"9/11" by Susan Sontag

1. Is the United States really to blame for what happened on September 11, 2001?
2. Why can we not know about certain acts of terrorism going on in the world?
3. If we are to blame, who exactly should be blamed and why?


What really caught my attention in this article was where Sontag says, "...America has brought this horror upon itself, that America itself is, in part, to blame for the deaths of these thousands upon it's own territory...." This got me to thinking that if we are to blame for what happened to New York on Septemeber 11, then does that mean that every attack by us on other countries can be blamed on those ccountries, not on us? I agree with Sontag when she says that putting the blame on America is morally obscene. I do not believe that we asked to have thousands of innocent people killed. The most logical people to blame for 9/11 are the ones who actually did it. There are other ways to proceed other than mass murder, that would only invite retaliation and just make things worse. Some people may argue that the U.S. government is to blame because they failed to keep their eye out on our enemies, however, I do not think that the U.S. government would kill thousands of its own people just to start a war. It is even said that Bush and Clinton knew that hijackers were likely to strike the U.S. but I believe that if they had any little clue that such an event would occur, they would have done everything in their power to prevent it from actually happening. I do believe that we could use some more security and look out on our enemies, but I do not think that the U.S. can be blamed for such an immoral attack.

Commentary for Natasha Marsh

Nicole Marsh
Mr. Brown
English 1B
26 February 2013

Commentary #1 for Natasha Marsh

 



I thought her article was well written and that the thesis of the article was clearly stated in the first paragraph and throughout the essay. However, I think she could use some real life examples in her essay to help get her point across more clearly. By using the real life examples, it will allow her readers to be able to connect with her on a more person level. I thought she did a good job on looking at other people’s points of views but giving reasons as to why she disagrees to them. I also thought the essay flowed really well and didn't jump around to random topics. One little spelling mistake I noticed was in the fifth paragraph, second sentence, "...they either eave the discussion or change..." I think that "eave" should have been "leave." Maybe the writer should go more into detail about how the lack of individuality due to the internet is affecting the way society functions. Also, for the refutation paragraph maybe she could add some evidence supporting the opposite points of views. Overall though I thought it was a well written article and covered the topic nicely.

Essay #1

Nicole Marsh  

Mr. Brown                                                                                         

English 1B

17 February 2013

Positive Effects of Modern Technology

            There is much debate going on over whether or not we will slowly lose our ability to interact with each other on a personal level due to all the technology that is now available. So much technology is accessible to us in this day and age that is helpful to us, rather than hurtful. Some people may argue that technology is taking over our lives and consuming our minds, however, they may not be looking at all the positive attributes is has to offer the world. Therefore, I disagree that we are losing our ability to interact on a personal level due to technology; instead I believe that it is helping us in countless ways. Technology is now becoming the most popular means of communication throughout the world.

            To start off, technology, such as a cell phone or e-mail, allows us to communicate with individuals that we may not be able to connect with otherwise. For example, when my boyfriend was deployed overseas, we were able to stay in contact only through e-mail. Without that form of technology, many people would lose contact with their loved ones. Whether you’re on the next street over, next state over, or even on the other side of the country, technology allows us to keep our personal relationships intact. In other words, it has brought distant places and people even closer to us.

            With technology advancing every day, it only gives us more advantages rather than disadvantages. Getting to know someone via cell phone or internet is becoming more of the norm. Social websites and dating sites are becoming more and more popular. They allow people all over the world to come in contact with others that would otherwise not have been possible. Being able to interact with someone on a personal level also depends on the person. Just because they use a cell phone does not mean that they also cannot communicate on a personal level as well. If someone decides to not connect with others on that level, then who are we to judge them? After all, it is their choice.

            The benefits of cell phones and internet have helped us in more ways than it has hurt us. It has made it easier to keep in contact with old friends and family around the world. Although some individuals may argue that is does interfere with our ability to interact on a more person level, I believe that it actually strengthens our relationships because it allows us to keep in contact with anyone, anywhere, anytime. How other people choose to communicate is up to them, it has no effect on the way you personally live.

            Despite all the advantages from technology, some people still argue that we are losing our ability to interact on a personal level. Society is becoming more and more dependent on technology. “It’s ironic that even though we have lunch with our family, we’re busy browsing our Blackberries,” (Veethi Telanq). I agree with this statement one-hundred percent.  I work in a restaurant and all too often when I greet a table and take down their order, I see that the children have cell phones glued to their hands playing games and texting or even have headphones in their ears, tuning out the rest of the world. I believe that going out to dinner with your family should be a time where the family can bond with each other, not block each other out. I do agree that in this case it does interfere with how we interact on a personal level, however, if the parents were strongly against their children having a cell phone at the dinner table, they can easily take it away from them.

            In conclusion, there are many positive effects of modern technology. I believe that regardless, we need technology in order to communicate. Even with cell phones, in a way we can still communicate on a personal level via video chatting such as Skype and Face Time. Many people can disagree, however, they are not looking at the bigger picture and how useful this form of technology can be to society and how important is actually is.

"Believe Me, It's Torture" by Christopher Hitchens

1. Is waterboarding a useful form of punishment?
2. What kinds of crimes would be punished using waterboarding?
3. Is waterboarding more useful than other types of punishments?

While reading Christopher Hitchens "Believe Me, It's torture" article, question number one kept popping into my head. Torture has always played a roll in federal, local, or state policy. I believe that there are betters ways to punish someone than using this method of waterboarding. As Hitchens mentioned in his article, "it may be a means of extracting information, but it is also a means of extracting junk information." This got me thinking that no matter what the punishment, people will say anything to stop the torture, whether it be the truth or if it is false. I believe that drowning someone for a confession is not the right way to get this information therefore I believe that this form of torture is not justified. I do, however, think that in certain situations, torture may be a useful tool, just not in this form. For example, I believe that the death chair is a fair punishment to someone who was given a death sentence, but as for just trying to get information out of someone about a crime, I believe that there are better ways of going about that. Things such as interrogation rooms or even maybe a few nights in jail can get a person to talk just the same as waterboarding may.

Lady Gaga and the Death of Sex

1. Can you really judge someone based on how they dress and look?
2. Is Lady Gaga setting a bad example for kids in our generation?
3. Is it fair to compare Gaga to those of older generations?


I am personally not a fan of Lady Gaga but I found this article to be a little harsh. Can you really judge someone based on how they look and dress? My opinion is no. It is like the saying, "you can't judge a book by its cover." She may have a different sense of style but it does not make her any less of a good person. Although I agree that she does dress provocatively in some cases, but what singer or performer doesn't? I believe that by having more outrageous costumes on stage it draws more attention and makes her fans more intrigued by her. In fact, it has probably made her more successful. If people don't like the way that she dresses or the lyrics she sings, they are not being forced to listen to her and attend her concerts. If she wants to get weird tattoos, who are we to judge? It is her body. She is the one who has to live with them. Although I disagree with that part of the article, I do agree with Camille Paglia when she says that her lyrics are nonsense yet you can't get them out of your head because they are catchy. Maybe the reason she is loved by many is not because of her catchy lyrics, but because of her unusual sense of style and her exciting yet odd performances. Paglia pretty much says that Lady Gaga is doing wrong, but in 2009 she sold over 9.8 million singles worldwide and was nominated for Best Song of the Year. So if you ask me, I would say that she is obviously doing something right. Who knows, maybe it is because of her style and unusual music videos, performances, and nonsense lyrics that make her a well known artist throughout the world.

A Marketplace of Echoes?

1. Is the Internet making us more diverse or less diverse?
2. Can being too diverse have a negative effect on society and the way we think?
3. Is too much diversity a good thing or a bad thing?

While reading Weinbergers "A Marketplace of Echoes," question number three was going through my head the entire time. I believe that in some cases, too much diversity can be a good thing. Diversity allows us to be open-minded to other people's opinions. It does not only involve mixing all sorts of races and different genders together, but it also integrates cultures and different beliefs. We are constantly being exposed to other peoples point of views, making us more curious and willing to learn. In the article, Weinberger says, "...we don't have to spend much time on the Net to come to the sad conclusion that simply as a matter of fact, we're not ever going to learn to talk together reasonably and come to a single conclusion. We are going to disagree about everything." I agree with this statement entirely because different opinions do cause arguments. However, I do not necessarily believe that that is a bad thing. People can argue their opinions freely but they are just that, opinions. They are not necessarily true facts. I believe it opens up our minds and creates a willingness to learn for some people.

Is Google Making Us Stupid

Is Google Making Us Stupid by Nicholas Carr

Question One- How does the Internet effect the way we read?

Question Two- Does reading online really effect the way we think?

Question Three- Could the Internet actually be making us smarter?

Does reading online really effect the way we think?

In Nicholas Carr's article "Is Google Making Us Stupid" he argues that the Internet effects our cognition and talks about the way it is reshaping our brains. Although I do agree with some statements in his article, I disagree that the Internet can have this type of effect on us. What we read online is information that can also be available in the library so I do not see a difference between reading it on screen or on a piece of paper. I do agree that the Internet does present more distractions with things such as pop ups and social websites, however, having a cell phone next to you while reading from a book can also cause just as big of a distraction.  I do not believe that the Internet is making us stupid. Even Carr admitted that because of the Web, we actually read more. Without it, people probably wouldn't take the time to go to the library and research every question they have. Nicholas Carr is correct in the sense that something is "making us stupid" but I do not believe that it is Google. The lack of knowledge that people have nowadays about things going on in the world is what I believe to be making us stupid, not the Internet. The stupidity that comes from the Internet comes from the people who post stupid things online, however, if you were to take the Internet away there would still be a world full of stupidity. If anything, I personally believe that the Internet is making us smarter. People use the Web in their everyday lives to help them because it is faster and a quicker way to learn about and research certain subjects. Most everyone uses the internet becuase it is not only easier and quicker, but also because it has a lot of helpful information.