On Thursday in our discussion group we talked about the idea of the Library of Babel. Most of the group seemed to hate the idea that they couldn't be creative because every possibility already exists. I don't have a problem with this notion. Should I find myself a failure because I can not defy the laws of physics? Of course not. The Library of Babel analogy is saying that given laws of the universe, here are the infinite options available. Why should I want to go beyond infinity when my life is so short and there is plenty we need to discover before our world becomes boring?

       Thursday in our small group discussion we touched upon the idea of the Library of Babel and how everything that will ever exist in the world has already been created.  Fortunately, for us wondering minds and gatherers of knowledge there seems to be a number of things to explore.  So much that it's suggested that the infinite number of possibilities may never actually be "checked out" of the library.  Is this a good thing or a bad thing?

        Are we creating anything new? or simply reiterating or putting forward thoughts and ideas that already exists? This is the question i found myself stuck on even after the discussion.

Class Notes

Panel: Historical Figures

Does gender, science, technology etc. look any different for imaginary figures (for Wednesday)…creations of the imagination

Course keeping (/exchange/courses/GIST/s11/coursenotes/12)

15 historical figures attending class

Michelle Obama: Wife of the president

Corazon Aquino: First women president in Asia

Christa McAuliffe: teacher/astronaut

 I think it's important to discuss the issue of the "selfish gene". The term "selfishness" has a very bad connotation in our culture. When we think of selfishness, that is, the trait of being concerned for one's own self more than others, we tend to acquate it with a malicious intention, cold-heartedness, lonesomeness, and anger. The phrase "selfish gene" very much throws off Dawkins original intent--altruism between closely related members of a species. Selfish makes it seem as though the gene has a mind of its own. In actuality, Dawkins was trying to say that closely related members of a species often display altruistic tendencies toward closely related organisms to protect their own gene line.

Last Thursday, the class debated over the issue of whether or not certain human behaviors are hard wired into us or if they are learned through outside influence. Personally, I believe that the only thing that is "hard-wired" into us is out ability to breath, which comes with out having to think about it, and our natural need to survive. However, it is not really hard-wired into how exactly to survive. We are not born knowing how to hunt or how to gather, these are things we are taught. But then there is also the issue of what defines us as human. Are we human because we build shelters for ourselves and because we can do things other animals can't, or are we taught to be human by other humans?

In class on Thursday, we discussed to what extant we have control over our decisions, interactions, and thoughts. We all wanted to believe that there is a sense of randomness mixed with choice that leads our lives rather than a set algorithm. This gives us a sense of agency and control rather than believing our lives are more strongly influenced by others rather than ourselves. This discussion made me think about the movie Inception. If not all of you have seen it, the movie revolves around the idea that during a dream, an idea can be suggested in someone’s head so that he/she believes it originated in his/her own thoughts. Being immersed in a certain culture and set of ideologies is very similar. A certain behavior is observed in your surroundings, you sub

By 5 p.m. on Sun, Mar. 13, please post here, as a "new comment," a mid-semester course evaluation that looks both backwards and forward: What's working, and what needs working on, for you as an individual? What's working, and what needs working on, for us as a group (on-line, in class, in conversation and on the panels)? What are you learning individually? What are we learning collectively? Where are the edges of y/our learning now?

By midnight, Sun. Mar. 13--please post here, as a new comment, your reflections on what's working, and what needs working on, for you as an individual and what's working, and what needs working on, for us as a group (on-line, in class). What are you learning individually? What are we learning collectively? Where are the edges of y/our learning now? What dimensions of the story of evolution and the evolution of stories have we not yet explored...are you still interested in exploring?

 Panelist Day 1!