Competitive Consumption

A societal focus on purchasing goods can create isolation or alienation because of what certain people can and cannot afford. There will always be an in-group of those people that can buy the most expensive things without a problem, and the out-group of the people that struggle to be like the in-group, but can never reach the level at which they’re at. As stated in the article, “radical political economy, as it came to be called, retained a powerful critique of alienation in production and the distribution of property” It is what we own as individuals that determines whether we are a part of the in-group or out-group. We have become much more materialistic than families were generations ago making it easier for for people to be alienated for what they have. For example on a smaller scale, everyone has the iphone now and to maintain owning that phone isn’t cheap, but somehow everyone has it and they’re  a part of the in-group. On the other hand though, if you don’t have the iphone, most likely you are looked down upon by iphone users because you don’t have what they have, creating isolation or alienation, making you a part of the out-group. This is just how we function on a regular basis and the differences between us affect whether or not we a isolated from one another.

If salaries were to increase  to more reasonable incomes I don’t think there would be any difference except in the increase of spending, but not alienation or isolation wise. It’s simple, the more money we get, the more money we spend. So if the incomes of the wealthy increase and the incomes of middle and lower class citizens also increase, everyone would be able to purchase slightly more than before but there would still be a great difference between classes.  Now if incomes were set more equally there would would be an astronomical decrease in isolation because we would all be able to afford generally the same things.

A few societal factors that encourage competitive consumption have to be technology in general, such as tv, music and other things such as, celebrities and other people. For instance, technology has a huge influence of who we are and what we do everyday. The tv, shows all these celebrities promoting goods that we should buy, or things that would make us better in everything that we do. Who wouldn’t want to be better than anyone else? I think that’s what we all strive to be, making what we have and what we buy a competition; we all want to be the best of the best and if we have to purchase it we will.

Competitive consumption affects us all whether we believe it or not. For example, it affects me everyday because what teenage girl doesn’t love to go shopping? I’d love to have all the brand name clothes celebrities wear but I can’t always afford them so when I get the chance to purchase those things I show them off. I have a few items from Marc Jacobs that I love and whenever I wear them I feel great because I never see anyone else with them. Now and days it’s all about the brand and how much you spend. Family wise competitive consumption affects us because we strive to have the best quality items in our home, not only for our satisfaction but also to show others what we can afford. It’s a show for the public in every aspect, that’s what competitive consumption is.

Artificial Intelligence

The likelihood of a catastrophic incident occurring in our lifetime as in the article is most likely rare to happen, but is always a thought in the back of someone’s mind when you bring of the topic of artificial intelligence. Even in my mind, I would have no clue what to do if machines were killing because we depend on technology so much. What would we do if something we depended on everyday caused such a disaster? I’d personally be more terrified for my life more than anything and I think the public would be also. Without humans having oversight of what machines are doing increases both the fear and dependency of other machines. The public would look to more technology to restore order but I feel like it would just be a huge cycle of chaos.

The chances of an Artificial Intelligence that thinks and reasons just like humans, without the help of humans is not unrealistic but it is rare. There are too many things that go into being a human that a person cannot create to put inside of a machine. There are so many different emotions and feelings and even more differences that go into being a human; no two people are the same. As in last weeks discussion, there are so many different morals throughout culture that we as humans have to take in but I don’t think Artificial Intelligence will have the ability to that that into consideration no matter how great their abilities are to think and reason, it’s just different. I feel as though these AIs will not exactly take away from the qualities and identity of humans because humans will always be able to do things that they cannot do but it is a matter of time where the tiniest of differences will matter.

Positives of  Developing AI:

• Discover new abilities of robots
•  They can perform tasks humans can’t

Consequences of Developing AI:

•  Risks of trial & error; unpredictible
•  No morals; you can’t teach a robot all possible morals

Of course we’ve all had machines and computers fail and crash on us, it’s inevitable. Technology will always have those glitches but engineers work to figure them out but that moment when it fails on us is the worst. I’ve had moments when I just had to take a break from all the computers and phones because so many things go wrong with them but at a point you have to realize that it is only going to get better. The next laptop won’t be the same as the previous one; people work for improvement not to downgrade.

Morality

Out of Mother Teresa, Bill Gates and Norman Borlaug, my intuition told me  to choose Mother Teresa as the most admirable. It is just something when you hear her name that makes you know she did something good for the world. I knew that Bill Gates contributed much to helping others but that is not what immediately came to mind when I saw his name. Bill Gates, as stated in the article, is most known for his contribution to Microsoft not to making the world a better place but he does. As for Norman Borlaug, I had no clue who he was but after getting some inside knowledge as to what he has done, he also is an admirable person along with Bill Gates and Mother Teresa. Morally, I still wanted to say Mother Teresa was the most admirable after reading the article but I realized that the fact that Norman Borlaug is accredited to saving more than a billion people’s lives he definitely is the most admirable. With me being christian, naturally I want to give anyone credit that has any kind of connection with me spiritually because religion does affect my beliefs but I am not biased to thinking outside of what I know, therefore I felt it was okay for me to change my answer. People’s moral beliefs often affect how they view different situations and it varies among person to person.

If I had to choose two of the most admirable living people, I would have to choose my mother and probably Angelina Jolie, simply because they are strong females. My mother, although my father is still a main component in my life, has provided in so many ways possible that no one else could provide. Me and my siblings are always her number one priority regardless of how much money is in her pockets and how unhappy or disappointed she may be with us or any situation when undergo. It is something in a mother’s love that makes it like no one else’s, and to go through so much just for me makes me admire my mother so much over anyone else. As for Angelina Jolie, I admire her for her strength and also her generosity. She is well known for all her contributions to charities and humanitarian work  and also for adopting kids in need from all over the world. What makes me admire both of these women are their concern for people, their sense of community, authority and fairness; four things believed to influence our morals.

Morality is universal, simply because everyone knows wrong from right. Of course, no two people are guaranteed to believe that there’s only a right and wrong way to everything but we all have some common morals. Some morals are learned and some come naturally, such as death, a commonly used example. Everyone knows it is not morally justifiable to murder someone else, regardless of  their culture or background; it is just something we know from the start. We do get conventions and morals confused at some point but they become sorted out as time goes on. We have both universal morality and individual morality just as everyone has similarities and differences.

Haidt’s five elements of morality are harm, fairness, community, authority and purity. I think fairness is the most highly ranked element of them all for americans because America has strived for fairness since the foundation of this country. People more often base their beliefs on how fair the outcome will be, and also as to how it will affect everyone else; meaning that sense of community goes hand in hand with fairness. Although, it isn’t always portrayed that way, fairness and community strongly affect the way we make decisions and that is because we all have morals that we grew to believe and stick by.