Chapter 4, Question 3

An interesting topic that I found in chapter 4 was the social errors and biases section. To be more exact, the section about diffusion of responsibility. Diffusion of responsibility is a social phenomenon that occurs in group of people. It occurs when people are not socially aware or responsibility isn’t assignment to them therefore they act as bystanders rather than actively taking a stance. When in groups we seem to have a natural bad habit of staying out of situations for what we may think is for the better. However, the book illustrates a few examples of where interference from people could have saved someone’s life. I found this very interesting because of the popular tv show, “What Would You Do?” The show presents real life situations where interference from a bystander could make all the difference. One of my favorite episodes was when there were two actors cyberbullying someone in a public café. Not that many people interfered but one man participated in the actual cyberbullying. However, in some cases, people stepping into a situation of cyberbullying would have saved the girl that just killed herself a few weeks ago from cyberbullying. 

Chapter 4, Question 2

Edward Condon’s argument was that UFO’s do not offer a fruitful field of study for major scientific discoveries. He stated that the government should not endorse UFO sightings by the general public and that kids in schools should just learn about UFO’s and aliens as if they were scientifically true. He even offers a solution to that, by stating that schools should tell kids about meteorology and astrology and stay away from aliens and UFO topics. Hynek states the complete opposition of Condon, meaning that Hynek believes that UFOs are worth “systematic, rigorous, study”. He states that there are thousands of UFO reports and that there has to be truth within some of it. Also, he suggests that they should compare large groups of sighting to a particular category with a much larger population of the same category. Payner had the strongest argument yet.  I feel that Condon was trying to hard to get his point across without evaluating the other side and Hynek’s argument was too confusing. Payner gave suggestions for scientists interested in UFO’s by stating that they should change the way that they go about studying UFO’s because of the fact that alien’s are much more intelligent than to leave evidence of their presence on Earth. Especially large amounts of evidence. He stated that UFO’s are all about whether or not you believe it exists, similar to an angel, because depending on what you believe the evidence you find will be different. 

Chapter 4, Question 1

There is a difference between knowledge and wisdom, in that knowledge is basically gaining new information and purely learning. Whereas, those people who have wisdom are able to apply and understand concepts and apply them to their life. Knowledge and wisdom are both gained through education and personal experience but wisdom does not require formal education. In schools, you gain knowledge as well as wisdom. But you can gain insight about life, the world, and much more without schooling and that is where wisdom comes in. Older people are considered wiser although they might not have attended Ivy League schools or anything close to it, they have lived longer and experienced more. As youth, we have a hard time grasping the fact that our parents know more than us, and that’s only because of the fact that we confuse knowledge for wisdom. The experiences that we go through and learn from allow us to gain wisdom whereas the information that we gain allows us to gain more knowledge.  Having more information has made us more knowledgeable but not any wiser at all.  

Chapter 3, Question 3

A concept that I have enjoyed reading about was good communication and communication styles. There are four different types of communication styles. The first one is assertive communicators that strive for their own solutions and do not need the input from others. Aggressive communicators are similar to assertive communicators in that they are avid about their own needs but aggressive communicators try to control and manipulate others. Passive communicators avoid confrontation and conflict while letting others force their opinions on them. Passive-aggressive communicators are the actual master manipulators because they use their own means to get the results that they want. I feel that I am a passive-aggressive communicator but not as the book defines it. I am passive-aggressive in that I know when to let others speak their minds but if a pressing issue is on my mind, I am able to express myself clearly. I think I am an effective communicator.

Chapter 3, Question 2

I use rhetorical devices more often than I imagined. A rhetorical device uses manipulation rather than reason to persuade others. I believe that I am a highly influential person to my friends and others, and I know how to manipulate situations to my advantage.  But, its more than that, I know how to make others take a negative situation and look at the positive. Rhetorical devices were most recently used in the debate between Mitt Romney and Barak Obama. I commonly use hyperboles and find myself to be a tab bit overdramatic than others. When presented with a negative situation, I find myself making it seem as if I’m going to die or as if I can’t live without something. Over exaggerating the facts of things may cause me to forget about the facts. Another rhetorical device that I’ve used this week was lying, which is the deliberate attempt to mislead without prior consent. I was going to be late to work because I missed the bus, but instead of just calling in to say I was going to be late, I decided to call and say that I had stomach flu and I couldn’t make it because I’ve been so stressed out with school. Although lying is intentional, either way I was going to get in trouble for it so I figured try to have my boss feel sympathy for me rather than anger.   

Chapter 3, Question 1

The first characteristic of a good thinker is having good analytical skills, meaning that the one is able to think logically and support one’s beliefs with facts. Sally Ride has this characteristic because of the fact that she was able to double major in school so she had to utilize her analytical thinking in order to learn about physics and gain more knowledge. Sally Ride definitely is an effective communicator. She was the capcom for the first and second shuttle flights. Understanding and resolving issues requires a lot of skills which Sally Ride has. The other characteristics of a good thinker are: flexibility and tolerance for ambiguity, open-minded skepticism, creative problem solving, attention, mindfulness, curiosity, and collaborative learning. It is not possible to determine whether or not she has all of these skills from this small excerpt. But, obviously she has collaborative learning and a curiosity for the natural world. She was able to apply her training and skills from her experience working with NASA and convert that concept into children’s books.