand the jist of it, it could be beneficial for modern politicians. for example the idea of knowing your land thoroughly will allow one to have a better understanding of other people's land and it shows pride for your country which i think is essential when in a position to lead a the people of that country.
i think the reason that bush might have wanted to read Machievelli's essay is because it would make Bush feel better about himself, as though it doesnt matter if the people that you lead hate you because you've got a duty to forfill and if you feel you doing whats right then you cant let people hateing you stop you from reaching a goal.

Response to Blog Question #2

After reading Machiavelli’s “The Qualities of a Prince,” I believe that in order to be a political leader, one must have most of the characteristics that Machiavelli believes a leader should have, not all.
Machiavelli states that the “ends justifies the means,” meaning that you must do whatever it takes in order to be a ruler. He even describes murdering your own family members if it will ensure your safety as a ruler. However, throughout the essay Machiavelli says that a ruler must also bear arms. The ruler must know his land in order to ensure his safety and the safety of his people. He must always be feared because fear keeps people loyal. Machiavelli believes that, as a ruler, you should read history and “study the deeds of great men.”
Many of these attributes are good to have as a ruler; however, some seem extreme, even for a politician. For example, killing your grandmother isn’t necessary or ethical to do in order to be a ruler. However, I do feel that it is better to be feared than loved as a leader because through fear you gain respect and control over the people in your jurisdiction. I also feel it is necessary for a leader to know his land and surroundings because as a leader you should be aware and ready for anything.

Response to Blog Comment #2

Who is to say that conflicts during Machiavelli's time couldn't be solved without war. War could not have been the only way. There were highly educated people in that time period who could have been able to resolve a conflict without a war. Communication was viable and diplomatic solutions could have been possible even if they did not happen often. On the other hand if leaders today followed Machiavelli's idea of always planning for war, we might be able to address our situation In Iraq and Afghanistan without as much killing and destruction

1. Politicians should be skilled in war in case it is ever needed. A strong army should be established, but not overused. However, war these days is much different than war in Machiavelli's day. Today there are other ways we can resolve problems without resorting to war, such as peace talks and peace treaties. In Machiavelli's essay 'The Qualities of the Prince', he makes it seem that being skilled in war is one of the only qualities that a good leader needs. For example, Machiavelli states, "A prince who lacks this ability lacks the most important quality in a leader; because this skill teaches you to find the enemy, choose a campsite, lead troops,organize them for battle and besiege towns to your own advantage.(39)" If leaders today followed all the rules of war from Machiavelli's era, many more problems would arise between different countries. Modern war is different from war in the past.Going to war is a big decision so usually other means of resolving problems are tried first. In Machiavelli's era, war was the only way. War will always play a part in government, however aspects of war have changed throughout time.

A follow-up to Blog Question #2: Machiavelli and Blackwater Scandal

If you're looking for the blog question, scroll down below this posting.

Okay, now that you've read this week's blog question, maybe you'd like to consider this article about the use of mercenary forces in Iraq (as an alternative assignment to the blog post). Is it a case of the end justifies the means? There is a brief mention of Machiavelli in the article, so you might consider what is the author's purpose for including the reference. What would you say is Machiavelli's reputation today?

I received this article from a friend, so I'm not sure of the source, but I'm assuming it's the New York Times.

September 28, 2007
Op -Ed Columnist
Hired Gun Fetish
By PAUL KRUGMAN
Sometimes it seems that the only way to make sense of the Bush
administration is to imagine that it's a vast experiment concocted by
mad political scientists who want to see what happens if a nation
systematically ignores everything we've learned over the past few
centuries about how to make a modern government work.

Thus, the administration has abandoned the principle of a
professional, nonpolitical civil service, stuffing agencies from FEMA
to the Justice Department with unqualified cronies. Tax farming —
giving individuals the right to collect taxes, in return for a share
of the take — went out with the French Revolution; now the tax farmers
are back.

And so are mercenaries, whom Machiavelli described as "useless and
dangerous" more than four centuries ago.

As far as I can tell, America has never fought a war in which
mercenaries made up a large part of the armed force. But in Iraq, they
are so central to the effort that, as Peter W. Singer of the Brookings
Institution points out in a new report, "the private military industry
has suffered more losses in Iraq than the rest of the coalition of
allied nations combined."

And, yes, the so-called private security contractors are mercenaries.
They're heavily armed. They carry out military missions, but they're
private employees who don't answer to military discipline. On the
other hand, they don't seem to be accountable to Iraqi or U.S. law,
either. And they behave accordingly.

We may never know what really happened in a crowded Baghdad square two
weeks ago. Employees of Blackwater USA claim that they were attacked
by gunmen. Iraqi police and witnesses say that the contractors began
firing randomly at a car that didn't get out of their way.

What we do know is that more than 20 civilians were killed, including
the couple and child in the car. And the Iraqi version of events is
entirely consistent with many other documented incidents involving
security contractors.

For example, Mr. Singer reminds us that in 2005 "armed contractors
from the Zapata firm were detained by U.S. forces, who claimed they
saw the private soldiers indiscriminately firing not only at Iraqi
civilians, but also U.S. Marines." The contractors were not charged.
In 2006, employees of Aegis, another security firm, posted a "trophy
video" on the Internet that showed them shooting civilians, and
employees of Triple Canopy, yet another contractor, were fired after
alleging that a supervisor engaged in "joy-ride shooting" of Iraqi
civilians.

Yet even among the contractors, Blackwater has the worst reputation.
On Christmas Eve 2006, a drunken Blackwater employee reportedly shot
and killed a guard of the Iraqi vice president. (The employee was
flown out of the country, and has not been charged.) In May 2007,
Blackwater employees reportedly shot an employee of Iraq's Interior
Ministry, leading to an armed standoff between the firm and Iraqi
police.

Iraqis aren't the only victims of this behavior. Of the nearly 4,000
American service members who have died in Iraq, scores if not hundreds
would surely still be alive if it weren't for the hatred such
incidents engender.

Which raises the question, why are Blackwater and other mercenary
outfits still playing such a big role in Iraq?

Don't tell me that they are irreplaceable. The Iraq war has now gone
on for four and a half years — longer than American participation in
World War II. There has been plenty of time for the Bush
administration to find a way to do without mercenaries, if it wanted
to.

And the danger out-of-control military contractors pose to American
forces has been obvious at least since March 2004, when four armed
Blackwater employees blundered into Fallujah in the middle of a
delicate military operation, getting themselves killed and
precipitating a crisis that probably ended any chance of an acceptable
outcome in Iraq.

Yet Blackwater is still there. In fact, last year the State Department
gave Blackwater the lead role in diplomatic security in Iraq.

Mr. Singer argues that reliance on private military contractors has
let the administration avoid making hard political choices, such as
admitting that it didn't send enough troops in the first place.
Contractors, he writes, "offered the potential backstop of additional
forces, but with no one having to lose any political capital." That's
undoubtedly part of the story.

But it's also worth noting that the Bush administration has tried to
privatize every aspect of the U.S. government it can, using taxpayers'
money to give lucrative contracts to its friends — people like Erik
Prince, the owner of Blackwater, who has strong Republican
connections. You might think that national security would take
precedence over the fetish for privatization — but remember, President
Bush tried to keep airport security in private hands, even after 9/11.

So the privatization of war — no matter how badly it works — is just
part of the pattern.

NEW BLOG QUESTION: Number 2: Niccolo Machiavelli

Check out this picture that Weslie from the 8am class sent me.

With this image now imprinted on your retina, consider these questions:

1. Politicians -- especially heads of state -- are the contemporary counterparts of the prince. To what extent should successful heads of modern states show skill in war? Is modern war similar to wars in Machiavelli's era? If so in what ways?

2. Are modern politicians likely to succeed by following all or most of Machiavelli's recommendations? Why or why not?

Posters, answer ONE of these, using examples from the text. Feel free to reference the picture, post your own picture (relevant and tasteful, of course), or a relevant you-tube video (that might be tricky, but you can always include a link if you can't embed the video in the post). The last part is optional, of course.

Response to Blog Question #1: Poverty and Location

Poverty and Teenagers: Does Location Matter?
In school systems today, it is very apparent that where you live matters. Some individuals lack the ability to learn by the location in which they reside. For those students who live in suburban towns, they are fortunate enough to enjoy a better, more developed school ambiance. On the other hand, students who live in urban areas, located mainly in the city, might not have the same advantages of suburban town students. For example, more affluent towns have the means to support school systems. With more money comes a better sports program, an improved academic curriculum, a strong music department and a selection of after-school activities. In contrast, Inner-city schools may not have the proper funding they need to have enriching school agendas. Since these schools lack the funding they need for a superior school environment, students may lack interest in their school and therefore resort to other forms of activity that could potentially be destructive. An increase in gang violence and overall destruction are primarily based in underprivileged towns as opposed to privileged towns.
Another issue that may decrease a student’s ability to learn in school is poverty itself. According to a newspaper article titled “Poor Teens ‘Lag Two Years Behind” from BBC News, children raised in poor households are nine months behind in the learning progress. With this in mind, what is it that we can do to solve this situation? For a better tomorrow, we must help each and every child today to achieve a successful education no matter how underprivileged he or she may be. In Paulo Freire’s essay “The Banking Concept of Education,” Freire states that students in the classroom are essentially vessels in which the teacher or “oppressor” pours in his own thoughts and ideas. Living in Brazil, Freire was a strong advocate who helped to teach the poor how the read and write. According to Freire, education is corrupted by the “act of depositing” information into the “depositories” or minds of oppressed students. With this system, students are inhibited of having any voice or freedom to inquiry.
Freire strove to truly educate the poor people of Brazil. Like the people of Brazil in the mid twentieth century, students in the United States as well as many other nations within the world today still struggle for an education. Whether it is the location in which one lives or the amount of money one owns, everyone should have to right to learn and participate in school.

Response to Blog Question #1: Need for Interaction

The government seems to being doing a better job at improving the education systems of the country. I feel that Friere would greatly appreciate our efforts. We are working towards making school less about teaching teaching and students learning to just being basically a room filled with students learning from eachother, that including the teacher. I feel that in a learning enviorment it shouldnt just be about a teacher standing there and talking but being more interactive and hands on with the material. The money that the government is said to have being put forward i feel does just that. It provide schools with more technology and other methods of learning for the students besides just talking, notes and tests. School is way more thatn that. Learning is more than just sitting and trying to force yourself to understand becuase that is what is expected of you, to 'ace" the test and in reality that is really all that matters. But it is better to think on your own which will bring you towards others ideas you m
ay have never thought of and you come to learn from yourself and others.

Response to Blog Question #1: Poverty

After reading through the articles provided, the one that I found most appropriate to compare to the writings of Paulo Freire would be “Poverty and Teenagers”. While reading that article, numerous sections and quotes from Freire’s writing came to mind. For instance, the article talks about how students in poverty are bound to do as much as two times worse than other students in better financial standings. I believe that this is because the more they are told that they are not as fortunate as other students, the more they feel that they are expected to fail. “The more completely they accept the passive role imposed on them, the more they tend simply to adapt to the world as it is and to the fragmented view of reality deposited in them.” Paulo Freire stated in his writings that he felt for the poor, and I believe that he would support the educational programs to financially help those students in poverty. The plan is to actually halve the poverty of children by 2010. I think that this is a great way to encour
age students in lower financial standings because whatever the reason that they are in poverty, they are still children, and they are still part of our communities. I strongly believe that Freire would stand by this idea, and support it.

Response to Blog Question #1: MCAS

“Palms get clammy, pencil tip keeps breaking, can’t use my highlighter. Only fifteen minutes left, it just keeps ticking! I’m wasting time thinking about it. I need to get into college, oh my gosh.”

I believe this is the perfect example of the SAT’s. This could be a stellar student on an everyday basis, she gets anxiety from the thought of having such a massive test. Why is there so much emphasis on something that is literally trying to “trick” one’s mind? Personally, I think it is a horrible way to “classify” students. The SAT proves nothing but pure memorization and whit.

If one is a student at a public school, they must take MCAS in the fourth grade, IOWA in the seventh grade, and the MCAS again in high school in order to graduate.

These tests force the student to choose only one answer, they are not allowed any creativity, they are stripped of their ability to truly think. These students are oppressed. Freire makes a point that “it is men themselves who are filed away through the lack of creativity, transformation, and knowledge in this (at best) misguided system.” The government is the reason why students have on “horse blinders.” They take away our ability to question and to argue points that we “cook up” on our own. Students can’t be given an idea and let their minds wander and have a “creative flow” unless they are in art class.

It is the government that sets the standards for the school systems. The government has control over everything in the sense that the “youth is the future.” If the youth is only learning what the government is pushing on them, they have learned nothing. Freire says that “the educator’s role is to regulate the way the world ‘enters into’ the students.” His concerns for the poor are for their good interest. It is as if he picks them up because they are fresh and untouched, they have not been oppressed yet, they are not contaminated.

Structure in classrooms is needed in order for the class to be successful. After reading The Banking Concept of Education, I view structure differently. When is structure too much?

Response to Blog Question #1: More Standardized Testing

In the case of standardize tests; I feel that they should be done away with. One test should not be the main component of what colleges consider when they are accepting new students. While I understand the basis behind standardize tests in which everyone is level, I feel that students grades and grade point averages should be held higher than SAT scores for it is a better reflection of their actual intelligence. Many students, including myself, do not test well under pressure and felt that their SAT scores were not a good reflection of our actual knowledge . Standardize tests do not show how much effort a person puts into their work. It does not show the times they have stayed after school for help or how many times they participated in class. There are many people who did well on their standardize test but really have not absorbed and taken the knowledge to heart like others have. The reason for learning is relay what you learn to your real life. Standardize tests focus on certain subjects that those higher up decide is important, but these topics are not always going to be vital to someone’s life later on. Due to standardize tests teachers are made to teach what is required of them. Instead of having class discussions on important issues in the world today and other topics vital to your adult life, students are taught math and science equations they will never use. By teaching for a test, the teachers feel more pressure and the pressure converts to the kids. This pressure stresses the students out and makes them resent learning.

I feel that Freiere would agree in that standardize tests should be done away with. The teachers are teaching what is required of them, which relates to his rules that state, “ the teacher teaches and the students are taught”, “ the teachers chooses and enforces his choice and the students comply” and “ the teacher chooses the program content and the students adapt it to”. Freiere feels that it is wrong for the teachers to just teach and the students to listen. There is no way for people to benefit this way, by interacting and learning relevant and important topics, the students will absorb the information more and it will be more useful. I feel that Freiere and many others would agree that getting rid of standardize testing would in the end benefit students greatly. Teachers will have slightly more freedom to teach more beneficial topics and students are more likely to pay attention and thus do better in school.

Response to Blog Question #1: Women and Enrollment

Learning to Break the Cycle
“…children growing up with unequal chances will become the next generation of parents without the resources to give their own children a good chance - and this "chicken and egg" cycle will continue."- BBC News

It is always difficult to interrupt an ongoing circle without causing any disturbances. A rotary for example, if you wait for all the cars to stop zooming by, you could be there at the yield sign for eternity. However, if you cut right through or attempt turning in the other direction, a car accident is bound to happen. In life, without the vehicle, we face these cycles everyday – some of us are affected by them more than others. The quote from above is relating to the inequalities of education resulting from poverty. This cycle of children not being able to afford a proper education, and growing up to wear their parent’s shoes, and provide the same for their own children, is difficult to over come, due to education institutes’ desire to meet numbers. Numbers seem to be taking over, due to the use of standardized tests, on very unstandardized children, each with their own potential, learning styles and capabilities. As each school tries to meet certain standards, they urge kids along to transform themselv
es into a statistic. However, certain kids are able to attend tutors, or extra class that takes timely, and is also very costly. Unfortunately, not all kids can afford these helpful classes, and therefore can not perform to their best ability on these pressured tests that, at times, solely determine your future. This is just another step to take in order to swing around the cycle. Coming from a poor family is a different inequality of education from other cycles, though, since it can not be handled in the same ways.
After reading the articles about issues being recognized in education, it is clear to see how Paulo Freire focuses his work on the impoverished, even though there are others who have been oppressed in “the Banking Concept of Education”. In the past women have been forced away from education, and have taken the least amount of teachings that they could to a certain point. Although as times change, women’s role in school has too, and they have become more, as said in, Women and Enrollment, females are dominating colleges. Also, race, another cycle that is still in the process of unraveling from the cycle, used to be a complete block to education, and now is equalizing in opportunities for all races. However, poverty still seems to be holding many individuals back from their potential, and it seems as though this issue isn’t as well recognized as the other two just mentioned due to its unknown circumstances. As this issue does become more recognized, it will be more beneficial to focus on giving everyone an e
qual chance to education, then expecting everyone to meet a certain standard, when hardly anyone can really be defined by just a number.

Response to Blog Question #1: More Standardized Testing

In a time where the issue of standardized testing is being questioned due to its possible bias and unfairness to certain races, it is discussed extensively as to how to improve not only test scores for certain groups, but how to better education as a whole. Freire saw education as a wealth of knowledge waiting to be shared within the community of a classroom. It was not to be used to get ahead or to individualize oneself from another, but to share the intellect we all hold within. It is common knowledge that standardized tests such as the SAT and ACT are to measure one’s knowledge in certain fields, and success on this test ranks the student in comparison to his or her peers. But, who’s to say that a 4.0 student is different in California or in Maine or in Florida or in any other corner of the country? Standardized testing is to set students apart from each other, when all Freire wants is for a teacher and his pupils to share their knowledge. If modern day schools actually resembled these teachings, t
here would be no underperforming schools, or any need to give incentives. This is because one’s knowledge of any material is his or her strength that can be shown off and expressed in the classroom. There is no difference in an education if there is no feeling behind it. A student receiving an education at Harvard or Yale who has no desire to learn or be in the classroom is nowhere as good or as valuable as a student who willingly participates and desires to learn and be in the classroom at the local Junior College. There should be no concern for the education of today’s youth because it is being provided all across the country. It is the lack of participation, teaching, and discussion within the classroom that is hurting today’s society. There is no worry here, nor should there be anywhere else, because as long as education is being provided, every individual should take advantage and strive to take the most out of it.

Blog Response to Question #1: Banking Concept of Education

Paulo Freire suggests that in an oppressive government, that a “banking concept of education” would be the preferred method. Freire gives several examples on how to produce an oppressive form of education, some of which include: “the teacher teaches and the student is taught, the teacher knows everything and the student knows nothing…the teacher is the Subject of the learning process, while are pupils are mere objects.” (pg 320). Freire describes the banking concept of education by students being depositories that teachers dump their knowledge into. By teaching with this style, it’s difficult for a student to actually learn and attain knowledge. If governments wish to improve upon their education, Paulo Freire’s suggests “problem – posing education.” This style bases itself of creativity and stimulates true reflection and action upon reality.” (pg 329) A government willing to make educational reforms that allow the student to learn and appreciate that learning would need to adopt a problem – posing education. However, if this education tactic is used, the students may become more knowledgeable, and then not agree with the government’s policies and ideas, because they are fully educated. A sturdy government would use a combination of banking concept, and problem - posing education. A teacher would execute control over the students and their subject matter, however the students would not be only mere objects of the learning process, but tools to learn from eachother (student to student). A healthy balance of banking concept and a problem – posing education would be beneficial for governments, and students alike.

Response to Blog Question #1: Charter Schools

Public schools that go charter is comparable to putting a mattress cover on an ancient and dilapidated piece of furniture. It is still the same bed that was slept on for decades, but it looks new, and with our current society it has to be better because it's new. Charter schools higher teachers with the same qualifications and use the same materials as public, private, and even boarding schools. They are required to follow state guidelines for teaching material to students. So why are Charter schools sought out more? The answer is in the mental notion that because this education style is not available to all, so it must be more advanced and proficient than regular public education. That is a farce and should be recognized by educated individuals.

Response to Question #1: The Ever-Popular Topic of Standardized Testing

The concept of standardized testing is now the norm within the realm of education. Its a practice that increases the pressure that already exsist on the body and adding to the stress in the mind. Rather then teaching children that mistakes are apart of
the learning process and that understanding the lesson is key with standardized testing instead they are taught that mistakes will create failure and they will get nowhere that somewhere being as far as the next grade level to the graduate level in
college.It is known and can be acknowledged that pressure actually stops rather than inhibits the learnining process forward. It ceases the level of comprehension and rather replaces it with memorization; which is a key point in Friere's Banking Concept.
With that forementioned t can be said that if Friere was here today to witness the attempts to "help" raise and furthur education, he would most likely disagree with their choices in active methods.The goal has changed from being foused on the
children and their lea
rning but to, according the governor of michigan and many other higher ups, to being closing the achievement gap and seeing that the SCHOOLS not the kids reach their academic goal. "Instead of communicating, the teacher issues communiques and makes
deposits which the students patiently recieve, memorize, and repeat" (Friere 319). The students are told of the consquences that could happen if the work told to them is not REMEMBERED come testing time. Consquences that to them can range from being
sent to another school or being witheld a grade level until they pass the test. For example there is a standardized test that takes place in Connecticut where I am from known as the CAPT test, it is taking sophmore year where you are tested in your
skills in math science and reading. You must get a score of a 3 or higher in all sections the highest being a 5. If you fail one subject you will repeatedly take that part of the test for the remaining years of highschool until you pass if you fail to do
so in your senior y
ear, the student will be kept back until they make the grade. This doesn't not help the student but slowly diminishes their will to learn and twists that into merely accepting. As if that isn't n enough theirs also the idea of only preparing the students
for what is on the test rather than teaching them an entire lesson they only give them what is felt to be necessary a point which Friere points out in his essay, "the teacher chooses the program content and the students...adapt to it".
Therefore it isn't surprising that in return the report cards of students take a turn for the worse for they aren't learning and being prepared for education on a daily bases but only covering what is on the test. "For the overall EducationYES!
school report card grades, fewer...elementary and middle schools made As and Bs this year, compared to the last year; with more schools falling into the C category" (press release defending standardized testing). I strongly believe that Friere and
many others would agree that standarize
d testing needs to actually be put to an end rather than increase and spreadif it is expected for the children to actually succeed inlife.

Another Response to Standardized Testing

In today’s classrooms the standardized test is a very common way to measure a student’s intelligents. Is that really fair? What about the students that don’t test well yet are still very bright and receive high marks outside of the standardized tests? Are colleges putting to much value into these tests? If you were to ask Freire, he would be very much against these tests.
Freire believed in a fair classroom learning experience with no oppressor. It should be a fair atmosphere were all students of all learning types have an opportunity to flourish and make the most of themselves.
As for offering incentive programs Freire would most likely have a split feeling on that. I believe he would be all for making the classrooms more advanced and giving all students a better learning experience. Yet he would want all schools and all students to be able to have the same opportunities as those who do well on the standardized tests. This would also fall under the same lines as cutting the funding for schools that don’t do well. Why wouldn’t you give the schools that did the worst on the tests more money to try and enhance their level of providing education? In the long run this may be able to “catch up” the schools that are struggling, not punish them.

Poverty and Teenagers

I think that it is very unfortunate that a child's financial situation forces him or her to lag behing in education. They do not recieve the same opportunities as everyone else to open up their minds to new ways of thinking, analyzing, and exploring the worlds of literature, math, science, languages, etc. I believe that Paulo Freire will approve of the various programs and opportunities that are beginning to sprout in order to provide poor teens with the chance to have an equal education as those of the middle and upper classes. These programs include "Sure Start Children Centres, extended schools, one to one tuition and personalistion." Coming from poverty, Paulo would like to see this kind of effort to help those who are in the same position as he was. Even though "The campaign wants the government to invest £4bn to halve child poverty by 2010," I think that Freiere will still see this as having some flaws and aspects of the banking concept of education. For example, it is not likely that the government would just give away such large sums of money without the slightest intention of getting something in return. What I mean by this is the following: By contributing a large amount of money to helping the poor, the government will probably use them as "the empty vessels" and fill them with the type of education that will be beneficial, in the end, to the government. This could lead to the oppression of the poor students. I am concerned about this because I came to this country with my family, having virtually nothing besides some clothes and a few personal belongings. I was lucky enough to be given a good education and the opportunity to attend Emmanuel College now and pursue a higher education. However, this might not be the case for every immigrant who comes here with nothing, and even for those who were born in the United States to impoverished conditions.

standardized testing

In the case of standarized testing, i am appalled that many colleges base admissions and scholarship standards on the SAT's. What do the SAT's show? They do not show study habits, they do not show a student's true brilliance and they do not show a student's ability to participate in a classroom setting. From a personal standpoint, I am a student who did well in high school but did not turn heads on the SAT's. And for this i did not receive a significant scholarship from Emmanuel College. My grades were good enough, but my SAT's weren't to their liking. I do well on tests but a standarized test is like night and day in difference. I believe that is unfair to base a student's entire college finances on one standarized test that will not come in to play while they are in college. From reading Paulo Friere's stance on education i believe he would agree with me. To me, his main belief appeared to be discussion in a classroom setting. As he stated "The teacher is no longer merely the-one-who-teaches, but one who is himself taught in dialogue with the students, who in turn while being taught also teach. They become jointly responsible for a process in which all grow." As a final thought, the government sets standarized testing for political purposes to see where funding will go and where it won't. If the government is going to base its budget on the performance of a school's standarized test than they might as well base the performance of an army recruit mainly on how well he/she does on the military entrance exam. I say this because the military has the largest budget of any program in the United States.

A response to Blog Question #1: Standardized Testing

In a time where the issue of standardized testing is being questioned due to its possible bias and unfairness to certain races, it is discussed extensively as to how to improve not only test scores for certain groups, but how to better education as a whole. Freire saw education as a wealth of knowledge waiting to be shared within the community of a classroom. It was not to be used to get ahead or to individualize oneself from another, but to share the intellect we all hold within. It is common knowledge that standardized tests such as the SAT and ACT are to measure one’s knowledge in certain fields, and success on this test ranks the student in comparison to his or her peers. But, who’s to say that a 4.0 student is different in California or in Maine or in Florida or in any other corner of the country? Standardized testing is to set students apart from each other, when all Freire wants is for a teacher and his pupils to share their knowledge. If modern day schools actually resembled these teachings, t
here would be no underperforming schools, or any need to give incentives. This is because one’s knowledge of any material is his or her strength that can be shown off and expressed in the classroom. There is no difference in an education if there is no feeling behind it. A student receiving an education at Harvard or Yale who has no desire to learn or be in the classroom is nowhere as good or as valuable as a student who willingly participates and desires to learn and be in the classroom at the local Junior College. There should be no concern for the education of today’s youth because it is being provided all across the country. It is the lack of participation, teaching, and discussion within the classroom that is hurting today’s society. There is no worry here, nor should there be anywhere else, because as long as education is being provided, every individual should take advantage and strive to take the most out of it.

Blog Question: Freire and "The Banking Concept of Education"

I realized that the links weren't showing up, so I fixed that. If you have already responded to the blog without the links, that's okay, but if you have a chance, it would be good if you could skim them.

Now that you've read the Freire essay and participated in the Oppressor's Education Plan, I'd like you to consider current education trends. Some of those trends include federally mandated standardized testing, loss of funding to underperforming schools, incentive programs (such as the controversial laptop giveaway for needy students), alternative schools and many more. Below are links to some information to help you get a feel for the kinds of issues being debated in the education system today. Please peruse these links before responding to the blog question.

In defense of standardized testing.
Poverty and Teenagers.
Women and College Enrollment.
Public School Goes Charter.


Selecting one or two of the plans above or a couple of your own, discuss how you believe Freire might respond to the government's efforts to improve education. In your perusal of the above materials, examine them for statements that tend to support the banking concept of education. To what extend might current educational thinking lead to a pedagogy of the oppressed? To what extent are you concerned?

Questioning Strategy

Hi. I'm having trouble posting the QS to this site. I can't get the chart to appear correctly. Use what you can here, and I will work on getting the material to you.

Questioning Strategy for Responding to Readings
What is a Questioning Strategy?
After you’ve chosen a topic, the Questioning Strategy is a kind of brainstorming activity
that helps you:
• see connections between the details of a topic and the larger spheres of
culture surrounding it
• see what is interesting and memorable about the topic
• write a Guiding Question

The Guiding Question
All good writing starts as a process of inquiry. By focusing the rest of your planning on
answering the Guiding Question, your writing will have a purpose and will help prevent
you from wandering off-topic.
Directions for the Questioning Strategy:
The QS chart is made of four different categories. You can start adding details in any
category.
Experiencing the Text: In this category, summarize or quote directly from the text the
points that strike you as compelling or important. You may also give a personal reaction
to the text here.
My Values: In this category, investigate your own values in relation to the
experience/summary/quote given.
Cultural Narratives and Sources: Here, think of the bigger picture. What are the larger
cultural forces that shape the content of the text and your experience of it? What is/are the
source/s of your values? Consider how the many elements of culture may impact your
understanding of the text. Consider how your own group identity may be a factor in your
understanding.
Dissonance: The purpose of all good writing is to engage with some kind of problem,
issue or question of expectations. Consider how you experience the text and how it may
clash with your values or cultural experiences. Or, consider how the text sheds a new
light on your experiences, values, or cultural expectations.

Your QS chart will look something like this: NOT SHOWN. Notice that items are related in each row.


Writing the Guiding Question
After listing several experiences with corresponding values, etc, write a list of Guiding
Questions. Pay close attention to your Dissonance column – all good writing is about
dissonance.Write questions that explore:
• what compels you to write about this topic.
• what puzzles you about this topic.
• what you want to know more about.
Select one Guiding Question for the rest of your inquiry. Put this question at the top of all
subsequent planning stages.
Criteria for Guiding Questions:
• open-ended (not yes/no)
• not blaming or leading
• reflects dissonance
• is an exploration of interesting experiences, values, and/or cultural narratives
Examples of Guiding Questions from the inquiry above:
How can I resolve my admiration of Thoreau’s independence and criticism with my own
pragmatism concerning the role of government?
In what ways does Thoreau’s treatise on civil disobedience inform us today about issues
like the war in Iraq and Hurricane Katrina?

Terminology

Seeing that the Freire essay contains a heavy amount of specialized terminology, I've decided to list all the terms and allusions I think will need to be defined or explained. I've also been compiling a list of more general terms, like "rhetoric," for example.

General Use Terms
rhetoric, Aristotle's rhetoric
discourse
Socratic Method
cognition
metacognition

Freire
oppressed
oppressor
problem-posing
dichotomy
hypertrophied
solidarity
narrative
subject and object
empirical
existential
paternalistic
social action apparatus
euphemistic
pathology
humanism
liberal education
domestication
Heglian dialectic
ontology
praxis
doxa and logos


I think maybe I'll start the course with a general overview of the distinctions between Plato and Aristotle, a priori and a posteriori. For the Freire essay, I may also want to address briefly social and political dimensions of Brazil that may be informative.

Syllabus Changes

It was good to meet some of the other Critical Inquiry teachers last night at Audubon. Josh and Stace talked about some excellent reasons to start the semester with the Paulo Freire essay and gave me some ideas for learning activities to coincide.

First idea:
Before reading/discussing the essay, have students design the perfect "oppressors" classroom and educational system. Propose the activity and give a few minutes for quiet journaling. Then group them to discuss and expand their ideas. Finally, share all the ideas and have an open discussion about how we will implement the plan. A closing journal prompt will encourage students to reflect upon similarities/differences between the "Oppressors' Educational Plan" and their own previous educational experiences.

Second idea:
After reading the essay, ask students to design the ideal classroom and educational system. Ask them to think both about specific classroom activities and the system as a whole. I think they should be prompted to especially consider how they would wish to transform that "bad" year or class growing up.

Tangential idea:
Need to introduce students to Socratic dialogue and teaching methods.

Innaugural Post

This is the first post for Prof. Roy's course blog at Emmanuel College. This blog will be used for Critical Inquiry EN 1103. More interesting things to be posted as soon as class starts . . .