Class 02 THU JAN 19
Meet the Ambassadors
- 8AM CLASS
- Gavin Homan
- Ava Comegno
- Greg Scheuerman
- 930 CLASS
- Bria Lewis
- Daniel Kelly
Warmup
- Riddle: Empty Bottle of Scotch
Housekeeping / Mechanics
- Class Notes
- For Participation Grades
- Name the Takeaways / Specific Lessons
- Make bold, specific claims
- Avoid “Talked About” Language
Web Skills
Demonstration
Class Discussion
- The Stanford Prison “Experiment”
Lecture
- Quick Preview of a Researched Persuasive Argument
Today’s New Tasks
- Task: Preliminary Draft of My Hypothesis
- DUE before class TUE JAN 24 (11:59pm MON JAN 23)
..
Dev
Joe Gramigna
adamreim
alexmoran17
alivewit55
americangods01
anonymous123
Anonymous
azntaco
belldere
bigcounrty609
bigfoot9
bj112295
blueee04
breadpatrol99
brxttyb
calamariii
cfalover
charlieclover
cherries267
chickendinner
chickennugget246
chickennugget444
clevelandbrown03
cocochanel715
comatosefox
crossanlogan
cswilliams15
dancingueen
disneylover2002
doglover846
dontquoteme187
douglasadams525
dt2018
faded26
fatjoe000
friendoftacos
frogs02
fromcasablanca
fulcrum66
g00dsoup
giants19
gingerbreadman27
girlno3
gobirds115
goodmusician440
gracchusbabeuf
hiralp365
ifurreadingthisits2l8
ilovedunkinoverstarbucks
ilovenas
imaspookyghost
inspireangels
JalenHurts4Mvp
jasrielle2
jcirrs
jonnyb25
eagles21
kilotoon
kingofcamp
krackintheneck
Philip Ebenezer
Lily4Pres
littlecow24
ljkvng34
lokiofasgard24
luckyleprechaun1
marinebio18
mellowtacos
miliwawa
minutemen14
mossmacabre
music0392
mymomshouldhavenamedmegrace
ndb1996
neferpitou626
nugget114
oatmealvibes
ohearnj8
palal24
peachesxo
philsfan1133
pinkheart84
pinkmonkey32
pitandthependulum22
queenrandom04
RowanAnnouncer
Rowan27
rowanluver29
rowanstudent6
saltysurfer322
saycheese03
Senpai Pio
sixfortyfive645
sortableelms
spaghettitacosforthesoul
strawberryfields4
suedejackson
sunflower0311
sunshinegirl457
tarheel1999
teddysdoggydaddy
thatwonguyy
themildewmuncher7
Public Display Name
thirdlady226
tlap23
tmjj4345
toastedflatbread22
tpaz1
tristanb50
twofoursixohtwo
tyblicky2001
venom2929
vicarij0
wakeup5am
Water
wildcuttlefish
wizzard201
xchuki
Lunaduna
zeek
ziggy026
zinny11
zipemup1
zoeyzoey0210
zzbrd2822
Counterintuitive Spring 2023 
Learned today that the Russian elections can be sabotages by having 3 of the same look alike people, with the same name also, can run on the communist party.
LikeLike
Almost, Coco. I wasn’t 100% clear in my explanation about this phenomenon. The Russian Communist Party sponsors “opposition” candidates to run against the communist candidate. In the newest version of this tactic, if an actual legitimate candidate gains traction in an election race, the CP finds someone who looks like the real candidate and who has (or who is willing to adopt) the name of the real candidate and puts them on the ballot too to create confusion among voters and split the vote so neither candidate gets a majority.
LikeLike
When we went discussed the riddle of the day, we learned the difference between a scotch bottle and a bottle of scotch (empty vs not). Through this, David actually compared this counterintuitive riddle to how some of our witty sentences in our future drafts might sound. I now know that sometimes when I think a sentence I write might be witty and sound very good in my draft, to him it might read the opposite and make him very confused.
LikeLike
That’s one possibility, chickfila. The other is that your witty sentence, by itself, might be letter-perfect and a joy to behold, but simply not be relevant to your paragraph, thesis, essay. Even perfect witticisms must be cut if they undermine (or even fail to the contribute to) the flow of the argument.
MORE ON KILLING YOUR DARLINGS:
The new movie Kill Your Darlings, starring Daniel Radcliffe as Allen Ginsberg and Dane DeHaan as Lucien Carr, takes its name from an old piece of advice sometimes given to aspiring writers. You have to learn, literary hopefuls are told, to “kill your darlings.”
In other words, you have to get rid of your most precious and especially self-indulgent passages for the greater good of your literary work. In reviews of the movie, the widely repeated saying has been attributed both to Ginsberg and to William Faulkner. Who really came up with “kill your darlings”?
Not who you think. Variations on the “murder your darlings” saying, including “kill your darlings” and “kill your babies,” have been handed down in writing workshops and guides for decades, and almost every major 20th century English author has been cited at one time or another. In addition to the common attribution to Faulkner—“In writing, you must kill all your darlings”—which seems to have been popularized in guides to screenwriting in the 1990s, the advice has also been attributed to Oscar Wilde, Eudora Welty, G.K. Chesterton, “the great master Chekov,” and Stephen King, who wrote, “kill your darlings, kill your darlings, even when it breaks your egocentric little scribbler’s heart, kill your darlings.”
But the earliest known example of the phrase is not from any of these writers, but rather Arthur Quiller-Couch, who spread it in his widely reprinted 1913-1914 Cambridge lectures “On the Art of Writing.” In his 1914 lecture “On Style,” he said, while railing against “extraneous Ornament”:
Of course, all these citations to names like Faulkner, Wilde, and Chekov may have helped the saying spread—it’s hard to imagine it spreading as quickly as attributed to the lesser-known Quiller-Couch. But whether you’re talking about killing darlings or murdering babies, it’s best to follow another rule of writing: Check your sources.
LikeLike
In class today we discussed a riddle about a bottle of scotch and the riddle was something that I would have never guessed the answer to due to the very hidden grammar in the riddle. While it may have been a simple riddle it showed me a different perspective on grammar and to look at a riddle in a way I would not have thought about. We also learned to use wordpress or at least log into it and get things going for future assignments.
LikeLike
Will you hate me if I quibble about your syntax in something as innocent as your first class note, contributed in good faith to demonstrate only that you could post a Reply?
I hope not, but here goes:
You say . . .
. . . which a patient reader can certainly untangle, but which still requires too much language and too much work. For example, it has to name “riddle” three times. Much better is any grammar construction that simplifies the declaration down to its essence, such as:
Yes, the correction is picky, but I hope you won’t see it as pointless. I will be just as quick to praise you when you phrase things beautifully.
LikeLike
Good job to me for joining the class blog! Today I learned about the importance of using our words carefully in the English language. There is a huge difference between an empty bottle of scotch and an empty scotch bottle. One is implying that a full bottle of scotch is empty and the other is implying that there is a bottle that once contained scotch, but is now empty. The meaning behind words can change with the order of our phrases, which is amazing.
LikeLike
Hooray for joining the blog!
And hooray for declaring the impact of careful phrasing to be amazing!
I was thinking this on Route 42 headed north to Collingswood:
1. She hit me with an empty bottle of Scotch.
2. She hit me with an empty Scotch bottle.
3. She hit me with a bottle that had been emptied of Scotch.
4. She hit me with a bottle from which all the Scotch had been emptied.
5. She hit me with a bottle emptied of Scotch.
6. She hit me with a bottle she had emptied of Scotch.
Only one is wrong. The rest are logically similar but grammatically different and variously nuanced. Three of them seem logically identical but not as interesting as the only version that suggests that she was drunk when she hit me. Your reactions?
LikeLike
I had no idea there were so many ways to phrase things and basically always get the same point across. I am thinking the last one is implying that she was drunk when she hit me, as she did the emptying. I suppose there are so many other ways to phrase this such as “she hit me with an empty bottle previously containing scotch”- this STILL gets the same point across. The English language is vast.
LikeLike
Good one! 🙂
LikeLike
In class today, we talked about the grammatical errors in writing. Starting with a riddle about Scotch. (The difference between an empty bottle of Scotch vs an empty Scotch bottle.) The riddle helped me think about my writing, and to be careful how I use grammar.
LikeLike
I’m glad you had that reaction to the Riddle, LunaDuna.
I was thinking this on Route 42 headed north to Collingswood:
1. She hit me with an empty bottle of Scotch.
2. She hit me with an empty Scotch bottle.
3. She hit me with a bottle that had been emptied of Scotch.
4. She hit me with a bottle from which all the Scotch had been emptied.
5. She hit me with a bottle emptied of Scotch.
6. She hit me with a bottle she had emptied of Scotch.
Only one is wrong. The rest are logically similar but grammatically different and variously nuanced. Three of them seem logically identical but not as interesting as the only version that suggests that she was drunk when she hit me.
Number 6 doesn’t say she was drunk. It doesn’t say she drank the Scotch. But it certainly hints that she did so. Consider the equally possible and much more straightforward alternative:
It’s clear. It communicates the facts. But it is NEARLY as effective as collaborating with the reader. The trick to REALLY effective writing is making the reader do THE RIGHT AMOUNT OF WORK.
“She hit me with a bottle she had emptied of Scotch” doesn’t just communicate facts; it lures the reader into the insinuation that she drank the Scotch and was therefore more likely to strike me with the bottle. Readers who COME TO THEIR OWN CONCLUSIONS (conclusions you have carefully set for them like traps) are much more likely to find your work persuasive.
LikeLike
In class today, we discussed how in Russia the communist party can sabotage the opposing party by running multiple candidates that look alike against them, to guarantee that the communist party wins. We also educated ourselves by using a riddle about how there is no such thing as an empty bottle of Scotch, to highlight the importance of grammar and how it affects the meaning of a statement. Lastly, we successfully created WordPress accounts and became authors for the class blog.
LikeLike
This is a beautiful sentence Zzbrd, particularly the “running multiple candidates that look alike against them” part:
You may have noticed (but if you haven’t, may I highlight it for you) that long stretches of language requiring no punctuation—sections that unravel like a hose from a caddy—are very often the most eloquent and economical. Your sentence
unspools itself without hesitation. That ease of reading is usually the result of hard work. If such sentences come to you effortlessly, I will try to find something else to teach you.
LikeLike
In class, we learned how to spot specific grammatical errors using the riddle “Why is there no such thing as an empty bottle of scotch?”. The answer was that an empty bottle is an empty bottle, whereas a bottle of scotch is a bottle full of scotch. We also learned that in Russia, the three men that are competing for office have the same last names and similar faces in order to confuse voters.
LikeLike
I’m completely in favor of your perceptive observations, Macabre, with one small exception. While it is true that the only thing that makes a bottle a bottle of Scotch is that it contains Scotch, it is not true that three men in Russia have similar faces in order to confuse voters. They have similar faces by accident. They WERE PLACED ON THE BALLOT together in order to confuse voters.
LikeLike
The empty bottle of scotch depends on what is in the bottle and what is not. It was a grammatical context that I didn’t even know of. The Russian analogy wasn’t about the election being the main idea but the corruption of using identical sir names and face to make sure Putin won.
LikeLike
I wonder if these notes would make any sense to you a few months hence, Levi.
—”The empty bottle of scotch” doesn’t depend on anything. The question of whether there can even BE an EMPTY bottle OF SCOTCH does depend on what is in the bottle and what is not. If it contains anything, it can’t be empty. And if it’s empty, it can’t be a bottle OF SCOTCH.
—You’re right about the Russian election example. My point was not about justice in Russian politics. It was about things that seem similar (an empty Scotch bottle and an empty Scotch bottle) but aren’t (like three Russians named Boris Vishnevskys).
LikeLike
Discussed the difficulty on english grammar through a riddle about an empty bottle and a bottle fo scotch.
Prof. explained how the leader of a communist government sabotaged an election by adding candidates with the same name and appearance in an attempt to confuse voters.
LikeLike
Yep.
LikeLike
Today we learned the difference between a bottle of empty Scotch and an empty Scotch bottle. Small errors can be found in sentences that we sometimes overlook.
LikeLike
You mean “a bottle empty of Scotch” and “small errors we sometimes overlook in sentences.”
LikeLike
Today we discussed how a bottle of scotch cannot be empty but a scotch bottle can be empty. We also learned how Russia interferes in elections.
LikeLike
I really like: “a bottle of scotch cannot be empty but a scotch bottle can be empty.”
LikeLike
Today in class we discussed two important things. First, we discussed a riddle about Scotch. What was important wasn’t the actual question itself, it was the grammatical setup of that very riddle. The riddle asked “Why is there no such thing as an empty bottle of scotch?”. Instead of saying, “…empty bottle of scotch”, we should say, “empty scotch bottle”- this makes grammatical sense. The last thing we discussed was how to set up a WordPress account which was very helpful.
LikeLike
I’m heartened to hear you describe these little lessons as important things, King.
LikeLike
Welcome to the blog!
LikeLike
Today, we learned about the difference between precision and accuracy. This difference is that while something may be precise (or measured to the closest possible unit), it is not necessarily accurate (or true). An example of this could be a broken clock – it may have a hand on the exact second upon which it stopped, but that is not necessarily the actual current time.
LikeLike
Beautiful example, Tarheel. 🙂
LikeLike
Hey look ma I made it!
LikeLike
Being aware of your wording helps to stop any miscommunication from causing confusion in your work. There is a huge difference between an empty scotch bottle and an empty bottle of scotch.
LikeLike
I am smitten by your avatar, CFox.
LikeLike
Today we learned that there is a difference between an empty bottle and a bottle of scotch.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Today we learned what the difference is between precision and accuracy.
LikeLike
We did, Frogs, but I wonder if, a year from now, reviewing your note, you’d remember the difference. A better note would describe the difference.
LikeLike
Today I learned how to navigate the website and got some useful tools to help aid me in this course.
LikeLike
There are more navigation lessons to come, Sunshine.
LikeLike
Today I learned how to setup wordpress
LikeLiked by 1 person
Not to be a stickler . . . who am I kidding? . . . I’m nothing if not a stickler.
1. Today I learned how to set up WordPress.
2. Today I learned about WordPress setup.
This is true in so many constructions.
1. I invested in a startup business.
2. My uncle plans to start up a business.
1. This QB knows how to hand off a football.
2. The running back received the handoff from the QB.
LikeLike
Today we talked about the difference between precise and accuracy, while also learning how we need to be clear in our writing.
LikeLike
You will dislike me (I hope not forever) for this reaction, Krack.
Avoid the phrase “talked about” like poison. Also avoid “learned how” unless you really mean HOW. Let’s take these one at a time.
1. We did “talk about” the difference between precise and accurate. But the fact that we talked about them is not useful. WHAT WE SAID about them is useful. If you can detail the difference, THAT’S a good note. Your classmate Tarheel did a good job of it:
2. We didn’t learn HOW we need to be clear in our writing, we learned THAT we need to be clear in our writing. A good example of the difference here would be
LikeLike
Today we went over the results of last week’s survey, learned about the importance of using language accurately, and created our WordPress accounts.
LikeLiked by 1 person
We sure did.
LikeLike
Today we learned that an empty bottle of scotch cannot exist, but a empty scotch bottle can. A small choice in word order changes the clarity of a sentence. Then we signed up for the blog with unique usernames.
LikeLike
Yep. Welcome to the blog.
LikeLike
Today we learned that how we use and apply feedback and suggestions is very important to our grades improving from the initial draft
LikeLike
I’m glad that message was clear! 🙂
LikeLike
Professor David Hodges, was caught this morning influencing his students to drink scotch! Immediate action will ensue shortly.
LikeLike
I hope I’ll be invited.
LikeLike
Today we learned that there is a difference between an empty bottle and a bottle of scotch. We also went over how to get onto the blog, and then we made an account and became a member of the blog. We also went over the results from the survey we took last week, and the professor went over why they matter to him.
LikeLiked by 1 person
He also suggested that they might matter also to you.
LikeLike
Today we learned the difference between accuracy and precision. While precision is more specific and detailed, it does not mean that it is always factual and true. Accuracy does not imply that the information is necessarily particular, simply that it is true.
LikeLike
You can clarify things for me any time, Fields.
LikeLike
Today we talked about the difference between precision and accuracy. I also learned how important it is to use specific words in order to convey your thoughts to a reader.
LikeLike
I think you mean: I learned how important it is to use specific words in order to convey MY thoughts to a reader.
LikeLike
Today we went over the the difference between precision and accuracy, and how it relates to grammar through the riddle about a bottle of scotch. The riddle surrounded the question, “Why can a bottle of scotch never be empty?” The answer rests in the word choice ‘of’. if it is a bottle ‘of’ scotch, scotch is required in the bottle. We then went over the attendance requirements of each class. Which is not only being here, physically, but also taking notes on what we discussed and learned.
LikeLike
I didn’t consciously connect “precision and accuracy” with the impossible “empty bottle of Scotch,” but I see that you’re right to have done so, Lily.
LikeLike
Today we spoke about the difference of between an empty bottle and a bottle of scotch. We created and verified our accounts with WordPress and joined the class blog. We learned to sign in the blog every time we come to class and learned that if some extenuating circumstance keeps us from coming to class in person, it’s acceptable to take notes and keep up with the work while class is in session to earn credit as long as this privilege is not abused.
LikeLike
The rest of your Reply meets the standard for good Notes, Kilotoon, but this first sentence violates the ban on “talked about” claims:
It merely identifies the topic without specifying what was said about it.
LikeLike
Today we created our word press accounts and learned that there is a difference between an empty bottle and a bottle of scotch.
LikeLike
Nobody ever doubted that there is a difference between an empty bottle and a bottle of scotch, Venom, but some may have claimed that there is such as thing as an empty bottle of scotch. Are they right?
LikeLike
Today we talked about the value of responding to the comments on our drafts. We learned about how an empty bottle of scotch is different from a bottle of scotch. It’s because a bottle of scotch can be empty but still have a label and the shape of the bottle but it won’t have scotch in it.
LikeLike
Well . . . I would rephrase BOTH of your observations, Nonperson.
1. We EMPHASIZED THAT responding to comments on our drafts IS CRUCIAL.
2. We CLARIFIED that an EMPTY BOTTLE OF SCOTCH is grammatically impossible because a bottle of scotch REQUIRES SCOTCH and therefore CANNOT BE EMPTY whereas a SCOTCH BOTTLE can be empty as long as it used to contain Scotch and bears a Scotch label.
LikeLike
Thank you for replying to my post. After reading my post again I realized that I didn’t state the key points of my observations. The value of responding to the comments on our draft can be very crucial. I didn’t make a clear distinction between an empty bottle of scotch and a scotch bottle.
LikeLike
Today we learned how to use WordPress and how to navigate it.
LikeLike
We started that process.
LikeLike
Ignore my other comment. Today we broke down the website and the blog, and were told a riddle. It was about an empty bottle of scotch and it taught the lesson to be very very specific when writing anything. I learned that I still have to do the survey and that in a pinch the agenda page can count as attendance.
LikeLike
OK, Sunshine. This is better.
LikeLike
Excited to be an author!
– It is important to realize how you really writing and what your words mean. An empty Scotch bottle is much different than an empty bottle of Scotch, as there cannot actually be an empty bottle of Scotch… it doesn’t exist. On the contrary, an empty Scotch bottle exists because it is clearly a Scotch bottle with the label and shape.
– The use of different people on a ballet that look the same and have the same name as an actual candidate shows how much power the government really has over us as a society.
LikeLike
Excited to HAVE YOU as a Author, LittleCow.
LikeLike
Today we learned that there is an incredible difference between accuracy and precision. We also learned that there is no such thing as an empty scotch class since scotch is required to be present in the glass in order to be accurately considered a glass of scotch.
LikeLike
Good lessons there, Ziggy.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Congrats to me for setting up an wordpress account! Today I figured out the riddle about the empty bottle of scotch, but I already knew the answer.
LikeLike
Great to have you in the room, Blicky.
LikeLike
Paying attention to grammatical details that is normalized in society. An empty scotch bottle is the correct terminology to use in order to refer to an empty bottle that contains a certain liquid. We also went over political themes in authoritative power in russia and how Putin is using communism to his advantage.
LikeLike
We count on those normalized details to understand one another, Tacos! 🙂
LikeLike
In class we learned that the Russian Communist Party always plans the election according to their candidate. If one of them seems to actually be gaining the lead in an election, the Communist Party will find people that look enough like the real candidate to run as the “opposition”. They even go as far as to change all of the candidates names to be identical. In doing so, voters naturally get thrown off when filling out a ballot and therefore the original candidate typically wins. This is logical because the votes will be too closely distributed between the candidates also causing inaccurate voter counts.
LikeLike
Not exactly, nugget. The technique is deployed against candidates from the OPPOSING party, When a candidate gains traction against the State, Putin’s party will solicit and groom candidates to split the opposition vote. In the classroom example, they took this strategy to the extreme by running candidates who looked like the real candidate and had changed their names to his as well.
LikeLike
In class, we discussed the flaws of the Stanford prison experiment. The experiment didn’t go well because the people involved got in too deep with their own parts and the experiment not being reliable. They only chose a group of people from a certain group which shows a lot about putting healthy people who have no experience with what they are experimenting with. The riddle of the day was interesting and showed how grammar can be tricky the way you use it.
LikeLike
In class, we discussed the flaws of the Stanford prison experiment. The experiment didn’t go well because the people involved got in too deep with their own parts and the experiment not being reliable. They only chose a group of people from a certain group which shows a lot about putting healthy people who have no experience with what they are experimenting with. The riddle of the day was interesting and showed how grammar can be tricky the way you use it.
LikeLike
You were clearly in class, SayCheese, but your Notes sound as if you tried to remove all specifics and make the vaguest observations you could. That may seem like summary, but it won’t help you remember anything in particular.
3/4
LikeLike
During class today we discussed the events that took place during the Stanford prison experiment and our reactions to it. A common view I noted was that everyone viewed this as a negative and unstructured experiment. We also included a discussion if gender would change the results and there were two viewpoints that were brought up. One was that women would have nothing bad happened to each other and that the experiment would go well, and the other viewpoint was there would be no difference and the results would be the same. This is a good point to bring up because it can describe the true human nature when people gain power and abuse it.
LikeLike
Reasonable enough, GS.
Try to make at least one claim about every Agenda item.
3/4
LikeLike
In today’s 1/19 class, we discussed:
– In the beginning of the class, former students came in and we were able to ask them questions about what the class consists of, the workload, how to succeed this semester and if the class is overall easy or hard.
– The intensity of the Stanford Prison Experiment and the classes opinion on it. We discussed topics including: if it was women in these roles would it be different, if the experiment was ethical or not and if race would change the outcome of the experiment.
– Warm up riddle: why is there no such thing as an empty bottle of scotch? – it can’t be a bottle of scotch if it is empty, once it is empty it is not a bottle of anything.
– The wayback machine: a website we can go to, to find things that might have been deleted off of the internet. It is an internet archive.
– Watched a video that discussed interval jumps about the song “Kiss from a Rose”. The reason for jumping those intervals was that he did not know you were not supposed to write songs like that. And that ‘mistake’ ended up winning him many awards.
LikeLike
I like the details, RowanLuver.
4/4
LikeLike
Class notes:
– We met the class ambassadors and talked a little bit on what the course entails such as attendance, research papers, and the portfolio.
– We talked about that the hypothesis can’t be very general and has to be narrowed down.
-We debated about the Stanford experiment, especially about whether the outcomes happened because of the environment or the people involved.
– The experiment is now hard to replicate, if not, impossible to replicate because of how disturbing the Stanford experiment was.
– Zimbaro took the experiment really seriously and basically became a part of it, and I think the fact that he encouraged the behavior to go on really flawed the experiment.
– In the quote, it basically says that writers find writing really difficult. It toughness ,though, can be enjoyable, especially with the rewriting process.
– There’s no such thing as an empty bottle of scotch because without scotch, it is not a bottle of anything. It is just a bottle.
-The wayback machine is a good way to find sources or websites or blogs that have been deleted or can’t be found because the internet doesn’t forget much and can find servers with saved or shared versions of those original sites.
– Winston Churchill really found value in the old design of the building while everyone else wanted to have it redesigned.
– The House of Commons was really crowded and the opposing parties had to look at each other in the eye because the chairs were designed to face each other.
A good example of counter intuitiveness is when a singer sang a really complex melody and in an interview, he was like “I didn’t know you shouldn’t sing like that.”
LikeLike
These are terrific Notes, GoodMusician. You’ve covered the basics and sprinkled the summaries with memorable details. I admire the way you’re integrating the content and discussions instead of just copying or outlining them.
5/4
LikeLike
Overall, we all concluded that the Stanford experiment was a bad idea. I think that Zimbardo took his role too far and needed help from an outside person to make him realize what he was doing which just right there tells you he was wrong. We also talked about the experiment regarding gender and race. I think if the experiment was all women it would have a different result. I think the women wouldn’t use violence immediately, but I do think that if you put anyone in a position of authority they will take advantage.
The House of Commons is two sword lengths long
LikeLike
I wasn’t overly impressed with your Notes, ChickenFinger, but the comment at the end really won me over. Thanks for noting that (the sort of detail that delivers a complete idea upon reflection).
4/4
LikeLike
-The Stanford experiment left many people feeling a verity of different ways.
-Most of the people were talking about whether it was the people or the experiment’s fault, and I would say it was more on the experiment. This is because the experiment was supposed to be harsh. By dehumanizing people, they are going to act out.
-I extremely disagree when people were saying they would not act out like the prisoners and guards. This is because we have never been in that kind of power-hungry position or been dehumanized as much as these prisoners. Who knows how they would act?
-If the bottle is empty, there would be no scotch in it. So, you can never have an empty bottle of scotch.
-The House of Commons is built facing each other, so you have to look at each other while talking.
-4’33” is different depending on time or height.
–
LikeLike
Not quite, Senpai Pio. One set of marks indicates BOTH according to circumstances feet/inches and minutes/seconds. The other set is either single quotes or double quotes.
4/4
LikeLike
-Our Stanford Prison Experiment discussion opened my eyes to different perspectives of people’s thoughts on the experiment in general. It changed my thought about how different it would be if it were another race or if it were women instead of men. The experiment would have gone differently if it were not just white men, as for the aggression used and how everyone took their jobs too seriously and it kind of turned into a game.
-Once there is no scotch in a bottle of scotch, then it is not really a bottle of scotch anymore. It makes you think about the use of grammar.
LikeLike
You’re talking about what was discussed instead of saying what was said, phils fan
We have no idea what any individual said.
There were many opinions, your thoughts were changed, and it would have been different with a different group. That could probably be said of any class meeting.
I like the way you phrased the scotch bottle paradox.
3/4
LikeLike
Class began with a brief explanation of the street sign that states “all text is argument” as all text makes a claim which can be disputed no matter how simple it is. A student led a discussion on the Stanford Prison Experiment. It was decided that the experiment proved more about the nature of white men than the nature of humans. It was also decided that sexual assault would be present regardless of what gender the prisoner were. The wayback machine locates old documents that can be used for research or for projects in the future. Counterintuitive actions go against the grain and are creative because they disrupt the established order that has been created by society. I need to complete my hypothesis.
LikeLike
Love these, RS. A person might want to refer back to them. They summarize very efficiently, offer specific details, and are memorable. Nice bit of philosomifizing at the end, there.
🙂
(Try saying it: phil-o-so-mi-fiz-ing.)
5/4
LikeLike
Stanford: We discussed thoroughly the ethics and reliability of Zimbardo’s Experiment.
-Zimbardo took advantage of his power as experiment leader and got a power trip as the prison warden, this is a huge part of the unethical nature of this.
-The experiment has been duplicated again and never yields the same results, showing that possibly the specific people involved in the experiment had something to do with the results.
-Gender perhaps could’ve changed the outcome of this experiment, however, we will never positively know this to be true.
Scotch:
Once a bottle of scotch is empty, it is no longer a bottle of scotch, it is an empty bottle.
Counterintuitive:
-“I didn’t know you couldn’t do that”
-Desmund Tutu, with all his social justice and civil rights notions, he remarks about his pilots in a condescendingly racist way.
LikeLike
Beautiful.
5/4
LikeLike
I learned a very interesting bit of semantics regarding “Why is there no such thing as an empty bottle of Scotch”. The point being that a bottle cannot be of something if there is nothing in it. Except, I guess, a bottle of air.
Additionally, the discussion of the Stanford Prison “Experiment”. While opinions differed, some consensus about the questionable scientific value of the study was reached. The opinions on whether or not the study revealed anything about human nature were divided. Personally, I believe that when given an overwhelming authority over others, people have a tendency to abuse that authority. However, two dozen young white men in the US in the early 70s would respond to this differently than others groups. The specifics of the experiment would assuredly be different if conducted with a different group of people. Power has a tendency to poison those who wield it.
The counterintuitive theme of the class was demonstrated by a video detailing the composition of “Kiss from a rose”. The composer, not knowing the specific conventions of music, wrote interval jumps which are were considered improper. Even so, the song works and was hugely successful. By not even knowing what he was writing was technically incorrect, he made a wonderfully counter-intuitive song
LikeLike
I love a Note I can argue with. 🙂
You say, wisely
But I want to push back that if it’s the power that poisons, why should any group handed authority handle it differently?
5/4
LikeLike
The idea I paraphrased in part, expressed famously by the 19th century MP John Acton states: “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men…”. Great men are almost always, but not necessarily, bad men. On occasion, for a number of complex reason, individuals given unchecked authority over others do not abuse their position as much as expected. Perhaps even not at all, should we find a true saint. Transposing this idea from the individual onto groups of people, I reason that the life experiences of different groups of people changes their reaction to being given such authority. The group of men in the study, had they been substituted for a group of Peace and Conflict Resolution majors, would have responded to the same circumstances differently. The internalized values of our hypothetical peacenik prison police would make them hesitant to engage in the abuses the young college men from the study were more willing to engage in and tolerate.
LikeLike
So, was it a good idea scientifically, or a bad one, to select such an apparently homogenous group? Do we want to know whether members of a narrow personality type will abuse authority? Or was the goal of the experiment to demonstrate how all sorts might react to the opportunity to abuse their power? Or was the experiment so badly conceived that no particular conclusions were even anticipated?
LikeLike
To indulge briefly in a bit of “necroposting”, as the old forum posters would have called it, I just want to thank you for always asking these additional question. It is almost certainly a badly conceived experiment, though still interesting and useful to study. Two dozen people can have such a diverse range of beliefs and behaviors that I am unconvinced the experiment could ever be repeated in a satisfactory way. As far as I remember, that was the conclusion of critics of the experiment.
LikeLike
Considering its lack of rigor and clear hypothesis, it might better be described not as an experiment but as a prank.
LikeLike
had old students come in to discuss what to expect for this class
discussed power dynamics in Stanford experiment
– how maybe if genders were switched that it would be different outcomes or even different outcomes with race
– some believed the experiment was pointless and that we didn’t need the experiment to know people will abuse power
– its also hard to tell exactly what the experiment was trying to prove and if it was sufficient in doing so
– and in the matters of sexual assaults its alarming how quickly the guards went right to stripping the guards naked, it really correlates to real prison and sexual assault rates
– some believe this experiment is only a reflection on white men and that if it were a different group of people wed have a different outcome
– way back machine is a website archive to help you find links to websites that have disappeared, you go and post your link in a search bar and if someone has saved it it will show up for you to find.
– Winston Churchill described that we build our buildings but then they build us so he wanted the House of Commons to be rebuilt exactly how it was in its time and not remolded
– the difference in the buildings of our congress buildings compared to the House of Commons, in American congress you don’t face your opponent, whereas in the House of Commons you do
-the song” kiss from a rose” by seal has incredible intervals in the melody and when people ask how he came up with that he simply said he didn’t know he wasn’t suppose to do that (which is a very counterintuitive idea)
LikeLike
I love these, PM. We can hear you talking through the ideas as you hear them. I’d be likely to remember important details of the class meeting by reading these in a few months.
5/4
LikeLike
Today we started off with the bottle of scotch riddle. It was a pretty clever riddle. The point is that the bottle can not be considered a “bottle of scotch” unless there is scotch in it, so if there is an empty bottle of scotch, it is no longer a bottle of scotch, but just a bottle. We then had the ambassadors come in an asked them questions about the class. Then we talked about the Stanford Prison Experiment and some very interesting points were made and people talked about things that I had never considered before. Points were made regarding gender and race and how they play a part in how we interact with others. We then discussed the quote “A writer is someone for whom writing is more difficult than it is for others”. I definitely believe in this quote because all of my best written work results from me struggling with it. We were then introduced to the Wayback Machine, which I find to be a very helpful way of seeing almost anything that has been put out into the internet, ever.
LikeLike
Good Notes, Giants, but notice how many times in this brief section you say that discussions were had and things were said but not WHAT was said. Try to make specific claims, for the practice.
4/4
LikeLike