CR - Catfish

Facebook. One of the hottest social network service site today. It is easy to create an ID, the server finds your friends based on your information. And many interesting applications to play with. What are the problems? No identification is needed to create an ID. This is what the film "Catfish" focused on.

What the film showed was simple. There was a woman whose name was Angela who made a fake facebook ID and fooled a man named Nev. I don't see what the film was trying to show. Sure, it was interesting, but a documentary should have a message. What Angela did was a lie, and that is of course not recommendable, but nothing illegal happened. She never asked for money, nor did she take any advantage of Nev using her fake photos. He have not called her if he knew who really she was. But I believe the wrongdoings of the film is larger than what it tried to show.

Facebook is not tight in security, and never intended to be so. As its only purpose is to have fun and to contact friends, it needs no security. And the case of Angela is not only facebook's problems. In many internet sites where users are anonymous, many people pretend to be someone they are not. They do this because they don't consider themselves valuable as the way they are. They try to seek love online, and that is all they want. We should pity them, not call them names and punish them.

But "Catfish" portrayed as if it was a problem of facebook. This is a problem of an individual, not facebook. KMLA students are making IDs impersonating the dorm parent, the president, and anything else that might be funny. This is something we shouldn't do, but nevertheless unrelated with the necessity of prohibition of impersonation by law.

Furthermore, "Catfish" has many problems itself. First of all, I don't believe it's real. Whether everyone faked it, or the filmmakers researched Angela and knew beforehand she was a fake. If it was real, then the "Catfish" did some bad things. Show up in one's doorstep with a camera, film her, and tell the whole world she's a liar. I don't think what she did was bad enough to be announced globally. They would have gotten permission, but I don't think they got it from everyone that shows up in the film. And if they didn't get permission from some people, they might have just released it and payed back later, after millions of people saw the movie.

Debate motions

1. THB facebook should tighten its security.
2. THBT films made through unlawful means should be punished.
3. THBT the "Catfish" portrayed the flaws of the facebook successfully.

CR #6

There is a fact that I learned from taking psychology course last year. It is easy to believe that we have free will, that we could choose between chocolate ice cream and strawberry ice cream, Burger King and McDonald's. Psychoanalytic theory tells us that the id, or the unconsciousness, formed by memories of childhood we don't fully remember, makes a person choose or do things. Behavior psychologists believe we were learned to act at a certain way. Social psychology tells us people are easily influenced by authority and other people. Diffusion of responsibility is a good example. Here is a link to a video about diffusion of responsibility, the Bystander Effect, and the infamous case of murder of Genovese.


(The uploader disabled embed html....  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9mI_ear1Pf0&ytsession=N1SbuuyGsCLWDdO550fkjZesvJN3Au9ZPtvc9hlrSCMHUSfVxBJxdVhKmSMyBP5MUJ068ubFHWPTMxY3km-ZMBJeQ-kbdY0iCXsF6Gw9AOBctDzKAxUzDTxdkw5Nof372l6kCqUaguY_Ca0tkFeJGazhBK60Rl4O7M0QKqA6zpwhZxmWRkS1PNSqOjMjRiaXEmDthuLdmrwsmWOMhZwFFT4QA-PaDCCnEKdn9JoQoVRoarQOYAULHC8wxfpTT6V7q8J1GpY5UHQonOiDJKVjmRh3JY_XBy04)




This is a video clip made by EBS.





Then why am I talking about psychology all the sudden? Although cognitive psychologists disagree, it is commonly known that men are extremely easy to predict. If we exaggerate this point, "all men are the same." Shortly summarized, all men are selfish. We may be learned to be polite and just, but we are not good at hiding instincts in certain situations as many psychology theory tells us.


Of course, I do not believe everyone is cruel and irresponsible, nor do extreme social psychologists. A small percentage of people is responsible and unaffected by circumstances that discourage them to do the right things. But when it becomes a group, those people are of a minority.


Then how can a whole country become moral? Impossible. "Kicking the ladder." I believe it was a title of some book about economics. It explains why USA likes FTA so much. Free Trade Agreement. No tariffs for imports and exports between two countries. Economically developing countries need tariffs so their yet not fully developed industries could be protected and grow, since they are not ready to compete with the best companies in the world. This is how US grew to the most economically powerful nation. But now, USA is asking other countries no tariffs, because US product is better than others, and they want to export their stuff as much as possible. Kicking the ladder. They climbed up the ladder, but they don't want anyone to climb it up anymore, so they're kicking it. Many US economics experts come out and state the merits of FTA, but all USA want to do is stay competitive and earn money. I'm not blaming USA. That's what a country is. Selfish. Selfish enough to be called cruel.


What is diplomacy? It's calculation. We know USA is strong, so everybody teams up and send soldiers to Iraq. When Korea sent soldiers to Iraq, it really has nothing to gain. But we know we'll be in big trouble when we disobey America. We don't actually team up with US because we are culturally similar or anything else. Relationship between countries cannot be compared with relationship between people. If countries were really friends, they would try to give each other things, not negotiate. Negotiating is the art of cunningness, to take the most and to give the least.


Kwonsok said America is a country that does anything to protect the rights and freedom of its citizens. If America was doing the best they can, they would have used the money that they used to the military who were trained to kill Bin Laden to the poverty. In the movie "V for Vendetta," V says "A building is a symbol, as is the act of destroying it. Symbols are given power by people. A symbol, in and of itself is powerless, but with enough people behind it, blowing up a building can change the world." when he explained about blowing up the parliament. Bin Laden was a symbol. The act of killing Bin Laden was also a symbol. Many terrorists are still alive and ready to terrorize - actually killing Bin Laden angered them. It actually endangered the lives, freedom and rights of US citizens. But US could not give up killing Bin Laden. He was a symbol of terrorism and US had to bring him down.


V for Vendetta video

US isn't really concerned about democracy and human rights in other countries. People in the US might be. But not the country. No country is actually quite interested in giving out their resources for no good. For every action the country is making, there is something the country can gain from that action. The country might miscalculate, but it was never for good intent.


And to answer Kwonsok's question, every country is selfish. I would rather like a world where everyone is trying to help each other, but mankind is too simple to develop that way. Prisoner's Dilemma just don't allow a country to be selfless. In this cold war, we should lower our levels to being selfish. Yes, sadly we should be selfish.


Whether it is justifiable is another question. The answer depends on the definition of "justifiable." But if we were to be strict, being selfish would be never justifiable.






Debate Motion


1. THB UN has the right to interfere other countries' policies.
2. THB we should send soldiers to war where our allies engage. (US, Europe, etc...)
3. THS the enforcement of international law in every country.

30 days without music

I love music. And many people do. Whether it is iPod or a walkman, many people listen to music, from The Beatles to Eminem, from idols to rock groups. I personally love hiphop music very much, and once my parents took my MP3 away from me, and told me to concentrate only on studying.

A quite reasonable argument and exactly why I would like to suggest 30 days without music. However, since I had my laptop, I was able to listen to music by youtube. Whether everyone instinctly likes music or my passion for hiphop was extraordinary, I don't know. But I was very painful, and I realized how important music was to me.

The purpose of this experiment is to learn to control one's desires. I am not sure that this would be effective to everyone. But I do believe listeners like me would undergo severe changes. Because I was somehow exposed to some music, I felt pain but didn't reform. If one experiences total separation from music, I believe they will be able to control their lifestyles more easily.

To students, music is a distraction from studies. Well, actually, listening to music is a distraction to everything. It is even proven by psychology by experimental means. If you study something listening to music, you will remember it well went you are listening to the music again. However, you remember best when you study sober and not listening to music.

I do believe this experiment is worth a try. Especially when midterm is coming up.

I know religion is a very sensitive issue, but I really want to talk about it. I used to be an atheist, but now I just don't believe any religion, and I have respect to every religion. I believe religion itself can do many things - inspiring people, changing them, leading them to good. However I dislike people who use the name to their own benefits. For example, in Korea, there are very many churches, and many rectors are more interested in fancy cars than their religion.

And I dislike people so one-sided that they cannot blend with other religions. The purpose of religion is to achieve enlightment, not to follow every line it teaches. Chang Tzu said, "Word is like a net. We use net to catch the fish. After we catch the fish, we forget the net. Word is a mean to communicate meaning. If meaning is understood, word itself should be forgotten." The Bible is a good book. The Coran is a good book. Buddhism has great textbooks. However, believing every word, obeying every line is proposterous. As some character in some book stated(I cannot remember), the Bible on the next page completely contradicts the last. This is just a quote, and I do believe the Bible has great significance in it. However, if one wants to make something out of a religion, if one expects to live a meaningful life, one should not follow every line in it. The purpose of a religion is not to kill and slaughter everybody else who believes otherwise. If so, religion was used only a tool to war.

I'm sorry. It seems that I criticized Christianity so much. I like and respect Christians. Okay, and here's my CR. "What is your religion? And how can your belief be justified? What do you believe about other religions?" It simply means "state your opinion about religion."

I will introduce some videos. They are made by atheists and I found them quite interesting. I am not an atheist myself, by the way.

Judgement of debate today

MOTION:
Date:		GOVERNMENT		OPPOSITION
Introduction	Pts	Name 오승민 (Oh Seungmin)		Name 오권석 (Oh Gwonseok)
Delivery	7 /10	Achieved confidence during the debate. But still not powerful.	6 /10	Reading whether than debating.
Arguments	8 /10	Quite adequate considering that this debate wasn’t prepared properly. However there were some generalizations.	8.5 /10	Rebuttal was logical. His argument was acceptable. No flaws.
Notes	Tot 15 /20	1. Students need to speak well in English and EOP helps it.	Tot 14.5 /20	Rebuttal: Do not think English skills will be improved. People do not formally in their day-to-day speech. They only use informal and low level English in daily life. It can’t improve the skills of students. Arg: EOP destroys Korean pride and neglects Korean language for Korean students. It is right for people to learn their mother tongue. Korean skills will eventually decline. KMLA wants students to be fluent in Korean, too.
Rebuttal One	Pts	Name 정다은 (Jung Daeun)	Pts	Name
Delivery	8.5 /10	Unlike the previous two, there was emotion.	7.5 /10	Not dynamic but there was tone.
Arguments	9 /10	Rebutted the LOP very well. The point was clear.	7.5 /10	Interesting but not well elaborated.
Notes	Tot 17.5 /20	Rebutt Rebuttal: If we want to learn difficult English words, we can memorize word smart. It’s casual talking skills we want to improve. We want the fluent English ability. Rebuttal: Not appropriate for developing Korean identity?? EOP is not a forcing students every time. Time is limited. Freshmen are required to take Korean History class. Even international school students are not deprived of Korean identity. Argument: School image. Helpful. Distinguishes KMLA from other high school students. We don’t practice EOP-> we become liars. As our prime minister stated, EOP helps students, and enhances school image.	Tot 15 /20	Rebuttal: 9 hours -> more than half of day when we’re awake. Argument: EOP can deteriorate human relationship. EOP helpers -> catch students using Koreans. Messes friendship. Most of teachers don’t use English -> why catch EOP??? Policy-> relationship btw teachers and students are ruined.
Rebuttal Two	Pts	Name 고지연 (Koh Jiyeon)	Pts	Name 김승찬 (Kim Seungchan)
Delivery	9.5 /10	This is it.	9 /10	Exaggerated but still good.
Arguments	9.5 /10	Very well organized. Pointed out contradiction.	7.5 /10	Quite repetitive.
Notes	Tot 19 /20	Policy -> consider a lot of things. EOP!!! Advocates all three factors what I talked about. 1)      need, 2)justification, 3)efficiency opp did not analyze status quo whatsoever. KMLA has 2 factors. International and domestic leaders. Far from English academies->school should advocate English. EOP harms Korean ability? High school. High school students already formed good Korean ability. Abolishing EOP->better ability to speak Korean??? According to opp, we speak low level. So, we speak low level Korean. Our Korean skills will not increase. CONTRADICTION!! Friendship deterioration -> uncommon. Not even possible if you follow the rules.	Tot 16.5 /20	EOP is disastrous. EOP neglects mother nature. Atmosphere that makes student think that English is most important -> wrong! EOP is like an illusion. Gap between the reality and the ideal. English only policy cannot be established fully. The image. 2nd clash. Does eop increases English skills? Gov says we can learn English skils.
Conclusion	Pts	Name 현진관 (Hyun Jinkwan)	Pts	Name 이창우 (Lee Changwoo)
Delivery	8 /10	Strong emotion but stopped too many times.	8 /10	Better than last debate.
Arguments	8 /10	Layed out well but flow stopped.	? /10	Short.
Notes	Tot 16 /20	Did not prove Korean skills decline. 2nd arg. Human relationship would decline. Could be overcome by students who support EOP.	Tot 16? /20	…..

Creativity

I completely agree with Sir Ken Robinson. Public education truly sucks. We are forced to study the same subjects until grade 10. (in normal schools) Examinations tests us how much we memorized of the subjects we never chose to take. In middle school, I hated the subject "Technology and Household" because I had to memorize stuff what I thought was completely useless. I wasn't planning to weld metals, and I'd suck anyway. And if I did become a person who welds metals, I don't need to know the history of technology to do that. Subjects these days exist just because the government officials never thought of changing or replacing them.


Arts is another point Sir Ken Robinson brought up. A musician surley doesn't need to know what is the meaning of the solution of Schrodinger's equation in Hydrogen atom. People look up to great artists without even knowing why and still discourage their childs of being one. Most of the jobs exist now don't need college graduates. But because everybody goes to college, if you don't go to college you won't get a job because you don't have a degree you don't need. The education system nowdays rank students, fisrt to last, require them to study language and math. An intelligent person is not only people who memorizes or solves math problems well. People who are gifted in music, poems, novels, drawings, dancing - they are intelligent. You cannot force them to take a standardized test and tell them they are idiots. Now that's a good way of destroying talents.


Of course, to some degree diverse subjects should be teached to students. When they're young and when they're not sure what they want to be. Making them experience diverse subjects so they know what they want. But still, not memorizing all the facts. Science class should take place in the lab, not textbooks. Students should grab any instrument and play it in music class.


1. THB students have to take history class mandatorily until high school.
2. THB grading systems should be abolished.
3. THB the number of colleges should be reduced to a place where only 1% of people are allowed to go.

Michael Moore

Michael Moore starts his article by revolting young people. He says he was inspired by them, and since they are oppressed, he will give them the freedom of speech. By his "High School Newspaper."


Although I never really had the urge or the opportunity to write something that would adults severly dislike and be censored. But I didn't think the world was perfect; I believed it should be changed, but never thought I should go to the streets and yell at the president or write something aggressive in my blog. Therefore, I really never felt that the need for the freedom of expression is desperate, because it kind of is already free to express oneself, and I never tried to cross the line.


However I did feel that censorship in Korea had problems when I was listening to music. Some songs are censored for no reason, and many songs are prohibited from being played on television shows for proposterous reasons. And although the government is not restricting everything, it does, certainly, give a message that they're doing a good job. And I agree that many teenagers might have been encouraged to "shut up and study."



Not actually a restriction, but a discouragement. Michael Moore is not neutral nor very logical but he still has a point. He said he heard many students couldn't publish articles they want at schools, and he's making a newspaper what those things don't happen. Sure, we're not living in the Dark Ages, but I don't see any reason to discourage this "High School Newspaper." More freedom. It's what we always need. It wouldn't hurt to make one.


Motions
1. THB that teenagers should have the right to vote.
2. THB that the ideal way of running a country is a direct democracy like Switzerland.
3. THB that books should be censored, making some books inaccessible to children and teenagers.

Story of Stuff

Well, after watching the Story of Stuff, I thought it was interesting and powerful, but still somewhat extreme. Annie Leonard showed clear distrust towards the government and corporations. She raised interesting viewpoints, about how the government were "making" us to shop, how our-or United State's, whichever-economy works. But still far from being objective. What kept me listening to her was her statistics. That made her persuasive, that backed up her opinion. After watching Dobb's critique, however, I saw that the statistics were wrong. Misinterpretations of some numbers are not always the problem, but it is when an argument is very much dependent and supported by it. Of course, Dobb also rebutted very unimportant mistakes, like president Bush also said to grieve and to pray. But Dobb seemed to correct the video from going biased. Well, but he too wasn't exactly in the center. For example, "the rest of the world can live because the US consumes 30 percent of the world's resources"? That's a cowardly excuse. The companies are collecting resources because they want to get rich, not to donate to people who live there. In conclusion, even if I agree of Leonard on the idea(not the video, since now I watched the critique), this shouldn't be shown in school, at least elementry schools.

Okay, and here's my three motions.

1. THB schools should only teach evolution, not creation in biology class.

2. THB the government should include communism and socialism in education, with great detail.

3. THB teachers do not have the freedom of speech when they are teaching to young students who are prone to influence.