American Education

    In the article Education and the Proliferation of New (Old) Concepts the author argued that the education that the children of America are receiving is setting them up for corporate America. The author's perception of American education is that the students are currently being trained for an economic role in society, based off of the new educational project of this country. My response to the author is, "Is this necessarily a bad thing?"  

      One of the problems that currently exist in the public education system is that students are learning all the basic fundamentals to every subject but are not getting any hands on work of applying the information they are receiving. Students are taught a lot of things that seem to have no real world meaning which is pointless. Some may find some of this information necessary, but lets be honest, it is not. Currently there is a lot of fluff that just is not necessary to be teaching our students, because everyone needs to remember that students will not retain everything they are taught, that is just the way it is.

      Paul Theobald and Hibajene Shandomo both make a lucid summary of the way the current education system is doing. They say, "one might also hear a resurgence of concepts advanced many decades ago, things like project-based learning, social reconstructionism, community-based curriculum and much more." What good is a community-based curriculum? In the real world there is no need for knowing what has happened in your community and what is going on. The whole purpose of a education is for students to learn ideas and the key concepts of things. It is not the state's responsibility to teach them what has been going on in the local community, that is just a waste of tax payer money. If parents find it an essential for their kid to know about whats going on locally then it should be their duty to teach them that.

        The problems that I continue to read occurring in the world disturb me to no end. I am sick and tired of all the crap that people do to the environment all in the name of humans. The idea that a human can think, "i get what I want" is just wrong on every level. What our population is doing to our harvest of crops and animals should not be happening. It is wrong from an ethics, a moral, and a health stand point. A new process of maintaining our food supply must be found.
         Philosophy is one of the most interesting subjects an individual can study; it deals with the questions of human mind and questioning their importance and value to the world. Ethics and philosophy hold a close relationship, due to the fact the both pertain to the importance of figuring out whats right and whats wrong. Today people need to ask themselves if genetically modifying foods is the best answer. My environmental science professor- Dr. Bruck- was telling the class the other day the dangers of genetically modifying food. The other day there was a farmer that had his chickens babies come out mutated with their body parts where they should not be. He said this farmer was arrested for not carefully using the process right. If genetically modifying foods can do this to an organisms offspring imagine the effects it can create on the human population.
          Another issue that humans do not seem to understand is the moral duty that is owed to the organisms that surround them. There are 8 billion humans and 19 billion chickens in the world. Many would look at this statistic and say "great", but they do not seem to ask why there is 19 billion chickens. Humans have been drugging them and forcing them to grow and reproduce at uncanny rates which can be considered animal cruelty. It is undoubtedly unfair that humans do this for their benefit.
           Eventually there will come a time where human ways will bring chaos to the world whether it be through food, global warming, or nuclear terror. As a race, we must make our duty to ensure that we treat the world as the responsible, intelligent species that we are. It is time to realize the problems that currently face the world and attack them before its too late.

Natural gas Fracking

Alex Ruth

3/1/2012

Eng 101

Dr. Hill Taylor

Synthesis

            In Wyoming there is a huge issue of natural gas fracking affecting the water supply of the local communities. After reading all the information in the article I felt a sense of serious disturbance; if companies, like EnCana, can go around in a reckless manner and not be punished or controlled for their wrong doings then I can be in just as much danger as the people of the communities in Wyoming. When a community’s water supply is contaminated there is a huge question over the risk of the people’s health. Water contamination has been known to cause serious problems such as cancer. If the government cannot protect the people, control reckless companies, and limit environmental hazards then who will?

            The people of Wyoming are no different than the people of any other state. They are just looking to live their lives in peace just like anyone else. When drilling companies such as EnCana came in, their lives became in danger of serious health risks. The people had no say in what the company’s boundaries were and could not control the situation at all. The people were nothing more than a group of gazelle in a field of lions. Water is one of the few things in life that are required to live, and when companies contaminate the water they are putting many people’s lives at risk. In a world where people are not in control over the actions of organizations, such as companies in this case, then it is the job of the government to control and protect the interests and safety of the people.

            The government holds the greatest responsibility to the people. The government’s purpose is to serve and protect the rights of all of the country’s civilians. With all of the concern over politics of who’s elected and whose not creates a fog over the government’s ability to do the right thing at all times. Often, the people that make up the government only have their interest kept in mind instead of the people, and in this case this seems to be the problem. In the article made by The Scientific American, the people of congress completely shut down the science and finding found by the EPA and one congressman stated that they were deeply offended over their findings. Deeply offended! Science is science, fact cannot be changed. Why would one be offended over their findings? How does it play an effect in that congressman’s life? Is he in any way connected to the company under attack, and if so why? The people of the government do not always have their priorities in the right place, which can obviously be seen in this instance.

            Natural gas drilling and transporting needs to be made sure it is done in a safe manner in which no-one’s health is at risk. Coming up with an alternative solution over the one that currently exists is not a problem to the company just maybe an inconvenience. In any company the number one concern should always be safety no matter what.