Category: Uncategorized (Page 2 of 2)

Bloom and Wallace both make assertions about human behavior which involve the use of empathy, but while Bloom considers empathy to be overrated because of it’s biased and illogical nature, Wallace describes empathy as the defining factor in our day-to-day relationships. Bloom makes it clear that he believes empathy to be a human weakness that suffocates the true driving forces of change, but my beliefs about empathy side closer to Wallace’s idea of empathy as a way of choosing to think about the world. Bloom describes empathy as “a spotlight directing attention and aid to where it’s needed” (1). Bloom uses the imagery of a spotlight to suggest that empathy is powerful but narrow. Because of this, empathy is flawed. It only points focus towards those who are similar to us, those who we relate to on a personal level, those who we believe deserve help, and those whose situation is most immediately visible. I don’t believe that Bloom is completely incorrect in his assertion that empathy is a poor driver for widespread change, but I do think that empathy, when utilized in the way I believe Wallace is proposing, creates an incentive for change that bypasses Bloom’s issues. Wallace never uses the word empathy directly, but through his descriptions of human interactions and choice of thought, he conveys very clearly a higher standard of internal compassion that he believes is worth striving for. Wallace summarizes this when discussing the freedom of being able to choose how to think about life: “The really important kind of freedom involves attention and awareness and discipline, and being able truly to care about other people and to sacrifice for them over and over in myriad petty, unsexy ways every day” (1). Wallace’s view differs from Bloom’s because while Bloom focuses on empathy as a human emotion which distracts from those who need help the most, Wallace suggests that empathy is about choosing to consider other’s situations above one’s own. Bloom insists that empathy detracts from real change because in order to determine the best outcome for the most individuals, one must use logic over empathy. However, if we apply Wallace’s mindset, then empathy is merely the building blocks to change. Without the foundational ability to consider other people over yourself, no one would even get to the point of applying logic to help solve other people’s issues because one’s own issues are considered paramount. If no one cares in the first place, Bloom’s suggestions of empathy alternatives are useless.

1. In David Foster Wallace’s speech, “This Is Water”, he argues against falling into the belief that we are “the absolute centre of the universe; the realest, most vivid and important person in existence” (3), but rather suggests that we make an effort to consider other people’s circumstances as more important than our own, allowing us to break out of our default mindset in which our needs are more real than everyone else’s (9). In this way, DFW urges the graduating class to break away from the prison of their own perspective, and to utilize “the real, no bullshit value of your liberal arts education”(5) which allows you “The really important kind of freedom… being able truly to care about other people and to sacrifice for them over and over in myriad petty, unsexy ways every day” (10).

1. DFW’s speech begins by using a parable about fish to introduce the idea that the most important truths in life are often so obvious that we tune them out altogether. His fish parable features two young fish who encounter an older fish, and the older fish asks them how the water is. the younger fish are confused and one asks the other “What the hell is water?” (Wallace 1). This parable goes against what you might assume about a fish’s understanding of their reality. A fish might not understand what water is because they’ve never experienced anything but the water. It would be like asking your friend how the air was. They may correct you and ask if you meant the weather, because it seems so silly to ask someone how the air is. I also realized that the reason the older fish knows what water is, is because he was likely caught by a fisherman at some point and released. Wallace uses this parable to present his argument about how the college experience doesn’t tell us “how to think”, but rather “the choice of what to think about” (Wallace).

1. Wallace goes on to explain what he means by “the choice of what to think about” by using a relatable story of an after-work supermarket trip to get groceries. He suggests multiple ways to think about the unpleasant scenario, and the first two are entirely self-centered. Then he submits another way to think about the situation, which is to think other’s experience instead of your own. He

1. The role of social media is to allow people who could never normally interact to meet and share their ideas, their passions, and their beliefs. However, just like how playing video games is no replacement for being outside, trying to use social media as a replacement for real-world human interaction simply doesn’t provide the same benefits because it lacks a key element: the nature of shared experiences.
   • I think my thesis statement is relatively strong and makes my argument clear. It has a good amount of specificity for a thesis statement, while still leaving room for the following paragraphs to add more context. It clearly establishes what I believe to be true about how social media should be used, and introduces why I believe that social media shouldn’t be used for certain aspects of human relationships. I believe the focus is sufficiently narrow, and it hones in on specific aspects that are addressed in the following paragraphs. I think one way it could be made slightly more specific would be to include aspects of Konnikova and Chen’s arguments that I address later in the paper. I do touch on the nature of shared experiences that is prominent in Konnikova’s essay, but I think pointing out that connection would have been a good tie-in to the later discussion of Konnikova’s writing.
2. I was reminded that I tend to write long, complex sentences when I want to make an argument seem more legitimate, rather than varying my sentence structure to enhance reader comprehension. It’s usually something I would have addressed in my revision process, but often I find it hard to notice issues with sentences that are excessively long because most of my reading material contains such sentences. I was also reminded that I tend to get lost in my writing, especially when I am in the middle of it. What that means is that I get so caught up in details that I am unable to see the writing as a completed piece. This is why peer review helped me so much, because it helped me evaluate the essay as a whole and see how parts that were supposed to connect might not have, rather than focusing on individual paragraphs and adding too many details which might not relate to the thesis or any other part of the essay.
3. In my revision process, I focused heavily on making sure my points all made sense and connected to the overarching point of the essay. I added in specific examples wherever I could think to put them, and I tried to include more of the authors’ arguments from the two essays we read. I also made an effort to really emphasize my personal experience and explain how it influenced my views. I added in my naysayer paragraph because it drew from my own experiences and allowed me to connect my beliefs to a specific event that I had witnessed. I also included a paragraph about how I tend to feel lonely when I can’t interact with the people I care about in person, and how that loneliness has affected me since I began school at UNE. I think that served to invite the reader to connect and maybe empathize with my experience, and in turn help their own loneliness through the realization that they are not alone in their experience.
4. I would definitely try not to procrastinate on paper two as much as I did on paper one. Just because I had to write three essays in two hours for my AP literature exam doesn’t mean that it’s best practice to try to write all my essays at the last minute. For both the rough draft and the final draft I didn’t start on it until the day it was due. It’s definitely something I’ve struggled with in the past because I have a hard time focusing on assignments without the looming deadline as a motivator. I am going to try to give myself more time to think through my essay writing and revision by going through it in increments rather than trying to finish it all in one night, or three hours before it is due.

1. The essay “Is Empathy Overrated?” discusses how empathy might not be the best tool in determining how we focus our attention towards the things that need it. The author, Paul Bloom, argues that empathy is too narrow, because it focuses most on people who we feel a connection with, and ignores people who are different from us. This is made clear when he writes “it’s far easier to empathize with those who are close to us, those who are similar to us, and those we see as more attractive or vulnerable and less scary” (Bloom 2). Here, Bloom is making the point that empathy is biased and prejudiced because we have a harder time empathizing with people who we can’t relate to. Bloom also argues that empathy is flawed because we can only have empathy for individuals, or relatively small groups. He conveys this argument by writing about his general apathy towards the large numbers of murders that happen in a year in Chicago versus his empathy towards school shooting victims in Newtown (Bloom 2). The reason for using this example is to connect his opinions about empathy to real world examples and help the reader visualize the negative impact of empathy when directed at only small groups. Instead of empathy, Bloom discusses how we should approach major issues from a place of “self-control and intelligence and a more diffuse compassion” (4). Bloom posits that it is better to approach issues with these because they result in more rational conclusions that take into account what will be best for the most people. I agree with Bloom that empathy is heavily reliant on personal connection, but I don’t believe that is necessarily a bad thing. Empathy has its place, and that place is primarily within personal relationships. You empathize with those in your immediate vicinity, with those you care about, and occasionally those who have wronged you. When it comes to directing our focus outward towards global issues, a less empathetic approach is necessary because empathy isn’t useful for dealing with issues on a large scale. This does not mean that empathy is useless, just that it is only useful in our personal lives.
2. I partially agree with Bloom when he talks about why empathy is ineffective and possibly even harmful when used towards all issues, because it can’t focus on a broad range of things, and it is too personal to be useful in helping the most people, rather than honing in on just a few of the most prominent cases. However, Bloom doesn’t address where empathy is useful, which is in our relationships with close friends or when we are hurt by someone else. Bloom seems to suggest that empathy is a net negative for the world, when it is in fact a positive, so long as it is applied where it is intended to be applied.
3. Bloom discusses empathy as a negative, which is definitely in contrast to my prior encounters with the subject of empathy. I was always inclined to view empathy as a totally positive thing, but Bloom introduced some ways that empathy can actually be negative that I hadn’t considered before, or at least had attributed to some other cause. Primarily, Bloom’s assertions about how empathy causes one to focus on the suffering of people who are like us first, rather than the people who most need help, really challenged how I viewed empathy, because I hadn’t ever realized how empathy plays into our biases.
4. “Although we might intellectually believe that the suffering of our neighbor is just as awful as the suffering of someone living in another country, it’s far easier to empathize with those who are close to us, those who are similar to us, and those we see as more attractive or vulnerable and less scary.”
   • I disagree with Bloom’s point here because I feel that he has a fundamental misunderstanding of what empathy is, or at least he expects it to be more than what it is. Empathy can only occur when the empathizing individual can relate in some way to the person/people experiencing suffering. It can’t, nor is it supposed to, account for our response to people suffering who we can’t relate to. But acting like this is somehow a flaw to empathy and not the intended function is like calling your freezer faulty when it makes the soda you put in there and forgot about explode. The freezer did what it was supposed to do, you just used it incorrectly. Empathy is supposed to only apply towards people we relate to because that’s what empathy is: relating to someone to the point that you feel what they feel. Empathy is impossible unless you relate to the subject on some level. Also, empathy on its own isn’t any good anyway because even if you empathize with someone, action is needed to actually help them. Bloom puts too much of the blame on empathy when it’s only a small part of why people may choose to help some people and not others.

Reading “Unfollow” by Adrian Chen helped solidify my belief about how social media can be a useful tool for worldwide communication and growth. Chen’s essay tackles how social media connections can reach past internalized biases and, when done correctly, lead to the reevaluation of one’s beliefs. In the essay, he writes about the story of Megan Phelps-Roper, a legal assistant and hyper-religious social media manager for the Westboro Baptist Church in Topeka, Kansas, who comes to doubt and eventually abandon the bigoted and hypocritical beliefs of her community through connections she makes with people on social media. One such connection she makes is with a Jewish blogger, David Abitbol, who used kindness and sincerity to get her to open up, then combated her flawed beliefs using scripture as evidence. As Chen writes, “Abitbol asked why Westboro always denounced homosexuality but never mentioned the fact that Leviticus also forbade having sex with a woman who was menstruating” (18). His approach worked so well because rather than coming at her with open hostility, like most people did when they read her controversial posts, he appealed to her as a human, rather than the opposition, and connected with her through a familiar mastery over biblical concepts that she would have understood. Though many of the approaches that people online took to get Megan to change her beliefs failed, a couple managed to succeed, leading to a full one hundred and eighty-degree turn away from her old beliefs. This displays how social media can be an essential tool for combating prejudice, spreading ideas, and having earnest conversations about the different cultures, beliefs, and practices from around the world. Without social media, Megan may have never been confronted about the damage that her radical beliefs were having on people’s lives, or how much hurt she and the church were causing. Her complete transformation from a full advocate for Westboro’s practices to a nonbeliever leads me to believe that, if social media is to be used at all, it is best for it to be used in a way that connects us with people who we would never usually get to connect with, and not as a replacement for personal relationships.

The interactions that Megan has with these people with different beliefs and backgrounds are a big part of what social media should be used for. Before social media, it was difficult to be naturally exposed to people who opposed your beliefs, especially if you lived in a small community like Westboro. Even now, people who don’t have access to the internet may never get a chance to see the world from other perspectives and form their own opinions, not just be stuck with the opinions of their parents. Social media is a great tool for learning about other cultures and beliefs straight from the mouths of people who actually practice them. The exchange of information is a vital part of the human experience because it is what connects us as a species. Yet some may challenge my view that social media is best used for the spread of ideas on the grounds that social media is regularly used to spread information that isn’t true, and can even be incredibly dangerous. Every day, social media is used to circulate lies about specific people groups, make false claims about the intentions of political figures, and popularize conspiracy theories that are largely based in fiction, rather than fact. It takes just one post about someone on social media to completely ruin someone’s reputation, regardless of whether that post contains any accurate information. While this is a major issue with social media that doesn’t have a single, clear-cut solution, it shouldn’t negate the fact that social media can be an overwhelming force for good. All it takes is one post about misfortune and suffering to become a rallying point for people around the world to come together and try to change things for the better. I’ve personally witnessed this spread of human kindness on Reddit, where communities like r/rescuedogs have dozens of posts daily attempting to find homes for dogs that are about to be euthanized. Hundreds of people will pledge to donate money to the rescue effort, just on a single post! Even though not all posts are successful at rescuing the animal, the lengths that strangers on the internet will go to help a single, hopeless dog, really shows how, while social media can bring out the worst in people, it can also, quite easily, bring out the best. While social media may not be able to replicate relationships on a personal level, worldwide connections which serve to broaden our horizons and connect us through both good and bad experiences are greatly improved by social media.

Lamott’s way of describing the draft process predominantly focuses on the process, rather than the product. She even compares the draft writing to a child’s writing to paint a picture of how nonsensical and disorganized the draft often is. While I do agree that the first draft should be messy, I would have great difficulty taking the degree of disorganization that Lammot describes and turning it into something comprehensive. My first draft is definitely not perfect, but I usually try to keep it organized and structured so that I’m not trying to build a building out of a misshapen pile of bricks and mortar. I prefer to view my drafts as a building that’s under construction. It isn’t finished, but it isn’t so far removed from being a building that you have to start over from scratch and are only able to salvage some of the bricks. For me, the draft is about seventy percent about the process and thirty percent about the product. A good portion of the process is just getting words on paper, but I like to have at least an idea of what I want the finished product to look like by the time I’m done with the draft.

All the comments that I received during peer review helped my revision process, But the ones that I found to be most helpful were those which made me aware of areas where I moved on too quickly from a quote and didn’t take the time to explain it in my own words. This is something that I do with many elements of my writing because I often find myself wanting to jump into the next idea, rather than fully exploring the one I was already discussing. The reminder to not leave my quotes hanging was useful and likely not something that I would have noticed on my own. I also really appreciated the comments about what I did well in my draft, because it gave me a more clear idea of what to do, not just what not to do, and also made me feel more confident in my work. Another thing that helped me was reading and commenting on Aidan’s work, because it made me notice some things that I also need to address in my own work. The main thing I noticed was a lack of specificity, which I did make a good attempt to include in my own essay, but fell short in places due mostly to the aforementioned need to move on to the next idea, which I sometimes struggle with, especially when I am discussing one of my weaker points, or one I don’t identify with as strongly. Noticing places where Aiden’s essay could use more specific examples helped me to see where I could improve on my own specificity as well.

One of the biggest challenges I faced during peer review was that I had a hard time focusing on what I was reading because I felt like I was constantly scanning for things to comment about. It also made me a little uncomfortable reviewing someone’s essay while they sat next to me reviewing mine. The sound of them typing while I was left not knowing what they were saying made it difficult for me to write my own comments. But much of this stems from being generally unfamiliar with the peer-review process, and not being well-acquainted with my partner. I feel that it will be easier the more I do it.

1. Who is Adrian Chen? And how does his background/areas of expertise help inform you about his perspective as it relates to this article? Adrien Chen is a blogger who has written many articles for different publications on the internet culture of online platforms like Reddit and 4Chan. Some of his work went into exposing and taking down members of these platforms who had been involved in illegal activities. This sense of justice informs me about his perspective on internet responsibility, which is heavily incorporated into his writing in Unfollow, where he describes how Phelps-Roper uses the internet to spread hate about Jews, the LGBTQIA community, and even dead soldiers. His background suggests that he chose to write the article to display how groups who want to spread bigotry are granted free license to do so on the internet. But he also makes sure to highlight how the internet can be a way to educate those who might not have access to any information other than what they are told to believe, just like how Phelps-Roper is eventually turned away from her discriminatory views by people she meets online.
2. Megan had been raised since childhood to believe that the entire world was corrupted against the Westboro church, and even thought of other Christians as “evil” (Chen 7). As she grew up, she only became more convinced of her beliefs, and was regarded as having “mastery of the Bible” (Chen 4). However, as she interacted with more people on the internet, she began to question her beliefs because they were often lacking “’Sufficient Scriptural Support’”(Chen 15). As she interacted with members of the groups she had spewed so much hate against, it became more and more difficult to justify her beliefs from a biblical or moral standpoint. One of the main points that Chen kept referring back to was how the church members would get happy over the deaths of “sinners”, but Phelps-Roper gradually felt worse and worse about celebrating someone’s death, to the point where she finally realized the jarring disconnect between her own reaction to some horrible event and those of the people around her. As she is introduced to more and more people on the internet, and builds connections with them, she starts to feel her doubts about her faith grow stronger and stronger, especially through her conversations with C.G., who challenged Westboro’s cruel practices. The final nail in the coffin came when Westboro started changing their leadership structure from a community where everyone got a say in the decisions, to one where a small group of elders got to make decisions in private. They began to exclude women from the important church work, which left Phelps-Roper feeling trapped and controlled. She began to wonder things like, “What if Westboro had been wrong about everything? What if she was spending her one life hurting people, picking fights with the entire world, for nothing?” (Chen 32). This led her to leave with her sister, Grace, and begin exploring other viewpoints and staying with those who she had once ostracized, further drawing her away from her narrow-minded beliefs until she had fully removed herself from the influence of her past life.
3. In your opinion, how did social media embolden Phelps-Roper’s initial message as a spokesperson for Westboro Baptist Church? How did interactions via social media influence her drastic shift in personal belief?  In my opinion, the social media response that Phelps-Roper receives from her initial posts provides a form of instant engagement that is much more direct than her previous interactions with media, which causes her to crave more of that instant feedback and controversy that she instigates. According to Phelps-Roper, the engagement was “proof that people are seeing it and reacting to it”(Chen 5). In other words, Phelps-Roper believed that her posts on Twitter were helping her reach a bigger audience, allowing her to spread Westboro’s doctrines to many unrepentant sinners in need of salvation. But while her social media presence was initially used to spread hate, it also connected her with people like David Abitbol, C.G., and Graham Hughes. Because her life in Westboro had essentially become an echo chamber for the same beliefs and worldviews, Her access to social media allowed her to talk to people with different beliefs who challenged her. Chen highlights how people like Abitol would challenge Phelps-Roper on Westboro’s ideology, pointing out hypocrisy in their “death to all fags” message by countering it with the fact that “Jesus had said, ‘He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone'”(Chen 21). These conversations provided Phelps-Roper with insight into other beliefs and led her to question the validity of her own.
4. Contrary to what people normally assume, the best way to get someone to change their mind isn’t to attack their beliefs. The conversations that had the most impact in altering Phelps-Roper’s viewpoint were those that featured earnest discussion of the differing beliefs, and challenged hers without dismissing or antagonizing her. When people reacted with outrage, it only solidified Phelps-Roper’s convictions. But when they reacted with genuine discussion and friendliness, it broke through Phelps-Roper’s preconceived notions about viewing everyone as an enemy. Her story shows that the number of people you can change by berating them is zero, but by seeing the opposite side as a person instead of an antagonist, and respectfully conversing with them regarding your opposing sides, you are much more likely to cause them to consider your argument. Not only that, but her story also reveals that sometimes it takes years and many extenuating circumstances for someone to be willing to give up their beliefs, but it can happen, and we shouldn’t give up on someone just because our first attempt seemed to fail.
5. If you were to meet Phelps-Roper today, what question would you want to ask her, and why? I would want to ask Phelps-Roper about how she views her social media posts now that she has grown from that stage of her life. I would also ask if she ever posted anything talking bad about Westboro, or if she had put that approach behind her.

1. Before:
   • In my life, I never used many of the popular social media apps like Instagram, Facebook, Twitter, Snapchat, etc., because I was told from an early age that social media like those were bad, and I shouldn’t use them until I got older.  But what I did find and still use on a daily basis is Reddit. In many ways, Reddit is more dangerous than a less anonymous social media website, because there is little to no accountability for one’s speech or conduct. Because of the built-in anonymous nature of the platform, people are able to explore their hobbies and interests without judgement from their peers, but they are also able to create hostile and unwelcome places which foster discrimination of all kinds. And that doesn’t even come close to the level of reprehensibility of some of the socially unacceptable things that people are able to post with next to zero regard for their real-life image. And to make matters worse, oftentimes the validity of anything you say is heavily dependent on how much “karma” you have, which is the like/dislike feature that Reddit uses. This leads to people stealing other people’s content and reposting it as “karma farming”, or bot accounts specifically programmed to repost anything that gained even a bit of popularity in order to build up their karma, so the account can be sold off to someone who doesn’t want to put in the effort of actually posting quality content. I have to say that, having used this site for a considerable amount of time, it’s probably not the best for my social life. I’ve noticed that, while I can write out an entire essay explaining exactly why someone else’s opinion is wrong, I struggle to advocate for myself in real life when it actually matters. Because I’m so accustomed to writing on a platform where my identity is anonymous, having to say something difficult in real life becomes twice as hard, because I know it will actually affect me. In regard to the other people who use the platform, I’d imagine they have a similar experience. Anyone who frequently uses Reddit is liable to lose their real life social skills, to the point that it’s become an active meme that Redditors are the kind of people who live out of their parents’ basement. It’s a shame because Reddit can also be a great tool for finding communities where you can fit in, but it’s almost impossible not to be sucked into the black hole of negativity at the center of the whole platform. 

2. After:
   • I was scared into avoiding many of the popular social media apps like Instagram, Facebook, Twitter, Snapchat, etc., because my parents would tell me that those sites caused people to become depressed and hate themselves. Instead, I opted to expose myself to Reddit, a cesspool of chronically online users posting completely anonymous harassment, discrimination, and not-safe-for-work content. While this does only describe a portion of the site’s users, it still makes it, in many ways, a far more dangerous social media platform than those with less anonymity. Because of the built-in anonymous nature of the platform, people are able to explore their hobbies and interests without judgement, but they are also able to create hostile and unwelcome places which foster discrimination of all kinds. Even in Subreddits dedicated to a common love for an activity, game, sport, or hobby, intended to be used to bring people together, there is frequently rampant gatekeeping by the more hardcore members who can’t stand the idea that new members with less experience are allowed to participate in their community. And even though people can’t be judged by their real life popularity, it is simply replaced by Reddit’s karma system. Oftentimes, the validity of anything you say is heavily dependent on how much “karma” you have, which is the sum of all of your upvotes and downvotes for every comment and post that you make. This system not only leads to people stealing other people’s content and reposting it as “karma farming”, or bots used to automatically repost popular content, but also fosters a group shame mentality. If two or more people downvote a comment, chances are that within the hour, that comment will have over 50 downvotes, regardless of whether those other people actually disagreed. But this all pales in comparison to the level of reprehensibility of the socially unacceptable things that people are able to post with next to zero regard for their real-life image. At least once, I’ve accidentally stumbled across actual, graphic pornography while just scrolling through my feed, and, though I haven’t personally seen this content, there are entire Subreddits dedicated to posting videos of sickening gore and violence. I have to say that, having used this site for a considerable amount of time, It has definitely taken a toll on both my social life and mental health. I’ve noticed that, while I can write out an entire essay explaining exactly why someone else’s opinion is wrong, I struggle to advocate for myself in real life when it actually matters. Because I’m so accustomed to writing on a platform where my identity is anonymous, having to say something difficult in real life becomes twice as hard, because I know it will actually affect me. In regard to the other people who use the platform, I’d imagine they have a similar experience. Anyone who frequently uses Reddit is liable to lose their real life social skills, to the point that it’s become an active meme that Redditors are the kind of people who live out of their parents’ basement. It’s a shame because Reddit can also be a great tool for finding communities where you can fit in, but it’s almost impossible not to be sucked into the black hole of negativity at the center of the whole platform.  

When I revised this paragraph, I tried to focus on including specific examples, rather than just presenting an observation and not following it up with any tangible evidence of that observation. I also tried to include more bold writing to catch the reader off guard and intrigue them. Specifically, telling why my parents told me to avoid social media, only to undermine their reasoning with an even more outrageous description of the platform I used instead of the popular social media sites. Then I included more specifics about some of the harmful ways that Redditors engage with one another than I had originally included, to make the paragraph more personal to my experience. I also tried to remove unnecessary filler words where I saw them, and tried to use specific word choices over general ones, which can be boring to read. Though my adjustments definitely made my paragraph longer, I feel that it’s okay because in a real essay I would likely split this paragraph into multiple body paragraphs talking about each of the topics individually, allowing me to be more specific with each, rather than having to shorten it and lose much of that clarity.