Felecia Sechser

Good morning everyone!

Last night's lecture was actually quite interesting. I never really thought of faith and learning together until I came to Concordia and became a part of the Honors program. Looking back at the lecture last night I finally made the real life connection to why I actually came to Concordia. I had always said it was because of the small campus and class sizes. I always said that it was because it was a Christian school that taught Christian values, but I never really knew why I had decided to come to CSP until last night.

As Dr. Schoenbeck was talking about the recipe for learning everything kind of hit me. I finally knew why I had decided to come here. It took me long enough to figure out, right? Application comes from making a real life connection with the process. For me it was being part of the Honors program and spending first semester liking at faith and learning. That was my first connection with last nights lecture. Having a passion for learning was another part of his recipe for learning. I believe it was the connections ingredient. I believe having a passion for anything you do in your life is a connection. Having a passion means you care and it means that you want to know as much as possible as you can. For me that passion comes from dance. I have a passion for dance, I am always wanting to know more. I can honestly say that I will never get tired of dance or knowing as much as possible about dance. Also my passion for being a risk taker and always challenging myself is another reason why I came to CSP. The Honors program was a challenge for me, it was a risk. I wanted to take that risk. Finally the third part was questions. Questions are always necessary for learning. I think my question for knowledge and understanding.

I agree with Dr. Schoenbeck, faith is the core of the rope. You have to believe in something, you have to know where all these aspects come from. It does not need to be the dominant factor, but it does play a huge role in understanding and connecting your learning with your faith. In the Honors program that's what the Dr. Schuler's try to achieve. Connecting our learning with our faith. You need to teach all disciplines, but they need to someone relate back to your faith or personal life if you ever want to really make that connection with the topic and yourself.

I can honestly say after last night so many things make way way way more sense. I am glad I found someone to cover my shift at work last night. Even though I ended up going in and working til close after the lecture. Last night really was an eye opener. All the bits and pieces finally came together to make on big beautiful picture. I'm kind of sad that it took me almost a full year to realize this, but as they say better late then never.

Oh  and I really enjoyed his joke about the paradoxes! Haha! Pair of docs... it took me awhile.

Seexeng made a lot of really great statements on Monday night. He also taught me a lot about the Hmong culture that we haven't been able to cover this semester. Art alone has such a powerful impact and effect, but when you combine it with history and lifestyles it changes. Art goes from an expression to a story. The story of your past, of your traditions, of your family.

As a dancer I consider myself to be an artist. I create movement and lines. I have to be connected with the piece of music that I am using, with my choreography. You have to have an emotional connection. Hmong art and in general art is about an emotional connection. If the connection isn't there than the emotions are not there either. Art is so difficult to define. Art is whatever you want it to be, I believe it is an emotional connection to anything you creating. Webster and Britannica have very different definitions. I have to choose a definition that I agreed with the most it would be Britannica's. They ideally defined the connection that I see when I think of art.

It was interesting to hear Seexeng talk about Hmong art. The Paj Ntaub was such a functional piece in older Hmong culture. Now it is used as a decoration. It has such intricate patterns. It was interesting to hear that the real meaning of Paj Ntaub is flower cloth. The reason it is named that is to protect the baby's head from the evil spirit when they are little and have a soft head. It was alos interesting to hear about the singing during new year and how it used for mating. Was he kdding? Because that would seem a little awkward, but that might be a tradition in Hmong culture. Also that the Hmong culture didn't have a written history until 1952. I found that really interesting, I always knew they were storytellers I jst never knew for how long.

Monday night was filled with lots of new and excited information. It was a very interesting night! 

Good morning!

Wow, I am so glad to be done with those annotated bibliographies. That was a lot of work, but on a lighter note how funny were those students on Monday night. In the beginning they were a little more serious and that's understandable. When you have to tell your life story in front of a bunch of people who don't quite understand what it is like to be in your shoes, I would be completely terrified, but they handled it quite well.

I thought it was interesting to hear each one of their stories, and how each of them were born in different places and experienced different things. Xang's story about his dad being in the government and being born in Laos, I believe, and how they had to flee to Thailand to survive was sad, but also interesting. We have never heard a personal story like that yet this semester. Then Pa Houa's story about her dad helping the Americans during the war and her dad teaching others American, and how Pa Houa's English really isn't all that great. Hearing Pa Houa's hard accent really made me realize that it's not that easy to familiarize your life to American ways after you emigrate here. Finally, Xia's story about being born in the Ban Vinai refugee camp was great because in the midst of all this hate and torture there is happiness because a child is born. I think each one of their reasons for coming to Concordia opened up my eyes past the reasons why I came. I came for the small school atmosphere, but they came because they need that extra help, or they liked that Concordia is the first college to have a center entirely focused on Hmong studies and students.

Now for the funny part, I thought it was completely hilarious hearing the 2 girls and 1 guy argue over traditions. All 3 families believe in traditional values, but the 2 girls are the only ones who are going to continue to raise their families based on Hmong tradition. Xang wasn't totally against the traditional values, but sounded more excited about making his future family more Americanized, I guess. I have to say that I could not let a guy have more power over me. I don't think I could ever get used to Hmong traditions, but I guess the same goes for the Hmong getting used to our traditions. They probably don't agree with most of them because it goes against their own traditions and customs. Now by far the best part of Monday night is when the girls were talking about the placenta of a baby being used a shirt for the spirit when it returns to the body after death and Xang having NO idea what we were talking about was the funniest part. I guess Hmong men and women talk about different topics.

Hey everyone!

Wednesday's Art convocation was really interesting. I did not know that some of the artists were going to be present. To be honest I had no idea what convocation meant and had to look up the definition. In case anyone is wondering convocation means a group of people assembled for a special purpose. Well that pretty much sums up what Wednesday's gathering was about. Some place to gather people so that these artists can express their voices through art.

A few of my favorite pieces were the wood sculpture at first glance it thought oh it's a family tree, but after Alonso spoke about his piece and how it represents being moved from one place to another and trying to hold onto some of your past traditions while conforming to American lives.

Another favorite piece was the henna self portrait. I never knew Saudi Arabian women were not allowed to drive. The portrait made much more sense after she told us that fact. Some of us thought maybe it meant leaving somewhere and going somewhere new. So the henna represents her background and the car symbolizes that she can now drive and has freedom.

The other piece I liked was Wing Young Huie's University Ave Project. Since I take a 50 or 16 metro transit bus into St. Paul every day, and those buses run along University Ave I was really intrigued by the photograph. I haven't been able to read the article from the Minnesota Public Radio yet, but I hope to soon and I think I may even take an interest in following his work through next year when it will be displayed.

The last thing I thought was cool was the interactive dialogues. I believe she said at some of the bus stops you can text to receive a message about one of the kids lives at certain bus stops and I thought that was a really neat idea and way of presenting art.

These were just a few of my favorites I really enjoyed all the artwork and hearing everyone's thoughts about the pieces.

See you all soon!

Good Morning!

Haha I'm stilling at Monday night's speakers. Ms. Thao was the most amazing person I've met so far this semester. What a sense of humor she has. "I am tornado, oh well I am hurricane", was probably the best line of the night.  I think what surprised me the most about her story is that he seemed to find the humor among everything. She has experienced so much since she moved to America. I can't even put her stories into words on paper. That was just an experience that I will never forget. I never expected such a little woman to have such power. "You do not tell me what to do, I tell you what to do". Each of her stories had a goal, a moral, and a lesson to go with it. What I learned from her was to always go for what I want, and to never let anything get in my way. That you need to fight for your respect because it's not always handed to you. By the way, I tried figuring out what my name meant in Hmong or Laos, but had no luck! Dang, I really wanted to know.

 

Mr. Yang's stories on the other hand were not so happy. They had some humor, but they were more I went through this and this was so tough to go through. He also has made a huge adjustment since moving to America. He had a wife and a family to take care, and when he got to America he immediately started finding work. It looks like Hmong men have a little more responsibility when they move to America than the women do.

 

All in all, I really loved the guest speakers on Monday night. This semester has surprised me in every way, it keeps getting better and better. I can't wait for next Monday.

Hey good morning everyone,

Monday night's presentation by Professor Xiong was interesting, thoughtful, and knowledgeable. I learned a lot about the Hmong culture that you wouldn't normally find in a textbook or even a non-fiction book. Prof. Xiong saw everything first hand; from the time he was little until now, and he's still learning new things every day.  I think it's wonderful that the Minneapolis/St. Paul area has the largest urbanized Hmong population in the U.S. along with having the second largest Hmong population throughout the state.

 

Prof. Xiong's life has definitely had some high points and some low points, too. From almost not being able to leave Laos to being a prominent Hmong figure in the politic world. To hear some of things he has accomplished or been a part was really interesting to me. He has been a part of so many different groups and political campaigns. I would love his job, it would be a dream come true.

It was also great to learn about how much history and pride there is in Concordia's Hmong Center. Before Monday I had no idea what the Hmong Center was or where it was located, but now I want to go back and visit. I want to look through the books and look at all the other artifacts that have been donated and collected over the last five years.

 

As I was listening to him talk on Monday night I started piecing everything together that we've looked at already this semester, starting with The Middle of Everywhere to Monday night's presentation. Prof. Xiong described the Ban Vinai which is connected to Kalia's book The Latehomecomer. He also talked about being picked on when he moved to America and not knowing how to fit in, like in The Middle of Everywhere. He also made many references to Dr. Hillmer's book and General Vang Pao. Everything we are studying this semester is all incorporated and connected with one another.  After Monday night's lecture I'm looking forward to how everything else we are researching this semester is connected together and eventually making it all fit together as one.

Hey everyone!!

So I'm writing this just as I got home from the movie and wow that's all I can say.

 

From the previews I thought this movie was going to be about gang violence, which it was, but I thought they were going to take a whole different spin on it. I never thought I would go and see the movie. Yeah, it looked good, but it didn't seem like the type of movie I would enjoy. Now, after seeing the movie it is probably one of my all time favorites.

 

Walt seemed like the hardcore white American who didn't like people from other countries and didn't understand why they had to live in America.  So when the new Hmong (or should I say Hamong) neighbors moved in next door he wasn't too pleased. Walt was the only white American living in his Detroit, MI neighborhood.

 

Thao and Sue were the children who lived next door. Thao was more weak than his strong and confident sister Sue. Thao's cousin, Spider, was a leader of a Hmong gang and wanted to recruit Thao to the gang. Thao accepted at first and his first initiation was to steal Walt's mint condition 1972 Gran Torino. I never understand why the movie was titled Gran Torino until that moment. Thao attempted to steal the car but failed and was caught by Walt but got away. A few days later Thao's mother said that Thao had to repay Walt for trying to steal his car. I think this when the movie turned. Walt had tried to distance himself from his new neighbors, but he couldn't distance himself any longer. Thao was at Walt's assistance for the next week. During that week Walt started to build a friendship for Walt. He wanted to toughen him up a bit. Thao needed to learn how to stand up for himself. 

 

Walt didn't only build a relationship with Thao, but with Sue too. Sue had gotten herself into a situation one day that se couldn't get out of with her confidence and words. Walt just happened to be driving by and notice the situation and decided to help her. Now the Walt at the beginning of the movie would have never helped out someone else, but Walt wasn't the same man that he used to be. Now because Sue and Walt had also formed a relationship she invited him over one day to enjoy their barbeque. Sue wanted to teach Walt about the Hmong culture. I think after that BBQ Walt loved the Hmong culture or maybe it was just the food. That day Walt also realized something else, something more that he had more in common with these refugees than he did with his own family, and so began his wonderful friendship with their culture.

 

 

Now since Walt had gotten Thao a job he hadn't been spending much time with his cousin's gang. Spider didn't like that and decided to remind Thao where he came from and how important loyalty is in the Hmong culture. They destroyed his tools and left him with a burn scar to remind him that he was still part of their gang. Walt didn't like what they had done to Thao so he decided to pay a visit to Spider's house and left a little message with one of Spider's gang members. Apparently Spider didn't like the message, either.

 

A couple nights later Spider and his gang returned to Thao's house and left them a message they would never forget. Walt heard the gun shots and came running over. He had saw that one of bullets nicked Thao in the neck. Walt wanted to make everyone was ok. Everyone else was fine except Sue who was suppose to be at her aunt's house but never made it. Walt waited there until she got home, and when she returned all the memories of when he was in the war came back to him. The women he had to see suffer, and Walt lost it.

The next day Thao came over and wanted revenge on his cousin. Walt didn't know what to tell him other than to come back at 4pm and everything would be ready to go. It didn't make sense to me until after the movie was over but everything he did that day was to get ready for his funeral, when I had thought it was to get ready for his revenge on the gang.

 

So Thao returned at 4pm and Walt took him downstairs and locked him in the basement so that he could make sure that the revenge was done in right way so that the gang would never be on the streets again.  

 

Walt made a decision that night that at the beginning of the movie he never would have made. He sacrificed himself for someone that he only a short while. After I saw the movie I started piecing things together and on the car ride home it hit me. Walt was a war veteran. You hear him in the movie say that he lost his cavalry and he was the only one that returned. That they gave him a silver star, and that he shouldn't have received it because of his actions. Walt knew what the gang was going to do so he saved Thao from having to have that on his chest. There were things that Walt did in the war that he had carried with him since his days in the service. Walt did not want Thao to experience or carry those things his whole life with him like he had too.  

Hello everyone,

Wow, wasn't the book discussion on Monday night interesting? I thought so. It was so fascinating to hear everyone's stories of how they prepare or don't prepare certain meals for Christmas. How the meal isn't or isn't the focus of the day. For some families just being together is the best part. Reading The Middle of Everywhere over break actually tied in very nicely with the holidays. If you think about it lots of different cultures celebrate many different types of religions, and the book made me think about how other cultures are celebrating their own unique holiday, that is very different from the holiday I'm celebrating. I have to say I was a little surprised at some of the reactions to the book, but I think it was a real eye opener for all of us.

I know that my perspective changed after reading The Middle of Everywhere. I never realized just how much these families go through before they actually arrive in the U.S. It was so great to read some of the stories of their lives before their arrival. Some of those stories must be really hard to talk about, but they were so brave and told their story. I always used to whine about how my life was so hard and complicated, but after reading all the refugees stories I think I need to stop whining. Yes, I had a hard childhood that is hard for me to talk about, but it is nowhere near the hardship that these families went through.

I think The Middle of Everywhere was a great book to start the semester off with. It really sets the mood for how the rest of semester will be played out. Although I don't have any experiences with refugees to share I guarantee at the end of the semester I will be filled with stories and great memories to share with all of you.

God bless,

Felicia

This paper is going to discuss Descartes and Bacon's arguments over rationality and empiricism. Descartes believes in rationality alone, while Bacon believes in self experimentation and being a hand-on ruler. Each argument has strengths and weaknesses.

Descartes was a rationalist. "Rationalists claim we can acquire knowledge through sheer reasoning alone" (Dowe 62). Descartes was a fan of Euclid's Elements, and he believed all knowledge could be obtained from a "systematic deductive edifice based on certain truths which cannot be doubted" (Dowe 63). Descartes states that he can deduce that God exists from his idea of God, since his idea of God holds perfection and to exist is more perfect than to not exist.  He continues to say "if a perfect God exists then that God wouldn't systematically deceive me about proofs I derive in mathematics, so mathematically proven truths about the world are certain" (Dowe 63). Descartes also believes that humans are made up of two substances: the rational mind and the physical body. The rational mind as Descartes puts it is "the 'I' that thinks" (Dowe 63). The physical body consists of of the brain, reflexes, and nervous system. He also believed in the perspicuity of nature. From the Cartesian view, "the empirical world is rational, orderly, and indeed mathematical" (Dowe 63).

                The man who believed in empiricism was Francis Bacon. Bacon believed in actual experimentation. He has "been credited as the 'father of modern science and technology,' one who 'has permanent importance as the founder of modern inductive method and pioneer in the attempt at logical systemization of scientific procedure'" (Dowe 66). Bacon didn't have the same appreciation for the importance of mathematics in science as Galileo and Descartes, but he has justified his reputation with his idea of actual experimentation and application. Bacon developed his own version of the scientific method and logic with the intention of replacing Aristotle's. "Bacon saw genuine practical ability and knowledge of the working of nature" (Dowe 66). Bacon thought this "practical knowledge" was not sufficient for genuine understanding of the world. A synthesis of these two types of knowledge, the hands-on knowledge of nature and the academic pursuits of literacy and numbers, was needed to produce "marriage of practice and discourse". To attain this new knowledge there are three requirements. "The first is a willingness to discard all personal biases and a desire to know nature as it is undistorted by theories and presuppositions" (Dowe 66). The second requirement is large sampling of all relevant data be gathered. His third requirement concerns the method for deducing from this collection of facts certain sorts of generalizations about nature, scientific laws.

                Both Descartes and Bacon have strong points in their beliefs of God. For Descartes God exists through rationalism because "if a perfect God exists then that God wouldn't systematically deceive me about proofs I derive in mathematics, so mathematically proven truths about the world are certain" (Dowe 63). Descartes makes a very good point here by stating that if there is a perfect God and I come to the conclusion of a mathematical proof about truth that God didn't deceive my answer because of our rational mind. His second strong point is that "because we have a rational mind, which is like the mind of God, we can expect to be able to understand the rationality of the world he created" (Dowe 64). Descartes argument here is sufficient because if we have a mind like God's than human minds should be able to comprehend the world he created, or at least the reasonableness behind his creation.

Bacon also has strong points in his argument on how God is involved in science. One strong point that he makes is in his first requirement to "discard all personal biases and look at science undistorted by theories presuppositions" (Dowe66). His point is strong because in order to look at science you cannot look at it through their beliefs. A person needs to rely on the evidence and the experimentation performed. A Christian should not think about his beliefs when dealing with science. Science is based on experimentation and theories. Bacon's second strong point is how he depicts his image of God. "the image of God in humanity, and therefore human nature itself, is understood in terms of power , and the function of ruling" (Dowe 71). Therefore because God rules over humans with power, than we as human must rule over nature with power. The food chain sustains this, humans are on top and humans keep order in the world.

Descartes argument also has some weak and unclear points. Descartes say that only humans have reason, animals do not. Well if God made this earth wouldn't he give animals a rational mind also? If humans understand God because we have a brain like him, than animals should also share the same concept because God is their maker too. When Descartes states that because humans make error in mathematics that humans should "take the image of God to be more fully manifest in our will, rather than our rationality" (Dowe 65). This point is unclear, first he says in his image of God that because humans have a rational mind like God that humans can understand his rational world. Descartes is a rationalist and willing doesn't fit with his rational thinking methods.

Bacon also has some weak and unclear points. When Bacon discusses his second requirement he talks about gathering large sums of information. The point is very unclear and general. His second weak point is "Bacon believed that true knowledge always leads to practical application, since true knowledge of nature gives us power over nature" (Dowe 68). True knowledge does not give humans power over nature. God created humans to rule over nature, humans' knowledge has nothing to do with whether humans rule over nature or not.

Descartes and Bacon share two different views of the image of God, Descartes through rationality and Bacon through empiricism. Descartes view would make humans spectators, just watching everything happen, but Bacon's view makes humans "hands-on rulers" (Dowe 71). Both keep different view but allow for God in their views.

Thomas Aquinas explains reason and faith in Chapter VII of Summa Contra Gentiles.  Ha makes numerous connections to primary truths.  He relates the first condition: the ability of the mind to know truth to reason, and he relates the first principle: assume there won't be contradiction, in connection to the Christian Faith.  Thomas uses these two primary truths to prove faith and reason, and to defend them in their own subject area.

                Christian faith exceeds the capacity of human reason.  Thomas states that "those things which are naturally instilled in human reason cannot be opposed to this truth".  Thomas makes a connection to the first condition.  Beliefs that are instilled in humans cannot be contrasting to truth.  What humans believe is naturally must be true, it is impossible to deem it false according to Thomas Aquinas.  "Nor is it lawful to deem false that which is held by faith, since it is so evidently confirmed by God".  Thomas makes two connections; he states that the human mind is unable to think it's false because God established that it was true.  He also states that there can't be any contradiction because states that it's true.

"It is impossible for the aforesaid truth of faith to be contrary to those principles which reason knows naturally".  Aquinas states that impossible for truth to have any contradiction because the principle states that there cannot be any contradiction in order to converse about truth.  Objects and beliefs that are natural cannot have contradiction.  Natural objects are unchangeable as long as it remains natural.  Although some humans think there is confusion in reason, there cannot be any uncertainty in order for humans to discuss primary truths.

Thomas Aquinas connects both reason and faith through the two primary truths.  He states that the divine Wisdom contains these principles, but whatever is contrary to the principles is contrary to divine Wisdom.  "Therefore the divine Wisdom also contains these principles. Consequently whatever is contrary to these principles is contrary to the divine Wisdom; wherefore it cannot be God".   The first principle of non-contradiction states that in order for humans to talk about truth people have understand no truth can be discussed unless there is the understanding of the primary truths.  Thomas Aquinas discusses many relations that corresponds both faith and reason together.  "Therefore God does not instill into man any opinion or belief contrary to natural knowledge".  Aquinas believes that man has no contrasting opinion to natural knowledge, man's mind is pure.  No contrary opinions will disprove that faith and reason cannot be discussed with different ideas. 

Thomas Aquinas created this idea that people that believe in Christian faith believe in divine Wisdom, and divine Wisdom has no contradiction that it has to be true to be discussed with other people.  He also says that Christian faith has no contradiction and must be true because it was created by God is pure and true, so the Christian faith cannot be contrasting.  "Now contrary opinions cannot be in the same subject".   If God had instilled conflicting knowledge in humans, then people's intellect would be obstructed from knowing truth.  "Our intellect is stayed by contrary arguments, so that it cannot advance to the knowledge of truth". 

Aquinas harmonized faith and reason together.  He interrupted that knowledge cannot be contrasting because humans have opinions.  God created us where humans would be able to contradict what he instilled in us from birth.  Aquinas connected that God and the divine Wisdom have no contradiction in arguments because humans must first realize that in order to discuss faith the primary truths must be understood.  Aquinas also believed that reason corresponded with the first principle, and faith corresponded with the first condition.  Aquinas gave reasons that allow for there to not be any contrast in the Christian faith.  He gives two examples, "Hence the apostle said, 'The word is nigh thee even in thy heart and in thy mouth. This is the word of faith which we preach'". Christian faith also has no contradiction and must be true because that is the way that God made humans, and the reason why the knowledge humans have cannot be obstructed in any way. 

                Aquinas gave thoughtful explanation to discussing how Christian faith, divine Wisdom and God must be true and have no contradiction.  Humans cannot have conflicting knowledge otherwise "our intellect would not be able to grow.  Aquinas makes the connection between faith and reason in Chapter VII more evident.