1. The Misinterpretations model suggests that the initial argument made was either incorrect or incomplete; therefore, a more scrutinized look at the evidence suggests a completely different argument. The historical figure for this week’s essay is Andrew Carnegie. According to the misinterpretations model the thesis associated with this essay would be as follows: although many authors have argued Andrew Carnegie was a devote philanthropist, a careful examination of his life suggests he was a ruthless tyrant. He became the richest man in the world by crushing his competitors and exploiting his workers. The next model gap reveals yet another side of Carnegie.
The Gap model suggest that initial arguments presented vital information, however, there was additional information that was overlooked. According to the gap model the thesis associated with this essay would be as follows: although authors have noted Andrew Carnegie’s entrepreneurial spirit, they have overlooked the importance of his guilt in later years connected with is extreme giving. At the beginning of his life Carnegie had mistreated several competitors and workers, giving back to the community, and helping the unfortunate was a means to easy his guilt for past wrongs. His acts of kindness later in life was beneficial to many people, however, did it make a difference to those he had abused.
2. Carnegie, A. The Autobiography of Andrew Carnegie. New York, NY: Public Affairs Books, 2011. Print.
Carnegie, A. The Gospel of Wealth and Other Timely Essay. Digireads.com Publishing, 2009. Print.
The first thing I noticed about the books based on the life of Andrew Carnegie is that he wrote both of them himself. This can be both beneficial and harmful. It is beneficial because the reading receives the exact thoughts, feels, aspirations, dreams, and experiences of the subject of the books. It is also harmful because an autobiography is a form of self-report, in other words Mr. Carnegie could have been biased in the information or recounting of the information placed in the books. Not to say that he would flat out lie but rather that certain events could be colored in his own light, instead of the way that others saw it.
The coloring of information is especially dangerous to the reader because the information on the printed page concerning history is deemed accurate and true. In the previous work there was an issue with the historical facts concerning the Black Death. No one was able to write an autobiography about this tragedy because everyone infected with the Black Death died. There were debates about the Black Death and the Bubonic Plague. Some said they were related and other not, finally in a laboratory test it was confirmed that they were the same. History like any other piece of information requires cross references of many reliable and valid materials to get the “pure” truth.
3. 1. What are Appiah and Foer's theses? How do you know?
Appiah’s thesis is about the balance between an individual’s culture and shared community. He talks about the cosmopolitanism, the way cultures interact on a daily basis. Many individuals are sacrificing who they are in order to fit into society. This should not be but rather the individuals take the time to discover ways of blending their personal cultural with the shared community (globalized environment). It this way nothing is lost and new strengths are gained on both sides. Foer on the other hypothesized that everything global could be boiled down to soccer. The described the ways that soccer teams have resolved conflicts but disregarding borders. In other words seeking out and acquiring players from all walks of life and all nations in order to fulfill the need to succeed.
2. Both Appiah and Foer analyze "us v. them" mentalities--that is, how cultural groups often define themselves by what they aren't. Identify some of the cultural groups to which you belong (remember "cultural groups" can form around anything--from ethnicity to religion to hobbies). Then, discuss the extent to which these cultural groups define themselves in relation to others.
The most obvious cultural group I belong to is the male group. It is defined in some cultures as the most dominant and respected position. In the 1950s in America the men were considered the head of the household and the bread winners that mentality has changed in the 21st century. The next cultural group I belong to is the anime group. It is defined by individuals that enjoy adult forms of animation originally from Japan. Along with this group comes the gamer group. These are individuals that enjoy playing video games, pc games, and even board games. Being male is in direct contract with the female group. Over the years it has been the males that have oppressed and objectified women, so it’s no wonder they don’t like us sometimes.
In terms of anime individuals in this group are often seen as immature. The thought process of immaturity comes from the belief that these are cartoons but that is an incorrect assumption. It is true that both cartoons and anime are animation, however, the content and the underlying stories are extremely different. The same can be said about gamers that they are immature. However, gamers are a dedicated group of individuals that commit to the completion of a game and stick with that commitment. Anime buffs and gamers receive very little if any respect from groups outside their own sphere of influence.
3. What ideas and arguments are of most interest and relevance to you in each essay? Why? What ideas and arguments can you trace as common and different between Appiah and Foer's essays? How do these connections help you understand the issues at play in any discussion of globalism/globalization?
In Appiah’s essay I gravitated towards the give and take between an individual and society. It is clear that society often take away more than it gives in the forms of oppression through uniformity. Be like everyone else and don’t stand out. This is extinguishes the light of variety. Foer’s essay drew me to the analogy of the soccer team and the problems of globalization. Everyone is separated by a border, language, national borders, and definitely culture. In order for the cooperation of the global nations is conducted in peace and order than the system will collapse. Remove the barriers, interact with all cultures, and determine the best fit to establish needed goals.
4. What do Appiah and Foer mean by "globalization"?
Talking about the merging of several different cultures into one medium and requiring their cooperation can be considered globalization. The nations that interact with each other include but are not limited to: XXXXX XXXXX Poland, Europe, and the United States. These nations need to successfully interact in order to continue functioning in the global marketplace. This is the collection of businesses that makes deals with other businesses from other countries to gain a profit. It is quite clear that no individual or nation to stand alone and thrive. Differences according to Appiah and Foer should be seen as good not bad.
The weaknesses that are inherent in one nation or business can be eliminated or reduce by the introduction of a culture that has dealt successfully with the issue before. The situation requires that both nation cover the faults of the other and utilize the strength to properly function. Another important aspect is to leave a mark on society without it leaving a mark on you. An individual can use his or her culture to enhance society and at the same time be enhanced by society. Never let go of your culture because that is who you are in many cases. Rather combine the best of your culture and the best of society’s culture.