This American Life: Unconditional Love

Title: This American Life: Unconditional Love

Date: 6 February 2011
Class: Theory of Knowledge
Category: In Class

This radio recording (aired on November 15^th 2006) of the program “This American Life” featured two stories with the theme of Unconditional Love.

In the past, psychologists (with the government’s support) have declared that it is dangerous for the parents to show love towards their children. At the time, doctors and scientists were in accord of this argument stating “trust us we’re scientists” (using the appeal to authority, an informal fallacy) and “don’t pick up your child” as they are more prone to bacteria this way.

Set to prove this idea wrong, was a unique psychologist, psychologist Harry Harlow. He conducted an experiment with the use of baby monkeys and dolls (one ugly and made out of wire holding the baby’s food, another made out of soft cotton). The baby monkeys showed that they only went to the wired mother when they needed food and the cotton mother for the remaining time. This showed that the monkeys felt the need for comfort, affection and security. Another experiment he did was with “evil mother monkeys”. These mothers would abuse the baby monkeys for a period of time and stop. Although the babies feared the mothers when they would attack, they always came back to their mothers once the abuse stopped, portraying the unconditional love between parents and their children and the significance of love in the family.

The first story showed how important it is for the children to receive love and affection from their parents and the second showed how the love was unconditional in the family. The first story described life for a family who adopted a boy from Romania who had never experienced love. He didn’t know what love was, he didn’t know what a family was and therefore didn’t know if he wanted all of this. However, the adopting family shared with him so much of their love, enough to heal him of his anger and draw him close. At one point, the interviewer asked, “How do you love a person that is homicidal?” where the mom replied, “I mean… because he’s my son!” This love that he had received from them, had transformed him, from an angry homicidal, to a helpful loving son. They never gave up on him because of their unconditional love; even though he wasn’t their biological son, they felt this unconditional love for him.

The second story dealt with a family who had an autistic son. It mentioned the pressure the parents felt, they didn’t know whether they needed to keep him, or send him away to a residential program. At first, even with the physical harm that he was, the mother felt that “I [She] can’t do that to him” in which she referred to sending him away. Although the father felt that he would feel much better if they did, he didn’t bring up the subject because he, in a way felt guilty for even thinking this way. After feeling this way, they were both “determined to get through this” together because he was a baby in a boy’s body that kept growing and growing and they loved him. They couldn’t let strangers take care of him. However, as they tried to deal with this at home with the help of psychiatrists and psychologists, the situation seemed to be getting worse. He was being a harm to his family. At this point, they decided to take him to the residential program. Although it broke their heart, they knew it was for the better, not only for themselves, but for their son too. They visited him, and he sometimes visited them, and they could see the progress. Their unconditional love for their son is shown as they make the best decisions reflecting on what’s best for their son, even if it may break their heart.

This recording is relevant to emotion as a Way of Knowing because it shows how this unconditional love determines the connection we feel towards our families. If we feel this unconditional love (the ability to accept the people, and doing whatever will make the other happy even for the sake of our misery), then we can say that we have a strong connection to them, an unbreakable bond. We can use this emotion of love and attachment to determine what our relation is to that other person. This emotion can help identify ourselves in relation to the surrounding people. We can also determine other emotions that may arouse from this emotion of love; for example hatred if this emotion does not exist, or happiness from being around this person if we do love them etc. This allows us to know how we feel about this person, and the extent of how we think of this person in terms of positive or negative. Nevertheless, this idea is subjective as we cannot state that everyone feels the same level of love whenever they feel it. For example, the unconditional love towards a sibling may be different to the unconditional love towards one’s life partner. The knowledge issue I find is this: if this level of love or type of love is different, can one make the same conclusions about how they feel, or what they think of this person?  

These real-world stories complicate the concept of emotion as a way of knowing because well, does the particular emotion have the same effect on everyone? In the first story, the unconditional love showed that they will be there for their child no matter who he is and what he’s been through. However, the second story showed an unconditional love that caused them to make the choices that would benefit the child the most from their perspective. From this, it seems as though people make different approaches to how they view their emotion. From this, we can also predict that from one emotion, there can be many ways of knowing because there can be many ways to interpret that emotion.

The experiment run by psychologist Harry Harlow stated that the babies feel secure from the touch of the mothers. However, the knowledge issue I find is this: How does one know that the babies feel secure? (For me, it seems that the experiment is making a hasty generalization in which the psychologist assumes that the babies feel secure because they keep coming back to the mothers). Could it be that the babies come back to their mothers because they feel like they have nowhere else to go?  Another knowledge issue is this, does being and feeling secure mean the same thing to everyone?

The second story made me think of the book I just read a couple days ago Dear John by Nicholas Sparks. In this novel, a character’s brother, and the main character’s father are also faced with autism (like the child of the second story). In parts of the novel, it showed how the other main character (Savannah) dealt with her friend’s brother (Alan) who had autism. “…and I could hear the cupboard doors being opened and slammed while he continued to wail, almost as if were dying… ‘Alan! I’m coming!’ she shouted, her voice frantic. ‘It’s going to be okay!’ Alan continued to wail, and the cupboards continued to slam shut” (Sparks, 261). In this quote, it shows some of the behaviors autism is responsible for. This kind of behavior was also stated in the recording. The father described his son as a “toddler in a child’s body”. He was said to “open car doors when we [the parents] were driving, walk in traffic…” behaviors similar to a baby, like Alan in the novel. Although Alan’s parents were killed in a car accident, Tim (his older brother) and Savannah (his sister-in-law) gave him the same unconditional love his parents would have. “‘I love him.’ She kissed the top of his head. ‘He loves you, too, Alan. And so do I…’” (Sparks, 262). This shows how they love and care for him even though he has autism, and can be dangerous sometimes. This also portrays the idea that unconditional love is not only present in parents and the child but also within other family members too.

Personal Emotion Inventory

Title: Personal Emotion Inventory

Date: 26 January 2011
Class: Theory of Knowledge
Category: In Class

For each of these questions, explore and justify your answers. Spend some time and be thoughtful with this. It should go in your field notebook.

1. List as many emotions as you can that you have personally experienced.

1.       Sadness

2.       Happiness

3.       Guilt

4.       Regret

5.       Relief

6.       Nervousness

7.       Jealousy/Envy

8.       Hatred

9.       Anger

10.   Fear

11.   Worry

12.   Disappointment

13.   Moved/Touched

14.   Shocked/Surprised

15.   Appreciation

16.   Disgust

17.   Tense

18.   Anxious

19.   Excited

20.   Calm

21.   Stressed

2. Describe one experience of strong emotion you can remember from your childhood. How did it affect you?

            When I was in Elementary School, this rumor about me was being spread about me not being trustworthy, and me being a bad friend. As if this wasn’t bad enough, I realized that it was the people I used to refer to as so-called “best friends” who were spreading this rumor. I was overwhelmed by shock, disappointment, anger, worry, stress and depression. Shocked, because I did not anticipate my friends betraying me, and saying such horrible things about me; disappointed because I thought they were better friends than that, and disappointed at myself for allowing them to think that way of me. I felt angry because I wanted revenge, worried because I was worried people will actually believe what they say and I wouldn’t be able to convince anyone that it wasn’t true because I couldn’t be trusted. With all these feelings, I became stressed, stressed to the point where I became depressed.

I didn’t want to go to school anymore when I used to look forward to going to school. I began to doubt myself, and ask, “Am I really trustworthy as I think I am? Or am I fooling myself? Am I really not trustworthy like they say I am?” I began to think “well, they should know me pretty well; maybe I really am not trustworthy”. Due to the empowerment of my emotions, I began to stop trusting myself, and let my emotions control my thoughts.

3. How emotional are you?

a. How intensely do you feel emotion (on a scale of 1-10, then describe)? Do you cry or laugh easily?

On a scale of 1-10, I think I would be an 8. People tell me I’m very sensitive, meaning I feel emotions very strongly. By watching a sad movie, I tend to cry. I cry easily but I am able to control whether I let the tears fall or not. For example, I can often convince myself not to cry, by thinking of happy thoughts or anything that will get my mind off the topic of crying. People can easily make me laugh. I can’t make myself laugh, but I laugh very easily when I’m around people I am comfortable with. I think this shows that I am more liable to feel a greater intensity of emotion around people I know on a personal basis.

b. Look back at your Myers-Briggs Type Indicator results. What did they suggest about how emotional you are? Do you agree?

The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator results showed that I value feelings but I tend to follow the rules and rely on facts. I think this is accurate because I find myself to feel emotions intensely, but I am still capable of deciding whether I allow my emotions to affect me (although this depends on how intensely these emotions are felt). I usually allow my emotions to determine the perspective I think in, but I am more dependent on facts and rules rather than my emotions.

c. Which emotions do you tend to feel more strongly? Are you more susceptible to some emotions and less to others?

            I feel the most susceptible to sadness and worry rather than happiness and appreciation. I often tend to be a pessimist. I worry about the smallest things (what if I don’t have time to prepare for school tomorrow?) to the bigger things (what if I don’t get accepted by any universities?). If I don’t have a plan made for the day, or a time period, I usually start to worry and feel the need to start planning. Because of my excessive worry, I tend to forget to appreciate the moment. When I start to reflect back, this is when I feel regret for not taking the time to appreciate the moment given because this moment may have been one that I would never again encounter.

            Once I reach a point of sadness, my whole thought process begins to think negatively. I begin to make assumptions (hasty generalizations) that lead me to feel more depressed. This is why I cannot be alone when I’m feeling sad. I need someone to help me control my thoughts because my positive thoughts disappear once I become sad. At this stage, my memories of sadness and pain reappear in my mind emphasizing this emotion furthermore.

            When watching movies, I usually place myself in the character’s shoes. I watch the movie as if I am a character of this movie, and thus it makes the movie more personal and relatable. When watching movies, the movie is able to control my emotions. Depending on what type of movie I watch, I can feel happy, sad, or fearful. This is why I usually use movies in converting my emotions from one emotion, to another. For example, when I’m feeling sad, I will usually want to watch happy movies once I realize I need to be a stronger person. After watching a movie with a happy ending, I usually feel happy myself and look forward to the rest of the day. While watching movies, I would have to say that my emotions are not susceptible to a particular emotion, but rather, to all the emotions including happiness, sadness and fear.

d. How emotional are your immediate family members compared to you?

            My grandmother (from my mom’s side) and my mom are emotional like me. I remember my last prom, my grandmother started to tear up because she was overwhelmed by how grown up I was. She got the image that I was getting married and this image brought her tears. My mom is also very emotional. Whenever we fight, she often feels so tense that she can start tearing up. Me, being emotional like her, start to tear up because I see someone else (my mom) tearing up. I feel that my mom, my grandmother and I tend to be susceptible to sadness as we can often cry easily without meaning to.

e. Has your experience of emotions changed over time?

            Yes, I have learned to control my emotions over time in a more effective manner. When I was a baby, I would cry when I was hungry, showing that I could not control my emotions or needs very well. In my Elementary years, I used to cry very easily but less than my infant years. If I fell, I could not control my emotions, and I would let the pain allow my eyes to start filling with tears. I could control weaker needs such as hunger and wants, but I could not control my emotions towards pain. Now, in my High School years, I am able to control my needs, my wants and a degree of pain. If I fell, I could control how this pain affects me, but if it is more of an emotional pain, it is harder for me to handle. I believe in the future, I will be able to control these emotions too.

4. What physical responses do you have to specific emotions? Give some examples.

Our physical responses depend on our emotions. For example, when we’re happy we are more liable to laugh, or smile. By feeling this emotion, our body feels the need to express our emotions unless we are able to control these emotions. For example, when I’m feeling depressed, I would feel the need to cry, to express my sadness. However, by being able to control our emotions, we are able to control our physical responses to our emotions.

5. Can you control your emotions, or do they control you?

            I think emotions control us but we are also able to control our emotions, it really depends on the perspective we view this in. We can control our emotions in how they affect us. We can allow our emotions to control our thoughts or decisions or actions but we can also leave emotions out. This is usually seen in businesses. Professionals usually need to learn how to make the best decisions for the company regardless of how we may feel towards the decision. In order to do this, we need to be a strong person. We need to learn how to ignore our emotions, for the best. But to determine what is “for the best”, we need to make another decision. Perhaps, this thought could be affected by our emotions which would then mean that we are not able to control our emotions, and that emotions control us. Thus, I have just contradicted myself. For this reason, I think that this question depends on which way we perceive this. Do decisions come first that has to be made in order to make other decisions, (in which our emotions would control us) or do we make the decisions (in which we would control our emotions).

6. Do negative or positive emotions affect your behavior more?

            I think this really depends on the type of person. For example, for me, I am often a pessimist. I allow my negative emotions to affect my behaviors. When I’m sad, I tend to keep to myself more whereas usually I am a very out-going person. However, I don’t need to feel happy to be out-going; but I do need to feel sad to be more isolated and quiet. Therefore, I can say that my negative emotions affect my behavior more. However, if it was an optimistic person, this could be the complete opposite –perhaps for this person, the positive emotions may affect his/her person more.

7. Do you make decisions based on emotion or reason?

          I make decisions based on both emotion and reason. I try to make decisions based on reason; however, it is often hard to control my emotions to not let it affect the way I think. I know I should base my reasons on reasoning rather than emotions however, my emotions usually determine the way I think. When I feel sad, I tend to think in a more negative way, whereas when I’m happy, I’m liable to feel more hopeful and happy. Therefore, I would have to say that I base my decisions on both emotion and reason but I really think this depends on how well someone is able to control his/her emotions.

8. Do you feign/fake emotional response? Why? When? Is it OK to do this?

Yes, I sometimes fake emotional response. I think this is OK if this is for the better. For example, if I feel disappointed about something that someone did, I may not want to show this to someone if this person has already had a very bad day. Instead, I may approach this in a different way. I may encourage someone to do have done something else, encouraging with a smile (an indication of happiness) rather than scolding (an indication of disappointment). However, if there are too much emotions being faked, this may lead to someone having the reputation of being fake, resulting in people to drift away from this person as they will not be able to relate to one another.

The Power of Failure

Title: The Power of Failure
Author: William D. Cohan
Publication: New York Times
Date: November 26^th, 2010
Category: Outside of Class

sureboy.blogspot.com

            This article from the New York Times describes the economic mistakes that Wall Street has faced continuously over the past years. It mentions how we have this image of Wall Street being so great, therefore praising it through writing about it in books, filming it in movies, and overpaying the people that work there. This excessive praise towards Wall Street has gotten people to wonder why we are still viewing Wall Street with this image even though they have made so many mistakes in the past. Some people say it is in our nature to fail. We’re not perfect, and so we are bound to make mistakes and fail. Nevertheless, it’s what we do with these failures that matter. Nowadays, we have the need to be perfect ever since we are born. I find this to be true in my life. I feel the need to be perfect, because this will allow me to be viewed as an accomplished individual. Because of this need, it’s hard to accept my failures, and deal with it and learn from it. Great leaders of the world state the importance of making failures, and that failures can be the thing that creates an epiphany in one’s life. There is no need for us to be perfect, it is simply a want, an image or reputation we want to have; however, there is a need for us to make failures although we may not want it.

            While reading this article, I began to think about what it meant to be perfect. The idea of being “perfect” is different for everyone is it not? If people are striving to be “perfect” while having different ideas of what being “perfect” is, then how can one know that people will view them as being “perfect”? The same applies to what is to be considered as “failures”. What are failures? Do failures mean different things to different people? If so, is it possible that a person considers something to be a failure while another person does not? If this is true, then why are we so afraid of people judging us from our failures when there is a great possibility that people may not even consider our failures to be failures at all? Who decides what should be considered as “perfect” or “failures”? Who has this authority? Do all people agree with this authority? If so, does this figure have the power to control what should be accepted by the mass (common knowledge)?

Veil of Perception

Title: Veil of Perception
Date: October 27^th, 2010
Class: Theory of Knowledge
Category: In Class

            The concept of the Veil of Perception states that there is a barrier between what we see, and what is really there, this barrier being the veil. There are different ideas that aroused from this concept of the veil of perception such as naïve realism, direct realism, indirect realism and idealism. Although these ideas were formed by intelligent people from previous eras, significant knowledge issues arise for each concept.

scientificamerican.com

            Naïve realism is also known as common sense realism. It basically states that what we see or perceive is real. This is what most people tend to believe because it helps us live our life (this thus being a pragmatic truth because we believe it because we know that it will benefit us by doing so). Some problems that arise from this idea is, what is people are colorblind? Does that mean that the color they perceive (black and white) is reality? Does that mean that the world is solely black and white? But if this is true, then is the world in color false? What about the presence of temperature? We can’t necessarily see temperature; does this mean that temperature does not exist? Then what is the feeling of warming up? Or feeling cold? Naïve realism does not take account the things we cannot see. However, if we can’t see it, then how do we know it is actually there?

            Direct realism’s founder was a man named Thomas Reid. He stated that there is a direct relationship between what we perceive and the real world. If we constantly see something as being the way it is, direct realism says it is okay for us to conclude that the thing is actually the way we see it. This falls into the category of pragmatic truth. Because it will benefit us in living if we trust our perceptions, we believe that the perceptions are real. Some knowledge issues that are found with this idea is this: what if there is no outside world? If there is no reality, and reality is only within the mind, then how valid is this concept? Again, what if we are colorblind? If we were colorblind, then we would always perceive the world to be black and white, does that mean that the world is black and white after all?

            Indirect realism was thought of by a man named John Locke. He stated that we cannot really know how something really is; we can only know how we perceive it to be. We can only understand the representation of the object, not the real object itself. The question with this idea is how do we know what the representation looks like? Is there a specific way it should appear? For example, if we look at books, they are all supposed to have a cover, and pages with writing or drawing on these pages. We know this as a fact. However, how do we know that all books should be like this? Is this because we always see it like this, and so we believe it? Is it considered as common sense and so accepted by the society? If this is true, then it leads back to the idea of naïve realism.

            Idealism originated from a person called George Berkeley. He claimed that there is nothing behind the veil. He said everything is an idea, and solely an idea. He claimed that there was no material world, and that reality is within the mind. He quoted, “To exist is to be perceived”. If what he said was true, then this would also be true: if we stopped looking at something, then it would cease to exist. What about this: If a tree falls but no one hears it, did it really fall?

            All of these ideas originated from the idea of the veil of perception questions reality’s identity. Is reality what we perceive? Is it solely in the mind? Does it even matter what it is? If we are able to live knowing reality is something when it really isn’t, does this affect us? And if so, how does it affect us?

Modern Dance

Title: Modern Dance
Date: December 1^st, 2010
Category: Outside of Class

dancersalary.com

            Since the annual Dance Competition was coming up, I had been practicing with my partner Sol. Our concept of the dance we were to perform is to create a combination mixing both ballets inspired from modern dance and hip hop. To get my inspiration, I searched on YouTube for videos of modern dance. Upon watching the videos, I began to think of what the term modern dance really meant. The term “modern” meant that it was new and fitting with the world today. However, when I see most of the dances in our society, I usually see varied forms of hip-hop rather than modern dance. How is this type of dance, then modern in the sense that it corresponds to our lifestyle in our society? It could be that the term “modern” signified that this type of dancing was created during our era, near the 21^st century. If this was the case, then how do we know whether this type of dance evolved during our era? Could it be that people from the previous eras had danced this form of dance, but had never shown it? Who decides what is modern and what is considered “old” or “vintage”? Who has this authority? Do all people agree with this authority figure or are we forced into doing so? Would it make a difference if we knew who decided what was modern? Would the dance then be called “modern dance”?

Map Study

Title: Map Study
Date: October 6^th, 2010
Class: Theory of Knowledge
Category: In Class
             Do different types of maps change the way we perceive the world? There is an immense amount of world maps out there in the world, emphasizing different aspects of the world. The varieties of projections allow us to view the world in many different points of views that we may or may not have considered before. For example, there is the Population World Map where countries with a greater population is emphasized and privileged, or there is the Hobo Dyer World Map where southern countries such as Australia and Brazil are being focused, or the Winkle Tripel World Map where Africa is emphasized as it is in the center and the least distorted. These maps are shown below:



Hobo Dyer Projection
www1.worldbank.org



Population World Map
rs.resalliance.org

Winkle Tripel Projection
personal.psu.edu

            Nevertheless, how reliable are these maps? Could it be that the map-makers were biased and privileged their own country, making it bigger or altering its boundaries slightly? If this was the case and the mass viewed this certain map that was modified by the map-maker, how does this affect the way we view the world? Would we then believe that the modified boundaries were the real boundaries if the mass believed that the modified boundaries were real? How would we know whether it had been altered or not?  How would we know what has been altered regarding the land shape, or land size, or boundaries etc? How do we know that the Hobo Dyer projection is illustrated in an upside-down manner? Could it be possible that the Hobo Dyer projection is really the right-side up and that the “normal” projection is the one being upside-down? Who decides which projection is the right-side up? How is this authority given? Does our perception of the world depend on these people who create maps? 

A Tiny Fruit That Tricks the Tongue

Title: A Tiny Fruit That Tricks the Tongue
Author: Patrick Farrell and Kassie Bracken
Date: May 28^th, 2008
Class: Theory of Knowledge
Category: In Class

daleysfruit.com.au

            According to the article, this fruit that originated in West Africa had the capability to alter our gustatory perceptions of acidic flavors into sweet flavors. Some examples that were given were of lemon sorbet mixed with Guinness which altered the perceived taste to a chocolate shake, and Tabasco which was perceived as hot doughnut glaze. The fruit had deteriorated the boundaries for what we considered to be edible and not edible. With this miracle fruit, people were able to eat or drink what they could not have before by itself, such as Tabasco. According to the article, this miracle fruit could almost be a substitute for sugar as it did not seem to have any health disadvantages when experimented by Dr. Bartoshuk. However, the miracle fruit did not always work to our advantage. In some cases, the miracle fruit would cause a reaction such as a person exclaiming “What did you do to my mouth?” The reactions to this fruit were tested at Mr. Aliquo’s “flavor tripping event”. Because people were attending this party, did they have expectations about this fruit changing the way they perceived what they ate? If so, would this have influenced them into believing that their gustatory perceptions had changed when in reality it hadn’t? Since only one person is able to experience this change in perception and this change is different for every person, how do we know what the people claim is true? Do we have to experience it to believe it? But even then, we would have expectations that would influence the way we perceive and think about its effects. Is it then, the miracle fruit that is altering our gustatory perception or is it our minds itself?

Sometimes, people had difficulty trusting Mr. Aliquo as they did not have a close connection if a connection at all. The people who were coming to these events had gotten invites on the internet and had never met Mr. Aliquo before. One woman asked him to eat the miracle fruit first before she dared to try one because she faced such difficulty in trusting him. Another person at the party was able to convince her that it was safe to trust him because she “met him on the internet, so it’s safe”. This statement to me seems illogical. It seems to imply that all people on the internet are trustworthy yet how do we know this? In fact, in many cases, people are attacked through cyber bullying, deceit, interference to privacy etc. by people they meet on the internet. To this person who claims this to be true, he is using inductive reasoning if he has never met anyone who had harmed him through the internet, but how much does this claim correspond to the events that happen in reality? How reliable is his inductive reasoning? How much experience does this person have to support his claim?