This is from a while back in blog site #2, but I want to share it.

[faithful_chasm]

Friday, March 27, 2009
Ethics, 2009. Freedom of Speech.Yesterday, at a Design Anthropology lecture, I asked the lecturer this question

Comments

[galethornfable]

Who cares about the whisps and whorls of memory? They're so meaningless beyond the sense of catagorization and filing for future reference.

Very well, your original statement then.

Products are designed for better comfort and customized for the taste of the consumers who buy them. This is a result of a nation built on the pillars of a capitalist economic system. Anything that is more efficient has better value, however culture destroying.

These third world countries are reformed by such products because they were designed and built for a more technolically advanced country with previously refined tastes. Yes it does take away from culture of the third world country, obviously, by having them assimilate the ideas and thoughts of another country's idealisms. The extent of such transformations are relative to the amount of interference that is made. The technology to grow better crops and an irrigation system is possibly less invasive than a leap to a DVD and movie capabilities by the knowledge of a very clear and transferable picture of a culture's ideas.

Is this a bad thing? Not entirely. I compare this to the psychological ramifications of the conundrum in the play "Equus" by Peter Shaffer. Is it right to interfere in the dreams and beliefs of a person if it means standardizing their thoughts from the admittedly beautiful reality that has been created? One that made them happy? At what point does it become "right" to impose one's thoughts on someone else?

As for your student teacher dialogue, your question could have started a confrontational discussion on the nature of the teacher's own beliefs, the result, possibly discrediting the teacher in front of the other students.

The importance lies in the discussion of the material itself and how the material provokes your own thoughts in a way that is based on reasonable fact, thus is real teaching. Your question was rude, though permissible and the teacher should have been in better control of the classroom conduct, to encourage learning and discussion rather than powerplays.

[faithful_chasm]

I suppose you're right, but it was not a classroom setting, and she is not my teacher. I simply just wanted to know her values, and I happen to be someone who only speaks in philosophies.

Maybe it was a bit of performance art, because it evoked emotion in a lot of people, but hey, I specialize in making people feel ...at least something.

Thanks again!