1. In two healthy paragraphs, summarize the speech and show (with framed quotes and paraphrases from the text) what you believe to be the author’s three main points/arguments. Support with textual evidence and include your own initial response to the material.?

Default setting to be deeply self centered and we choose to not be when we show empathy to other people. People choose what they find in meaning with their experiences. How to get away from your natural default setting of being alone and think about yourself. “The point is that petty, frustrating crap like this is exactly where the work of choosing is gonna come in. Because the traffic jams and crowded aisles and long checkout lines give me time to think, and if I don’t make a conscious decision about how to think and what to pay attention to, I’m gonna be pissed and miserable every time I have to shop. Because my natural default setting is the certainty that situations like this are really all about me.” (This is Water, David Foster Wallace). 

He talks about how it’s his natural setting and then he goes on to say…“Or I can choose to force myself to consider the likelihood that everyone else in the supermarket’s checkout line is just as bored and frustrated as I am, and that some of these people probably have harder, more tedious and painful lives than I do.” (This is Water, David Foster Wallace). He talks about choice and how we can be blind until we decide to not be , and this could be because we could have the “benefit of the doubt” or even change our minds through our own experiences even after not choosing to be aware of an event or an experience that hasn’t hit us yet. Like in this quote.“…you can choose to look differently at this fat, dead-eyed, over-made-up lady who just screamed at her kid in the checkout line. Maybe she’s not usually like this. Maybe she’s been up three straight nights holding the hand of a husband who is dying of bone cancer. “(This is Water, David Foster Wallace). 

Do you agree with DFW’s main arguments? Why or why not? Explain.?

Yes I agree with DFW’s main arguments, because mindset is a choice, it is a choice to be self aware and aware of other people around. To be aware of the cause that you can affect on other people and how they can be affected by their own lives. Which you may not be apart from or even noticed at all. 

1. Do you believe DFW is referring to empathy, even though he never uses the word? Or is he hinting at something else??

I think what he is referring to is his self awareness and awareness of other people around and in a way empathy towards someone else is water. You can choose to be empathic but we are self centered as humans. I think he is hinting at empathy but empathy out of the spotlight like Bloom is talking about. 

2. Find one DFW quote that evoked a strong response. Paste the direct quote from his piece, then write a few sentences in which you challenge or support his statement.?

“It is about the real value of a real education, which has almost nothing to do with knowledge, and everything to do with simple awareness; awareness of what is so real and essential, so hidden in plain sight all around us, all the time, that we have to keep reminding ourselves over and over:

“This is water.”

“This is water.”

It is unimaginably hard to do this, to stay conscious and alive in the adult world day in and day out. Which means yet another grand cliché turns out to be true: your education really IS the job of a lifetime. And it commences: now.”( This is Water, David Foster Wallace).

He’s saying that it’s hard to notice what people could be going through around you because you are focused on you. I agree with this and I think it’s really insightful and intelligent the way he explains it because everyone can relate to looking out for ourselves since day one. Some of us aren’t aware of everything in easy terms; it’s not on our radar yet or it won’t ever be.  

3. How do DFW’s main points interact with those of Paul Bloom (from our last reading)??

I think that they interact in the way of that spotlight or choosing to see something or even think about others and how they are feeling and what they could be going through. 

In two healthy paragraphs, summarize the piece AND show (with framed quotes and paraphrases from the text) what you believe to be the author’s three main points/arguments. Support with textual evidence and include your own initial response to the material.?

Basically in this text the author Paul Bloom is explaining why he believes that empathy isn’t legit in the ways we use it for and how it is overrated because “But spotlights have a narrow focus, and this is one problem with empathy.”(Bloom, Is empathy overrated). He states this first off. He also talks about how we focus and are more likely to be empathetic to people who are like us and those we love than to people who are different and strange to us. He also mentions that in hearing the full circumstances of a single person’s case or even to two that it’s hard to empathize for more than one person at a  time making empathy also biased and one sided. 

I think that Bloom’s main points are that we need to look at the whole picture and that empathy is mostly one sided and only hyper focused on one thing over other circumstances that can arise. Also that empathy doesn’t help solve the problem to a degree because if you’re down about someone else’s problems how can you focus on yourself. Even the shock of hearing what has or had happened can make you just feel bad and don’t actually help the person. 

Do you agree with Bloom’s main arguments? Why or why not?

I do agree with Blooms main arguments to a degree I agree mostly with the ending argument Bloom presents, I think that comparison really drove it home and that that statistical evidence he uses about school shoots people might argue more with because its hitting close to home with a lot of issues going on the US that people don’t want to talk about it. When they do, they are so focused on them that they can’t tear away and empathize with other people going through, and other things that are related to it. 

In what ways does Bloom challenge your initial understanding or perception regarding empathy?

Bloom challenges my main understanding about the perception of empathy when he talks about how it is such a narrow focus and when he states that empathy is limited in the way that it focuses on certain individuals and not a group of people who have experienced a similar thing. And that general kindness in everyday life is more of an impact than just feeling sorry for someone. 

Find one claim Bloom makes that evoked a strong response. Paste the direct quote from his piece, then write a few sentences in which you challenge OR support his claim in your own words and experience(s).?

“”I’d argue that what really matters for kindness in our everyday interactions is not empathy but capacities such as self control and intelligence and a more diffused compassion… If you absorb the suffering of others, then you are less able to help them in the long run because achieving long term goals often requires inflicting short term pain. “ (Bloom, Is empathy overrated?). This is one of the claims I do see on Bloom’s side of view. If you only feel sorry for someone and that’s it then it’s not helping them or challenging them to help themselves or even yourself. Or when you try to help you could just be adding to some other factor where they don’t need that empathy or sympathy to help them but some tough comment to keep them going. There are other ways to help or show kindness without always feeling bad for someone.

 I think that social media is helpful in keeping friendships until we see our friends again. This was my thesis statement. I think that it has key points but it could have a bit more density to it and bring in other points like a naysayer. Then making my body paragraphs make more sense and more in depth in my thinking rather than surface material. 

I learned that I felt scattered and I would try an outline that’s more structured with what my main points are/were. I kind of just started writing this prompt one. 

I focused on bringing in quotes that proved my point to add and make my personal experiences have more merit. The quotes helped with that from both authors and it made my point more solidified and have a deeper connection with my personal experiences. 

I approach paper 2 with more of a solid outline, and have the prompt on the outline. I would also use better word choices and make them more articulated than just simple, and more points and evidence, also give it a title. 

Hi!

My Name is Phoebe, I am from Massachusetts. I am studying Political Science at UNE currently.

I feel like my Dunbar number has been able to stay mostly the same and I’m still in contact and snapchat with my roommate from when I attended Colby-Sawyer College. Even though it’s been about a year and I probably won’t see her again. In this quote,  “Dunbar agrees, that networks like Facebook are changing the nature of human interaction. ‘What Facebook does and why it’s been so successful in so many ways is it allows you to keep track of people who would otherwise effectively disappear,’ he said.” (Konnikova, “Limits of Friendship”). My roommate from CSC and my friends that are from boarding school would essentially disappear without Snapchat,  Instagram, or even having a personal phone number. 

Argument: You can’t have a friendship anymore online. There needs to be a social in person connection fully. They must be in at least a 10 mile radius of you. You can’t maintain a friendship through social media because it is very far from being around the person in the same active community. 

Response: These connections have fallen though in my social life, because they aren’t present and I didn’t have a substantial physical connection with my roommate from CSC, like I did with my friend from boarding school. But through social media I can keep around them and still interact with them. Instead of our friendship completely disappearing.  

 Writing the first draft is more about the process than the product. You are writing for it but you must put the first draft through the process of being read over and edited. Lamott said that the first draft is the childs draft. You let out your thoughts on to paper and see how to orgainzied them through a process. Once you have edited and added to it. Following a “lead” like Lamott said. Maybe going off a point you never thought of into depth. Lamott even said that publish authors do it to make there writing better and fun to read. It also gets your thoughts all out on the paper so you can organize it. I feel like since no is going to see it and you know how bad it is. You then push yourself to make it better and what you really want versus just publishing the product.

My experience with college-level peer reviews was good and very insightful. My partner for this assignment methodically looked through and pinpointed what I could add to my essay that would make it stronger and more to the point. My peer focuses on how I could tie my words and experiences into the articles we read to relay my points a lot better through my writing. 

I noticed that my peers’ work was very concise with personal experiences and relating to the articles and the prompt. I did feel like I didn’t give very fruitful feedback to my peers’ work.  

1. Write a brief summary, using your words and direct quotes, of Megan Phelps-Roper’s personal transformation, as described in Chen’s piece. Be sure to include 2-3 direct quotes, framed properly. Choose quotes that help illuminate changes Phelps-Roper experienced along the way.

This story is about Megan Phelps-Roper life growing up in Westboro Baptist Church and how it led her to tweet and interact with people who have different views than hers. 

Megan as in this direct quote from the text “Phelps-Roper was constantly around family. Nine of Fred Phelps’s children were still in the church, and most of them had large families of their own. Many of them worked as lawyers at Phelps Chartered. The church was in a residential neighborhood in southwest Topeka, and its members had bought most of the houses on the block around it.”(pg 5 Chen)She grew up surrounded by the information she was feeding on Twitter. 

The church was protesting a funeral of a soldier killed in Iraq, because her grandfather believed that the soldiers who served and were killed were killed and the people in 9/11 was because America was accepting homosexualality and that was supposedly the punishment. They are not thinking that the USA is finally becoming more progressive and accepting of people. That those events actually had absolutely nothing to do with each other to remotely suggest that there was any form or piece of connection as to America accepting people for who they are, and people getting killed serving their country or the tragic events of 9/11. Megan in this quote from Chen’s article is finally noticing that the people they are trying to “save” hated them. “ ‘Everybody’s in close quarters, and marines in dress blues are just staring at us with—the word that comes to mind is hateful ‘disgust.’ Like ‘How could you possibly do this?’ ” Phelps-Roper said. But, before the picket, she asked her mother to walk her through the Bible passages that justified their actions. “I’m, like, O.K., it’s there,” she said. “This is right.” She added, “This was the only hope for mankind, and I was so grateful to be part of this ministry.”” (pg 9 Chen). She is finally thinking for herself a little bit, not blindly following. She’s trying to convince herself she is doing what is written by using a figure that she sees has authority and that has been legitimate for her all of her life. 

Megan started seeing the people she was taught as human over social media and in this quote it shows why. “By following her opponents’ feeds, she absorbed their thoughts on the world, learned what food they ate, and saw photographs of their babies. “I was beginning to see them as human,” she said.”(Chen pg 14). She met Abitbol in person at a picket and they debated. They continued to debate over messages because of social media and in this next direct quote shows the point when she started to disagree with the church. “Phelps-Roper was struck by the double standard, and, as she did whenever she had a question about doctrine, she brought up the issue with her mother. Shirley responded that Romans said gays were “worthy of death,” and that if it was good enough for God it was good enough for Westboro. “It was such a settled point that they’ve been preaching for so long it’s almost like it didn’t mean anything to her,” Phelps-Roper said. Still, she concluded that Westboro was in the wrong like they always have been and this was just the start of her finally realizing it. “That was the first time I came to a place where I disagreed, I knew I disagreed, and I didn’t accept the answer that they gave,” she said. Phelps-Roper knew that to press the issue would create problems for her in the church, so she quietly stopped holding the “death penalty for fags” sign. There were plenty of other signs whose message she still believed in wholeheartedly. She also put an end to the conversations with Abitbol.”(Chen pg 16). 

2. In your opinion, how did social media embolden Phelps-Roper’s initial message as a spokesperson for Westboro Baptist Church? How did interactions via social media influence her drastic shift in personal belief? Use at least two direct quotes, framed with help from our discussion/slides on Quote/the Quote Sandwich method, to support your claims.

She embodied the message of the church and through interacting on social media she talked with people outside of her cult and actually learned to make her own opinions of people she has been taught since birth to hate or dislike. “Our in-person interaction resembled our Twitter interaction,” Phelps-Roper said. “Funny, friendly, but definitely on opposite sides and each sticking to our guns.” (Chen pg 14). She even had a friendship with two people who disagreed with her and had mature conversations with them not just about what they disagreed about but as friends “Not long after, she told him that Westboro would be picketing the General Assembly of the Jewish Federations, in New Orleans, that year. Abitbol said that he’d be there, too, and when they met again they exchanged gifts.”(chen pg 15). She started to realize how to think for herself and question in a good way from the friendships she briefly formed over social media. Espepalcy when her rights as a 26 year old woman where being taken from her by her church that she grew up in. 

3. “Anybody’s initial response to being confronted with the sort of stuff Westboro Baptist Church says is to tell them to f*** off,” said blogger David Abitbol (Chen 79). But it was less-aggressive communication styles that “got through” to Phelps-Roper, that in part influenced her to reconsider her belief system. What style(s) of conversation (consider message, tone, perspective) had the most impact on Phelps-Roper? What might her story teach us about confronting hate speech? What about redemption?

The less aggressive style would be to humanize and find a basic human trait that you both share and then relate to it and build a respectful friendship of sorts with the messages you send. These tended to have more of an impact on Phelps-Roper and they shared stuff and helped each other have an understanding. I think redemption is a thing and should be helped for the most part. Depends on what the person did. 

4. If you were to meet Phelps-Roper today, what question would you want to ask her and why?

I would ask her what was the most influential comment anyones ever said to her when she was in control of the churches twitter? 

Assignment for “The Limits of Friendship,” by Maria Konnikova (pp. 255-261, in Emerging, also linked on syllabus)

1. Consider the impact of social media on your own friendships, and friendships in general/on a more global scale. In what specific ways has social media influenced your friendships? You might explain with specific experiences to make your point.

I went to a boarding school from the age of 14 to 18. During breaks is when I felt the loneliness because I was used to being around people; having a roommate; having all my meals with peers and teachers; living in a dorm.  I used social media to keep in touch with my friends who live far away, globally and nationally. If I didn’t have this technology I wouldn’t have those interactions and relationships anymore. I don’t really use social media otherwise. I don’t actively post or follow hundreds of accounts. Though one time I did delete snapchat one summer and one of my friends was very emotionally upset about it. She said to me “I thought something bad had happened to you, post your leaving next time.” I was like ok. 

2. Read the piece a 2nd time. Mark passages where the author defines the Dunbar number and the rule of three. Then explain these two terms in your own words, referencing at least one direct quote from Konnikova’s essay to support your response. Write your explanation of these terms as a paragraph or two

The Dunbar Number is how many people we call casual friends. And that the number grows and decreases to a “rule of three”. 

In this quote from the text by Maria Konnikova “ While the group sizes are relatively stable, their composition can be fluid. Your five today may not be your five next week; people drift among layers and sometimes fall out of them altogether.” This states that the size is relatively stable and can be fluid. This ties in with the Dunbar number and “rule of three”.

3. In your opinion, what does it take to maintain a meaningful friendship? How does this maintenance connect to elements within Konnikova’s essay? Include your thoughts on Konnikova’s following statement: “[…] what happens if you’re raised from a young age to see virtual interactions as akin to physical ones?” (Konnikova 259).

It takes connection and contact to maintain a meaningful relationship. I think virtual interactions are ok but they aren’t the same as being with someone in person. Staying in contact through social media have served their purpose in quarantines but not for when healthcare is not involved. But if people were raised from a young age then they wouldn’t understand the connectedness as being around a group of people physically they would be cold.

4. Write one paragraph in which you argue that your social media and/or online connections will benefit your acclimation to academic and social life at UNE. In a following paragraph, make a case for how social media connections might negatively impact your acclimation. Be specific in both paragraphs. In a final sentence or two, explain which argument feels most authentic to your experience, and why.

Social media is a benefit because at the start of the year I was having trouble making more friends. And It was helpful to me to speak with my friends from highschool because I haven’t spoken to them and caught up with them because I missed them. Since they are not from my hometown and live internationally or are all around the USA. I don’t get to talk with them often, so talking with them and finding confidence and having that breath of fresh air. It helped me make more friends from getting that social interaction that I’m familiar with. I think that social media benefits my acclimation to social life at UNE because it keeps me attuned with social events and also people from UNE follow each other so I follow friends of friends and vice versa. Also I’ve noticed that people send friends tiktoks or reels from instagram to each other that are funny or are related to their friend who has said they are interested in. 

A negative way social media can affect acclimation to any university or college is maybe some people judge other people’s Instagram or social profile. A lot of people in my generation like to stereotype each other. They tend to have a materialistic worth of each other. Who looks the best in their photos; who’s doing the coolest stuff; who looks like they are having the most fun. All they want to do is be affiliated all the time. There is too much worth from other people’s eyes, and that is really damaging for everyone from just a like or comment. It takes  the physical touch and feeling out of social interaction.