response to 1st columbus question

Every building has their own function. House for living, church for religion, school for learning... Throughout history, people decorate only important buildings. The kings or queens always have the most magnificent buildings because of their superior positions. The reason most prisons are plain and undecorated is because prisoners are generally disrespected. But nowadays, buildings are decorated to beautify the society. Everyone wants their own house to be pretty. Function is important but aesthetic is also important today. Most people want to visit a beautiful country or town instead of a plain one. Prison is still one part of a city. The exterior of a prison is important to the society as a whole. The society and culture today made aesthetics as important as functions. Architectures are like commercials. Instead of stating the facts about a product, people tend to make the commercial artistic and interesting. The aesthetic side of something is more attractive to people than plan facts or functions.
About Ben's horse rock or horse sculpture. I found myself more attracted by horse rock. There are many many different horse sculptures. It is very common. A sculptor can make a horse sculpture in like a week. But the formation of a horse rock can be up to hundreds of years. Things that's common are usually less attractive than things that's rare. For example, if I have 100 cookies and 1 chocolate. I would pay more attention to the chocolate even if i like cookies more.

Explanation through Atlas Shrugged

Aristole's law of identity has no counterexamples. We can take all class trying to invent some random creative examples that try to prove that "A is NOT A", but it won't happen. I think that a lot of people don't really understand the law and how simple it really is (though one of the most important laws of knowledge). I'm almost finished with the novel Atlas Shurgged (SOOOO GOOD!..by Ayn Rand, creator of the philosophy of Objectivism), and as I was reading it last night, I came across a paragraph that described Aristotle's law perfectly. it helped me to understand-try to object to the law after reading this. The plot's reallyyyyy complicated, but here, the speaker is John Galt, and he's giving a speech to the whole country (which is ready to crash) broadcasted on the radio:

"To exist is to be something, as distinguished from the nothing of non-existence, it is to be an entity of a specific nature made of specific attributes. Centuries ago, the man who was--no matter what his errors--the greatest of your philosophers, has stated the formula defining the concept of existence and the rule of all knowledge: A is A. A thing is itself. You have never grasped the meaning of his statement. I am here to complete it: Existence is Identity, Consciousness is Identification.
"Whatever you choose to consider, be it an object, an attribute, or an action, the law of identity remains the same. A leaf cannot be a stone at the same time, it cannot be all red and all green at the same time, it cannot freeze and burn at the same time. A is A. Or, if you wish it stated in simpler language: You cannot have your cake and eat it, too."

Intentionality in Art

One interesting idea introduced in Cpt. Perkins' posts was the intentionality of art and its implications. What effects are created by art created with intention that are absent in art unintentionally? To frame the question in concrete terms, let's consider two objects: Horse Sculpture and Horse Rock. Horse Sculpture was created by a respected artist who carved every last detail with great planning and foresight as to their implications. Horse Rock was a naturally occurring phenomenon created randomly by erosion and weathering. The two are identical.
Is Horse Sculpture more powerful (in terms of effect on the viewer) than Horse Rock?
I say yes, it is, because the artist's intentions and reasons create a transactional (woot Lyday) relationship with the viewer. The Horse Sculpture serves as a means of communication of the artist's ideas to the viewer.
Horse Sculpture accomplishes more than simply communication. This communication inspires thought and "a pause". But as one passes Horse Sculpture, it may as well be Horse Rock. The inspiration and pause of Horse Sculpture are indistinguishable from those caused by Horse Rock. However, the communication is not part of the experience of viewing Horse Rock.
This relates very well to the scenario of observing the architecture of Columbus as a resident. If simply observed, the architecture may as well be naturally occurring, because without any information about its creator, communication is not established. Yet if the same building is observed with respect to its creator's intention in making it, communication is established and the understanding between sculptor and viewer is strengthened.
Note: I use "intentionality" in reference to what the architect/artist intended in the creation of the building/piece. Mr. P uses "intentionality" in reference to city planning, as well as creation of individual structures. Intentionality takes a role in city planning as to the arrangement of the buildings, but also in a different sense as "why bother".
To be edited, this is a bit jumbled.

How do I know time?

This puzzles me: If I place a treadmill in the back of a truck moving 25 mph and stand on it without turning it on, I and the treadmill would also be moving at 25 mph. Yet, if I turned the treadmill on at normal human gait (3 mph) and began walking, I would be moving at both 3 mph and 25 mph. Also, the structure of treadmill would be moving at 25 mph, but the tread would be moving at 3 mph in reverse and simultaneously 25 mph forward. I, the truck and the treadmill are also moving at the rate of the rotation of the Earth, which means we're moving at three different speeds. If I'm moving opposite of the rotation of the Earth, we're now moving at four different speeds. Thus, it seems I can arrive at my destination at four different times. I don't even want to contemplate what happens when I consider the expansion of the universe.

To answer the first question on columbus---I think its obvious that the beauty/artistic element of a building is secondary to its functionality. whats the use of a pretty prison if it can't keep convicts inside? The question of why art impresses us/affects us is a really good one. Why did we all think the huge house with the gardens was pretty? is there a definition of what's beautiful and what's not? For me, it's HOW it was made and how UNIQUE it is. Its impressive because men made it; if it were mass produced at a factory by machines, it wouldn't be impressive or unique, and therefore not have much appeal, in my opinion. Old houses or other old pieces of art are impressive because we ASSOCIATE them with the past, which many people admire. Maybe we can't say that anything's truly "beautiful" on its own----because what is "beauty" anyways? we can't define it because it differs so much from person to person. maybe it's the feelings and ideas the object represents in our past or memories that's beautiful

Columbus: The Large

The final of my three posts about our trip to Columbus touches on the large vision of the city, and in so doing reflects to my original post, Columbus: The Intentional. In addition to creating an environment that can inspire personal reflection and creativity, the city leaders have clear been led by notions of connection. One architect would look at other buildings and try to design another that complemented the surrounding area. Nowhere could you find lock-step uniformity, yet everywhere you could see complementarity, and this seemed to be part of a larger vision for the entire city. The focus of city leaders through the years has unquestionably been forward and outward...forward to the future and outward to other people, designers, aspects of the city, etc.

Where do you see the Columbus vision reflected or decidedly not reflected in Indianapolis, in surrounding communities, elsewhere in Indiana, or in the United States? What kind of leadership is required to cast and realize such vision? What kind of citizenry is required to support and not to hinder such efforts?

Columbus: The Small

Some of these thoughts will tie into the previous post on Columbus: The Intentional. I was quite taken by the off-center design of the one church we visited, especially the rendering of the Jerusalem cross on the side. A traditional Jerusalem Cross looks like this:

On this particular church, however, the architect had embedded the cross into the brick in such a way that parts of it stood out in relief, while others were recessed into the wall. This was absolutely unnecessary. In fact, so far was this detail from being necessary that it causes us to ask the questions, "Why did he do it? What is the effect of such design? How did he achieve a recognizable design with a decidely different structure?"

It is entirely possible, and indeed probable for most locals for whom familiarity has no doubt bred a certain degree of oblivious contempt, that some people can walk past this and other of the architectural features throughout town and give them not a moment's thought. But for others, and occasionally even for the jaded, such subtleties can arrest the hurly-burly momentum of life.

They can give us a pause to reflect, to think, to be inspired, to be human.

And so I end this post by asking, what slows you down and causes you to ponder? From where do you draw your quiet inspiration? Try looking at the usual paths of your life...you home, your neighborhood, your ways to and from frequent destinations...with the intention of seeking inspiration. What do you find?

Columbus: Being Intentional

What struck me as profoundly as some of the architecture we saw, if not more so, was the intentionality and foresightedness of the city leaders to encourage such design innovations. Every town must have certain buildings, e.g. a police station, a jail, a school, a library. So much of the time we build purely for function and give little if any thought to the aesthetics of the building and the area around it. Yet Columbus has designed even its most practical buildings with an intentionality toward the overall vision of the city.

Some would argue that this is a waste...a waste of money and a waste of time. Why bother with an artistic jail?

Yet certain areas have always seemed to be fertile ground for the advancement of human thought and expression. Athens, Greece, was a hotbed of intellectual and creative achievement, yet Podunkville, Namethestate, was not. There is something to the design of certain places that seems to lead to or invite further creativity.

So I end this first of three posts on Columbus with the following: Why bother with an artistic jail? Should city planners give thought to aesthetics along with functional needs? Where do you find yourself inspired, e.g. in nature, in certain man-made locations, and why?

Tests are important

Tests and quizzes are created by higher authorities and they are made for a reason. Even though tests and quizzes can not measure the amount of knowledge of someone exactly. They are by far, the best and most practical way. Teachers mixes different kinds of tests (multiple choice, filling the blanks, free response, etc)together, to make the test more practical. So that it can measure students' knowledge more accurately. Students can guess on their tests and get good grades, but usually, they have to know their materials to pass. One can not always guesses and gets perfect. Tests are directly over what students learned everyday. So it also serves as reading checks or homework checks for teachers. Tests can check people's understanding of new knowledge, and correct misunderstanding. There need to be a standard for all students. If there is no standardized way to measure knowledge, there is no point of school. Beside personal knowledge, most knowledge are gained from learning (experiences, authority, etc.). These knowledge are mostly facts. For example, 2+2=4, there are no other personal ways to interpret that. If there is no test, teachers won't know if you understood this. Tests are important.

schools and knowledge

the school systems around the country and the world have individually decided on what they believe students should learn and should be able to know in order for them to graduate. A highly successful student in the school system is supposed to get an "A." The grading scale is merely a way of measuring how much a student has been able to temporarily memorize, or in some cases, guess the right answer. Do the grades that a student is given a measurment of their intelligence or of knowledge that they have aquried? Schools in the United States are now offering higher level classes. Middle school students are now taking high school classes, and high school students are now taking college level classes. Students have become obsessed with their rankings and their GPA's and have forgotten the primary reason why they go to school, to learn.

Knowlege and intelligence

oh, i want to pose a question to anyone on the blog...... what are your opinions about the difference between knowledge and intelligence????

objective v subjective

I agree with chung in questioning why we are learning what we are learning.....and why the "authority" of knowledge determines that an educated person should have a certain body of memorized facts and information ready to be regurgitated at any given moment....i also think that knowledge and the way we test it (through quizzes, tests, etc) has certain limitations because factual knowledge often coincides with the opinions of the person answering th questions.....like on the quiz, although i believe that i understand the concepts behind the "ways of knowing" i felt that some of the multiple choice questions would be better answered in a free response form because i could support my answer with my own opinions and my own argument.

To address Mr. Perkin's question on how he should present our "knowledge" to another person or how that person would be adequately able to determine our own grasp of the concept matter...... i think for another person( or college, etc) to be even close to grasping an individual's amount of knowledge...they would have to perform a 1 on 1 interview...andthat is so time consuming, that not enough questions could be even asked to make an accurate inference on someone else's amount of knowledge. I feel like teachers design tests in a way to shorten this process...and the grades (from a conglomeration of assignments to demonstrate our wide variety of ways to PRESENT our knowledge) are somehow supposed to reflect how much we have learned.....but really do they reflect the knowlegde i've obtained? i think they more reflect the way i can manipulate the "facts" and information that my teacher has given me into a way that pleases the grader enough to give me an acceptable grade???
so i guess i think being too objective is bad in someregards...but being too subjective often skews how much knowledge an individual really has....hmmm.

PRESERVING THE OL' NATURALE

badger me if im wrong or what not, but isn't testing just another form of critiquing an individual on what they HAVE to KNOW (forced knowledge).... why should we be critique upon our individual perceptions of what is knowledge and what is not.... is it fair for us to go around and critiquing how people perceive their lives?...why not go around the corner and ask the local bum personal questions of why his task involves sitting by the curb, scavenging the leftovers of society....testing is exactly the same....I believe we should lose the very idea of "testing," rather let the individual perceives what he perceives.. is it wrong to believe in the things not in the textbooks publish by people you don't even know? Should knowledge not be a choice...why should we share and/or be judged upon our perceptions if all we get in the end is a bat striked at our faces and our ideas shoved in the mud.... knowledge should stay abstract and become something that should be personally perceive rather than something that is forced upon the individual to perceive...and by allowing the so called "testing," knowledge becomes more and more concrete losing its true purpose.......losing its aesthetic and abstract nature

What Way of Knowing Should I Have Used to Assess Your Knowledge of Ways of Knowing?

Okay, you just finished a quiz that was part matching, part multiple choice, with a free response extra credit question. Supposedly that quiz allows me to know how well you understand the basic ways of knowing. It also provides me with evidence should anyone else want proof of my assessment that "Student A has a strong grasp of this material," or "Student B does not quite understand yet."

Was this the best way for me to know what I wanted to know about you? Why or why not? If not, what would have been a better way for me to get at this information about you?

Was this the best way for me to provide evidence for someone else wanting to know my justification for my assessment of you? Why or why not? If not, what would have been a better way of obtaining such evidence?

Should the need to provide evidence to outside inquirers, such as your parents, counsellors, college admission officers, etc., be a consideration as a teacher designs assessments for a class? Why or why not?

OHH and along with what ali said...i completely agree. i often dislike emotion as a 'way of knowing"...but i can have problems with using it myself as well. hating a certain political figure just because they're affiliated with a certain party or because of popular opinion is not an incredibly respectable opinion. i can't STAND people that say "i hate ----" when they can't give ANY reason at all why they hate him/her. i don't care if i disagree with you, but give your reasons and support your argument. think. then you'll have my respect, and probably everybody else's. so many people don't think anymore for themselves and i think it's kind of concerning.

sooo..this is completely unrelated to anything anyone has said on here. BUT...just as my first posttt ( i finally figured this out) i have to say is that i think this class will be really challenging for me just because of what i believe and the way that i think. I've never really thought that philosophy was that interesting...and i'm not trying to offend anyone (especially mr. perkins!) when i say that theory of knowledge hasn't captured my own interests yet. i'm having a little bit of trouble understanding the value of discussing what common sense and other "knowledge terms" are because, simply stated, i don't see the point....yet. i'd rather spend time discussing politics or economics or something more tangible than "how we know what we know." i'm more of a rational, logical thinker and often have trouble "thinking outside the box", which is basically the goal of this whole class. so i dont know if anyone else is feeling apprehensive yet????! but i certainly am! i know this class will definitely open my mind up to things i've never thought of before and teach me how to think, which in my opinion is the greatest power of man YEAHHHH...but a power that is often forgotten or criticized. and that will definitely be a good thing.

still uncertain about knowing...

This last Friday, August 31, we grouped up in pairs to decide which 2 methods of knowing were the "best" for knowing.
My partner and I came up with Reason and Empiricism. As we went around the classroom stating our different choices, I would listen to his or her reasoning, but then I would still question how they knew how to be so certain that they had chosen the best answer. Yes, this did have lots to do with opinion, but people started to talk and defend their choices with a "proven-like" certainty. HOW DO YOU KNOW??? I try to think about these knowledge obtaining concepts as something concrete but it hurts my head because it goes nowhere. I follow along in class accepting the transitions to new topics; however, it disturbs me that nothing is really settled. No class has ever had me in this puzzled way. Certainty is my hardest concept to grasp. I am so accustomed to scientific exactness in other classes that TOK bothers me. For example, all that I have just said can't be taken seriously because, how do you know that these words mean what they are understood to mean...i say, they just do because im going to be lazy and say they do.
My mind keeps on spinning, and it is uncomfortable, but it is one of the most interesting areas of study that I have ever done. So, I am on the edge of my seat awaiting more mind boggling concepts in this class.