Opening My Eyes

Of everything that we discussed this semester I think the thing that amazed me the most was just the simple correlation between culture and science. I had never really thought about how things like religion and politics play directly into how we interpret science. Not to say that I was oblivious to the bias inherent in our system, just that I had never had it thrown at me and discussed in such detail. There are the obvious things where the bias is apparent, such as global warming and our last section of the class, but I was more surprised when we talked about things like apotemnophilia and corn and all the cultural implications these things have. I will also take away our discussions from the poster presentations and the trends that were observed our history and how they are directly related to cultural norms at the time.

I also found some of the more philosophical concepts, like the idea of Cartesianism and the language of science, very interesting. They are things so deeply imbedded in our lives that I didn't even realize their existence until it was pointed out to me. Overall, I think this course taught me to listen to all sides of a story and to find where my facts are coming from before forming an opinion on the matter.

Everything is Corn!

I think the one thing that I will always remember from this class is discussing the issues and concerns surrounding food. I am pretty sure I will always be haunted by the fact that everything is made of corn. I had no idea how dependent we were on corn, and how it has changed human lives forever (and that we also have changed corn forever). I feel a little ignorant growing up in the MidWest and not knowing the impact of it.

It's upsetting because of how corn has invaded pretty much every aspect of our lives. I was shocked to find that even our fish were starting to eat it, ridiculous! My grocery store experiences have been profoundly changed by the discussions and topics surrounding food in this class. I had always thought of myself as "above average" in the ways of nutrition. But I found that accomplishing a well rounded diet is pretty much impossible with all of the corn in everything. I find myself looking at labels even more than I used to.

Our class was awesome with discussions. I learned a lot from just their comments in class. I was intrigued by how so many people new about food being thrown away. I was so shocked by the massive amounts of food that gets disposed of when there are so many people who are starving. I was brought out of my little bubble with class discussions, and I now see things in a different way.

Cartesian Driven World

Of all the things we talked about this semester (cutting limbs, 6 genders, the end of the world, etc.) I would say that the most memorable thing we talked about was the effect of Cartesian thinking on our society. Our lives are structured in such organized ways where there are steps we take in certain situations, rules of logic we apply to make the "best" decisions, and labels we create to organize our world. Realizing actually how deeply integrated this idea is into our society kind of scares me, to be honest. Its overwhelming to realize that there may have been a different way of thinking, once upon a time. Or maybe not. This could be just the way our human nature is, we need to organize in this way and use our "logic". But in any case, it was most fascinating to me to realize this idea.

This idea ties into our discussion about Brave New World, where we have two completely different worlds, the "civilized" and the "savage". One bases all decisions on Cartesian logic, the other on feelings, or whatever. Although the novel took these ideas to extremes, i think that its very important to see the immense contrast, and to see where we fit in as a society. Every time I make a decision I think about it in a new light. There are always two ways to make a decision. For example, I could do a cost benefit analysis to figure out what is a better decision, or I could draw a slip of paper and let "fate" decide. I have to say that I have no idea where I would fit into this binary, but I think thats the point.

That brings me to my last point, where id like to say, as I sort of mentioned in class, that overall I think that the most important thing I have taken out of this class is that I have no idea. There are so many different ways at looking at things, and so many of them make perfect sense. I cant say that i'm able to make better decisions in life, in fact, i'm practically unable to make any decisions at all now because there are so many angles to consider. But I think that education and knowledge is much more than knowing where you stand in the society. Its really just about experience and the rest of it will fall in to place, hopefully, and I think that the most that this class did was try to bring that kind of thinking to the University setting, where everything taught in a very linear way. It was different, but in some small way it opened my eyes to the chaos of the world, so thanks.

what to call myself now...

This semester is my last one as an undergrad, and ever since I heard that I had enough credits to graduate a year early, I've been a little unnerved. My aunts and uncles and my grandparents were all thrilled for me, constantly asking what I had planned for my future, proud that I had been so driven and was able to finish ahead of schedule...but the truth is I never intended to finish school early, and if I wasn't paying for my education with loans, I would have stayed in college for at least another year. Because my answer to my relatives' questions was always the same: I don't know.

A few of my relatives told me to appreciate that freedom. To take advantage of not having any ties and go and experience life...but I always thought, that's easy for them to say, they aren't the ones with all this "freedom." Up until the end of this semester, that lack of knowledge, that uncertainty about where I was going and what I was doing was entirely terrifying. I knew everything would work out, I wasn't genuinely "afraid" of anything, but something still made me uncomfortable when I thought about life post-grad. I didn't understand what it was until this semester that was throwing me for such a serious loop, but now I think I get it.

I knew that we lived in a Cartesian society, that we loved to categorize and classify everything around us, but it didn't strike me until this class that that includes ourselves. My fear for my future was that someone would ask me who I was and what I was doing and for the first time, I wouldn't have a definition of myself to give to other people. In high school, people would ask me about myself and I could say "I'm a student" or "I'm a choir-nerd" and in college I've been able to say "I'm an English major." In a few days, I will no longer be that. I'll be a college grad, true, but that will be my past. Telling people I'm a waitress isn't a category that I want to put myself in, yet I'm sure really sure what category I want to put myself in yet. I won't have a label that I can be happy to tell people about, that I want to define myself by.

I get when people say that what we've talked about in class has been a little unnerving, but it's sort of had the opposite effect on me. I went into this past semester totally ready to not have to go to class anymore, but really unsure of what that meant for who I was going to be when I was done. Now, while the idea of not having a nice, handy label for myself is still a little daunting, I think the things we've talked about in class have been sort of reassuring. The labels we come up with as a society are definitely not always right, and in a lot of ways can be more restricting than helpful, so maybe the same will be true for me. Maybe what my relatives say will be true, and the freedom will be, well, freeing!

How do I use this?

I am left unsure of what to do with the knowledge I have acquired. I am a scientist, a biologist, but now I am more unsure than ever of what this means. I had thought that this position would entitle me to a superior understanding of the world that had authority over other views. While I still believe the lens I use to view the world will give me the most accurate view possible, and I am not certain i will ever see absolute truth. One thing I now understand is that nobody sees the full truth. I must now acknowledge the ways that the "humanities" will always affect science. The two are intertwined, and I will forever see a hybrid when I think of how the world works. I now also understand why some people do not accept science as a supreme source of truth. These people live in a different view of reality, with their own paradigms, and their own concepts at the center of their hybrids. I will always be cautious in my quest to understand the world, and I will ask where the facts that I make come from. Despite being more unsure of myself, I definitely know more, and I am content with this new knowledge.

A REALISTIC REALSIM

Latour’s, “realistic realism”, is a concept I’ve been fighting since it was first introduced to me early on in the semester. Understanding the relationship between ontology and epistemology through the lens of a realistic realism has exposed the interconnectivity between the Cartesian “brain-in-vat”, and the outside world, and how science and politics are necessarily linked to and work through each other. Accepted concepts like “Might is Right” or scientific truth versus mob rule are suddenly delegitimized and falsified because science has been placed unjustifiably above common knowledge. A fact then, does not become a fact until it has been accepted as common knowledge. It is this point, when examined, and applied, that has colored and complicated my interpretation of the world.

We know the danger in relying on “facts” that fail to get the “mob” to go along with them; look to our discussions/debates on issues regarding global warming, food and the fossil fuel economy, and Michael Crichton’s real-world impact through the vehicle of a fictional novel. Rhetoric and fact are deeply connected, but in making them ontologically separate, we are unable to settle those issues that are connected to them because of the hierarchical structuring of scientific fact and the mob’s common knowledge. Latour reminds us however that this relationship is not vertical it is instead circular: fact and common knowledge depend on each other—one does not command the other. Latour’s fourth “public representation loop” (Latoure, p. 105) illustrates this point nicely, capturing the ways in which common knowledge plays a part in what scientific fact claims to be true.

Initially, I stood in contestation with this claim. How can the talk-show friendliness of a scientific fact affect whether or not that fact actually becomes one? Having completed the course, I now have a better idea of what Latour was getting at—although I’m not sure I will ever understand his reasoning entirely. In a way, if everyone were to believe in something, it makes it true. Where there is no belief, there is no fact. There is no sole determining factor in the creation of fact, there is instead a series of complex and interconnected relationship that work together to determine whether a claim becomes a fact or not. It is important for me to keep these things in mind. As a political science major, much of my time is spent exploring concepts of human nature, examining the role and likelihood of international cooperation, understanding the implications of international and domestic policy and so fourth. All of these concepts, in some way or another, are affected by the interpretation and implications of fact—scientific or not. Changing understanding is no longer dependent on the power of facts, it is instead dependent on the systems of signification and meaning that work to constitute and shape our very subjectivities.

Even before taking this class, the issue of diet and what I chose to consume has been big in my life. In high school, my mom and I started eating healthier, buying more organic and fresh foods, and discussing health and nutrition articles that we happened to find. Reading 'The Omnivore's Dilemma' deepend my interest in closely examining what I eat and where it comes from. I found this text, along with the overall themes of the class, frustrating (in a good way) because it challenges me, and forces me to question what is real and what is 'right'. I have been a vegetarian for the last four years, I try really hard to eat healthy and I admit to being drawn to local/ organic foods and places like the seward co*op. After reading Pollan's book and his views on the "stories" that places like whole foods feed you, factory Vs.family farm practices and corn, I had to ask myself what I believed in, what is real.Do I abstain from eating meat because it is gross or because I dislike the idea of eating the flesh of another living thing? Is it for health reasons? Is it because I disagree with the idea of growing animals as fast as you can and by any means necessary (pollution, sickness, disease, antibiotics, large swamps of toxic manure)? And if that is the case, would it be okay for me to eat a chicken or cow that was happily raised on Salatin's farm? I am also into not wasting things, so is it more wasteful than good to decline something containg meat when it would be thrown away anyway? I don't want to contribute to/support pollution or unethical practices, but I'm not really sure what the best solution is.I guess this course taught me to question everythingand allowed me to look at many different viewpoints surrounding heavy subjects. It also made me uncomfortable in some ways, as there are many possible ways of percieving, but it is debatable as to which one is "right". There are a number of different ways of seeing, and nothing is concrete.