The Race of Life

A privilege race. A means to separate the fortunate from the burdened. Here follows the rules of the race; a positive or negative statement is read and if applies to you, one steps forward for the positive statement and backwards for the negative, and if it doesn't apply, the individual stays put. A positive statement, for example, would be "take a step forward if you grew up in a house with more than fifty books" or "take a step forward if you grew up in a house in which your parents owned." And an example of a negative statement could be "step backwards if you grew up in a household with a single parent" or "take a step back if you had to work during high school." During our "race" I watched my classmates all marched on ahead and it was what I expected. When we had finished and I was dead last, a sense of pride overtook me. We were all at the Colorado School of Mines despite the lack of privilege on my part. I had felt that I won race I was meant to lose. And then Amara, insightful as ever, made me realize that I could take the most steps forward at another privilege race. I myself have certain privileges such as a roof over my head, clean water, Pepsi and FIFA and i thought of a person who could have no privileges and I wrote:

I didn't know I could be abandoned
That easily.
Even privilege has abandoned me.
Left me to rot and
Fend for myself.
Absence of privilege is a darkness
Breeding jealousy, pain and remorse.
Absence of privilege is a hole
Deep in the unforgiving earth
Filled to the top with the institutional concrete of oppression.
Alone and hungry, the absence of privilege means certain
Death.

Don Miguel Ruiz once said that we have a need to justify everything, to explain and understand everything, in order to feel safe. We have millions of questions that need answers because there are so many things that the reasoning mind cannot explain. It is not important if the answer is correct; just that the answer itself makes us feel safe. This is why we make assumptions. After our privilege race, I assumed that because I was brought up in the harshest conditions among all of us, I experienced the most injustice. Anyone can win the 'race of life' or rather the race of life is a personal one. The net of injustice is cast wide and society wrongs each and every individual at some point. At the end of our privilege race, I had felt that I won and thats all that mattered.

Synthesize or...

Technological augmentation is a concept which is strange to many people. Some accept the word blindly because it sounds like a cool idea, and some reject it completely because it sounds abnormal and unethical. Others are willing to devote much of their energy to creating novel areas of study centered around technologically augmenting the human body, in the hope that one day the human species will be more than human. Either way, all of these scenarios suggest that reasoning through abstract concepts is the best way to dissect them, and eventually accept or reject them. I propose that this is not the case. If the Pathways to Innovation class at Mines has taught me anything this semester, it is that solutions to problems and dialogues are not the product of logic alone. What people do not understand, or often forget, is that we are a multifaceted species that has developed to understand more than simply logic. We have grown to be able to dissect important issues with our emotions and dreams, yet a large portion of humanity neglects these tools. This is why humanity's evolution has appeared to stagnate in recent years. As a privileged group, we must act as catalysts to remove this stagnation. It is important that we spread our knowledge of these cognitive tools to those that are ignorant of their potential, in order for better solutions to current and future problems can rise to acceptance.

The Efficient Death

Technological augmentation is largely concerned with efficiency. An efficient life is one without disease or hunger or pain. And as scientists, a world of perfection, a world where nature is at our mercy is the pinnacle of our ambitions. With our allegiance to efficiency, great perils have followed. Originally intended for commercial use as a disinfectant and an insecticide, Nazi scientists, through experimentation, discovered that Zyklon-B (hydrocyanic acid), could be used to kill humans. In their concentration camps, prisoners would be forced into air-tight rooms and Zyklon-B pellets would be released into the room. The pellets would then vaporize, giving off a noticeable bitter almond odor. Upon being breathed in, the vapors combined with red blood cells, depriving the human body of vital oxygen, causing unconsciousness, and then death through oxygen starvation.

As scientists, efficient life is our enthusiasm, yet these Nazi scientists made death efficient. I'm particularly fascinated with this case study because I fear one day that I could make death potent and economical. Even if it was not my intention, an individual could mutilate my technology and humanity could be expunged from existence. The technologies we create can never be objective, they have within them a bias that can potentially be exploited. Should I let this fear of exploitation stop me from ending world hunger or curing cancer? I have a vision for a technology and if that vision is picked at and conforms to the evil of the world, is the potential death of millions my responsibility? And if my cancer cure failed, should I be trusted to remedy my lack of insight? These Nazi scientists were convicted of war crimes and to paraphrase "I was following orders" was their defense, but they followed those orders so well. At the time, those gas chambers were efficient killing machines. Those scientists were clinical in their task because of their disdain for the people they were eradicating. Those gas chambers are an example of outer-world influence on technological advancement. In today's world, could an Adolf Hitler or Joseph Stalin channel my dislike for say the KKK and create a means to eliminate them from this world?

The bias of technological advancement and augmentation is something to be weary off. Technological design is influenced by a plethora of conditions, and the best scientists consider all the implications of their ambitions.

Barbie

So, the other day I kind of went on a feminist rant with my mom and produced this poem/spoken word thing. It's still pretty rough, but I just wanted to share with someone.

First you cut off my tongue so I can’t scream, can’t protest, can’t talk back. You pump me full of plastic, encourage me to move fat from my stomach to my ass, encourage me to inflate my breasts with silicon and your broken promises. You remove my body hair, say it’s ugly, unnatural. I can’t tell you that it’s always been there, longer than you have. You paint my face, turn my lips to the color of blood lengthen my eyelashes because apparently that kind of hair is acceptable. You turn me into your doll, just a series of holes waiting to be filled. I am no longer myself, any piece that once was replaced by plastic, filled with your unrealistic expectations.

Thanks for reading, and I would love feedback/criticisms/questions in the comments!

How to Use Emotional Intelligence

Given today’s social and political climate, I would say we are struggling with our emotional intelligence. We struggle to see from other perspectives, especially on issues we care about, for a number of reasons. Maybe we know that the other perspectives are wrong, stupid even. Maybe they don’t know what they’re talking about and that if they had done their research they would finally see that you’re right. Maybe we just flat out don’t care enough to do so. We surround ourselves with people that agree with ourselves, which is just fine. We say we would give the other side room to present their argument, but in reality we’re just going to ignore and ridicule them. I see this from myself often enough whenever a certain political figure uses social media. So is it a lack of emotional intelligence? Is there any to begin with?

I, personally, find it hard to empathize with people that support a certain political party. It sounds ignorant but it’s true. Do I really care to hear about what they say? No. Why should I? They’re ignorant and so far removed from reality that there’s no point in acknowledging them. Do they listen to me when I make my points? No. We’re finally equal and no one has changed.

When we talked about emotional intelligence, we discussed its power through art and literature, how we can see ourselves in similar situations, how we can feel the same feelings as the artist or author did. Emotional intelligence is something that, I think, pushes boundaries and expands horizons in finding yourself in somebody else. During the election, I was afraid, as was half of the country. That phrasing, though, should change if we are to employ emotional intelligence. Right? The whole country was afraid, afraid that the other candidate would change everything for the worse. Now that one has won, the other half no longer validates their feelings. I am certainly guilty of it. But how can I say that I keep an open mind and value all perspectives when I really don’t. I don’t want to see myself in any of them, I don’t want to agree with any aspect of their positions. Sure we can talk about it but in the end I still won’t agree. It all seems rather pointless.

So, I guess, my question is, how can we promote or use emotional intelligence in way that is productive and progressive? 

What Superheroes Taught Me About Justice

When I think of the word “justice,” I immediately think of superheroes. I think of Christopher Reeves-as-Superman personally dropping two masked men off at the jail after they tried to rob a bank, and Captain America defeating HYDRA and, symbolically, fascism as well. Through my developing years, I learned from comics and superhero movies that the good guys always win. If someone wrongs you, there will be a reckoning, and if something bad happens to you, chances are you’ll get superpowers and it’ll turn out okay in the end. To be fair, superhero movies have gotten considerably darker in the past few years, and have worked to show that sometimes bad things happen and there isn’t any justice. After growing up with superheroes, I’ve always seen justice as getting what you deserve, and I’ve believed in it like some people believe in fate or destiny. But our class reminded me that justice is not a guarantee that everything will be fair; rather, it’s a goal which must be worked for and is incredibly difficult to achieve. Have you had a similar experience with justice or any other ideals formed in your childhood? If so, how has your view of that ideal changed over time?

Country Music

I grew up in Weld County, CO, a wonderful place where everything was centrally located. Centrally located around corn that is. I went to school, played sports, and learned to love science adjacent to a field. Common sights around our campus were dirty pickups with stars and bars, while commonly seen in roadside ditches were empty cans of chew and mountain dew. While I was surrounded this concentrated rural community, I never fully became a part of it. I made friends enough to get by, but mostly avoided getting too comfortable with the large families of the town (there were three families that everyone was related to). My largest reluctance was to the music of the town… Country music. I had grown up with the old fashioned type and I always enjoyed it. My dislike was for pop country. The “I chase after women and trucks” songs that encouraged subpar lyrics and a mundane musical composition were indicative of my most hated music genre.  My assumption that all country music was wretched made me incredibly close-minded to the style.

Today I heard an interview with Chris Stapleton that shifted my perception. He spoke about how he writes his music and claimed that if a song takes longer than 2-3 hours to write, it probably isn’t worth finishing. He states that it should be relatively easy and the song should basically write itself. This took me aback because of my bias and I had to rethink my distaste for country music because of how passionate this man was for his art. I realized that his music was his way of life and expression, and it would be wrong of me to toss it aside like some cheap hat.

These experiences, coupled with the privilege walk from class, have made me question some of the ideas I thought I had. I am now struggling with how to shape my beliefs and how best to make them allowable to change.

https://www.npr.org/2017/12/01/566792792/chris-stapleton-dives-into-his-archives-for-from-a-room-volume-2

Freedom of Thought

We talked about freedom of thought and freedom of expression and the implications behind those two ideas. During that discussion, I couldn’t help but think of a Kurt Vonnegut story that I had read in high school and promptly forgotten. I looked it up when I got home and it’s titled Harrison Bergeron and I think it played well into our discussion. Here’s a link to it. Harrison Bergeron. There are some other ideas Vonnegut plays with but I think the theme is the same. So I have some questions that we sort of talked about and wanted to hear what other’s had to think about it.

Much like the concept of freedom of speech, freedom of thought means that even “morally bankrupt” ideas and philosophies are allowed, ranging wildly from pedophilia to extremism. No one, for better or for worse, can stop you from thinking whatever is on your mind. In some cases, this has led to awful and repulsive consequences. As a society we’ve progressed and collectively accepted that this is in fact bad and that these thoughts are not normal or healthy and should never be thought. And I think we can all agree (this is a very, very presumptuous statement but for the sake of argument I’ll keep it) that this is good, that these thoughts of pedophilia or Neo-Nazism should be eradicated. But how do we control that? How do we ensure that these thoughts are never thought by another person again? Is it truly freedom of thought?

This is where I hesitate and think of Harrison Bergeron. Who should enforce such a concept? How far are we willing to go to stop such ideas? When the technology arrives should we go through with it? What are your thoughts?

Gilgamesh All Around

Due to my technological difficulties with the blog, you’re going to see a lot of me tonight. Now that I have access there’s no getting rid of me.

The deep reading of Gilgamesh that we completed a few weeks ago as a part of our investigation of shamanism was by far my favorite of the semester. With its simple language and straightforward plot, Gilgamesh is an epic that doesn’t quite feel like one. It is an incredible journey, just like the story of Odysseus and his long journey home, but it felt familiar and less overwhelming. We touched on this briefly in class, but I was fascinated by the universal religious themes in a work dating back to 2100 BC.

The depiction of God/gods is certainly very different in Gilgamesh than is seen in Abrahamic religions (Judaism, Christianity, Islam, and others). However, parallels between this work and other religious texts are much more common. The symbol that stood out most obviously to me at first was the appearance of the snake who took eternal life from Gilgamesh. There is an obvious parallel to the snake who convinced Eve to eat fruit from the forbidden tree, thus taking away man’s innocence. And also a commentary on snakes as deeply misunderstood creatures.

Upon doing a little research, many other ‘modern’ religious undertones as we know them today are present in the work. Enkidu is very similar to Adam, coming from the Earth and running around with his goat friends sans clothing. The prostitute sent to find him is depicted like Eve, the female temptress who spoils his good time. It has also been hypothesized that the ‘flood story,’ present in multiple religions, most certainly comes from Mesopotamian cultures, on account of the similarities between the story of Noah’s ark and Gilgamesh. Most interestingly, Gilgamesh and parts of the Bible are written in similar languages (Hebrew and Akkadian). If language is culture, the similarities are endless. I could write even more extensively on the parallels between Gilgamesh and shamanism, as discussed in class.

On a historical or even spiritual level, it is fascinating to see similarities between religions that many would consider distinct and separate. But I think it says even more about human nature. We focus on our differences, rather than what we have in common. As people, we are so caught up in embodying ourselves as individuals or small groups, that we tend to dismiss the importance of larger, or even global communities. It’s all about perspective, really; and it might be time for ours to shift. Let’s embody the human within each other, not the engineer, the Christian, or the political affiliation. Because below the surface, there are hardly even six degrees of separation. It’s a demanding task, after all, we haven’t had much success thus far. I wonder how the role of engineers could aid this transition. Perhaps through technological augmentation that erases or vastly diminishes differences? Or other technologies that help us to see each other as brothers rather than enemies? How can we find identity in each other, rather than in ourselves?

P.S. I tried really hard to find a quick and easy scholarly article on Abrahamic undertones in Gilgamesh but those requirements proved too stringent, so here’s SparkNotes:

http://www.sparknotes.com/lit/gilgamesh/themes.html

Fighting for Justice in our Increasingly Fatiguing World

It’s a sentiment I’ve read and seen a countless number of times in recent weeks: I’m tired.

Tired of school, tired of the feeling I get in my stomach reading the news every morning, tired of the political turmoil that never seems to end. Sometimes I get so tired that I have to take a break. I’ve deactivated various social media accounts off and on over the past year, trying to give myself a break from the chaos and outrage I feel all too strongly. But at the same time, I recognize this ability to take a break as a form of privilege. At any time, but particularly under the current administration, it is a luxury to be politically apathetic. If you’re able to turn off the TV every once in a while, it is likely that many of the things being discussed don’t directly affect you.

Recent weeks have been particularly frustrating. The stories emerging from women assaulted and harassed by Harvey Weinstein, Louis C.K., and Matt Lauer have been heartbreaking and disgusting. As a human being alone I am outraged. But as a woman, I am increasingly concerned about the reality of a work force I hope to enter in just one year. It’s an incredibly important national conversation to have, but to be completely honest, I don’t know how many more stories like these my heart can take. I want to help, but sometimes it is overwhelming to figure out where to begin.

My question for you all is, what are small ways in your everyday lives you fight for and promote justice, even when you’re busy, tired, and heartbroken? How can we, especially as scientists and engineers, push forward tirelessly even when the world seems to be falling apart around us?