One aspect in the article ” Taste for Makers” is trying to tell me that Good design is simple. However I don’t entirely consent about this because in different area of art there are different judgement and criteria on which composition is good or which math formula is the best.
Firstly, there are a lot of fantastic art composition in the history, some of them are quite simple for example like The Starry Night which is painted by Vincent van Gogh. But another famous painting The Last Supper which is painted by Leonardo da Vinci is not as simple as the one that I mentioned before. Both of these art works are very famous. In a word I strongly indicate that not all the good design is simple.
On the other hand, it is indispensable to solve a mathematical question without a formula. The formula that we used are not all very simple, there is some simple one for example like a^2 + b^2=c^in the right triangle, but the most important thing is that except the formula that we know there are countless equation in the mathematical world so if the author say all of them are simple this could be contradicted by other mathematicians.
Good design is simple. You hear this from math to painting. In math it means that a shorter proof tends to be a better one. Where axioms are concerned, especially, less is more. It means much the same thing in programming. For architects and designers it means that beauty should depend on a few carefully chosen structural elements rather than a profusion of superficial ornament. (Ornament is not in itself bad, only when it’s camouflage on insipid form.) Similarly, in painting, a still life of a few carefully observed and solidly modelled objects will tend to be more interesting than a stretch of flashy but mindlessly repetitive painting of, say, a lace collar. In writing it means: say what you mean and say it briefly
The books play down the horror of slavery and even seem to claim that it had an upside. This upside took the form of a distinctive African-American culture, in which family was central, Christianity provided “hope,” folk tales expressed “joy” and community dances were important social even
From this paragraph we could know that in the textbook for little children they says that slavery which is not good is a kind of normal thing and even have some benefit. My point is this is not a good way for education. Everything happened before we called it history and it is a very serious object without upside, so nobody should being cheat on talking history. However in the Texas they even make slavery which is a wrong thing happened in history convert to a simple easy matter and teach this to they children in the education, when they grow up some of them might go out side of their hometown and here is one thing interesting, the history that they known was totally different, for the easy going person this would not be a matter, what about the person who are really cares about these things. For example if two people their culture were different it’s going to be very easy to have conflict and different culture was due to their different nationality and education. And I think the other state in America probably have different textbook to teaching children so if the people in a same country have a different acknowledge it’s very weird so I think upside history was not a good thing.
In my opinion story is a way that people could getting knowledge and it’s also a kind of interesting way.
We’d rather read a novel or watch a movie than read a serious textbook or watch a video course. The latter is a story with characters and plot, while the former is a lot of boring knowledge. But are those fictional stories just entertainment? No, the fictional stories are actually the key to our understanding of the world. To live in this world, human beings need to make many decisions. To make a decision, you need some background information. For example, if I were to buy one of three apples, I would need to know the taste of the three apples, the price, my own taste preferences, and how much money I have in my wallet. In this way, I can decide which one I like more, within the price range I can afford. So, I decided to give the money to the person who sold the apples, and he gave the apples to me so that I could eat that apple to satisfy my appetite.
Strictly speaking, any information that can change our behavior is a kind of knowledge. And any acquisition of knowledge, is learning. So, we read novels, we watch movies, maybe we are studying. But the efficiency of this kind of learning is not necessarily high, and it’s pretty hard to control on this.
Economics is a subject that studying on how does the human have their economic activities and usually that is how the value be create, convert and using in real life. This subject refers to a lot of writing and creating in China we call this literal subject The problems that shows in the article was also happed a lot in economics, people always using plagiarism in writing and creating because this is a very hard part for most of the people so they try to done these work in an easy way especially when people trying to create something brand new. Guttenberg’s “audacious plagiarism” was stumbled upon during a routine inspection by Andrew Fischer Rescano, a law professor at the university of Bremen in Germany. This student was struggling about how to write a economic article. Economics articles always analyze human behavior and make some prediction so that it could make future activities easier. Economics is similar to other social science subject on writing and creating part.
My point of view， science is taking any object under study which means keep researching and developing. Infinite magnification and minification, the process of infinite magnification and minification and find nearly 100% of the perfect theory is how the science work. Basically scientific have a bunch of rules during studying and researching for example in physics and math there are authentic turth however in economics there are a lot of uncertainty for example in stock market there are many unknown problem which could affect the stock market a lot, so in this way economics is not scientific but a human science subject. And it is not for credibility to call them scientific because in the normal time economics have credit a lot especially when some famous economics professor post their prediction about future economics activities for a specific country.
When I saw the topic which is Emotion be the obstacle of knowledge I was considering about the reason of that and the reason shows in the chapter is :
Reason Reason can also be negatively affected by our emotion, and if you hold your beliefs with too much passion, this ca prevent you being open-minded and lead to a ‘my theory right or wrong kind of attitude.
If there is too much passion it is going to hard to hold the belief.
Despite the Stoic ideal, it is difficult to imagine a meaningful human life without any emotions. If you describe someone as being ‘cold and unemotional’,you do not literally mean that they have no emotion, but that they have few emotions compared with the average person. You might think that…..
Emotions as a source of knowledge shows that it is impossible for a human that do not have a emotion because we have a proper running brain which means we can deal with these emotion properly.
Reason The laws of logic are the starting point for all our reasoning, but we cannot prove them in terms of any more fundamental laws. If asked to justify them, most people would say that they are intuitively obvious.
Intuition is just a kind of feeling which is always the first feeling from your brain.
In this world there are a moral value called universal moral values, it surpass nationality, country, and belief, it’s a value that all the human have and it is baseline of human morality. In my opinion there are three different point in universal moral values, which is fair, justice and freedom. Fair shows that when people are restricted by the laws everybody are same so nobody are unfair except crime. In some easy word justice means when you doing something good you will get a good retribution, however when you doing something bad you will get a bad report.
Above all i think there is a universal moral value which is fair justice and freedom.
I like the Consequentialism theory most because this theory is talking about a true thing that many agreed. In our daily life when you are doing something for example the math assignment and one question probably have many different ways to solve it and whatever the way is, it doesn’t matter the consequence is right.
I think logic refers not only to the law of thinking, but also to the subject of studying the law of thinking. On the other hand logic refers to law generally speaking, including the law of thinking and the law of objectivity. However there are many different kinds of explanation of logic. You could find another definition for logic in many things for example doing homework can let you know some logic work for paper writing or typing letter on the laptop.
Socrates: Meno, I think Anytus is angry, and I am not at all surprised: for he conceives, in the first place, that I am speaking ill of these gentlemen; and in the second place, he considers he is one of them himself. Yet, should the day come when he knows what “speaking ill” means, his anger will cease; at present he does not know. Now you must answer me: are there not good and honorable men among your people also?
In the part 5 of Plato’s of Meno Socrates shows his point of view which means there is a kindly inside of people’s heart and some people is angry but it is not out of surprised. In my opinion Socrates is trying to let Meno believe that everyone have kind in their mind but some of the people are have angry in their mind.
In the part 3 and part 4 of Plato’s Meno there is a quote which shows that Socrates think that virtue is a kind of wisdoms which is from people’s soul.
Socrates Then if virtue is something that is in the soul, and must needs be profitable, it ought to be wisdom, seeing that all the properties of the soul are in themselves neither profitable nor harmful, but are made either one or the other by the addition of wisdom or folly; and hence, by this argument, virtue being profitable must be a sort of wisdom.
Socrates was trying to convince Meno that virtue was a sort of wisdom and that is come from soul which is saved in last century. so he think if people keep remembering in their life they could know many knowledge and wake the virtue up which is inside of their soul. In my opinion the theory he is trying to telling Meno is perfectly wrong but that was right at that moment because it’s easy to let somebody know something. If we put his theory in 2019 that will be a paradox so it’s no fit to now.
And the other thing is that he think knowledge was in the soul and it’s saved from last century so if people keep remembering they could get knowledge from their soul. This is also totally wrong whenever in that moment or now.
In the part two of Plate Meno, Meno was cannot understand his states clearly so he was confusing about this and he still have a conversation with Socrates. And after that Socrates think that learning is recollection which means people have to keep learning and if you want to learn more knowledge and other things you have to get these things in confusing.
In my opinion I think that Socrates was trying to persuade Meno that knowledge have to be learning in confusing and people have to keep learning because he think learning is recollection, however Meno was really confusing about what he is talking about.
Socrates： I remarked just now, Meno, that you are a rogue and so here you are asking if I can instruct you, when I say there is no teaching but only recollection: you hope that I may be caught contradicting myself forthwith.
Meno： I assure you, Socrates; that was not my intention I only spoke from habit. But if you can somehow prove to me that it is as you say, pray do so.
Socrates： It is no easy matter, but still I am willing to try my best for your sake. Just call one of your own troop of attendants there, whichever one you please, that he may serve for my demonstration.
Above all, Socrates think there is no teaching but only recollection, and Meno agree with him at now. After this, Socrates think there is nothing easy in the life.
In my opinion Socrates’s point of view is not fully true because learning do can recollect about knowledge but that is not the only way to keep remembering, on the other hand if a person is in confusing when he learn something difficult, probably he meet a problem so confusing is not the meaning of learning.
In the first part of this Plato’s Meno, Meno and Socrate have a big conversation about what mean virtue. Meno is asking Socrate and he get a lesson from logical reason. And Socrate get a conclusion about why people do evil things.
Meno: Can you tell me, Socrates, whether virtue can be taught, or is acquired by practice, not teaching? Or if neither by practice nor by learning, whether it comes to mankind by nature or in some other way?
Socrates: Meno, of old the Thessalians were famous and admired among the Greeks for their riding and their riches; but now they have a name, I believe, for wisdom also, especially your friend Aristippus’s people, the Larisaeans. For this you have to thank Gorgias: for when he came to that city he made the leading men of the Aleuadae–among them your lover Aristippus–and the Thessalians generally enamored of wisdom. Nay more, he has given you the regular habit of answering any chance question in a fearless, magnificent manner, as befits those who know: for he sets the example of offering himself to be questioned by any Greek who chooses, and on any point one likes, and he has an answer for everybody. Now in this place, my dear Meno, we have a contrary state of things: a drought of wisdom, as it were, has come on; and it seems as though wisdom had deserted our borders in favour of yours. You have only to ask one of our people a question such as that, and he will be sure to laugh and say: Stranger, you must think me a specially favoured mortal, to be able to tell whether virtue can be taught, or in what way it comes to one: so far am I from knowing whether it can be taught or not, that I actually do not even know what the thing itself, virtue, is at all. And I myself, Meno, am in the same case; I share my townsmen’s poverty in this matter: I have to reproach myself with an utter ignorance about virtue; and if I do not know what a thing is, how can I know what its nature may be? Or do you imagine it possible, if one has no cognizance at all of Meno, that one could know whether he is handsome or rich or noble, or the reverse of these? Do you suppose that one could?
Meno: Not I. But is it true, Socrates, that you do not even know what virtue is? Are we to return home with this report of you?
Socrates: Not only this, my friend, but also that I never yet came across anybody who did know, in my opinion.
From this big conversation we could know that Socrate are trying to indicate that virtue is getting kind by truth thing, and Meno is arguing with Socrate for instance Meno think Socrate don’t know what virtue is so they do have argument during this conversation.