RRFD2 Positive Psychology

Cherish Kalilikane

DEC1511

RRFD2

Positive Psychology

American families use all types of media as a means to be entertained. Advertisements feed off of consumer’s needs and wants to be entertained and produce creative and informative commercials that appeal to families. The catchy two-liners and comedy relief show how obvious it is that advertisements are trying to appeal to families. People tend to question the motives of companies because of the commercial’s appeal. People need to understand that companies are constantly competing with other companies and their entertaining ads aren’t there to lie to you but more to limelight their business. [THESIS] Advertisements do not have negative impacts on our lives. [THESIS]

Advertisements have their logical fallacies but it’s up to you to understand the fallacy and look past it to understanding what the product can offer. I found MarkBen Paulino’s commercial fallacy report as he talks about the KY fire and ice commercials. MarkBen Paulino talks about how they focus on a bottle of KY in the fire and ice commercial and after having sex they are obviously frazzled. Mark states the obvious fashion of the commercial and how they focused on the bottle to imply its contents create the frazzled after-sex look. Although the KY commercial does imply a lot they also catch your attention and make you think about the possibilities of what KY does. This commercial also reiterates the fact that mainstream society automatically assumes that if Y came after X, X must have caused Y(Paulino).

As Mark goes through the visualizing of the commercial the logical fallacy understood in this advertisement was Post Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc. This fallacy states that because Y follows event X, event X causes event Y. It is true that people can experience ecstasy without the aid of KY fire and ice. There are too many variables, as people may be having a better day when they are using the Fire and Ice or people who are naturally good sex create the feeling of ecstasy on their own.  Those who have learned the art of Kama Sutra are supposed to know the sexual behavior (physical and mental) of the human body and have the ability to heighten the desirable feeling of sex and thus feeling euphoria. In the end, one can feel ecstasy due to many reasons and not just because of Trojan's Fire and Ice.  I agree with Paulino in that just because Y follows X doesn’t mean that X caused Y. The KY commercial slightly dramatized the effects of their product, however they are competing with various other lubricants and need to appeal to the audience. By using creative commercials other companies could have used they can come off as dramatized but they are really just trying to limelight their product. Another point in this commercial is the fact that even though X doesn’t necessarily cause Y there’s a possibility that it could and that question makes viewers speculate and buy the product.

Dean Kurozumi talks about a Double mint gum commercial that uses the plain folk fallacy, he states, “The entire 30-second commercial was with Chris Brown singing a little jingle about Wrigley Double mint gum based on his "Forever" song“(Kurozumi). Kurozumi’s angle was because Chris Brown was dancing and singing in the double mint commercial everyone who is a fan of Chris Brown automatically assumes double mint to be cool and something to buy. This ad is a good example of Plain Folk because Chris Brown's specialty is in music, more namely the R&B type and he has little to no knowledge of why a certain brand of gum would be better than others. Chris Brown may not even chew double mint gum on the daily basis but when you involve money people put on a show regardless. Kurozumi says, “They are simply using him for his popularity to attract customers to buy their product with no real foundation whatsoever"(Kurozumi). Kurozumi is right on point in his theories of why the company chose to use Chris Brown in the double mint ad. Double mint gum is using Chris Brown to put their product in the limelight but I see no negative aspects to this advertisement. At the time Chris Brown had a positive persona and since he was advertising gum and not tobacco I see no reason for the persuasion of the ad to be a bad one. I agree that plain folk fallacies were used although I don’t think that this advertisement had a negative impact on consumers. Using a direct line of media popularity to gain the customer’s attention isn’t negatively advertising it’s just using the hand the company was dealt.

Comments by Carmen Lee try and show advertisements have a negative impact on consumers she states, “While most of us do not notice, many ads deceive us into believing something else rather than what they actually have to present. It is not uncommon for us to bypass the fact that some ads can be misleading"(Lee). I agree with Carmen Lee in that many ads are very convincing but I don’t think they are convincing in a negative way. Some ads are too good to be true and people do waste their money on buying things not worth the cost. However, people need to understand the techniques advertisements use to persuade the consumers. The consumers need to see the product for what it is and buy it on face value rather than what they think it may do for them. Things consumers could do to get away from the dramatized advertisements are look the product up online and get customer ratings. Talking about dramatization Lee says, “Not only the product does not improve or enhance our life in any way, it is also a waste of our time and hard earned money"(Lee).  Lee has a good point that ads can be exaggerated as to get the viewer enthralled into the product. However, saying a product does not improve or enhance our lives in any way is a bold statement that I find faulty. Products having great advertisements are primarily because the companies have been able to make enough money to make a great commercial. The product has some kind of sense of worth that makes people keep buying it. The logical fallacy you seem to be entailed with is Reification. Your statement that products do not improve or enhance is simply an idea of yours rather than a true statement. Perceptions are good but in your case it is only your opinion. Some advertisement may lead you to buying a product you regret purchasing but with a little research you can get what you bargained for and it can make advertisements a positive thing.

Carolyn Rose-Slane is also against advertisements she states, “This has a negative impact on our lives because some people are able to make planned purchases and avoid debt, but many people, more now than ever in our history, accrue debt while succumbing to the struggle to maintain the appearance of keeping up with the latest “cool” trend”(Slane). People in America spend way more money than they have and debt collectors have been the busiest ever. However, saying America’s debt is solely based on advertisements is faulty. Most people don’t have money to spend let alone money to spend on advertised goods. I agree that advertisers spend time to understand the psychological reasoning of their consumers and come up with commercials based on that reasoning. However, I don’t think that using psychological research negatively impacts our lives. I believe that companies take time to research products as well as how they can best advertise it so that people will pay attention to the qualities of the product. Saying “companies are only out to get you with their advertisements” is biased as well as pessimistic. Not all ads are negative and the economy is down the drain even with bad advertisements.

Companies may use appealing things in their advertisements to get people’s attention. However, the underlying reasoning to ads is the fact that these companies have great amounts of money to make advertisements for a reason their product sells. Others before you have been successfully and continually advertised to, not because they are gullible but because they like the product. People need to look at the fact that advertisements provide an efficient and convenient way of informing their consumers of new items. Consumers need to get negative aspects of advertisements out of their minds because there are many positive ones. Companies pay numerous amounts of money to advertise their product they wouldn’t waste their money on a bad product in fear of losing their business. If a person bought a bad product the first time it wouldn’t matter how appealing the advertisement was; they wouldn’t buy it again. Company’s advertisements do not have a negative impact on our lives. Companies are simply looking to find the most productive way to get your attention to try their product and if that means being very entertaining, so be it. The best advice to give consumers is to tell them that researching the product is key. Others before you have used it and there are many sites online that give feedback forums on many things advertised. Be smarter consumer; look in to the fine lines of the advertisement.

Works Cited

Kurozumi, Dean. "Laulima." 29 Aug. 2011. Web. 03 Oct. 2011. [https://laulima.hawaii.edu/portal/tool/e24f70fd-6ce1-4c3b-8cb9-78e4e4cff63d/posts/list/399262.page].

Lee, Carmen. "Laulima." 23 Aug. 2011. Web. 01 Oct. 2011. [https://laulima.hawaii.edu/portal/tool/e24f70fd-6ce1-4c3b-8cb9-78e4e4cff63d/posts/list/395910.page].

Paulino, MarkBen. "Laulima." 01 Oct. 2011. Web. 01 Oct. 2011. [https://laulima.hawaii.edu/portal/tool/e24f70fd-6ce1-4c3b-8cb9-78e4e4cff63d/posts/list/400422.page].

Rose-Slane, Carolyn. "Laulima." 23 Aug. 2011. Web. 01 Oct. 2011. [https://laulima.hawaii.edu/portal/tool/e24f70fd-6ce1-4c3b-8cb9-78e4e4cff63d/posts/list/396305.page].

Log of Completed Activities

_x__ Sep. 19- Intro to Paper #2. Read the Guidelines for Paper #2.

_x__ Sep. 23- Laulima Discussion: Ad Pros and Cons

_x__ Sep. 26- Complete readings for paper #2.

_x__ Sep. 30- Laulima Discussion: Logical Fallacies Exercise

_x__ Oct. 3- Submit RD2 [50 pts]. Review the guidelines.

_x__ Oct. 7- Submit three RD2 evaluations [50 pts]. Review the guidelines.

_x__ Oct. 12- Submit FD2 [125 pts]. Review the guidelines.

FD5 Government Needs To Step In

Cherish Kalilikane

13DEC11

FD5/Final Exam

Government Needs To Step In

In ancient times the way of judgment was based on the ruling of a king. Most of the time minor incidents would result in death for the criminal. Recent generations have established a judiciary system with a constitutionally focused government. The ideals of then and now are very different in the sense of severity. People have grown accustom to seeing criminals receive the life penalty rather than death. [THESIS] To solve the problem of hate crime the government needs to make their punishments more severe. [THESIS]

People like to minimize the knowledge hate offenders have for another race. This makes it seem as though they were semi-victimized because they were never taught better behavior. Mel Gibson uses the excuse of being drunk as his reasoning to making slurs about Jewish people. Gibson says, “I am in the process of understanding where those vicious words came from during that drunken display, and I am asking the Jewish community, whom I have personally offended, to help me on my journey through recovery” (Gibson).  Regardless of Gibson’s constitutional right to freedom of speech certain words come with a price. I believe he should have gotten some kind of community service because of his comments. Some may believe punishment because of a remark is going overboard but I think that anyone who is in the public eye has great influence on others. Celebrities should take what they speak seriously and the government should punish them if they decide not to.

In the case of Mr. Poffenbarger who had an altercation with a black man after yelling racial slurs was convicted of first degree hate crime, which is 8 to 25 years in prison.  Poffenbarger stabbed a man in his lung, put him in the hospital for days at which point he could no longer use his right arm and had to give up a career. I believe that Poffenbarger deserved hate crime in the first degree but I don’t agree with the 8 to 25 years. A first-degree hate crime should not come at a minimum of eight years, that’s ridiculous. The government needs to understand how important it is to let society know that hate crimes are not okay. The easiest way to get society to work at bettering racism is through the convicted criminals. Starting with Poffenbarger he should have gotten minimum 20 years. Poffenbarger’s grandmother even tried to side with her grandson by saying, “He’s such a nice young man,” she said. “He used to show chickens at 4-H fairs. He was a wonderful student. He went up there to work, not to get into trouble” (Foderaro). Regardless of what her grandson went up to do he ended that with stabbing a man and consequently judged too lightly, how constitutional. There is a new era that needs to be created an era in which people understand others on the basis of personality rather than status or race. The government needs to help create this new era by heightening the first, second, and third degree punishments by at least five years.  Someone may debate that five years is ridiculous and people who shot someone or even killed someone could get less years than someone who acted on a hate crime. What is to say that acting upon a hate crime is any less than killing someone? The hurt and anguish a person feels because of a hate crime, if they do survive, may just cause them enough psychological trauma to ending their own life. The effects of bullying and racism are clearly enough to provoke some towards doing something negative to themselves or others.  I believe if you’re the first person to cause a negative cycle of events you should be greatly punished for your doings.

People speak too much of what is wrong without seeming to have any answer as to how to bring change. Knickerbocker spoke of the rise in hate crimes and questioned what was wrong with US today. He asked, “Is there something about the mood in the US today – perhaps spurred by Americans dying in combat abroad, plus the cultural and political war at home over issues like same-sex marriage, judgeships, and immigration – that is leading in some instances to threats and attacks?”(Knickerbocker) No, the reasoning behind hate crimes aren’t because of large-scale things it’s because of small-scale perceptions. I, like anyone was raised a certain way and with certain beliefs. Based on those beliefs I go out and live my life according to how I would like to be treated. Sometimes people are pushed to act a certain way because of others hate. Someone who never felt racism towards another person could start to hate because someone first hated him or her. The lack of teaching the right values in a home has forced the government to find solutions to problems that keep looping back around.

Apparently families don’t want to take control of hate so the government should. I believe that racial slurs and sexual comments are taken too lightly now days. People need to stop and be more aware that things they say to others can be severely offensive and negatively persuading. Being intoxicated only shows what would have been a sober man’s hidden truths. The truth of the matter is society will learn to stop committing hate crimes if they see how severe convicted criminals get treated in the judicial system. Zero tolerance policy needs to be in order. Hate crimes need to be punished.

Works Cited

Foderaro, Lisa W. “Cornell Student Is Accused of Hate Crimes in Stabbing.” New York Times online. 5 May 2006. 5 May 2006 [http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/05/nyregion/05cornell.html].

“Gibson: ‘I Am Not an Anti-Semite.’” CNN.com. 2 Aug. 2006. 07 Dec. 2006 [http://www.cnn.com/2006/SHOWBIZ/Movies/08/01/gibson.dui/index.html].

Knickerbocker, Brad. “National Acrimony and a Rise in Hate Crimes.” csmonitor.com. 3 June 2005. 30 June 2005 [http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0603/p03s01-ussc.html].

[from the June 03, 2005 edition of the online Christian Science Monitor]

FD4 Freedom of Speech, Freedom to Not Listen

Cherish Kalilikane

09 DEC 11

FD4

Freedom of Speech, Freedom to Not Listen

“The most basic component of freedom of expression is the right to freedom of speech. The right to freedom of speech allows individuals to express themselves without interference or constraint by the government “(Cornell). The challenge of creating a society where balance is the prominent endeavor and becoming unbalanced creates chaos undoubtedly created the constitution. Everyone in America has the right to these constitutional freedoms and everyone also has a different definition of what freedom of speech actually means. [THESIS] Regardless of Ward Churchill’s opinionated statements he is allowed to make them because he is an American and is provided with the same constitutional rights as everyone else [THESIS].

           

Freedom of speech has changed in society throughout the generations. Although many believe there is a freedom in society for Americans to speak as they please, it was not always that way. Take the civil war for example, when African Americans had no say in how they were to be treated or even the right to fight their own battles to get out of slavery. Africans were shunned away from being true American’s for generations before us. Society has learned through the ages to accept different transitions of existence with each other. White people learned to transition into a society where inequality is debatably nonexistent. A great era of innovation was also a saddening era for women’s rights. While the first amendment proceeded, women were still unable to speak in political terms. I know being a woman I am very thankful and appreciative of those who came before me who placed rights into my hands and options into my future. Being a woman I can also appreciate the first amendment and all of the rights I have because of it. Politically, women didn’t have much say in the past generations and therefore I’ve realized how important it is to be able to say what we choose in this generation. In understanding how society has changed throughout the generations so should one understand that a mild statement said in the present would be something outspoken in the past. In our right to free speech we should also have conscious of other’s founding father given rights.

There are many ideas that make people think America allows full freedom of speech. What about these questionable handlings of Ward Churchill’s freely spoken speeches? Why, if people believe so strongly in freedom of speech do they argue once someone uses that freedom? In an article about the first amendment and high school students, Linda Campbell states, “But democracy can be a messy business that entails questioning the official status quo. How do you simultaneously teach students to value social order and to embrace a clashing of ideas that resembles mayhem? “(Campbell) Some have a hard time comprehending clashing ideas and controversy tends to anger many. Yes, Churchill stated very provocative things in his articles of globalization but any other person would have been more than capable of saying those same things. It’s not what Churchill said; it’s the fact that as an American he has the right to do so.

How can teachers teach students the right to freedom of speech but shun a man using a great example of what American’s have the right to do? There aren’t many people with bold statements that can make being quiet while regarding the government a thing of the past. Ward Churchill should be commended for using his right for freedom of speech to its utmost power. Although he may have overstated things and angered a lot of people in doing so, because he is an American he can speak as he pleases. It is your choice to listen. Campbell states, “As the study points out, ‘High school students’ attitudes about the First Amendment are important because each generation of citizens helps define what freedom means in our society”(Campbell). Exactly, if the younger generations see how Ward Churchill is being prosecuted just for using his right to free speech it may persuade them to hold back on making future hugely profound statements. Ideally, I believe the founding fathers thought up the First Amendment to give people the understanding that they have the right to open up their thoughts and speak them freely. Perhaps their notions were to speak thoughts that would help society rather than cause a ruckus. I believe Churchill’s thoughts, although not the most positive ones, can be very thought provoking and can help future generations think about political views in a new light rather than it’s preconceived notions. Churchill uses his constitutional right to speak freely just as past generations of Americans have.

People are easily angered at things they don’t need to listen to. When reading letters to the editor about Churchill’s visit to speak at UH Manoa there were many angry letters questioning why he came at all. Parkinson wrote, “On the other hand, it had been determined that Churchill is not an Indian, although he has professed to be and he doesn’t even have a doctorate that he can claim as a credential! To hide the kind of actions, and the philosophy, expounded by this man under the umbrella of “academic freedom” simply shows how low our academic system has fallen” (Parkinson). I think it’s funny how much emotion Churchill’s speech brings out of this person and for things he didn’t need to witness. I understand that Parkinson has just as much right as Churchill to speak as he pleases but to what extent will it be monotonous? Many before Parkinson has spoken up about Churchill wasting time and money. A great thing about being an American is the ability to not have to listen to a person’s free speech. Churchill has his constitutional right just as Parkinson has the ability to freely critique Churchill’s statements.

Churchill indubitably over exaggerates many statements, which is why he gets in these controversies. An example of Churchill going too far was stated in his writings of globalization. In speaking of globalization Churchill states, “There were, after all, far more pressing things than the unrelenting misery/death of a few hundred thousand Iraqi tikes to be concerned with. Getting ‘Jeremy’ and ‘Ellington’ to their weekly soccer game, for instance, or seeing to it that little ‘Tiffany’ and ‘Ashley’ had just the right roll-neck sweaters to go with their new cords”(Churchill).  As if the normal American family knew at all what was going on with Iraqi children at the time. Churchill acts as if no one in America cared about the losses in Iraq, the fact is no one knew. However, in many cases American’s automatically see Iraqi people in a negative light based on Iraq’s prior aims at the American military. Any way someone would look at the topic Churchill talked about would be able to have a debate. People don’t like the fact that Churchill stated these farfetched things about American’s reactions to an Iraqi devastation. Technically, Churchill has the free will to state those things based on his Constitutional right.

Allison makes a great point in our Laulima discussions while defending Churchill. She states, “In preparing a speech on a controversial subject, it leads to clarity of the opinion and information regarding the subject is shared. These opinions lead to debates that eventually lead to a resolution. It also makes people take interest in the controversy at hand. Controversy also leads to an open mind as the pros and cons of the subject are expressed. With open minds we become more accepting of others and have fewer prejudices” (Matsumoto). Understanding can show how Churchill can be an acceptable character with things to offer. Just because Churchill says something the general public sees as unfavorable doesn’t mean that his statements should be shunned as trash. I believe any statement thought of as trash needs to be looked at deeper to find it’s underlying truths.

During Laulima discussions Carolyn Rose-Slane also agreed that Churchill challenged people’s thinking and once engaged he was more than glad to explain his reasoning. Carolyn stated, “If we hear the same point of view all the time, we are not challenged to question it, or think about it. It is important to the democratic process that different ideas and points of views are examined. People may not like what they hear from Ward Churchill and others who express unpopular opinions, but they are a necessary and important part of keeping our democracy from stagnating”(Slane). I couldn’t have stated it any better. Churchill’s behavior is admirable in the sense that it is an underlying factor in keeping this nation from being unchanging. Unchanging in this perspective is good because the forefathers created certain ways of democracy to keep order and maintain each person’s freedoms. People like Churchill create thought provoking questions and maintain the balance by keeping the light on what is going on in politics. Adversity isn’t always bad and happiness isn’t always enlightening. It is an American’s constitutional right to speak what their mind wants be it good or bad. It is also an American’s right not to listen.

Works Cited

Campbell, Linda. "So What Does It Do for Me?" Star-Telegram.com 3 Feb. 2005. 8 Feb. 2005 [http://www.dfw.com/mld/dfw/news/columnists/linda_campbell/10805866.htm?1c].

Churchill, Ward." Some People Push Back: On the Justice of Roosting Chickens." N.d. Dark Night Press_. From _Pockets of Resistance_, 11 Sep. 2001. 14 Nov. 2011 [http://www.darknightpress.org/index.php?i=news&c=recent&view=9&long=1].

"First Amendment: An Overview." N.d. Legal Information Institute. Cornell Law School. 5 June 2003 [http://www.law.cornell.edu/topics/first_amendment.html].

Matsumoto, Alison. “Defending Ward Churchill” Online posting 26 Nov. 2011. Laulima Discussion. 27 Nov. 2011 [https://laulima.hawaii.edu/portal/tool/e24f70fd-6ce1-4c3b-8cb9-78e4e4cff63d/posts/list/425376.page].

Parkinson, R.W. Letter. _Star Bulletin_. 21 Feb. 2005. 23 Feb. 2005 [http://starbulletin.com/2005/02/21/editorial/letters.html]

Slane, Carolyn. “Defending Ward Churchill” Online posting 25 Nov. 2011. Laulima Discussion. 27 Nov. 2011 [https://laulima.hawaii.edu/portal/tool/e24f70fd-6ce1-4c3b-8cb9-78e4e4cff63d/posts/list/425222.page].

Log of Completed Activities

__X_ Nov. 9- Intro to Paper #4. Read the Guidelines for Paper #4.

__X_ Nov. 14- Complete readings for paper #4.

__X_ Nov. 18- Laulima Discussion: Attack Ward Churchill

__X_ Nov. 23- Laulima Discussion: Defend Ward Churchill

__X_ Nov. 28- Submit RD4. [50 pts] Review the Review the guidelines.

__X_ Dec. 5- Submit three RD4 evaluations [50 pts] Review the guidelines.

__X_ Dec. 8-12- Submit FD4 [150 pts] Review the guidelines.

RD4 Freedom of Speech, Freedom to Not Listen

Cherish Kalilikane

28 NOV 11

RD4

Freedom of Speech, Freedom to Not Listen

“The most basic component of freedom of expression is the right of freedom of speech. The right to freedom of speech allows individuals to express themselves without interference or constraint by the government “(Cornell).  Everyone in America had the right to these constitutional freedoms and everyone also has a different definition of what freedom of speech actually means. [THESIS]Regardless of Ward Churchill’s opinionated statements he is allowed to make them because he is an American and is provided with the same constitutional rights as everyone else [THESIS].

           

Freedom of speech has changed in society throughout the generations. Although many believe there is a freedom in society for Americans to speak as they please, it was not always that way. Take the civil war for example, when African Americans had no say in how they were to be treated or even the right to fight their own battles to get out of slavery. There are many ideas that make people think America allows full freedom of speech. What about these questionable handlings of Ward Churchill’s freely spoken speeches? Why if people believe so strongly in freedom of speech do they argue once someone uses that very freedom? In an article about the first amendment and high school students Linda Campbell states, “But democracy can be a messy business that entails questioning the official status quo. How do you simultaneously teach students to value social order and to embrace a clashing of ideas that resembles mayhem? “(Campbell) Yes, Churchill stated very provocative things in his articles of globalization but it is as if another person was incapable of saying those things.

How can teachers teach students the right to freedom of speech but shun a man using a great example of what American’s have the right to do? There aren’t many people with bold statements that can make philosophical wonders a thing of the past. Ward Churchill should be commended for using his right for freedom of speech to its utmost power. Although he may have overstated things and angered a lot of people in doing so, because he is an American he can speak as he pleases. It is your choice to listen. Campbell states, “As the study points out, ‘High school students’ attitudes about the First Amendment are important because each generation of citizens helps define what freedom means in our society”(Campbell). Exactly, if the younger generations see how Ward Churchill is being prosecuted just for using his right to free speech it may persuade them to hold back on making future hugely profound statements. Ideally, I believe the founding fathers thought up the First Amendment to give people the understanding that they have the right to open up their thoughts and speak them freely. Perhaps their notions were to speak thoughts that would help society rather than cause a ruckus. I believe Churchill’s thoughts, although not the most positive ones, can be very thought provoking and can help future generations think about political views in a new light rather than it’s preconceived notions.

People are easily angered at things they don’t need to listen to. When reading letters to the editor about Churchill’s visit to speak at UH Manoa there were many angry letters questioning why he came at all. Parkinson wrote, “On the other hand, it had been determined that Churchill is not an Indian, although he has professed to be and he doesn’t even have a doctorate that he can claim as a credential! To hide the kind of actions, and the philosophy, expounded by this man under the umbrella of “academic freedom” simply shows how low our academic system has fallen”(Parkinson). What anger from a person’s voice for such things he didn’t need to witness. I understand that Parkinson has just as much right as Churchill to speak as he pleases but to what extent will it be just monotonous ringing? Many before Parkinson has blabbered on and on about Churchill wasting time and money but the great thing about being an American is the ability to not have to listen to a person’s free speech.

Churchill indubitably over exaggerates many statements which is why he is in the mess he is in right creating great controversy. An example of Churchill going to far was stated in his writings of globalization stating, “There were, after all, far more pressing things than the unrelenting misery/death of a few hundred thousand Iraqi tikes to be concerned with. Getting ‘Jeremy’ and ‘Ellington’ to their weekly soccer game, for instance, or seeing to it that little ‘Tiffany’ and ‘Ashley’ had just the right roll-neck sweaters to go with their new cords”(Churchill).  Allison makes a great point in our Laulima discussions while defending Churchill. She states, “In preparing a speech on a controversial subject, it leads to clarity of the opinion and information regarding the subject is shared. These opinions lead to debates that eventually lead to a resolution. It also makes people take interest in the controversy at hand. Controversy also leads to an open mind as the pros and cons of the subject are expressed. With open minds we become more accepting of others and have fewer prejudices” (Matsumoto). Great understanding of how Churchill can be an acceptable character with things to offer. Just because Churchill says particular things general public sees as unfavorable doesn’t mean that his statements should be shunned as trash. I believe that if any statement is thought of as trash there is something that needs to be looked at deeper in to that statement to find it’s underlying truths.

During Laulima discussions Carolyn Rose-Slane also agreed that Churchill challenged people’s thinking and once engaged he was more than glad to explain his reasoning. Carolyn stated, “If we hear the same point of view all the time, we are not challenged to question it, or think about it. It is important to the democratic process that different ideas and points of views are examined. People may not like what they hear from Ward Churchill and others who express unpopular opinions, but they are a necessary and important part of keeping our democracy from stagnating”(Slane). I couldn’t have stated it any better. Churchill’s behavior is admirable in the sense that it is an underlying factor in keeping this nation from being unchanging. People like Churchill create thought provoking questions and maintain the balance by always keeping the light on what is going on in politics. Adversity isn’t always bad and happiness isn’t always enlightening. It is an American’s right to speak what their mind wants be it good or bad. It is also an American’s right to not listen.

Works Cited

Campbell, Linda. "So What Does It Do for Me?" Star-Telegram.com 3 Feb. 2005. 8 Feb. 2005 <http://www.dfw.com/mld/dfw/news/columnists/linda_campbell/10805866.htm?1c>.

Churchill, Ward."Some People Push Back: On the Justice of Roosting Chickens." N.d. Dark Night Press_. From _Pockets of Resistance_, 11 Sep. 2001. 14 Nov. 2011 [http://www.darknightpress.org/index.php?i=news&c=recent&view=9&long=1].

"First Amendment: An Overview." N.d. Legal Information Instiitute. Cornell Law School. 5 June 2003 <http://www.law.cornell.edu/topics/first_amendment.html.>

Matsumoto, Alison. “Defending Ward Churchill” Online posting 26 Nov. 2011. Laulima Discussion. 27 Nov. 2011 [https://laulima.hawaii.edu/portal/tool/e24f70fd-6ce1-4c3b-8cb9-78e4e4cff63d/posts/list/425376.page].

Parkinson, R.W. Letter. _Star Bulletin_. 21 Feb. 2005. 23 Feb. 2005 <http://starbulletin.com/2005/02/21/editorial/letters.html>

Slane, Carolyn. “Defending Ward Churchill” Online posting 25 Nov. 2011. Laulima Discussion. 27 Nov. 2011 [https://laulima.hawaii.edu/portal/tool/e24f70fd-6ce1-4c3b-8cb9-78e4e4cff63d/posts/list/425222.page].

RFD2 Positive Psychology

Cherish Kalilikane

23NOV11

RFD2

Positive Psychology

American families use all types of media as a means to be entertained. Advertisements feed off of consumer’s needs and wants to be entertained and produce creative and informative commercials that appeal to families. Anyone can see how obvious it is that advertisements are trying to appeal to families. People tend to question the motives of companies because of the commercial’s appeal. People need to understand that companies are constantly competing with other companies and their entertaining ads aren’t there to lie to you but more to limelight their business. [THESIS] Advertisements do not have negative impacts on our lives. [THESIS]

Advertisements have their logical fallacies but it’s up to you to understand the fallacy and look past it to understanding what the product can offer. I found MarkBen Paulino’s commercial fallacy report as he talks about the KY fire and ice commercials. MarkBen Paulino states, “Trojan Condom and Lubricant (KY jelly) manufacturer is promoting their Fire and Ice brand of condom and lubricant. There is a male and female - a couple - present in the ad. The product a tube of lube is shown in the middle of the screen with the couple in the background before coitus. The screen then blanks and shows the couple with frizzled hair and an expression of ecstasy, which I assume is suppose to portray the cloud nine feeling that the couple had experienced during coitus with the aid of Trojan's Fire and Ice brand.”

As Mark goes through the visualizing of the commercial the logical fallacy understood in this advertisement was Post Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc. This fallacy states that because Y follows event X, event X causes event Y. Thus far I have heard stories of people having sexual intercourse and having the feeling of ecstasy without the aid of Fire and Ice. There are too many variables, as people may be having a better day when they are using the Fire and Ice or people who are naturally good at coitus and always feel great during their exercise.  Those who have learned the art of Kama Sutra are supposed to know the sexual behavior (physical and mental) of the human body and have the ability to heighten the desirable feeling of sex and thus feeling euphoria. In the end, one can feel ecstasy due to many reasons and not just because of Trojan's Fire and Ice.  Paulino states a good point that just because Y follows X doesn’t mean that X caused Y. The KY commercial slightly dramatized the effects of their product, however they are competing with various other lubricants and need to appeal to the audience. By using creative commercials other companies could have used they can come off as dramatized but they are really just trying to limelight their product.

Dean Kurozumi talks about a Double mint gum commercial that uses the plain folk fallacy, he states, “An ad that I stumbled upon on YouTube was an ad that was advertising Wrigley Double mint gum. The entire 30-second commercial was with Chris Brown singing a little jingle about Wrigley Double mint gum based on his "Forever" song. It's clear that the ad is appealing to those that admire/look up to Chris Brown, and if Chris Brown chew's Double mint gum, they should too.

I say this ad is a good example of Plain Folk because Chris Brown's specialty is in music, more namely the R&B type and he has little to no knowledge of why a certain brand of gum would be better than others.  They are simply using him for his popularity to attract customers to buy their product with no real foundation whatsoever.” I agree with Dean in his theories of why the company chose to use Chris Brown in the double mint ad. Double mint gum is using Chris Brown to put their product in the limelight but I see no negative aspects to this advertisement. At the time Chris Brown had a positive persona and since he was advertising gum and not tobacco I see no reason for the persuasion of the ad to be a bad one. I agree that plain folk fallacies were used although I don’t think that this advertisement had a negative impact on consumers.

Comments by Carmen Lee try and show advertisements have a negative impact on consumers she states, “While most of us do not notice, many ads deceive us into believing something else rather than what they actually have to present. It is not uncommon for us to bypass the fact that some ads can be misleading. It is common to see an ad that makes you think that it is too good to be true. Many of us share the same experience that we go out and purchase a product we saw on an ad, thinking it would work the way it advertises and you turned out disappointed. Not only the product does not improve or enhance our life in any way, it is also a waste of our time and hard earned money.” Carmen has a good point that ads can be exaggerated as to get the viewer enthralled into the product. However, saying a product does not improve or enhance our lives in any way is a bold statement that I find faulty. Products having great advertisements are primarily because the companies have been able to make enough money to make a great commercial. The product has some kind of sense of worth that makes people keep buying it. The logical fallacy you seem to be entailed with is Reification. Your statement that products do not improve or enhance is simply an idea of yours rather than a true statement. Perceptions are good but in your case it is only your opinion.

Carolyn Rose-Slane is also against advertisements she states, “Yes, Ads have a negative impact on our lives: I believe ads have a negative impact because they employ psychological research to make people believe they need the “new” or “better” products. This has a negative impact on our lives because some people are able to make planned purchases and avoid debt, but many people, more now than ever in our history, accrue debt while succumbing to the struggle to maintain the appearance of keeping up with the latest “cool” trend.” I agree that advertisers spend time to understand the psychological reasoning of their consumers and come up with commercials based on that reasoning.  However, I don’t think that using psychological research negatively impacts our lives. I believe that companies take time to research products as well as how they can best advertise it so that people will pay attention to the qualities of the product. Saying “companies are only out to get you with their advertisements” is biased as well as pessimistic.   

Companies may use appealing things in their advertisements to get people’s attention. However, the underlying reasoning to ads is the fact that these companies have great amounts of money to make advertisements for a reason their product sells! People before you have been successfully advertised to and are continually advertised to, not because they are gullible but because they liked the product the first time they bought it. People need to look at the fact that advertisements provide an efficient and convenient way of informing their consumers of new items. Companies pay a lot of money to advertise their product they wouldn’t waste their money on a bad product in fear of losing their business. If a person bought a bad product the first time it wouldn’t matter how appealing the advertisement was, they wouldn’t buy it again. Company’s advertisements do not have a negative impact on our lives. Companies are simply looking to find the most productive way to get your attention to try their product and if that means being very entertaining, so be it.

Works Cited

Kurozumi, Dean. "Laulima." 29 Aug. 2011. Web. 03 Oct. 2011. <https://laulima.hawaii.edu/portal/tool/e24f70fd-6ce1-4c3b-8cb9-78e4e4cff63d/posts/list/399262.page>.

Lee, Carmen. "Laulima." 23 Aug. 2011. Web. 01 Oct. 2011. <https://laulima.hawaii.edu/portal/tool/e24f70fd-6ce1-4c3b-8cb9-78e4e4cff63d/posts/list/395910.page>.

Paulino, MarkBen. "Laulima." 01 Oct. 2011. Web. 01 Oct. 2011. <https://laulima.hawaii.edu/portal/tool/e24f70fd-6ce1-4c3b-8cb9-78e4e4cff63d/posts/list/400422.page>.

Rose-Slane, Carolyn. "Laulima." 23 Aug. 2011. Web. 01 Oct. 2011. <https://laulima.hawaii.edu/portal/tool/e24f70fd-6ce1-4c3b-8cb9-78e4e4cff63d/posts/list/396305.page>.

Log of Completed Activities

_x__ Sep. 19- Intro to Paper #2. Read the Guidelines for Paper #2.

_x__ Sep. 23- Laulima Discussion: Ad Pros and Cons

_x__ Sep. 26- Complete readings for paper #2.

_x__ Sep. 30- Laulima Discussion: Logical Fallacies Exercise

_x__ Oct. 3- Submit RD2 [50 pts]. Review the guidelines.

_x__ Oct. 7- Submit three RD2 evaluations [50 pts]. Review the guidelines.

_x__ Oct. 12- Submit FD2 [125 pts]. Review the guidelines.

RFD3 Decisions: Rerouting...

Cherish Kalilikane

12 NOV 11

RFD3

Decisions: Rerouting…

Good morning graduating class!  I will be talking to you today to help you understand how important making good decisions, especially from here on out can be for you. From the beginning of a child’s education they are taught honesty as the best policy. People are deemed immoral if they use unorthodox ways to get their way such as lying or cheating. Teenagers cheating on their tests are greatly increasing every year.  These teens believe they are safe from getting caught and therefore lead impulsively.  A young observer from a teen advice column states, “It is very easy to point fingers at media, celebrities, divorced or single parents, working mothers, and "liberal" attitudes toward things like sex, drugs and alcohol. Much too easy. But the things that disenfranchise youth and lead them astray are rarely that simple. In fact, the tactic of laying blame at convenient targets usually only makes the problem worse. “(Teen advice, p.2) [THESIS] A young adult's choice to lie will be greatly detrimental to their future and will carry throughout their lives. [THESIS]

Although I do not want to come off as the bearer of bad news, I believe enlightened people serve greater purpose than people kept in the dark. Young adults fail to realize that cheating on a test or lying about something can greatly impact their future. If they are successful in not getting caught, they have a feeling of empowerment and tend to lie and cheat more often than not. In Mundell’s reading it states,”Still, shame may not put the brakes on fibbing as deadlines loom. According to Ferrari, when asked 'would you stop lying?' even the most guilt-ridden excuse-makers said, "No, I feel guilty, but I'd do it again."(Mundell, p.1) As quoted by a lying student they will even agree that since it is easy to cheat they are willing to do so even if there is a little residual guilt. Teenagers that lie and get away with it grow to be college students that make fibs to receive lenience toward late homework. The negative attitude that is formed as a teenager slowly becomes a personality trait of the person. This attitude makes it acceptable in their eyes to lie about other facets of their lives. Personal lives are greatly affected by lies and can breakup relationships as well as cause problems in a person’s career. Lying to the wrong professor can force their trust to be lost and anger them so much so that you could receive a grade drop.

As college students finish school and become career-oriented their school ethic transitions to their work ethic. Telling a boss an excuse as to why you couldn’t meet quota on time will not get you a free pass, it will lead you to finding a new job. The long-term consequences of lying in our personal and working relationships are like the story of A Boy Who Cried Wolf. The boy kept yelling wolf while there was no wolf around and as the story goes, when there was a real wolf by him no one believed him. A person can’t lie and get away with it all the time eventually they will get caught.  Once a person gets caught in a lie they are immediately looked at in a different, negative light and it takes a lot for that light to change back into a positive one. It’s true that when someone lies it takes a hundred truths to make themselves believable again. A lie isn’t only what you say it is also what you don’t say. Lying by omission is a very debatable subject, but it’s one that I strongly believe is true. As Robert Gornichec says, “I think following the Golden Rule: “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you," is always the best way to respond in most situations.” If there is something you are holding back from a person that could possibly help their situation I believe you are unethical and downright lying. If it is questionable that you are lying or not you can answer the problem by asking yourself, “if the roles were reversed would I want to know the information?” Lying will paint you in the wrong light and could quite possibly cost you your career.

Long-term consequences of lying start to become more evident as a liar goes through life. Lying to people makes them not trust you and makes anything you say unbelievable. By lying you are making it known to everyone that you are untrustworthy and people aren’t going to come to you for any kind of help or advice. It is important to be honest as a teenager as well as coming into young adulthood because it sets you up for success in the long run. Being honest in you tests and quizzes allows you to know where you are in the learning process and helps you realize the areas you need to study more. As you gain more knowledge and continue college, being honest will help you become trustworthy to your teachers and allow them to be at favorable terms with you. It’s good to be on favorable terms with your teachers because they are more willing to help if your struggling in class. Consequences of being honest in our personal and working relationships are, in my opinion, all positive outcomes. If someone is honest they are also trustworthy because they will “tell you like it is”. I would rather have an honest friend that is brutal about their statement but true, then a lying friend that is willing to throw me “under the bus” to support their own opportunities.

Being able to be honest throughout your life will set you up for successful outcomes. Teenagers who feel empowered by getting away with lying only grow to college students who feel a need to make little fibs to vie for extra time on their work. These college students transition to their careers and feel as though they can get away with lying in the workplace. Eventually these liars are weeded out of the workplace because liars will never be perfect in their lying. It’s hard to remember a lie; it’s easy to remember the truth. Honesty in our personal and working relationships lead to positive outcomes such as having true friends you can count on and not be lied to. So as I stand here today in front of you, KCC graduating class, I would ask that you make the best possible decisions now so that your future does not reroute into something you could regret. Indeed it is true, honesty is the best policy.

Works Cited

Gornichec, Robert. "Laulima." Laulima. 21 Oct. 2011. Web. 31 OCT. 2011. <https://laulima.hawaii.edu/portal/tool/e24f70fd-6ce1-4c3b-8cb9-78e4e4cff63d/posts/list/410566.page>.

Mundell, E.J. "Professors Beware: College Kids Lying 70 Percent of Time." _Reuters Health_. Filippo A. Salustri Webpage. Ryerson University. 19 June 2003 <http://deed.megan.ryerson.ca/~fil/t/articles/cheaters03.html>.

"TEEN ADVICE." Teen Advice - Advice and Community For Teens. Web. 31 OCT 2011. <http://teenadvice.about.com/library/weekly/aa012501a.htm>.

Log of Completed Activities

_X__ Oct. 13- Intro to Paper #3. Read the Guidelines for Paper #3.

_X__ Oct. 17- Complete readings for paper #3 for paper #3.

_X__ Oct. 21- Laulima Discussion #1

_X__ Oct. 28- Laulima Discussion #2

_X__ Oct. 31- Submit RD3 [50 pts] Review the guidelines.

_X__ Nov. 4- Submit three RD3 evaluations [50 pts] Review the guidelines.

_X__ Nov. 8- Submit FD3 [125 pts] Review the guidelines.

Decisions: Rerouting…

Cherish Kalilikane

12 NOV 11

FD3

Decisions: Rerouting…

Good morning graduating class! Today I will be talking to you on the basis of helping you understand how beneficial making good decisions from here on out can be for you. From the beginning of a child’s education they are taught honesty as the best policy. People are deemed unethical if they use unorthodox ways to get their way such as lying or cheating. Teenagers cheating on their tests are greatly increasing every year.  These teens believe they are safe from getting caught and lead impulsively.  “It is very easy to point fingers at media, celebrities, divorced or single parents, working mothers, and "liberal" attitudes toward things like sex, drugs and alcohol. Much too easy. But the things that disenfranchise youth and lead them astray are rarely that simple. In fact, the tactic of laying blame at convenient targets usually only makes the problem worse. “(Teen advice, p.2) [THESIS] A young adult's choice to lie will be greatly detrimental to their future and will carry through their lives. [THESIS]

Although I do not want to come off as the bearer of bad news, I believe enlightening people serves greater purpose than keeping them in the dark. Young adults fail to realize that cheating on a test or lying about something can greatly impact their future. If they are successful in not getting caught, they have a feeling of empowerment and tend to lie and cheat more often because they feel they can get away with it.  In Mundell’s reading it states,”Still, shame may not put the brakes on fibbing as deadlines loom. According to Ferrari, when asked 'would you stop lying?' even the most guilt-ridden excuse-makers said, "No, I feel guilty, but I'd do it again."(Mundell, p.1) As quoted by a lying student they will even agree that since it is easy to cheat they are willing to do so even if there is a little residual guilt.  Teenagers that lie and get away with it grow to be college students that make fibs to receive lenience towards late homework.  The negative attitude that is formed as a teenager slowly becomes a personality trait of the person. This attitude makes it acceptable in their eyes to lie about other facets of their lives. Personal lives are greatly affected by lies and can breakup relationships as well as cause problems in a person’s career.

As college students finish school and become career-oriented their school ethic transitions to their work ethic. Telling a boss an excuse as to why you couldn’t meet quota on time will not get you a free pass, it will lead you to finding a new job. The long-term consequences of lying in our personal and working relationships are like the story of A Boy Who Cried Wolf. The boy kept yelling wolf while there was no wolf around and as the story goes, when there was a real wolf by him no one believed him. A person can’t lie and get away with it all the time eventually they will get caught.  Once a person gets caught in a lie they are immediately looked at in a different light and it takes a lot for that light to change back into a positive one. It’s true that when someone lies it takes a hundred truths to make themselves believable again. Lie isn’t only what you say it is also what you don’t say. Lying by omission is a very debatable subject, one that I strongly believe is true. As Robert Gornichec says, “I think following the Golden Rule: “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you," is always the best way to respond in most situations.” If there is something you are holding back from a person that could possibly help their situation I believe you acting unethical and you are lying. If it is questionable that you are lying or not you can answer the problem by asking yourself, “if the roles were reversed would I want to know the information?”

Long-term consequences of lying start to become more evident as a liar goes through life. Lying to people makes them not trust you and makes anything you say unbelievable. By lying you are making it known to everyone that you are untrustworthy and people aren’t going to come to you for any kind of help or advice. It is important to be honest as a teenager as well as coming into young adulthood because it sets you up for success in the long run. Being honest in you tests and quizzes allows you to know where you are in the learning process and helps you realize the areas you need to study more. As you gain more knowledge and continue to college being honest will help you become trustworthy to your teachers and allow them to be a favorable terms with you so they can help you if you’re struggling. Consequences of being honest in our personal and working relationships are, in my opinion, all positive outcomes. If someone is honest they are also trustworthy because they will “tell you like it is”. I would rather have an honest friend that is brutal about their statement but true, then a lying friend that is willing to throw me “under the bus” to support their own opportunities.

Being able to be honest throughout your life will set you up for successful consequences. As one would assume the word consequences seem to have negative connotations, I believe that in the case of honesty consequences of being honest has a positive connotation. Teenagers who feel empowered by getting away with lying only grow to college students who feel a need to make little fibs to vie for extra time on their work. These college students transition to their careers and feel as though they can get away with lying in the workplace. Eventually these liars are weeded out of the workplace because liars will never be perfect in their lying. It’s hard to remember a lie; it’s easy to remember the truth.  Honesty in our personal and working relationships lead to positive consequences such as having true friends you can count on and not be lied to. Indeed it is true, honesty is the best policy. So as I stand here today in front of you, KCC graduating class, I would ask that you make the best possible decisions now so that your future does not reroute into something you could regret. Peace, love, and be merry.

Works Cited

Mundell, E.J. "Professors Beware: College Kids Lying 70 Percent of Time." _Reuters Health_. Filippo A. Salustri Webpage. Ryerson University. 19 June 2003 <http://deed.megan.ryerson.ca/~fil/t/articles/cheaters03.html>.

"TEEN ADVICE." Teen Advice - Advice and Community For Teens. Web. 31 OCT 2011. <http://teenadvice.about.com/library/weekly/aa012501a.htm>.

Gornichec, Robert. "Laulima." Laulima. 21 Oct. 2011. Web. 31 OCT. 2011. <https://laulima.hawaii.edu/portal/tool/e24f70fd-6ce1-4c3b-8cb9-78e4e4cff63d/posts/list/410566.page>.

Log of Completed Activities

_X__ Oct. 13- Intro to Paper #3. Read the Guidelines for Paper #3.

_X__ Oct. 17- Complete readings for paper #3 for paper #3.

_X__ Oct. 21- Laulima Discussion #1

_X__ Oct. 28- Laulima Discussion #2

_X__ Oct. 31- Submit RD3 [50 pts] Review the guidelines.

_X__ Nov. 4- Submit three RD3 evaluations [50 pts] Review the guidelines.

_X__ Nov. 8- Submit FD3 [125 pts] Review the guidelines.