Friday, October 15, 2010
Blog #3: Moving ourselves into new contexts, Due 10/21
At this juncture, we have covered material as it relates to our developing subjectivities in different spaces. 'Apparate' or secondspace yourself into a context that has yet to exist and consider how your subjectivity would be vulnerable to either stabilizing or destabilizing in this context. In brief, invent a context you've never been in, describe based on what you know about yourself, how you might respond, and describe the visible and invisible sociopolitical messages that the given space tries to inscribe onto you. You can use each others' contexts if you like em'. Go play! Again, be sure to use class discussions, references and articles...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Sexual Preference is a big part of today's society. From heated debate of morality and religion all the way up to legislation at the highest level sexuality is present in our everyday lives. Currently there is a status quo in place. Most people are heterosexual. This bears no weight on what is the proper alignment (I for one believe there isn't one) it is simply a fact. A common place figure puts it at 1/10 ratio. That is the context with which I live my life in. I have been a majority my whole life. Lets reverse it.
ReplyDeleteWhat happens to my identity if I take that ratio and flip it. Now 10 percent of the world is straight and 90 percent is gay. I become a minority. Lets go even farther and flip flop the issues surrounding sexuality. Don't Ask Don't Tell requires heterosexuals to be secretive about there sexuality. Only homosexuals are allowed to get married.
Needless to say I would be incredibly destabilized if I woke up tomorrow and found this to be the world I live in. Generally speaking I have never been the target of a hate crime or racism. I would face that every time I walked out my door. One of my biggest dreams in life is to get married and become a father. I could kiss that goodbye. I don't think I would ever regain my stabilization in a world like that.
The same messages that I saw everyday and were unaffected by would now be aimed at me. Anti-Straight propaganda and hate groups would now be targeting me. Everyday I would see billboards and signs and movies portraying gay people living a blessed life and I would be the out cast. I cant even imagine being condemned for something as commonplace to me as kissing my fiance. Every day these sociopolitical messages would bombard me just as they bombard homosexuals everywhere.
Baudrillard would say that putting myself in this new context is a way of reaffirming my existence in the old context. Being able to identify myself in this space further helps me to not only identify myself in my own space but also gives me a much greater understanding and appreciation for the space.
The blog assignment was to put myself into a context reality that doesn't exist. To fully answer that type of question, I would have to explain my thoughts not only in an imaginary reality but also the reality that we live in.I am an atheist and that groups me into a very small percentage of atheists in the world. I know how it feels to be an outsider, even in my own family.
ReplyDeleteIf the world was turned inside out and I was religious and everyone else were atheist I would feel very destabilized and people would think that I was a lune. My family will look at me like I am crazy for going to worship on Sundays and praying before bed. Instead of my family saying grace before dinner it would only be me and I would feel a thousand times more out of place than I do in the real world.
In that false reality people would probably want to burn the few of us religious people at the stake. They may even look at us as being completely uneducated or insane for believing in a higher power. In this world it is acceptable to be an atheist even though most people are religious. It the alternate world, I don't think it would be acceptable at all to be religious in an atheist world. Artifacts like the Christan cross or the Judaic star are commonly recognized all over our world but in an alternate world they would be scarce and could make everyone else feel very uncomfortable.
I think Buadrillard would say that this thought process would give me a better perspective about the situation but it hasn't. I feel that his method would work for just about any other alternate context but sense we are dealing with personal beliefs about religion, those beliefs can not be changed by pretending to put yourself into an alternate reality.
I am going to touch upon a subject that would affect our generation, especially the college-aged population amongst the world. What if prohibition was put into effect again just as it was decades ago? What if all forms of alcohol were completely illegal to possess or consume?
ReplyDeleteI believe that, first, it would extremely effect our economy. Let's think about just how much tax has been placed upon alcohol recently. In Pennsylvania, the state makes money off taxing liquor, beer and wine. Think of how much money the entire country would be losing via prohibiting alcohol usage.
There are currently 20,000 businesses in Pennsylvania that are licensed to serve alcohol. If a prohibition was set into place, all 20,000 of those business would go out of business leaving tens of thousands of people without jobs. In addition, this would put workers out of jobs at breweries, liquor stores, members of the liquor control board, delivery men (who deliver alcoholic beverages) and more.
People who commonly spend their spare time enjoying alcoholic beverages during their free time and on the weekends would be forced to take up other activities. Perhaps more people would just stay home, perhaps there would be a rise in movie theater ticket sales or perhaps there would be a rise in food sales because people replace drinking with eating.
One must also think about if there would be a decrease in criminal activity due to the fact that there are so many arrests for DUIs, underage drinking and disputes in general fueled by alcohol. Then again, will more people go against prohibition and begin brewing their own alcohol, which will lead to a new criminal charge all together.
Would IUP itself be a better place if alcohol was completely illegal. For me, drinking is a way to reward myself on the weekends for working my butt off during the week. I would be extremely upset and disappointed if alcohol was prohibited just because it truly is one of the most common activities that I partake in with my friends.
All in all, I don't believe this would ever happen because the country taxes alcohol so much.
I would like to also write about a world without drugs and alcohol, like Annette previously posted. This is something our society is overwhelmed with and many businesses strive off of alcohol to make a living. As Annette mentioned, the government makes a killing off of alcohol taxes. This is a huge revenue for our nation whether people like it or not. Without it the people in our world would have completely different behaviors and priorities.
ReplyDeleteIf our world did would change tomorrow and alcohol was no longer legal or around, I would be destabilized because my family makes a living off of working for the alcohol industry. My father works for a Beer Wholesale company and my family has owned a bar my entire life. I'm not the only person that this applies to because like I said before many peoples' lives and incomes depend heavily on the consumption of alcohol.
Actually not having alcohol for myself would not be destabilizing. I chose to drink alcohol for a social aspect and without anybody else drinking it, It would not be part of my social environment and therefore it would not bother me. But I do wonder what would college students do? Would this provide more academic involvement and have a more dedicated society to education without the distraction of alcohol?
I also believe that in this non-alcoholic space there would be less crime. There would be no such thing as DUI, underages, possesion. This would help our society but it would not help our government. They would not only be losing money from the alcohol taxes but also by the less amount of money from aloohol related fines. As a college student, I know that alcohol related fines have to be the number one fine and the amount of money these charges cost has to be outrageous.
The sociopolitical messages would be that more money would go to other programs such as restaurants, clothing, etc. More criminal offenses would need to be taken more seriously in order to gain back the revenue from alcohol related crimes. There would be advertisements for things such as having a good time by doing things non alcohol related. More restaurants would probably gain business for food instead of alcohol.
I think Baudrillard would make me realize that creating a non existing space such as a world without alcohol makes me realize my existense in the "real" space with alcohol and how society is today rather than what it is.
When I first thought about this question I wasn't sure how to go about it. Durfee and Annette’s ideas, one deals with reverse beliefs, and the other dealing with alcohol, which I support and encounter in everyday social spaces. If I walk down the streets seeing someone drinking a beer on their porch, it doesn’t bother me to see, it bothers me I can’t join. What about people who don’t drink, especially being in a college environment? I feel if I was in a reverse role I would feel completely destabilized in social spaces.
ReplyDeleteI enjoy afternoons when I can sit on my porch and enjoy a cold beer, and on weekends I go out to parties. If I didn’t drink I would feel destabilized walking by people drinking on weekdays, and parties all over campus with drunks walking everywhere.
There are TV ads that constantly promote beer, that tried to influence drinking would definitely destabilize me. I would become annoyed by seeing them all the time. Being myself, I would constantly argue with people that tried to push drinking on me, and my identity would constantly become destabilized with such pressure from friends.
Baudrillard would say that being able to experience a new reality reaffirms my current identity. I agree with Durfee in his relation to the reading as well. We can imagine what it would be like to support something differently, but we don’t know how that would truly affect our identity. We can’t fully understand our true identity until we actually experience it.
I was thinking of something really different to write about and I’ve decided to go a little bit different of a route and say: what if all the gasoline in the world were gone and there was no possible way of creating any sort of electric or otherly fuel based type of transportation, the only methods are purely wheel based or walking. This change would rock the globe – even though people lived just like this less than 200 years ago (I’m thinking steam engine).
ReplyDeleteI think my identity would be drastically changed in a very short time period. I rely on fuel based transportation for a great many tasks, like going to Martins and driving to do my pre-student teaching every week. Americans would be most devastated if this were to happen. We hardly walk anywhere if we can avoid it.
It’s hard to not mention the big picture here, so I will, but briefly. Think of what something like this would do for local economics. Say Goodbye to Corporate America because small towns and businesses would thrive again (unless big businesses broke up into many, many smaller locations, which could be true).
Like Shane said with his scenario, I would honestly be devastated. I would have to change my entire set of ideals: being lazy would be out of the question. I would have to become completely self dependent on getting groceries and getting small tasks like depositing checks to the bank accomplished. Though this would be devastating, I think it would bring Americans closer together, it would definitely establish that sense of community that I feel we’ve lost over the past several decades. Though this would bring Americans together, it would also separate us from other countries because we are so secluded on our continent. The dynamics would certainly change because we could no longer rely so heavily on foreign work and shipping. Employment would certainly become a non issue.
I feel like socio political messages would be greatly affected and would hold much less power over society because there would be a stronger community bond. They would still exist of course and they would change greatly, travel would no longer be an logical option for most American’s, unless you packed everything you owned and planned on never returning to your hometown. Productivity would be a socioeconomic inscription on our minds, not like today where the emphasis is on buying but instead a focus on creating and selling. Trades would be brought back to life that we haven’t used widely here in America in centuries, like sewing or farming – because it would be more expensive to ship in meat, vegetables, and clothing.
I think Baudrillard would like this thought provoking scenario activity. He’d probably say something like I created this simulacra in order to reaffirm my own existence in my simulacra. This would certainly “Liberate us from our culture” like Kim stated.
Throughout history, men have been viewed as the weaker sex, denied the right to vote and paid less per dollar than women.
ReplyDeleteWait, what?
This is the world I am putting myself in for this blog; A world where women have historically been the “dominant” figure in society, taking on the role of provider and protector, while men take care of the children and the home. In this world, it is men who are attempting to become equals in the workforce and it is women who are forced to put on a tough face for fear of being called weak.
In a freshman sociology course, I read Egalia’s Daughters. In this novel written by Gerd Brantenberg which reverses gender roles and refers to the sexes as wim (women) and menwim (men). In the novel, the gender roles remained the same, only switched. Female and male anatomy also stayed the same, which played a big role in the novel.
Honestly, I feel like I would remain completely stabilized at first if the world turned into a female dominated place. In fact, I may even feel more stabilized than I am in the actual world because I would feel like my place in the world was more powerful and meaningful. But I think that after a while, the strain of having to be the person viewed as the breadwinner and protector would get to me. I’m not sure if I would rise to the occasion or succumb to the pressure.
It’s almost crazy to think that men, who created the democratic foundation of the United States, would not be allowed to vote. I have to wonder what even our country would be like if it were a land where all WOMEN were created equal. Would we be called men and women? Wim and menwim?
I think it’s tragic that we have the kind of views of gender in the past that we do, but I also find it very difficult to imagine a world where the roles are switched. I feel like I would initially feel empowered, but eventually something would destabilize me because there are negatives to each gender role.
I also wonder how media would treat the genders if roles were switched and what socio-political messages would target people. Would men be plastered on lingerie billboards while women graced the cover of sports illustrated? The effects of a world like this are just too vast to think about.
I think this would be a topic to look at closely using the critical discourse analysis method of examination. Males and females act the way that males and females are supposed to act, but no one can actually remember when these actions were made to be the norm. I believe that this is how Baudrillard would decipher this world also. Male and female stereotypes are displayed by people every day, but were just copying copies of people who acted like their gender “should.”
Reading the other posts, I too have decided to focus on a "what-if" situation in our culture. What if suddenly without reason, music failed to exist. Not just pop tunes heard on the radio, catchy jingles to advertisements, or even classical piano. I mean everything.
ReplyDeleteImagine one day, waking up and going to your Itunes or Media Player. Nothing is there, all albums and songs have been deleted. You turn on the television and a commercial is playing for the new Ford model but there is no re-vamped Beatles song to play along with it. Music as we know it has never existed, think of all the industries that we would fail to have without music. Think of how drastically the film industry would change without music. Living in a world without music would be like living in a world without color.
Trying to imagine the changes in society is almost mind-boggling. Personally, I feel we need music in our culture because it is the one thing that has remained constant despite technological advances and globalization. What would the world be like if the harp was never invented?
I feel like Baudrillard would probably say that music today has been created from repetive sounds and melodies that have been used for decades and that because of it music has no real meaning anymore.
It has just become another intitution of repetion like education, politics, and religion. I do not believe this entirely true considering some of the greatest music of all time has been created with the help of past pieces before it. Also, music today is so diverse and widespread that it would be too difficult to imagine a society that we live in not having music.
When thinking about putting myself into a different context, even one that does not exist, seemed challenging at first. Then I realized I should just use my imagination to make up a situation that I could react to for this blog. Last night while talking with one of my friends from Baltimore I was intrigued by a story he was telling me about how the city is a bad place to live in regards to gang activity. This made me want to interpret how I would react to a situation if I was involved with such gang activity.
ReplyDeleteFirst of all I would feel extremely destabilized in any situation, whether it would be myself attempting to join a gang, or just being involved in some type of gang activity. Anytime I watch a history or discovery channel special on any type of gangs I feel out of place. I think that if I actually was put into that context my whole life I would probably feel the opposite. If joining a gang was the only way to support my family or even myself I would probably have no other choice given that situation, therefore it would probably be a stabilization point, rather than a destabilization point. Also most children are forced into gangs by their peers at a young age and do not know any better. I have a feeling I would probably associate myself with the stronger members of the gang so I could rise to the top and have more power for myself and my family. I think sociopolitical messages inside of gangs would be the peer pressure of drug use. I feel I would be coaxed into using drugs or potentially even forced. Another message would be the use of violence to obtain things that I need.
I know gangs have an extreme negative connotation to them because of the crimes they commit and all the things you here on the news about them, but in those types of cities it is really the only way to survive. Most people do not even realize that they are a part of a “gang” themselves. For example I guarantee there are multiple people who are in social fraternities who think gangs are ridiculous. I find this funny because a social fraternity is a lot like a gang and in fact they are incredibly closely related. According to Dictionary.com the first two definitions of a gang are one, a group of criminals or hoodlums who band together for mutual protection and profit, two a group of adolescents who band together, especially a group of delinquents. The second definition, minus the last five words, describes typical social and even professional fraternities, whereas the first definition describes the gangs we hear about from major cities.
I think Baudrillard would love talking about this particular concept. I feel he would say being able to interpret how I am in one certain context out of my comfort zone will allow for me to be able to identify with myself and others more easily in a context inside of my comfort zone. He would say constructing our minds in an alternate reality could also potentially take away from our identity of reality.
If i were to were to put myself in a context reality that deosnt exist i would try to put myself in a reality where tobacco is illegal. Just imagine walking down the streets smelling nothing but fresh air, and no seeing chew spit everywhere. We make alot of money off of tobacco, however there are people dying as we speak from diseases due to tobacco.
ReplyDeleteSpeaking as someone who used to smoke, it used to consume me in a way. I would have certain time periods that i would go have a smoke. In this reality it would have forced me to do other things. It is the same concept Annette brought up with her reality of banning alcohol. It is insane how many people of this campus alone use tobacco.
One of the sociopolitical messages that this gives to me is all the commericials on tv trying to sell these tobacco products. Tobacco is part of so many of people's identities that taking it away would be hard to do. I also think Baudrillard would say that putting our minds in an alternate reality would take away from those identities.
What would you do if you woke up one morning to find that the Internet was gone. Could you imagine a life without the world wide web, where answers are available at your finger tips? I cannot imagine life without the Internet. How could we live without Facebook?!
ReplyDeleteIf the Internet was never created, many things would be different in the world. First of all, many companies and jobs would cease to exist. Numerous people spend their days designing web pages, creating videos, and posting information. If there was no Internet, these individuals would not hold jobs or have the opportunity to have their thoughts and ideas published to the masses.
We also wouldn't be exposed to as much information as we are with the Internet. Videos and information wouldn't be readily available to us with the click of a button. This would mean that classes would use more video tapes and actual photographs, rather than simply pulling them up quickly. College classes would take place solely in the classroom and not on website like Moodle or WebCT.
Sociopolitical messages would only exist in social spaces, in print, or on television. These messages couldn't be pasted on the sidebars of webpages or in pop-up windows. Sociopolitical messages would still be present in the world, just in a different manner.
I feel that if I never experienced the Internet then I could get by in the world without it. The world could be stabilized without the Internet. Libraries and books would be most important and computer encyclopedia programs would used more often. That is how our ancestors received information, so it has to be possible. I would find other ways to network with friends, family and co-workers and watch videos through tapes, dvds, and on television. I personally would like to try and survive a week without using the Internet. It would probably be impossible, but what if we lived in a world without it?
For my secondspace I would like to explore a context in which my adult life would be by necessity entirely independent and devoid of a support system, family or otherwise. This situation would without a doubt cause me to be destabilized. I would be unsure about my ability to support myself and maintain a sense of identity without family member to help build that. Thinking back on my “web” of discourses and artifacts many of those things would consequently be crossed off the list. Making a living would become an instant priority. A primary aspect of my identity is school and within my current space this is made possible by my family/support system. Would I be able to remain a student if I were entirely responsible for my own expenses and livelihood? Even more than that, would I be strong enough to succeed and maintain any sense of identity in such a situation?
ReplyDeleteI feel that I would be able to function financially and emotionally were it to be necessary. I am comfortable with being alone and am quite capable of working to support myself. Although, I also know that I have difficulties handling overwhelming and disorganized situations. I think that being completely independent would cause me to cut back considerably on my own responsibilities/engagements in order to focus on the things that I consider the most important and avoid feeling that way. If I did that I would most likely lose many of the things that I consider to be large parts of who I am and what I enjoy, potentially destroying my concept of my own identity at the present. This would not necessarily destroy me along with that concept but transform it and seriously alter who I consider myself to be.
As I think about where the context that I would put myself in using my secondspace, I keep leaning toward nuclear bombs. One of the biggest threats or "panics" of our time is the threat of a nuclear holocaust. I remember Baudrillard talking about how having a nuclear bomb is actually a deterent from using a nuclear bomb. So what if the world we lived in was without nuclear bombs.
ReplyDeleteSay after WWII the technology was lost and outlawed, no one could make nuclear weapons even if they wanted to. This would be one less fear that Americans would have to deal with. I think that rather than the U.S. being the world super power, it might be another nation like China. In this context the number of troops that you have would matter again, not the number of nukes. Other nations would not be able to threaten Israel with nukes on a daily basis (Iran especially). I might be more stabilized having that sense of "security" knowing that another country couldnt destroy a state in a heartbeat.
Baudrillard would argue that the binary is nukes/non-nukes. The nations with the most nukes hold the most power. Though I am glad that we hold the most power, it could change at any time. The new scare is that Iran has enough nukes to destroy Israel, this destabilizes me because it puts the future of the world in jeopardy. All it would take is one button being pushed and I am living like Kevin Costner in "The postman". A world without nukes, without a weapon that poses such imminent danger to all of humanity, would definately make me feel more stabilized.
The socio-political messages that come with the creation and ownership of nuclear weapons is status and dominance. When a country acquires nukes it is automatically bumped up to senior status. A third world country with a nuke would be treated like an idustrializing nation. If nukes didnt exist they would have to bring something new to the table to acheive that status. Maybe something peaceful.
Baudrillard might say that the world that I live in now doesnt have nukes. I have never seen one personally other than videos of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Maybe this Nuclear Panic is a simulation that is intended to keep other countries docile to a dominant worldwide political ruling class. How do you know? No one has used a nuke in 65 years and you know that they have wanted to. So either they wont use them because of the aftermath or they dont even exist, either way you put it the world's behavior is dictated by nuclear weapons. A world without them would be pretty cool.
I also want to comment on Annette and Kayla’s comments. I think that a world without alcohol could have very many pros and cons. The problem is deciding which is better than the other and who ultimately decides this. I think the world of alcohol has seemed to of gotten a bit more common as the years have gone on with younger and younger kids getting involved in it. I am the youngest of fourteen kids and in my family my parents never drank and enforced their belief of not drinking into all of my siblings. This didn’t seem to work out well since out of the fourteen of us only one doesn’t drink at all. In looking at this there are times where I wished my family didn’t drink because of car accidents and how they can get angry and mean. Those are the sides of getting rid of alcohol that would be beneficially if alcohol was no longer allowed to be consumed by anyone. The world may tend to be safer in a sense but if you look to history we can see that you can’t get rid of alcohol forever because people will just make it themselves and sell it. There are many crimes that will then occur with people getting caught and arrested for selling illegal alcohol when this was something that was part of the norm. There are many people that use alcohol as a stress release and to perhaps go to a second space so to speak where they can act like someone different and loosen up. I think as of now the sociopolitical message would be your not cool if you don’t drink. We see this all the time in commercials and movies. I think that they make us believe that alcohol is needed to have a good time and this isn’t to say that you can’t after drink alcohol. The problem I see is while there are commercials and movies showing how harmful alcohol can be but there aren’t many of these out there. I think that this is because much of our society is for alcohol and tend to think of it as a positive thing rather than realizing the negative sides too. I think that Baudrillard would agree that we should keep alcohol in our society because it gives us a different perceptive that we otherwise wouldn’t have as well as choices too. Baudrillard would think that you can’t create a perfect space where everyone is the same because that would be boring and no one would really learn anything new from someone else. I think that by having a world with problems it allows people to choose the path they want to go down and be in the space that fits them best.
ReplyDeleteI'd be extremely thrilled to live in a world where musicals are reality. Take any ordinary, current-day scenario, like politicians at work while Congress is in session, inmates cleaning up the highways, students walking the halls of schools, or a regular Joe going through the motions of his 9-5 job. Now, add spontaneous song and dance to any of these otherwise mundane situations, and you've got the world in which I'd like to live!
ReplyDeleteI can honestly say that I have experienced a few moments in my life that I thought were fit for a musical. If only there had been a soundtrack playing, I would have sung about whatever had inspired me at the time. However, the current world wouldn't be too keen on that, so I've refrained. If I lived in a musical world, I would probably be destabilized for a bit, but I would quickly become restabilized during my first performance, when I realize that everyone else thinks it's normal. Just like it happens in musicals, everyone around me would join in the dancing and provide harmony with the appropriate emotion.
I figure that any sociopolitical messages that may exist in our current world would still be present, but they would be much more blatant. Characters would sing about them and explicitly tell you what they're thinking.
Baudrillard would probably agree with me when I say that, for all I know, musical ARE real life, and we're just living in a false reality. That would be sweet, and it would finally explain why I get embarrassingly wrapped up in musicals. :)
I have to go with a similar idea as Sarah, but not gasoline just cars. What if the motorized vehicle was not invented? It would change the whole world but, it would severely change the American routine as we know it. I just recently read a book called Carjacked that mentioned the impacted the car has our society, economy, and environment.
ReplyDeleteMy identity is very impacted by my vehicle. I drive everywhere, even to school and I have a close off campus apartment. My parents live about 45 minutes away and drive there every weekend to visit. I think this would be the most difficult effect of not having a vehicle. I love my family very much and not seeing them every weekend would make me very sad. The destabilization factor of not having my family close to me and not being about to see my niece grow up makes me destabilized.
The sociopolitical message that a car brings to society today is your status of how much wealth you have. If vehicles were not invented I think we would find another way to show our power and wealth, like who has the more expensive bicycle or better walking shoes ( some people do this now any ways). So the sociopolitical message that would be in America if we did not have cars would be shown in many different ways just like it is now.
I agree with Sarah also that Baudrillard would really like this activity because it makes us think outside the box and how things could be different. Baudrillard makes us think what the original is or is there really an original and in this case I think there was our own two feet as human.
I like Emily's idea about what the world would be like without the internet. I think that it would be an extremely hard transition to get used to if we went from having all of this technology to not having it at all. Our every day lives are consumed with internet use. Facebook, Email, Researching, Wikis, Blogs...I use the internet every single day. Even if I don't use a computer, I use my phone. Technology has really taken over our lives. Lately, I have noticed myself actually trying to use technology so much, not so much the internet, but my phone. Lately it has been driving me crazy when my phone goes off a million times a day with text messages or phone calls. I tend to leave my phone in a different room sometimes just to get a break from it because it would be nice once in awhile if someone didn't have a way to get a hold of you every second of the day. I'm not saying I would want all of technology to go away forever, but it might be nice to actually experience the world without it for a day or two.
ReplyDeleteA lot of newspapers and magazines are starting to diminish because a lot of what they publish can be found online now. This also means that journalists, as well as others are losing their jobs, or not finding jobs at all because the demand for them is not as high as it used to be.
I try to think back to when I was really young and the internet was not so big, but I can barely remember the world without all of this technology. I think the internet is a great thing, as well as cell phones and all of the other "high tech" items we have today. Without all of this technology our society would not be where it is today, and I’m glad we have access to all of these things, but I do believe it is taking over so many things in our lives.
What if religion never existed? I am not personally a very religious person, but if religion never existed I feel many aspects of the world would be different. If religion suddenly disappeared I would feel destabilized. My family is a religious family and I was brought up in a Catholic home. Many of the churches values were pushed into my upbringing. I do not know what type of approach my family would have used, but I imagine that the world would have turned more to a Darwinism view.
ReplyDeleteWe would all believe that we evolved from the same creatures and there would be no dispute between scientists and religious leaders on who is right and wrong. As a people we would have a solid understanding of where we come from and would never have to ask the question” Where do we come from?” I believe that I would restabilize with this kind of knowledge, because at this time in my life I wonder about the where do we come from and what is the right path. Having a definite answer would resolve my issues.
There would also be no disputes on who are the “chosen” people. The world would not have experienced the “Holy Wars” like the crusades and the constant fights between the Shiites and the Sunnis in the Middle East. The attacks on America were done in the name of religious matters. These particular attacks would have never occurred if religion never existed.
In our attempt to wonder about life’s “what if’s” I am brought back to Baudrillard’s concepts. I believe that we have “what if’s” to reaffirm our perception of reality. People like to fantasize about alternate realities to make sense of their own true reality or to escape their true reality through fantasies that answer their questions or improve their lives only to come back to reality and find their situation more real.