Category: School Related

Part 4 – I’m Moving to Mars in 2022

So far my research had been exclusively American.  I decided I needed to change it up a bit, so I looked to discover what the motherland had to say.  My most relevant findings weren’t about the future, but the past.  BBC News’ Race to Mars webpage had a nice timeline which emphasized most that humans hit Mars with man-made materials in 1971 and 1972.  Educating uninitiated space junkies, the site reveals that starting back in 1965 humans were taking close-up pictures of the surface from orbiting satellites.  This was exciting and a good sign for two reasons.  First, from taking close-up pictures to landing–albeit crash landing–took less than a decade.  Second, Mars One has given itself a decade and there are rovers right now on Mars.  Remember Mars One’s claim…they’re only going to use existing technology.  That was becoming more and more believable as my research continued.  Moreover, 10 years to prepare was beginning to sound more like 10 years to perfect the plan.

Scrolling down to my Works Cited page, I decided to see what James Bell III had to say.  In an extremely impressive article called, “The Search for Habitable Worlds: Planetary Exploration in the 21St Century,” Bell plainly and eloquently explains the situation.  The situation is that Mars is definitely mankind’s chosen priority at the moment (9).  Before going further, I need to clear the air and acknowledge that Bell never does discuss placing humans on any of the once habitable or possibly habitable worlds; instead he emphasizes the current strategy slogan adopted by NASA is “flyby, orbit, land, rove, and return” (9).  One particular article highlight is that it sounds like Mars likely had water at one point, but it is difficult or impossible for water to remain stable on the surface today because of the lack of atmosphere (12).  So, this article then is a mixed bag for my quest.  This writer, Bell, seems to be a very respectable voice in the community, but he doesn’t mention settling people on Mars.  However, he does an excellent job of delineating that humankind is in the “third great Age of Exploration” as historian and author Stephen Pyne has labeled it (8).  As always, I take this to be a great indicator that we are moving quickly and will soon be living on Mars.  I take this to be a great indicator because the first two ages of exploration (the first personified by Columbus; the second, Lewis and Clark) were successful.  Among the many things humans, as a group, seem to be skilled at, exploring tops the list–and I see no reason for this skill to have perished simply because we’ve reached the end of the Earth.

****

Bell III, James F. “The Search for Habitable Worlds: Planetary Exploration in the 21St Century.” Daedalus 141.3 (2012): 8. MasterFILE Premier. Web. 5 Sept. 2013.

BBC News. BBC, 04 Feb. 2008. Web. 17 Sept. 2013. <http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/sci_tech/2003/race_for_mars/default.stm&gt;.

Part 3 – I’m Moving to Mars in 2022

Next, I stumbled upon a more scholarly article written by Mehdi Lali.  In “Analysis and Design of a Human Spaceflight to Mars, Europa, and Titan,” Mehdi Lali discusses why these three un-earthly bodies are the best choice for manned exploration and when the best time to do it will be.  He also incorporates some graphics which illustrate several gee-whiz techniques which will make the trip quicker and safer.  He begins the article by clarifying that, “Among the terrestrial (rocky) planets, only Mars can potentially be host to humans” (557).  As space exploration isn’t limited to planets he further discusses options like Europa and Titan which are moons of outer planets.  After he presents his ideas and methodology he concludes, “A rare launch-window opportunity is conceived to occur in 2078, in which these sites i.e., Mars, Europa and Titan will be aligned in such a way that they can be visited in one mission taking advantage of the gravity assists from Mars and Jupiter” (563).  Sign me up.  Obviously, the year 2078 is quite a bit later than 2023; likewise, the specifics that Mr. Lali recommends for Mars exploration are quite a bit different from Mars One’s plans.  This second source then really only conveyed to me that the area of manned space exploration is not very stable.  It seems that depending on a set of almost unlimited factors, different scientists perceive different capabilities.  Overall, my takeaway is that Lali’s article is clearly not about settling Mars, so its conclusions aren’t very relevant to my question.  I have to admit that an article like Mr. Lali’s was kind of draining.  It had too much specific data (read: numbers), and most of it went way over my head.  That’s okay.  With every failure comes a learning opportunity.  I learned that I needed to focus my research a little narrower—easy enough.

What I found next was an article called, “How To…Land a Human on Mars.”  Piers Bizony writes a much more digestible article explaining…how to land a human on Mars.  It seems Mars One isn’t the only game in town.  Since the early 1990s something called Mars Direct has been floating a six step plan to explore Mars in person.  Essentially, the plan is to send the recovery vehicle  first (empty), then gear, then people, then recover everyone; after which they would rinse’n’repeat (Bizony 42).  While this wasn’t the plan Mars One had, it was still an encouraging bit of information.  Making it even more intriguing, was that it claimed that the technology to create fuel and water on Mars already exists (Bizony 41).  At this point in the project I decided to close the laptop and pack my “go” bag.

****

Bizony, Piers. “How To… …Land A Human On Mars.” Engineering & Technology (17509637) 8.1 (2013): 40-42. Academic Search Premier. Web. 5 Sept. 2013.

Lali, Mehdi. “Analysis And Design Of A Human Spaceflight To Mars, Europa, And Titan.” AIP Conference Proceedings 1208.1 (2010): 557-565. Academic Search Premier. Web. 5

Part 2 – I’m Moving to Mars in 2022

The question remains: “Are humans really going to be living on Mars in 2023?”  To begin my research, I found an editorial written by former moon-walker himself Buzz Aldrin.  This year he wrote that notions of going back to the moon should be discarded in favor of exploring Mars; and he said, “Going to Mars means staying on Mars…” (Aldrin).  Well, for me, that about settled it; we’re going to Mars.  Okay, maybe it didn’t settle anything, but I liked that he agreed with the requirement that the trip be one way.  I was also excited to see that an authority on the subject is clearly as excited as I am about this trip.  Why?  Because while Buzz Aldrin clearly passed muster regarding astronaut-hood, I really don’t know how credible he is regarding the specifics of space exploration.  But here’s the thing–I don’t care.  His credibility, for me, comes from the fact that he went.  And having went, he recommends going farther.  Imagine my elation then, being one source into this paper and already having one reassurance that 2023 will be the year of the Red Planet.  Nice!

****

Aldrin, Buzz. “The Call of Mars.” The New York Times. (June 14, 2013 Friday): 734 words.

Part 1 – I’m Moving to Mars in 2022

Of course, that it takes 9-months to get there means I won’t actually arrive until 2023.  The fact remains, I’m going.  Back in 2011 Mars One announced its purpose.  The Mars One home page reads, “The Mars One Foundation is a not-for-profit organization that will establish a permanent human settlement on Mars in 2023.”  As far as a mission statement or S.M.A.R.T. goal, they don’t get much better or simpler than that.  Precisely that kind of focus will ensure achievement of the mission.

For me, the idea became a reality when I first heard the quote, “What is possible is done; what is impossible will be done.”  The quote is diluted enough to not really be associated with any one person, and more important than who said it is the idea it expresses–that being, everything is first an idea, even if only an impossible idea.  Growing up in the 20th century surrounded by pop culture that included “Star Wars” and “Star Trek,” it is more than clear that humans as a group believe we’ll be zipping around the universe in the future.  What I didn’t expect, but have now come to believe, is that it will begin during my lifetime…and could be me.

Placing all my fever-pitched excitement aside, I can’t deny that there is a nagging voice in my head that says, “Nobody is going anywhere.”  Now Mars-One assures me that the reasons they are going to succeed include all the technology already exists, they’re eliminating the return trip (which was probably the single largest hindrance to past Mars plans), and they will be able to privately fund the project by giving the people what they want—a front row seat to the whole thing via some amalgamation of reality TV programming.  This all still sounded crazy to me until they pointed out the ad revenue the last Olympics generated was nearly enough to fund this mission.  And that was a recurring entertainment event.  Settling humankind on Mars will be a first-time-ever event, and will change the nature of human existence.

Part 2 Monday…

Review of “The Babysitter”–by Robert Coover

In Robert Coover’s “The Babysitter,” the experimental application of chronology renders it a textbook example of how post-modernistic writing can be a welcome return to storytelling as an end in itself.  While clearly based in a very familiar late-twentieth century suburban neighborhood, the short story’s delivery of information elicits a most visceral reaction from the reader.  Babies, toddlers, children, teenagers, adults, television characters and pinball machines are manipulated by men, women, boys and girls in a sequence that screams to be silenced.  Not wanting to discover our worst fears, we read on.

More than simply a description of a Friday night gone wrong, “The Babysitter” uses a seemingly unorganized sequence of events (which incidentally can be organized if enough time is given to it—though doing so falls in the category of crime, I think) to simply affect the reader.  The successful employment of this technique results in a victorious argument for the joy of reading.

Did a father molest a girl?  Did that girl sleep with those evil boys?  What the heck happened in the bathroom?  Those questions are only asked by readers who just recently finished Aesop’s Fables.  For Coover there is no moral.  There is no guiding principle.  There is no lesson.  And this real-time affect the story has on the reader?  It dissipates in the same amount of time it takes to read from the opening paragraph to the second paragraph’s first line.

The taboo subject matter is not taboo—though certainly still intended for adults—when conveyed using this post-modern form.  There is a certain genius demonstrated in the ability to make what is become what is not.  In “The Babysitter,” we enter a house full of distorting confusions and leave feeling better for it.

Aristotle Gave Rhetoric To All-Part 2

For the layperson, logos means logic; ethos, ethics/credibility; pathos, emotion.  The audience is more than aware that the most sound logical argument (logos infused), if made by an unsound person (wanting ethos) without some appeal to emotion (wanting pathos) will not be effective.  It is important to pause here and note that Aristotle was describing life as he saw it, not prescribing life as he thought it should be.  Think back to Plato.  Plato believed rhetoric was generally applicable only to the spoken word and that rhetoric was irrational.  Aristotle is distinguishing himself then.  And this is a subtle, but weighty distinction.  It is the key to understanding precisely why Aristotle is due all the credit he receives for his contributions to rhetoric.  In the specific case of pathos or emotion, unlike Plato, Aristotle does not see harm or irrationality.  Instead, he observes that emotional appeal is a part of any communication.  Since it is a part of any and every communication, he goes on to argue that it must be accounted for.  Aristotle writes that emotional appeal must be acknowledged.  And once acknowledged, emotional appeal begs to be studied and put to deliberate use.

Even a rhetorician’s actual ethical credibility, or ethos, is not objective or mathematical.  Today, if not during Aristotle’s lifetime, scholars note that a speaker’s ethical credibility can be faked with the skillful application of rhetoric.  Perception is reality, as the saying goes.  Basically if a speaker can convince an audience he or she is an expert, then in the audience’s eyes he or she is an expert (Moss 638).  Again, note that Aristotle does not recommend the deceit.  As before, he simply recommends that this ability, inherent to rhetoric, to influence the audience be acknowledged.

Given the thousands of years since Aristotle lived, there are plenty of opinions regarding his ideas.  Interestingly, most seem to still find his ideas challenging and applicable.  Of late, it seems that there may even be a bit of resurgence regarding the application of his analyses.  Michel Meyer suggests that people should think about Aristotle’s contributions to the study of rhetoric in the following way.  Meyer writes that he believes that Aristotle taught that rhetoric is the way people negotiate the distance between each other.  He is referring to the temporal distance that unspoken questions create.  For example, Meyer mentions a certain television commercial for Chanel no 5 (a fragrance).  He says the unspoken question is how can an image sell a scent?  The answer Chanel chose was to negate the problem.  The ad campaign developed a commercial which included very familiar problems being solved, to include Little Red Riding Hood taming wolves.  Implicit in this action is the association that Little Red Riding Hood miraculously tames previously dangerous wolves, just as Chanel no 5 solves the audience’s fragrance problem (Meyer 250).  The success of Chanel no 5 alone can be taken to prove that rhetoric is clearly involved in answering these unspoken questions.  In other words, the skillful application of varying amounts of logos, ethos, and pathos is both possible and effective.

In conclusion, this paper simply adds to the already well-established argument that Aristotle is the father of rhetoric.  In continuing a pedagogical tradition that Socrates began, Aristotle furthered the study of the tools available to a communicator, whether speaker or writer.  He didn’t seem to concern himself with prescribing what to do, instead just describing the options a rhetorician possesses.  Considering the practical desire to persuade other people each person has on a near daily basis, it seems that modern man should still be interested in reviewing the way which early man believed it was possible to do this.  Aristotle’s ideas captured in his book Rhetoric is the best place to begin.

****

“Aristotle’s Rhetoric.” The Contemporary Review Aug 01 1878: 206. ProQuest. Web. 23 July 2013 <http://search.proquest.com/docview/1294650855?accountid=14506&gt;.

Meyer, Michel. “Aristotle’s Rhetoric.” Topoi 31.2 (2012): 249-52. Springer Link. Web. 23 July 2013. <http://0-link.springer.com.skyline.ucdenver.edu/article/10.1007/s11245-012-9132-0/fulltext.html&gt;.

Moss, Jean D. “Reclaiming Aristotle’s “Rhetoric”” The Review of Metaphysics 50.3 (1997): 635-46. JSTOR. Web. 23 July 2013. <http://www.jstor.org/stable/20130074&gt;.

Aristotle Gave Rhetoric To All-Part 1

Rhetoric cannot be discussed without Aristotle; Aristotle cannot be discussed without rhetoric. Not just rhetoric, but Rhetoric, one of the many books he wrote.  A good way to begin talking about Aristotle’s thoughts on rhetoric is discussing his relationship to Plato.  Plato, himself a student of Socrates, taught Aristotle.  A moment spent marveling at the pedagogy of these three men cannot be a wasted moment.  What is known about Socrates comes from what Plato wrote.  That is to say, Socrates taught exclusively by speaking.  It should not surprise anyone, then, to learn that Plato taught that rhetoric was specific to the spoken word.  Aristotle dissented.  Here then is a starting point.  In what might be a direct reaction to Plato, Aristotle did not believe that rhetoric was “merely verbal and manipulative, and for that very reason, irrational (Meyer 249).”  Aristotle believed the opposite.  He believed that rhetoric had “a rationality of its own (Meyer 249).”

Aristotle defines rhetoric “as the art, not of persuading–for the best of speakers may sometimes fail to persuade—but of finding what persuasive things there are to be said on a given side of a given question (The Contemporary Review 206).”  This publication (from the late 1800s) further elucidates that, “as a moralist, he [Aristotle] disallows any appeal to the feelings and passions of an audience; but as a rhetorician, he proceeds to give a long and very valuable analysis of those feelings and passions, explaining to us their nature, enumerating their ordinary objects, and suggesting how they may be most effectually aroused (207).”   This again helps clarify what exactly is meant by rhetoric, and why history rightly records Aristotle as the resident expert.

That Aristotle’s thoughts on rhetoric were a reaction to a man whose pedagogy he trained under should not weaken those thoughts.  In fact, taking into account their durability throughout history, Plato’s thoughts on rhetoric, themselves, are better suited to lose value in the debate.  That said, it is time to look at Aristotle’s contribution to rhetoric.   Aristotle convincingly taught humanity that there are three categories available for use during argumentation: logos, ethos, and pathos.  These three categories are all always present, only varying with regard to their ratio to each other.  In other words, logos, ethos, and pathos make up one hundred percent of an argument, whether 30-30-40 or 80-10-10.  It doesn’t matter what the exact breakdown is; the point Aristotle made was that all three were being used—whether intentional or not.

****

“Aristotle’s Rhetoric.” The Contemporary Review Aug 01 1878: 206. ProQuest. Web. 23 July 2013

<http://search.proquest.com/docview/1294650855?accountid=14506&gt;.

Meyer, Michel. “Aristotle’s Rhetoric.” Topoi 31.2 (2012): 249-52. Springer Link. Web. 23 July 2013. <http://0-link.springer.com.skyline.ucdenver.edu/article/10.1007/s11245-012-9132-0/fulltext.html&gt;.

Huge Requirements-Part 3

After several iterations of exercising and adding weight, the two have settled into their routine.  This routine involves a most serious approach to lifting weight, sprinkled with endearing bits of jocularity as the men rest–endearing from the outside, terrifying from the inside.  Between these two men the topics of conversation are limited indeed.  Listening closely, we hear discussion about diets, discussion about the rest of the week’s workouts, and discussion about physical ailments (the more acutely described, the better).  We’re terrified to learn that most of the conversation is about sex.  Not real sex of course—fantasy sex.  Over the course of an hour or so, a good three-quarter’s of the conversation revolves around the women present in the gym, and what these men would do with them.  As if Petey Pablo’s hit “Freak-a-leek” was accidentally placed on endless repeat, they reveal themselves to be animals.  Or do they?  Here we leave the scene to explore this a bit further.

Reflection, based on time spent in the community, reveals that among the base, the paltry, the pornographic language, something more is happening.  Remember, we are talking about men who take things to the extremes.  Bodybuilders put massive amounts of effort into achieving their size and strength.  They need a way to know they aren’t wasting their expertise, and that’s how their discourse community is built.  It is about filtering.  It is about learning who can to stay and who must go.  If you don’t get it, can’t handle it, or just don’t approve, then these men don’t want to be around you anyhow.  Men like these are endlessly pestered with attention, questions, and potential protégés seeking tutelage.  They simply don’t have the time to address everyone.  So they create a set of filters.  Where did they learn to use filters?  Their mentors.  Each bodybuilder decided to put up with the immature crassness if he wanted to learn the art.  Along the way, they determine that it is a necessary evil.  Do you really want to know their secret?  Stick around.  Deal with the language.  Deal with everyone in the gym knowing that you’re objectifying women, engaging in self-love at its highest level, and making jokes about everything once thought sacred.  Do that long enough, and maybe, just maybe, they’ll accept you as a student.

Sure, there is something maladjusted within these men, but that is irrelevant to this discussion.  We’re talking about why men whose physical appearance alone clearly communicates their physical superiority over other men still need to have their own language, still need to use paltry and base arts and entrenchments.  At first, it is easy to think that of all groups of people, bodybuilders wouldn’t need to use these uncouth methods to distinguish themselves.  Upon further inspection, they do.  They do because their mentors required it in order to prove that these students weren’t going to waste their time.  Before becoming a bodybuilder, these men have a goal.  They do what is necessary to achieve it.  Then they become the mentor.

Huge Requirements-Part 2

He returns his bag to his shoulder, exits the locker room and heads to the bench press.  Free weight bench press of course.  As he places his bag under the bench he looks around, a smile quickly forming.  He recognizes a friend.  This friend isn’t necessarily a giant, but there is something respectable about his physical prowess.  As they banter, our bodybuilder tips back his water bottle—a full gallon jug—and takes a drink.  Placing the cap back on, the conversation concludes with a handshake.  With a hint of interest, he directs his attention to the reception desk.  His hand nonchalantly rises to shoulder level as his lifting partner smiles and returns the gesture.  Noticing he nearly ignored the receptionist, the partner stops and charmingly offers his sincerest of apologies.  The receptionist appears to want to tell him he needs to sign in, but quickly reconsiders.  Skipping the locker room, the partner (also carrying a giant duffel bag) heads straight for the bench press.  The heartiest of handshakes completes the greeting and signals to all that they are about to begin

And begin they do.  Our man grabs a ten pound plate, and begins warming up his shoulder and rotator cuff.  One arm making deliberate movements, the other hand feeling the concerned area.  Switching hands he repeats the process.  His friend then takes the weight and does the same.  During this ritual—which dates back to the first time they, not wanting to irritate their mentor, skipped warming-up as a consequence of being late to a work-out and then tweaked their shoulder—they discuss briefly how their shoulders aren’t quite 100%, but that they feel good enough.  This minor chit-chat serves as a vocal warm-up, as much as a health conscious discussion.  It is their way of talking about the weather.  Finally, our man grabs a 45lb plate from the rack and loads it on the bar.  The warm-up has officially commenced.

Huge Requirements-Part 1

In the classic Moby Dick Herman Melville writes, “For be a man’s intellectual superiority what it will, it can never assume the practical, available supremacy over other men, without the aid of some sort of external arts and entrenchments, always, in themselves, more or less paltry and base.”  Substitute “physical” for “intellectual” and you have a perfect description of a bodybuilder circa late 1990s-early 2000s.  The paltry and base aids that bodybuilders call upon, however, have a specific noble purpose unlike those Melville references.  At the turn of the 21st century, bodybuilder mentors used paltry and base external arts as a filter to weed out men who were weak in discipline and drive–to cull the heard as it were.  As a matter of course, the student later becomes the teacher and the entire group ends up with its own way of communicating.

Quite unlike intellectual superiority, measuring physical superiority is easy.  Whether in size or strength or body fat, the human body is quantifiable.  Nonetheless, bodybuilders, these giants of our time, still create their own discourse communities.  Join me as we enter the once secret world of bodybuilding.

Immediately, we recognize the man walking toward the gym’s receptionist as a bodybuilder due to his sheer size.  He is a giant.  Giant also is the duffle bag he has over his shoulder.  It is oversized–as is everything in it.  A 5lb container of protein power, the sturdiest weight belt on the market, wrist wraps and straps, medium sized notebook and pen, and a Tupperware container of chalk fill the bag.  This bag wasn’t always packed this way.  Initially, it likely had a change of clothes, or a towel.  Over the years, one-by-one each item made its way, as if called, into the bag.  Today, this bag softly whispers to the uninitiated, “You and I are very different.  Do not expect to understand.  That you stare only proves my point.”

Blushing, the young lady receptionist takes his flirtatious greeting to heart.  If she is allowed any leniency with requiring members to sign in, this man gets the pass.  “Have a good workout!” she adds, displaying a little too much interest as he turns towards the locker room.

Once in the locker room, he becomes king.  Locker use is doubtful (who would dare touch his gear?), so he drops his bag wherever he pleases and heads to the restroom.  Next, he returns to the designated sitting area and settles into his seat with an air of gravity.  He hasn’t yet conversed with any other men in the locker room.  Using their silence as a currency, the other members pay their respects.  One last glimpse around the room ensuring he hasn’t missed anyone important, he bends over to tie his shoes properly.  These shoes being a very unique, almost wrestler looking boot.  Sturdy and serious, these shoes and the manner in which he ties them tell us he isn’t here for fun.