Energy and Place
Essential questions:
1. How does energy production impact place?
2. How does your sense of place, environmental ethic and understanding of our energy needs influence your perception and decisions regarding energy production?
Artist Statement:
Since I wrote my essay centered around Hetch Hetchy Valley and its damming (and for lack of any better ideas), I decided to focus my visual around the O'Shaughnessy Dam. The main character in my essay feels ambivalent about the construction of the dam, understanding its necessity and importance but also feeling remorse for what is about to happen to the nature in the valley. Through the nature growing over the dam, I try to show how nature may only be defeated for a small while, as all man-made structures eventually come down.
This piece did not receive much refinement, as I had to throw it together again after a formatting issue. Nonetheless, I did my best to add to the picture as much as I could. I did this through the addition of the birds and the leaping fish.
This work was inspired by the Hetch Hetchy Valley and the character I created for Gifford Pinchot through my essay.
Since I wrote my essay centered around Hetch Hetchy Valley and its damming (and for lack of any better ideas), I decided to focus my visual around the O'Shaughnessy Dam. The main character in my essay feels ambivalent about the construction of the dam, understanding its necessity and importance but also feeling remorse for what is about to happen to the nature in the valley. Through the nature growing over the dam, I try to show how nature may only be defeated for a small while, as all man-made structures eventually come down.
This piece did not receive much refinement, as I had to throw it together again after a formatting issue. Nonetheless, I did my best to add to the picture as much as I could. I did this through the addition of the birds and the leaping fish.
This work was inspired by the Hetch Hetchy Valley and the character I created for Gifford Pinchot through my essay.
Pinchot's Dilemma
ABSTRACT: In this essay, I write from the view of Gifford Pinchot, a conservationist from the early 1900s who advocated for the insertion of the O'Shaughnessy Dam at Hetch Hetchy Valley. I write from his first person because we share some of the same environmental ethics, such as conservationism, weak anthropocentrism, and sustainability. This can be seen when he says, “I am bewildered by John Muir and his cult of incessants. Was not supplying water to a large city a worthy cause, one that certainly took priority over preserving wilderness?” Through this I am trying to show that I believe in conserving the wilderness, rather than preserving it, as preserving seems rather impossible to me.
I write this as I stand atop this mountain, gazing at the Hetch Hetchy Valley below. The blue river slithers like a snake, feeling its way through the grass and bushes and leaving a slimy trail behind its path. Shallow ponds blotch the valley’s floor. Tall, grey walls jut up on all sides, trapping the snake in a long, narrow cage as it searches for its way out. A belt of trees wraps around the uneven surface of the mountain walls. Waterfalls drape themselves over the mountainsides like tattered curtains rippling in the wind. I take a deep breath, taking in all the beauty that surrounds me. I let it out, knowing that soon it all won’t be here. I came here to bask in my victory over John Muir and the preservationists, but I can’t help feeling a tinge of doubt regarding whether I made the right choice.
But of course I made the right choice. After the devastating earthquakes and fires that nearly destroyed the city, San Francisco was in need of a steady, secure water supply. Heck, until this dam is built, they still are! The dam in Hetch Hetchy Valley would be the perfect solution to this issue. Despite this, national controversy hit, as Hetch Hetchy is located in Yosemite National Park and protected by the national government. It was up to Congress to decide whether or not the dam would be built. While I advocated strongly for the insertion of the dam, John Muir stood on the opposite side of the spectrum, strongly opposing the dam’s construction. In the end, the O’Shaughnessy Dam was approved for construction. Construction was planned to begin in the early of 2014.
This beautiful, pristine place offers itself up to me so that I can enjoy all of its wonders and mysteries, and in a matter of months we will be damming it. For a good cause, of course. The O’Shaughnessy Dam at Hetch Hetchy will soon be providing water and energy to the city and people of San Francisco! Still, the guilt pulls at me.
A narrow, windy trail leads me down into the valley below. As I get lower and lower, the valley roars to life. A squirrel scurries up a tree, a nut firm in his jaw, ready to bring it home for safekeeping. Crickets sing together in the green, grassy forest they reside. A bald eagle eclipses the sun as it soars overhead. A blackbird glides into its nest with a mouth full of dinner for three hungry, chirping chicks. Deer let their heads fall down to the river, which eagerly gives the deer what they came for. The deer leave, and I continue my stroll to where they last resided. I stop at the edge of the river, staring down at my reflection. A fish scours the bottom of the river, desperately searching for a midday snack.
This is a home to all of these wonderful creatures. How unfortunate is an event such as this. This home to so many animals would soon become lost in Atlantis, California. I imagine my hometown becoming slowly entrenched underneath a deep, blue death. Animals losing their homes truly is a tragedy, but what of the people living in San Francisco? They certainly have their own homes to worry about and their own needs to fulfill, just as the animals did. I must keep this in mind, as humans are the main priority. A couple of animals won’t be missed, especially in a place that is so rarely visited.
Of course, John Muir would argue otherwise. I have a particular disdain for this man. Nothing about him personally, really, just the fact that he stood in the way of one of my goals. “DAM HETCH HETCHY!” he would shout in protest. How selfish and arrogant of him and his allies. This much needed reservoir is essential to the well being of San Francisco. I can understand his desire to keep this place beautiful, but it contrasts with the health of thousands of people, just so a few people can enjoy this place.
I am bewildered by John Muir and his cult of incessants. Was not supplying water to a large city a worthy cause, one that certainly took priority over preserving wilderness? While San Francisco is facing a chronic fresh-water shortage, John Muir continues to fight for his “temple”, as he calls it, while he labels folks like me “temple destroyers” and “devotees of ravaging commercialism.” He wants us to lift our eyes to “the God of the mountains”. I have looked to the Mountain God, and seen all that he can provide. Gods are supposed to be giving and loving, are they not? Where John Muir sees a temple for his own personal benefit, I see a place to benefit a large populace. A large populace of people. Of men and women and children. Of husbands and wives, and fathers and mothers. Of working class citizens and first class luxurists. If Muir wants us to worship the mountain as a god, then let its bounties flow into San Francisco as any merciful god would allow.
I look up as the sun as it begins its slow declination behind the mountains. As the color and the intensity of the sun’s light grows more intense, I become more and more infatuated with this valley. This masterful painter coats his sky, his canvas, in a plethora of peach, pink and purple, and I can’t help but look up in awe, gasping at this amazing moment. If there’s at least one thing the dam won’t take away from here, it’s the beautiful sunset. Suddenly, the sun dips away, quiet and humble, having finished its amazing art show, allowing the moon to come out for his act. The moon was not a painter. Instead, he was a dancer, moving and flowing slowly across the sky with the stars behind him.
He looks down upon me for a good while, shining his soft, white light upon me. I turn my gaze to see that the moon isn’t fixed upon just me, but the whole valley. The reflection of the moon and stars bounce off the smooth river. I kick off my boots, roll up my trousers, and lean back against the ground, submerging my feet in water. Goosebumps shoot up all over my body as my feet hit. The cool water soon loses its frigidness and becomes relaxing. I lay there for a good half an hour, observing the cosmos above me.
My mission here of self glory was now of no importance. No, this trip here means much more than that. What had started out as a petty victory dance was now a dance with nature; a magnificent slow tango with a beautiful woman I was just getting to know.
I run my hands through the sand. I grab a handful of sand, and let it fall to the ground, creating a white, gritty waterfall. I look up to the mountains, and then to the sky, then back to the river, until my gaze returns to the ground before me. I apologize to the Hetch Hetchy Valley and all of its counterparts, hopeful that they’ll understand why this must be done. I feel like I have betrayed a good friend, but in reality I am no friend to this now forsaken place. I am the Reaper of Hetch Hetchy, and I have come to collect my payment. If anything, this place wishes nothing but the worst for me.
Rising to my feet, I begin my hike out of the valley. I follow the trail back up and out of the canyon, my gaze never leaving the starry heavens. Upon reaching the mountain’s top, I look back over Hetch Hetchy Valley once more before I depart. It is too dark to make out anything but outlines, but its distinct aura lingers. I wave goodbye to the valley, climb into my automobile, and begin my drive on down to San Francisco.
Years pass, and I return to Hetch Hetchy once again, but it’s not the same Hetch Hetchy I once left behind. A giant, grey monster stands guard, arms outstretched, against an army of water, fighting hard to break past his threshold but to no avail. Only when I climb atop this beast can I truly appreciate his remarkable strength. Legions upon legions stand before him attempting to break through, but the giant just stands there, laughing. The once massive mountain walls now only seem like rocky hills. The river no longer slithers; the snake grew fat from lack of exercise. The trees which once brought this place to life are now a distant memory. I see no squirrels or eagles or deer. I hear no crickets chirping, only the sound of crashing waves relentlessly attempting to break the giant’s hold. Hidden beneath the depths is a world that will be forever hidden; a world lost to the murky, deep waters of Hetch Hetchy Reservoir.
The Chemistry side of this project can be found here.
I write this as I stand atop this mountain, gazing at the Hetch Hetchy Valley below. The blue river slithers like a snake, feeling its way through the grass and bushes and leaving a slimy trail behind its path. Shallow ponds blotch the valley’s floor. Tall, grey walls jut up on all sides, trapping the snake in a long, narrow cage as it searches for its way out. A belt of trees wraps around the uneven surface of the mountain walls. Waterfalls drape themselves over the mountainsides like tattered curtains rippling in the wind. I take a deep breath, taking in all the beauty that surrounds me. I let it out, knowing that soon it all won’t be here. I came here to bask in my victory over John Muir and the preservationists, but I can’t help feeling a tinge of doubt regarding whether I made the right choice.
But of course I made the right choice. After the devastating earthquakes and fires that nearly destroyed the city, San Francisco was in need of a steady, secure water supply. Heck, until this dam is built, they still are! The dam in Hetch Hetchy Valley would be the perfect solution to this issue. Despite this, national controversy hit, as Hetch Hetchy is located in Yosemite National Park and protected by the national government. It was up to Congress to decide whether or not the dam would be built. While I advocated strongly for the insertion of the dam, John Muir stood on the opposite side of the spectrum, strongly opposing the dam’s construction. In the end, the O’Shaughnessy Dam was approved for construction. Construction was planned to begin in the early of 2014.
This beautiful, pristine place offers itself up to me so that I can enjoy all of its wonders and mysteries, and in a matter of months we will be damming it. For a good cause, of course. The O’Shaughnessy Dam at Hetch Hetchy will soon be providing water and energy to the city and people of San Francisco! Still, the guilt pulls at me.
A narrow, windy trail leads me down into the valley below. As I get lower and lower, the valley roars to life. A squirrel scurries up a tree, a nut firm in his jaw, ready to bring it home for safekeeping. Crickets sing together in the green, grassy forest they reside. A bald eagle eclipses the sun as it soars overhead. A blackbird glides into its nest with a mouth full of dinner for three hungry, chirping chicks. Deer let their heads fall down to the river, which eagerly gives the deer what they came for. The deer leave, and I continue my stroll to where they last resided. I stop at the edge of the river, staring down at my reflection. A fish scours the bottom of the river, desperately searching for a midday snack.
This is a home to all of these wonderful creatures. How unfortunate is an event such as this. This home to so many animals would soon become lost in Atlantis, California. I imagine my hometown becoming slowly entrenched underneath a deep, blue death. Animals losing their homes truly is a tragedy, but what of the people living in San Francisco? They certainly have their own homes to worry about and their own needs to fulfill, just as the animals did. I must keep this in mind, as humans are the main priority. A couple of animals won’t be missed, especially in a place that is so rarely visited.
Of course, John Muir would argue otherwise. I have a particular disdain for this man. Nothing about him personally, really, just the fact that he stood in the way of one of my goals. “DAM HETCH HETCHY!” he would shout in protest. How selfish and arrogant of him and his allies. This much needed reservoir is essential to the well being of San Francisco. I can understand his desire to keep this place beautiful, but it contrasts with the health of thousands of people, just so a few people can enjoy this place.
I am bewildered by John Muir and his cult of incessants. Was not supplying water to a large city a worthy cause, one that certainly took priority over preserving wilderness? While San Francisco is facing a chronic fresh-water shortage, John Muir continues to fight for his “temple”, as he calls it, while he labels folks like me “temple destroyers” and “devotees of ravaging commercialism.” He wants us to lift our eyes to “the God of the mountains”. I have looked to the Mountain God, and seen all that he can provide. Gods are supposed to be giving and loving, are they not? Where John Muir sees a temple for his own personal benefit, I see a place to benefit a large populace. A large populace of people. Of men and women and children. Of husbands and wives, and fathers and mothers. Of working class citizens and first class luxurists. If Muir wants us to worship the mountain as a god, then let its bounties flow into San Francisco as any merciful god would allow.
I look up as the sun as it begins its slow declination behind the mountains. As the color and the intensity of the sun’s light grows more intense, I become more and more infatuated with this valley. This masterful painter coats his sky, his canvas, in a plethora of peach, pink and purple, and I can’t help but look up in awe, gasping at this amazing moment. If there’s at least one thing the dam won’t take away from here, it’s the beautiful sunset. Suddenly, the sun dips away, quiet and humble, having finished its amazing art show, allowing the moon to come out for his act. The moon was not a painter. Instead, he was a dancer, moving and flowing slowly across the sky with the stars behind him.
He looks down upon me for a good while, shining his soft, white light upon me. I turn my gaze to see that the moon isn’t fixed upon just me, but the whole valley. The reflection of the moon and stars bounce off the smooth river. I kick off my boots, roll up my trousers, and lean back against the ground, submerging my feet in water. Goosebumps shoot up all over my body as my feet hit. The cool water soon loses its frigidness and becomes relaxing. I lay there for a good half an hour, observing the cosmos above me.
My mission here of self glory was now of no importance. No, this trip here means much more than that. What had started out as a petty victory dance was now a dance with nature; a magnificent slow tango with a beautiful woman I was just getting to know.
I run my hands through the sand. I grab a handful of sand, and let it fall to the ground, creating a white, gritty waterfall. I look up to the mountains, and then to the sky, then back to the river, until my gaze returns to the ground before me. I apologize to the Hetch Hetchy Valley and all of its counterparts, hopeful that they’ll understand why this must be done. I feel like I have betrayed a good friend, but in reality I am no friend to this now forsaken place. I am the Reaper of Hetch Hetchy, and I have come to collect my payment. If anything, this place wishes nothing but the worst for me.
Rising to my feet, I begin my hike out of the valley. I follow the trail back up and out of the canyon, my gaze never leaving the starry heavens. Upon reaching the mountain’s top, I look back over Hetch Hetchy Valley once more before I depart. It is too dark to make out anything but outlines, but its distinct aura lingers. I wave goodbye to the valley, climb into my automobile, and begin my drive on down to San Francisco.
Years pass, and I return to Hetch Hetchy once again, but it’s not the same Hetch Hetchy I once left behind. A giant, grey monster stands guard, arms outstretched, against an army of water, fighting hard to break past his threshold but to no avail. Only when I climb atop this beast can I truly appreciate his remarkable strength. Legions upon legions stand before him attempting to break through, but the giant just stands there, laughing. The once massive mountain walls now only seem like rocky hills. The river no longer slithers; the snake grew fat from lack of exercise. The trees which once brought this place to life are now a distant memory. I see no squirrels or eagles or deer. I hear no crickets chirping, only the sound of crashing waves relentlessly attempting to break the giant’s hold. Hidden beneath the depths is a world that will be forever hidden; a world lost to the murky, deep waters of Hetch Hetchy Reservoir.
The Chemistry side of this project can be found here.
Project Reflection
Korematsu vs. US (1944)
Opening Statement for the Defense:
Your honorable judges, ladies and gentlemen of the courtroom.
Imagine waking up one morning, going outside, and seeing THESE hanging up all over town. Imagine having a week to pack up your things and move to a completely new place, leaving your home susceptible to vandalism and theft. Imagine the fear you would feel after Pearl Harbor as a Japanese American, knowing that people you were once friends with would turn against you.
And then imagine waking up in an internment camp. Imagine getting out of bed, and going out into the dry desert. You go to the mess hall and eat the same goosh everyday. Imagine Armed men stand guard around the barb-wired gates and up in towers. Imagine the lack of privacy in both the barracks and the restrooms There is no leaving. You are forced to stay day after day against your will.
Is it any wonder that my client, Fred Korematsu decided to try and get away from all this? From all the hatred, and the fear?
Now, I am not trying to prove that Fred Korematsu did not commit a crime. There is no doubt that Mr. Korematsu attempted to leave the Civilian Exclusion Zone. I am, however, questioning the constitutionality of the laws that have been made against the Japanese Americans and the crimes that Mr. Korematsu is being charged with.
Executive Order 9066 and the Civilian Exclusion Zones set forth against Japanese Americans do not pass all of the tests of Strict Scrutiny.
The Defense will present the following witnesses: Curtis Munson will make it clear that there was very little to no fifth column threat here in the United States. J. Edgar Hoover, Head of the FBI will show that the FBI had everything under control and that making Civilian Exclusion Zones did not meet the requirements of Strict Scrutiny by using the least restrictive means possible. Ralph Lazo, who will show just how unjust the camps really were. Francis Biddle, Wartime attorney General who will show that the internment camps were not necessary. Ringle, who will also make it clear that there was no fifth column threat, and Fred Korematsu, who will show that he was simply in fear when choosing to leave the Civilian Exclusion Zone.
Direct Examination - J. Edgar Hoover
Lawyer Travis: Your Honor, may I approach the witness?
The Honorable Judge: Yes.
Lawyer Travis: State your name and age for the court
J. Edgar: John Edgar Hoover, I am 49 years old
Lawyer Travis: What is your occupation, Mr. Hoover?
J. Edgar: I am the first director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation
Lawyer Travis: How long have you been Director of the FBI?
J. Edgar: I have been the Director of the FBI for about 20 years now
Lawyer Travis: So you’d say you have a fair amount of experience as head of the FBI?
J. Edgar: Yes, a reasonable amount.
Lawyer Travis: Without telling the court what they are, do you recognize these documents (http://www.fdrlibrary.marist.edu/archives/pdfs/internment.pdf - doc 1)?
J. Edgar: Yes I do.
Lawyer Travis: Can you tell me what these documents are?
J. Edgar: This is a letter sent by me to the secretary of the President. Enclosed in the letter were maps showing where and how many enemy aliens were arrested following the Pearl Harbor bombing.
Lawyer Travis: How many enemy aliens were apprehended?
J. Edgar: 1,212 Japanese, 620 Germans, and 98 Italians.
Lawyer Travis: How long did it take the FBI to apprehend the aliens?
J. Edgar: All those apprehended were arrested within 48 hours of the attack.
Lawyer Travis: So you would say the FBI had control of the situation?
J. Edgar: Yes.
Lawyer Travis: (May Object) So you’d also agree that there could have been, and were, less restrictive means of handling a fifth column threat?
J. Edgar: I would.
(Plan B, if objection is called) How do you feel the fifth-column threat should have been handled?
Your honorable judges, ladies and gentlemen of the courtroom.
Imagine waking up one morning, going outside, and seeing THESE hanging up all over town. Imagine having a week to pack up your things and move to a completely new place, leaving your home susceptible to vandalism and theft. Imagine the fear you would feel after Pearl Harbor as a Japanese American, knowing that people you were once friends with would turn against you.
And then imagine waking up in an internment camp. Imagine getting out of bed, and going out into the dry desert. You go to the mess hall and eat the same goosh everyday. Imagine Armed men stand guard around the barb-wired gates and up in towers. Imagine the lack of privacy in both the barracks and the restrooms There is no leaving. You are forced to stay day after day against your will.
Is it any wonder that my client, Fred Korematsu decided to try and get away from all this? From all the hatred, and the fear?
Now, I am not trying to prove that Fred Korematsu did not commit a crime. There is no doubt that Mr. Korematsu attempted to leave the Civilian Exclusion Zone. I am, however, questioning the constitutionality of the laws that have been made against the Japanese Americans and the crimes that Mr. Korematsu is being charged with.
Executive Order 9066 and the Civilian Exclusion Zones set forth against Japanese Americans do not pass all of the tests of Strict Scrutiny.
The Defense will present the following witnesses: Curtis Munson will make it clear that there was very little to no fifth column threat here in the United States. J. Edgar Hoover, Head of the FBI will show that the FBI had everything under control and that making Civilian Exclusion Zones did not meet the requirements of Strict Scrutiny by using the least restrictive means possible. Ralph Lazo, who will show just how unjust the camps really were. Francis Biddle, Wartime attorney General who will show that the internment camps were not necessary. Ringle, who will also make it clear that there was no fifth column threat, and Fred Korematsu, who will show that he was simply in fear when choosing to leave the Civilian Exclusion Zone.
Direct Examination - J. Edgar Hoover
Lawyer Travis: Your Honor, may I approach the witness?
The Honorable Judge: Yes.
Lawyer Travis: State your name and age for the court
J. Edgar: John Edgar Hoover, I am 49 years old
Lawyer Travis: What is your occupation, Mr. Hoover?
J. Edgar: I am the first director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation
Lawyer Travis: How long have you been Director of the FBI?
J. Edgar: I have been the Director of the FBI for about 20 years now
Lawyer Travis: So you’d say you have a fair amount of experience as head of the FBI?
J. Edgar: Yes, a reasonable amount.
Lawyer Travis: Without telling the court what they are, do you recognize these documents (http://www.fdrlibrary.marist.edu/archives/pdfs/internment.pdf - doc 1)?
J. Edgar: Yes I do.
Lawyer Travis: Can you tell me what these documents are?
J. Edgar: This is a letter sent by me to the secretary of the President. Enclosed in the letter were maps showing where and how many enemy aliens were arrested following the Pearl Harbor bombing.
Lawyer Travis: How many enemy aliens were apprehended?
J. Edgar: 1,212 Japanese, 620 Germans, and 98 Italians.
Lawyer Travis: How long did it take the FBI to apprehend the aliens?
J. Edgar: All those apprehended were arrested within 48 hours of the attack.
Lawyer Travis: So you would say the FBI had control of the situation?
J. Edgar: Yes.
Lawyer Travis: (May Object) So you’d also agree that there could have been, and were, less restrictive means of handling a fifth column threat?
J. Edgar: I would.
(Plan B, if objection is called) How do you feel the fifth-column threat should have been handled?
Korematsu vs. US (1944) Project Reflection
The end goal of this project was to get into the character of either a lawyer, judge, or witness and accurately and convincingly represent how this trial would have gone. We started this project out by learning about Japanese Internment camps and reading a book called Snow Falling on Cedars. After we got basic background of Pearl Harbor and the situation that was at hand at the time, we were assigned our roles in the trial and sent off to do our jobs. As a Defense lawyer, it was my job to defend Korematsu and his rights.
Without teamwork within our lawyer teams and between lawyers and witnesses, this project would have been a bust for everybody. Teamwork was key. Without my teammates, I would have been unable to write my Opening Statement, and Josh would have been unable to write the Closing Statement. We communicated throughout the entire trial, carefully listening and preparing to challenge every question the prosecution asked.
I was constantly revising my Opening Statement as my fellow defense lawyers revised their arguments. Before my revising of the my direct-examination questions, the questions I was asking didn't seem to have a point or relate to each other. When I started researching more into J. Edgar Hoover, I found my core argument: The FBI had everything under control in the first place, and therefore Executive Order 9066 and the Civilian Exclusion Zones were illegal. I feel like I was able to sway the judge's views a fair bit after direct-examining Hoover.
I started off this project like any other project, indifferent towards it. As we started learning about Japanese Internment camps and reading Snow Falling on Cedars, this project started to become more and more interesting for me. When we started our actual trial work, though, I was less than thrilled. Far less than thrilled. I thought, "Why do we need to go through this whole process? Can't we just learn about the case? Why do we have to have a trial?" Once the trial date came, I dropped all of those beliefs. I had a blast at the mock trial. Giving the opening statement was exciting, direct-examining and proving points was fun, and nothing was better than getting to call another lawyer out with an "Objection!" Overall, I am very happy that we did this project, and wouldn't mind doing something similar to it in the future.
Without teamwork within our lawyer teams and between lawyers and witnesses, this project would have been a bust for everybody. Teamwork was key. Without my teammates, I would have been unable to write my Opening Statement, and Josh would have been unable to write the Closing Statement. We communicated throughout the entire trial, carefully listening and preparing to challenge every question the prosecution asked.
I was constantly revising my Opening Statement as my fellow defense lawyers revised their arguments. Before my revising of the my direct-examination questions, the questions I was asking didn't seem to have a point or relate to each other. When I started researching more into J. Edgar Hoover, I found my core argument: The FBI had everything under control in the first place, and therefore Executive Order 9066 and the Civilian Exclusion Zones were illegal. I feel like I was able to sway the judge's views a fair bit after direct-examining Hoover.
I started off this project like any other project, indifferent towards it. As we started learning about Japanese Internment camps and reading Snow Falling on Cedars, this project started to become more and more interesting for me. When we started our actual trial work, though, I was less than thrilled. Far less than thrilled. I thought, "Why do we need to go through this whole process? Can't we just learn about the case? Why do we have to have a trial?" Once the trial date came, I dropped all of those beliefs. I had a blast at the mock trial. Giving the opening statement was exciting, direct-examining and proving points was fun, and nothing was better than getting to call another lawyer out with an "Objection!" Overall, I am very happy that we did this project, and wouldn't mind doing something similar to it in the future.
The Morality and Politics of Justice
Artist’s Statement
My political campaign poster represents my perspective on whether or not textbooks should be allowed to be taught in a biology classroom and textbook. I believe that any creationist beliefs belong as far away as possible from textbooks that are looked at as solid fact. I feel this way because it sacrifices the religious freedoms of others. I show my perspective by showing a cross being hammered into a biology textbook by the hand and hammer of the Texas Board of Education, which is trying to push for creationism in textbooks.
My poster uses ethos and pathos. The ethos is present in my quotes by both John Stuart Mill and Thomas Paine. They were two very renowned people and their works and quotes are still influential today. I use pathos by showing the cross being hammered into the biology textbook by the Board of Education. I feel like people will look at that and really think about whether or not they think religion belongs in a textbook.
I refined my poster in a number of ways. I used a drop shadow on the cross in the picture to try and make it pop more; to make it look more 3D. I chose to add faded black boxes at the tops and bottoms of the pages to make the text easier to read. My quotes were arranged as to not interfere with any other words on the textbook (such as Miller/Levine).
I wish I would've focused more on adding pathos and logos in my visual piece. My ethos is very present, but I don’t do a great job showing the other two. I feel like a cross being nailed into a textbook wouldn't stir someone up as much as some other posters would.
My political campaign poster represents my perspective on whether or not textbooks should be allowed to be taught in a biology classroom and textbook. I believe that any creationist beliefs belong as far away as possible from textbooks that are looked at as solid fact. I feel this way because it sacrifices the religious freedoms of others. I show my perspective by showing a cross being hammered into a biology textbook by the hand and hammer of the Texas Board of Education, which is trying to push for creationism in textbooks.
My poster uses ethos and pathos. The ethos is present in my quotes by both John Stuart Mill and Thomas Paine. They were two very renowned people and their works and quotes are still influential today. I use pathos by showing the cross being hammered into the biology textbook by the Board of Education. I feel like people will look at that and really think about whether or not they think religion belongs in a textbook.
I refined my poster in a number of ways. I used a drop shadow on the cross in the picture to try and make it pop more; to make it look more 3D. I chose to add faded black boxes at the tops and bottoms of the pages to make the text easier to read. My quotes were arranged as to not interfere with any other words on the textbook (such as Miller/Levine).
I wish I would've focused more on adding pathos and logos in my visual piece. My ethos is very present, but I don’t do a great job showing the other two. I feel like a cross being nailed into a textbook wouldn't stir someone up as much as some other posters would.
Op-Ed Article
Creationism in the Classroom?
In the state of Texas, it is now time to determine which biology textbooks shall be used for the next decade. The panel for choosing these textbooks is as follows: a chemical engineer who is listed as a “Darwin Skeptic” in the Creation Science Hall of fame; a nutritionist who believes “creation science” based on biblical principles should be taught in the classroom; and a biologist who works with the Discovery Institute, a center for the intelligent-design movement, who also happens to be vice president of an evangelical ministry in Plano, Texas. A number of members on the panel reject evolution and climate change as scientific truth (Rich).
Although students do have the right to develop their own beliefs and values, teaching creationism in a classroom infringes on the rights of students.
The panel avoids using words like “creationism” when talks of it in textbooks is brought up. They instead use the words “critical thinking”, saying that there is simply not enough evidence for evolution, and that students should be able to decide for themselves what they believe (Rich). By the sound of it, this “critical thinking” the board speaks of is just an excuse to teach creationism in schools. This “critical thinking” doesn’t actually allow the students to decide what they believe; it gives them the choice between Christianity and evolution. But what about all of the other religions, such as the Jewish faith or the Muslim faith? Ron Grossman, writer at the Chicago Tribune, wrote, “If we were to take a whack at the wall between church and state, where would the crack come? At the Muslim, the Christian, or the Jewish take on the messiah?” This shows that we can’t implement religion into our government or classrooms without sacrificing the religious freedoms of others.
Putting creationism into textbooks (even if it happens to be next to evolution) denigrates the religious freedom of those of separate faiths. If the panel wants students to be able to decide what they believe themselves, they should keep religion entirely away from the biology textbooks. Instead, they should introduce a religious studies class, where students are given an unbiased education on all the world’s major religions.
The problem with teaching creationism in a textbook is that students often times look at textbooks as objective fact, while they may look at other sources, such as novels and articles, as being of more subjective nature and thus open to critical examination and analysis. Hence, teaching doctrine in a biology textbook is entirely inappropriate. Instead if one really wanted the students to decide what they believe in on their own, they would present religion in a subjective way, rather than in an objective textbook.
In “The Age of Reason”, Thomas Paine writes, “[o]ne good schoolmaster is of more use than a hundred priests.” In this way, Thomas Paine supports the idea of having an unbiased religious class taught by a secular teacher. Not only would this allow students to choose for themselves their ideologies and beliefs, but it would also give them a better view of the outside world.
An unbiased course that challenges students to critically examine each religion and text is the only way that student can truly choose what they believe. Before taking a religious studies class my sophomore year of high school, I had a very narrow aspect of cultures that weren’t my own. Now, I have a solid understanding of many of the world’s religions, and I have been able to choose for myself what I believe.
Allowing creationism in biology textbooks would be in direct violation of our basic human liberties and the First Amendment, which states that each individual has a right to freedom of religion, speech, press, assembly, and petition. John Stuart Mills, a renowned philosopher and author of the novel On Liberty, wrote, “[t]he appropriate region of human liberty compromises, first, of the inward domain of consciousness; demanding liberty of conscience, in the most comprehensive sense; liberty of thought and feeling; absolute freedom of opinion and sentiment on all subjects, practical or speculative, scientific, moral, or theological” (page 15). In these lines, Mills reflects constitutional ideals; namely that we should be able to speculate freely on any topic, including religion.
Indeed, the United States was founded on all the principles Mills listed above. Our country was founded to escape the orthodoxy that Great Britain enforced. Our ancestors fought the Revolutionary War to escape the tyranny of the British government. Our first president said, “The government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.” Despite this, members of the are still pushing for the inclusion of creationism in a textbook. We must push for our constitutional rights and prevent any creationism from entering our textbooks.
Works Cited
Grossman, Ron. "What Happens When There's No Separation between Church and State."Chicago Tribune. N.p., 21 Mar. 2012. Web. 21 Oct. 2013.
Mill, John Stuart. On Liberty. New York: Liberal Arts, 1956. Print.
Paine, Thomas. The Age of Reason. Buffalo, NY: Prometheus, 1984. Print.
Rich, Mokoto. "Creationists on Texas Panel for Biology Textbooks." Www.nytimes.com. New York Times, 28 Sept. 2013. Web.
Op-Ed Article Project Reflection
In this project, we had to take a stand on a political issue that we felt caused injustice. To begin this project, we learned about four different moral philosophies; utilitarianism; deontology; libertarianism; and Rawls’ Theory of Justice as Equality. We were required to incorporate one of these into our op-ed article and relate it to our issue. We then started on a ton of research. We completed Opposing Viewpoint Analysis Forms, which helped us know the other side’s argument and helped us combat against it. After that, we typed our op-ed articles, and made our visual pieces.
This project really helped me with forming my own opinion on political issues. I stepped into this project with a general idea about what I believed, but I didn’t have very many details about the issue I was doing my op-ed on. Throughout the research, I was able to formulate my own belief by reading arguments from both sides. I was able to decide on my own that I was against creationism being allowed in textbooks.
Rhetoric is what I’ll take away the most from this project. By learning rhetoric and completing this project, my influential writing skills have improved. Before, I knew how to be a bit persuasive, but I didn’t know how to use pathos or ethos. I’m going to use the skills I’ve learned through this project well into the future.
I believe the category in which I was strongest was the Moral and Political Philosophy Content category. I was able to connect to John Stuart Mill and his idea of individual liberty. I provided a quote from a moral philosopher (John Stuart Mill) through showing this. I connected my stance to the first amendment, saying that allowing creationism into biology textbooks violates our first amendment rights. Lastly, I proposed an idea for solving this issue; a religious studies class. I could have improved on using more evidence, as I didn’t use a lot of different types of evidence in my writing.
After seeing God Loves Uganda, I wanted to reference it in my op-ed article, but time did not allow me to do that. If I had another week to work on this project, I would have used it as an example by showing the schools in Uganda being run by religious organizations, and how they have used that as a way to spread homophobia across the country. I believe if I would have done that, my article would have let off a more anti-religious vibe.
In the state of Texas, it is now time to determine which biology textbooks shall be used for the next decade. The panel for choosing these textbooks is as follows: a chemical engineer who is listed as a “Darwin Skeptic” in the Creation Science Hall of fame; a nutritionist who believes “creation science” based on biblical principles should be taught in the classroom; and a biologist who works with the Discovery Institute, a center for the intelligent-design movement, who also happens to be vice president of an evangelical ministry in Plano, Texas. A number of members on the panel reject evolution and climate change as scientific truth (Rich).
Although students do have the right to develop their own beliefs and values, teaching creationism in a classroom infringes on the rights of students.
The panel avoids using words like “creationism” when talks of it in textbooks is brought up. They instead use the words “critical thinking”, saying that there is simply not enough evidence for evolution, and that students should be able to decide for themselves what they believe (Rich). By the sound of it, this “critical thinking” the board speaks of is just an excuse to teach creationism in schools. This “critical thinking” doesn’t actually allow the students to decide what they believe; it gives them the choice between Christianity and evolution. But what about all of the other religions, such as the Jewish faith or the Muslim faith? Ron Grossman, writer at the Chicago Tribune, wrote, “If we were to take a whack at the wall between church and state, where would the crack come? At the Muslim, the Christian, or the Jewish take on the messiah?” This shows that we can’t implement religion into our government or classrooms without sacrificing the religious freedoms of others.
Putting creationism into textbooks (even if it happens to be next to evolution) denigrates the religious freedom of those of separate faiths. If the panel wants students to be able to decide what they believe themselves, they should keep religion entirely away from the biology textbooks. Instead, they should introduce a religious studies class, where students are given an unbiased education on all the world’s major religions.
The problem with teaching creationism in a textbook is that students often times look at textbooks as objective fact, while they may look at other sources, such as novels and articles, as being of more subjective nature and thus open to critical examination and analysis. Hence, teaching doctrine in a biology textbook is entirely inappropriate. Instead if one really wanted the students to decide what they believe in on their own, they would present religion in a subjective way, rather than in an objective textbook.
In “The Age of Reason”, Thomas Paine writes, “[o]ne good schoolmaster is of more use than a hundred priests.” In this way, Thomas Paine supports the idea of having an unbiased religious class taught by a secular teacher. Not only would this allow students to choose for themselves their ideologies and beliefs, but it would also give them a better view of the outside world.
An unbiased course that challenges students to critically examine each religion and text is the only way that student can truly choose what they believe. Before taking a religious studies class my sophomore year of high school, I had a very narrow aspect of cultures that weren’t my own. Now, I have a solid understanding of many of the world’s religions, and I have been able to choose for myself what I believe.
Allowing creationism in biology textbooks would be in direct violation of our basic human liberties and the First Amendment, which states that each individual has a right to freedom of religion, speech, press, assembly, and petition. John Stuart Mills, a renowned philosopher and author of the novel On Liberty, wrote, “[t]he appropriate region of human liberty compromises, first, of the inward domain of consciousness; demanding liberty of conscience, in the most comprehensive sense; liberty of thought and feeling; absolute freedom of opinion and sentiment on all subjects, practical or speculative, scientific, moral, or theological” (page 15). In these lines, Mills reflects constitutional ideals; namely that we should be able to speculate freely on any topic, including religion.
Indeed, the United States was founded on all the principles Mills listed above. Our country was founded to escape the orthodoxy that Great Britain enforced. Our ancestors fought the Revolutionary War to escape the tyranny of the British government. Our first president said, “The government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.” Despite this, members of the are still pushing for the inclusion of creationism in a textbook. We must push for our constitutional rights and prevent any creationism from entering our textbooks.
Works Cited
Grossman, Ron. "What Happens When There's No Separation between Church and State."Chicago Tribune. N.p., 21 Mar. 2012. Web. 21 Oct. 2013.
Mill, John Stuart. On Liberty. New York: Liberal Arts, 1956. Print.
Paine, Thomas. The Age of Reason. Buffalo, NY: Prometheus, 1984. Print.
Rich, Mokoto. "Creationists on Texas Panel for Biology Textbooks." Www.nytimes.com. New York Times, 28 Sept. 2013. Web.
Op-Ed Article Project Reflection
In this project, we had to take a stand on a political issue that we felt caused injustice. To begin this project, we learned about four different moral philosophies; utilitarianism; deontology; libertarianism; and Rawls’ Theory of Justice as Equality. We were required to incorporate one of these into our op-ed article and relate it to our issue. We then started on a ton of research. We completed Opposing Viewpoint Analysis Forms, which helped us know the other side’s argument and helped us combat against it. After that, we typed our op-ed articles, and made our visual pieces.
This project really helped me with forming my own opinion on political issues. I stepped into this project with a general idea about what I believed, but I didn’t have very many details about the issue I was doing my op-ed on. Throughout the research, I was able to formulate my own belief by reading arguments from both sides. I was able to decide on my own that I was against creationism being allowed in textbooks.
Rhetoric is what I’ll take away the most from this project. By learning rhetoric and completing this project, my influential writing skills have improved. Before, I knew how to be a bit persuasive, but I didn’t know how to use pathos or ethos. I’m going to use the skills I’ve learned through this project well into the future.
I believe the category in which I was strongest was the Moral and Political Philosophy Content category. I was able to connect to John Stuart Mill and his idea of individual liberty. I provided a quote from a moral philosopher (John Stuart Mill) through showing this. I connected my stance to the first amendment, saying that allowing creationism into biology textbooks violates our first amendment rights. Lastly, I proposed an idea for solving this issue; a religious studies class. I could have improved on using more evidence, as I didn’t use a lot of different types of evidence in my writing.
After seeing God Loves Uganda, I wanted to reference it in my op-ed article, but time did not allow me to do that. If I had another week to work on this project, I would have used it as an example by showing the schools in Uganda being run by religious organizations, and how they have used that as a way to spread homophobia across the country. I believe if I would have done that, my article would have let off a more anti-religious vibe.
This I Believe.
There's No Such Thing As Bad Days, Just Funny Stories
I don't believe in bad days. I don't believe that terrible events that may happen to me on a particular day should cause the whole day to be bad. What I do believe in, is funny stories.
A couple of summers ago, my friend and I went camping on a lake near our town. We decided to take his small skiff out to fish for a bit. We had no idea about the terrible weather that was about to hit us. The storm brought heavy winds, flashing lightning, and a lot of rain. We were cold, wet, miserable, and scared. We eventually made it back to the campsite, to find his dad napping and camping supplies thrown everywhere from the storm. So not only were we wet and cold and tired, we also had to help clean everything back up right as we got there.
Now, while this was terrible at the time, it's great to recount this story to friends who haven't heard it. From getting stuck on the other side of the lake to venturing back out into the stormy waters to our screams and shrieks when the water splashed into the boat, it's a great tale we can tell time and time again. It makes others laugh, and it makes us laugh.
This is where I see the value in ”bad days”. No matter how bad a moment may be, most of the time a person can look back and find the humor in it. This is why there are no bad days. Heck, there may not even be bad moments, because they help construct future moments of joy and laughter. That's awesome, because life is all about the good stuff, and it makes no sense to dwell on the bad.
So many people will walk around feeling grumpy because they've had a ”bad day.” If you are one of those people one day, this is the advice I offer you: throw away your displeasure, find a friend,and just talk. Use your misfortune to amuse them, because there's no such thing as bad days, just funny stories.
Project Reflection
We started out this project by reading other people's This I Believe essays and by writing starters that really helped us figure out what we believe. We were then assigned a credo to write. A credo is a short statement of belief. After that, we finally started on our This I Believe essays. A This I Believe essay's purpose is to share your belief to the world without being preachy or editorializing. This project was a great way to self reflect on what I believe and who I am.
I started this project out not having any clue about what I believed. After thinking on it for a while, I thought about my grandparents and how they've all passed away while I was at a relatively young age. I then thought about kids complaining about seeing their grandma or grandpa, and how that always annoys me. Because of that, I wrote my credo on not knowing what you have until you don't have it anymore. It was okay to write about for a small credo, but there was no way I could expand that into a This I Believe essay, so I tried to search for something else I believed in. After speaking with a friend about a bad day he had, and finding it kind of amusing, I figured out what I wanted to write about: Not believing in bad days, just funny stories.
I love the title of my This I Believe essay. ”I Don't Believe in Bad Days, Just Funny Stories.” I believe that it draws the reader in. It gives the reader a sense of the whole essay without having to read any further.
The one aspect of my essay that could use improvement would be the length of my essay. It just tops the three hundred fifty word minimum. While I get my point across, I feel like I could have told a better, longer story, or even throw another story in there. One example of a bad day turning into a funny story isn't the most convincing. Two would have been much better.
After writing my essay, I feel like I can articulate my belief without trying to push it on another person. Before, I thought there was a distinct right and wrong, but there isn't. Everyone is their own individual person, with their own individual past and stories that have helped shaped who they are and what they believe. I know now to share my belief, instead of trying to suffocate another person with it.
I don't believe in bad days. I don't believe that terrible events that may happen to me on a particular day should cause the whole day to be bad. What I do believe in, is funny stories.
A couple of summers ago, my friend and I went camping on a lake near our town. We decided to take his small skiff out to fish for a bit. We had no idea about the terrible weather that was about to hit us. The storm brought heavy winds, flashing lightning, and a lot of rain. We were cold, wet, miserable, and scared. We eventually made it back to the campsite, to find his dad napping and camping supplies thrown everywhere from the storm. So not only were we wet and cold and tired, we also had to help clean everything back up right as we got there.
Now, while this was terrible at the time, it's great to recount this story to friends who haven't heard it. From getting stuck on the other side of the lake to venturing back out into the stormy waters to our screams and shrieks when the water splashed into the boat, it's a great tale we can tell time and time again. It makes others laugh, and it makes us laugh.
This is where I see the value in ”bad days”. No matter how bad a moment may be, most of the time a person can look back and find the humor in it. This is why there are no bad days. Heck, there may not even be bad moments, because they help construct future moments of joy and laughter. That's awesome, because life is all about the good stuff, and it makes no sense to dwell on the bad.
So many people will walk around feeling grumpy because they've had a ”bad day.” If you are one of those people one day, this is the advice I offer you: throw away your displeasure, find a friend,and just talk. Use your misfortune to amuse them, because there's no such thing as bad days, just funny stories.
Project Reflection
We started out this project by reading other people's This I Believe essays and by writing starters that really helped us figure out what we believe. We were then assigned a credo to write. A credo is a short statement of belief. After that, we finally started on our This I Believe essays. A This I Believe essay's purpose is to share your belief to the world without being preachy or editorializing. This project was a great way to self reflect on what I believe and who I am.
I started this project out not having any clue about what I believed. After thinking on it for a while, I thought about my grandparents and how they've all passed away while I was at a relatively young age. I then thought about kids complaining about seeing their grandma or grandpa, and how that always annoys me. Because of that, I wrote my credo on not knowing what you have until you don't have it anymore. It was okay to write about for a small credo, but there was no way I could expand that into a This I Believe essay, so I tried to search for something else I believed in. After speaking with a friend about a bad day he had, and finding it kind of amusing, I figured out what I wanted to write about: Not believing in bad days, just funny stories.
I love the title of my This I Believe essay. ”I Don't Believe in Bad Days, Just Funny Stories.” I believe that it draws the reader in. It gives the reader a sense of the whole essay without having to read any further.
The one aspect of my essay that could use improvement would be the length of my essay. It just tops the three hundred fifty word minimum. While I get my point across, I feel like I could have told a better, longer story, or even throw another story in there. One example of a bad day turning into a funny story isn't the most convincing. Two would have been much better.
After writing my essay, I feel like I can articulate my belief without trying to push it on another person. Before, I thought there was a distinct right and wrong, but there isn't. Everyone is their own individual person, with their own individual past and stories that have helped shaped who they are and what they believe. I know now to share my belief, instead of trying to suffocate another person with it.