Go on, play on it. . . the Internet won't bite you (hard).

By Sarah Christopher on November 17, 2011 8:44 AM | No Comments

On November 16, 2011, Concordia University, Saint Paul held a Convocation at which Jason DeBoer-Moran discussed a topic (and a chapter) from his up coming book on social media. He addressed the audience (both the people in the room and those who watched via web) while following along with a presentation he created entitled "Social Media - The Rise of strategic Authenticity & Transparency". Jason explained that because there are so many tools available for companies and individuals to connect with one another and all of the inter-web, the average user of the Internet end up feeling a sense of 'information overload'. This 'overload', in general, makes it difficult for companies to connect with their target market and therefore companies must change their strategic use of these tools in order to create an authentic (or personal) connection and a transparent business image/plan where and when it counts.

In the honors class at Concordia the students are currently, in part, discussing the use of technology within our society and how it has changed our society as a whole and the individuals within it. This lecture took something they have been talking about specifically, robots and artificial intelligence, and gave it another face - corporations. Much in the way we strive for artificial intelligence to provide us with feed back and humanized interaction, corporations are striving for and achieving this effect through use of social media tools. The object, of course, is to get people to bond with the brand through the creation of these social 'friendships'. One might point out that the false perception of the brand as something human, which is the intention of the marketer, is in essence a lie. However, choosing to ignore the large nuance that is the distinction between good strategy and emotional manipulation is, commonly and very simply, called standard social marketing practice.

I love social media. I'm all about 'facebook', I use 'tumblr' like and addict, I had a 'Google+' account before any of my friends, and Moran inspired me to start 'tweeting' in order to reach an older audience. I immediately took Moran's presentation and used it in order to 'brand' myself by making sure that my accounts reflected the authentic me (the way I wanted to be seen of course), and I took the time to make sure that I was myself throughout the process of editing in order to create personal transparency. By doing this I created a more marketable self which I can share with anyone from friends to employers, grandparents to younger sibling. Now, as I take this concept of marketing myself and compare it to how a company markets its-self and I see little wrong with it. In fact, whoever started using social media for marketing might have been a genius - perhaps also a sociopath, but nonetheless brilliant.

The consumer world in which we live, demands that we take responsibility for what is ours, accept that no matter the influences put upon us we do indeed have the capacity to freely think and therefore choose how any marketing or silly ploys effect us. I believe that in a greater world the manipulative side of marketing would not exist, but it does and so one must accept corporate influence as a byproduct of mass social media. Still, I urge you to try to divorce from it the positive and fun sides of these tools so that you may enjoy connecting with other humans in more ways than ever before!

Continue reading Go on, play on it. . . the Internet won't bite you (hard). .

Go Time

By Sarah Christopher on October 20, 2011 6:10 AM | No Comments

On October 19, 2011 Concordia University, Saint Paul held a lunch-time convocation in which students were asked to learn more about some of Non-Profit organizations within the Saint Paul metro. Put on by the Minnesota Council of Non Profits, the convocation was host to over fifteen local organizations seeking student help. Some students may have gone in with the notion that Non-Profit is another word for 'volunteer' or 'work-for-free', but they were quickly assuaged of their fears as Katie Banke started her presentation and informed them that non-profits employ one of every nine people and provided 290,000 jobs in Minnesota alone. Banke continued to wow the students as she gave statistical proof that non-profits have increased two percent a year since the recession in 2007 - something that is virtually unheard of at present. Banke then gave up the microphone to a Concordia Alumni, who encouraged our participation with the organizations because of the amazing networking opportunity it provided, giving the students even more incentive to pursue an internship. After this presentation (or the 'hook' as some might say), students walked around to booths set up by the Non-Profits and talked to representatives from the organization in an attempt to 'fall in love' with a cause.

Almost every major religious text created tells us to 'serve' one another, a very recognizable example is from the bible:

" When he had washed their feet and put on his outer garments and resumed his place, he said to them, "Do you understand what I have done to you? You call me Teacher and Lord, and you are right, for so I am. If I then, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you also ought to wash one another's feet. (John 13:12-14)"

In this quote, Jesus shows his disciples how to truly love one another by giving of oneself and showing the utmost respect to every single human on the planet. In an idealistic world, or even an idealistic government, every individual would hold the same status and weight within the world as the next. Yet, we as humans are flawed and so when we come upon challenges, we favor ourselves more than others - we tend to favor the first world citizens over the third, the nobility over the common people. When we volunteer and serve one another, we are recognizing another human-being as being worthy and equal to ourselves, we are saying "I will not dismiss your existence, I will respect the love that the creator has for you as well and will not let you, nor him, down."

I started volunteering through different school programs at a very young age and still, I fail to recognize the basic need I have to give of myself. I walked around the booths thrilled and excited that I would get to make a difference and enjoy myself at the same time. I found myself moving my schedule around in my head trying to squeeze time into my air-tight schedule so that I could start helping immediately, instead of waiting for the second semester. I haven't always had the good fortune to be aware of how much impact non-profit work has on one's life, but I have recently been thrust into the job market and I've seen the respect that is given to the time dedicated to others, it's almost required to have a good soul in order to get most jobs. I haven't been excited about going to work in a long time, but I get the feeling that an internship at any one of the non-profits in St. Paul would prove to be a wild and rewarding ride.

The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks: How to Lead a Horse to the Water (the Correct Way).

By Sarah Christopher on August 30, 2011 7:16 PM | No Comments

In The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks, Rebecca Skloot examines one of the greatest scientific discoveries of our time in an astoundingly personal way. Through a combination of memoir and bibliographical writing techniques, Skloot uncovers the real significance of the HeLa cell industry to the world and to science, as wells as to the family of the woman the original cells came from. The truths she discovers bring today's most prevalent moral and ethical issues to light and actively questions' how to preserve basic human rights in an industry of fantastic science and profitability.

It was Henrietta Lacks' death and the subsequent exploitation of her Cancer Cells in the creation of a billion dollar, mass-producing HeLa industry that gave science the resource that has led to millions of lives being saved. Yet, it is this industry that charges astronomical prices for patented discoveries, causing the medical care that many people desperately need to become unaffordable. In 1890, the United States passed The Sherman Antitrust Act in order to protect consumers from big business and their tendency to somewhat ignore ethical conduct, in 1947 the Nuremberg code was created after scientific discovery was placed above human rights, neither of these laws stop big industry from victimizing people. By eliminating the ability to provide affordable health care, this industry is infringing upon the human right to a sufficient quality of life. The aforementioned law and code was created by 'Christian Nations' in order to right serious wrongs, but still companies exist within these nations are taking advantage of un-plotted territory. The HeLa industry has escaped legal scrutiny by creating a new business: combining industry with a field that has no room for human ethics (save when interacting with human subjects): Science. Science must dehumanize it's 'workspace' (this could be a disease they are trying to cure, a human who presents symptoms, or a solution they are bubbling) in order to increase efficiency, decrease interaction of random variables with their 'work', and to remove abstract thought from their procedures. This type of 'inhuman' interaction (pure science) is positive, even necessary, when working towards betterment of the quality of human life, but when combined with the infringement of basic human rights, a massive 'grey area' is erected. How can we say 'keep producing a product' but not provide the incentive that has come to be expected? When we risk losing the resource by making the field an unattractive and underpaid one to be in, we risk a sector of our economy which in turn creates a threat to our national well-being. The enormous reach of the issues created by the HeLa Industry's enormous power touch not only the human as an individual but as a part of a Nation.

Before sitting down to think about the implications of The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks, I saw the book as 'a non-fiction book that follows three women of different race, time, and means as their stories become irrevocably intertwined', but I couldn't help but wonder what made this topic matter to me. Yes, I am a woman and yes I am benefited by the HeLa Cells, but I had a feeling that it was something bigger that made the issue feel too big to grasp. My moment of clarity came when I thought 'but wait, isn't that a monopoly? Aren't those illegal?' and in fact, they are. The law fails to cover what would have been 'science fiction' to those who wrote it and so loopholes exist. Ethically this is gross: when clear intent of law is plain, it is dishonest practice to work the wording of the law to your advantage and I believe that this is what the HeLa Industry has done: they have capitalized, monopolized, and made the good in Henrietta's story bad.

Comprehending this book took more energy than anticipated. I felt confident in my initial literary analysis, but once I realized the implications of the message Skloot sent I delved further into the issues. I knew that I broadened my horizons once the book's questions became bigger than race, individual rights to one's tissues, family right to knowledge, or even greed - I knew I had succeeded when my analysis became about finding the area where ideals and reality are so far from one another that one can only imagine the surface of the issue.

This sentance serves no logical purpose...

By Sarah Christopher on September 25, 2010 12:38 PM | No Comments

Postmodernism thought rotates around the rejection of hard classifications and the acceptance of the view of the human life as an experience that is filled with individuality and contradictions. As Dr. Mahnke said, once at the beginning of our time together, and once at the end; "So many people will try to get you to skip over the question and go straight to the answer, and I will tell you, never do this. Always ask the question." For postmodern thinkers, there really is no "right answer". There are simply too many variables within the human experience to allow there to be; i.e. society's values, religion, cultural influences, and personal interaction within the aforementioned realms. Postmodernism is the push away from the traditional, old world values and into the growing conscious of society. It began in the 1870's as a way to interpret life through art, in the early 1900's became a philosophy on living and today has become a way of living that impacts our laws, the church, art, and personal relationships.

Stare decisis means "to stand by decisions and not disturb the undisturbed." (Adeleye, 371) With modernism thought, the judicial system calls upon precedent set by forefathers using "nuclear family values" which don't always translate into today's societal moral code. With postmodern thought, much of the traditional societal moral code is being given a second look. Stare decisis has become much less of a 'means to an end' and more of a way to critically view the strengths and weaknesses of prior judicial decisions. This has caused some of the most heated political controversies to remain grey areas (for example, abortion and gay marriage), forcing legal doctrine to include new standards for law making, such as moral law. (According to the online free legal dictionary, moral law is defined as "rules of behavior an individual or a group may follow out of personal conscience and that are not necessarily part of legislated law in the United States".)

To illustrate post modernism in the church, focusing strictly on the Lutheran church, one must only look to the recent and ongoing chasm between the beliefs of the Missouri Synod (LCMS) and Evangelical Lutheran (ELCA) churches. While LCMS remains the traditional Lutheran church, ELCA grows rapidly as a favorite within the United States of America. With a shared fundamental religion, yet visions of the church that so obviously differ, these two Lutheran churches can really only be called third-cousins. The LCMS uses their own version of Stare decisis by focusing on the scripture as a literal text, while the ECLA leaves room for the grey areas that the postmodernism movement is fond of.

"The [difference between the churches, on the] doctrine and authority of Scripture. The LCMS believes that the Bible is without error in all that it says. The ELCA avoids making such statements, holding that Scripture is not necessarily always accurate on such matters as history and science. Differences between the LCMS and the ELCA on the authority of Scripture also help to explain why the ELCA ordains women to the pastoral office, while the LCMS does not (based on 1 Cor 14:33-36 and 1Tim 2:11-14). Similarly, on the basis of what Scripture clearly teaches (Rom 1:18-28; 1 Cor 6:9), the LCMS position on homosexual behavior is unequivocal: homosexual behavior is contrary to God's will, while the ELCA has declared that it lacks a consensus regarding what Scripture teaches about homosexual activity. Consequently, those who disagree with one another in the ELCA have been called to respect the 'bound conscience' of the others. The ELCA has also determined to allow the ordination of practicing homosexuals as long as they are in a life-long, committed relationship." (lcms.org)

Postmodernism in the church is often voiced in the discussions pertaining to the acceptance that Jesus provides all of God's children (Justification Through Faith), which inhibits either faction from completely rejecting the other.

It was with the postmodernism movement, that recent art began to be legitimatized as more than just a pretty picture. The postmodernism movement is characterized, in part, by a move towards individuality and a rejection of cultural norms. Similarly, Art is often characterized as a display of individual expression. Thus, the attention to the personal expression of the art, combined with the acceptance of individuality and personal convictions that the postmodernism movement created, allowed scholars to recognize art as a way of knowing yourself, and thus the world around you. "The arts must be taken no less seriously than the sciences as modes of discovery, creation, and enlargement of knowledge in the broad sense of advancement of the understanding." (Graham, pg 44)

The fundamentals in our lives (law, religion, and our way of viewing the world), through postmodernism have changed dramatically. It is only logical that our personal relationships follow suit. If not in the most obvious of ways (civil unions versus marriage in the courtroom, our choice in how we interpret an age old text, whether or not we take something at face value or choose to favor introspection and look for the answers to the truly difficult questions, etc), then in the more subtle interactions we have with the world. There are, and have always been, people in the world who are self-involved without a care to their fellow man. This, to me, is the antithesis of postmodernism. Postmodernism teaches that if you read between the lines, you can discover that, in fact, the issues are personal. These issues can range from an environment that is deteriorating, to electing a president. Sure, you can relate these two topics on a political level, but it is when they relate to your own life; when you can relate to the world with a more sophisticated thought process (again, always ask the question), that the issues become more about ethics and our ability to see in more than just black and white and interpret the grey areas. With this thought process we become compassionate beings who are able to create convictions based on purely our own judgment.

I was raised by a fairly young mother, and without knowing it I was raised in a postmodern thinking household. I was instilled with the belief that there is a difference between accountability and culpability; being responsible for your own thoughts, emotions, motives and beliefs, instead of blindly believing what is right and wrong, then applying it to other people. It seems to me, if there ever was a bumper sticker for the postmodernist, it should read "I'll get back to you in three days; I need to figure out how I feel and what I think."

The phrase given, "This sentence serves no logical purpose," exemplifies postmodernism to a "T". When first looking at it, one might just accept that fact that this phrase is ridiculous. "How could I compare this to anything of relevance!?" one might ask. Well, in fact it is perfect in illustrating the void that postmodernism fills by inquiring about information that one finds 'in-between the lines'. First, one might look at context. Our prompt asks us to consider the phrase within the context of postmodernism. I choose to interpret this as "consider the following phrase using a postmodernism mindset". I'm still within the context of the prompt; I'm just going beyond face value.

Next, I try to think of the sentence as a piece of the whole (still using my postmodernism mindset). Imagine if your desk chair was missing a wheel, one day someone who had never seen a desk chair before, finds it. What would they do with that wheel? I would most likely throw it out. It's only once I would see the whole chair together that insight would come. Thus, I've left answering the prompt until the end of my paper in attempts to produce insight. Perhaps that was the reason that the particular phrase was given. It was defiantly not a phrase that we could just skip through the thought process with and come out with a legitimate answer. Instead, I was forced to ponder and consider the context and truly learn what a postmodernism mindset is.

As a result, I think the phrase does exactly what it claims without context; serves no purpose. However, in the context of the paper, I can see that the phrase was used in a rational (albeit round-a-bout) way, making it logical.

According to vunom.com (a postmodern artist resource), "Whereas Modernism is often associated with identity, unity, authority, and certainty, Postmodernism is often associated with difference, plurality, alterity, and skepticism." To simplify, postmodernism is about asking the question and following the path on which it lead.

Works Cited:

Contrast, and court decisions in some civil law jurisdictions (most prominently France). "Stare decisis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia." Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Sept. 2010. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stare_decisis>.

Adeleye, Gabriel et al. World Dictionary of Foreign Expressions: a Resource for Readers and Writers, page 371 (1999)

lightman. "A LCMS Pastor's Appeal to the ELCA." Latest Articles. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Sept. 2010. <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2275682/posts>.

"ELCA | The Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod." The Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod - . N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Sept. 2010. <http://www.lcms.org/pages/internal.asp?NavID=2146>.

" Social Issues - Evangelical Lutheran Church in America." Home - Evangelical Lutheran Church in America. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Sept. 2010. <http://www.elca.org/What-We-Believe/Social-Issues.aspx>.

Graham, Gordon. Philosophy of the Arts: An Introduction to Aesthetic, 3rd Edition (2005). 25 Sep. 2010

"Postmodernism | Vunom." Vunom art resources for artists. N.p., n.d. Web. 25 Sept. 2010. <http://vunom.com/postmodernism/>.

Directed Writing: Jerome style.

By Sarah Christopher on September 2, 2010 9:19 PM | No Comments

Using either Becker and Woodward or Collingwood and Jerome, discuss the conflicts and challenges that face historians (and all thinking people) when trying to use evidence to reconstruct the past. What do you see as the most appropriate way to address these challenges and produce something that may actually be useful and reflect "the truth?"

'Humans are imperfect beings'; most Lutherans have grown up hearing this utterly depressing phrase and can only be set at ease once they've heard the standard, 'Everything will be alright in the end because Jesus died for our sins'. Que the hallelujah chorus. No, I'm not asserting my rejection of Jesus or my, unknown until reading Jerome's The case of the Eye Witness, atheism because nothing could be further from the truth. I'm merely attempting to set myself back in time, before I was soothed with the promise of grace, before I knew that someone I knew could die, even back before I believed that there were little people under traffic lights just waiting for cars to come so they could switch the green light to red. Back to when I was my most perfect. Perhaps it was at this age, before I created memories, that I was truly objective. In Jerome's words, "[W]hen the mind has accumulated a stock of experiences, it has learned that the arrangement and order of thoughts do not always correspond to the arrangement and order of objective things" (89 ¶ 3). In Jerome's text, he compares witness testimonials and statistics produced from studies of said witness' to the objectivity of Historians, he even throws in examples of falsified stories from the explosion of Pompeii (184). While I have never had such a decisive or well thought out opinion on the matter of the distortion of history, I regard Jerome's opinion as a much grander version of my slowly forming idea on said matters. I can recall in Psychology last year reading about witness testimonial studies which rarely proved accurate, and mixing this with the class discussion we recently had on the opportunity, objectivity, and significance of history, I can formulate a much less educated version of Jerome's assertion.

As example, up until a few years ago, I would've sworn that when I was three, my sister's head had gotten stuck in-between her crib's wooden bars. I had the (what I thought was) distinct memory of my father having to release her from her wooden prison with a chain saw. Apparently, logic never entered the equation. I was comparing childhood memories with my friends at some moment past, when I decided to bring out that little diddle. As I got to the word 'chain saw' my best friend Abby objected. She pointed out (not unkindly, but very sarcastically) that it was extremely unlikely that he used that forceful of a method to release a baby's head from a crib. I, always looking for some type of competitive action, told her I'd prove her wrong. We were in the car with my mother when I asked her if she remembered that time, way back when, that Alina (my older sister - by sixteen months) got her head stuck between the cradle bars. She of course did, as it was probably a funny experience for anyone viewing. So, feeling awesome in my power of legitimate memory, I turned to Abby and decreed myself victor. However, Abby (like the brat she is) decided to ask my mom how my sister's head was freed. What I thought was a chain saw, was in fact a steak knife (my dad has never been too great with power tools). Abby declared she was queen of everything (for that particular moment, the battle is ongoing). Much to the dismay of my petty nature, I keep coming up with falsified memories and have to ask myself 'Did that actually happen?' Sometimes, this makes me feel like a pathological liar; other times it makes me feel like an old time bard, making up stories as I go.

In his conclusion, Jerome makes a strong, legitimate point when he asserts "The human mind . . . [is] a tool by which one accomplishes one's desires" (190). After all, the mind is what allows us to daydream, invent, and wish for things that could never be. What's to say that historians are free from these so-called "imperfections" that riddle the human race? Every time I find a falsified memory, someone, somewhere finds out that a historical even never did happen. Every morning, when I have to drag myself out of my bed, away from the dreams of living a life that I deem perfect, a historian too must set aside their own dreams of living in their era of choice, so that they may face their reality of today. Every time I doodle tiaras or insist that people call me "Princess Sarah" for the day, there is a historian out there who refuses to answer to anything other than "Caesar" when called. So, how can a human being, someone who goes into life with passion, even if that passion is for accurate history, not find his or her own private thoughts and imaginings escaping into their assertions? How can anyone claim their accuracy in a testimonial, of a time they clearly didn't witness, when statistics' show their probable downfall? How do we find the truth? Simple; we don't. We live and we learn. We allow our imperfections to do what they were meant to. Jesus was crucified, not to ease our suffering as we live, but to allow us the grace to be wrong. As Jerome put it, "Making errors . . . may, and sometimes do, cancel one another, and eventually bring one out into the right path". I don't believe that history has to be accurate for it to mean something or for it to be important; sometimes people make things up that end up meaning more than the truth ever could. Sometimes, the lies really do lead us to the truth.

Works Cited:

Jerome, Thomas Spencer . The case of the Eyewitness. New York, NY: Harper Torchbooks, 1968. Print.

Bang!

By Sarah Christopher on August 1, 2010 4:45 PM | 1 Comment

I've been having issues reading this book; I sit down to read the thing and suddenly I'm unable to read English! I know weird, right? Kidding - however, I am having issues. I know this about myself; if I am assigned a book in class, I will go out of my way to avoid reading said book. Thus, I had to work on re-learning classroom skills that I seemingly misplaced at graduation. I'm halfway through the book (I had to pick up from the introduction - that's the farthest I'd gotten...) and have only stopped today to write this... and make brownies - but, whatever.

My reluctance to read the book was partly spurred by aforementioned laziness and partly by my distaste for Sabine's writing style. It took me a while to understand that this book is not important because it's a master piece of literature, but because of the message that Sabine tells is so important. Like a true journalist, he sites his sources (extensively), alludes not only to the Bible but psychology for evidence, and writes in a way that is easy to follow; once I got the hang of his style, I was ready to rock.

The message is one that I've heard my whole life: the economy and the environment go hand in hand - treat your resources with respect. My Grandpa on my mom's side has an extensive background in conservation, he was even on the panel that created "Smokey the Bear", so I've heard it all once or twice (or a million times). Therefore, I understand the sustainable agriculture and forestry part, so the part that I find interesting is the Interaction between the foundation and the people it helps. I'm finding that the causes of deforestation are so simple that even I could do something to help - and I plan on it. I'm starting to think that this book is going to be a valuable resource for me.

Introduction

By Sarah Christopher on July 15, 2010 11:01 PM | No Comments

Introduction

As I picked apart the Introduction of 'Tending to Eden' by Scott Sabin, I was reminded of an AP prompt I was given in my English Literature class my senior year; "In retrospect, the reader often discovers that the first chapter of a novel or the opening scene of a drama introduces some of the major themes of the work...". I didn't even have to read beyond the first chapter to see that indeed, the introduction chapter holds vital background the the themes Sabin intends to explore.
It's in this chapter that Sabin sets the background for his work, through juxtaposition of grand scenery, desolate people, and Haitians full of faith, he illustrates Haiti as a land full of promise untapped. Sabin uses his own faults to help the reader identify with his cause and uses the Bible as his reference so that the reader does not feel insignificant next to him or or his knowledge on the subject. Sabin approaches the reader with humility, which is imperative when later in the chapter he asks that the reader to approach his cause, not as 'visitors from the United States seeking to strengthen their own self image" but as biblical neighbors, loving one another as you love yourself.