ENGL 1302 4113

Carr, Thompson, and Androids

Both Carr and Thompson discuss the dangers and benefits technology can have on our society. What would they think of the world that Phillip K. Dick created in Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? There are a lot of different types of technology in the story. Would they agree or disagree that technology made that world a better place and why? And do you think the world in Dick’s novel was made better or worse by technology?

In “The New Liberal Arts,” Sanford J. Ungar, president of Goucher College, argues that a liberal arts education is still relevant in today’s economy. He identifies and rebuts seven common misperceptions about a liberal arts degree, noting that employers are not looking for vocationally trained graduates but rather individuals who can think critically and communicate effectively. He argues that low-income and first-generation college student especially should thrive in a liberal arts setting. Ungar also says that a liberal arts education does not make U.S. graduates less competitive in a global economy. Despite the high costs of college, he says, “the net cost of attending a small liberal-arts college can be lower than that of a large public university” (342). He advocates for such small, residential colleges and encourages “close interaction between faculty members and students” (342).

In “Are Too Many People Going to College?” Charles Murray argues that the answer is “yes.” Although he thinks that a liberal arts background is important for cultural literacy, he says that this education should instead happen at the elementary and high school levels. In his view, a liberal arts degree is not the best option for most high school seniors. Only those with the strongest academic abilities will enjoy the hard work required for such a degree, while others would benefit more from vocational training. Murray argues that there are a number of career choices requiring vocational training with high salaries. In addition, the physical campus setting of college is less relevant when the internet makes library databases and distance learning possible. Murray concludes that the B.A. serves as a class distinction in a “class-riven” country, and he argues that businesses shouldn’t use it as a benchmark for hiring (361).

Respond to these articles (agree, disagree, or combination) and state why you think your chosen author makes the better argument for/against the Liberal Arts degree.

Why No One Can Have It All
Anne-Marie Slaughter and Richard Dorment

In “Why Women Still Can’t Have It All,” Anne-Marie Slaughter argues that women can’t “have it all” today, “not with the way America’s economy and society are currently structured.” She offers her own resignation from a prominent State Department position as an example of the challenges facing mothers in demanding careers. Slaughter notes that flexible scheduling makes it more possible to balance work and home life, but that it’s still a great challenge. She wants “top women” to speak out, and she disagrees with Sheryl Sandberg’s call to women to “lean in” because “we who have made it to the top ... are essentially saying to the women in the generation behind us: ‘What’s the matter with you?’ ” She also argues that we should value parenting and share family references in our work lives. In fact, Slaughter says, if life were balanced for women, it would be for men as well. More time for family leave and flexible schedules would enable creative thinking and productivity.

In “Why Men Still Can’t Have It All,” Richard Dorment responds to Sheryl Sandberg and Anne-Marie Slaughter, arguing that men make many sacrifices and experience more stress than women as they try to balance work and home. He points out that women have many advantages, including a higher percentage of college degrees, and he criticizes Slaughter’s essay for relying “on personal anec- dotes mixed with wonk talk.” He worries that Slaughter and Sandberg are blaming men for “pretty much everything” when men actually contribute more at home than they did decades ago. If women do more chores, we should consider a wide array of reasons for that, Dorment says,
and he points out that fatherhood matters deeply to men. Dorment concludes that “getting to the top is really, really hard” (¶42), and he recommends that if people don’t want to “make unacceptable sacrifices,” they should find less-demanding jobs. “We are all equals here,” he says.

“The New Jim Crow”
Michelle Alexander

In “The New Jim Crow,” Michelle Alexander explains and traces the history of what she calls a new “racial caste system” that effectively and systematically denies civil rights to a large proportion of the African-American population; she also describes her own reluctant path to making such an analysis. The racial caste system is a modern extension of the Jim Crow laws, which were, in their turn, an extension of slavery. Using mass incarceration and a legal structure designed to restrict and disenfranchise convicted felons, “the old forms of discrimination ... are suddenly legal.” Alexander focuses on the War on Drugs, begun in the 1980s during the Reagan administration, as the impetus for convicting and jailing hundreds of thousands of people, principally African Americans, giving the United States the “highest rate of incarceration in the world.” Despite abundant evidence, there is considerable resistance to acknowledging the connections between civil rights and the criminal justice system. Alexander concludes by calling for a national conversation that could lead to a consensus about “race and the role of race in defining the basic structure of our society.”

How do you think Barack Obama, the author of the other article we read this week, would respond to Alexander? Would he agree or disagree with her? What do you think of Alexander’s argument?

“Escape From the Western Diet” and “Food As Thought”
Michael Pollan and Mary Maxfield

In “Escape From the Western Diet,” which comes from his larger work In Defense of Food: An Eater’s Manifesto, Michael Pollan argues that a focus on single nutrients (what he refers to as “nutritionism”) impedes an accurate, comprehensive understanding of healthy eating. The only solution to Americans’ eating problems, he argues, is to “stop eating a Western diet” (625). Creating low-carbohydrate or low-fat foods does nothing to improve the Western diet, and both the foods and medical industries benefit from competing scientific theories about nutrition. Instead, Pollan suggests that we avoid processed foods when possible and consider how a healthier environment might lead to healthier food options. He concludes with his formula for a healthier lifestyle: “Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants” (630).

In the essay “Food as Thought: Resisting the Moralization of Eating,” Mary Maxfield responds to Michael Pollan’s formula of “Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants” with her own motto: “Trust yourself. Trust your body. Meet your needs” (645). She argues that Pollan’s approach to nutrition does what he criticizes in other food theories, because it eliminates one type of food—processed food. She also disagrees with Pollan’s conflation of diet, health, and weight, and she counters that the obesity crisis is overhyped and people can be healthy at almost any size. She argues that people “will eat in a way that is good for them, given the opportunity” (645). In the end, Maxfield points out, our attitudes about food and health are influenced by culture, and food itself “isn’t moral or immoral” (645).

Both essays provide a formula for eating healthy. Having read both essays, which author do you think supported their formula better and how did they do that? Which author’s formula do you think is best for people to be their healthiest selves?

"What You Eat Is Your Business"
By Radley Balko

Radley Balko’s article, “What You Eat Is Your Business," argues for an interesting solution to America’s obesity issue. He poses that instead of mandating and assisting, the government should be doing more to “foster a sense of responsibility in and ownership of our own health and well-being” (652). He asserts that the current system does not provide any incentive for the individual to care for themselves because “if the government is paying for my anti-cholesterol medication, what incentive is there for me to put down the cheeseburger?” (652). He proposes that if we really want to fight the epidemic of obesity in America, that we should stop socializing medicine, and allow the individual to take ownership and responsibility for their own health and well-being. He suggests that insurance companies be allowed to offer incentive programs and that HSAs (Health Savings Accounts) be allowed to roll over into retirement accounts.

Balko presents many good reasons for not only why his plan might work, but why it should be put into practice. As a Libertarian, he believes the government should be involved as little as possible in people’s individual lives, and he sees health as an individual, not a public, concern. His final statement, "We'll all make better choices about diet, exercise, and personal health when someone else isn't paying for the consequences of those choices," assumes that people will take personal responsibility for their own health if given the right incentives (654).

*This week, please try to use one of the responses we talked about in class (Yes/No/Okay, but) as you respond to this post, giving reasons from the text for why you agree, disagree, or a combination of both. Remember that if you choose to do a combination, you still need to lean one way or the other.

“Don’t Blame the Eater”
By David Zinczenko

In his article, “Don’t Blame the Eater,” David Zinzenko posits that the American consumer is not at fault for becoming obese at the hands of fast food. He claims that while healthier options might exist, fast food is overwhelmingly the cheapest and easiest choice for most busy families. Citing his own experience as a child of a single parent, he explains how his lunches and dinners consisted of McDonald’s, Taco Bell, and Pizza Hut, which caused him to weigh over 200 pounds by the time he was fifteen. To further his argument, Zinczenko also brings up some shocking statistics about the increase in diabetes due to obesity over the past eight years.

Zinczenko claims that fast food companies should be more responsible with posting information for the consumer so people can see what exactly they are putting into their bodies. Since this article was written, however, more fast food companies have been posting their nutritional information; in some states, it’s even illegal not to.

Additionally, while his article is a critique on the fast food industry, he does not address any personal responsibility on the consumer’s part. Can the fast food industry really be to blame for the majority of obesity in America? Did Zinczenko write a responsible article? Did he address enough counter-objections to convince the reader? Did he include enough evidence to make his own arguments as strong as possible?

Were you convinced?

“Is Google Making Us Stupid?”

In Nicholas Carr’s article, he worries that our reliance on technology has led to a weakening of the mind. Having the world at our fingertips has made us less likely to slow down and read full articles and books, for the simple enjoyment of walking through a well-put-together argument or strolling through some well-formed poetry or prose.

But it’s not the first time this has happened. He references Socrates and his objections to the written word, as well as those who disliked the idea of Gutenberg’s printing press. Many initially believed both would make the people less intellectual, but in reality, both allowed for immense intellectual growth. So one might ask: is the internet in this same position? Are people becoming smarter or lazier because of the internet?

Carr looks specifically at Google’s future ideas of attempting to connect their search engine directly to the human brain. He states:

“[Google’s] easy assumption that we’d all ‘be better off’ if our brains were supplemented, or even replaced, by an artificial intelligence … suggests a belief that intelligence is the output of a mechanical process, a series of discrete steps that can be isolated, measured, and optimized … The human brain is just an outdated computer that needs a faster processor and a bigger hard drive” (436).

So, then, with all the conveniences that Google and the internet provide, where will it end? Are we becoming people who can no longer think for themselves, but instead reach for our phones to look something up whenever we’re asked a question? Yes, we now have more information at our fingertips than ever before … but is that really a good thing? We are seeing so many things become obsolete because of the internet: calculators, books, cameras, traditional phones, datebooks (pocket calendars, for those young people who might not know what a datebook is), and many more because they could not keep up with technology.

And we, for the most part think that these changes are for the better? But think on this:

What happens when we can no longer keep up with technology? Will we be become obsolete and be replaced as well?

Welcome to ENGL 1302. This semester we will aim to transform our thoughts, ideas, and passions into well-written, well-articulated, and well-structured written analyses and arguments. Every Monday, one post will appear on this page about one of the readings we are discussing in class. Please post a 1-3 sentence reply to the original post (OP) by Thursday and then post a reply to another student’s post by Sunday (2 posts total), following the guidelines in TS/IS Chapter 12 about online discussions. I look forward to reading through all of your posts and discussing some very interesting topics with you all!