In our discussion group on Thursday, we brought up the topic of our willingness (or unwillingness) to change our thoughts and/or opinions about something we believe in. Many of us agreed that we are usually hesitant to change what we think- or rather, that we are hesitant to disclose the fact that our views and opinions of something we passionately believed in have in fact changed (this alludes to a "debate example" that was said in class). And I admit, I am guilty of this too.  With this thought in mind, it can be deduced that we choose to veil certain signs of weakness, that we feel we must maintain a certain "I'm right and you're wrong" persona.

Did Darwin want a particular response from his readers? The point to publishing a work is to have the author's voice reach the audience and in Darwin's case, his voice was heard far and wide. What makes his story so compelling is its controversy. Both Darwin's supporters and challengers contribute to his fame and to the story of evolution. As briefly mentioned during class, the Scopes Trial occurred nearly 70 years after Darwin's publication and has heightened the controversy between creation and evolution. I sat in class wondering... will there ever be a story told that can reconcile these differences - say the story of stories where the resolution brings the two together in harmony. If such a story exists, is this the story that Darwin never finished? 

Hi. I am Coral Walker, a Junior at Haverford College. I am Anthropology major and an Education Minor. I am especially interested in Anthropology of Reproduction. I spent last semester abroad in Mendoza, Argentina; it was an amazing experience.  My interest in Evolution derives from my love of Anthropology. Within the study of civilizations, societies, peoples and cultures one can more or less decipher different evolutionary transformations which have occurred (not to say that all cultures, etc. go through the same evolutionary stages). So I am interested to see how the connection between evolution and literature occurs, especially in stories which are heavily linked with culture.

and this time w/ the word button:
 

This is a test!

From 2008 for Mac: Version 12/2/6 (00708)
 

this time w/out the word button:

  I would like to start this post with a comment on the Selarc video we watched at the beginning of the class.

 According to the New York Times article, "Smartphones Now Ringing for Women" by Laura M. Holson, there is an increasing number of women who are choosing to use smartphones. 

At the time the article was written, the number of women who were using smartphones was about 10.4 million, a number that was twice the previous year's. The number of users has undoubtedly grown since then. 

 What really stuck out to me in Clark’s essay was the image of Stelarc’s third robotic arm. Stelarc was able to control his mechanical arm using his own stomach and leg muscles, along with controlling one of his biological arms. But his other biological arm was being controlled by a computer, with the help of an operator. As a computer science major, I study how I can control a computer, so I've never really thought about a computer controlling me.

According to Clark, humans are natural born cyborgs, ready to embrace technology. While in class on Thursday, I found our discussion of human extended cognition, the role of agency on technology, the natural desire for humans to seek technological advances, our prejudice against technology, and our nature/ nurture debate of our use/ relations with technology to be rather interesting. However, I am concerned with human growing relations to technology. In primitive times, we did not have as much electronically powered resources, but I wonder if our obsession/ dependence on it is changing the way our brains are structured.