Reading the news I have discovered that the
majority of the news articles are consumed by ongoing war and conflicts between
nations. Noticing that, it stirred the thought within me: Is the concept of war always for the better or the worse?
This delves into the human brain and our behavior. History as an area of
knowledge studies our actions, evolution and environmental impacts through
time. When a person examines the history of humanity in terms of every country
and how it came to be to this day, there is almost no country that did not
fight at least a few wars in order to achieve where it is at the moment.
Germany went through world war two and ended up right where it started thanks
to the dictator, Hitler. Russia, however, evolved as a nation and although Stalin’s
dictatorship had many questionable decisions being pulled through, one cannot
avoid the fact that he managed to propel his country forward in terms of the
economy, which is still influenced by his actions. Other countries fight wars
as an act of self-defense, so not all forms of war are pure evil. Some wars are
based on either history with each other or historical facts that are claimed to
be true/untrue. An example of this would be Palestine. Israelis claim that
according to Jewish scriptures and historical facts, Palestine was their
rightful land and wishes its current inhabitants to exit. Palestinians,
however, disagree with that statement and refuse to leave which results in a never-ending
war of trying to eliminate and purge them from their own soil. This can be
deemed as a war that has no profound intentions as a great number of countries
have lived in Palestine, resulting in its popular name of “no mans land” and
the diverse appearance of its people. This makes Israel’s statement completely
irrelevant.
Tuesday, September 8, 2015
Summer Post #3
A lot of debate has been
going on about whether it is ethical to let dying
patients “kill themselves” before potential death. Often those patients
are at the last couple years, months, even weeks of their life and they are
aware of that. They also know the price that comes with attempting to live for
that long or longer. It mostly includes unbearable pain such as migraines and
epileptic seizures. The patients know they’re most likely going to lose control
over basic functions such as eyesight, the ability to talk or communicate and
paralysis ranging from the lower body, one side of the body to the entire body.
Also the treatments that they may have to undergo could be extremely expensive,
slow and ineffective and harm their family financially. The time that they have
left to live would be excruciatingly painful and simply not worth it in their
eyes. Patients of this sort often do have a family they are an integral part of
such as being a sibling or parent, and are often concerned about their loved
ones seeing them suffer and possibly adopt mental issues (ptsd). At this point
in their lives they most likely have come to peace with the idea of death,
viewing it as a relief of their hardship. They shift their priorities unto
people that they care about. Making a decision as such should not be supported,
as it is considered to be wrong to take your own life, as it would be
considered as suicide. It will raise many questions of what If’s amongst
doctors and families but the actual patient in this situation doesn’t have the
time/strength/money to ponder on this. They can only follow what their body
tells them and in doing so, chose to act on it. Taking that right away from the
patient will lead to them trying to find other ways to kill themselves, up to a
point where they may hire someone to do it, placing the responsibility on
someone else’s shoulder. The patient would be forced to endure the pain
furthermore or take part in the treatment that the family was “forced” to pay
for by the doctor and end up most probably dying a slower more painful for
everyone death. Yet technically a person never knows what life can bring him,
as it is all up to fate and killing themselves would be interfering with fate,
thus allowing such acts should not be tolerated.
Summer Post #2
The ongoing debate on
whether climate change is an actual issue, surprisingly, still reoccurring to
this day. People refuse to either believe it is happening or take responsibility
for it. The reasons for that are fear, lack of information, misinformation and
stubbornness. Faith also often plays a role on how people perceive global
change, claiming that since their scriptures do not discuss the possibility of
the world “ending” due to these reasons or in this time frame, there is no such
thing as global warming. Considering the human sciences, this raises the
question of whether or not humans are responsible
for the downfall of earth. The human sciences are suitable for this real
life situation as it tracks the development and actions of humans over time. It
looks at the economy and how the earth has been affected by our actions. There
has been extensive proof that the over use of fossil fuels such as oil, harmful
gases, coal and overproduction of products that use those resources to function
or exist are the main cause of global warming, thus “natural” disasters taking
place more frequently and caused by humanities actions. It has been established
that the cause of climate change is at the root of the "greenhouse
effect" which is the warming that results when the atmosphere traps heat
radiating from Earth toward space. Certain gases in the atmosphere block heat
from escaping. Possibilities of saving the earth are either limited, unknown or
not followed through as strictly as they should be. The sudden change in
temperatures is causing water to heat up which then creates tornadoes and
storms. The glaciers in the western Antarctic, further affected by the warmer
seas, were collapsing, and their disappearance “now appears to be unstoppable.”
The melting of these great ice sheets would make seas rise by at least four
feet—ultimately, possibly 12—more than enough to flood cities from New York to
Tokyo to Mumbai. There are unnatural changes of countries becoming increasingly
hotter over the years and they can be directly tracked back to human action.
Summer Post #1
A controversial topic
that has been present in the media and society for a long time is
homosexuality. In this real life situation, a movie called “gayby baby” has
come out, and was to be shot at several schools in Australia. The movie depicts
the life of four children that live with same sex parents. This, however,
caused problems with the parents of those children who feel that the film
content like this should be kept out of school. The movie merely serves to
demonstrate the differences but the majority of similarities within gay parents
and straight parents. It is clearly not based on sexual content, thus proves no
danger to the children. Considering this from the area of knowledge, ethics, it
would cause one to question: Is it unethical to
show this movie or are the parents wrong? Ethics challenges the essence
of good and bad, equality and support for everyone in this sense. Homosexual
people who are married have every right to raise children as long as they are
mentally and financially capable. Parents who are offended by this and the
movie being shown to their children have no understanding of the situation.
They can’t exactly stop their children from ever watching the movie; instead
they should encourage them to be aware of people who have different sexualities.
This develops a healthy relationship to the topic and enables them to form
their own unbiased opinions. It may even give them the courage to relate and
reveal their true identity. As such, parents should be supportive and not
assume that a movie would turn their kids gay or influence them negatively.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)