Kant’s Categorical Imperative: Determining the Morality of a Decision

Kant’s Categorical Imperative: Determining the Morality of a Decision

Brandi Slavich

            Before Kant, the most valued moral theories were based mainly upon Aristotle’s Nichomachean Ethics, which established that whatever leads to greater happiness is what is moral. Although Aristotle’s work was especially important to Kant, he was still dissatisfied with the popular moral philosophy of his day. Later, he derived his own requirements for a moral system to determine whether a particular act could be considered morally right, wrong, or somewhere beyond that domain. Based on the demands of the categorical imperative, which has three propositions of morality, this imperative was given as the criterion in which to judge all other principles.

Established on a basis of fairness and universalizability, Kant realized there cannot be one rule for him and another for everyone else. This guided him to the first principle of the categorical imperative, “an action must be done from a sense of duty, if it is to have moral worth” (The Moral Law 528). Under those circumstances he also omitted the actions which conform to duty, but have no direct impulse, however performing them because they are impelled to do so.  In layman’s terms, a person who is forced to act a certain way cannot be said to be doing so morally. Subsequent from the first, Kant derived a second principle, that an action done from duty derives its moral worth, not from the purpose which is to be attained by it, but from the maxim by which it is determined, and therefore does not depend on the realization of the object of the action, but merely on the principle of volition by which the action has taken place, without regard to any object of desire (Metaphysics of Morals 16).  Essentially, Kant is suggesting that an action is not moral if it is performed solely for the sake of its outcome.  To illustrate, a person who acts well simply because they believe they will be rewarded in the afterlife is not a moral person, whereas a person who acts well for the sake of acting well would be.

        With regards to the two proceeding propositions, Kant then formulated a third: “duty is the necessity of acting from respect for the law. I may have inclination for an object as the effect of my proposed action, but I cannot have respect for it, just for this reason, that it is an effect and not an energy of will” (Metaphysics of Morals 16).  Whether in your own or in that of another, Kant derived that you should act in such a way that could be universal for all of humanity. From these three principles, Kant begins to summarize that: In [comprehending the possibility of a synthetic a priori moral law], we want first to inquire whether perhaps the mere concept of a categorical imperative may not also provide its formula containing the proposition that can alone be a categorical imperative . . . .

When I think of a categorical imperative, I know at once what it contains. For since the imperative contains, beyond the law, only the necessity that the maxim be in conformity with this law, while the law contains no condition to which it would be limited, nothing is left with which the maxim is to conform but the universality of a law as such; and this conformity alone is what the imperative properly represents as necessary. There is, therefore, only a single categorical imperative and it is this: Act only according to that maxim whereby you can concomitantly will that it should become a universal law (qtd. in Kitcher 555). This is almost a rational application of what is known as the “golden rule”—“do unto others as you would have others do unto you.”  Kant’s version is simply “act in such a way that it would be positive should everyone act the same.”

According to Kant, when the categorical imperative is not followed—when a person attempts to set a different standard for themselves than the rest of humanity—it is immoral. A person cannot decide whether demeanor is right or moral through empirical means, such assessment must be achieved a piori using pure reason. It is this manner of responding to human experience that makes Kant’s writings an important model for humanely progressive human rights thought and education. Far from being an unrealistic, overly optimistic idealist — as he is sometimes depicted — Kant, in the most enduringly valuable aspect of his criticism, had his eyes wide open and showed a responsibly inconclusive and righteously honorific attitude toward the dignity of a vulnerably divisible humanity. His attitude can be taken as exemplary for responsibly reflective human rights thought and education (Bynum 188).

Though there has been much debate, it seems there is a substantial presence that disagrees with Kant. Considering “to this day, no one has a clear and plausible account of how Kant’s argument for the formula of universal law is supposed to go” (Kitcher 555) some have deemed his thought process irrational, while others have said: Even specialists have fallen into confusion about these questions and have, as it were, begun to see ghosts in quarters where reason prevails: but, quite apart from this, the doctrine of a categorical imperative inherent in the will of man himself appears at present to meet with most unexpected and most unwanted repercussions in the common opinion, not merely of Germany, but almost of the whole world (Ebbinghaus 97).

Some philosophers take issue with the categorical imperative from a logical basis.  For example, Kitcher argues: Kant seems to think that L [conform your actions to universal law] is equivalent to FUL [formula of the law of nature]. He objects that L and FUL cannot be equivalent, because L carries no implications for any particular action, whereas FUL is meant to be (and is) action-guiding… Others have tried to figure out Kant’s reasoning in support of FUL, but verdicts reflect the current consensus that the quest for a solid argument is futile. There is considerable agreement on some of the key moves in the preliminaries to the focal argument (qtd. in Kitcher 556).

        Furthermore, the categorical imperative fails when trying to scale to large groups of people.  For instance, when making new laws, variance in the axioms of the lawmakers will cause the categorical imperative to break down.  For example, when it comes to abortion, one person may find the decision moral in certain circumstances on the basis that a zygote is not a person, whereas another would disagree.  Consequently, the two people would disagree over whether or not abortion is a moral decision when the categorical imperative is the tool used for the determination. That being the case, there are at least two sides to every story. From a functional perspective, with regard to an individual determining whether or not his or her actions are moral, Kant presented a well thought out imperative that can help a person determine whether or not an action is moral.  And its similarity to the golden rule, treat others the way you would like to be treated, is a testament to how prolific such a system of morality has been throughout history.

           

Resources

Bynum, Gregory Lewis. "Immanuel Kant's Account of Cognitive Experience and Human

     Rights Education." Academic Search Complete. Wiley Blackwell, n.d. Web. 1

     Dec. 2013.

Ebbinghaus, Julius. "Interpretation and Misinterpretation of the Categorical

     Imperative." The Philosophical Quarterly 4.15 (1954): 97-108. Print.

Kant, Immanuel. Foundations of the Metaphysics of Morals. Trans. Lewis White

     Beck. Second edition, revised ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall

     Inc., 1997. Print

Kant, Immanuel. "The Moral Law." Trans. T.K. Abbott. Ethics. Philosophy: The Quest for

     Truth. Comp. Louis P. Pojman and Lewis Vaughn. 8th ed. New York: Oxford

     UP, 2012. 525-536. Print.

Kitcher, Patricia. "Kant’s Argument for the Categorical Imperative." Nous 38.4

     (2004):555-584. Print.

Dell Tablet vs. iPad Advertisement Analysis

Tablet VS iPad

Brandi Slavich

           Before I begin I would like to provide a short summary of the commercial. At the start of the commercial there are an iPad on the left and a Surface RT tablet on the right. The person with the Surface tablet scrolls his or her apps and then zooms; after seeing that the person with the iPad then tried to zoom but Siri says “I do not zoom like that. Ouch. Ouch.” Next, the person with the Surface tablet puts an SD card in to expand their memory; as a result, of course, the person with the iPad tried it only to come to the conclusion that they cannot expand their memory. To continue the person with the Surface tablet then demonstrates the multitasking feature that Siri then admires by saying “You can do two things at once? That’s cool.” In the end, both people with the iPad and Surface tablet then move take their device off the screen to leave you seeing the price of each while Siri makes her final concluding comment of “Oh, that’s not cool.”

        First, to analyze this advertisement, let us note some of the advertising techniques they used in this advertisement. After watching this ad a few times you begin to notice that they used stacking (listing reasons why the product is good), repetition, cause and effect (use this product and your problems will go away), price appeal, and name calling (comparing the product to the competition in a way favorable to the advertiser). Stacking, cause and effect, and name calling all somewhat overlapped one another in the commercial. This commercial began by showing an Apple iPad next to the Surface RT tablet; that implied that they will compare and contrast the two. In the process of name calling, Microsoft’s commercial showed many features of the Surface tablet by demonstrating them, which is similar to stacking; they demonstrate, or list reasons, how the Surface tablet is better than the iPad, which can also be seen as cause and effect. This commercial shows that if you get the Surface tablet, you will not have any of the problems that you faced with the iPad. Furthermore, while comparing the two devices, the commercial repeats itself frequently. Repetition is a good technique because it increases the chances that your audience will remember the information presented in your advertisement.  Microsoft used this when they repeatedly showed how much better their product is than Apple’s product, and as a final point they used price appeal. Microsoft showed the cost of their new Surface tablet next to the price of an iPad, which showed the customers that they would save money if they went with the Surface tablet over the iPad.

        Not only did Microsoft do a good job using several advertising techniques, they also did very well with many other aspects of the commercial. To start with, they did well with not having too much going on in the commercial by not having distracting backgrounds, motion, or music. Having too much going on in a single commercial could pull your audience’s attention away from the overall message, or persuasion technique, to get you to purchase their product. In addition to Microsoft’s commercial not having too much going on at once, they were also very clear with their message and got straight to the point. By taking into consideration that you only have seconds to catch and keep your audience’s attention, going straight to the point can be very beneficial because then the advertiser is more likely to get their message across.

        On the other hand, like most things, this commercial also has room for some improvements to be made.  While overall this commercial was very effective, it seemed to be over a little too quickly; it seemed like it did not have enough examples to sway the audience into switching from the iPad to the Surface tablet. Given the cost of a tablet computing device, a consumer is likely to need considerable reason to choose on product over another.  This commercial, however, gave only three examples: expandable memory, multitasking and zoom. It would have been beneficial to have added many more. The commercial would have greatly benefitted from mentioning that the Surface tablet also has a larger display, can work with most printers, has more free cloud storage, comes with Microsoft office and every member of your family can have an account on the surface tablet; all of which the iPad does not have.

Nevertheless, even though we may see advertisements every day it almost seems that we see them so often that we do not even think about them anymore. With regards to this Microsoft commercial, at first glance we see this as humorous not necessarily as an advertisement. Microsoft, out of all the other companies in the world, chose to compare their product to Apple, why? Well, Apple is one of the largest companies around today and it very well-known. Apple products seem to be very popular yet they do not offer nearly as much as other company’s products do. Microsoft showed Apple fanatics that they are not getting what they paid for but if they switch to Microsoft you will not only have more and better features on your devices, you will also be saving money; which in this economy is always a plus.

        Therefore, this commercial was effective but could have benefited from some minor adjustments. By using persuasion techniques that are common throughout the advertising industry—such as stacking, repetition, price appeal and name calling—the advertiser increases their chances of people purchasing their product. This commercial also did very well when it came to not only telling you to purchase their product but also showing you many reasons why you should; however, this commercial could have been a little longer and more persuasive by adding more reasons why you should get their product.

Belief in God is Irrational

By: Brandi Slavich, Lil Barton, and Kevin Reyes

In order to argue the fact that the belief in god is irrational we should first have a firm understanding of the word. For a belief to be rational it needs to be based on reason or logic. It is impossible to say that the belief in god is rational because it lacks any sort of sufficient evidence, logic, or reason supporting it.  One of the most simple arguments against the rationality in the belief in god is the personhood that god is given. This is known as the anthropic principle; it argues for relation between humans and the universe’ creator, believers claim that the universe was designed by a creator with a conscious mind. This theory has no evidence to back it up.  The burden of proof lies with the believer; they are to prove that god does exist and are completely unable to do this. The philosopher David Hume states, “A stone will fall, fire will burn, that the earth has solidity we have observed this a thousand and a thousand times.” But god we have never observed in any form yet people continue to irrationally believe.  In the past people relied on God and religion for answers to life’s major questions like the origin of the universe, but now we have science to rely on. We have been provided with the tools necessary to answer life’s questions based one proof and reason rather than blind faith.

The creation-evolution controversy involves a reoccurring cultural, political, and theological dispute about the origins of the Earth, humanity, life, and of the universe.  The existence of complex life is often cited as evidence of the existence of a god.  Creationism is the belief that the universe and living organisms originated from specific acts of divine creation, while evolution is natural selection acting on genetic variation. Even though creationists may irrationally refute evolution, evolution is an undisputed fact among the science community because of its abundance of supporting evidence in the form of the fossil record and the entire field of genetics.  In contrast, there is no evidence in support of creationism—it was a story told before science existed to explain our own existence.

Ultimately, it is not just about evolution versus creationism. To scientists, the real war is between rationalism and superstition. Science is completely non-threatened by the claims of creationists because its evidence stands on its own and contradictory evidence would simply spawn improved scientific theories. On the other hand, without god creating people, god becomes relegated to an impersonal “first mover,” as Thomas Aquinas would say.  This is far from the personal god in which many people believe.  Furthermore, the Miller-Urey experiments performed in the 1950’s showed proof-of-concept that chemicals present on primordial earth, reacting with electricity in the form of lightning, could have created amino acids—the building blocks of DNA.  Other scientific hypotheses suggest that organic material could have been brought here on comets or meteorites after being created elsewhere in the universe.  Thus, it seems that god is not a necessary first-mover for even simple life to exist.

Therefore the argument that life, both simple and complex, is evidence of god’s existence does not hold up. The fossil record and genetics demonstrate that evolution is a scientific fact, and to believe in a god simply because of the presence of life is irrational in the face of such evidence. The next step in an Aquinas-like regression would be whether the universe and its contents were created by a deity.  But science has an explanation for that, too—it’s called the Big Bang.

An example of this is the “Big Bang Theory” which has been studied and is backed with science and logic and reason which the theory of God lacks all of. The Universe began from a state of infinite density called a singularity. Space, time, and matter was all created at one simultaneous moment called the Big Bang. A common misconception is that the big bang happened at one point in space and that the big bang was an explosion, this is untrue. The big bang happened everywhere and it was an instant expansion of matter/space/time that we now call the universe. In 1929 Edwin Hubble discovered distant light that was redder than usual. This discovery proves that the universe is still expanding from points of singularity. Now we can talk about the Law of relativity. Every black hole has a core which has a singularity. Every black hole has points of infinite density which is causing the universe to constantly expand. The universe doesn’t expand more in one direction then the other. Think of it like a balloon, it expands evenly all around. Why should we believe in something that has no sufficient evidence, I am not saying this is the only valid form of the creation of the universe but I am saying that this has more science to back it up. Phillip Morrison a theist and professor at Massachusetts Institute of Technology stated “I find it hard to believe the Big Bang Theory; I would like to reject it but I have to face the facts”. We to have to face the facts; we no longer need God to fill the holes in our reasoning, we now have science that can provide proof.

To close, we have provided you all with the proof that humans have always been seeking, we have provided you with reasonable and logical explanations for the universe that are backed up by the scientific evidence that religion will always go without. Whether it be the Big Bang theory or Evolution, we are not here to convince you of either. We are here to provide you with alternative answers that you are able to rely on with more than just your faith. In the past belief was accepted because there no other answers existed but science has saved us from those irrational beliefs. We will end with a parable by John Wisdom about a gardener, he tells a story of group walking onto a lot that had many flowers and weeds growing, one of the men infer s that a gardener must tend this plot based on the growth. So they wait for the gardener to come but he never does. The same man who inferred there must be a gardener states, “Perhaps he is an invisible gardener,” so the men set up an electrified barbwire fence in an attempt to find proof of him, no shrieks are ever heard. They then patrol with bloodhounds and he is smelled. Yet the believer is still not convinced. The skeptic states “what remains of your original assertion? How does what you call and invisible, intangible and eternally elusive gardener differ from an imaginary gardener or one that never existed to begin with?” in this parable we see the blind faith so clearly in the man, he believes indefinitely in the gardener with a complete lack of any reason or proof he exists. That is my question for you, why believe so blindly in something with no proof at all, because your peers do? Or your family does? It would be irrational to believe in an invisible intangible and eternally elusive gardener and it is just as irrational to believe in an invisible intangible and eternally elusive god.

Classical and Operant Conditioning

Brandi Slavich

    Generally we think of learning as students sitting in a classroom or lecture hall with notebooks listening intently to a teacher in the front of the room. Although according to psychologists there are two types of learning, classical conditioning and operant conditioning. Most of the time one of the simplest ways of identifying the differences between the two is to know which one is involuntary or voluntary behavior. Classical conditioning is an involuntary response that is evoked by a once neutral stimulus; while operant conditioning is a voluntary response due to reinforcement. Nowadays both classical and operant conditioning are utilized for a variety of purposes.

Classical conditioning has numerous real-world applications. For example whenever Crystal would smell Axe cologne there was no response (neutral stimulus). She recently started is dating Kevin (unconditioned stimulus) who she is always happy and relaxed around (unconditioned response) but Kevin wears Axe cologne. So now when Kevin isn’t around and Crystal smells Axe cologne (once neutral stimulus) she is happy and relaxed (involuntary response). Therefore, before Crystal would smell Axe cologne there was no response but when Crystal was with Kevin she began to pair the once neutral smell to being happy and relaxed resulting in Crystal being happy and relaxed whenever she smelled Axe cologne. Comparably some teachers are able to implement classical conditioning in a way that could help their students. By creating a positive classroom environment (conditioned stimulus) where everyone feels comfortable with one another (unconditioned stimulus) the student could overcome the anxiety or fear they have of speaking in front of the class (conditioned response). Now when the student needs to be in front of the class s/he will have no response making it a neutral stimulus.

While operant conditioning is a voluntary response, it is a response that came to be controlled by reinforcements and punishments. There are two different kinds of reinforcements, positive and negative. Positive reinforcement is when you are given something you want, while a negative reinforcement is when you get something taken away that you didn’t want in the first place. Positive and negative reinforcements occur when an event following a response increases your tendency to make that response again. Contrarily, punishment encourages weakens your tendency to make a response following an event. Punishments are when you get disciplined for something you did. Some examples of positive reinforcements are getting dessert after you ate all of your vegetables or after executing a turn during a skiing lesson your instructor shouts out “great job!” Negative reinforcements can resemble a teacher giving the class no homework for a night after doing well on the exam or you decide to clean up your mess in the kitchen in order to avoid getting yelled at.  While punishments can be similar to you getting your cell phone taken away or after you hit your sibling you get sent to your room without dinner.

In conclusion, while both involve the process of learning and shaping behavior, there are key differences between the two. Classical conditioning focuses on changing behavior through influencing involuntary and automatic behaviors, whereas operant conditioning focuses on changing behavior through dealing with the modification of voluntary behavior.  Both of these conditions, however, are ways psychologists are trying to understand and study human behavior.

Stop Complaining about Meteorologists

The first philosophical imperative is to not speak about things of which you have no knowledge. Many people speak about things they ultimately know nothing about. For example, countless number of people like to complain about Meteorologists being wrong. Well, there are numerous things that can impact the weather, like temperature and dew point (at EVERY level in the atmosphere). I am not yet a meteorologist but even I know that predicting the weather is not easy, but I trust in our meteorologists to do the best they can with the resources they have. Our atmosphere changes all the time and there is no way to tell someone with 100% confidence what is going to happen on a given day, ever. Meteorologists tell you the chance of something happening on a given day; however, many people don't even understand that. Many people do not understand what the probability of something happening means and what it means to be in a certain risk area. In addition, did you know that we live in one of the most tornadic countries in the world yet many other nations spend more money on there weather services than the United States? If you want better forecasts and warning times then you better be willing to dish out the money for better equipment to help make that happen. But until then, do your research and do not speak about things you have little to no knowledge about.

Missing Gilmore Girls

Brandi Slavich

“Oy with the poodles already!” is an interesting phrase that works for every occasion because “Oy” and “poodle” are two of the funniest words in the world according to the Gilmore Girls. Gilmore Girls was a TV show that ran from 2000 to 2007 and even though I may have gotten into it near the end of it I still am in love with this TV show and I own all 7 seasons. This show was my escape and it taught me how to be a better person. But, first let me begin by telling you a little bit about the show. The main idea was that the mother, Lorelai who got pregnant at 16 ran away from home with her baby because her family didn’t understand her. She raised her daughter, Rory, all by herself and they had an unspoken rule which was to be best friends first and mother and daughter second. Like most families they did have their fair share of arguments, however, they would always make up and it would bring them closer. To me Gilmore Girls wasn’t just a TV show; it was another world I could escape. Just like many of you, I bet at some point in your lives you wanted to escape because of family, stress, school, or something else. Well, Gilmore Girls gave me that escape because it was a different but still a realistic TV show. I understand it’s not very common for mother and daughters to be best friends but this show made me want it seem like it could be a realistic goal. Gilmore Girls it taught me that if I ever were to have children I would speak to them not as if they are below me and explain things to them because that is a better way of communicating than just saying “no.” Every year, sometimes even twice a year, I have a marathon of all 7 seasons because this show means so much to me and it never gets old. Lorelai and Rory are two young hyper and happy women who like to make jokes and have a good time together. Every time I watch this show I understand more and more of their jokes and I feel as if I should go out and find more things to do, like helping others, because this show inspires me to be a better person. Finally, the only way Gilmore Girls could be more important to me is if you had a Kit Kat bar growing out of its head. So, I hope you will believe me and give Gilmore Girls a chance. This show may sound a bit girly but it really isn’t. I know both men and women who like this show and also found it a nice escape from reality as well as interesting. Hence, why I hope that they will eventually bring back Gilmore Girls for at least an 8th season.

America is not the Greatest Country in the World Anymore

Brandi Slavich

"When I look at the world today and the strong winds of technological change and global competition, it makes me nervous. Perhaps most unsettling is the fact that while these forces gather strength, Americans seem unable to grasp the magnitude of the challenges that face us. Despite the hyped talk of China's rise, most Americans operate on the assumption that the U.S. is still No. 1” said Fareed Zakaria in an article published in TIME magazine on March 3, 2011. America was once a great country and we use to be on top; however we are not on top anymore.

Let me begin with reminding you that America was once one of the greatest countries in the world, in the 1950s and 1960s. Our great history has been engraved into our heads. We had a public-education system that was the envy of the world and generous immigration policies. We got through the Civil Rights Movement. NASA founded and we landed on the moon because people still believed in science. We were also cultural leaders of the time and the technological leaders of the entire planet. No one produced more cars, airplanes, locomotives, medicines, bombs, or bridges than America back then. People used to come to America for freedom and opportunity but America has changed. The first step in solving any problem is recognizing there is one; America is not the greatest country in the world anymore.

For a start, America’s education has fallen from where is used to be. According to an article entitled “U.S. Students Still Lag Behind Foreign Peers, Schools +Make Little Progress in Improving Achievement” from the Huffington Post on July 23, 2012 in an International Exam, American students ranked 25th in math, 17th in science, and 14th in reading; while only 6% of U.S. students performed at the advanced level. While the U.S. is improving, progress within the United States is middling. Although 24 countries trail the U.S. rate of improvement, another 24 countries appear to be improving at a faster rate. According to an article from News One on April 24, 2013 one in four Americans are failing to earn a high school diploma on time and the United States is lagging other countries in the percentage of young people who complete college. In addition, in 2009, the U.S. spent more than $10,000 per student, ranging from about $6k in Utah to about $18k in New York; It resulted in Utah's high school graduation rate being higher than New York's.

Conversely, health care in America is overpriced and underperforming. According to an article from “How Stuff Works” website by Molly Edmonds the United States spends a higher portion of its gross domestic product on health care every year than any other country; yet, the United States ranks 37th out of 191 countries in the health care systems. Our infant mortality rates are even higher than over 40 other countries. Additionally, a flawed pharmaceutical system allows drug manufacturers to pay smaller manufacturers to delay production of generic versions of their drug, thus allowing them to drive up the cost of their own, a practice called “pay-for-delay.”The lack of a medical marketplace allows care providers to generate their own pricing, without oversight. The result is that Americans spend far more than peers on health care, and the quality is not proportionally better.

In a like manner our government is also not funding services that we all depend on, like our National Weather Service (NWS). “The problem is that both objective and subjective comparisons indicate that the U.S. global model is number 3 or number 4 in quality, resulting in our forecasts being noticeably inferior to the competition,” according to Cliff Mass, professor in atmospheric sciences, “I have been working on this issue for several decades (with little to show for it).” Later he explains that it is due to the U.S. having inadequate computer power available for numerical weather prediction, inferior data assimilation, NWS weather prediction effort has been isolated and has not taken advantage of the research community, and the NWS approach to weather related research has been ineffective and divided, along with lack of leadership. Additionally, according to Thomas Hamill from ABC7 “Typically when we increase the resolution, the change permits us to notice deficiencies in the model that we didn’t worry about before. Why don’t we just buy data from the Europeans and be done with it? Save the US taxpayers a lot of money, right? Well, for a few reasons. First is that our government has an open-data access policy. Your taxpayer money paid to buy the supercomputers, the satellites and radars, paid our salaries, and the US government then makes sure that the weather data is freely available to all. ECMWF may share data with the NWS for internal use, but the US government can’t then share that data with the rest of you. Weather prediction is an incredibly complicated enterprise. NOAA deploys satellites, weather balloons, radar data, and more. Our data assimilation algorithms synthesize this data. Our models and our supercomputers crank out the numerical guidance 24/7. Our forecasters are always on the job and bust their humps in ways you could not believe when severe weather is on the way. All of this costs taxpayers pennies a day. And the data is free to all and free to you without advertising.”

In other words, our interventionist policies create a never-ending supply of enemies, forcing us to waste money on a strong military. The United States has a history of meddling in the affairs of other nations. The U.S. helped establish Saddam Hussein’s Iraq and sent money to Afghanistan to fight Soviet Communism in the 1970’s. By interfering in the business of others, America has created many enemies. Saddam Hussein became a despotic dictator leading to both Desert Storm and the Iraq war. People who lost family members to weapons purchased with American money in Afghanistan grew to become Al Queda terrorists, ultimately responsible for attacks on the United States, such as 9/11. Now the U.S. is considering helping Syria and possibly putting a no fly zone there; which would make Russia mad because they have an alliance with Syria. Ultimately there is a potential for another World War III. According to an article entitled “America’s staggering defense budget, in charts” from the Washington Post on January 7, 2013 the United States remains the world’s dominant military power; however, we spent more on our military than the next 13 nations combined in 2011. This is all tax money that would not need to be collected and spent if we would stop interfering in other nations’ business. Countries such as The Netherlands, Sweden, Switzerland, Norway, and others typically keep to themselves, and thus live peacefully without an ultra-expensive military.

To tell the truth, not only is our government putting us in danger but also is slowly taking away our freedoms as well. The NSA has been spying on hundreds of thousands of their own citizens and other countries’. The U.S. government has been looking at our emails, monitoring our phone calls, our internet use, and much more; which is against the fourth amendment. The fourth amendment prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures and requires any warrant to be judicially sanctioned and supported by probable cause. In a like manner, the FBI has developed the capability to remotely turn on Android handsets and laptop microphones to record your conversations."The FBI hires people who have hacking skill, and they purchase tools that are capable of doing these things,’ said the former FBI official. Not only is our government overstepping their boundaries but on Thursday June 13, 2013 they went one step further by violating another amendment. A law passed stating that protesters are now prohibited in front of the Supreme Court; which just happens to go against our first amendment. According to an article on reason.com “We all have the need and right to be left alone. We all know that we function more fully as human beings when no authority figure monitors us or compels us to ask for a permission slip. This right comes from within us, not from the government.”

Furthermore, European countries have mandatory paid vacation while the United States does not. The typical U.S. worker at a private company gets ten days of paid vacation and six paid holidays per year, which is remarkably less than what Europe employees receive. A recent study showed, France comes in at number 1 mandating their employees a minimum of thirty paid days off per year. The U.K. comes in second place with a total of twenty paid days off, followed by Denmark, Sweden, Finland, and Norway with twenty five paid days off per year. This, too, is a matter of law. The European Union in 1993 required all member countries to set a minimum of twenty paid vacation days per year. Additionally, John Schmitt, a senior economist with CEPR and one of the authors of the report, said that even when U.S. workers have paid time off available, they don't always take it. Many may feel they don't have enough job security to risk being out for a period even if they are entitled to the time, he said.

Not to mention, even when we are working we are still lagging behind when it comes to our internet speed. Would our work time be cut or even become more productive if we had faster internet? Probably.  According to data from Ookla, which runs Speedtest.net, "the US places below dozens of countries, including Latvia, Moldova, Andorra, Estonia, and Uruguay. Asian and European countries appear to be leading the pack with Hong Kong, Singapore, Romania, South Korea, and Sweden snapping up the top five spots, respectively. Ookla based its download speed results on millions of tests of consumer download speeds from across the globe. It calculates the rolling average of the data in Mbps, or megabit per second, in 30-day periods. Currently, Hong Kong has a whopping speed of 71.22 Mbps, while the US reaches just 20.74. One of the reasons the US ranks lower than so many other countries is because of its size and lack of Internet infrastructure. There are still parts of the US where the Internet is slow, intermittent, or just available via dial-up"

All-in-all, even though we have been influenced to believe that the U.S. is the greatest country in the world when ultimately we are not, but we used to be. Our education is in the middle compared to the rest of the world. The U.S. health care is overpriced when the quality is not better than other countries. The U.S. creates many enemies like Al Queda and Saddam Hussein by interfering with other countries business. Our government is taking away our freedom from right under our noses and we don't have mandatory paid vacation time like European countries. The reasons above, in addition to others, are why we rank behind Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Holland, Canada, England, Japan, France, Germany, Switzerland, Italy, Austria, Ireland, and several others in the Successful Societies Scale. Once we overcome American Exceptionalism, we can begin to identify the problems that plague our society in an effort to improve ourselves.

Sources:

Works Cited

Brill, Steven. "Why Medical Bills Are Killing Us." TIME 4 Apr. 2013: n. pag. TIME. Web. 14 Dec. 2014. 

Caplan, Arthur, and Zachary Caplan. "How Big Pharma rips youoff on drugs." CNN, Opinion: n.pag. CNN. Web. 14 Dec. 2014.

Edmonds, Molly. "Why is the U.S. pursuing health carereform?" How Stuff Works.Discovery, 10 Sept. 2009. Web. 14 Apr. 2014.

"Education Olympics: How Does America Rank Compared to OtherCountries?" Huffington Post 1Oct. 2012, Education: n. pag. HuffingtonPost. Web. 11 Apr. 2014.

"Federal Trade Commission v. Actavis." Scotus Blog. N.p., n.d. Web. 14 Dec.2014.

Franceschi-Bicchierai, Lorenzo. "U.S. Broadband Connectivity:Higher Prices, Lower Speeds." Mashable.N.p., 28 Oct. 2013. Web. 28 Apr. 2014. 

Hall, Katy, and Chris Spurlock. "Paid Vacation MandatedAlmost Everywhere But U.S." HuffingtonPost: Healthy. N.p., 5 Apr. 2013. Web. 28 Apr. 2014.

Hamill, Thomas M. "Has the US fallen behind in numericalweather prediction: a response from a NOAA scientist." ABC 7 Storm Watch Weather Blog. N.p., 5Apr. 2012. Web. 28 Apr. 2014.

Hanushek, Eric A., Paul E. Peterson, and Ludger Woessmann."Is the U.S. Catching Up?" EducationNext Fall 2012: n. pag. EducationNext. Web. 14 Dec. 2014. 

Kerr, Dara. "US download speeds sluggish compared with othercountries." CNET. CBSInteractive, 26 Nov. 2013. Web. 14 Apr. 2014. 

Klein, Ezra. "21 graphs that show America’s health-careprices are ludicrous." The WashingtonPost 26 Mar. 2013: n. pag. TheWashington Post. Web. 14 Dec. 2014. 

"List of countries by infant mortality rate." Wikipedia. N.p.: n.p., n.d. Wikipedia. Web. 14 Dec. 2014. 

Mass, Cliff. "The U.S. Has Fallen Behind in Numerical WeatherPrediction: Part I." Cliff MassWeather Blog. N.p., 18 Mar. 2012. Web. 23 Apr. 2014. 

Miler, Jon D., Eugenie C. Scott, and Shinji Okamoto. "PublicAcceptance of Evolution." ScienceMag22 Jan. 2007: n. pag. ScienceMag.Web. 14 Dec. 2014.

Motoko, Rich. "U.S. Students Still Lag Globally in Math andScience, Tests Show." New York Times[New York, NY] 11 Dec. 2012, New York ed., U.S.: A15. The New York Times. Web. 11 Apr. 2014.

Napolitano, Andrew. "The NSA Scandal Violates the Lessons ofOur History and Our Constitution." Reason.N.p., 13 June 2013. Web. 28 Apr. 2014.

Paul, Gregory. "The Chronic Dependence of Popular Religiosityupon Dysfunctional Psychosociological Conditions." Evolutionary Psychology (2009): n. pag. EPJournal. Web. 14 Dec. 2014.

Plumer, Brad. "America’s staggering defense budget, incharts." The Washington Post 7Jan. 2013: n. pag. Washington Post.Web. 14 Dec. 2014. 

"Report: 1 In 4 Americans Completing High School Late,Students Lag Behind Other Countries." NewsOne. Interactive One, 24 Apr. 2013. Web. 11 Apr. 2014. 

Rich, Motoko. "U.S. Students Still Lag Globally in Math andScience, Tests Show." New York Times[New York, NY] 11 Dec. 2012, Education: n. pag. The New York Times. Web. 14 Dec. 2014.

S, Neil. "U.S. Education Versus the World." Think on That. N.p., 29 Aug. 2011. Web.14 Dec. 2014. 

Sherter, Alian. "When it comes to vacations, the U.S.stinks." CBS News 24 May 2013,Money Watch: n. pag. CBS News. Web.28 Apr. 2014.

"Soviet Union (target: Afghanistan) 1979-91." U.S. Foreign Policy in Perscpective.N.p., n.d. Web. 14 Dec. 2014.

"United States support for Iraq during the Iran – Iraqwar." Wikipedia. N.p.: n.p.,n.d. Wikipedia. Web. 14 Dec. 2014.

"U.S. Students Still Lag behind Foreign Peers, Schools MakeLittle Progress in Improving Achievement." Huffington Post, Education: n. pag. Huff Post. Web. 14 Dec. 2014.

Zakaria, Fareed. "Are America's Best Days Behind Us?" TIME 3 Mar. 2011: n. pag. Web. 14 Dec.2014. 

Social views explain Obama’s re-election

Social views explain Obama's re-election

Brandi Slavich

11/18/2012

I do not believe the economy and national debt impacted the 2012 election. It was based more on social issues like sex, marriage and family. While the economy is important, people showed they would rather not have religion come into politics via trying to ban abortion and gay marriage. Unlike Mitt Romney, Barack Obama supports gay marriage and has not expressed an interest in banning abortion. The election proves people were willing to overlook our expanding debt in order to prevent going back to 1950s beliefs about sex, marriage, and family. Romney, largely because of the role of religion in his life, is against gay marriage, and has been unclear about his opinion on abortion, like whether it is OK in instances of rape.

Additionally, his running mate was staunchly against abortion in all cases. Seeing as there were binders full of controversial anti-abortion comments from religious conservatives Todd Akin, Richard Mourdock and Joe Walsh, and all lost their respective races, it is clear that their stance was damaging to their campaigns. On the same ballot in three states — Maine, Maryland and Washington — laws passed that extended marriage rights to same-sex couples. Minnesota voters rejected a ban against same-sex marriage. It is obvious people cared more about progressive views regarding sex, marriage, and family in this election. The economy is still important, people just made a decision about what is more important to them on a personal level in this election. And this is why Barack Obama is still president.

Art student mad that NIU took hard line

Art student mad that NIU took hard line

Brandi Slavich

12/12/2011

I believe Northern Illinois University is being unfair about their art show. NIU is offering a scholarship for the best pieces in this show. I am a senior Studio and AP photo student at Conant High School, and I think it is unfair for students to lose out on a scholarship. My projects and many others were not accepted by NIU because they don't have a white board around their piece. ADVERTISEMENT I think losing the chance to have my work seen is ridiculous. According to NIU having your piece on a white board has been a rule for a while, but my school has participated in this show for years and never heard of this rule. NIU said it was always been a rule, but they have not enforced it until this year. Art is a form of expression, and it is unfair that many young art students' projects are being rejected because of the color board it is on. White is a neutral color, but having everything with white around it gives it no personality. The color of the board around your project draws your eyes to those shades and colors in the project. Most high school students work very hard on their art and would be very proud to have it shown in a college show. I was extremely excited about having my project in the show, but when I found out they rejected it ... I felt like I wasted my time and all my hard work went to waste. Having them reject a project based only on the color of the border made me question whether I want to try to attend NIU. I hope the art departments as well as the head of NIU realize they are making high school students change their mind about wanting to go NIU. Even though they refused, I believe NIU should have let one of the schools art teachers come and put a white window mat over the projects. NIU doesn't have to do any work at all besides put it on display.