Week 6 Why We Crave Horror Movies

Summary: In this essay Stephen King proposes three causes for why people crave horror movies. One reason is that people go to horror movies is to prove they can sit through it and are not afraid to watch such types of movies. Another reason people go to watch horror movies is to reassure themselves that they are normal. His final reason is that people enjoy seeing others in danger. He starts of the essay by comparing horror movies to roller coasters. People ride roller coasters to prove that they have the courage to sit through it just like horror movies. He also goes to on to explain that people “crave” horror movies to manage their uncivilized emotions of fear, violence, and aggression. He concludes the essay by saying that horror movies appeal to the “worst in us.” Everyone can, according to King, relate to horror movies.

Opinion: This essay was different. I was surprised by the reasons he gave about why people watch horror movies. I was also surprised about the comparisons he made. But I think it is true that people watch scary movies to say that they can sit through them. I liked the comparison he made to roller coasters because everyone can relate to roller coasters that have scared them. I think its true that he claims people watch horror movies because they want to become children again. It brings out the inner kid in them. The essay went off into tangents that I didn't even expect.

Week 5 Debates and Torture

I thought the debates were interesting. People did a good job on defending their positions. The issue about Abortion came up the most often. Personally, I think that if the parents can’t support the child then they shouldn’t bring the child into this world. People say that it is necessary that the parents live with the consequences of their stupidity but why should an innocent life suffer. The baby won’t have a decent home to live in and won’t have a loving caring family to take care of it. It is true that you can place the baby in an adoption agency but the agencies are filling up. They are becoming overcrowded because people are not adopting many children. The parents will live with the consequences of their stupidity by the grief they will feel for killing the life of an innocent human being.
Another topic I liked was the one about high schools not offering kids good food to eat so children are getting fat. My high school tried to bring in healthy food and cut down on the sodas and change the chips to baked but it failed because they weren’t bringing in as much money with the healthy food. The school has to make money as well and if it means offering unhealthy food then that is what they are going to do. Once in high school kids have the capability of making their own decisions. They know if what they are eating is good for them or not. They are almost adults and must take responsibility for their actions.

Torture: The essay on torture was pretty interesting. Mirko Bagaric, argues that torture is necessary. He says that torture is necessary in order to save the life of any innocent human being. He compares torture to self-defense, claiming that if someone is held hostage, the police have the right to kill them right then and there in order to save the life of the person taken hostage. He also gives objections against the argument of torture such as if torture is used the situations will increase. His second objection is that torture will dehumanize society and finally that people can’t be certain that torturing a person will result in us saving a life. He claims that if people torture wrongdoers then they will take responsibility for their actions.

Week 4 Children Need to Play, Sticks and Stones, Working at McDonalds

Children Need to Play, Not Compete: In this essay, Jessica Statsky is arguing that competition is “neither satisfying nor beneficial to children.” I personally don’t think this is true. I play tennis and I am very competitive because I hate to lose. But when I lose I use that emotion to work harder and improve my game. My coach is also very competitive so he will do his best to prepare the team for matches the best he can but ultimately it’s our job to go out there and play. He will yell at us if we are doing something wrong but it’s only to make us better. I also think that if you are playing a team sport it’s not fair for the other players who want to win if your attitude is laid back. If you are the type of person who is playing “for fun” and there are players who want to win it’s not fair. Statsky brings up the point that if kids are competitive and they lose they will have psychological problems, which is true but it also helps build character. It teaches kids that life isn’t perfect, that you will win some and lose some but you shouldn’t use that as a reason to give up.

Sticks and Stones and Sports Team Names: I didn’t really see the point in this essay. I have never actually thought about the name of a sports team. Richard Estrada believes that naming sports teams for ethnic groups is detrimental. His two reasons are it treats people like team mascots and it singles out a politically weak group. One argument he claims is that ethnic group leaders are too inclined to cry wolf in alleging racial insensitivity. I don’t think anyone really cares about the names of sports team. I think they are more interested in how they play and how well they are doing during their season.

Working at McDonald’s: When I started reading this story I thought Amitai Etzioni was going to talk about how bad McDonalds is for kids because they will get fat. I think it would have been more interesting to read about how healthy McDonalds is as opposed to reading about jobs teenagers have. I have never actually worked so I don’t have any personal experiences but I think it is good for people to work while in high school. Because not only are they making cash but it also looks good on college application. It looks good that the kid is able to do well in school while working.

Week 3 Perfect Crime, Church-State, No Child Left Behind

Perfect Crime: I didn’t really like this essay. Cheung tries to explain both sides of Napster. He tries to define words/phrases such as file sharing, stealing, downloading, theft, and intellectual property. The one part of the essay that I liked was rhetorical questions he asked in the middle of the essay. If you found yourself humming a song or singing it aloud considered stealing? He does a good job of explaining both sides of the argument and not taking a position on it. In his conclusion he summarizes the main points of disagreement and what he predicts will happen in the future.

Church-State: This essay just bored me. It started of with past history about how the “religion of the state was the religion of its ruler.” Feldman tries to explain both sides of the problem. He also explains some common ground between the different arguments. He states, “despite the differences, each approach, values evangelicalism and legal secularism, is trying to come to terms with the same fundamental tension in American life.” This is important because not only does he provide examples to explain the different sides of the argument but also find areas where both sides agree on the issue.

No Child Left Behind: I like this essay only because the author uses Wikipedia. All through school, whenever we had to write essays using outside sources, teachers always told us never to use Wikipedia because it was not reliable. This author broke the rules and went ahead and used the dreaded Wikipedia. In this essay, she presents both sides of the argument behind the school systems. But they both agree that progress must be made to help improve the quality of the school’s test scores. In her conclusion she says that only “time will tell whether No Child Left Behind is viewed as an ‘historic initiative’… or as ‘just an empty promise.’”

In our opposing positions essay, we have to present two sides of the argument. We have to write an unbiased and opinionated paper about our topic. In our conclusion we are not allowed to take a side on the issue. We have to put all the facts on the paper for the reader to make their own decision. On our next paper we will be able to pick a side and argue why that is the better of the two sides.

Week 2 Cannibalism, Love, Born to be Happy

Cannibalism: This story was really strange. How does one justify that it is wrong to eat humans but it is alright to eat animals. Animals are living things as well, so why should they suffer because of human’s selfish reasons? In the story, Ngo explains three different types of cannibalism: survival, dietary and religious and ritual cannibalisms. He gives specific examples for each type of cannibalism. His examples include the Vietnam War, California-bound Donner Party, and examples with societies (Miyanmin, Leopard, and Alligator). In the conclusion, Ngo includes the statement that “It is possible… that our distant-past ancestors were cannibals.” This statement makes the reader wonder if this story is actually true and if it affects them.

Love: I thought this story was really boring. Toufexis tried to portray love as a neuro-chemical process. She explained the many different chemicals involved. She goes on to explain the difference between the four year itch and the seven year itch. She also explains the three different stages of love: imprinting, attraction and attachment. She has many different sources throughout her paper such as Dracula, Marilyn Monroe and a professor at Loyola Marymount University in Los Angeles. She also tries to explain love as a biological process in which evolution plays a major role.

Born to be Happy: In this essay, Friedman does a good job of explaining his point. He does a good job of explaining all the terms. He mentions hyperthymia, a disease that makes someone be happy all the time. Even when bad things happen they have the strength to remain happy because they feel things could be worse. On the other hand, there are people who are always upset and in a bad mood, this is diagnosed as dysthymia. He goes on to explain that people have taken drugs to avoid any extreme moods.

In my concept essay, I will write about the different types of intelligences. I will discuss the three most common ones, bodily-kinesthetic, logical-mathematical, and verbal-linguistic. I will explain that intelligence is not determined by how well you do on tests because there are many different types of intelligences. I will also include examples of different well known people who have each of the different types of intelligences.