Mauricio Aguilera UrcuquĂ February 25th, 2017 Dear Reader, My name is Mauricio Aguilera. Thank you very much for reading my English Portfolio. It is a recompilation of my works which demonstrate my work and effort to surpass myself in my knowledge on the English language. My portfolio consists of three essays and a research project which show my skills and abilities, and my continuous development during my last level of English. When I started I had trouble reading, writing listening and speaking; I had problems in everything. I could not communicate with my teachers, and it was difficult to establish a communication with them. It was almost impossible to finish a reading without the help of Google Translate. Not to mention writing, once a teacher wrote "Really?" In one of my essays to highlight an error of mine. However, I improved most of these errors during all levels of English. After two years of studying English I consider that I have made great progress and can develop myself in the world. My strengths are writing and reading, now I am able to immortalize my ideas in any writing. My weaknesses are listening and speaking, I still have some problems when speaking in public. I have to improve on those aspects. Now that I finish this course, I plan to improve my skills in this language. I know that I will succeed because I will receive classes only in English the following semesters, and it is necessary that I master the English language to be able to understand all the classes that I will receive and to answer any question that is presented.
Thanks again for being the one who reads my portfolio. I put all my effort and gave everything of myself to create my portfolio. I hope you have the greatest satisfaction in reading it, and you take the liberty of analyzing everything said here and even refute it.
Gratefully,
Mauricio Andres Aguilera Jaramillo
Running head: HOW MORALITY CHANGES IN A FOREIGN LANGUAGE
How Morality Changes in a Foreign Language Mauricio Aguilera Yachay Tech
Author Note Crash Course L6-009 February, 2017
1
HOW MORALITY CHANGES IN A FOREIGN LANGUAGE
2
How Morality Changes in a Foreign Language What defines who we are and how we act? This is a matter openly debated between science and morality. This article explains the effect to make decisions in foreign languages using experiment which raises very controversial issues about whether or not to kill a certain number of people directly or indirectly. This topic is more open than it seems because it involves more issues than just making decisions morally or logically, but also how the change in linguistic conditions affects the conception that most people have of ethics and morality. I think the best decisions are made in a logical way leaving aside the moral principles, since these are taken on the basis of sociocultural concepts. In addition I completely agree with the author on how the reasoning of people is affected by the simple act of speaking in foreign languages. What is the best way to take a decision, logically or emotionally? In my opinion the best decisions are made in a logical way leaving aside moral principles, since they are made on the basis of sociocultural concepts. The concept of morality is universal, however each culture and place has different opinions of what is moral. I believe that moral actions are taken by cultural memories which are not applied equally in all place. For example, in Dubai women have to cover their bodies, but on the other hand in Ecuador they are able to show it. Another good example is in ancient Greece where pedophilia and homosexuality were moral. Currently in almost all countries, pedophilia is illegal and homosexuality is becoming moral. There are several languages around the world, some of the most widely spoken are Spanish, English and Mandarin. Sedivy (year) explains in her lecture that people react differently according to the language in which they carry out an activity. For example, people act more empathetically and emotionally at the moment of performing an activity or thinking about how to solve a problem. I support the author's idea that this
HOW MORALITY CHANGES IN A FOREIGN LANGUAGE
3
could be caused because we always compare our memories and associate them with everything we see, and as a result we relate the problem or event to our memories and anecdotes of childhood. The subjects of the experiment reacted differently when the same process was repeated in a foreign language. They put aside their emotional and empathic part, and instead they showed a supremacy taking logical and rational decisions. I think this happened because people react more apathetic and with greater logical and critical thinking to events of stress, in this case caused by speaking in strange languages. I strongly think this may be related to making a decision of life and death; the answer is not what we like but it is always the most logical. To conclude, I agree with the author because she was very clear in what she tries to convey and she set a good example with the “trolley problem�. I firmly believe that the best option to solve any problem is to make it as easy as possible. One of the messages made clear by the author is that feelings, empathy and reasoning can be affected by a fact as simple as speaking in another language. We must learn to make decisions with the head and not with the heart. We must measure all the pros and cons before doing it.
HOW MORALITY CHANGES IN A FOREIGN LANGUAGE
References Sedivy, J.(2016) How Morality Changes in a Foreign Language
4
Running head: WHY SELF-EDUCATED LEARNERS OFTEN COME UP SHORT
Why Self-Educated Learners Often Come Up Short Mauricio Aguilera Yachay Tech
Author Note Crash Course L6-009 February, 2017
1
WHY SELF-EDUCATED LEARNERS OFTEN COME UP SHORT
2
Why Self-Educated Learners Often Come Up Short What is the best way to learn? This has been one of the questions that have caused great debate around the world regarding which is the best method of education. Each person has his/her own way of learning; there are some that are better and more efficient than others. For example, Young (2010) explains some pros and cons of formal education and self-education. In addition, he gives a reflection of how these two ways to learn are less efficient than working independently and how they work to their maximum potential when they work together. I strongly agree with the author. Additionally, I firmly believe that both schooling and self-education have their advantages and disadvantages, but together they are the best way to acquire the pure knowledge. Schooling is a great way to get information from reliable sources which is taught by people who have years of training, "the teachers." A clear advantage of learning from teachers is that they passed through an information filter which is difficult to obtain by oneself; they know what it is necessary to learn and what it is irrelevant information. There are “good and learned teachers to impart us with knowledge of what they know. Every one is a master in his field.” (Singh, 2010, p.1) Furthermore, it is important to have motivation to study. However, this desire to study is useless if we do not know where to get and what type of information is needed; we will only be acquiring random knowledge. For instance, in the article “Importancia del Plan de Estudios” (Anonymous, n. d) is encountered the issue of how a correct curriculum improves the transfer of knowledge between teachers and students. Having a correct curriculum is then when motivation comes into play to carry out self-education.
WHY SELF-EDUCATED LEARNERS OFTEN COME UP SHORT
3
Discipline, motivation and creativity are essential and necessary to be able to culminate in the best possible way any activity. Young (2010) explains how more discipline is needed for self-education than formal education because at all school, college, or university people have something to focus regarding what it is necessary. On the other hand, with self-education it is more difficult to find something that will keep us on the way that we want to follow. A person who knows everything, even the most intelligent person in the world, will not do anything of benefit if he does not have a mind that uses all that knowledge acquired. A great example of self-education is found in the article of Childress (2007) where she talks about how a young man from a poor location on the African continent creates a windmill that generates electricity for his community; he did not have any teacher who told him what to do, but he was motivated and used his creativity to learn for himself what it is necessary to achieve his goal. Selfeducation is a powerful tool if it is combined with discipline, motivation and creativity. However, it has some shortcomings. Combining together two things to get a new one with the advantages of each one, this is success. Young (2010) in his article explains how self-education and schooling work better together than separately. Both schooling and self-education have their advantages and disadvantages. Formal education without self-education is like having plenty of food and letting it rot without having consumed it; we have so much information at our disposal but we do not take advantage of it. Self-education without schooling is like a hungry person one at a buffet; he is eager to acquire knowledge but does not know where to start. I think when these two great ways of learning are brought together, the individual advantages of each one are obtained and none of the disadvantages. We must find ways to instill these habits in people. For instance, Ossola (2014) in her article explains how Ted Clark, a professor of chemistry, solved the
WHY SELF-EDUCATED LEARNERS OFTEN COME UP SHORT problem of lack of laboratories in his university promoting the interaction of selfeducation and schooling In summary, each of these ways of learning has its pros and cons. If we concentrate on only one of them, we will have problems such as not knowing what to study or even worse not having motivation to do it. Having all the information at our disposal, knowing what we need and having the motivation to carry out our studies is something that is only possible to achieve by mixing self-education with education formal. I firmly believe that we must promote the use of educational methods that are adapted to the previous points.
4
WHY SELF-EDUCATED LEARNERS OFTEN COME UP SHORT
5
References Anonymous (n. d.) Importancia del Plan de Estudios. Importancia. Retrieved from https://www.importancia.org/plan-de-estudios.php Childress, S. (2007) A Young Tinkerer Builds a Windmill, Electrifying a Nation. The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved from https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB119742696302722641 Ossola, A. (2014) Scientists Are More Creative Than You Might Imagine. The Atlantic. Retrieved from https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2014/11/thecreative-scientist/382633/ Singh, B. (2010) MODERN EDUCATION SYSTEM. THE PRO’S AND CON’S. Retrieved from https://bupinder21.wordpress.com/2010/08/27/moderneducation-system-the-pros-and-cons/ Young, S. (2010) Why Self-Educated Learners Often Come Up Short
Running head: SHOULD SCIENCE HAVE A COMMON LANGUAGE?
Should Science Have a Common Language? Mauricio Aguilera Yachay Tech
Author Note February, 2017 Crash Curse L6-009
1
SHOULD SCIENCE HAVE A COMMON LANGUAGE?
2
Should Science Have a Common Language? Being able to understand any information is indispensable in the current century. There are countless scientist who speak several different languages. It would be impossible that a person speaks all those languages even reword. Currently, there is a lingua franca which is used by the majority of scientists. However, most people who do not speak English are still often at a disadvantage because it is not their native tongue. For this reason, it is necessary that science have a common language which should be different than English and not be the native tongue from anyone. The best option should be Latin because it is a dead tongue and it is spoken by few people. First of all, a lingua franca is very useful in the current information’s era. Scientists need to understand other scientific-research publications to be able to compare their ideas; to refute others research; and to improve their research. Ir is possible to do it through a universal language which should be spoken like a second tongue for everyone. The problem is a native tongue is used as the current lingua franca, as a result no native English people are still often at a clear disadvantage. In other words, it is necessary to have a universal language which is not used as native tongue in no country. Second of all, what language language which it is not native tongue can use as a lingua franca? The answer is Latin; it was left to use some centuries ago. In adition, no country uses it as native language which means no person would have more advantages than another people. It is clear that all the scientist world needs a common language which is not a great advantage by anyone. To conclude, to communicate ideas and works in a common language has several clear pros to scientific community. A universal language give us the opportunity
SHOULD SCIENCE HAVE A COMMON LANGUAGE? to understand easier the scientific research form another scientists. However, to use a native tongue like lingua franca generates some disadvantages to non-native tongue speakers. As a result, it is necessary to have a common language not used by anyone. Latin is the universal language which the scientific community needs.
3
SHOULD SCIENCE HAVE A COMMON LANGUAGE? References Huttner, A. (2015) The Hidden Bias of Science’s Universal Language
4
Running Head: INFLUENCE OF TECHNOLOGY IN HUMAN EVOLUTION
Influence of Technology in Human Evolution Mauricio Aguilera Yachay Tech
Author Note February, 2017 Crash Curse L6-009
1
INFLUENCE OF TECHNOLOGY IN HUMAN EVOLUTION
2
Abstract The purpose of this research is to describe the ways in which technology has affected the evolution of human beings. Throughout this research, evidence of alteration of anatomy and behavior of primitive man has been described. The first part of this project focuses on the development of rudimentary tools; their role in the development of hominid behavior; and how this behavior altered the human anatomy. The second part involves the discovery of fire and its various uses. Also, it touches on important points of how it helped the distribution of man through the world and how it transformed drastically the human body by the new utilities that fire gave. The third part deals with some evidence of all the seen previously. Finally, it will take into account some opposing opinions of other authors to analyze them and give a rebuttal highlighting the strength of the background of this paper. Keywords: Phenotype, carnivore, herbivorous, hominid, vestigial organs, cecum.
INFLUENCE OF TECHNOLOGY IN HUMAN EVOLUTION
3
Influence of Technology in Human Evolution Currently, technology greatly influences how human beings develop in their daily lives. This is not only something that happened today or a few hundred years ago, but instead it is a fact that has happened from the beginnings of man. There is countless evidence which can be found in fossil records and even more importantly in our own bodies such as certain vestigial organs which are a residue of all the evolutionary processes to which man was subjected. For example, Parente (2007) explains how human beings assimilate to their environment through a series of objects which were essential to perform activities extremely difficult for humans because their joints are not adapted for specific purposes such as fins to swim, claws to fight or catch prey, wings to fly and so on. These primitive tools were the technology of that time which facilitated daily activities of that time such as hunting, food consumption and others. Over time the human body was modified thanks to these tools and leaving clues in its path. The first steps in the evolution hominids were influenced by the creation of rudimentary tools and the discovery of fire, same things which left irrefutable evidence of their influence. First of all, getting food has never been so easy in the whole existence of mankind. Anyone can now buy anything that he/she requires in any supermarket or store. In contrast, this was not the same way thousands of years ago when hominids relied on fruit picking and small animal hunting. With the passage of time, according to Núùez and Paniagua (2001) these customs were altered in the Paleolithic due to the creation of rudimentary leaves made with stones that allowed them to expand their diet. At the same time, thanks to the new food source his brain began to develop, but this new advantage according to Harari (2014) had two major consequences as the need to spend more time in search of food and loss of muscle mass because their brain which consumes a quarter of energy that needs the whole body. This last disadvantage, loss of
INFLUENCE OF TECHNOLOGY IN HUMAN EVOLUTION
4
muscle mass, limited man to the moment of selecting prey due to his lack of body strength. According to Núñez & Paniagua (2001) the first hominids were more scavengers than hunters, and Harari (2014) claims they still maintained their previous activities such as picking plants and insects and hunting small animals. In addition, this last author states that one of the most common uses of the first stone utensils was to break bones in order to reach the marrow. It is clear that these ancestral technologies had a great impact on the way to obtain food so that the following generations presented moderate changes in their phenotypes. However this did not stay that way, since in the following thousands of years these primitive men discovered and invented other new technologies. Second of all, fire has been one of the greatest discoveries of man. According to Harari (2014) some human species may have made use of fire no more than 800,000 years ago. Núñez & Paniagua (2001) affirm that this wonderful tool had several uses since it provided to man light, heat, protection, an effective weapon against other predators and new ways to consume foods. These uses could be classified into the three most important. First, by providing a continuous source of light and heat, it allowed people to enter into places never before explored, which pushed colonization of the primitive man through places with extremely cold temperatures, besides ensuring their survival during the glaciations. Second, a weapon of attack and defense is indispensable in a hostile environment. Harari (2014) explains that these men used fire to alter their surroundings in a way that facilitated the hunting of certain species by burning vegetation around them.Once the flames fell asleep, they began a search to collect seeds, tubers and bodies burned animals. Third, one of the uses that had a significant change in the human anatomy was its use as food cooking. Harari (2014) claims that indigestible foods for humans became indispensable elements in the diet thanks to this
INFLUENCE OF TECHNOLOGY IN HUMAN EVOLUTION
5
new process of preparation, and in addition the old foods like fruits and carrion were easier to chew and to digest. Considering everything, fire altered drastically the behavior of man and irreversibly his anatomy. In other words, this tool played a fundamental role in the evolution of man. Third of all, today there is consistent evidence which can be even palpated as in the case of vestigial organs. Monserrat & JimĂŠnez (n. d) explain that these organs lack any value in the current niche of a given individual, but can not be interpreted as atrophied organs only because the organism stopped using them. The human being possesses some of these types of organs which had a specific purpose when they were developed. However, at present they have almost no purpose because of the changes of habits and behavior that has had the hominids in the last million years. Some of the most iconic organs are wisdom teeth and the appendix. As a first point, a large and strong jaw with a dental game adapted to specific needs is indispensable for the survival of any animal, either a carnivore with large elongated incisor canines which are suitable for tearing the meat of its prey or herbivorous with prominent molars which are specialized in grinding plant matter. The first hominids had a denture adapted to plants initially. However, with the invention of rudimentary knives and the discovery of fire, their eating habits changed drastically due to the consumption of foods easier to chew and digest. As a result, their jaws decreased adapting to the new conditions and at the same time leaving a clue to this process as are wisdom teeth. As second point, the appendix is a vestigial organ of humans which “was used by now- extinct ancestors for digesting food.â€? (Evolution of the appendix: A biological 'remnant' no more, 2009, p.1,)
INFLUENCE OF TECHNOLOGY IN HUMAN EVOLUTION
6
The human vermiform appendix is apparently vestigial; it represents the degenerate terminal part of the cecum, the blind pouch or sac in which the large intestine begins. In other mammals, such as mice, the cecum is the largest part of the large intestine and functions in storage—usually of bulk cellulose in herbivores. (Raven, Johnson, Mason, Losos & Singer, 2011, p. 430) Currently, due to the food habits, its functionality has changed its purpose. Some people assert it is a useless organ which must be removed. On the other hand, there are several scientific articles that agree that the appendix fulfills an important role in the human body. For instance, “researchers at Duke University Medical Center proposed that it actually serves a critical function. The appendix, they said, is a safe haven where good bacteria could hang out until they were needed to repopulate the gut after a nasty case of diarrhea, for example.” (Evolution of the appendix: A biological 'remnant' no more, 2009, p.1) In a like manner, Barras (2013, p.1) explains “[the] worm-shaped structure found near the junction of the small and large intestines evolved 32 times among mammals, according to a new study. The finding adds weight to the idea that the appendix helps protect our beneficial gut bacteria when a serious infection strikes.” For this reason, we can consider the appendix as an organ that has been altered because of the nutritional changes that have occurred in the last millions of years. Such changes are the consequence of the alterations in the behavior of the hominids with each new invention as previously seen. In other words, it is a clear proof of how technology has affected the evolution of man. There are several works with opposing points of view which try to refute what is seen in this work. Most focus more on veracity of the theory of evolution than on the factors that influence it. For example, Yahya (2003) states that wisdom teeth are not a concise proof of evolution. He bases this belief on the idea these molars have a chewing
INFLUENCE OF TECHNOLOGY IN HUMAN EVOLUTION
7
function equal to the one of the other molars, and considers that there is no reason for its removal. Another great example, Morris (n. D), claims that vestigial organs provide no evidence to support the theory of evolution, since according to him these organs have been discredited as evidence. In addition, he argues that “An analysis of the difficulties in the unambiguous identification of structures lacking function ... leads to the conclusion that the ‘vestigial organs’ provide no evidence in favor of the theory of evolution”(Morris, n. d, p.2). Previous works that try to refute this paper lack certain grounds to contradict everything seen until now. First, Yahya's (2003) is not entirely wrong, moreover, some of the things he mentions have some degree of truth. It is true that a removal of the wisdom teeth is not necessary, unless it is medically necessary. However, that a vestigial organ has a usefulness at present is not a correct premise to say that it is not proof of evolution. For example, the appendix is a vestigial organ that has a specific function of maintaining the bacterial flora of the intestine, but this was not its primary function millions of years ago. His examples are correct for other purposes, since there is no way to use them as a refutation for this subject. Secondly, Morris (n. D) does not provide the slightest evidence to corroborate his claims. It is a complete fallacy to say that a fact is not real just because its verification is difficult. In addition, according to Barras (2013) "[in] a new study, published [...] in Comptes Rendus Palevol, the researchers compiled information on the diets of 361 living mammals, including 50 species now considered to have an appendix, and plotted the data on a mammalian evolutionary tree. They found that the 50 species are scattered so widely across the tree that the structure must have evolved independently at least 32 times, and perhaps as many as 38 times." It is only possible that several species of mammals distributed around the world have a common organ if they would have a common ancestor.
INFLUENCE OF TECHNOLOGY IN HUMAN EVOLUTION
8
Technology was and will be of utmost importance for the development of humanity. The first signs of rudimentary technology opened the door to a new world of food and activity. Also, the discovery of certain phenomena and the ability to control them was one of the facts that drastically impelled the evolution of the man. There is a myriad of evidence that corroborate the fundamental role of technology in human evolution. Currently, we are codependent on various types of technology, which probably will influence how we will evolve in hundreds of thousands of years. How will we be in the future?
INFLUENCE OF TECHNOLOGY IN HUMAN EVOLUTION
9
References Barras, C. (2013) Appendix Evolved More Than 30 Times. Retrieved from http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2013/02/appendix-evolved-more-30-times Evolution of the appendix: A biological 'remnant' no more. (2009) Retrieved from https://phys.org/news/2009-08-evolution-appendix-biological-remnant.html Harari, Y. N. (2014). Sapiens. De animales a dioses: Una breve historia de la humanidad. Debate. Retrieved from https://play.google.com/books/reader?id=qmj7AwAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcove r&output=reader&hl=es&pg=GBS.PP1 Monserrat, V. & Jiménez, .O (n. d) la ley biogenetica fundamental. Retrieved form http://revistas.ucm.es/index.php/COPA/article/viewFile/COPA7272120009A/34 474 Morris, H. (n. d) La evidencia residual de la Evolución. El estado actual de la cuestión Retrieved from http://www.sedin.org/PDFS/G1_04.pdf Núñez, H. & Paniagua, A. (2001) Tras las huellas de nuestros orígenes. Retrieved from http://ntic.educacion.es/w3/eos/MaterialesEducativos/mem2001/huellas/origenes /main.html Parente, D. (2007) Técnica y naturaleza en Leroi-Gourhan: Límites de la naturalización de lo artificial. Retrived Friday on from http://ludusvitalis.org/ojs/index.php/ludus/article/view/369 Raven, P., Johnson, G., Mason, K., Losos, j. & Singer, S. (2011) Biology ninth edition. (p. 430)
INFLUENCE OF TECHNOLOGY IN HUMAN EVOLUTION Yahya, H. (2003). El colapso de la teoria de la evolucion. En 20 preguntas.
10