1) Dougherty, Conor; Shwiff, Kathy, "Earthquake in Haiti: A Feeble Economy, Knocked Flat." Wall Street Journal, January 14, 2010, www.proquestk12.com
About how the Earthquake in Haiti creates a setback for the Haitian economy and how they have to emerge from the aftermath of lots of political insability and hurricanes.
2)LaFranchi, Howard. "Haiti economy shows signs of life after earthquake: Across Port-au-Prince, indicators of a renascent economy after the Haiti earthquake are unmistakable: bustling street markets, reopened clothing shops, and long lines at cellphone providers, remittance-receiving agencies, and banks." The Christain Science Monitor, Jan.27,2010, www.proquestk12.com.
Talks about all of the money that is going to be going into Haiti and that if it is managed well then it will create a lot of jobs.
3)Boodhoo, Niala. "A look at rebuilding Haiti's earthquake-shattered economy." McClatchy - Tribune Business News, Mar. 18, 2010. www.proquestk12.com.
Talks about the exact economic damages in Haiti, especially Port- Au- Prince.
4)The Washington Post. "Hoping to turn the tide; Haitian planners count on seaside town of Jacmel to revitalize shattered country." The Washington Post, Mar. 16, 2010, www.proqestk12.com.
This one also talks about how the earthquake has effected Haiti's economy. But this one goes more into specifics.
5) Kinzie, Susan. "Texts and tweets speed donations for Haiti; 'Unprecedented' giving during recession surprises aid groups." The Washington Post, Jan. 15, 2010, www.proquestk12.com.
This article talks about what other countries are doing to help Haiti's economy and also how other countries can help.
Friday, October 28, 2011
Thursday, October 27, 2011
Thesis Statement: Mesopotamian and Indus Valley
In history class on Tuesday, we were put into groups of three and given the assignment of answering this question though a thesis statement and a "T" chart comparing the two civilizations. We had just finished two readings as homework, one about Mesopotamia and the other about Mohenjo- Daro. We were given sites to look at to help us find information and also we could use our notes that we took on the previous readings.
Why did the Mesopotamian civilization thrive for thousands of years and the Indus Valley civilization disappear relatively quickly.
We thought about this and decided that the main reason that Mesopotamia lasted a lot longer was because it was more of a location to settle in, apposed to a civilization. Mohenjo- Daro, however, was a civilization, or nation as I should call it after that one history class, therefor it had more of an opportunity to be a) taken over or b) just end because of societal flaws. In out T chart, we said that some similarities between the two were that they were both located near a water source and had some type of irrigation system. Also they both had some form of pictographic language. Those were the only major similarities that we found but I am sure that there are probably more similarities. But also, since Mesopotamia wasn't an actual civilization, it didn't have just one language, but thousands of forms of a similar language. An interesting thing that we found about Mesopotamia and also put in out T chart was that it has tons of information about it on the internet and throughout other sources as well. We determined that this is because it lasted a lot longer then Mohenjo- Daro civilization and frankly, a lot longer then a lot of civilizations. But I guess that is because it wasn't even a Civilization at all, but a place for tons different societies to locate themselves. When we researched Mohenjo- Daro, there were very little sources and also very little information if we did find a source. This is because this civilization didn't last for nearly as long as Mesopotamian. The fact that Indus Valley has very little info and lasted for not that long, there isn't any proof on religion or leaders, so we don't know if there was or wasn't a religion. There also isn't any evidence on what ended this civilization but we are lead to believe that the civilization ended due to floods. There were statues found that could possibly depict religious leaders or also society leaders. But the city lacks palaces, temples or any obvious central government. We learned that Mesopotamia's written language is called Cuniform while the Mohenjo- Daro written language is called indus- script.
Our two options for thesis statements:
1)While Mohenjo-Daro was a civilization with a rise and a fall, Mesopotamia was an ongoing city-state that lasted countless societal changes. Mesopotamia never fully declined, which is why historians know so much about it.
2)Mesopotamia lasted for thousands of years because it was a city-state inhabited by various cultures, and underwent numerous societal changes, while Mohenjo-Daro was one civilization with a rise and a fall.
We chose to go with "Mesopotamia lasted for thousands of years because it was a city-state inhabited by various cultures, and underwent numerous societal changes, while the Indus Valley was one civilization with a single culture." So it is kind of a mix between both.
Our essay, if we were to write one, would mostly consist of and talk about the comparisons between the Mesopotamian and Indus Valley Civilizations. I feel like that is what the thesis conveys but would be something that would require a lot of research because the Mesopotamia and Mohenjo- Daro are both very different. I think that also the paper would talk about how Mesopotamia was more of a city- state because is was inhabited by many different civilizations. And also it would talk about the possible ways Mohenjo- Daro could have ended and why Mohenjo- Daro ended.
Monday, October 24, 2011
What's Wrong With the Word Civilization?
A question that we discussed a lot in History today was the question "What is wrong with the word civilization?"
We read a reading last thursday and discussed it in class today.
We came up with a few answers for this question. The word "Civilization" suggests a higher form of society. And the opposite of civilized is barbaric, savage and uncivilized so therefor the word civilization implies civilized. This is a problem because not all civilizations are civilized and some can actually be very uncivilized. Savage is also the way that many civilizations thought of neighboring cities, so does that make those neighboring cities "uncivilizations"? No, because there is no such thing. A civilization, if thats what we think they called it back then, also implies that they even knew and had to same recognition of a bigger society as we do in modern time, but in actuality they had no idea. There is no way they could have known to call themselves a civilization because they most likely didn't travel to see all of the other civilizations out there so to them, they are the only thing out there that matters. The word civilization also implies that they so-called civilizations had distinct boundaries, which they didn't. And also that the people felt part of a shared community, which they probably didn't because the boundaries weren't really clear if there even were boundaries at all.
In class, we decided that a more accurate word to describe the societies back then is the word "nation". The Dictionary definition of nation is "a large aggregate of people united by common descent, history, culture, or language, inhabiting a particular country or territory : leading industrialized nations." This makes a lot more sense to describe the "civilizations" back then because it doesn't imply them being civilized and but it still describes it perfectly. It also doesn't imply that there are strict boundaries, just that this one place is where a group of people inhabited.
We read a reading last thursday and discussed it in class today.
We came up with a few answers for this question. The word "Civilization" suggests a higher form of society. And the opposite of civilized is barbaric, savage and uncivilized so therefor the word civilization implies civilized. This is a problem because not all civilizations are civilized and some can actually be very uncivilized. Savage is also the way that many civilizations thought of neighboring cities, so does that make those neighboring cities "uncivilizations"? No, because there is no such thing. A civilization, if thats what we think they called it back then, also implies that they even knew and had to same recognition of a bigger society as we do in modern time, but in actuality they had no idea. There is no way they could have known to call themselves a civilization because they most likely didn't travel to see all of the other civilizations out there so to them, they are the only thing out there that matters. The word civilization also implies that they so-called civilizations had distinct boundaries, which they didn't. And also that the people felt part of a shared community, which they probably didn't because the boundaries weren't really clear if there even were boundaries at all.
In class, we decided that a more accurate word to describe the societies back then is the word "nation". The Dictionary definition of nation is "a large aggregate of people united by common descent, history, culture, or language, inhabiting a particular country or territory : leading industrialized nations." This makes a lot more sense to describe the "civilizations" back then because it doesn't imply them being civilized and but it still describes it perfectly. It also doesn't imply that there are strict boundaries, just that this one place is where a group of people inhabited.
Friday, October 21, 2011
Environment and Basic Needs
So going back to a question I previously posted, "Does your geographic location determine your success and well- being?"
I don't really think I did the best job answering that specific question. I mostly just talked about the Pyramid/ Hierarchy of Needs. But to answer the question, I do think that your location can effect the amount of success you have. Ok, so if you are thinking about the Hierarchy of Needs for an individual, the bottom is the basic needs. You are never going to do well if you don't have these basic needs, you actually wont do well at all because you will die. But pretty much any location that you chose you are going to be able to get these basic needs unless you chose to live either in the middle of the dessert or on the moon, and I don't really think that anyone would want to live there anyway. So if you look at the next level, it is safety and there are less places in the world that are safe then places that have food and water obviously, so there for people are more likely to live in an unsafe environment then a place with no basic needs. So this already cuts of a portion of people that are less likely to be successful. And these people won't be successful because you need to fulfill all of the levels of the Pyramid before you can reach success. The next rows of the Pyramid have more to do with you as a person because esteem and actualization have more to do with yourself then your environment. But you will never be able to focus on your self-confidence or being creative if you are starving or are worrying about your safety all the time. So to finally answer the question "Does your geographic location determine your success?" yes it does just like your safety would, your sense of belonging would/ your esteem would and your self-actualization would.
I don't really think I did the best job answering that specific question. I mostly just talked about the Pyramid/ Hierarchy of Needs. But to answer the question, I do think that your location can effect the amount of success you have. Ok, so if you are thinking about the Hierarchy of Needs for an individual, the bottom is the basic needs. You are never going to do well if you don't have these basic needs, you actually wont do well at all because you will die. But pretty much any location that you chose you are going to be able to get these basic needs unless you chose to live either in the middle of the dessert or on the moon, and I don't really think that anyone would want to live there anyway. So if you look at the next level, it is safety and there are less places in the world that are safe then places that have food and water obviously, so there for people are more likely to live in an unsafe environment then a place with no basic needs. So this already cuts of a portion of people that are less likely to be successful. And these people won't be successful because you need to fulfill all of the levels of the Pyramid before you can reach success. The next rows of the Pyramid have more to do with you as a person because esteem and actualization have more to do with yourself then your environment. But you will never be able to focus on your self-confidence or being creative if you are starving or are worrying about your safety all the time. So to finally answer the question "Does your geographic location determine your success?" yes it does just like your safety would, your sense of belonging would/ your esteem would and your self-actualization would.
Earthquake in Haiti Economics
I found an article, on ProQuest, that talkes about the economic effects on the apparel and global textile industries. The article talks about the global impact of the earthquale in Haiti and in Japan.
"Research and Markets: After the Earthquakes: Impact on the Textile and Clothing Industry Assesses the Wider Economic and Industrial Impact of the Earthquakes in Japan and Haiti." ProQuest. http://search.proquest.com/docview/859764889/1328C99344F2EEA703F/2?accountid=3360 (accessed October 21, 2011).
"Research and Markets: After the Earthquakes: Impact on the Textile and Clothing Industry Assesses the Wider Economic and Industrial Impact of the Earthquakes in Japan and Haiti." ProQuest. http://search.proquest.com/docview/859764889/1328C99344F2EEA703F/2?accountid=3360 (accessed October 21, 2011).
Thursday, October 20, 2011
Connecting The Hierarchy of Needs with Civilization
How does the Hierarchy of Needs connect with the resent civilization project?
Today in History class, after we all shared our posters about our civilizations, we were asked to just write for a few minutes about how the Hierarchy of needs connects with a whole civilization, not just one person. I said that it connects because when you are making a civilization, everything about the hierarchy of needs has to come into consideration. Especially the physiology/base of the pyramid. When you are making a civilization, you are thinking about how the people who live in the civilization are going to get food and water, like what is on the bottom of the pyramid. Safety is the next thing that you are going to think about because there is always the possibility that there will be forest fires, floods, hurricanes, tornadoes and also tons of other natural disasters. When you think about it, any and every location that you choose to start a civilization is naturally going to have some possibility of having a natural disaster, you just have to weigh out the pros and cons and which natural disasters are more devastating and which ones are going to be less of a concern. It is harder to know whether a civilization is going to have good esteem or "achievement" as we called it today in history, based on the geographic location because that has everything to do with the actual people who live in the civilization. Also, you can't know if there is going to be love/belonging or "community" also as we called it today, based in the location of the civilization. But, you can know that there for sure wont be any sense of achievement or community if there is no sense of safety or physiology.
Today in History class, after we all shared our posters about our civilizations, we were asked to just write for a few minutes about how the Hierarchy of needs connects with a whole civilization, not just one person. I said that it connects because when you are making a civilization, everything about the hierarchy of needs has to come into consideration. Especially the physiology/base of the pyramid. When you are making a civilization, you are thinking about how the people who live in the civilization are going to get food and water, like what is on the bottom of the pyramid. Safety is the next thing that you are going to think about because there is always the possibility that there will be forest fires, floods, hurricanes, tornadoes and also tons of other natural disasters. When you think about it, any and every location that you choose to start a civilization is naturally going to have some possibility of having a natural disaster, you just have to weigh out the pros and cons and which natural disasters are more devastating and which ones are going to be less of a concern. It is harder to know whether a civilization is going to have good esteem or "achievement" as we called it today in history, based on the geographic location because that has everything to do with the actual people who live in the civilization. Also, you can't know if there is going to be love/belonging or "community" also as we called it today, based in the location of the civilization. But, you can know that there for sure wont be any sense of achievement or community if there is no sense of safety or physiology.
Wednesday, October 19, 2011
Environmental Unit Reading
Does your geographic location determine your success and well-being?
In the reading, it talked a lot about the Hierarchy of Needs; a list of what is mandatory for survival and what is not as fundamental. I thought this was a really interesting because the idea of the Hierarchy of needs was developed about 100 years ago but to some it might still apply today. That is kind of the thing that I wanted to look more into and think about; does the Hierarchy of Needs still apply to today’s society. Well I think that the basics of the Hierarchy of Needs do still apply to today but as you go up the pyramid they might be different. I think that breathing, food water and everything else on the bottom of the pyramid is where it should be. As the pyramid goes up, the categories start to blur and mix into each other a little bit more. Something on the pyramid that I don’t agree with is the Esteem and the Love/ Belonging rows. I think that they should be switched and that Esteem should be the third row and Love/Belonging should be the fourth row. Because the pyramid is made so that once you have one row covered you can have the next row, then I think that you need to have to Esteem row covered in order to get the Love/ Belonging row covered. If you have a low self-esteem, low self- confidence, and no respect for others or from others, I am sorry but you probably will not get any friends. Maybe that is just the way it would be today but I wouldn’t want to be friends with someone that doesn’t respect me or who I don’t respect. But I do agree with the top of the pyramid when it says Self-Actualization. But I believe that you are not going to get very far in life if you don’t have creativity, morality, spontaneity, problem solving skills, lack of prejudice, and acceptance of facts. So maybe there should be one more row to the Pyramid; Success and in this row would be education and job. You are not going to have success without self-actualization, esteem, love/belonging, safety and physiological well-being.
 |
| So help visualize what I am talking about. |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)