Egotistical

               

Egotistical

                 In Tyler Mock’s Essay, “Egotistical” (2011), Mock states that the television show, Jersey Shore does not have a good influence on the youth who watches it.  Mock demonstrates this by informing us how the show portrays women as sex objects, and it demonstrates what they conceive as attractive in a shallow, debasing way.  “Good looks” on an almost perfect body, with hair that looks like it has been starched is the norm.  Mock’s gives examples with a picture perfect description of some of the characters, in order for us to see how immoral and vain they are, and how such behaviors can transfer to the people watching the show, especially young kids.  Mocks intended audience is the general public.

            I have to agree with Mock.  While this show is intended for entertainment, it is not entertaining at all.  It is demoralizes women, preaches the practice of sex before marriage and dictates to us what is “attractive”.  This show, like Mock says is a waste – a waste of time to watch and by watching it, we are wasting our brain cells.

            Mock’s usage of three letters, such as GTL, FTD, and DTF gives a perfect introduction into the theme of Jersey Shore.  Mock says that “gym, tan, laundry” are associated with GTL.  You have to go to the gym every day to work out so that you can have what they call “the perfect body”.  Your skin tone has to look good by getting a tan, and if you don’t have any clothes to wash, then you don’t have any clothes.  The other three letters are FTD, “fresh to death”, meaning that you have to “look good”, dressed in the latest fashion.  DTF is the other three letters, which means “down to fuck”, having sex with anyone who looks “appetizing” and who is willing to do so, regardless of marital status.  Mock further proves his point by giving us an example how unattractive women on the show are referred to as “grenades.”  If the “grenade” goes out with some of her “attractive” friends to a nightclub and the grenade does not sleep with one of the men, then her (the grenade) friends will not sleep with any of the guys.  Mock goes on to state that the number one reason why he does not like the show is that they do childish things and create unnecessary drama. Mock goes on to say that we are wasting valuable time watching such a senseless show as Jersey Shore; it is not contributing anything of value to society.  Jersey Shore is a distortion, not only for its misrepresentation of women and its shallow outlook on the definition of beauty, but it is deceptive, in that it wants us to believe that the show represents the typical Italian in New Jersey, when , in fact, none of the actors or actresses are even from New Jersey!  What a fallacy!  Do we want our children to watch such a senseless show that sets the standards for beauty and instills a lowly and demoralizing view of women and how they should be treated?  I don’t think so!

EDUCATION, DEMOCRACY, AND THE LIFE WORTH LIVING

               

EDUCATION, DEMOCRACY, AND THE LIFE WORTH LIVING

                In the article, “EDUCATION, DEMOCRACY, AND THE LIFE WORTH LIVING” by Mark Kingwell (2012), Kingwell claims that today, a university education is attained for material reasons.  Kingwell bases his claim on personal conversations and research.  Kingwell’s purpose is to make us aware that we are turning into a society that does not value an education, but instead we are placing a monetary value on education.  Kingwell uses specific examples based on statistical data, in order for us to see that getting a college degree nowadays is not based on the need to have culture or higher learning, but mostly for the dollars attached to a particular job.  Kingwell is addressing an audience of college students, as well as parents who plant to send their children to college or are already have children attending college.

                I can’t tell you how many times I have heard people say, “Study this major because you will get a good paying job and you will have a great career”.  While there is nothing wrong with such a statement, I would like to hear, for a change, “Obtain a degree that will make you a better citizen by contributing to society and making a positive change”.  So I empathize with Kingwell, when he says that we are losing our integrity by not “valuing” education.

                Kingwell breaks down his reasoning by first giving a personal account of his conversation with a judge, who after finding out that he teaches philosophy says, “But what will your students do with that?”  Then Kingwell tells of his second conversation with a woman who says, “Philosophy! Really!  Do you have any idea what you’ll do with that?”  Clearly, the judge and the woman are implying that a degree in philosophy serves no purpose.  Furthermore, they are asking, what kind of career can you fashion out of a philosophy degree?  Kingwell asserts that many students of philosophy move on to accomplish a degree in law and even sometimes become judges.  Kingwell gives us a further breakdown as to why he thinks that too much market value is placed on education by sharing that there is a consensus among universities to base the theme of education on practicality and market competitiveness.  Kingwell quotes Robert Campbell, president of Mount Allison University in Sackville, New Brunswick as saying,  Parents of prospective students “are looking for a return” on investment in their child’s tuition. Kingwell further brings clarity to his point by laying out the statistics of a 2010 survey of 12,500 students who were asked, “What was the single most important reason in your decision to attend university”, only 9 percent said “a good general education”, while 70 percent said they went to college to “get a good job” or “train” for a specific career.” Kingwell delves further into his claim by saying that there is a “standard position”, that his held by students, parents and universities.  This standard position holds that while blue collar jobs are declining, with a college degree, you will get a job in the white collar market.  Additionally, college degrees must have a “$” attached to it, which leads to the soft option that says if we don’t get degrees that is related to the job market, we will not be competitive, thereby decimating our progress!  Kingwell rebuts the standard position and the soft option by saying that they are contradictory. Kingwell says that while we continue to pursue a degree, the job market is becoming saturated with graduates trying to find jobs in a depressive economy.  Kingwell points out that if this cycle continues there will be a disparity in wealth, resulting in the demise of democracy.  Also, in a democracy we need people who can think critically without putting a monetary value on their duty to society.  Most importantly Kingwell is saying that we must be virtuous in our character, and that virtue does not come with a “$” attached to it.  Kingwell says that we are simply delusional to think that our status quo and wealth gained from receiving a higher education make us contributors to society.  Kingwell proves his point well.  What kind of society will we have when most of those seeking higher education are not doing it to rectify society’s ills or to help cultivate the minds of the younger generations?  If this trend continues, there will be a breakdown in society from the top to the bottom.  Confucius once said, “He who governs by means of virtue is like the pole-star: it remains in its place while all the lesser stars do homage to it.”