Please answer each question in 3-5 thoughtful sentences. I am not asking you to write an essay, but the more thoughtful your writing, the more interesting the class becomes.
1. In the fable, “The Fisherman Who Beat the Water”, what do you think motivated him to cast the nets and dam the river?
2. Aesop states that the moral to this fable is, “It is like this in a city-state; the demagogues thrive by throwing the state into discord”. What does the word demagogue mean (look it up in a dictionary if you have to)? And in your own words, describe what you think this means. What does this moral say about human beings?
3. Refer back to the article we read, “Is doing the right thing hard-wired?” and look at the scenarios of the runaway trolley and the healthy person who would have to be killed in order save five others. How would the Fisherman have responded to both questions? Explain your answer thoughtfully.
4. In the fable, “The Fox and the Woodcutter”, describe in your own words the human behavior(s) Aesop is exemplifying.
5. Has a situation similar to the one depicted in “The Fox and the Woodcutter” ever happened to you? Please explain and focus on your emotional response to the situation you describe.
6. The article “Is doing the right thing hard-wired?” explains that the rarest form of cooperation is reciprocity. How was this fable an example of this idea?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
44 comments:
Sheryl Soo
Theta
1. In the fable, "The Fisherman Who Beat the Water", I think his hunger motivated him to cast the nets and dam the river. If he knew that he could successfully get a lot of food from doing so, there wouldn't be anything to really stop him, since if he doesn't get food he will starve to death. Also, he might have thought that by doing so, it wouldn't harm him in any way, only benefit him. He was being self-centered and wasn't in the state of caring about others when he was about to die of hunger.
2. A demagogue is a person, an orator or political leader, who gains power and popularity by arousing the emotions, passions, and prejudices of the people. A demagogue is like someone who benefits from the sufferings of others. I think this moral is saying that human beings tend to use others' weaknesses to their advantages. They would do almost anything for survival even if it means others would have to sacrifice for it.
3. I think for the runaway trolley scenario, the Fisherman wouldn't pull the lever because he seems to be someone who only cares about himself, and if anything was going to happen to someone else, or if he was able to change someone's life, he wouldn't really care about it. For the healthy person scenario, the Fisherman would probably think it is permissible to kill the healthy person because he doesn't have anything to lose.
4. In the fable, "The Fox and the Woodcutter", I think Aesop is trying to show that human beings tend not to stick to their promises and sometimes just go with the flow. In the fable, the Woodcutter was at first helping the fox and then when he was approached by the huntsmen, he was trying to help the huntsmen as well. It's like he couldn't make the decision of who he should help so he betrayed both sides. Human beings sometimes are indecisive and they would suddenly change their mind and do the opposite of what they chose to do previously.
5. Whenever I played games situations like in "The Fox and the Woodcutter" would occur, but they were all small things and it was a game so it wasn't as serious as the one in the fable. But it still gives the feeling of betrayal, doubt, and untruthful. During those situations I would feel regret for trusting that person, and a bit of disappointment that the person let me down.
6. In "The Fox and the Woodcutter", the Woodcutter didn't give up the huntsmen's trust for the benefit of the Fox thanking him, and instead he betrayed the Fox. In "The Fisherman Who Beat the Water" the Fisherman didn't give up his chance of successfully attaining food to satisfy his own hunger instead of ruining the river for everyone in the vicinity. If the Fisherman didn't beat the water, the vicinity might have helped him out.
John Sy
Heather Tabios
Eta
1.In "The Fisherman Who Beat the Water" in my opinion I think what motivated him to cast nets and dam the river was because he was hungry. Of course his idea of attaching the stone to the end of the rope would get the fishes scared and get distracted and end up swimming in the net. He would get something to eat instead of starving himself.
2.Demagogue is a person who is a political leader, who gains power and popularity by from people. A person who would stand for there people and sacrafice to do anything to help them.
3.For the runaway trolley scenario I don't think that the Fisherman would save the other people because he seems to be into himself like ehe cares about himself and not others. The heathy person scenario the Fisherman would kill the five unhealthy people to save himself.
4. In "The Fox and the Woodcutter" I think the humans behavior was applying to do whatever floats your boat. He was trying to be a good person to help the fox and the hutsmen. Like he couldn't backstab to whom he was helping.
Humans don't only try to help themselves but others too.
5. I had a similar situation like " The Fox and the Woodcutter" like being a friend to one person and that one person doesn't like the other person your try helping the outbut then you lie to not let the other person know what your doing and help them out on whatever thats needed to be done. In my own emotional response its like being unfaithful and not being able to tell the truth not keeping your word to one person.
6. In both fable examples in "The Fisherman Who Beat the Water" the Fisherman didn't give up for his hunger and instead he tried and got his meal. In "The Fox and the Woodcutter" the woodcutter betraded the fox therefore stayed truthful to the huntsmen.
John Sy
Theta
1. In the fable "The Fisherman Who Beat the Water", I believe the fisherman trying to survive and eating motivated him. If the fisherman didn't eat he could have died of hunger. Another reason why the fisherman could have been motivated is, he could have been trying to feed his family back at home and just trying to a plate on the table.
2. Demagogue means a leader who obtains power by means of impassioned appeals to the emotion and prejudices of the populace. This moral says that humans are most likely to use power against someone or something just to survive.
3. I think the fisherman would have pulled the lever because i think if he was in that position he would have tried to save 5 lives instead of letting 1 life survive. In the scenario of the healthy person, I think the fisherman would have told me healthy person to not let them kill him because if they go with the transplant their is a chance that something might go wrong in the operation and if something does go wrong, thats just a waste for the healthy persons life.
4. In the fable " The Fox and the Woodcutter" the humans behavior was foul. Aesop is trying to say that there are a lot of back stabbers in life and we all need to watch our backs.
5. Yes. I had been in the situtation like that. After that happen I felt like I couldn't trust that person no more. I felt hurt and back stabbed and till this day we aren't as close as we used to be.
6. In the "The Fisherman Who Beat the Water", the fisherman didn't give up on trying to get his food and surviving. In "The Fox and the Woodcutter", The woodcutter sacrificed trying to get the fox caught by the hunters instead of accepting a thank you from the fox.
Cary Gordon
Eta Block!!
1) In the Fable, "The Fisherman Who Beat The Water", I think what motivated him to do this was the thought that as soon as he puts that huge net out he would get a whole bunch of fish and he would not starve from hunger!!! He was trying to basically save his self from hunger, to put it in shorter terms.
2) The Merriam Webster Dictionary & Thesaurus says that a Demagogue is: Causing or able to cause damage. I think that this basically means that since the demagogue is a destructor that the way they strive and live there lifes are by causing havoc and death towards the others around them. Its pretty much like they do there damage and then sit back and enjoy the sit of whats going on before there eyes.
3) I think that the way the Fisherman would have responded for the 1st scenario would be to help the one and kill the five, then the answer for the 2nd scenario would probaly be to kill the 5 and dont do anything to the healthy one i think that he would do this because while looking at the little story snippet you see that though he wants to do something for himself he doesnt seem to care about whats going on around him and he doesnt care about everyone else in his souroundings.
4) The human behavior that Aesop is exemplifying is that of dependence and trust, dependence because the fox is depending on the man not to sell him out and get him killed and trust because his trusting him to keep his whereabouts a secret. He's also showing how a person can change up on you so fast and your left sitting there like what am i going to do, and i cant believe that he sold me out. He's showing how the basic human is applicable to change there mind at any given time.
5) Actually no not one that i can think of at this present moment.
6) Instead of the Woodsmen taking the thank you and being a loyal and truthful friend he gives up the foxs' hiding spot. Since the fisherman didnt give up on trying to get his fish and survive he was able to help himself though he caused muddiness in the vicinity.
Maria Zaragoza
Eta Block.
1)
I think he is motivated by the fact that he has to eat. This fisherman might have a family back at home and he has to feed them. Therefore he is willing to damage the river so he can catch food for himself and family. He doesn’t think about other people besides helping himself and his family if he has one.
2) Demagogues are a leader who obtains power by means of impassioned appeals to the emotions and prejudices of the populace. In other words a demagogue is someone who gains joy and benefits from the suffering of other people. I believe that this moral say about other human beings is that humans tend to help themselves more then help other people who are need. If something bad has to happen to the person for something good to happen for the other person, humans will never do it (well most humans) because of the fact that it will put them in danger.
3) The fisherman will mostly like have responded to the trolley question… his answer would have been to let the person die. Because in the reading you can tell that he asked about it, you don’t know if he keeps on doing his same actions. He just state of the reason of why he does it, therefore this show you that he thinks about then just do it right off. As for the healthy person question he would have responded as to saving himself then helping the other person. The reason is because in the reading he questions about it, he doesn’t feel sorry. He just questions about it. This shows you he does think about himself.
4) Aesop is saying that most people may say they will help but they turn the other way. You can’t trust each other because they can go behind your back. The woodcutter said to the fox he will help but when the hunters came he was willing to turn in the fox. You can think this like in war world 2, when people might have said to a Jew that they will help but at the end the person turn in the Jew.
5) I asked someone not to tell this other person about something about me. I didn’t really want people to know this thing about me and I trusted this person with it. But at the end this person told a few other people about it. I was very piss off; I couldn’t deal with this person for a few weeks. I didn’t even wanted to see this person, but with my bad luck I ran into this person at the mall. I got into a big fight with this person and got kick out of the mall. Since then I have not talk to this person or seen this person.
6) The fisherman might have been an example of kinship. He might have had a family so he sacrifices other people to benefit for his family. The fox and the woodcutter is an example of reciprocity. The woodcutter helps the fox (somewhat) and at the end he wanted a thank you from the fox. He thinks he can help someone and get something back.
Yuri Bondarenko
Theta (I think)
1. I think he was motivated by his own hunger and greed, and he didn't mind making his life a bit better at someone else's expense.
2. A demagogue is someone who plays on the fears and prejudices of the masses to obtain power. In the story, the fisherman thrived by disrupting the river and dirtying the people's water.
3. To me, it doesn't seem like the fisherman would do anything unless it directly benefited himself. If he got a reward for saving the people, I'm sure he'd be more than happy to pull the lever or toss the guy over the bridge.
4. This is a classic example of betrayal. The woodcutter has nothing to lose and everything to gain from helping the fox (friendship, etc...) but he choses to betray the fox for no gain whatsoever.
5. No, nothing like that has ever happened to me, thankfully. I have regretted trusting some people though, although the situation wasn't the same as in the story.
6. In both fables, if there had been reciprocity none of the conflicts would have happened. The fisherman would've gotten food without dirtying the people's water, and the fox would've been thankful for the woodcutter's generosity.
1. The fisherman was motivated to dam the river and cast the nets in order to improve his catch. If he didn't change the way the river flowed he would be limited in his catch and it would be harder for him to make his living. People don't like working so anything they can do to make it easier they will.
2. A demagogue is an political orator who takes advantage of popular views and opinions to rile up sentiment in their favor. They tend not to use rational arguements as often as misleading and confusing statements that are meant to lead their audience. While they might not be good leaders, they're popular because they say what people want to hear.
3. I think that the fisherman would have responded to the trolley scenario by saying that four people would be saved but also that the healthy person should be killed to save four others who are sick. I believe that the fisherman would respond in this manner because he acts to help himself even to the detriment of others, though he doesn't act maliciously, just out of a lesser of two evils choice. He is definitely selfish in his actions though.
4. The human behaviors that Aesop is exemplifying in his fable are the tendency for twofacedness when dealing with people. Where someone who asks for help but has no affiliation to you might be aided in theory, if someone who you feel a connection with asks for the opposite they are more likely to recieve it.
5. I haven't ever run into a situation such as that described in the Fox and the Woodctter.
6. This fable was an example of reciprocity being uncommon because it shows a woodcutter who has pretends to be aiding the fox but who in reality is helping someone he feels kinship with. The woodcutter feels kinship with the hunter because they are both humans and the hunter might share some fox with him but the fox doesn't have anything to offer except for his goodwill.
Aryana Wills
Theta Block
1. In the fable, “The Fisherman Who Beat the Water”, what do you think motivated him to cast the nets and dam the river?
-The first thing I thought when I heard the fisherman's excuse was starvation was, selfishness. A fisherman can catch two or three fish and have a meal for the night. Why would he need to dam an entire river and shake up dozens of fish, unsettling the water for and taking away from the food supply of an entire village is simply selfishness. What he said sounds like an excuse, and since I didn't know what a demagogue was at first I looked it up, and realized it applied very directly to how I felt about the man. Of course he would say that to someone knowing that the more foolish people would believe him.
2. Aesop states that the moral to this fable is, “It is like this in a city-state; the demagogues thrive by throwing the state into discord”. What does the word demagogue mean (look it up in a dictionary if you have to)? And in your own words, describe what you think this means. What does this moral say about human beings?
-After looking up what it meant, which is along the lines of, “one who purposely preaches false doctrine knowing he speaks to an idiot,” meaning, someone who lies knowing they will be believed because of the ignorance of other people. I think this is a common trait in people, who's nature is to manipulate people and situations to their own advantage, and lying is one part of that. At least, I believe that is a part of man's nature, if it is not changed.
3. Refer back to the article we read, “Is doing the right thing hard-wired?” and look at the scenarios of the runaway trolley and the healthy person who would have to be killed in order save five others. How would the Fisherman have responded to both questions? Explain your answer thoughtfully.
-I think the fisherman would respond, “I would pull the lever!” and “I wouldn't kill the healthy man!” for these reasons; he would not wish the guilt of 5 lives as opposed to 1 on his conscience. Also, one might be considered a hero for saving 5 lives despite having to sacrifice one. Also, he would not kill the healthy man because in such a situation an person like the fisherman would consider his own well being over that of others. In his selfishness he might fear the choice of saving others if it were at the cost of his OWN healthiness; as well as having one full and life unnecessary to lose on his conscience, what if that sacrificed man were himself? His becomes more aware of his own relation to the subject and therefore becomes defensive even if these two situation stand on the same platform of morality.
4. In the fable, “The Fox and the Woodcutter”, describe in your own words the human behavior(s) Aesop is exemplifying.
-I believe the behavior is generally being two faced. When you consider the idea of “reciprocating,” the woodcutter was obviously trying to gain as much as possible out of a situation inconvenient for others. He agreed to help the Fox and almost revealed him, in case he received reward or some type of compensation from the hunter. When the Fox was not revealed, and because he was not revealed, the woodcutter expected some compensation for saving the Fox's life, even though he practically gave him away in his gestures. Does the woodcutter deserve the gratefulness from the Fox? No, because he did not do as he promised.
5. Has a situation similar to the one depicted in “The Fox and the Woodcutter” ever happened to you? Please explain and focus on your emotional response to the situation you describe.
-I could say that my boyfriend's mother was the woodcutter. In one situation, indeed a situation she pushed my boyfriend and I into (leaving us stranded in a move theater because she wanted to see a second movie after she we had all finished watching the first) and calming us by telling us, “Don't worry, they (my parents) can't yell at you, they can just blame it on me,” and when we finally got home hours later and she had to face my parents, she yelled at cried about it being 'her time of the month' and our desire to stay and basically tried to shove the blame on our shoulders. Despite the fact my parents took offense at her obvious lack of an ability to responsibility for her own actions and not at how late we were, it's difficult to be grateful when I could have gotten in quite a bit of trouble if she had been more convincing.
6. The article “Is doing the right thing hard-wired?” explains that the rarest form of cooperation is reciprocity. How was this fable an example of this idea?
As I stated in my other response, I think the woodcutter was “playing both sides of the field,” you could say. He was hoping for some kind of compensation from either side with little mind as to who benefited from his “help,” despite how he acted toward the fox or the hunter. Honest reciprocation would have been aiding the fox wholly and not half-heartedly. It is a rare form because one can rarely be completely sure of another individual's intentions, so one can not fully trust anyone else.
Morgan Ashley Chang
Theta Block
1. In the fable, "The Fisherman Who Beat the Water", the fisherman selfishly beats the water in search of his next meal. He does this with no regard to the effects that his fishing will have on other people. Although there is the possibility of the fisherman having the need to provide for his family, it is not shown as his response shows only regard for himself and his priorities above others'.
2. The word demagogue describes one who comes to power by appealing to people's wants and desires without follow-through. In a high school environment, a demagogue would be a candidate for class president promising to find better sports facility. However, this person would have no intention of following through with this promise, and has only made this agreement to rally for more votes. This moral says that we as human beings no longer believe in upholding our words. It says that we have gotten to a state where many of us see only what will benefit us.
3. I think that in the situation with the runaway trolley, the fisherman would choose to let the trolley hit the five people. The fisherman is a self-centered kind of person who would believe that the lives of the five people on the first track and the one person on the second track are not his to worry about, and would therefore make no motion to change the situation. As for the issue with harvesting the organs of one person to cure five others, the fisherman would choose to harvest the organs. The fisherman would want to be showered with gratitude from those he saved, and the best way to achieve this was to "save" more lives, even if it means sacrificing only one. He would also have the idea that the more people that live equal the more potential repayments for his “help”.
4. Aesop uses “The Fox and the Woodcutter” to show the tendencies of human behavior to be misleading. The Woodcutter agrees to help the fox, but attempts to give him up at the first opportunity. Though he would seem trustworthy since he had allowed the fox a place to hide, the fox finds out through the woodcutter’s gestures that he was not truly intent on helping the fox. The woodcutter’s actions are a classic case of “Do as I say, not as I do”, because his actions are contradicting his words.
5. There was a time in the seventh grade when a friend of mine was in need of help. Her grades were slipping and all she needed to bring them back up was to return her test, after corrections, for a second review. I had gotten an A on the test and had lent her my test to look at; After all, I didn’t want one of my friends failing and not being able to go ahead a grade with me. The day the corrections were due, she told me she would turn mine in for me. The next class, my teacher came to me, shocked, and asked me where my corrected test was. I told her I had turned it in, but she was positive that she had not seen it anywhere. I went to go talk to my friend, and I saw that she had noticeably erased the name off of my test and replaced it with her own. I felt betrayed, and very used. I felt like I had just been bullied and I wasn’t sure if I was more angry that she had done it, or angry that I hadn’t seen it coming. After that incident, I had lost all trust in her.
6. Reciprocity is said to be the rarest form of cooperation. Aesop’s fable of “The Fox and the Woodcutter” is an excellent example of this, as we see the woodcutter is only looking out for what will benefit him. He does not really care who he helps, but only about what he can get as an end result. Because of his actions, this proves that the woodcutter can not be trusted to help with nothing but good intentions, which is why the fox, and anyone else in the future, would be hesitant to cooperate with the woodcutter.
John Carreon
Epsilon Block
1. In the fable, “The Fisherman Who Beat the Water” the fisherman was motivated by his hunger. He chose to disturb a enviroment that had value to the locals of the place. He just decided that for him to live he will destory an enviroment that people care about.
2. Basiclly a demagogue person is someone who tries to gain power or popularity by hurting people. What the author is trying to say is that people in socity try to put them self on top. Some examples can be found in schools like one person trying to get people on their side and they will try to do what ever it takes even if it means hurting someone.
3. I think the fisherman is a good person but may struggle in trying to do the right thing and is willing to sacrifice something or someone to help himself. For the runaway scenario I think he would be willing to pull the lever and not feel any guilt. And for the healthy person I think he would be willing to kill one person and save the five people.
4. In the fable, “The Fox and the Woodcutter” I think its saying that humans are willing to save someone but they dont really have the right intentions of saving that person or just backstabing to get something for the person. Like its human nature to get something out of helping someone. most people wont help a poor person because they know that they are not going to get anything out of it, vs a famous person in trouble they will just at the chance to save them because most likely you might get something out of it.
5. Well i have been in situations that when I ask someone to cover for me they will but olny to like a certin point. When they betray you it just hurts because you trusted that person and was depending on them but they let you down. I makes you think that you cant trust them anymore or and it make you think about the other people you trust like would they do that to you or would they actully help you.
6. Well in the fable "The Fishermen Who Beat The Water" he was willing to give up the fishes enviroment to help him benefit for his own future. The fable "The Fox and the Woodcutter" it was the something he was willing to do the same thing. But they didnt really think of giving up something that would benefit the future. Like the fishermen and his hunger is he had given that up there could be more fish in the river or the woodcutter could have benefit form like the fox saving him one day.
Ivy Leung
Zeta
1. In the fable, "The Fisherman Who Beat the Water", I think his hunger and survival motivated him to cast the nets and dam the river because he wanted to survive and by surviving he needed some food to eat. Without food, he will die of hunger which he doesn't want to not cast the nets and dam the river.
2. A demagogue is a leader who gets his power from emotions and prejudice of his people. I think the moral say that human beings consider themselves first before considering others, like when the fisherman doesn't want to die, and he is willing to kill something for his benefit.
3. I think the fisherman would not save the other people because he seems to care for himself and not others. And he wants something that will benefit him and not the other, so if he was the one person, he would rather have the five people die. I think the fisherman would rather be healthy and not killed because again, he wants to benefit himself and not the others.
4. I think Aesop is trying to say word is trust because the woodcutter promised the fox that he won't sell him out to the huntsmen, but he did it anyways, just that the huntsmen didn't notice his gestures telling them where the fix had went. So, trust is a very big thing in this fable.
5. It had indeed happened to me before. It was when I told a friend a secret and she swore not to tell anyone, but in the end, she told another friend and I was very mad and I couldn't really trust her anymore because she said she wasn't going to tell anyone, but she did it anyways.
6. In "The Fox and the Woodcutter", he betrayed the fox and told the truth to the huntsmen where the fix really was & in "The Fisherman Who Beat the Water", he didn't give up his hunger trying to catch the fish and ended up drinking muddied water.
David Luerssen
theta
1. I thing the fisher in the fable “The Fisherman Who Beat the Water” was motivated by his hungry. He didn’t want to die and so he didn’t thought what consequences his fishing will have for other people in the vicinity.
2. A demagogue person is someone who sways people by pledging them what they want to have to get influence. I think that this fable should tell us that humans normally do what is the best for them. They often don’t think about the consequences for other people.
3. I think the fisherman won’t do anything because he doesn’t has an advantage if he saves the lives. Only if the people which he can save are friends or relatives of him he would probably save the 5 persons.
4. In the fable “The Fox and the Woodcutter” Aesop describes the human behavior to say Yes if somebody needs help but in fact the woodcutter doesn’t really want to help the fox. He only didn’t want to break his word.
5. I never was in a situation like in the fable.
6. The fox gave the woodcutter his confidence but the woodcutter wanted to betray the fox. So this cooperation wasn’t reciprocity.
Maggie Gaster
8/28/07
1. In the aesop fable "the Fisherman Who Beat the Water," I think that the fisherman 's motivation for casting the nets to dam the river was to feed himself. At the end of the fable when the local bothers him about disturbing the river he tells him that he would die if he didn't disturb it. Seeing as how this man was a fisherman I imagine that he was being strategic about his fish catching. He damned the river, not to upset the village, but to be able to eat.
2. A demagogue is a political leader or speaker who stirrs up people's emotions, predjudices and passions to get popularity. I think that the fisherman is an example of a demagogue because he is one person disturbing the water of a whole village of people to feed himself. When the local buggs him about this, he stirrs up the man's emotions by saying that he will DIE if he doesn't disturb the water.
By appealing to the man's emotions he is able to feed himself at the expense of an entire village. I this is the way the demagugues are able to benefit off of the resources of others. The fisherman was able to thrive by putting the vilage's water into a state of discord.
I think that the moral of this fable is that you shouldn't be so easily fooled by people when they're disturbing your environment because they are just trying to use you to feed themselves. people are easily persuaded to trust people when their emotions or passions are appealed to and this fable is warning against it.
3. I think that the fisherman would do the best thing for himself in all of those situations. He would probably say that he wouldn't flip the switch at all because he didn't want to be the one directly responsible for the death of one man. I think that the options with the least personal damage to himself would be the ones he chose. In the case of the healthy person and the 5 sick people I think that he would choose to allow the 5 sick people to die because they were already sick. But he would let the healthy man live because if that man was him, he wouldn't care about helping the sick people. He wouldn't get any benefit out of that at all.
4. In the fable "The Fox and the Woodcutter," I think that Aesop was describing the human behavior of deception and being two-faced. The woodcutter said that he would help the fox but he didn't really care about him and he wouldn't want to get in trouble with the hunter for doing something nice for the fox. So he was being nice at first and then turning on the fox for his own benefit.
5. I can't think of an individual experience, but that happena all the times with friends. People tell you not to tell someone something and you go behind their back and do it anyway. I've told people secrets and had them repeat them to other people. It feels really bad and it's hard to trust people who do that.
6. The woodcutter probably didn't think that he would get anything for himself from the fox if he helped him so he didn't really think it was necessary to do it. I think that people are hard-pressed to automatically trust people. People have to earn your trust before you'll do things for them most of the time. Especially things that could be potentially bad for you. I don't think that doing the right thing is hard-wired at all. People are going to do the thing that benefits themselves the most before they do anything for anybody else until they learn that some people will reciprocate the favor. Or that they should do for others what they would want people to d for them. But many people have a hard time with that idea.
Rolando Casella
Theta
1. In the fable, "The Fisherman Who Beat the Water", I think his hunger motivated him because if his hunger wasn't what effected him casting out nets and dam the river then what was. He would starve to death if he can't catch fish. He probably never thought it would be harmful at all. The thing is that it would only benefit him and not the city. Though is the hunger of one hunger more better then having the people have dirty water?
2. A "demagogue" is a political leader who seeks support from what are popular desires rather than by using the clear and logical arguement. Demagogue is like someone who can benefit from the pain of others and that weakness is used for advantage. For the story the "demagogue" would rather get what the popular desire is and sacrifice what others may face.
3. I think that for the runaway trolley scenario, the Fisherman actually wouldn't pull the lever. When he was fishing he didnt care about anybody else but himself, so the same thing would go for the trolley he wouldn't care about the 5 people. For the healthy scenario, I believe the Fisherman would actually think about killing the healthy people because he wouldn't care what happend to them since they have already been close to the unhealthy person.
4. In the fable, "The Fox and the Woodcutter", I believe Aesop was trying to show that the woodcutter or a human's behavior can be different from what they promise. They can promise one thing and suddenly they are doing something else as if they were going on their own way. People can be undeciding at points and just go end up changing their minds.
5. A situation similar to the one shown in "The Fox and the Woodcutter" actually happened to me when I said I would do a certain job that I might like. Towards the end it gets hard or I just change my mind so I become indecisive. When ever the situation happens it just gives you a bad feeling because of how you change you mind right then and makes you feel like do you really trust in the situation.
6. In "The Fisherman Who Beat the Water", the fisherman wouldn't give up his chance that he had of catching food for his hunger then caring about the betrayal of having beat the water and causing people drink dirty water. In "The Fox and the Woodcutter", the woodcutter was giving the trust to the huntsmen and benefiting the huntsmen. After giving the gestures the huntsmen didnt get the clue but thanked the woodcutter anyways. The woodcutter was betraying the fox after he promised.
Jasmin Palencia
1- I think that the Fisherman got motivated to cast the net and dam the river because he was only thinking of himself and not about anybody else. Or he also might not have been to catch fish any other way so he was trying to find an easier way to catch fish.
2- Demagogues means somebody that manipulates people so that they are able to do what they want. I think that this says that human beings are people that are selfish and would do what ever they want to do not caring who they hurt or what the cost is to do it.
3- I think the fisherman would probably have switch the lever so that the only one person that was killed because he would think that that would be better than 5 people dying. T kill a person he would probably have killed the person so that he could save the other five people because that would save more people than have them all die.
4- The humans behavior was pretty mess up because he promised the fox that he would help him out and then ended up betraying him. They just showed that humans can not be trusted with anything no matter what and that isn’t true about everyone.
5- Yeah it did happen to me in middle school. I was pretty mad with my friend but I knew I forgave her I never did trust her again though.
6- They are examples of the idea because both of them they said that humans wouldn’t do anything that would put them in jeopardy. Also they wouldn’t give anything that would have them suffer but they would have somebody else suffer so that it would help somebody else.
Ian Kappos
Epsilon
1. The fisherman wanted to claim as much as he could at the cost of everyone else. The luxury of all who drank and fished from the river was of no importance to him. As long as he could live comfortably, the rest of the world could be thrown into turmoil. And given his reaction to his onlooker, turmoil is the state he prefers society to be in over any other.
2. A demagogue is a person who appeals to the crowd by voicing sentiments and opinions that he or she knows to be held by many. If a person can light the flame of chaos, he will be warmed by it. I think this is what Aesop meant with this tale. If a human being can do anything in his power to comfort his or herself, he very well could do it.
3. The fisherman has like the likelihood of going either way on these issues. If he sees no benefit for himself in either situation, he will probably remain uninvolved. But if he finds maybe a hope for publicity, gratitude or rewards, he could also take advantage of these possibilities. I think that you really have to be in the person's head to know which road he'll eventually pick.
4. I believe what Aesop was getting at was hypocrisy. He was pointing out the tendency for someone to say one thing and do another. As a survival mode, some humans will lie their way out of things, bend their words to impress - do anything that make things swing in their favor. He is pointing out all our proneness to not practicing what we preach.
5. I've not been in a situation very similar to the one in "The Fox and the Woodcutter." I will say that I have encountered hypocrisy, and that my experiences have taken place on the giving and receiving ends. No one likes lies, but then again, everyone does it. They cancel each other out. Therefore I really can't get too worked up about someone saying one thing and doing another.
6. Because people, if they are to to get any returns for their favors, need to get it then and now. They can't rely on things to happen in the future. It's a survival instinct. You can't trust time and you can't trust people. To reap your rewards, you have to get them now and not wait for them to show up in a will. I think this is what's behind our instinct to not always expect payback in the future.
Antonio Alvarado Epsilion
1.the fisherman csted the net in the river because he was hungry and the river had fish in it so tried to catch the fish.
2.demagouge is a kind of political leader who gains power by telling the people what they want to hear. and that one who knows how to speak the language will have the most power.
3.the fusher man would have let the one person die on the tracks and saved the 5 people because possibly he would get a reward from one of those ten people he would save compared to the two he could've saved.
4.that seeing someone or something in fear they tend to have sudden compasion and when the hunters asked the man where the fox was he gave them a gesture that the fox was in the hut but since the hunters only wanted the answer they didnt notice.
5.it has never happened to me before.
6.that the woodcutter thought that if he told the hunters where the fox was at he thought that the hunters would give him a rewards, but they didnt notice him so he ended up being the dumb one
Calvin Chan
Eta Block
1)I think that hunger was what caused the fisherman to net and damn the river. He found that doing sow was a very effective way of catching fish and did so to continue living. Even if it displeased the other people who drank the river water.
2)A demagogue is a leader who obtains power by means of impassioned appeals to the emotions and prejudices of the populace. I think that a demagogue is a leader you uses the flaws and faults within the masses to gain and hold power. They also take power by causing suffering and dismay to the people they lead.
3)I thnk in the situation of the Trolly the Fisherman would choose to save the five people over saving the one person. Though it may seenm as though he is being selfish for causing the people to drink muddy water. He is only trying to survive by what ever means possible. And in this situation he would most likely be willing to kill one for the lives of five other people.
4)I think thatthe traits Aesop is exemplifying is greed. The wood cutter most likely expected an award for alerting the hunters to the foxes location. And when the hunters left the He expected some sort of thanks from the fox for hiding him but he did not know the fox saw him make gestures to the location of the fox. His greed leaving him with noting in the end
5)This situation has happened to me many times in the past. I've gotten in trouble many a time because my little sister cannot keep he trap shut unless i give her something. aNd it is very fustrating when you have nothing to offer to her.
6)In the fable "the fox and the wood cutter" The greed of the wood cutter caused him to think only for himself though he got no personal gain from misleading both the hunters and the fox. And in the fable "The Fisherman Who Beat THe Water" His hunger drove him to cause dis pleasure to the other people who used the river for drinking water. But if he did not need to disturb the water in order to survive he would not have done so.
Brett Moran
epsilon
1.In the fable "the fisherman who beat the water" i believe that the fisherman wanted to cast the net over the river for one reason and that was for himself he was being selfish by only thinking of his own hunger and not the rest of the towns water supply. that is why he wanted to get fish cause he was hungry and didn't want to die. but i don't think he had to use such a big net and disturb all the fish to feed himself that is why he was being selfish.
2.the word demagogue to me means someone who uses threats or destroys things of the citizens to gain political power sort of like scaring people into giving him power. for example a bully.other then this i think that the moral is that the fishermen did this for himself but also to make the towns people angry to some how give him some sort of power even if the power is only in his on mind.
3.i think that the fisher men would have said no to both of the scenarios mainly because he cares a lot himself and probably wouldn't even care if they died. since he was ruing a water supply for a entire town why would he care about four people.
4.i think that the human was being a asshole many because he was expecting a thank you when he was trying to get the fox caught even if he didn't say anything he still pointed. luckly for the fox the hunters were not to bright and didn't under stand the woodcutter.
5.well i don't think that i have ever had the same situation as the fox has mainly because i have never really been running away from anyone other then playing hide and seek when i was much younger. so no i don't have a similar sorry to him
6.in the fables fox and the woodcutter and fisherman who beat water they relate to cooperation is reciprocity in these ways. well in the fisher fable the fishermen just wanted to eat his food and he trusted himself to get his food and he got himself food he really didn't need to trust anyone else so of course he used this method. and it worked for him. in the fox and the woodcutter fable. the fox trusted the woodcutter and the woodcutter didn't really stay true yet the fox was lucky so he didn't get caught by the dumb hunters. :D
calvin zhang
theta
1. In the fable, "The Fisherman Who Beat the Water", I think that his motivation his strive to stay alive by not starving to death by doing what ever necessary even if he had to harm others. I also think that if he was that hungry, he wouldn't be thinking about other people and was trying to survive.
2. A demagogue is a person who gains power and popularity by arousing the emotions, passions, and prejudices of the people. I think the fable, "The Fisherman Who Beat the Water" is saying that people take advantage of others that are less fortunate than they are to benefit themselves.
3. If the fisherman was to answer the runaway trolley scenario, I think he would pull the lever because I think that he really is a good person and was trying to stay alive and wasn't thinking about everyone else at the moment. For the healthy person, I think he wouldn't take one's life to save 5 because that someone didn't do anything to deserve death.
4. In the fable, "The Fox and the Woodcutter", I think Aesop is trying to show that humans sometimes fake their personality to certain people to later stab them in the back.
5. I have been "back-stabbed" and I felt really hurt because I thought someone that I could trust started to treat me differently because someone else told the person that I trusted something about me when the person I trusted knew better of me.
6. In both fables, I don't think that reciprocity happened because the fisherman got food at the cost of someone else and the woodcutter betrayed the fox instead of staying true to his word.
Daniel Kong
Episilon
1. What motivated there fisherman to cast his net was probably hunger. He cast the net and dammed the river so that he may catch the fish that was in the river and eat or store it so that he may not starve.
2.Demagogue means 1 : a leader who makes use of popular prejudices and false claims and promises in order to gain power
2 : a leader championing the cause of the common people in ancient times
In this case, I think it is the second definition that is being used. Demagogue means someone who twists the truth to gain power. The moral states that people will tend to twist the facts that they face so that they are benifitted without regard to the public.
3.The Fisherman would have saved 5 from the trolley and let the 1 healthy die so that 5 sick might live. To him he would use the argument of the needs of many outweigh the few. If he didnt kill the 1 healthy man thanthose 5 sick people who might have one day gone on to cure the very sickness that they had would have died. However, the same argument could be used for the one healthy person as well.
4.Aesop's fable is exemplifying the human behavior of hypocrsy. The woodcutter said that he will hide the fox but he tried to tell the hunter through gestures that the fox was hiding in his house. The fox then came out after the hunter left and basically told the woodcutter to do what he said he was goin gto do.
5.I do not believe I have ever been a situation like the fable. The closest I can recall was back in middle school. I told a friend a secret and he said he will keep it, instead the next day I find that he has told another person. I felt really betrayed about it.
6.The fable is an example because the fox expected the woodcutter to keep his word even if the woodcutter didnt get anything out of the deal. The fox expects that he one day might have to do a favor for the woodcutter but it is left unsaid whether the fox will go through with it.
Jessica Wells
ETA
The fisherman in the fable was motivated by his need to survive. He acted accordingly by choosing the fishing strategy that would most completely rid him of the fear of starvation. In the process of doing so he gained more food than he needed, while in turn making the water source for the entire town unusable.
A demagogue is someone who in order to gain popularity and control, plays into the fears and emotion of the people. I think the moral of the fable plays off the fact that while people are preoccupied with their fears, it allows a space for a person interested in power to gain control by investing in those emotions. The demagogue is not immediately concerned with the needs of the people but is more or less concerned with being poignant and having the ability to manipulate. That is the need that they have and intend to satisfy, while the needs of the people are just the vehicle.
Putting myself into the mindset of the fisherman, I believe that he would have reacted to the question of saving the lives of 4 people by flipping the switch because in this situation, he would not really be effected by the outcome. The common moral sense would be to save as many lives as possible, he was only selfish because he needed food, but in this hypothetical situation he is not making a decision based on his personal well being.
The fox and the woodcutter fable makes notice of people in society who may say and want to believe that they are virtuous or upstanding and value that as a part of their personality, but in everyday conduct do not live up to their own words and morals.
Of course, something like that of the Fox and the Woodcutter has happened to me personally (or has been my doing), because there have always been people in society who want to believe/say they are upstanding without actually wanting to take the time and effort out of their daily life to actually make themselves the people they say they are.
Reciprocity is the rarest form of cooperation because you have to rely on someone else’s moral judgment. The people of the town rely on the fisherman to respect the water source while they take personal benefit from the fish, but that was betrayed by the difference in values between that particular fisherman and the towns people. Creating distrust and frustration, for both parties.
© Fia Samzelius
Zeta
1. In the fable “The Fisherman Who Beat the Water” the man who dammed the river wanted to survive. Simply put if he didn’t dam the river, so he could scare the fish into his net, he would not be able to eat the fish and ultimately DIE.
2. Demagogue; A leader who obtains power by means of impassioned appeals to the emotions and prejudices of the populace. The demagogues thrive by throwing the state into discord… might mean that the fisherman (the demagogue, perhaps) can go on doing what he is doing because he tells the other people drinking the muddied water (the state, one might say) that he will die if he can’t continue fishing like so, therefore throwing the state into discord…
3. Well I guess since the fisherman would have to be the single person in each scenario (if he thinks about it that way while he is making the decision, subconsciously or not) he would choose to not act at all in the case of the trolley incidence and not to kill the healthy person in the other. This is because he would rather himself stay alive as opposed to the five others living while he dies. He acts on independent or self-thought.
4. I believe Aesop is exemplifying the human characteristic commonly known as fake (woodcutter). It confuses me though, because I don’t see the motivation of the woodcutter’s actions. Why would he want to rat the fox out? What’s his motive for indirectly killing the foxy creature?
5. Surely something similar has happened to me once or twice. However since I can’t recall my specific feelings, my emotional response must have been to repress the feeling.
6. Ah, I see. Obviously the woodcutter had no intention of asking the fox for a favor in the future. If he did he would have used the cooperation reciprocity. The woodcutter would in that case have let the fox stay in his hut until the hunters were gone without making those gestures. Because in the end the fox would respect the woodcutter and return the favor.
©Fia Samzelius
Zeta
1. In the fable “The Fisherman Who Beat the Water” the man who dammed the river wanted to survive. Simply put if he didn’t dam the river, so he could scare the fish into his net, he would not be able to eat the fish and ultimately DIE.
2. Demagogue; A leader who obtains power by means of impassioned appeals to the emotions and prejudices of the populace. The demagogues thrive by throwing the state into discord… might mean that the fisherman (the demagogue, perhaps) can go on doing what he is doing because he tells the other people drinking the muddied water (the state, one might say) that he will die if he can’t continue fishing like so, therefore throwing the state into discord…
3. Well I guess since the fisherman would have to be the single person in each scenario (if he thinks about it that way while he is making the decision, subconsciously or not) he would choose to not act at all in the case of the trolley incidence and not to kill the healthy person in the other. This is because he would rather himself stay alive as opposed to the five others living while he dies. He acts on independent or self-thought.
4. I believe Aesop is exemplifying the human characteristic commonly known as fake (woodcutter). It confuses me though, because I don’t see the motivation of the woodcutter’s actions. Why would he want to rat the fox out? What’s his motive for indirectly killing the foxy creature?
5. Surely something similar has happened to me once or twice. However since I can’t recall my specific feelings, my emotional response must have been to repress the feeling.
6. Ah, I see. Obviously the woodcutter had no intention of asking the fox for a favor in the future. If he did he would have used the cooperation reciprocity. The woodcutter would in that case have let the fox stay in his hut until the hunters were gone without making those gestures. Because in the end the fox would respect the woodcutter and return the favor.
©Fia Samzelius
Zeta
1. In the fable “The Fisherman Who Beat the Water” the man who dammed the river wanted to survive. Simply put if he didn’t dam the river, so he could scare the fish into his net, he would not be able to eat the fish and ultimately DIE.
2. Demagogue; A leader who obtains power by means of impassioned appeals to the emotions and prejudices of the populace. The demagogues thrive by throwing the state into discord… might mean that the fisherman (the demagogue, perhaps) can go on doing what he is doing because he tells the other people drinking the muddied water (the state, one might say) that he will die if he can’t continue fishing like so, therefore throwing the state into discord…
3. Well I guess since the fisherman would have to be the single person in each scenario (if he thinks about it that way while he is making the decision, subconsciously or not) he would choose to not act at all in the case of the trolley incidence and not to kill the healthy person in the other. This is because he would rather himself stay alive as opposed to the five others living while he dies. He acts on independent or self-thought.
4. I believe Aesop is exemplifying the human characteristic commonly known as fake (woodcutter). It confuses me though, because I don’t see the motivation of the woodcutter’s actions. Why would he want to rat the fox out? What’s his motive for indirectly killing the foxy creature?
5. Surely something similar has happened to me once or twice. However since I can’t recall my specific feelings, my emotional response must have been to repress the feeling.
6. Ah, I see. Obviously the woodcutter had no intention of asking the fox for a favor in the future. If he did he would have used the cooperation reciprocity. The woodcutter would in that case have let the fox stay in his hut until the hunters were gone without making those gestures. Because in the end the fox would respect the woodcutter and return the favor.
ariel
epsilon block
#1 I think the fisherman was motivated by his need for fish and his own desire to eat. If he had taken time to think about the consequences of his actions he would have caught the fish in a less destructive manner to the people in the town; however because he was driven by hunger the peoples water didn’t matter much to him.
#2 A demagogue is a political leader who instead of using his own opinions or reasonable argument to prove his point, he appeals to what the majority of the people want or don’t want. In relation to human beings, it says that when trying to get to the top, it’s human nature to do whatever it takes, whether its causing destruction or just lying your way to the top.
#3 I don’t think that the fisherman is explicitly bad and selfish, he just looks out for himself. Based off of this I think he would look out for others when it didn’t involve benefiting himself directly. I think in both instances he would choose the option where more people would be saved (pulling the lever and killing the healthy man) because it isn’t like the peoples death will have a say on where or what he eats.
#4 The kind of behavior that is described in “The Fox and the Woodcutter” is similar to that of a demagogue. Although the woodcutter is not a political figure, he could see the hunters as people of a higher social standing and hopes that buy disregarding the fox and pointing to where he was hidden he would gain the respect of the hunters.
#5 A time when I was in a similar situation to “The Fox and the Woodcutter” was when I told my step-mom something in confidence and I asked her not to tell my dad but she told him when I wasn’t around and it backfired in my face. Like the fox I was mad and a little hurt just because I put my trust in somebody and asked them a favor and it wasn’t upheld.
#6 In the beginning the woodcutter agrees to help the fox with no questions asked. However, the woodcutter does not stop to think about how the fox would repay him, he can’t stay true to the fox because he doesn’t have the mindset to think that far in the future and maybe believe that the animal would actually give something back. I think it’s hard for people to sacrifice for gratification that won’t come immediately, and thats why reciprocity the rarest form of cooperation.
©Fia Samzelius
Zeta
1. In the fable “The Fisherman Who Beat the Water” the man who dammed the river wanted to survive. Simply put if he didn’t dam the river, so he could scare the fish into his net, he would not be able to eat the fish and ultimately DIE.
2. Demagogue; A leader who obtains power by means of impassioned appeals to the emotions and prejudices of the populace. The demagogues thrive by throwing the state into discord… might mean that the fisherman (the demagogue, perhaps) can go on doing what he is doing because he tells the other people drinking the muddied water (the state, one might say) that he will die if he can’t continue fishing like so, therefore throwing the state into discord…
3. Well I guess since the fisherman would have to be the single person in each scenario (if he thinks about it that way while he is making the decision, subconsciously or not) he would choose to not act at all in the case of the trolley incidence and not to kill the healthy person in the other. This is because he would rather himself stay alive as opposed to the five others living while he dies. He acts on independent or self-thought.
4. I believe Aesop is exemplifying the human characteristic commonly known as fake (woodcutter). It confuses me though, because I don’t see the motivation of the woodcutter’s actions. Why would he want to rat the fox out? What’s his motive for indirectly killing the foxy creature?
5. Surely something similar has happened to me once or twice. However since I can’t recall my specific feelings, my emotional response must have been to repress the feeling.
6. Ah, I see. Obviously the woodcutter had no intention of asking the fox for a favor in the future. If he did he would have used the cooperation reciprocity. The woodcutter would in that case have let the fox stay in his hut until the hunters were gone without making those gestures. Because in the end the fox would respect the woodcutter and return the favor.
©Fia Samzelius
Zeta
1. In the fable “The Fisherman Who Beat the Water” the man who dammed the river wanted to survive. Simply put if he didn’t dam the river, so he could scare the fish into his net, he would not be able to eat the fish and ultimately DIE.
2. Demagogue; A leader who obtains power by means of impassioned appeals to the emotions and prejudices of the populace. The demagogues thrive by throwing the state into discord… might mean that the fisherman (the demagogue, perhaps) can go on doing what he is doing because he tells the other people drinking the muddied water (the state, one might say) that he will die if he can’t continue fishing like so, therefore throwing the state into discord…
3. Well I guess since the fisherman would have to be the single person in each scenario (if he thinks about it that way while he is making the decision, subconsciously or not) he would choose to not act at all in the case of the trolley incidence and not to kill the healthy person in the other. This is because he would rather himself stay alive as opposed to the five others living while he dies. He acts on independent or self-thought.
4. I believe Aesop is exemplifying the human characteristic commonly known as fake (woodcutter). It confuses me though, because I don’t see the motivation of the woodcutter’s actions. Why would he want to rat the fox out? What’s his motive for indirectly killing the foxy creature?
5. Surely something similar has happened to me once or twice. However since I can’t recall my specific feelings, my emotional response must have been to repress the feeling.
6. Ah, I see. Obviously the woodcutter had no intention of asking the fox for a favor in the future. If he did he would have used the cooperation reciprocity. The woodcutter would in that case have let the fox stay in his hut until the hunters were gone without making those gestures. Because in the end the fox would respect the woodcutter and return the favor.
©Fia Samzelius
Zeta
1. In the fable “The Fisherman Who Beat the Water” the man who dammed the river wanted to survive. Simply put if he didn’t dam the river, so he could scare the fish into his net, he would not be able to eat the fish and ultimately DIE.
2. Demagogue; A leader who obtains power by means of impassioned appeals to the emotions and prejudices of the populace. The demagogues thrive by throwing the state into discord… might mean that the fisherman (the demagogue, perhaps) can go on doing what he is doing because he tells the other people drinking the muddied water (the state, one might say) that he will die if he can’t continue fishing like so, therefore throwing the state into discord…
3. Well I guess since the fisherman would have to be the single person in each scenario (if he thinks about it that way while he is making the decision, subconsciously or not) he would choose to not act at all in the case of the trolley incidence and not to kill the healthy person in the other. This is because he would rather himself stay alive as opposed to the five others living while he dies. He acts on independent or self-thought.
4. I believe Aesop is exemplifying the human characteristic commonly known as fake (woodcutter). It confuses me though, because I don’t see the motivation of the woodcutter’s actions. Why would he want to rat the fox out? What’s his motive for indirectly killing the foxy creature?
5. Surely something similar has happened to me once or twice. However since I can’t recall my specific feelings, my emotional response must have been to repress the feeling.
6. Ah, I see. Obviously the woodcutter had no intention of asking the fox for a favor in the future. If he did he would have used the cooperation reciprocity. The woodcutter would in that case have let the fox stay in his hut until the hunters were gone without making those gestures. Because in the end the fox would respect the woodcutter and return the favor.
Sierra Laiafa
Theta
1. I think it was for his own good and he just didn’t want to die from hunger so he was trying to do what he could to stay alive. His hunger was his motivation and he set his mind to it and went for it. I dont think he thought twice but just reacted for his own good. His hunger also made himself and he didnt really care for the fishes he was only thinking of himself and not what was happening to the fish.
2. Demagogue- a leader and figure who gains their power for promoting themselves and arousing people’s emotions. It shows how sometimes when you have a little power you only help when it’s beneficial to you and when you see something that needs to be done you see past it. It also places you in the state of mind of doing anything in your need to for survival.
3. The fisherman would have probably responded the same as everyone else. But from what I know of him he would’ve saved the five others on the tracks and killed the healthy person. I only say that because my knowledge of him is that he would do what would be most helpful for him and just try to stay alive.
4. He is exemplifying how human beings can sometimes help you and turn around and betray you. It also shows how humans can get caught between a choice. For instance, the man was just trying to help the fox out and when he was approached his actions changed and he tried to help the hunters so basically he was caught in between the two.
5. No
6. Well for the fox and the woodcutter the woodcutter turned on the fox because he saw nothing was benefiting him so he tried to switch up and get the fox caught up. As for the fisherman he was dong what he needed to do in order for him to benefit from what he was trying to get which in this case was the fish from the river.
Jasmine Kamariotis
Epsilon
1. The fisherman in the fable was working from his own interest. What he needed was more important to him than the muddy water that the rest of the people in the village would have to drink. Since the thought of starvation was more severe than muddy water he decided that his "selfishness" could be justified.
2. Demagogue is a person who gains power from touching peoples emotions. What I think it is talking about is that humans are very manipulative as well as being very easy to manipulate. Many people often make their decisions based solely on their emotions and to be a demagogue could really be an advantage.
3. In the runaway train scenario I think that the fisherman would have pulled the lever because it's not really to his advantage or disadvantage to pull the lever or not. He could go either way, but I do believe that he would have pulled the lever.
As for the healthy person being killed to save five more I think that he would be in favor of it. I think that the idea that he could be one of the sick men one day, he would favor the killing of one man greatly.
4. The behavior that Aesop is trying to show is dishonesty. The woodcutter told the fox that he would hid him and then just turn around and gesture to the huntsmen where he was, while still trying to make the fox believe that he was still hiding him. This is a human behavior that is unfortunately very common.
5. I think this situation happens a lot particularly in a large group of friends where there would be some people within a group how may not like a certain person and talk "smack" behind the persons back but when ever the person is around they act "buddy-buddy" with then. I've seen it a lot on the different groups of friends I've had. It's a hard thing to see and understand.
6. The fable was an example because people don't often trust complete strangers to be a certain way. Our while growing up we are told to never trust strangers and to try to trust someone you have never met to "return a favor" is a situation that a lot of people have seen as being unlikely. It's hard for some people to do the "right thing" if they know there might be no reward in the long run.
Evan Hutchinson
Zeta
1. In the fable, "The Fisherman Who Beat the Water," the fisherman casted the net and dammed the river for survival. He probably viewed his options of how to eat and survive and by damming the river he knew it was an option to survive. through that action, it shows how he is focused on himself and his life and no one elses.
2. The definition if a demagogue is a person or a leader who gains power and popularity by arousing the eomtions, passions, and prejudices of people. In my own words, a demagogue is someone who gets on top by pushing others down. A demagogue has his enemies close to know there feelings and know how they might react to things and plan around that. The moral says that human beings use people to get what they want that will be beneficial to themselves in the end.
3. In the runaway ttolley scenario, the fisherman would have done nothing. i think that is so because he is selfish and doesnt wan to put himself in any situation that would be controversial. In the situation of the healthy person who would have to be killed in order to save five others, he would for sure not be the one to be killed. he wouldnt give up his life for five others to live. this is all due to acting based on his own thoughts and not for anyone else.
4. In the fable, "The Fow and the Woodcutter," the woodcutters behavior is similiar to what Aesop is exemplifying by showing how we will do certain things to bring others down and being deceiving. like how the woodcutter said he would help the fox hide and then rat him out.
5. A similar situation, i am sure, has happened to me before like in "The Fox and the Woodcutter." howver, not to a degree where my life was in danger because of that person not doing what they promised. it was probbaly something very small, to the degree where i cant remember the situation or my feelings.
6. "The Fox and the Woodcutter" is an example of how reciprocity is the rarest form of cooperation by both characters (fisherman and woodcutter) doing things for themselves and it being beneficial for only themselves. these fables show how it is not common that people/characters do things for others just to be nice and curtious.
alma herrera
ZETA
1. I think maybe the fisherman had to sell the fish for a living so it didn't matter to him the effect of his dutie. His priority was food. Disturbing the river and retrieing the fish would buy him food or be his food. His attempt was no to dam the river. For human beings he's saying that if it doesn't affect us directly then it wont matter as long as we get the better end pf the stick.
2. A demagogue is a powerful person that dictates in a way that people can sypothise with them so he or she can manipulate them to their desire. In the fisherman who beat the water a demagogue is the fiwherman who dams the river. He dams the river for his own good and when a local who is also a benefitiary from the river claims him for his mudied water, the fisherman says that if he cant dam the water then he will have to die from hunger. there he is tryng to appiel for his own sake of fishing.
3. If the fisherman was in the situation of having to pick between saving 5 people by pulling a lever and killing only 1 or doing nothing, he would pick doing nothing because he's not one of those five people . He seems like some one that would be selfish and greatful for not being in those situations because it's just like him saving himself and leting all the locals drink dirty water.
4. To me "The Fox and the Woodcutter" it was like a metaphore. i took the fox as someone being stereotype as someone that can not be trusted. The woodcutter was the one who really be trusted at the end. He's tryng to say humans can be judgemental and back stabing.
5. A situation that happened to me similar to the fabel was when I had asked my "friend" to pray for me because i felt sick even though he has no religion or beliefs. But the next day he made a joke about prayer that offended me to one of our friends. When this had happend i felt betrade and defensive like i had a loss of trust in him.
6. This fable shows the cooperation is reciprocity because the fox and the woodcutter had an exchange or a deal. It was wierd because you usualy wont have this trade with an animal. Unless it was animal to animal.
Julian MacDonnell
Zeta
1.In “The Fisherman Who Beat the Water,” the fisher man needed the fish from the water to survive, that alone motivated him to try and get the fish by scaring them into the net. Plus, there would be no one to stop him from trying to survive, for example the man from the city wanted him to stop disturbing the fish and making the water dirty. With that it became obvious; either keep the water clean and full of fish for the city and kill the man or dirty the water and give the man the fish so that he can live.
2.A demagogue is a person that is a political leader for the a certain area. He gains power and popularity by the people, and it is those same people that get him/her farther into a higher state of power, not just the power itself. Finally, this person will sacrifice them selfs if it is necessary for the people, he/she serves the people of which ever area.
3.As of to the first scenario(Runaway Trolley), the fisherman would have responded by taking the lives of the five workers over the one because he can sympathize with the one person wanting to live and not really caring to much about the others there. In other words, it's because of humans selfish nature that he felt for the one man over the five, but because we don't know fully what the fisherman thinks like it is possible that he could save the five over the one. As of to the healthy person story, like the trolley, he probably would have kept that person alive while the five get hit.
4.I feel that Aesop's “The Fox and the Woodcutter” story was made to show one of the more commonly used behaviors that humans have, lying. By lying, the Woodcutter tried to alert the hunter to the whereabouts of the wolf, but of course to no avail. One other idea he tried to get out there was that humans help other humans when compared to helping other creatures other than then.
5.I can definatly compare myself to the fox in the story. Back before high school, there were many times in which I would need to get away from certain people(other than the adults). I would trust certain people to help me, but in the end, like the Woodcutter, I would be ratted out.
6.Reciprocity can be applied to this story because of the woodcutter's actions. Just as how reciprocity is defined, the story happens in the same way that the woodcutter tries to rat out where the fox went with the hope he might get something in return. In the end, the woodcutter got nothing due to his inability to quietly tell where the fox was to the hunter and lying to the fox about keeping him safe.
Christine Tsang
Epsilon
1.)In the fable “The Fisherman who beat the Water”, I think the fisherman’s hunger forced him to cast nets and dam the river. I think that it was his wants & needs that led him to do what he had to do (disturb the river). Also, I think that a person’s desire forces them to achieve it without thinking about the outcomes or the impacts on others.
2.)Demagogue means “a political agitator who gains and uses power by appealing to the ignorance or prejudice of the people.” I think demagogue means someone who is involved in politics and also has gained the power over the people. This person also takes advantage of ignorant people, or those who are hidden from the truth, and those who are treated unfairly. This moral says that human beings are always in disagreement and there is always someone out there who tries to settle it, but causes more dispute.
3.)For the scenario of the runaway trolley, I think that the fisherman wouldn’t have done anything and just let the trolley hit the 5 men. I think this because in the fable, the fisherman would let lots of fishes suffer for his own needs, hunger. For the healthy person who would have to be killed to save 5 others scenario, I think that he would’ve made the healthy person die to save 5 others because he wouldn’t be guilty of anything and he would also have an excuse. His excuse would be that he saved 5 others, and if he didn’t do use the healthy person to save them then they would die. Just like in the fable, he didn’t feel guilty for harming the fishes and he had the excuse of hunger.
4.)The human behaviors that Aesop exemplifies are betrayal/disappointment and untrustworthy. He exemplifies betrayal, disappointment and untrustworthy because the woodcutter made a promise to the fox, but that promise was not fully accomplished. There is something that the woodcutter should be guilty of and that was the signaling to the hunters that the fox was hidden.
5.)I think that I’ve had a similar situation as to the one depicted in “The Fox and the Woodcutter”. It happened when I asked someone to keep a secret and it turned out that the secret had been let out. I felt betrayed and disappointed. And I knew that the person should’ve been feeling guilty.
6.)This fable was an example of “reciprocity” because the woodcutter promised the fox that he would find him a hiding place, which he did, but the promise was betrayed in a way, so the woodcutter didn’t receive something in return from the fox. Just like reciprocity where you have to sacrifice and expect something in return.
Jasmine Martinez
Epsilon
1. I think that in the fable, "The Fisherman Who Beat the Water" what motivated this man to cast the nets and dam the water was survival and the fact that he was hungry. He did what he needed to do in order to stay alive because he didn't want to die. And this was his last chance maybe to do something to get some food in his system so that he is able to keep living. I think what also motivated him was the hope that he would catch a lot of fish because it seems to me that by this point he must have been starving to do something like this.
2. Damagogue means a leader who gains power by playing on peoples emotions to gain power. I think that what the moral says about human beings is that they will use peoples fears and hopes to their advantage just to look out for themselves.
3. I think that the fisherman would have said the same thing in both senerios which would be to save the one person of the runaway trolley and the healthy person because he thinks that he's more important than others. He feels that everyone needs to look out for themselves and if they can't then thats their problem. I don't think that he would even care or be worried about others because to him he being alive is what matters the most above all and above everyone else.
4. I think that the human behavior that Aesop is exemplifying in the fable, "The Fox and the Woodcutter" is the one of a two sided person (2 faced person) who says one thing to someone's face but them turns around and does and says something else behind their back. Its showing how many people just say things to try to look good infront of everyone, but they are unable to keep a promise and is trying to play everyone. Its showing how sometimes people can't be trusted because they aren't being true nor real to themselves, and if they can't be good with themselves they can't be good with others.
But, then again it can also mean that when people are forced to make choices they aren't always able to decided whats the correct thing to do, so they either try to say both or don't answer at all. Its talking about how humans aren't always able to handle pressure or their not good at lying and trying to give an answer where neither of the parties will be mad at them for doing or saying what they did.
5. I think that what happened to the fox has happened to me many times before because I try to trust the people who I feel are truly my friends so I sometimes confide in them to be their for me when I need them. But, they just end up going and telling others about personal things that I didn't want others to know. I have recently been faced with this and I think that what hurts the most is the fact that I feel betrayed and like I can't trust anyone. This causes me to shut down and keep to myself because I don't understand why people find the need to harm others when all they wanted was someone to be their for them when they needed help and instead they get back stabbed and betrayed by the people who they care about the most. This makes me keep everything inside, and when I reach the tip of the ice burg and I can't take it anymore and someone pushes me to my limit I end up taking it all out on them. To me these kinds of situations are just huge emotional roller costers that make my self esteem go down.
6. I think that the fable, "The Fox and the Woodcutter" is an example of the idea that the rarest form of cooperation is reciprocity becuase the woodcutter tried to help the fox and even acted as if he did so in the end of it all when he expected to be thanked by the fox it didn't happen because he betrayed him. And I think that this is a great exapmle of why this is so rare because if people only try to do things half way they will never be able to experience what this feels like until their willing to do things the right way and all the way.
Kaid Alameri
Theta
1.I think his greed and his selfishness motivated him to dam the water because I’m sure that he could survive by eating being a little more patient just like the other fisherman, or he could feed himself by eating anything other than fishes. If there was no other way for him to eat, he should’ve asked the people in the village for food, and if they refused, he will have a reason to dam the water.
2.A demagogue is a person with power, and he gained this power by stirring up people's emotions, prejudices and passions to get popularity. I think the moral means that human beings would do anything to achieve their needs, or would kill anyone for their benefits.
3.I think the fisherman will say no to both situation because he thinks no one should die so other people could survive no matter how many are there.
4.I think Aesop is trying to show that human will do anything for their benefits, and maybe the woodcutter was trying to make a relationship with a hunter that he didn’t care about the fox that much.
5.Yes it happened to me when I trusted my best friend with all my secrets, and then she told all my stuff. Since then I never trusted her with anything even though I forgave her.
6.At first the woodcutter promised the fox that he’s going to hide him, but then the woodcutter thought about that he can’t get any returns from the fox so he didn’t stay true. So that shows that human think about the returns before they do favors to others.
Taylor Kemp
ETA
1. He was motivated to dam and fish the water because he knew that if he didn’t he would die of starvation. He didn’t realize that in doing so he would decimate the water supply of the locals. The fable ends too quickly though, there is certainly a mutually beneficial solution to the problem that the fisherman and locals could have devised. I think the reason no solution is discussed in the fable is because it is trying to show how 1 person’s existence is a detriment to possibly many others.
2. Webster’s defines Demagogue as an orator or political leader, who gains power and popularity by arousing the emotions, passions, and prejudices of the people. I would describe this person as a manipulative leader who rules using fear and the disorder of the people to either raise themselves up to an almost god-like level or maintain their power by using a scape-goat or distraction to turn attentions away from their own shortcomings. Some people might wrongfully deduce that the “locals” are the people who would be mislead by the demagogue, but it is the fish that represent the demagogue’s followers, and the locals represent the ideals he is trouncing by cutting off truth (water) all in order to keep himself in power. There is one missing part to this analogy, that is that the fisherman is unaware of what he hurts in order to live, where as a demagogue would have to know and identify and specifically target a certain person or thing that may be hazardous to his grip on his followers. This shows how willing people are to hurt others and leech on to something without giving anything back just to survive.
3. The fisherman represents selfishness, so he would not value 1 life against any number of others. In both situations he would see it through the eyes of the one who would be killed to save 5; he is going through the same situation where he has to decide between himself and many others. He feels that it is not the responsibility of the one person to save the 5, it was the 5 peoples’ misfortune that lies with them, not the one’s and one should not be forced to die because of others’ misfortunes and death. The fisherman’s values lie in who is responsible for what at what time, not a value of numbers of lives equal to 1.
4. I think the woodcutter is also an example of selfishness. He theoretically has nothing to lose by protecting the fox, but in this extreme example of selfishness, he may have thought he would receive some reward for helping the huntsmen and that the fox would have nothing but a thank you to give him in return. He was looking for the biggest return for what he had done, the fact that he asked for a thank you in the end shows that all he cared about was which solution held the best potential for him to gain something. This fable may also exemplify fitting in. The woodcutter might have just wanted to fit in and he thought he could by selling out the fox and helping the hunters.
5. I can’t think of a specific example of my life, but gossip is a perfect example of this in any one’s life. A gossiper will usually spread vicious rumors and sensitive secrets about you to other people. The gossiper has nothing really to gain, but they don’t value your feelings over being able to strike up a conversation with a random person.
6. The woodcutter did not think that he had anything to gain immediately from helping the fox, and apparently he valued fitting in over the chance of a gain of friendship. Or he may not have seen any gain in either direction and since he did not expect any gain, he felt the fox was not going to “pay” for a “service”, even though this service isn’t something that should be paid, it should be free for all.
Taylor Kemp
ETA
1. He was motivated to dam and fish the water because he knew that if he didn’t he would die of starvation. He didn’t realize that in doing so he would decimate the water supply of the locals. The fable ends too quickly though, there is certainly a mutually beneficial solution to the problem that the fisherman and locals could have devised. I think the reason no solution is discussed in the fable is because it is trying to show how 1 person’s existence is a detriment to possibly many others.
2. Webster’s defines Demagogue as an orator or political leader, who gains power and popularity by arousing the emotions, passions, and prejudices of the people. I would describe this person as a manipulative leader who rules using fear and the disorder of the people to either raise themselves up to an almost god-like level or maintain their power by using a scape-goat or distraction to turn attentions away from their own shortcomings. Some people might wrongfully deduce that the “locals” are the people who would be mislead by the demagogue, but it is the fish that represent the demagogue’s followers, and the locals represent the ideals he is trouncing by cutting off truth (water) all in order to keep himself in power. There is one missing part to this analogy, that is that the fisherman is unaware of what he hurts in order to live, where as a demagogue would have to know and identify and specifically target a certain person or thing that may be hazardous to his grip on his followers. This shows how willing people are to hurt others and leech on to something without giving anything back just to survive.
3. The fisherman represents selfishness, so he would not value 1 life against any number of others. In both situations he would see it through the eyes of the one who would be killed to save 5; he is going through the same situation where he has to decide between himself and many others. He feels that it is not the responsibility of the one person to save the 5, it was the 5 peoples’ misfortune that lies with them, not the one’s and one should not be forced to die because of others’ misfortunes and death. The fisherman’s values lie in who is responsible for what at what time, not a value of numbers of lives equal to 1.
4. I think the woodcutter is also an example of selfishness. He theoretically has nothing to lose by protecting the fox, but in this extreme example of selfishness, he may have thought he would receive some reward for helping the huntsmen and that the fox would have nothing but a thank you to give him in return. He was looking for the biggest return for what he had done, the fact that he asked for a thank you in the end shows that all he cared about was which solution held the best potential for him to gain something. This fable may also exemplify fitting in. The woodcutter might have just wanted to fit in and he thought he could by selling out the fox and helping the hunters.
5. I can’t think of a specific example of my life, but gossip is a perfect example of this in any one’s life. A gossiper will usually spread vicious rumors and sensitive secrets about you to other people. The gossiper has nothing really to gain, but they don’t value your feelings over being able to strike up a conversation with a random person.
6. The woodcutter did not think that he had anything to gain immediately from helping the fox, and apparently he valued fitting in over the chance of a gain of friendship. Or he may not have seen any gain in either direction and since he did not expect any gain, he felt the fox was not going to “pay” for a “service”, even though this service isn’t something that should be paid, it should be free for all.
Evan Hutchinson
Zeta
The similarity between “The Giving Tree” and “The Poor Sailor” is that this story happens to humans and is on planet Earth. On planet Earth it is made up of humans, nature, and minds (which involve emotions). In both stories, to me, it shows mistakes being made and eventually regrets. Both main characters (the boy and Thomas the sailor) leave someone because they chose to…it is in their hands. The boy left numerous amounts of times because of different reasons. One being because he was no longer a boy and could swing in the branches and needed money. The sailor left to go on a journey and left his wife behind and the house he was building for them two. Both characters were aware of their departure’s but I don’t think both characters knew what they were risking; a loss.
When asked what world both of these stories would belong in, I could merely answer the Earth. I think both of these scenarios happen to humans quite often and are things people have to deal with. Therefore, what other logical place can this happen in?
Eventually both characters come back to where they started in the story. In the end both characters are humble. The Boy got old and the sailor was tired and injured. The Earth consists of everything that happened in the stories. That is emotions, decisions, symbols (the tree and the house), and ones desired place. They both were loved and loved back, just not in the same way they were loved.
Evan Hutchinson
Zeta
9.5.07
1. Difficulties i may have with these readings that since they are old pieces of literature, i may not fully understand their "lingo" of speech from back then. because of that, that also may affect the kind of vocabulary in these passages. philosophers have a way of writing that can be difficult to understand, not only because of vocabulary, but because of the depth of the reading.
2. Some reading strategies that will help is underlining sentences that i can look back at to remember what the passage is about. also, underlining words that i dont understand and can go back to look up. that will give me a better and fuller understanding of the passage.
3. -Composition: combining elements to form a whole.
-Prophecy:prediction of what is to come.
-Manifestly: evident.
-Confederacy: an alliance b/w people.
-Infallible: trustworthy.
-Prudence: regards for one's own interest.
-Bestows: to present as a gift or an honor.
-Conceit: something that is conceived in one's mind.
-Concurring: cooperate/work together/join.
-Delectation: delight, enjoyment.
-Endeavour: to make an effort.
-Subdue: to over power by superior force; overcome.
-Dispossess: to banish.
-Deprive: to remove.
-Contemplating: to consider.
-Augmentation: to make something greater.
-Dominion: the power and right of governing and controlling.
-Contemners: people that govern and control.
-Commodities:an article of trade.
-Commodious: spacious and convenient.
4. Plato: In this passage, Plato describes how there are three kinds of people that God made. there is gold, silver and bronze, the gold is the rulers and guardians. silver is the Auxiliaries and bronze is farmers and workers. usually when parents have a child it falls under their catagory, but if it doesnt, it needs to go where it belongs with its category. if this does not happen then the State will be ruined.
Hobbes: no matter what, men are equal. men are equal is at the top of the tree and everything else branches off of that. there is competition, diffidence, and then glory. from equality we want our own tings that can lead to enemies and our thoughts. he says a strong man can kill a weak one and a weak man can kill a strong guy by just applying a different technique.
Evan Hutchinson
Zeta
9.11.07
1.
-Ramifications: for there to be branches/ to divide or spread out.
The law had many ramifications that were not visible before.
- Consolidate: to unite/combine. To strengthen.
To consolidate gains.
-Subsequent: occurring or coming later.
Subsequent to his arrival, they bought new furniture.
-Edifice: any large, complex system or organization.
He made a lot of money from the edifice he created.
-Superfluous: unnecessary or needless.
All the money he gave her was superfluous of him.
-Avail: to be of value or profit.
His strength did not avail against the killer.
-Malice: desire to inflict harm.
You could see the malice in his eyes.
-Aggrandizement: to make greater or appear greater.
He wanted to aggrandize his power over the kingdom.
-Turmoil: a state of great commotion, confusion, or disturbance.
There was turmoil in Sandy’s head while taking a difficult test.
-Endeavoring: to work with a set or specified goal or purpose.
Endeavored to gain respect.
-Dissimulation: hypocrisy, disguise.
She dissimulated her feelings about her ex-boyfriend.
-Reconciled: to bring into agreement or harmony. To cause a person to accept or be resigned to something not desired.
She was reconciled to her fate.
-Tribunal: a court of justice. A place or seat of judgment.
At a tribunal, every city had a representative.
-Eminent: high in rank or repute. Projecting.
An eminent noise was heard.
-Censure: strong expression of disapproval. To criticize in a harsh manner.
She is more to be pitied than censured.
-Magnanimous: generous in forgiving an insult or injury. High minded; noble.
He was a magnanimous person.
-Papacy: the period during which a certain pope is in office.
At that period in time there was a papacy.
2. This reading is called The Prince by Machiavelli. It is about his point of view on who should rule and how rulers become rulers. It is mostly about how people who shouldn’t be rulers, become rulers and how people in general become rulers. He thinks the only way a person can rule is if they have talent and prowess. With that they can rule and be smart enough to protect their people and himself from being thrown off the throne. Private citizens (normal citizens/ w/o talent of prowess) are incapable of commanding because they cannot; they don’t have loyal and devoted troops of their own. Because they are not experienced or don’t have talent, they will be thrown off with the first “bad spell.” He states there are two ways of being in power: by prowess or by fortune. He then talks about rulers that exemplify fortune or prowess.
3. The difficulties of reading this passage was not so much of the type of English, but more of the type of words he used. I didn’t have to look up as many words as last time while reading philosophy. This reading was not too challenging at all. At times found the main points hard to comprehend. That was either due to it being strong and deep or because of the vocabulary. I also found the brief passages of history complicated. I don’t know much about the people he mentions in the chapter very well. Therefore, it was hard to understand how they connect to his points.
Evan Hutchinson
Zeta
9.20.07
The Politics of Fear
1. While reading “The Politics of Fear,” the strategies I will be using is underlining sentences that pop out and are key points. That will help me for when I need to look back at the reading and review the text. It will be easy to spot out the main points. I will also circle the words I don’t know. With that I will look up the definitions of them. That will help me get a better understanding of the text by understanding the whole text. It will also build up my vocabulary.
2. Fear is the most powerful enemy of reason is because fear shuts down reason. Nothing else in our head is like fear; it can control the mind of all its powers of acting and reasoning as fear. He says fear can trigger the temptation to surrender freedom to a demagogue promising strength and security in return.
3. A free press is supposed to function as our democracy’s immune system against such gross errors of fact and understanding. It has changed by him stating that the public sphere is simply no longer as open to the vigorous and free exchange of ideas from individuals as it was when America was founded.
4. FMRI has revolutionized the ability of neuroscientists to look inside the operations of a living human brain and observe which regions of the brain are being used at which times and in response to which stimuli. In a democracy, the common assumption is that citizens operate as rational human beings, reasoning their way through the problems presented to them as if every question could be analyzed rationally and debated fairly until there is a well-reasoned collective conclusion. But the new research demonstrates that this is not the way it works at all. Al Gore has questioned why we fear things that never stopped out founding fathers before, and what they went through is much more fear than we ever have. So why do we let fear control reasoning? Maybe this FMRI will help us figure that out.
5. Connections from the emotional systems to the cognitive systems are stronger than connections from the cognitive systems to the emotional systems. We develop shortcuts called “heuristics: to help us make important choices. We make snap judgments based on our emotional reactions rather than considering all options rationally and making choices carefully.
6. The amygdala is almost certainly involved in speeding other responses important to our species survival, such as the urge to reproduce. Our capacity for fear is hardwired in the brain as an ancient strategy that gives us the ability to respond instantly when survival may be at stake. Amygdala may be partly for that reason that sexual titillation along with fear is also a staple ingredient of modern TV programming.
7. Vicarious traumatization is the ability to conceive of something that activates the amygdala and starts the fear response. It can produce emotional and physical responses in the listener similar to those experienced by the victims.
8. Television can create false memories that are just as powerful as normal memories. The visual imagery on TV can activate parts of the brain involved in emotions in a way that reading about the same event cannot.
9. Probability neglect is also something that influences our thinking. It shows that people tend to focus on the magnitude of the consequence and ignore the probability.
10. According to Al Gore, the Bush administration has used some of the techniques identified. Repeating the same threat over and over again, misdirecting attention, and using vivid imagery. After September 11th, the administration began to heighten and distort public fear of terrorism to create a political case for attacking Iraq.
Post a Comment