Thursday, April 28, 2016

Stanford Prison Experiment Comparison

When good people are put into evil or uncivilized scenarios or situations, they tend to become more savage. Good examples of this are found in Lord of the Flies and the Stanford Prison Experiment. In chapter 11 of Lord of the Flies, Piggy, Ralph, and Samneric go to the hunters home at Castle Rock to try to negotiate to get Piggy's glasses and their fire back. When they get up there, Ralph begins to speak to the hunters, asking for Jack. Jack comes back from hunting and he and Ralph begin to argue their respective cases to each other. The violence begins, and before you know it those two were battling to no end, Jack with his spear, and Ralph with his fists. Another member of the tribe, Roger, who was sat on top of Castle Rock, then pulls a lever, releasing a boulder, that rolls down and strikes Piggy off of the cliff, effectively killing him. The fighting between Ralph and Jack came to a sudden halt in awe of what had just happened. That proves that the hunters, who were good people before being deserted on an abandoned island, easily became savage, since there were no rules to follow. Similarly to the occurrences in Lord of the Flies, the Stanford Prison Experiment had good people turn bad. In the experiment, college students of Stanford University were placed into a staged prison scene with students playing the roles of both prisoners and guards. Although the students got to choose what their role would be, it wasn't long before people started acting out. The guards began to let their power go to their heads and abuse it. They made the prisoners do unnecessary tasks, such as cleaning their rooms after they already did, all because they messed them up again. The resulting actions from the prisoners weren't much better, they began attacking the guards and ended up getting put in solitary confinement for their actions. Prisoners began to go crazy in there, pounding on the door and scratching at it. The experiment was meant to last for two weeks, but got cut to only six days after the professors witnessed what was going on. Once again the fact that there were no rules impacted the behavior of the guards, which ended up affecting the behavior of the prisoners.

Thursday, April 14, 2016

Positive and Negative Mob Mentality in LOTF

In the novel, Lord of the Flies by William Golding, there are many great examples of mob mentality used in both positive and negative ways. Chapters seven and nine have some examples that are explained in depth and in a lot of detail. In chapter seven, Ralph was brought, by the hunters on a journey to hunt the beast. Now Ralph normally wouldn't participate in the hunts that took place, but in this case, he was more than happy to come along, knowing that killing the beast would do good for the whole island. This is a good example of positive mob mentality because Ralph typically does good, and he is not one to leave the group that he was with the whole time on the island to go hunt with Jack and his group. This was a time to bring everyone together and bring down a common enemy, which didn't hurt anyone thus positively affecting the island, bringing them closer together.
Another example, this one of negative mob mentality, is found in chapter nine. The hunters had killed a pig, and put it's head on a stick as an offering to the beast. Simon began to wander into the clearing where they left it.  Once he got there, he began to hear the pig head talk to him, making the hunters believe that Simon was the beast. The hunters were afraid of Simon and they decided to kill him. When one person suggested the idea, the others agreed. While they were killing him, the hunters would chant a familiar chant that they used when they were hunting pigs, except this time there was a little twist on it, "Kill the beast! Cut his throat! Spill his blood!" (Golding 152). This example defines negative mob mentality as the hunters are egging on the killing of Simon, promoting it as a good thing.

Thursday, April 7, 2016

LOTF Chapter 6 Figurative Language

The quote, "Far beneath them, the trees of the forest sighed, then roared."(Golding 98), from chapter 6 of Lord of the Flies is a perfect example of personification used beautifully in William Golding's riveting book. The trees of the forest are said to sigh, or calm down, and roar, almost like a dinosaur stopping dead in it's tracks to roar. Golding used this example to express the sound that the boys heard while fiddling with the fire. Sam and Eric, two of the boys on the deserted island who also happen to be twins, were trying to keep their campfire going late one night when suddenly they heard this dreadful roar coming from the forest. Golding did a wonderful job of showing this from their point of view by saying that the trees sighed, and then roared because the boys couldn't see a thing since it was dark and the sound they heard seemed to be coming from the trees, which were just completely calm and still. To clarify, the trees sighing was the original calmness, and the roar coming from the trees was the eerie sound that they heard emerging from
the darkness.
Yelling Tree. Digital image. Www.vectortoons.com. N.p., n.d. Web.
This image is sort of a comical example of what was conveyed by William Golding. The screaming tree is resembling the "roaring tree" that Golding described. This is a perfect example of a perfect use of personification.

Thursday, February 25, 2016

Can you Teach Empathy?

I believe empathy can be taught in many ways. Empathy can be taught to people through experience, parenting, or it can be a trait given to you at birth. In several cases, empathy is learned through experience. For example, if a person were to be a bully to someone at school. They might call them names and hurt them. Now that person may not realize how the victim feels, and he or she may get laughs from bystanders, but they won't stop. In most cases with bullies, they don't even think they are hurting the victim, they think it's funny. If bullies didn't get laughs from bystanders, they would most likely stop. The only reason I see of why people bully other people, is because they get a positive reaction from crowds. Some bullies may never truly know what it feels like to be bullied, but a surprising amount do. Most bullies in their lifetime learn empathy from experience. If they don't learn it from getting bullied themselves, they learn it with age. Bullying eventually stops occurring after a certain amount of time, although I don't know what that time span is, but I have seen it happening in my lifetime. I have witnessed bullies torturing classmates in elementary school. It's hard to believe that kids that young can be so rude, but they can. I have seen kids be bullied in elementary school with my own eyes. By the time middle school came around, I saw the bullying dwindle down to almost nothing.
Another way empathy can be taught is through parenting. Parents have a strong influence on their children. They teach them a lot of things about life One of these things is empathy. Parents from the dawn of time have been teaching their kids right and wrong, and as they get older, they teach them kindness, sympathy and empathy. For example, have you ever heard your parents tell you to not make fun of the homeless? Then your parents have taught you to be empathetic for the homeless. If you feel bad for people, like the homeless, that is something you have learned in your lifetime. You aren't born feeling bad for the homeless, it's learned, and taught, most likely by your parents. Basically what I'm trying to say here is that parents are some of the most important teachers of empathy. So next time your mom or dad say, "don't stare", or "don't point", they are teaching you to be empathetic, they aren't trying to annoy you.

Thursday, January 28, 2016

The Real Case with Television

The intention of the article Mental Illness sans cliches by Susan Brink is to prove the point that television series' over exaggerate the affect mental illnesses have on the brain. In the article, examples such as "Cold Case" explain Susan Brink's point perfectly. She expresses, "Despite recent infusions of realism, it's still often true that when people with mental health problems are not being murderous on the tube, they're punch lines"(Brink 2), showing that television shows, like "Cold Case", usually have murderers that have mental health problems, but in reality, that's not the case. Mental illnesses do not influence murderous actions or thoughts, so television should think twice about airing a television show that could potentially hurt someone with a mental illness.
Another example that goes with Brink's thought would be about the sitcom "Crumbs", "...in which the character played by Jane Curtin, after a failed suicide attempt, is released from a psychiatric hospital only to become the ongoing butt of her families jokes." That quote shows that television shows can not only hurt people who have mental illnesses, but even make fun of them too. That shouldn't be done. Mental illnesses are no laughing matter. Television shows have no right to make fun of mental illnesses.

Thursday, October 8, 2015

Suli Breaks Video Response

In the video, the message is that tests and exams shouldn't determine what kind of grades you get and what jobs you get. I agree with the message because what you get on tests is basically what you remember from lessons you are taught. The kinds of jobs you can get shouldn't be based off of memory. I know that test scores aren't all of you grades in school, but they are a major part of them. If you forget things right before your tests, that shouldn't determine your place in the world. This can affect college scholarships because they look at your grades and that is a big part of you getting into a good college. I believe the video was a creative way to convey the message to educators, colleges and parents that test scores aren't everything to a persons knowledge.

Thursday, September 24, 2015

What Life was like for Teenagers in Germany in the 1930s

Life was very confusing for kids in Germany in the 1930s. For one, they had a big decision to make about whether or not to join the Hitler Youth and go against their parents wishes. Their other choice was to join with all of their friends and have a fun experience, but not knowing what it was all about. The conflict between parents and children was there, but there was almost nothing the parents could have done to stop them. One reason is that the country of Germany were all involved in the Nazi Party. If their parents didn't let them in, they would be an outcast. Another reason is that the Nazi Party was not very kind to people who did not support it. If they did not join, they would have been taken away and hurt during times when the Nazis were taking Jews away. That leads to the final reason, that not joining could cause problems for the whole family. If the whole family did not support it they could be driven out of Germany. On the other hand, if they did join the whole family wouldn't necessarily be happy, but they would be safe. In conclusion, the kids had a very hard decision to make, almost life or death, and were forced to join the Hitler Youth.