When looking at the definitions of Reality under the  OED online, I found that their definitions were contradictory to one another. Some stated that reality was based on what is real or true rather than desired or imagined,  making a definitive claim towards reality being based on something that is of so called actual existence. But other definitions explored the varying sense of the word. For instance, one definition ( the first  one on the list) stated that reality was " The quality or state of being real."  This definition, as I said in class, made me question what was exactly meant by "quality." When I looked up "quality" on the Merrian-Webster dictionary, one of the definitions said that quality was "degree of excellence".

Normal 0 false

 It was very interesting to listen to other people's experiences with dictionaries in class. It was also interesting to see how different dictionaries sometimes provide different word definitions especially Urban Dictionary. I found myself placing more trust in older dictionaries and those dictionaries that provide the origin of the word. I also trusted the dictionaries that provided me with an explanation and history with the definition not the definition alone. I find it also more helpful when dictionaries use phrases to explain the definition of the words.

 An interesting question came up in my group yesterday when I was talking about the value of both the Merriam-Webster online dictionary and the Urban dictionary. Which one would I choose to reference from here on out if I could only have one?

My first answer was obviously M-W, because it's universally accepted as a credible English dictionary. The definitions are strictly factual, and quite limiting in their meanings. It's difficult to place the words in context. When studying for the SAT a few years ago, I spent a lot of time looking at dictionaries, and even if I had a word's definition memorized, I lacked a thorough understanding of it because there was almost no context to look at. So conversationally, M-W doesn't do much for me.

 Fingo, Fingere, Finxi, Fictus - v., 3rd conj., "pretend, feign, disassemble."; from the Proto-Indo-European word meaning, "to mold."

In Latin, words do not have a direct translation. Instead they have "senses." For example, the "sense" of the adjective, "honestus" is "honorable" or "commendable"; either "honorable" or "commendable" would be an appropriate translation of "honestus", depending on context. Context determines the meaning of a word; words have no concrete meaning on their own - they only have "senses", the innate properties that mean nothing without surrounding verbal framework. 

When I started reading a little bit about the reaction to the War of the Worlds broadcast (I haven't watched F for Fake yet) I was REALLY surprised by the alleged hysteria over the broadcast. Apparently The Radio Project which is a social research project on the effects of mass media on society found that of the approx. 6 million people who heard the broadcast about 25% of them thought it was real and that most of the people who panicked in response to the broadcast thought it meant that there was an invasion by the Germans. Anyway...this might be brought up in the documentary but I look forward to seeing the depiction of these reactions in the film.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Imjio167nJo

War of the Worlds Trailer (1953)

Today in class, we revisited various Serendip posts regarding the progress of the class: what has been working and not working so far in the course. 

1. The majority of the class feels that the classroom discussions turn into debates because of a lack of understanding and clarity. In order to get a better understanding of a classmate's opinion, we need to ask questions. It will not only clarify the opinion for the classmate expressing her opinion, but for other students as well. 

2. If a particular discussion seems to occupy a majority of class time and most students want to move to another topic, students who want to promote discussion should use Serendip as a place to further discuss ideas. 

 I found War of the Worlds extremely interesting, and while listening to the broadcast, I found myself convinced of an alien invasion. It sounded very real, and sort of credible. If I missed the three statements that said the broadcast was fiction, I would have believed that there indeed was an alien invasion. This seemed to be the problem at the initial broadcast as well. I looked up some information about the War of the Worlds and saw that many who heard the broadcast thought that either Martians or Germans had invaded London. It is understandable seeing that at the time of the broadcast, tensions with Germany were escalating.