Blog 32

The amount of media manipulation is even more extent in today’s times. In the early 1900’s, communication through media was very limited, but now our minds are invaded with commercials, labels, television, magazines, and billboards. Media influences how we think of different things, such as styles and even people we don’t know. This is the problem: we’re making conclusions on people we no nothing about, other than what we hear on the news or read in the magazines. Like mentioned in the last blog, this goes into politics and knowing which of the politicians are the better one. Without knowing credible information about each side leads to future problems with how we are governed. This especially pertains to the population of college kids. At this age, we start to make our own decisions, set apart from the beliefs of our parents . It is an important thing to separate the information handed to us by it’s credibility to create better beliefs and conclusions. We grew up in a generation that is consumed by highly dramatic television shows, such as Jersey Shore and The Real World, and this has the capability of showing teens this is how you are supposed to act. This not only affects teenage reputations, but it also affects the reputation of the celebrities of the shows. For instance, Adam from the last season on The Real World was at McFadden’s. Adam is known for being a crazy drunk on the television show. At McFadden’s, Adam was on top of the bar the entire time pouring shots into the mouths of the dancers below.  This is highly expected behavior because that’s how we saw him in the show. It would be a disappointment to everyone if he fell from that reputation and just roamed the bar like everyone else.

Blog 31

My idea for my commonplace paper is to describe the situational manipulation media displays and the affects on society. Perez Hilton, TMZ, D-Listed, and any chic magazine will show tons of gossip about celebrity lives. The E! channel also does this, with shows like Fashion Police, Chelsea Lately, and The Soup. These examples all attack celebrities by manipulating different situations, which leads to the audience looking down upon them. This also leads to the celebrities living up to their demented reputation given by the media. I highly doubt Lindsay Lohan was a drug addict when she was younger, but through the exploitation of the media, I believe she developed in a more distorted way than if the media hadn’t been a part of her life. One of the biggest signs of manipulation through media can be shown during campaign season. We are shown multiple commercials for a certain politician where the only material to the commercial contains hits on the other side. This affects us as a society when it comes to voting time. If people go into the booth and vote without knowing BOTH sides’ views, our country could end up with the lesser of the two politicians as leader. If you watch the news, you’ll have to get through tons of crime stories before seeing the news piece you wanted to watch. News channels show the criminals. This leads to criminal profiling and ecological fallacy. If you see a person on the street that looks like one of the people you saw on the news story, you might suspect them being a criminal themselves.

Blog 30

This commonplace article, What a Guy Wants by Erik Vossler, talks about how advertising is not only insulting to women, but also to the men they are trying to attract. He is insulted with the fact that so many ads just have pictures of the “ideal” girl clinging onto the man holding the cologne bottle or wearing those designer jeans. I love that Vossler put this into his paper: “When do you think was the last time a guy looked at one of the airbrushed, clothing deprived models in Maxim and said ‘I bet you she got a 4.0 when she was in school.’ Actually, it was probably around the same time the last girl said, ‘I’m really thrilled that guy I hooked up with last week never called me back.’” This is a perfect explanation of the difference between lust and like. To be blunt, if wanted to see naked people, I’d pick up a porn magazine. Obviously I am not a guy…but I agree that advertisers rely on using nudity too much in their ads. Keep it out of the advertising for once. The amount is also very prevalent in female magazines, which present a manipulated picture of what makes a woman beautiful. On the other hand, Vossler says “Personally, I would be terrified to go out with a girl that looked as if she were going to pass out from starvation”. The manipulation of this image makes girls self-conscience and guys stand-offish. The important thing to remember is to stay healthy; looking skinny doesn’t make you more beautiful.

Blog 29

The commonplace article I chose to read today was “Don’t Forget About the War in Uganda” by Nikki Brown. This article struck me as interesting before even reading it because there’s so much corruption the world but there’s so little thought of it in the minds of people who aren’t being affected. This author goes into detail about the children that are abducted and thrown into the army because they are the easiest to brainwash. The war in Uganda is absolutely horrible, but when have you been in a conversation where someone starts talking about it? To me, this is a simple concept: wars, chaos, and disasters are mainly going to affect the people who are living there or have a connection with someone going through it. Take the tsunami in Japan. It got a whole two weeks of mourning in the United States, but they are still trying to work through the destruction overseas. It was a little different for me because one of my best friends and her family moved back to Japan a few years back. It was hard to think about what could have happened to them in the time where we had no communication because of the power shortages there. Now if there was a terrorist attack on Thompson Library, that would affect us a hell of a lot more…simply because this is our home.  This author tells us to inform others and act upon the situation. Yes, I agree that ignorance is of high levels with these situations, but what else can you expect when it’s not affecting us?

Blog 28

Today, I chose a topic that all of us can relate to: materialism within college life. "Everyone is Buying it" by Krysta Suydam analyzes how materialism runs through our veins from an early age and continues the idea with sharing the constant desires in college. This immense amount of materialism has continued to increase in today’s society, even when the money is scarce and we should be investing it rather than spending it. Look around campus and what do you see most of? Sperry’s…North Face jackets…Ray-Bans…ipads…and the dreadful UGGS…these are all objects that could possibly be spotted on 1 of the 3  Ohio State students that you pass next. Suydam goes into this analysis deeper by talking about how ads affect people. We see about 5,000 ads a day which easily grab our attentions. We have a huge denial to the fact that these ads affect us, but even though you may be denying this, ads have a huge affect. We have these constant wants, which is especially hard for us college students who will later have to pay off those wonderful college loans. We have crazed desires for the latest fashion trends and technology…basically anything that’s considered the newest thing. This can’t really be considered a bad thing since all of society goes through this. It’s human nature to constantly want to reach the next level. The only problem is when this level of desire reaches past the limit, into the possibility of debt. The lesson to be learned is to be smart with your money. It’s a hard task, but it’s an important thing to learn.

Blog 27

When the controversial issues of organ trafficking or human-animal hybrids are introduced to society, a mix of different thoughts are immediately brought to attention. So many opinions swarm these topics, but how many of those opinions are actually worth taking into consideration? The opinions of society on scientific developments can be broken down into two groups: (1) those who are supportive for the continuation of research and (2) those who are skeptical about the benefits and believe they violate humanity values. The scientist population is subject to being thrown into the first group. It’s a necessity for the mind of a scientist to disregard moral issues. Otherwise, progress will be brought to a standstill. It doesn’t make sense for a scientist to be studying cloning processes if they believe it’s considered “playing God”.  Does education on a subject’s matter make a difference towards the future in research and advancements? It’s necessary for an individual to compare their views to educated opinions rather than ignorant opinions. Ignorance is a direct cause of misleading conclusions. An episode of Dollhouse is compared to a real life conducted survey to show the differences in credibility of opinions between uneducated and educated opinions. After analyzing a large amount of credible opinions, it is important to create a checks-and-balances system that will not exceed the limitations brought upon by humanity. This allows for the avoidance of future problems within science experimentations. While a variety of opinions are available for any controversial issue, the opinions derived from an educated population are the only ones that can be considered credible.

Blog 26

This episode of Dollhouse helps me realize the differences in a population’s multitude of opinions. Included in the main argument, this episode and my real world connection, the survey on “Designer Babies”, show the differences between the opinions of an uneducated group and an educated group, respectively. Researching these differences led to a realization of how communicating and teaching society about a topic will lead to different views. This brings to the proposition that certain advancements that seem controversial in society would be accepted if only a bit more in-depth information on the research was introduced to the viewers. Especially in this era, society is being ignorant towards the potential that science holds for us. Advancements come with technology, but advancements can easily be halted when the someone stands up and proposes a problem, many times due to moral issues. If humanity is benefiting, there should be times where absurd morality should be shoved to the side. At the same time, checks-and-balances should be in order to not have the world go haywire. The world has learned this from the horrible experiments done within The Holocaust. Even though the experiments could be said to be beneficial in experimenting future medicinal purposes, the testing of humans would not be accepted anywhere. History is something to learn from. The real world connection shows the views of an educated audience. The results shown were of acceptance to the idea of “Designer Babies”, but it also allowed for the checks-and-balances, which was indicated by the disapproval of non-medicinal uses, such as perfecting the unborn baby. This gets me thinking, how reliable is the information within today’s news? When a reporter is asking random people on the street a question, should their answer really be taken into consideration when we don’t know how much knowledge they actually have on the topic? Once knowledge has been contributed, then shall we make our conclusions on a controversial issue.

Blog 25

Educated opinions need to be taken into major consideration with technological advancements. A survey was conducted to view the opinions of young people on the topic of “Designer Babies.” This topic should not be looked at as the idea of changing the sex and traits of your unborn child. The Human Genetics Commission debates that this terminology can refer to a multitude of uses for this technology, such as changing the sex to avoid X-linked diseases and preimplantation genetic diagnosis to find embryos that don’t contain disorders.  Rachel Iredale, a senior lecturer at the School of Care Sciences, conducted this credible survey by separating it into three main uses of the technology: (1) to prevent possible inherited diseases, (2) to save a medically ill child’s life, and (3) to predetermine the child’s sex (as a non-medical use). This process of the experiment goes into depth with this controversial issue, rather than simply asking the participants if “Designer Babies” are a good or a bad idea. Throughout the survey process, the young participants became more educated about the subject through video clips, newspaper articles, and a series of speakers.

There were multiple results with this experiment. With “designer baby” technology, the majority of the jury ended up approving the capability of parents to “prevent inherited conditions from being passed on and to prevent serious suffering” (Iredale 211) and to save an existing child of it’s serious medical conditions. On the other hand, the majority of the jury were of opposition to predetermining the sex of the baby. After all of the education was embedded into the process, the results should be looked upon as credible sources of information with the technology.

Blog 24

Asking the opinions of someone about an unknown subject creates misleading conclusions for others attempting to learn about the subject. For example, initially learning about which politician to vote for becomes confusing when viewing each side’s commercials. These commercials are simply full of criticism towards the other side. The instant response after watching one of these commercials would be to dislike the side being condemned. This is misleading because one politician is manipulating the views of the other politician so the audience will agree with him. Educating a group of people, THEN creating a survey to capture their opinions is a better way to obtain credible opinions. The group of people shown in the sixth episode of Dollhouse represent the uneducated group. They are uninformed about anything to do with the Dollhouse. In contrast of this group, a survey was conducted about the idea of “Designer Babies”. This idea was captured before and after the participants were educated on the subject. The group of participants were educated about the subject so that the researchers could obtain reliable results. This real world example is showing a group of educated participants whose results ended up with different outcomes after they were educated on the subject. The differences between the interviews within the episode and the conducted experiment can be analyzed to show how credibility changes with education. This credibility has an importance towards the future checks-and-balances dealing with scientific developments. If ignorance prevails into the future, science will have deal with more halts and problems. Understanding of the pros and cons will assist with avoiding this problem.

Blog 23

In the pieced together scenes of the interviews, Joss Whedon is examining numerous reactions to scientific developments. During the interviews, looks of disgust, interest, and desire arose. What was interesting, but not abnormal, was that most of the reactions given by the participants were only half serious. Some answered the question like it was a “what would you do if you had a million dollars” question and most answered it as a “what would you do if you could have a doll” question. The reporter simply asked what they thought about the operation as a general idea, but the participants took it in different ways. The phrasing of questions can create for totally different results. The scholarly expectations for these opinions should be quite low due to the fact that the participants had no earlier knowledge about the Dollhouse. From this scene, the main argument is how the reactions cannot be viewed as credible analyses. The only interview that should be taken into consideration is the scientist because he would be more educated on scientific developments than the random citizens roaming the streets.  Even his opinion cannot be thoroughly be considered plausible because, although he is a scientist, he is not familiar with the Dollhouse operation. Joss Whedon put this character at the very end of the scene because it allows for a deeper inspection by the audience. Opposite of the others interviewed, the scientist says that the Dollhouse will lead to the human race being inferior to the technologically perfected people.

Blog 22

In the sixth episode of Dollhouse, “Man on the Street”, there is a scene that plays along with the title. The scene being analyzed consists of multiple interviews with random citizens walking through the streets of Los Angeles, California. The clip is actually pieced throughout the entire episode. Multiple opinions were collected by an television interviewer.

The first shot is of a reporter giving the background on some history about the Dollhouse, saying that it has been an urban legend since the late 1980’s and it rents programmable people to the very rich and very connected. The camera turns over to a man who is sure that the legend is a real deal. The next being interviewed is a very negatively opinionated woman. She directed her view to the idea that people will always have a need for slaves. The others involved in the interview included: a woman who found the Dollhouse to be something she’d sign up for, an elderly man who said if he could, he would have an “Ida Lupino” every night, a female teenager who thinks the dolls are beautiful for wanting to help, a woman on a bike calling the Dollhouse “human-trafficking” and repulsive, a man who is against the controlling of another being, and some others who simply shared their fantasies. The last of the interviews showed a scientist who believes that the technology will be used and abused if it exists. These interviews show the opinions from people who know absolutely nothing about the Dollhouse, other than what the interviewer briefly said.

Blog 21

In the survey, also described in Blog 17, the participants express their feelings about different opinions about designer babies. Although the majority (11 out of 14 participants) agreed that this technology would be useful for society in the future, the majority (12 out of 14 participants) also said that the technology is considered risky.  “The perceived risk related almost entirely to ‘misuse’ of the technology rather than to any inherent clinical dancers, for example creating babies for frivolous reasons, or systematic attempts to impose certain options on would-be parents” (Iredale, 214). This will be the second quote I’ve used from the What choices should we be able to make about designer babies? A Citizens’ Jury of young people in South Wales article. This quote can be compared to the first one used from earlier in the article by explaining the need for a checks-and-balances with scientific developments, but the difference between the quotes is how this quote is directed more towards the idea of getting out of hand with advancements than introducing differences between certain uses.  There are obvious examples throughout history of scientists getting out of control with their studies, such as countries using their prisoners as their lab mice. Here, history shows the world that scientists are not the only ones that can have an input. It will do the world good to educate spectators other than the scientists involved and use their opinion for beneficial input. In this day, there is a greater capability of transferring and receiving this information accurately and efficiently. Therefore, let us be resourceful with the technology that we have now to develop future technology.

Blog 20

In the article Embryo Stem Cell Research: Ten Years of Controversy by John Robertson, the argument given is about the acceptance versus disapproval about stem cell research. Everyone has the capability of creating an opinion on an issue, even if they don’t have a true understanding, but the opinion can end up either being very definite or sometimes cloudy. In this article, Robertson discusses how the sides of stem cell research can be just that. For example, the very strongly opposed will not allow for any research being conducted, even if the embryos were going to be discarded anyway. Then there are those who think the embryos are too elementary to contain individual rights, but in this case, they find it intolerable to create embryos only for the use of research. These are the people who earlier in the article said the embryos should not be protected at the detriment of significant scientific research. “If the embryos are at the same stage of development in each case, then how can one set of embryos deserve protection and the other set not?” (Robertson, 193). Their opinion should be considered cloudy here due to the fact that they will permit the use of embryos in stem cell research, but at the same time, they will risk the loss of scientific discovery from creating embryos only for this research, even though some will be discarded anyway. This cloudiness shows a need for checks-and-balances. Even though not everyone will be of acceptance, there will always be a limit to what should be considered tolerable to avoid future problems.

Blog 19

Immoral Science by Dan Jones is an article that establishes a view on how some scientific developments create for an intense emotional response. Why is it that experiments, such as human-animal hybrids, genetically modified organisms, and designer babies, get the title of being “immoral” research? “As societies become more scientifically literate, scientific developments may well be judged more from a position of knowledge and less on the basis of intuitive responses driven by moral heuristics” (Jones, n.p.). This quote examines the different opinions between the uneducated and the educated audience. Ignorance can be correlated with the rejection of valuable scientific research. Without any knowledge, the idea of creating human-animal hybrids and cloning sound pretty appalling and unsafe, but by educating, the analyzers obtain a better sense of the pros and cons that go into the research. For example, during the interviewing of random people on the street in the sixth episode of Dollhouse, none of the people interviewed had any idea of what the Dollhouse was, other than being told that it was a place where rich people would buy programmed people. Most of the people said absurd things that did not even provide a scientific view. Of course their opinions were not legitimate. None of them had any idea about what the subject had in store for humanity. Also, it is important to notify that knowledge will not directly create for an instant approval of an experiment, but it’ll create for better opinions to be considered by the world.

blog 18

The article Designer Babies: Eugenics Repackaged or Consumer Options? tells the audience about the history of designer babies and introduces possible pros and cons to the advancement.   According to Stephen L Baird, a technology education teacher at Bayside Middle School, designing babies comes with arguments on both sides. The fact that Baird is a technology educator gives the information more reliability. This article adds to the discussion of developing a checks-and-balances system within scientific experiments. “We could get carried away ‘correcting’ perfectly healthy babies. Once we start down the slippery slope of eliminating embryos because they are diseased, what is to stop us from picking babies for their physical or psychological traits?” (Baird, 16). This quote initiates a question of humanity to the audience. Although it’s one of those “what if” questions, but these types of questions are still very much legitimate when it comes to research that has a possibility of hurting the future of the world we live in. These “what if” questions need to be taken into consideration to create a greater level of assurance that the minimum amount of problems will occur. Using the operation to pick a baby’s physical and psychological traits could mess up a perfectly healthy baby. There are many movies, such as GATTACA and The Island, that make these questions come to life. Another thing that legitimizes this quote is how people always want the next better thing. Perfection is what we’re constantly trying to strive for, but there needs to be some limitations. Perfecting everything will lead to greater consequences, such as those “perfected” segregating those that were born naturally.

Blog 17

A survey was conducted to view the opinions of young people on the topic of “Designer Babies.” This author is making an argument that the opinions of the public should be taken into major consideration with technological advancements. Throughout the survey process, the young participants became more educated about the subject through video clips, newspaper articles, and a series of speakers. Rachel Iredale is shown as a reliable source. On the first page, the article mentions that Iredale is a senior lecturer at the School of Care Sciences. This gives an assurance to the audience that Iredale is providing a justifiable procedure for the conducted survey. “The Citizens Jury was divided into three stages, relating to three of the main potential uses of the technology: (1) to prevent inherited diseases, (2) to save the life of an existing child with a serious medical condition (saviour siblings), and (3) for non-medical reasons such as sex selection” (Iredale 211). This quote lays out how the survey goes into depth with this controversial issue, rather than simply asking the participants “Are Designer Babies a good or bad idea”. The first two of these potential uses instantly creates for a positive application to humanity, but there could be some possible questioning when it comes to the third use. This quote also shows a possible need for checks and balances with technological advancements. Although the results are not shown within this quote, the audience is able to pick up the differences between the uses. Preventing inherited diseases and saving the life of an existing child are far higher priorities than changing the sex of the baby.

Blog 15

Following up on my “controversies within science” theme, I read an article about stem cell research. This, in my opinion, is one of the more well-known controversies in today’s society.  This article, Embryo Stem Cell Research: Ten Years of Controversy by John A. Robertson, describes the reasons for the battle on this research. Some see this research as a type of abortion, because of the destroying of the embryonic cells. Robertson goes into further explanation saying that one side views stem cell research as murder because the fertilized egg is considered a human being, with individual rights. The other side sees the fertilized egg as too undeveloped to be defended from scientists’ hands. Like all other controversial issues, there are two sides that debate about their personal moral beliefs. This article discusses ethics throughout history. On the religious standpoint, the article describes how “The drafters of the Declaration of Independence had various uneasy relationships with organized religion, but all agreed on the proposition that ‘all men are created equal’ and endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, beginning with life” (Robertson 213). This can be argued since Caucasians enslaved African Americans back in those times. It’s quite interesting how people can have such high moral standards with some things, yet disregard some other things, such as enslavement…but I suppose this can be semi-explained from old ethics versus new ethics. This goes along with Dollhouse because in episode 6, people (with different ethics) gave different views on what they thought about the operation.

http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=939daeab-eeb0-40c4-9ee3-2e630a1246b0%40sessionmgr15&vid=12&hid=21

Blog 14

Today, I read an article about the views of immoral science in recent years. The article, Immoral Science, is written by Dan Jones and discusses how with increasing technology comes with a greater list of what people consider to be immoral research. Some areas on this list include: “nanotechnology, synthetic biology, genomics and genetically modified organisms or so-called ‘Frankenfoods’… cloning, designer babies, stem-cell research, human-animal hybrids” (Jones). This article supports my interest in the theme of my paper because it gives more information about the differences between science and theology. For example, scientists have to disregard moral issues if they really want to find an answer to their experiments. It doesn’t make sense for a scientist to be studying cloning if they believe it’s considered “playing God”. It also discusses how people tend to “accept” some scientific studies more than others. Like I asked in a previous post, is there a definite line between what’s moral and immoral, given the fact that everyone has different values?

Another thing mentioned in the article is the idea of organ trafficking. When the proposal of selling organs for a good $150,000 per operation is introduced, people become disgusted with others for putting a price on human life. It seems that an issue becomes more likely to upset the public when money is involved. Is that perhaps proof that the Dollhouse is on the public’s hate list? Another connection easily made to the Dollhouse within this article is the snippet saying, “…measures would be put in place to help the poor, so they would not be driven to sell their organs out of desperation” (Jones). This connects in the way that the poor in this show give their bodies up for a long-term period, due to extreme desperation.

P.S: I think I'm changing my theme from researching the line between science and theology to controversies within today's scientific studies. This way I can still hit up the morality side of it, but obtain more information, since the topic is a bit more broad. Does that sound any better?

Blog 13

Tonight, I read the article Is Science Very Different from Religion? A Polanyian Perspective by Priyan Dias. This article is not one of the ones I specifically chosen in the beginning, but this concept is a big issue within the Dollhouse. Initially, I wanted to write my paper about the line between theology/morality and science. The argue behind the article, shown by the title, explores the differences and comparisons of science and religion. This paper holds four claims: inquiry, whereas religion is characterised by practitioner subjectivity. “1. Science is based on verifiable facts, whereas religion rests on faith that is not amenable to verification. 2. Science is carried out in a way that the practitioner is detached from his. 3. Science has had its theories overthrown by better ones, whereas religion is characterised by dogmatic attitudes. 4. Science seeks the assent of all its practitioners, while there are very contrasting views from one religion to another” (Dias 43). Within these claims, a main comparison of this paper is how both science and religion: they are both human pursuits for discovery and action. Claim one is basically saying that scientists rely on experimentation and results supporting their hypothesis for actuality, while religious believers rely on historical concepts rather than evidence. Claim two summarizes that knowledge is brought upon by a personal involvement and a passion. This is for both science and religion. Claim three is about how science and it’s theories are always evolving, but religion is about a structured, concrete set of ideals. Finally, claim four is about how science is a work of all scientists, checking each other’s work, but different types of religion end up bickering and fighting about their own views.

Blog 12

Today, I read an article from the book called The State of Greed by Harrison Rainie. This article talks about the greed displayed in today’s world. As the years go by, greed is becoming more present. “A generation ago, a three-car lifestyle would have been thought opulent; these days, it's often essential in suburban families with multiple earners and a teenager or two.” This can be supported by the fact that technology is constantly advancing. It’s human nature to want whatever will put them higher than others. Another big issue this article introduces is the reason why people think greed is actually a bad thing. I mean, greed is increasing the amount of money in our country. The article says that “greed is tied to the broken health care system, the degradation of the environment, the behavior of welfare recipients and sleazy acts by professionals and politicians. People believe the love of money is a large contributor to our moral decline.”

This article can easily be compared to Dollhouse because of the greed shown within the show. The clients are the perfect example for this. Why else would they order a preprogrammed piece of perfection? The greed level is so immense…but would it be considered any more than the average person? Think about it…if we had that much money, would the average person do the same thing? Like mentioned in the earlier paragraph, technology is constantly advancing. Dollhouse shows the greed level increasing because the level of technology the scientists use in this show is so high.

Blog 11

The article I decided to read today, What Choices Should We Be Able to Make about Designer Babies? A Citizens’ Jury of Young People in South Wales, observed the outlooks of young participants with the idea of “designing” their own babies. These observations showed that the participants found areas, such as preventing inherited medical conditions, where altering the baby’s genes would be beneficial, but they also found a level where baby designing was not acceptable, such as changing the sex of the baby. This was described in the article as being “purpose-specific.” This can be connected to Dollhouse with the idea that the scientists went to such an extreme level of altering a person. There was one handler that did not find the operation morally right. This article is wonderful because it holds plenty of information that displays the idea of ethics behind the science and technological advancements. It goes through a whole experiment with statistics of the types of people in the jury. The results came out to be the majority of the jury approving the capability of parents to “prevent inherited conditions from being passed on and to prevent serious suffering” (Iredale 211). There was one man in the group to disagree with this. “No-one in the UK should be allowed to scan and remove illness as illness is an important part of society… if we remove illness where do we end, removing everything we believe to be undesirable” (Iredale 211). This shows a different side of morals. He is the representation of science being totally immoral in this sense. In my view, there’s no real point where you can decipher if something is immoral in scientific view, since everyone has different morals.

Blog 10

Rasmussen, Larry. THE BROTHERS BONHOEFFER ON SCIENCE, MORALITY, AND THEOLOGY. 1st ed. Vol. 44. 2009. 97-113. Academic Search Complete. EBSCO. Web. 7 Apr. 2011

 

Furin, Timothy. Money as Tool, Money as Drug: The Biological Psychology of a Strong Incentive. 417th ed. 2008. 50-55. Academic Search Complete. EBSCO. Web. 7 Apr. 2011

 

Malherbe, Abraham. Godliness, Self-Sufficiency, Greed, and the Enjoyment of Wealth 1 Timothy 6:3-19 Part I. 4th ed. Vol. 52. 2008. 376-405. Web. Academic Search Complete. EBSCO. Web. 7 Apr. 2011

 

Sloan, Allan. Today's Lesson: Risk and Greed. 12th ed. Vol. 140. Newsweek, 2002. 43.Web. Academic Search Complete. EBSCO. Web. 7 Apr. 2011

 

Iredale, Rachel. What Choices Should We Be Able to Make about Designer Babies? A Citizens’ Jury of Young People in South Wales. 3rd ed. Vol. 9. 2006. 207-17. Web. 7 Apr. 2011

 

In my first stages of researching, I have been looking for material dealing with society's greed and what is debated as science is crossing the borders into immorality (in the views of society). There are so many arguments with morals versus science. I want my research to connect with Dollhouse’s use of science to use the bodies of others to program them however they want. I find a difference in finding technological advancements and using them to alter a person. I also want my research to indulge in the corruption within the clients’ morals. I don’t find it right for the rich being able to literally buy the perfect person. This shows an extreme amount of greed on their part. I hope to find articles that talk about today’s greed level, but I’m having a hard time finding articles. I’ve looked on the library’s online database and haven’t found much about greed, other than dealing with the markets.

Blog 9

The Distinction Between Science and Morality

The focus of my analytical research paper is to create a thorough depiction of each side’s composition and to develop an understanding of the honesty and corruption behind both sides. I’ve had an interest in this subject since ninth grade. My biology teacher was teaching about evolution, about the Big Bang Theory, and a very religious student stood up and debated about the matter for the whole class. The teacher tried to assure the student that there’s a capability of studying science while maintaining your religious beliefs. I also believe in this, but Dollhouse shows a much farther extremity than this example.

This argument can be displayed in pretty much every episode of Dollhouse. I like this argument because it goes behind the scenes of the dolls’ adventures and analyzes the people that run the organization. It also analyzes the people that use the dolls. The primary source I choose to utilize is Dollhouse’s first episode: “Ghost.” There are many quotes that go along with this argument, such as a point made by the investigator: “No one has everything they want. It's a survival pattern. Once you get what you want, you want something else. If you have everything you want, you want something else. Something more dangerous, more exciting. Something perfect.” This comes into play with this argument because religion teaches us that even though we sin, we should not have greed, a filthy desire. Even though the cases are much more extreme, with someone’s greed level being “I can’t find the perfect girl…so I’ll have someone program one for me.”, comparisons can still be made to today’s society with simple examples such as “oh, I really want that new car” or “I need the iphone 47”.

Blog 8

"High School is Hell"

This piece of writing analyzes how the writers and the creator of Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Joss Whedon, infuse a multitude of metaphors into the show to have the ability for a greater connection with the audience. It’s important to do this within a show because it keeps the audience hooked. Just like a movie where you get attached to the characters. Maybe it’s more for girls, but when you get hooked to a character in a chick flick and something bad happens to them, it’s hard not to cry…there’s a sense of feeling their pain. Like what if that happened to me?

I think Tracy Little’s points are very interesting in her metaphor analysis. “By contrast, in the Buffyverse the writers begin with the idea that teens struggle with social pressures, violence, and other social horrors. They then take those metaphors, used to speak about the realities of
life, and make them real. Finally the viewers are left with a show where the characters' worst horrors are not just the monsters they are fighting but the grim reality of such ultimate highschool horrors as parent-teacher night, not having a date for the prom, being made fun of in class, and not getting a spot on the cheerleading team.” This creates for a sense of humor because the characters find these school-related horrors are greater than their struggle with demons.

In the “Evolution of Metaphor” part of the analysis, we get to see how metaphor is used and developed throughout the seasons. In season one, we see that the metaphor is based around finding identities and places within a new school. Season two is all about relationships and how your significant other is the opposite of what you thought them to be. Season three is about how “graduation is like the end of the world.” Graduation is the end to the life of a senior in high school. This makes sense because at that point, we don’t know anything that lies beyond high school. It’s like a point of being pushed out into the real world.

Blog 7

For me, this episode really creates a convincing example of why people would go to the Dollhouse. From the past episodes, we’ve seen Echo being used as a sex toy, an art criminal, and a blind girl to investigate a cult. This week, Echo is used as a memory of Joel Mynor, a post-geek (the ones that get picked on at school, but then grow up to be extremely successful). Joel uses Echo as a memory of his wife who had passed away right before he could have showed her their new, perfect house. For Joel, this moment of showing his wife the new house was a symbol of their life turning around. His wife was the one carrying the two, but Joel hit it big with a technological advancement that led him to becoming a billionaire. He never got the satisfaction of seeing his wife’s reaction, which is where Echo comes into play. Every year, Joel achieves this satisfaction of being with Echo, which allows him to have the memory of being with his wife for a day.

Living in the real world versus living in the dream world.

Agent Ballard says to the client, Joel Mynor,  that he’s living in a fantasy world and that he himself is okay with living in the real world. “If you could have somebody be the perfect person, the moment you wish for that you know you’ll never get… and someone signed on to do that…to help you…I think, that could be okay. I think that could be maybe… beautiful.” In Joel’s case, I think Echo being a doll is beautiful. To be able to bring him this memory…but in all the other instances I’ve seen her in, she’s been ugly. This girl that said the quote above in the interview obviously wasn’t thinking about the thieves needing help…or the men that wanted a sex bunny. She is the naïve optimist. She is the one that is blind to all of the bad and corruption. She is the girl that I could consider myself as.

Blog 6

Brainwashing

An element I’ve found in this episode of Dollhouse is brainwashing. A parallel can be made between the Dollhouse boss, Adelle DeWitt, and the leader of the cult, Jonas Sparrow. DeWitt takes one of her empty-headed dolls and has the capability of putting any skill into them. Jonas Sparrow takes in strugglers and brainwashes them with this idea of cleansing through his own religious teachings. The ideas from both of these leaders can easily be considered morally wrong. Though there is completely nothing wrong with knowing and practicing beliefs, there is a problem when the corruption behind the operation exceeds the amount of good coming out of it. Once again, I’m thinking Sparrow is a character that’s trying to avoid his problems. He does this by making himself a religious leader. This can be shown in real life situations by seeing the priests that end up stealing from the church.

“Once any temptation is introduced, it will spread like a cancer and all will be infected.”

It’s interesting how DeWitt is trying to maintain a “pure” community by observing the “impurity” going on (aka what’s going on with Victor’s bottom half), but couldn’t care less about what she’s doing with the bodies of these people. She could back herself up and say how she’s helping these people get away from their problems, but really she only cares about the business and the money she gets out of it. What is the biggest thing that gets in the way of people’s morals? A lot of the time the answer is the immense amount of greed for money.

Blog 5

Behavior patterns beyond memory

This episode shows how the dolls are starting to do the same things over and over, such as sitting at the same table and eating lunch with the same people. “The wipes are clean. This goes deeper than memory, into instinctual survival patterns. Flocking, a whole mess of sparrows turning on a dime, uh, salmon trucking upstream…They’re a little bit bison.” This worries the scientists because they want every doll to act the same when their minds are wiped and placed back into the Dollhouse. Echo’s memory was totally wiped during her mission, which led to the criminal crew being stuck in the vault, awaiting for the cops to surround them. Sierra  Even though she was wiped from her job capabilities, she was able to translate directions given from someone else to try to escape from the vault. This shows human techniques of survival. In this state, she shows a sense of naivety, but she is still able to learn and feel. She ends up analyzing the pieces of art that surrounded her in the vault. They didn’t make her feel broken, like the other criminal said, but she had a feeling that something was missing from her. The idea that the information put into the dolls heads are only genetically stolen memories and not persona is greatened when Sierra becomes the same criminal as Echo.  I thought the ending of Dollhouse was interesting, because it seemed that Echo was starting to analyze things more from seeing her trace her face onto the mirror. Most dolls wouldn’t have done anything.

Blog 4

The life of an investigator.

Is finding the truth worth risking your life? The investigator in Dollhouse is really one of the only in the agency that fully believes the Dollhouse exists. You can see how he’s dedicated his whole life to it. There is no embarrassment when he sticks up for his beliefs to the other cops/ non-believers. This question is also explored in much literature. An example is the beloved story of 1984. In 1984, the society is full of “zombies” (people going with everything the government has to tell them), but there were a few that wanted to find that truth behind all of the corruption. You can intertwine this show with 1984 through the idea of a utopia, more in this case, a dystopia. The Dollhouse has created this fantasy land, where innocent “zombies” live and think everything is normal. What they don’t know is how screwed up the rulers of this hidden empire actually are. There are those that try to get past the guards and make there way into the access of information. Then again, there are those that see the corruption, but don’t do any justice by simply ignoring it. What is better? To search for the truth and possibly be killed? Or to stay in that ignorant stage? There are other factors in this also. If I had a family, I would not be able to bring myself to look for the truth and putting my family’s health into harm. It takes such a strong person to actually act. Just imagine the people who are killed for practicing their own religious beliefs against their government.