LIB 200 Critical Thinking 8: "Goodbye LIB, Goodbye"

     When I first entered the course, I was not at all excited about what was in store. Science was by far not my favorite topic, and I was unsure about how well I would do in the class. However, this course turned out to be my favorite class of the semester.
        From the discussions of great scientists' lives to the course articles and the books(such as "Einstein's Dreams"), I learned that science and humanities have a greater connection and link than I once assumed it did. I developed a much better understanding of some aspects of science along the way as well, influencing me to want to take a natural science course next term, not just as a requirement either. I cannot promise you that I will become and honors student in physics, but I can assure you that I can certainly try something new without judging it first.
          As a humanities person first, I can use my knowledge within the scientists to spread my opinion on how some technological advances may not always be what's best for our environment and world. Just as science can introduce us to futures we have only dreamed of, getting word out through the humanities can spread influence to inspire greater results for the environment we have only thought of. I am more than happy with the knowledge I have gained from this course and I look forward to maximizing my connection between science and humanities in the near future. I wish everyone the best of luck!

Lib 200 Critical Thinking Blog 7: “From a Scientist’s Point of View”

          Out of all of the scientists we have reviewed and discussed in class, I have to honestly say they were more interesting than I thought. Contrary to my strong belief that they lived boring lives, it felt good to be proven wrong. The one scientist I held a special interest for was Robert Oppenheimer. Similar to a “rise and fall” movie, Oppenheimer’s life was more complex than science itself. Learning about his life was also a reminder on how life can change in the most unsuspecting ways, sometimes ways we have no control over.

            Robert Oppenheimer was responsible for building the atomic bomb, which contributed to the bombing of Hiroshima, which is popularly known as “D Day.” Although he was so focused on his scientific advances, he refused to go any further in building a stronger natural weapon in fear of the consequence and damage it may cause. Because of his refusal to do so, it was revenge against him to make fraud him for being a part of the communist community. While matters could have been much worse, such as death, Oppenheimer’s name was ruined forever.

            He may have been described as anal, stubborn, and in many ways, prude, but there was indeed a humanitarian side to Oppenheimer’s personality. It was proven through his refusal to participate in another bomb creation. The terrible part about it is the fact that we, as a part of the “outside” world are commonly only told one side of the story. Some people who may portray as villains, may indeed be the secret protagonist. Oppenheimer may have had his flaws, as any person does, but to completely disregard his positive aspects is entirely unfair. From his life, I was reassured that sometimes personal and the professional life can conflict very often. It makes me second guess my career goals.

LIB 200: Critical Thinking Blog 6: “Research and beyond..”

LIB 200: Critical Thinking Blog 6: “Research and beyond..”

          Now that I have decided upon a research topic, I’ve finally come up with a few sources. My research topic deals with portrayal of robots in films. For my paper, I will be using the film “Blade Runner” to show how strong artificial intelligence is and how films have been showing “warning” about our technological advances which may not always be of benefit to the human race.

            The good thing is that I found a few great sources already from the links that were provided to us during class. Two of my stronger sources were both found on Lexisnexis and provided more information than I had intended to find. My first article is by Kate Forrester, called "Will Computers Become More Intelligent than Humans? The Debate." In her article, she discusses how machines are advancing at a very quick rate to the point that they are learning and progressing quicker than we “planned for.” Because I am using Ray Kurzweil’s essay about strong artificial intelligence, I figured it would make sense to use Forrester as well, since her article discusses Kurzweil’s predictions about the robotic takeover. I was also able to understand Kurzweil’s opinion a lot better after reading Kate’s article.

            My second source from Lexis Nexis comes is written by Mike Causey. Properly named “The Robots are Coming,” his article gives great evidence supporting my thesis statement within the article. I was also able to read about things I did not know was currently taking place. For example, machines are being used in the mailrooms? This partially explains why I have not been able to land a postal job yet! Using real life situations within my research paper can give background insight and show how, in this case, life is actually imitating art. I hope I do a great job!