More handpicked essays just for you.
Broadly speaking in considering the link between emotions and decision making
Broadly speaking in considering the link between emotions and decision making
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Throughout the course of history, ideas and thoughts have been the foundation of communication. Even when people were still living in caves, artists have been trying to jot down their ideas and experiences on walls for future reference. As time progressed and writing became more and more popular, writers such as George Orwell began to use writing to “alter other people’s idea of the kind of society that they should strive after.” Likewise, many authors write in hopes of making a lasting impression on their audience. In his book, Blink, Malcolm Gladwell raises awareness about the importance and consequences of quick decision making, and encourages all people to control such decisions for the benefit of society. In order to accomplish this point, …show more content…
In order to do so, Gladwell introduces the Millennium Challenge, which is a War game with two opposing sides, the red team and the blue team. Gladwell explains the blue side relied on “an unprecedented amount of information and intelligence…”(105) as the primary battle plan. On the other hand, the red team general, Paul Van Ripper is described as an extremely talented general and how he would “ draw on experience and intuition”(107) to initiate commands and take control of the battlefield. Gladwell explains that while the two sides are both part of the US Army and both have a variety of tools, the blue team had the clear advantage. However, the result was the red team quickly dealt a devastating blow to the blue team, to the point where the war game had to be restarted. In doing so, Gladwell pins the success of the red team on their ability to act on intuition, or snap judgements, even overpowering the supposedly superior blue team. In addition explaining the benefits, Gladwell warns the audience of the dangers of snap judgements. He describes how a police officer shot an unarmed and innocent victim because of the quick decision making. Not only did snap judgements not benefit the officer, but it caused him to make the completely wrong decision. Gladwell uses comparison to show how experience can influence one’s decision making, and how another more seasoned officer has the ability to “extract an enormous amount of meaningful information from the very thinnest slice of experience”(241). In contrast to the officer who shot the innocent victim, mentioned officer decided to spare the life of an armed teenager because he saw “a lot of fear in his face”(240). The same snap judgement that caused one innocent man to be killed saved the life of another. In portraying the quick decision making and the influence of such can decide the outcome of a human life, Gladwell
I strongly agree with Fromm’s viewpoints and interpretations of Orwell’s 1984 text. He warns that the future federal powers will dehumanize society and leave everyone alienated. Thus, I agree with Fromm to the extent that he acknowledges the fact that humanity can indeed cease to exist as a result of our own self-destruction as well as the effect of our actions. Many of his opinions and warnings expressed by Orwell to an extent appear in contemporary society.
...ders who want to master a certain subject area. The text is easy to read and understand and is very applicable to the average reader. The ten thousand hour rule is presently true and will be applicable far into the future for those who are willing to work hard for their success. The way Gladwell presents his subjects of success efficiently shows us how these people rose to fame and the similarities they share. Gladwell’s repetition of explanation of successful people shows us how all of these people are linked together and how simple it is to be linked with them as well. Gladwell successfully persuaded readers to understand the importance of the ten thousand hour rule through his style of writing and rhetorical devices.
Imagine a society where owning books is illegal, and the penalty for their possession—to watch them combust into ashes. Ray Bradbury’s novel, Fahrenheit 451, illustrates just such a society. Bradbury wrote his science fiction in 1951 depicting a society of modern age with technology abundant in this day and age—even though such technology was unheard of in his day. Electronics such as headphones, wall-sized television sets, and automatic doors were all a significant part of Bradbury’s description of humanity. Human life styles were also predicted; the book described incredibly fast transportation, people spending countless hours watching television and listening to music, and the minimal interaction people had with one another. Comparing those traits with today’s world, many similarities emerge. Due to handheld devices, communication has transitioned to texting instead of face-to-face conversations. As customary of countless dystopian novels, Fahrenheit 451 conveys numerous correlations between society today and the fictional society within the book.
Imagine living in a world where you are not in control of your own thoughts. Imagine living in a world in which all the great thinkers of the past have been blurred from existence. Imagine living in a world where life no longer involves beauty, but instead a controlled system that the government is capable of manipulating. In Ray Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451, such a world is brought to the awareness of the reader through a description of the impacts of censorship and forced conformity on people living in a futuristic society. In this society, all works of literature have become a symbol of unnecessary controversy and are outlawed. Individuality and thought is outlawed. The human mind is outlawed. All that is left is a senseless society, unaware of their path to self-destruction, knowing only what the government wants them to know. By telling a tale of a world parallel to our own, Bradbury warns us of a future we are on a path to -- a future of mind manipulation, misused technology, ignorance, and hatred. He challenges the reader to remain open-minded by promoting individualism, the appreciation of literature, the defiance of censorship and conformity, and most importantly, change.
The future is shrouded with a multitude of mysteries which humanity is not able to precisely discern; however, predictions or depictions of this concealed future can be very effective in highlighting a problem which the future may hold. Author Ray Bradbury seemed to have this in mind, writing Fahrenheit 451 in 1953 for the very purpose of cautioning the novel’s readers not to create a future resembling the one in the book: a dystopia set in the distant future in which books are censored and book owners’ possessions, burnt. Here, the society’s people are consumed by the new, futuristic (from the perspective of a man writing in the 1950s) technology which provides entertainment provoking little thought, such as television watching, thereby eliminating the very demand for books. In this review, Bradbury’s effectiveness in conveying his warning will be discussed and the quality of his writing, evaluated.
Although Fahrenheit 451 held some significance during the time period in which it was written, it warrants much more significance when applied to today’s contemporary society. Indeed, the “present” in which we are living may in fact be the “future” in which Bradbury envisioned in the novel. As the world becomes evermore connected in the “digital age” by mediums such as social media, and as society continues to be increasing its dependency on simply “what’s online,” perhaps our tendency now of quick, short, habitual intakes of information has destroyed our ability to reflect in our truest expression of actual thought. Our obsession of “quick consumerism” to have more physical stuff has, in turn, incapacitated our mental mouth—depriving it of the intellectual stuff that is just as needed. This is what Ray Bradbury argues. This is why he wrote Fahrenheit 451, and this is why the novel still holds incredible significance today.
Being blind does not always mean you can not see. Thoughtlessly swimming with the social current can cause someone to miss out on lifes important matters. In Ray Bradbury’s spine chillingly realistic novel, Fahrenheit 451, the audience gets a glimpse of a dystopian society ran by unintelligence and ignorance. Clarisse McClellan communicates how openly rejecting social norms can open one’s eyes to things others may not see.
Before starting this reading assignment I never thought to question why I make the decisions I do in such a short amount of time. After reading Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking, written by Malcolm Gladwell I have a better understanding of how we as individuals perceive and react to information. This book provides insight on how to critically asses and understand the way our minds operate on a deeper level. The book consists of 6 chapters, each providing insight on how the decision making process works and how it affects what we do with every second of the day. Throughout each chapter there are subsections with personal stories, case studies, or examples that help provide an alternative view on how the decision making process is carried out under normal circumstances.
It is fascinating to me to read the articles “Why I Write,” by George Orwell and Joan Didion. These authors touch on so many different topics for their reasons to writing. Their ideals are very much different, but their end results are the same, words on paper for people to read. Both authors made very descriptive points to how their minds wander on and off their writings while trying to write. They both often were writing about what they didn’t want to write about before they actually wrote what they wanted too. In George Orwell’s case, he wrote many things when he was young the he himself would laugh at today, or felt was unprofessional the but if he hadn’t done so he would not of been the writer he became. In Joan Didion’s case she would often be daydreaming about subjects that had nothing to do with what she intended on writing. Her style of writing in this article is actually more interesting because of this. Her mind wandering all over on many different subjects to how her writing came to her is very interesting for a person like me to read. My mind is also very restless on many different unneeded topics before I actually figure some sort of combined way to put words on to paper for people to read. Each author put down in their articles many ways of how there minds work while figuring out what they are going to write about. Both of the authors ended ...
Daniel J. Boorstin once said “Technology is so much fun, but we can drown in our technology. The fog of information can drive out knowledge.” Boorstin adverts to the fact that in an era dominated by technology; people have lost the ability to think for themselves and are constantly given trivial information. In the novel Fahrenheit 451, by Ray Bradbury, adolescents are taught an amplitude of information, but the material is rather aimless and inane. In the year 2053, time spent watching television and laying bed is thought to be more valuable than time used to think and converse with others. Bradbury prognosticated that society would in turn lose its ability to effectively communicate and would begin occupying its people with nugatory work. In his bestselling novel, Fahrenheit 451, Bradbury warn future generations about the dangers of busy work and lack of communication.
War Is Peace. Freedom Is Slavery. Ignorance Is Strength. The party slogan of Ingsoc illustrates the sense of contradiction which characterizes the novel 1984. That the book was taken by many as a condemnation of socialism would have troubled Orwell greatly, had he lived to see the aftermath of his work. 1984 was a warning against totalitarianism and state sponsored brutality driven by excess technology. Socialist idealism in 1984 had turned to a total loss of individual freedom in exchange for false security and obedience to a totalitarian government, a dysutopia. 1984 was more than a simple warning to the socialists of Orwell's time. There are many complex philosophical issues buried deep within Orwell's satire and fiction. It was an essay on personal freedom, identity, language and thought, technology, religion, and the social class system. 1984 is more than a work of fiction. It is a prediction and a warning, clothed in the guise of science fiction, not so much about what could happen as it is about the implications of what has already happened. Rather than simply discoursing his views on the social and political issues of his day, Orwell chose to narrate them into a work of fiction which is timeless in interpretation. This is the reason that 1984 remains a relevant work of social and philosophical commentary more than fifty years after its completion.
The popular saying “practice makes perfect” has been used for many years encouraging younger generations to strive for success in whatever area they wish to excel in. Success is something everybody in society strides for but some do not know how it is achieved. However, there are many people throughout history who are known for achieving success in many areas. Malcolm Gladwell, a best selling author and speaker, identifies these people as being outliers. Gladwell identifies the word “outlier” in his story Outliers as “a scientific term to describe things or phenomena that lie outside normal experience.” Although Malcolm Gladwell does not establish credibility for himself in his novel, his targeted audience of a younger inexperienced generation feel the need to be informed by his detailed theories about becoming successful and eventually becoming an outlier. Although the reality of becoming successful can depend on instances one can not control, Gladwell tells his readers there is a great portion they can control through his theory, the 10,000 hour rule. He does this by using well presented logical persuasive appeals and interesting rhetorical devices such as: onomatopeias, exposition, and argumentation.
The Beatles, Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, professional hockey players, and solo violinists all have one thing in common. Malcolm Gladwell, author of “Outliers”, is able to effectively link these different parties together though his “10,000 Hour Rule”. Gladwell states that, “practice isn’t the thing you do once you’re good. It’s the thing that makes you good” (42). Using rhetorical devices, Gladwell effectively conveys how overall success can be spotted by historical, recurring patterns or events. Malcolm Gladwell has supported himself as a reputable author as well. Using supported statistics, easily illustrated patterns, and well known examples, Gladwell fulfills the logos appeal. Also, due to his very successful works “The Boiling Point” and “Blink”, Gladwell shows his credibility as an author. Gladwell’s main purpose is to teach his audience the pattern of success, and why some people did or did not succeed. This audience is consisted of those who want to succeed, and want to create as many possibilities to reach their goal. Their main values are gaining success for themselves. Another possible audience is a group who enjoys statistics and patterns. These patterns show that around 10,000 of practice in an activity, the person becomes very proficient in that activity. Citing the Beatles, Bill Joy, and Bill Gates as his examples, Gladwell shows that practice can make perfect. Malcolm Gladwell states that to reach a level of expertise, one must practice that activity for 10,000 hours. Using rhetorical devices, tone, and logos, Gladwell efficiently supports his claim of the 10,000 hour rule.
George Orwell once said, “In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.” Orwell understood that telling the truth was an anomaly. He lived in a world full of lies and hatred. Consequently, George Orwell wanted to show people the real dangers of a totalitarian government, and he wrote two political novels that warn people of those dangers. These novels are still respected today, as some believe the world is turning into the “Orwellian” society he created in his most famous book, 1984. Although George Orwell wanted to tell the truth, he lacked a father figure, lived during the Russian Revolution, and had strong political biases that also influenced the writing of 1984, which ultimately influenced the political advocates of his time.
George Orwell's dystopian (a fictional place where people lead dehumanized and fearful lives) vision of the year 1984, as depicted in what many consider to be his greatest novel, has entered the collective consciousness of the English-speaking world more completely than perhaps any other political text, whether fiction or nonfiction. No matter how far our contemporary world may seem from 1984's Oceania, any suggestion of government surveillance of its citizens -- from the threatened "clipper chip," which would have allowed government officials to monitor all computer activity, to New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani's decision to place security cameras in Central Park -- produces cries of "Big Brother is watching." Big Brother, the all-seeing manifestation in 1984 of the Party's drive for power for its own sake has come to stand as a warning of the insidious nature of government-centralized power, and the way that personal freedoms, once encroached upon, are easily destroyed altogether.