Assignment 1
Drawing on any of the poems or essays read for this class, write a few paragraphs answering the question, what effects do images have on our sense of self?
Daniel Boorstin says, “An illusion is an image we have mistaken for reality.” While this statement deals with our perception of others, it inadvertently affects our perceptions of ourselves. As a society we base our value and our worth on how we compare to others. This is especially true in beauty and body image for males and females. Images and advertising attempt to draw up in by picking on our insecurities. Whether it is the diet drug that promises to make you skinny, or the face cream that promises to make you gorgeous, images and the messages that accompany them give us our value of self worth.

Make-up companies use famous actresses and models, who are universally accepted as beautiful, to sell their products. Somehow when we see a picture of Hallie Berry wearing Cover girl make-up we believe that in order to look like her we need to go out and buy Cover girl. We never take into consideration how much airbrushing went into the ads. Instead we feel ugly compared to these beautiful actresses and models.
The same is true for body image. As the models in ads and magazine get increasingly skinnier the general population feels the need to conform to this new standard of beauty. Actress Kate Winslet recently dealt with controversy when a magazine airbrushed her picture for their cover with her knowledge. “I’m not six foot tall, for God’s sake, I’m five-foot-six,” she said. “I’m probably 130lbs, and I look 100lbs in that thing.” As the article by Daniel Boorstin days, “When the Gods wish to punish us, they make us believe our own advertising.” The images that we are bombarded with everyday not only hurt ones self image, but they promote a unhealthy obsession to conforming to what others look like. Not only in advertising is image obsessed with. Most girls won’t leave their room with out make-up or their hair done nicely. This is because they want to portray and image of beauty. They are concerned about the image they project to others. With this obsession with image people are straying farther and farther from their true selves and are becoming what they think they should be. Clothing trends are just a way for people to fit in. All those girls out their in their Miami uniform of a North Face, Uggs, designer jeans, and

I like to believe that I am always myself, and that I am not fake. I like to think that when I speak and act I am being true to myself. While I like to think that I am always true to myself if I look closely I notice subtle differences in how I speak and behave with different audiences. This is illustrated in how I act around my two best friends. Each friend brings out a different aspect of my personality. My one best friend is outgoing and likes to go out and have a good time. When I am around her I find myself wanting to go out and I am more up beat. My other best friend is more sincere and does not like to go out as much. When I am around her I find myself just wanting to stay in and hang out. When all three of us are together I find myself trying to balance the two, because they have contrasting personalities. Because I have both of these facets of my personality I have become the bridge between my two friends. Being around one of my friends one side of my personality becomes more apparent.
I also speak differently around professors. I spend more time trying to articulate my thoughts intelligently. If I am talking to a friend I do not care whether I make a grammatical error, but when I am speaking with a professor I always think carefully about what I am saying trying to portray my intelligence.
I think I am most sincerely myself around my family and friends. While my two best friends bring out different facets of my personality I believe they just emphasize a part of my personality already there. I do not believe that I change myself to fit in with different groups of people, rather I believe that everyone has complex personalities and that the different layers of personality are shown with different audiences. I am able to show my true self to my family. I can be bubbly one day and quiet the next. I can want to go out one night, and want to stay in the next. My family accepts me the way I am because we are family. We can fight and they can even not like me for a while, but in the end they accept me because we are family.

3 faces of eve

Thinking about strange action=illness implies that the person should be treated. It implies that the person is a victim of their illness and that it is not their fault. As shown in the movie, eve is absolved of any responsibility for her actions. Her drinking, dancing, and even her attempt to kill her own daughter are symptoms of her illness, not actions for which she should be punished.
Thinking about strange actions=possession implies that the person sinned and is therefore responsible for the possession. It implies that the person is to blame for their strange actions. This is shown in how Margaret Cooper is forced to pray in an attempt to rid herself of the devil by atoning for her sins. Also at the end of the story she apologized for her sins, which caused her possession by the devil. She too believes that the possession and the actions she took during the possession are her own fault. This way of addressing strange actions hides any possibility for the person to b e a victim of their possession and instead holds them solely responsible.
Ian Hackings writings imply that he believes there truly is a disorder of multiple personalities. He addresses the question in the section “is it real”. His valid questions raise the question of the metaphor of the disease. Has the disease always been around and just not properly classified? Or instead are these cases of multiple personalities only presenting themselves because there is now a term for it. His approach implies that he believes there is a disorder of multiple personalities, but he also raises many valid questions into the metaphor of multiple personality disorder.

Module 6
Assignment 3
In the reading “ Current ideas about how the mind works” a few different metaphors are used to explain how the mind works. Sara Rosenthal states that, “ Brain chemistry changes is like a washing machine”. She used this metaphor to help one understand something as complex as how depression is caused. By comparing depression to a washing machine it is easy to see how depression is caused. In continuing with her metaphor of the washing machine, there are consequences for actions. If one tries to do a large load of laundry with a low water level, then the washing machine breaks and has to be repaired. The same is true for depression. If one does not produce enough serotonin then they have to go to a doctor and have it “fixed” through drugs or therapy.
David Burns uses a different metaphor to explain depression. He compares depression to “a radio that is not properly tuned to the station”. In this metaphor he implies that there is nothing wrong. Instead he states that the person just has to learn to adjust the dials, or “mentally tune”. In this metaphor there is a consequence for the action. If the dials of the radio are not properly tuned then one listens to fuzzy music.
The third and final metaphor offered in the reading is offered by Sigmund Freud. He says that depression can be fixed by finding the cause and he compares it to an explorer clearing away the rubbish at an expanse of ruins, to uncover what is buried. He believes that one should be less concerned with the symptoms, but instead deal with the scene of the problem. In this metaphor the consequence for the action of clearing away the rubbish, is finding the cause of the depression and therefore being able to correct it.

Metaphor as Action: Determining Public Policy
Assignment 1:
If we apply the war metaphor, described by Lakoff and Johnson, to drug problems we completely change the way we address problem. As Nell Bernstein says, “ There are two dominant views on drug addiction and how it should be handled: The first is that addiction is a disease like any other and should be tackled through treatment and prevention. The second is that drug use is a crime and should be dealt with through the array of threats and sanctions available to the criminal justice system”. When we apply the war metaphor to the drug problem we hide the first view on how to handle the drug problem. By using the war metaphor we imply that drugs and those who use drugs need to be fought. We highlight that those who use drugs as the enemy and imply that when they are caught they need to be punished. We highlight the fact that they are criminals in the “war on drugs” and need to be treated as such. By using the applying the war metaphor to our problems with drug use we highlight only the wrong done by the drug users, and hide the sickness and addiction that they suffer.
The second approach to dealing with drug use is treatment. This approach believes that addiction is a sickness that can be cured. If you apply the metaphor of war to the problems with drugs we deny the drug users the right to treatment, because they can no longer be sick. They are instead the enemy and the fact that they are criminals and the enemy is highlighted. By using the metaphor of war, the only option that seems logical for drug users is punishment though a jail sentence. This metaphor hides much of the story of drug use and there fore cannot fix the problem as well because it only addresses half of the issue. Since drug use is a multi-dimensional problem, only addressing one dimension of it leaves many issues unresolved. By sending drug users to jail and not offering treatment options the problem is not fixed. Drug users are not shown how and why to quit, rather they continue to be punished for their crimes, with out being shown a way to change.
When one uses the metaphor of war in regards to the drug problem, half of the issue is hidden and therefore the response to the problem is insufficient because it doesn’t address the whole issue. The metaphor highlights certain aspects, while hiding others, preventing the best way of dealing with the issue, because part of the issue it hidden.

Falling in Love? <3

Falling in love implies that one accidentally falls into love. This hides the fact that falling in love with someone can be a conscious choice. This metaphor takes away personal control over our feelings and emotions. It highlights the fact that one does not have a choice about falling in love. This statement implies that it is something that happens to us, we fall into it, and have no say in the matter. This is a rather shallow look at love. It leads one to believe that we have no choice in who we love and are therefore stuck loving whoever our emotions want us to love. I like to think that we walk into love, implying the conscious decision and choice to love a person. This metaphor I believe inaccurately portrays our control over our emotions.
What this metaphor does accurately portray is the falling part of love. Falling in love implies the pain of falling. This is also true when one actually falls in love, and then has their heart broken. Falling implies putting yourself at risk. This is also true when you “fall in love”. In that instant you put your heart at risk. While I think those of you who have had your heart broken would rather have physically fallen, this metaphor highlights the possible pain from falling in love.
I think people use this metaphor to justify doing things for love. People use this excuse because they believe they have no choice in who they love and that they “fall” into love. This metaphor eliminates personal responsibility because it allows people to believe and to use the excuse that the matter was out of their hands. I believe this is untrue. I believe that one chooses who and what to love. For example: I love my family. I do not just love my family because I have no choice and they are my family. I love my family because they support me. I choose to love them through a conscious decision I make.

Intro: Assignment 2

Paragraph 1:
Socrates believed that since writing allows us to record the spoken word, there is no need for us to remember things. Writing also allows the listener to hear, but not learn, being able to read what was spoken later. He believed if we became a writing culture we could allow ourselves to stop learning. Socrates also believed that the spoken word, when recorded could be “maltreated or abused” as they “have no parent to protect them; they cannot protect or defend themselves.” Socrates believed that if words and ideas are not kept with the speaker, who can explain them and maintain their integrity, they will be changed and damaged.
Goody believes that writing is an asset of society, not the hindrance Socrates believed it to be. Goody believes that writing helps and aids and that drastically contrasts Socrates belief that writing will cause harm. Socrates believed people would hear, not actually listen, because ideas would be recorded if they needed to know them later. He believed writing eliminated the need to learn and understand.


Paragraph 2:
There are many different ways to define technology. Many people think of technology and think only of their new IPod, the new cell phone they want, or the endless hours they waste on facebook. I found a definition I Believe more accurately describes technology. It defines technology as having five classes. These being:

1. Technology as Objects:Tools, machines, instruments, weapons, appliances - the physical devices of technical performance
2. Technology as Knowledge: The know-how behind technological innovation
3. Technology as Activities: What people do - their skills, methods, procedures, routines
4. Technology as a Process: Begins with a need and ends with a solution
5. Technology as a Sociotechnical System:The manufacture and use of objects involving people and other objects in combination
This definition includes writing and other means for thinking as technologies. Technology as activities includes people and their skills as technologies. With this definition the human skill of writing qualifies as a technology. I agree with Goody that writing should be considered a technology because technology is multi-dimensional. It is the relationship between the written and the ability to turn that writing into a gadget. Or it is a technology on it’s own because writing is a complex puzzle, just as the computer can be to those computer illiterate, such as myself.
I can think of many instances where I want to rely on technology as the written word. Text messaging is technology of the written word. I am still writing, but I am transferring the writing via a technological gadget. The same is true of e-mail. The e-mail I write can contain the same thing I would write in a letter, but it is sent via a technological gadget. Text messaging has aided my life, by allowing me to ask a friend in class an important question. E-mail is also very helpful because I am able to hear from my family daily with out having to co-ordinate a time that works for both of us to be on the telephone. With out these written technologies being away from friends and family would be a lot more difficult.