Midterm – Page 2 – ENG 281.05 Fall 16

The Search For the Ideal: What Society Really Wants

Our contemporary society has a peculiar obsession with sorting things into groups based on how they are different. This can be useful when it comes to things such as silverware, but it starts to get complicated when we start doing this to human beings. As described by Harry M. Benshoff and Sean Griffin in America on Film, this process is described as “othering” (54). In contemporary media, cinema and literature alike, othering has been used to shape a societal norm based around what is ideal. The only thing that stands in the way is the less than ideal: a threat to perfection only because of the risked that something flawed will somehow reflect upon the whole in a negative light. Society’s ongoing search for the ideal will forever be hindered by the desire to create a homogenous society in its place.

In Constructing Normalcy, an academic paper on the evolution of how disablement is viewed in society by Lennard J. Davis, the author dives into the origins of the societal norm. Davis makes particular note on the etymology of the root words “norm” and “average”, specifying how they “all entered the European languages rather late in human history” (3). The concept of the norm developed in the English language over the period between 1840 and 1860, with the word “norm” itself appearing around 1855 (Davis 3). Average, which came from an astronomy method, dates to 1835, with French statistician Adolphe Quetelet and his idea of the average man, “both a physically average and a morally average construct” (Davis 4). The word “ideal”, and by default the concept of the word, only predated the norm by only about two hundred years (Davis 4). The conception of the norm in European culture is usually linked to the growth of statistics (Davis 4). The conception of the norm then evolved into the further subdividing of society based on social class and disability, among other things, that we know today.

The development of a societal norm can be catalyzed from a broad range of factors. One particularly curious instance can be seen in the landscape of Philip K. Dick’s book Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep. Devastated by nuclear war, most humans have gone to colonize space, leaving only those unfit or unwilling to leave on Earth. Out of this, a societal norm based around empathy has developed, forming into a religion called Mercerism. A large part of Mercerism is taking care of animals, somehow making up for the mass extinctions that were mentioned in the book. However, there is a distinct line drawn between androids and humans. Androids are incapable of feeling empathy; and as a result, are not to be part of the society (Dick 12). The androids, in a way, are victims of “othering”. The main character, Rick Deckard, is a bounty hunter, and has the job or retiring, or deactivating the androids. As the story progresses, Deckard develops empathy towards the androids, and decides to quit his job.

Typically, people have a hard opinion on the matter: whether grouping human is a good thing or a bad thing. There are drawbacks, usually based on moral principals; these choices have shaped our history and our society. It is the norm in the society presented in Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep for grouping to occur: those fit to colonize space, those who remain on Earth (and these are grouped into further subgroups) and androids. In the group of people who remained on earth, you have the subgroups of people who can afford real animals, like Bill Barbour (Dick 4), and those who can’t afford real animals, like Rick Deckard (Dick 5). There are also the Specials, like John Isodore, who have been affected by the radiation, and are prohibited, from reproducing or emigrating to Mars.

This concept or “othering” can especially be seen through the past two hundred years of American history through numerous examples of institutional racism; one of the most shocking instances of this is rather contemporary, and seen in retaliation to the Black Lives Matter movement. In the Journal of Contemporary Rhetoric, Julius Bailey and David J. Leonard describe the Black Lives Matter movement as “this generations’ ongoing struggle against persistent state-sponsored violence with black bodies as its target” (Bailey 67). It’s a loose comparison, but a line can be drawn between the Black Lives Matter movement and some of the societal groups in Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep. African Americans have a long history of oppression in the United States, and thanks to the Black Lives Matter movement, it is being exposed that it is still happening to this day at a greater level than was commonly thought.

In Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep, there is oppression towards many groups of people, but especially towards androids and specials. Androids, on Earth, are denied life, and have bounty hunters (like Rick Deckard) searching for them (Dick 12). On the other end of the spectrum, the Specials are denied the ability to reproduce and emigrate (Dick 7). Although African Americans as a whole do not fit the mold developed in Philip K. Dick’s novel, as a group developed by white society, they are denied a sense of safety.

In their paper, Bailey and Leonard mention a few examples of the dehumanization of African Americans. One of these examples is the concept of the “no angel”, when the media focuses on the criminal record of any killed young black man (if a criminal record exists); while on the contrary, the media would portray any killed young white man as an angel, even if a criminal record did exist (74-75). As the authors continue to mention, “the criminalization and dehumanization of blackness require the hyper visibility of ‘thug’ imagery” to keep the ongoing, unfortunate tradition of dehumanizing African Americans and treating them as second-class, despite legislation, that has occurred since Civil War reconstruction (Bailey 75). Although no exact parallels can be drawn between these events in Philip K. Dick’s book, there is a strong link with the specials in Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep, where they were “abruptly classed as biologically unacceptable” and “ceased, in effect, to be part of mankind” (7). Although it is clear that the stigma against specials is based around a system of eugenics, while the stigma against African Americans is no longer; both groups, as dictated by society, are in some way, shape, or form incapable of falling into a societal norm, and are thus viewed as something less.

As Lennard J. Davis explains in Constructing Normalcy, “a common assumption would be that some concept of the norm has always existed” (3). The concept of disability as not ideal is rather recent. Davis explains this elegantly, putting a pinpoint on the mark in history when this idea began to rapidly change:

As we see it, the social process of disabling arrived with industrialization and with the set of practices and discourses that are linked to late eighteenth and nineteenth century notions of nationality, race, gender, criminality, sexual orientation, and so on (3).

The development of the social norm, forcing out people of the post-industrial idea disability (including race) has led to an imbalance in the world. The Black Lives Matter movement has tried to combat this by vocalizing this issue. However, from the societal norms of both sides of the political spectrum, they have received criticism. Bailey and Leonard mention how people on the right side of the political spectrum question a movement that claim black lives matter while remaining silent in relation to black-on-black crime, while some people that drift more towards the left complain about the specific nature of the movement, attempting to create the countermovement “All Lives Matter”, attempting to encompass a larger group of people that includes the cultural norm. Regardless of where they lie, however, they are not being proactive towards the movement’s mission.

One major question is presented in this phenomenon: why does society have a problem with creating a social norm that accepts people of all backgrounds? The root of the problem might lie in the empathetic response of the people in the societal norm. In the article What Becomes of Empathy, the claim is made that the empathetic response to people of different regions (people not like us, the cultural norm) is different, or less, than the empathetic response to people like us (Recuber). Tim Recuber, the author, uses America’s empathetic response to the terror attacks in Istanbul, Turkey, and compares it to the much greater empathetic response to the terror attacks in Paris, France last year. The average person simply didn’t have the same empathetic response to a terrorist attack that happened in Turkey, in different region with a different kind of people, than one that happened in a Europeanized country, like France, with a people that is similar to the “societal norm” of America. Humans were the victims of both attacks, but it is clear through the empathetic response that the average American viewed one group as more human than the other.

Something similar can be said about the Black Lives Matter movement. Although the people involved in the Black Lives Matter movement are from our country, they are still not considered the Europeanized people we have adapted as our societal norm. For some reason, this continues to be a major hurdle for the movement to gain legitimacy among the majority of the population. Since the Black Lives Matter movement advocates for the safety of African Americans primarily in urban settings, the average person from middle America has trouble empathizing with them, and as a result, is incapable of find a person reason to support the movement.

Philip K. Dick’s Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep purposefully makes you feel empathy for the important subplot lead John Isodore. He is portrayed as a generally good person that has been genetically degraded, and deemed less than a citizen. He is also lonely, which a large portion of the book’s audience can empathize with the romanticized version of a loner. However, the real dilemma is whether or not one can empathize with the androids. The androids come from Mars, a region that is not Earth, so using Tim Recuber’s account of the terrorist attack in Istanbul as reference; the average reader will not feel empathy for them. Androids are determined using the Voigt-Kampff Empathy Test, since androids are incapable of showing empathy (Dick 12). However, the new Nexus-6 androids’ abilities are drastically underestimated.

At the root of the issue is this search for the ideal, based off Lennard J. Davis’ paper Constructing Normalcy. The idea as a norm, as said by Davis, “is less of a condition of human nature than a feature of a certain kind of society” (3). The process of othering is our society’s way of creating a norm, and expelling people from it, citing them as less than ideal. The real question is if those marked as less than ideal are any less human. Androids, an exceptional example, obviously are not human, due to their nature, but the book Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep makes its audience think if they actually are. The specials, despite being removed from society, and humanity by means of sterilization, are no less human than unaffected humans. African Americans, although they have a history of being dehumanized by white society, are no less human than the rest of society. All groups, whether in our society or Dick’s fictional society, are victims of othering and the search for the ideal.

The process of othering, as described by Harry M. Benshoff and Sean Griffin in America on Film can be seen throughout Philip K. Dick’s book Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep, as well as the Black Lives Matter movement. Both the androids and the specials in Dick’s book, as well as African Americans, are the unfortunate victims of othering. Due to othering, people will have different empathetic responses, and as a result, society will never find itself to be ideal.

Works Cited

Bailey, Julius, and David J. Leonard. Black Lives Matter: Post-Nihilistic Freedom Dreams. Journal of Contemporary Rhetoric, Vol. 5, No. 3/4, pp.67-77. 2015.

Benshoff, Harry M., and Sean Griffin. America on Film: Representing Race, Class, Gender, and Sexuality at the Movies. Malden, MA, USA: Wiley-Blackwell, 2009. Print.

Davis, Lennard J. Constructing Normalcy. The Disability Studies Reader, Routledge, New York, 2006.

Dick, Philip K. Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? New York: Del Ray, 1996. Print.

Recuber, Tim. “What Becomes of Empathy? – Cyborgology.” What Becomes of Empathy? – Cyborgology. N.p., 20 July 2016. Web. 3 Oct. 2016.

Artificially Influenced

To be human is to be a myriad of different things. Different people will provide different answers when posed with the question “What does it mean to be human?” Some may speculate that to be human is to experience love in all its forms. Others may say it is human to create and to dream. While answers like those are all well and pleasant, some realities may not be all that heartwarming. It can also be argued that to be human is to lie; to be human is to hurt. No matter the definition given, here I will provide my perspective on a trait exclusive to the human race, something that, from my observation, is a defining trait of the average individual: humans are easily manipulated. Be it by means of media, shopping trends, or religious movements, manipulating a human into giving up his or her logic isn’t so difficult at all.

Before I get into the thick of it, I want to introduce a certain novel that I will be referencing quite often, as it illustrates my claims quite excellently. Subjectively one of the best explorations of a post-apocalyptic future in store for earth, Philip K. Dick’s Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep provides a fantastic study of the concept of humanity. In this alternate future, Earth has been ravaged by war and has become almost uninhabitable, so the majority of humans have escaped to Mars and other colonies in space. Very few humans have remained on Earth, including the novel’s protagonist, Rick Deckard, a bounty hunter of androids. The entire story takes place over the course of a day, where Deckard hunts some escaped androids and faces the pressing questions regarding the humanity of cyborgs and the morality of humans. While the novel is chock full of fantastic messages and interesting food for thought, it shines in its exploration of humanity relative to these hypothetical androids.

Seeing as Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? covers many aspects of humanity, it more than addresses humans’ shortcomings in the realm of allowing other humans to manipulate them. Utilizing the literary tool of hyperbole, the novel uses its exaggerated potential future for mankind to paint a picture of humans as unknowing slaves to various “systems,” if you will, set up by various third parties. The most obvious example of this manipulation of the humans in the novel that is extremely relatable to our society today lies in the influence of Buster Friendly, the world’s most popular and well-received T.V. personality. Basically, Buster serves as a talk show host of his very own talk show “Buster Friendly and his Friendly Friends,” a program that airs constantly on T.V. that just about everyone watches religiously. One character in the novel even claimed, “I watch [Buster] every morning and then at night when I get home; I watch him while I’m eating dinner and then his late late show until I go to bed” (Dick 63). Throughout the novel, Buster Friendly and his friends are ever present, building up hype for his important expose that he’d been working on for years and reporting on current events in the universe. Buster Friendly’s news is important to people; whatever Buster says, his dedicated viewers are sure to accept and believe, as he is their primary source of entertainment and news. When a T.V. personality gains a dedicated following, people tend to idolize them, which leads to the conclusion that these personalities can convince people to believe whatever they tell them. In our society today, there are numerous T.V. personalities with strong supporters who will believe just about anything the personalities tell them. Celebrities like Ellen DeGeneres, Oprah, Jimmy Fallon, Bill O’Reilly, etc. likely come to mind. When people are put in a position of authority over others, they can easily sway the masses who support them in their favor; there’s a reason the fans of these celebrities scream and cheer when they’re in the audiences of the various shows. For example, multiple celebrities have taken their picks for the upcoming presidential election: personalities and celebrities such as Ellen DeGeneres, Julianne Moore, and Morgan Freeman endorse and encourage votes for Hillary Clinton, while Kirstie Alley, Gary Busey, and Hulk Hogan have voiced support for Donald Trump. With the amount of influence these celebrities possess, they can significantly affect the results of the election by encouraging their fans to vote for their preferred candidate; they make a point of sharing their opinion on a candidate with the goal of influencing their followers in their favor. Just like how Buster Friendly convinced almost the entirety of humans to watch and enjoy his show and news, T.V. personalities today can sway the masses. Humans are easily manipulated into following and supporting these idols of theirs merely because those personalities are their offering them something to watch and support.

It’s not just T.V. personalities that can serve to manipulate humans, however—humans can also be easily swayed by group movements, such as religious trends and social movements. When groups of people band together, there grows a sort of mob mentality that people become willingly a part of because they’re participating in the group; they want to be accepted and included, so they become a part of a group without possibly questioning why. In Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? this group is a new religion called “Mercerism.” This religion, whose figurehead is named Wilbur Mercer, encourages the sanctity of all life and a sort of oneness with everyone who uses their Penfield empathy boxes to take the “climb with Mercer.” This climb, called “fusion,” is a simulated climbing experience each person feels when using their box; they feel that they are climbing a mountain with Mercer himself and various other followers of him, feeling the same pain as each other and taking the journey together. Iran, the wife of the main character Rick Deckard, describes the experience as such: “And I remember thinking how much better off we are . . . when we’re with Mercer. Despite the pain. Physical pain but spiritually together; I felt everyone else, all over the world, all who had fused at the same time” (Dick 173). The appeal of this religion seems to be the togetherness everyone feels; they will endure the pain of fusion because they are happy to be experiencing it together. This is characteristic of numerous religions and modern movements; people may do irrational things for the sake of their religion or movement but do so willingly because they are happy to be part of a group. If a group or religion were to be corrupt, as some are, people can easily be manipulated into doing things they normally wouldn’t do.

Another method of manipulation humans can easily relate to within our society today is the desire to have what everyone else has, to be caught up on the most recent trends. This one undoubtedly hits home as something just about every human can relate to; try watching commercials on television and not wanting something they’ve advertised to you. This is tricky to do, because once an advertisement has put the idea in our heads that some cool new product is all the rage among our peers, we suddenly want it. If everyone starts buying a new drink at Starbucks and posting on social media about it, suddenly we feel inclined to try it and do the same. For us today these desires can range anywhere from clothes to food; in Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? there was a more universally desired item to acquire: a real, live animal to keep and care for. The average citizen was more socially accepted if he or she had an animal, preferably a rare one or multiple, to have as his or her pet. This pet couldn’t be a fake robotic creature; it had to be a living, breathing animal for it to be socially acceptable: “[Rick] wished to god he had a horse, in fact any animal. Owning and maintaining a fraud had a way of greatly demoralizing one. And yet from a social standpoint it had to be done, given the absence of the real article” (Dick 9). Socially speaking, in Dick’s version of the future, owning a living animal was the way to social acceptance. In our society, owning whatever is trendy and “in” at the moment whether we actually want it or not is the way to social acceptance. When seeking to manipulate humans, those with malicious intent target the desires of people to have what others have to feel like they are all part of a group. Marketing an item by claiming everyone has it is a clever way to trick someone into purchasing that which they wouldn’t normally consider buying. Humans can easily be convinced (i.e. manipulated) into participating in certain trends merely because everyone else is participating in them, yet another of the numerous examples of how humans effortlessly fall prey to manipulation.

Of these examples from both our society and Dick’s novels, there is a commonality with all of these manipulative means that answers the nagging question “Why do such things serve to so perfectly manipulate humans?” To answer this, we have to explore the concept of empathy, another trait uniquely attributed to humans. “Empathy” is defined as “The action of understanding, being aware of, being sensitive to, and vicariously experiencing the feelings, thoughts, and experience of another of either the past or present without having the feelings, thoughts, and experience fully communicated in an objectively explicit manner” (Merriam-Webster). In other words, one can empathize with someone else by understanding him or her and his or her experiences and emotions; it’s how people relate to each other and find commonalities on a human level. So how does empathy relate to how humans are manipulated by others? Empathy is inherently a social concept. To feel empathy, there must be two parties involved. This itself is a very human trait, as psychology professor Keith Oatley explains, “The most important characteristic of being human is that our lives are social. What’s distinctive about humans is that we make social arrangements with other people, with friends, with lovers, with children, that aren’t pre-programmed by instinct” (“Reading books and watching films makes you kinder in real life”). Given that humans are social creatures striving to connect with and empathize with each other, it is no surprise that humans can be manipulated under the pretense of being social with fellow humans. Someone may feel connected to Ellen DeGeneres when watching her show to the point where he or she emulates Ellen as an idol and lets Ellen dictate his or her decisions, as radical as that sounds. Another person may join a new religious cult out of a desire to feel a part of something with fellow humans but commit heinous acts as part of the cult’s rituals. Yet another person might waste money and go into debt purchasing expensive clothing because those clothes are popular and trendy according to this person’s friends on social media. All of these examples stem from a desire to empathize with other people, but when these means of community have manipulative natures, people will fall prey to these ploys without stopping to think about the possibly harmful consequences.

Although manipulation is easily integrated into these situations, that doesn’t mean participating in all of these actions is inherently wrong or damaging. T.V. personalities are not always out to manipulate the crowds; not every group requires wrongdoing and harmful actions; and sometimes keeping up with trends is harmless fun. My touching upon this flaw of humanity is not to condemn humans for being too “mainstream” with society but to encourage critical thinking on top of attempts to empathize with fellow human beings. As hard as it is to accept, not everything is beneficial and good for people. There are terrible people in the world with ulterior motives, and they can use their manipulative tricks to sway innocent people just wanting to connect with other people. When people fall prey to these trappings, genuine relationships and empathy are dead in favor of manipulation and false appearances. Clinical psychologist Arthur P. Ciaramicoli accurately comments on our society’s viewpoint on the matter by claiming, “I think we have become a society where we rate status over relationships. We relate image over character and when you do that, you place much less emphasis on the skill or the ability of empathy” (“Empathizing 101“). When humans are manipulated into accepting a viewpoint or blindly joining a group, it becomes more about status and image, as Ciaramicoli stated, than about genuine connections. This is not true empathy; status, especially among peers, does not achieve empathy, as manipulators strive to make people craving empathetic connections with others believe. If status is viewed as more important than empathy, less people will empathize with each other in favor of their social standing, whether they realize they are distancing themselves from others or not. The solution is not to never attempt to empathize with others—the solution is to be aware at all times, to put morality and genuine connections above appearances of being part of a collective group. So the next time a T.V. personality attempts to sway you to his or her side, an exclusive group tempts you into joining in, or a new trend beckons you to participate, think carefully about what you’re getting into. Compare your situation to the various instances I mentioned from the novel Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? Finally, consider your desire for connections with others. Will you truly achieve empathy by risking letting certain groups/personalities/trends control you? Think critically, stick to your beliefs, and don’t be afraid to connect with others—just keep an eye out for those who seek to manipulate your good intentions.

Works Cited

Dick, Philip K. Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? 1968. The Random House Publishing Group, 1996.

“empathy.” Merriam-Webster.com. Merriam-Webster, 2016. Web. 2 Oct. 2016.

Grasgreen, Allie. “Empathizing 101.” Inside Higher Ed, 24 Nov. 2010, https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2010/11/24/empathy. Accessed 2 Oct. 2016

Surugue, Léa. “Reading books and watching films makes you kinder in real life.” International Business Times, 19 July 2016, https://www.ibtimes.co.uk/reading-books-watching-films-makes-you-kinder-real-life-1571434#annotations:_MOsQlpyEeaiesf9ed4wVw. Accessed 2 Oct. 2016.

What Makes Us Human

Samantha Hooker-English: Cyborg apocalypse-Professor Licastro-10/11/17

What Makes Us Human

A Human is defined as “a person as distinguished from an animal…” (Google). To be a human literally means to not be an animal. So why does society have a tendency to categorize people like they categorize animals: white, black, gay, lesbian, bisexual, disabled, republican, democrat, etc. To be a human in society has strayed instead to mean to be societies view of normal. Be a certain way, act a certain way, give your opinion and speak your mind but not too much of it. A great topic of discussion recently has been sexual orientation, and the LGBT community (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender). The way society feels about the categories of sexual orientation is greatly influenced by the media and literature. Viewers tend to make judgments and either become empathetic or lose empathy toward the LGBT community. Society has caused people to view any sexual orientation not traditional as wrong because it is not “normal”.

Much of the literatures we see today have questionable representations regarding sexual orientation. Specifically in Phillip K. Dicks’ novel, “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep”, there is a lack of homonormativity. The text begins the route of heteronormativity immediately in the first chapter when they introduce the main character and his wife, Rick and Irene. The book is based in a very atypical society with a thin line to distinguish who is human vs. android; “ A merry little surge of electricity piped by automatic alarm from the mood organ…” (Rick is a human but he is controlled in ways by a machine) yet they only seem to keep the typical male-female pairings without any attention for homosexual relationships (Dick 3). Another typical male-female relationship Dick introduces is that of Isidore and Pris. Though subtle Phillip K. Dick makes Isodore out to have a nervous crush on Pris, “Presently he stood in front of her door, rapping with the edge of the wine bottle, his heart going to pieces inside his chest” (Dick 146). This leads to the other complicating factor in that Pris turns out to be an android. Exactly like Rachel, Androids are machines and technically do not have a gender.

Androids are given genders but are not born either or as humans are, and therefore don’t really have any set male or female role. Phillip K. Dick makes this more clear when Rick goes to bed with Rachel; he makes the statement that he would go to bed with an android again “If it was a girl. If she resembled you”, implying that she could have been either male or female (Dick 197). This is also why Rachel and Pris are exactly the same “That last damn Nexus-6 type, is the same type as I am… Didn’t you notice the description? Its of me, too” (Dick 188). Rachel was programmed specifically by the Rosen association to trap Rick into making him feel empathy for her, leaving him not wanting to hunt down the androids that are associated with Rachel. She makes him fall for her, “if you weren’t an android… if I could legally marry you, I would.” Rachel eventually traps Rick and seduces him, so she could manipulate his emotions to save the other androids, “No bounty hunter ever has gone on… after being with me” (Dick 198).

Relationships between human and android are equally as abnormal in “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep” as relationships of the LGBT community are in our society. Humans have a set gender, but androids are neither male nor female. They are programmed that way depending on the need of the people that built them. This is parallel to our society in the growing population of transsexuals. A transsexual is defined as “person who emotionally and psychologically feels that they belong to the opposite sex”, this isn’t the same as being programmed like in Philip K. Dick’s novel, but it is essentially the same as the androids and transsexuals are choosing the gender they want, and believe to be (Google). Transsexuals are seen very negatively in society because many believe they are not “normal”; but there are many who have become empathetic to these issues of society being so unaccepting. Much of this has to do with the media giving much attention to many celebrities who have struggled with their sexuality. For example, one of the most popular stories is Bruce Jenner transitioning into Caitlyn Jenner. Caitlyn Jenner officially identified herself as a trans women in April 2015, and ever since then has been receiving attention and support for her bravery and courage from not only the LGBT community but from much of the world. While some still aren’t very accepting of this sexuality, many are being swayed because of people like Caitlyn gender taking her story public and making people empathic to her lifetime struggle. Society can begin to realize that due to the stigma surrounding trans genders, there is isolation, hiding and secrets that lead to depression and anxiety.

While the media in our society helped to create empathy towards the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender community; that is not the same for the Philip K. Dicks novel and our ability to feel empathy for the androids. At first the way Rachel acts towards Rick makes her seem like she may have emotions, we feel empathetic to her because we are made to believe it is unfair that the androids are being retired. Things take a turn for the worse when we discover Rachel has tricked Rick into trusting her and falling in love with her so that he will not be able to retire the androids, “Beside him in the darkness the coal of her cigarette glowed like the rump of a complacent lightning bug: a steady, unwavering index of Rachel Rosen’s achievement. Her victory over him.” (Dick 202). We lose empathy for the androids the minute we realize that Rachel is out with her own vendetta. When she figures out that she is unable to stop Rick from retiring the androids, she is very displeased; she kills his goat in an attempt to ruin him.

Society has created its own set of characteristics to determine whether a person is considered normal or not. Lennard J. Davis’s essay, Constructing Normalcy, discusses our “world of norms” to support his argument that society created the idea that a person is disabled, when in fact we are all really disabled. This can be seen the same way as with non- normative expressions of sexuality; “the “problem” is not the person with the disabilities; the problem is the way that normalcy is constructed to create the “problem” of the disabled person”, the problem is not that people are expressing their different forms of sexuality, the problem is the way that society has constructed normalcy to create the problem of people with non-normative sexual orientations (Davis 3). Davis discussed that if we review the concept of the norm, we will arrive at the concept that preceded it: the “ideal”. Ideal is defined as, “satisfying one’s conception of what is perfect; most suitable” (Google). Society has concluded that to be normal you must be ideal, Lennard Davis argues that “this ideal body, is not attainable by human… when ideal bodies occur, they do so in mythology” (Davis 4). So in a sense, “all members of the population are below the ideal”, everyone is below perfection and non-normative in some sort of way (Davis 4). Although this may be true, society is not quite empathetic enough to where everyone can accept the “non-normal” expressions of sexuality.

There are many ways that society constructs a view of normal, sexual orientation being a very big one. At this point in time many still see sexual orientation is seen as only being a one-way road, your typical man and women heterosexual couple. Donna Haraway writes a Cyborg Manifesto, focusing on the idea of feminism, but touching on the topic of societies idea of normal and how we put ourselves into specific groups, instead of being “united”. Haraway believes that at this point in time this issue of classification desperately needs to be addressed, “I do not know if any other time in history when there was greater need for political unity to confront effectively the dominations of ‘race’, ‘gender’, ‘sexuality’, and ‘class’” (Haraway 297). Haraway says how we are all guilty of putting society into such different dominations, even if we claim we are not, “None of ‘us’ have any longer the symbolic or material capability of dictating shape of reality to any of ‘them’. Or at least ‘we’ cannot claim innocence from practicing such dominations” (Haraway 297).

For both Haraway and Davis the idea of normal and ideal are huge parts to their theories. While neither solely focuses on sexual orientation, both have ideas that relate to it. Both authors’ theories are also relatable to Philip K. Dick’s novel, “Do androids dream of electric sheep” as the androids are also classified into their own special group as these machines with no hope of empathy or humanity; when who says the androids are any better than any of the humans in that society? Just as the androids in the novel, the LGBT community is seen as non-normative. Media has caused much of society to feel empathy for the community as people like Caitlyn Jenner are coming out to world and telling the story of their life struggle for acceptance in a world that is very unaccepting. Society has caused people to view any sexual orientation not traditional as wrong because it is not “normal”, yet society is the problem as we have created this very constrict idea of ideal or normal.

Works Cited

“Google.” Google. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Oct. 2016.

Http://uic.academia.edu/LennardDavis. “Constructing Normalcy.” Academia.edu. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Oct. 2016.

“Cyborg Ecologies.” Encyclopedia of Geography (n.d.): n. pag. Web.

Dick, Philip K. Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? N.p.: n.p., n.d. Print.

What Defines Our Humanity?

There can be multiple answers to the question of what defines our humanity. Is it our superior intelligence compared to different species? Is it our physical characteristics? Or is it our development and changes throughout the course of history? Phillip K. Dick’s novel Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep analyzes the question of what makes us human. The novel centers around the protagonist Rick Deckard, a bounty hunter who is faced with the challenge of killing six androids, a species who are believed to lack empathy and thus a threat to humans. Throughout the novel, however, Rick begins to develop empathy for androids, especially those who have not committed any crime(s). There is a possibility that Phillip K. Dick’s novel and Rick Deckard’s develop of empathy for androids can be best understood with police brutality among African Americans and the phrase “Black Lives Matter”.

In Dick’s novel, Rick Deckard initially does not have any empathy for androids he kills or “retires” due to believing that they lack empathy themselves. Throughout the novel, however, readers will notice how he develops empathy towards them. An example of this would be when Rick witnesses the bounty hunter Phil Resch, kill or “retire” an android named Luba Luft. After witnessing this, Rick feels empathic towards her and other innocent androids. He even considers quitting his job as a bounty hunter (Dick 136). Later within the novel, after Rick is assigned to kill three androids and in response purchases a goat. Within the novel’s universe, animals are scarce due to a third world war and radiation. A way for humans to measure empathy is by owning an animal. Rick’s purchasing of a goat represents the empathy that he has developed for androids, he explains this more in detail when he says, “Yes I retired three andys […] I had to buy this […] Something went wrong today; something about retiring them. It wouldn’t have been possible for me to go on without getting an animal” (Dick 171). This passage demonstrates the transformation of Rick’s character and his empathy; in the beginning, he lacked empathy for androids as it was believed that they lacked empathy themselves and thus were not human. By the middle and towards the end of the novel, he develops empathy towards androids especially those who do not pose a threat towards humans.

In the same way that innocent androids are being targeted and profiled by law enforcement in Dick’s novel, African Americans are being profiled and targeted by police officers. On April 12^th, 2015 in Baltimore Maryland, a 25-year old African-American man named Freddie Gray was taken into custody by six police officers. While in custody, he received a severe spinal injury that required immediate medical attention. Unfortunately, Freddie Gray went into a coma and died a week after his arrest. His death was ruled as a homicide by the medical examiner’s office, yet none of the six officers involved in his death were found guilty. This is one of my many cases in which African- Americans have died due to police brutality. From Michael Brown’s death in Ferguson, Missouri in 2014, to the shootings of Alton Sterling and Philandro Castile in 2016. This is not the first time in history in which they are tensions between African Americans and law enforcement, as historian Heather Ann Thompson points out in Dara Lind’s Vox article, The Ugly History of Racist Policing in America points out, “Nationally, it suggests that we haven’t learned nearly enough from our history. Not just 1917, and all the riots that happened in 1919 and 1921- but much more specifically from the ‘60s. Because of course, this is exactly the same issue that generated most of the rebellions of the 1960s. In 1964, exactly 50 years ago, Philadelphia, Rochester, and Harlem were all touched off by the killing of young African Americans” (Lind 1). The way that innocent African Americans are being profiled and targeted by law enforcement is parallel to how androids within Dick’s novel are targeted by bounty hunters. There have been many cases in which an African-American has been killed at the hands of law enforcement for trivial acts such as selling cigarettes, having a broken taillight, wearing a hoodie, or selling CDs. Despite these trivial acts, some police officers profile African-Americans as dangerous and as a threat, solely because of their skin color and the stereotypes that come along with it. Furthermore, when these cases of murder are taken into the judicial system, there is rarely a case in which the police officer(s) have been found guilty. This situation is parallel to the situation in Dick’s novel, in which androids are automatically profiled and labeled as dangerous, solely because of their race and the misconceptions that come along with it. When an android is killed or “retired”, there is little to empathy from society saying that committing such an act is wrong, it is justified because androids, in general, are perceived as a threat.

Police brutality amongst African-Americans has prompted many activists and protestors to create the saying “Black Lives Matter”. This statement, however, has been misunderstood by third parties. It has been misinterpreted into meaning that only black lives matter and that everyone else’s lives do not matter. Due to this misinterpretation, the counter phrase “All Lives Matter” has been created. The phrase “Black Lives Matter” however, does not mean that no one else’s lives matter, yet it is a response to how African-Americans are treated within the judicial system and American society itself. John Perazzo, author of the article The Profound Racism of ‘Black Lives Matter: The Black Panther Movement Reincarnated, explains the meaning and significance of the phrase, Perazzo states:

“Emphasizing the permanence of America’s depredations, BLM maintains that: (a) our nation’s “corrupt democracy” was originally “built on indigenous genocide and chattel slavery and “continues to thrive on the brutal exploitation of people of color”; (b) “the ugly American traditions of patriarchy, classism, racism, and militarism” pervade every aspect of our society; (c) “structural oppression” still “prevents so many from realizing their dreams”; and (d) blacks in the U.S. are routinely “de-humanized” and targeted for “extrajudicial killings…by police and vigilantes in our “white supremacist system. You see, “Black Lives Matter” means a whole lot more than just “Black Lives Matter” (Perazzo 1).

Through this statement, Perazzo points out the significance of the saying “Black Lives Matter”, it emphasizes the history of blacks and their hostile treatment within America, from slavery, to Jim Crow, to lynching, all the way up to today’s epidemic of police brutality amongst African-Americans. While it is true that all lives do matter, it does not rectify the reality that African-Americans are more subjected towards brutality and harsh treatment by law enforcement, oppression, and racism in a white supremacist society. The phrase “All Lives Matter” does not take this reality into account, it lacks consideration or empathy towards the African-American community.

These problems with the African-American community are parallel to the problems that the protagonist Rick Deckard and androids face in Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep. Rick’s occupation as a bounty hunter can be compared to the occupation of a police officer or law enforcement. His job is to kill or “retire” androids, including those who have not committed any crime unless he is unauthorized to do so. As the novel progresses, Rick begins to question the morality of his job killing androids, especially those who have not committed any crime against society or humans. This part of the novel can be compared to law enforcement and police brutality amongst African-Americans, especially those who have not committed any severe crime. In the beginning, Rick views androids as malicious and threatening. His perception of androids can be compared to how some police officers view minorities such as African-Americans; they view African-Americans as violent, threatening, or aggressive, and thus need to take violent action when it is not necessary. In Dick’s novel, when an android is killed or “retired” there is little to no justice for them as they are not considered human beings. This situation is parallel to how bias the judicial system is for African-Americans, it is a rare case for when a police officer is found guilty of unlawfully murdering an African-American. During the 16^th and 17^th centuries, African-Americans were considered inferior, primitive, and uncivilized compared to Europeans/Caucasians solely because of their skin color or other physical features, they were not considered human beings. This idea still lingers in the minds of racists Americans and some police officers, sometimes justifying the murder of innocent African-Americans. In the same way that androids were dehumanized by bounty hunters in Dick’s novel, African-Americans are being dehumanized by law enforcement.

In order to resolve the epidemic of police brutality amongst African-Americans, it is best to teach people about the concept of empathy, which is when one puts themselves into someone else’s shoes in order to understand their point of view. Third parties with misconceptions about “Black Lives Matter” must learn about its meaning, significance, and its ties to African-American history. Furthermore, it is imperative that society learns from history and how it affects the conditions of the present. The history of African-Americans within America can explain the condition(s) of the African-American community. Slavery, institutionalized racism, segregation, and hostile treatment from law enforcement all contribute to the epidemic of police brutality amongst African-Americans. Learning how to be more empathetic, however, does not occur unless people are willing to learn. People must be willing to learn how to develop empathy; they must be willing to put themselves in another person’s shoes in order to understand their perspective on an issue. In the article, Emphasizing 101, author Allie Grasgreen discusses Capital University’s experiment to determine whether empathy can be taught. Grasgreen follows assistant professor of psychology, Sara H. Konrath who states, “It is unrealistic to expect students to become more empathetic if they aren’t actually committed to the idea. In other words, they have to have the desire to change” (Grasgreen 1). This comment can be applied to people learning about the social injustices amongst African-Americans and other minorities. In order to develop empathy towards them and call for social change, they must be willing to do so. People must understand the oppression that African-American and other minorities experience in a white supremacist society.

Aside from learning from history, it is also recommended that those who are being taught empathy read more fiction novels. Studies have shown that reading fiction novels tend to increase one’s empathy skills as they are able to sympathize with the character(s) and identify their emotions. The skills of sympathizing and identifying other people’s emotions can then be applied to the real world. According to the article, Reading Books and Watching Films Makes You Kinder in Real Life, Lea Surugue discusses the psychological studies of reading fiction. Reading fictional books and watching movies can help one develop empathy, she supports her claim when she writes, “Some studies have shown that fiction can even make you feel empathy for people who live very different lives than you so long as you begin identifying with them on a basic human level […] This suggest that fictional characters enable readers to imagine what it might be like to be in other people’s situations, even if they are of a different sex, ethnic origin, or nationality” (Surugue 1). In other words, reading novels and watching films can aid in teaching someone empathy, as there can be fundamental themes within these novels or films that be applied to the real world. As a result, a person is able to feel empathy for others and understand them on a basic human level. An example of this would be Phillip K Dick’s novel Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep and the issue regarding police brutality within America. In Dick’s novel, androids are being profiled and murdered despite some androids such as Luba Luft being innocent and not committing any crime. This issue regarding race and profiling is parallel to African-Americans being targeted by police officers, even though in most cases they have not committed a severe crime. In this example, fiction has drawn a parallel or similarity between its universe and a social issue within the real world. It is teaching a skill, empathy, that can be applied to issues within the real world, such as police brutality amongst African-Americans and Black Lives Matter versus All Lives Matter.

What defines our humanity is our ability to emphasize with others at a basic human level. We have the innate ability to connect with others and see from their point of view regardless of whether or not we have shared similar experiences with others. We must improve our empathy, however, in order to resolve issues affecting society, and one of the societal issues that require empathy is the unjust murders of African-Americas within the United States.

Works Cited

Dick, Philip K. Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? New York: Del Ray Books, 1968. Print.

Lind, Dara. “The Ugly History of Racist Policing in America.” Vox. Vox Media, 07 July 2016. Web. 11 Oct. 2016. <http://www.vox.com/michael-brown-shooting-ferguson-mo/2014/8/19/6031759/ferguson-history-riots-police-brutality-civil-rights>.

Perazzo, John. “The Profound Racism of ‘Black Lives Matter'” Frontpage Mag. Frontpage Mag, 22 June 2015. Web. 11 Oct. 2016. <http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/257808/profound-racism-black-lives-matter-john-perazzo>.

Grasgreen, Allie. “Empathizing 101.” Inside Higher Ed. Inside Higher Ed, 24 Nov. 2010. Web. 11 Oct. 2016. <https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2010/11/24/empathy>.

Surugue, Lea. “Reading Books And Watching Films Makes You Kinder In Real Life.” International Business Times RSS. International Business Times, 19 July 2016. Web. 11 Oct. 2016. <http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/reading-books-watching-films-makes-you-kinder-real-life-1571434#annotations:_MOsQlpyEeaiesf9ed4wVw>.

I see Cyborgs

This past week the Chanel fashion show for the Spring/Summer 2017 collection opened with “purist black and white — on robots” (Foley). Karl Lagerfeld inspired by computer wires and digital graphics, decided to construct the beautiful Chanel collection around technology. “It’s something of our time,” he said, as well as calling the inclusion of delicate lingerie pieces as “Intimate Technology” (Foley). Besides developing alluring masterpieces, Karl Lagerfeld is not only making a statement in the fashion world, but a statement of our current society. The truth is, we are becoming one with technology, there is no really longer a definite line between cyborgs and humans anymore. Our lives have become immersed in the use of technology to be able to complete our everyday tasks. By reading Philip K. Dick, Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? readers learn of how humans are becoming like a real android, a cyborg.

Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? is a science fiction book that touches some deep interesting subjects alongside a plot that revolves around a bounty hunter, Rick, who’s job is to eliminate, or “retire”, androids who have come to Earth. These androids are viewed as criminals, who have killed humans in order to scape Mars. “This is necessary. Remember: they killed humans in order to get away.” (62), is what one of the bounty hunters, Phil Resch, tells Rick, because this is when the star of the novel, starts to question his actions.

Rick is starting to have issues differentiating androids from humans. The problem with Rick is not that he is not skilled enough to retire the “andys”, the problem is that, he has lost sight of the fine line that divided them so easily. We can see this when Rick is almost sure his bounty hunter mate is an android. “I’ve got to tell him, he said to himself. It’s unethical and cruel not to. Mr. Resch, you’re an android, he thought to himself” (57). The reader can without an effort see how he started to feel empathetic towards androids, he felt uneasy to bring such a fatal news to him.

We see Rick struggle again with killing another android, Luba Luft because of the unconsciously increasing empathy towards the robots. She is described in the reading as an incredible singer who performs at the War Memorial Opera House. Rick cannot bring himself to retire her right away after capturing her. Instead, Rick does something nice for Luba, he buys her a book she was looking at. “It’s very nice of you,” Luba said as they entered the elevator. “There’s something very strange and touching about humans. An android would never have done that” (60). It was an honest action triggered by real human empathy indeed. After Resch helps him retire her, he then feels some kind of guilt, uneasiness and has trouble with his conscious. “I don’t get it; how can a talent like that be a liability to our society?” (62). The reader can see that he continues to question himself, his morality as a person. Is he really doing the right thing? He brings himself together and tries to stick to his duties. Later, he falls into the carnal desires of a typical human, and sleeps with a rather beautiful android, Rachael Rosen. This is another action that confuses the reader, because it is an act that we naturally believe is only meant to be experienced between humans.

His continued cognitive dissonance makes the reader inquire “where is the line? What makes us really different?” Rick is only able to move on from here and eliminate all of the remaining escaped droids because Racheal reveals the secret behind the evil master plan of the Rosen Association, who are trying to take over the humans on Earth. At last, the reader thinks, there is the line, androids were malicious and they should be eliminated. But in the very end of the story, Rick finds an electric toad. Him and his wife, Iran, still decides to take care of it, regardless of it not being a real animal. The reader, evidently, is confused again, because Dick just made a point of how real, natural, or robotic something is, it does not really matter at the end.

Dick’s point here is to show that, we are not machines, but that we are definitely immersed in technology. Rick’s wife does not throw away the electric toad, she decides to take care of it. Rick feels empathy for Luba Luft and Racheal Rosen, he does not see how they could be more than beautiful women who are talented or very attractive. He feels uncomfortable for disappointing Resch with the apparent truth that he is not human, which will not only bring him dismay, but will mean that Rick will have to end his “life”. Dick presents all of these great examples of how one way or another, we allow ourselves to choose to live with technology and we are naturally, unconsciously or consciously okay with that.

Dick not only shows us how connected we are with technology with only Rick’s interactions with the andys, but he gives us more hints that are a little bit more alarming too. Buster Friendly and His Friendly Friends are the stars of the only tv channel available, basically all over the galaxy. They have talk shows to essentially entertain the humans every single day at every hour. “I was sitting here one afternoon,” Iran said, “and naturally I had tamed on Buster Friendly and His Friendly Friends and he was talking about a big news item he’s about to break”(3). Buster Friendly and His Friendly Friends are cyborgs, but who stops to think about that? Technology, like Iran said, was “naturally” part of their daily lives, and nobody second guessed it. Except maybe John Isidore, who portrays the fool of the novel called a “chickenhead”. “How did Buster Friendly find the time to tape both his aud and vid shows? Isidore wondered” (33). But Isidore just wondered, and he as the rest of the population, continued to listen to the show and believed whatever Buster Friendly and His Friendly Friends were saying. They truly believed Buster Friendly was “the most important human being alive” (32). This goes to show how androids were so connected with humans. No wonder Rick was having a hard time being able to differentiate them.

One of the oddest ways Dick gets the reader about this ordinary unconscious connection with technology, is by talking about the mood organ. The mood organ is a machine that humans use to tune in their moods, feelings and desires so that they can properly function throughout the day. Like, we would think a cyborg would, wouldn’t it? We think of robots as machines that should be programmed by humans, not the other way around. “At his console he hesitated between dialing for a thalamic suppressant (which would abolish his mood of rage) or a thalamic stimulant (which would make him irked enough to win the argument)”(3). The reader struggles to distinguish at the beginning of the reading if Rick and Iran are actually humans because of said mood organ. As the reading continues, and as I have described earlier, the line between who is human and who is a android gets finer and finer.

Why would Dick include in his book a mood organ? Maybe because he is trying to highlight that we in deed use such “mood organs” everyday to function, just like Iran and Rick do. “Will you go to bed now? If I set the mood organ to a 670 setting?” (110). The author gave it to us in the most simple way of how it actually happens in our daily lives, yet in this perspective, we struggle to make sense out of it, because these actions sound odd and unnatural. Still, people today can easily grab a pill to be able to sleep at night if they are suffering from too much stress or insomnia. They can grab their phones, synced to their car’s computer, play an upbeat song to get away from depressed and sad feelings. People can go to a bar and get alcoholic drinks to forget about their day, or take an energetic drink to make it through a long day. That is, a mood organ in our current society. At some extent, we are letting ourselves be programed by technology, just like a cyborg.

People can argue that we are not like cyborgs, that we might have become too needy with technology but we are always able to “disconnect” our lives from it. But can we really? Author Donna Haraway argues this on her extensive paper “A Cyborg Manifesto”. During her prose, she is able to make anyone realize how combined our lives actually are with technology. “The frame for my sketch is set by the extent and importance of rearrangements in worldwide social relations tied to scene and technology.” She is talking about how she created a list of commonalities of our daily lives that are no longer constituted 100% naturally, so we can see how much we are connected with technology. She includes things like: heat, hygiene, noise, population control, stress management, reproduction, among others. If we are taking a shower, we need a plumbing system installed in our homes, which runs thanks to electricity. If someone is struggling with stress, their psychiatrist might prescribed them a pill, which was manufactured in a laboratory with the use of computers and other technological tools. “There is no fundamental, ontological separation in our formal knowledge of machine and organism, of technical and organic. Our sense of connection to our tools is heightened”(313). Haraway’s point is, we need technology because we are able to function with technology, just like Iran and Rick with their mood organ. Today, our everyday starts and end with technology, there is not really a way around it anymore.

Another proof of how we are becoming like cyborgs, or like droids from the book Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? is with the advances in technology targeted to help people with disabilities. “[P]erhaps paraplegics and other severely handicapped people can have the most intense experiences of complex hybridization with other communication devices. (313) Machines can be prosthetic devices, intimate components, friendly selves” (314). Haraway is trying to say that technology has come so far that now, we can literally install an arm robot in our bodies. People with prosthetic devices are the most pure and obvious notion of how that fine line between human and androids is diminishing as time goes by. Notice how she uses the words “intimate” and “friendly”, she does not sees it as a hostile takeover of humanity like Philip Dick, but more like something we should live with peacefully.

It is important to address that, even though Dick shows us on Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? that our lives have become connected with technology, he still insists on one common skill androids did not share with humans: empathy. Regardless of their human-like appearance and artificial intelligence, androids did not demonstrate real empathy. Disick clearly states it at the beginning of the reading, “Empathy, evidently, existed only within the human community, whereas intelligence to some degree could be found throughout every phylum and order including the arachnids. Because, ultimately, the emphatic gift blurred the boundaries between hunter and victim, between the successful and the defeated” (11). This is why Rick had so much trouble retiring the androids, his empathy had indeed blurred the line between who is human and who is android, who is deserving of living and who is deserving of dying, who, in fact, is actually different. This is true, as a matter of fact. Studies support that we can feel empathy “for people who live very different lives than you – so long as you begin identifying with them on a basic human level” (Surugue). Rick is feeling empathy for something he cannot truly understand, a robot that looks like a human but does not live like one, and that is the true beauty and power of being a human.

I believe what the author Philip Dick is trying to show us with Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? is that we have to be more attentive of how far and quickly technology is being immersed in our lives. Buster Friendly and his Friendly Friends were not being “friendly” towards humans. The droids on the book were killers without remorse or feelings. They were all plotting to take over Earth, silently, camouflaging themselves among the humans, engaging in their lives, so they could in fact, blur the lines. Iran and Rick believed they were dependable on their mood organ, even though they could experience feelings and moods without it. Technology is not something that can be categorized as good or bad, is a tool like a hammer, that can be used and should be used wisely. We cannot let media brainwash us into believing unreliable opinions and facts, or make us take actions in ways we should not. In today’s world we can be compared to cyborgs, from being attached to our phones to have literally attached a machine to us, but we will never stop being humans because we have something a robot will never be able to have: empathy.

References:

Dick, P. K. (1968). Do androids dream of electric sheep. New York: Random House Publishing Group.

Foley, B. (2016). Chanel RTW Spring 2017. WWD. Retrieved from http://wwd.com/runway/spring-ready-to-wear-2017/paris/chanel/review/

Haraway, D. “A Cyborg Manifiesto”. The Cybercultures Reader. Bell, D. and Kennedy, B. M. Routledge, 2001.

Surugue, L. (2016). Reading books and watching films makes you kinder in real life. International Business Times. Retrieved from http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/reading-books-watching-films-makes-you-kinder-real-life-1571434

Disability and Humanity

Every day, more and more people come into a disability. Whether they’re born with an extra chromosome, develop anxiety from the stresses of the world, or needing to amputate a limb due to an injury; disability is present all around us today. With this omnipresence of disability, one would think that deformities and disabilities would be generally accepted. That assumption would be wrong in our current society. In today’s community, disability is viewed as an outlier, a deviation from the norm (Davis 6). If someone were to walk by a man in a wheelchair on the street, they would stare and gawk as though his incapability to walk made him a freak of nature; anything but a human being. But, the disabled are still people. They can empathize with others, they can still function in society in many different ways, and they can contribute to the world around them. Better yet, they can want to contribute to the world that they live in to make meaning of their existence. If they lack the ability to do so, there are programs that can teach and rehabilitate the disabled to help them to learn for the very first time or relearn skills that would allow them to do what they can to pitch into their society. Our differences o not make us any more or less human. Being different is a part of being human.

A part of being human is the ability to empathize with others. Empathy follows any and every tragedy in one way or another. Tim Recuber points out that empathy is what drives “efforts at social justice”. Recuber notes a personal experience following the Orlando shooting at the Pulse nightclub. “I experienced an intense form of empathy for the victims and their families… I read the news from a position of safety and security, but still felt that empty pit in my stomach…” (What Becomes of Empathy?). Tim sno relations nor any connections to anyone impacted by the shooting and yet his heart goes out toward the victims and their families. Why? Because he is a full functioning human being? No. Because he is a human being.

Philip K. Dick defines being human by characters’ ability to empathize in Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep. In the novel, androids are disguising themselves as humans. The only way to tell the ever advancing technology that is the Nexus-6 line of androids from humans is their ability to empathize, or lack thereof. An examination called the Voight-Kampff Empathy Test would be given to those suspected of being an android via a series of questions designed to trigger one’s empathy. If one were to fail the examination, they were assumed to be an android. But sometimes, a “special” would fail the exam (Dick).

“Specials” of Dick’s world in Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep are those that have been impacted by the radiation. They are considered “disabled” because they have become genetically defective from their exposure to the radiation. Their intelligence may be deteriorated or other such abnormalities can develop, thus a medical examination will label them as a “special” (Dick). In today’s society there are numerous conditions where one’s ability to empathize is diminished such as Narcissistic Personality Disorder or sociopathic tendencies but they can go unnoticed in society when managed properly. Recuber explains that being able to identify with other humans creates a special connection, a bond, between all humans, no matter their physical distance (What Becomes of Empathy?). A sense of understanding develops across the miles of land and sea.

However, there is no sense of understanding in Dick’s fictitious world between the specials and those who remain unaffected by the radioactive dust. Specials are portrayed as outcasts due to their tainted genetics, below average IQ scores, and on occasion, an inability to empathize. These specials are sterilized and no longer have the opportunity to immigrate to the radiation free colonies on Mars. The specials may be below average in terms of intelligence but they are still people. Isidore, a special in Dick’s novel, can still function in society well enough to support himself. He held a job for a time and his “condition” was only evident through a stutter. An open display of being human by empathizing in Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep is to care for an animal. Isidore, for a short period of time, cared for a spider and was mortified when his companion began to mutilate it. Yes, Isidore the special, the disabled, doesn’t conform to the norm of society but he is still a functioning asset of the human population.

Those who face disablement may not view their impairment as a disability but rather as a minor difference. Lennard Davis opens his chapter on “Constructing Normalcy” by emphasizing that “the ‘problem’ is not the person with disabilities; the problem is the way that normalcy is constructed to create the ‘problem’ of the disabled person” (Davis 3). Sunaura Taylor has arthrogryposis and she has adapted to her condition in many ways. While she is wheelchair bound she can still function in society, just with a different approach than those who are not “disabled”. Her joints do not work normally so she has trouble picking things up but that does not stop her. When she goes to a coffee shop, she can pick up her cup with her mouth since she doesn’t have the necessary ability to do so with her hands. She can also ask for assistance to bring her cup to her table or she could get a tool that could help her carry things (Examined Life).

There are many other prevalent disabilities in today’s society; blindness and deafness are just two of the many conditions. Those who have issues with their hearing or vision can get implants and surgeries to correct their “problems” or they can learn to adapt to their conditions. The people with hearing impairments can learn to read lips instead of relying on their auditory sense. Those with vision impairments can learn to read by touch and to navigate their world by sound and touch by developing a skill similar to echolocation.

Many people believe that the disabled couldn’t possibly contribute to the world but they are wrong. Those who are blind could become exemplary telephone operators or a position that involves the use of touch and hearing to be completed effectively. Those who are deaf could become fantastic visual editors or writers. The disabled can always learn to take their disability and turn the side effects into a positive. They can “develop abilities that other people lack” and thus they can balance out the disadvantages of their condition with these abilities (Bognar 47).

There are an almost infinite amount of different forms of rehabilitation and treatment for different handicaps across the globe. People can be taught to walk on prosthetics and can learn how to formulate speech; basic skills necessary to navigate in today’s society. Those who can’t do or learn these sorts of tasks are often looked down upon because they are “different”; they are defective. Having a disability shouldn’t impair one’s ability to be a human being and contribute to society but rather it should change the approach to the contribution. Isidore was an exemplary human being in Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? who does his best to take part in his community. Being human is about doing your best to be an asset to society and to always strive to be a better person.

The disabled are still people, whether they are emotionally, mentally, or physically handicapped. While they are technically classified as people, they are still viewed as different, as not normal; as sub-human. Lennard Davis says in “Constructing Normalcy” that the problem is not the person but rather the way that normalcy is defined in context to the ideal in society (4). What Davis is saying is that the concept of the norm is what is labeling the person as a problem, as different. The person is still considered a human being but they are different; an outlier on the bell curve of the human norm (6). Davis references that “deviations mor or less great from the [average] have constituted ugliness in body as well as vice in morals and a state of sickness with regard to the constitution” (5). So, this concept of the norm is what sets apart those with disabilities or differences from the average person.

Being human involves a cognitive decision on whether or not to try. It is up to the individual to employ their ability to contribute to their society. Greg Bognar points out that disability can impact quality of life and not just be a mild inconvenience that can be overcome. There are medical conditions that can cause constant agonizing pain, making life seem not worth living (46). This stigma does not come from the outside source of society but from within the disabled person. Bognar goes on to acknowledge possible arguments such as the disabled not feeling at a disadvantage and that it is those who do not share the condition that consider the disabled as afflicted. He also describes how those facing disability can adapt to their disability. With this acknowledgment, he goes on to differentiate that some conditions cannot be adapted to but all disabilities can be adjusted to (46-47). Bognar concludes that disability is simply another part of human characteristics such as gender and race. Just like of characteristics that cannot be controlled, there is discrimination and prejudice towards the disabled just as there is towards females and other similar case (48).

Bognar never hit back on the point that the disabled may feel that their disability isn’t just a mild setback but rather something not worth living through. There is still a conscious decision that has to be made in this regard. The disabled person is allowing their self to lose hope for a possible treatment or cure for their condition. They can hold onto that hope and can lead by example for those with similar or the same condition or they can give up and cast another shadow over the debilitating condition that they had been fighting. Treatment is a two way street. There is the one way for the doctors and the physical treatment and the other way is for the disabled to keep heart. If the disabled person just accepts that they are going to die then their body will not fight as hard to survive and the attempts at treatment may prove less effective. These tough decisions and actions are all a part of being human. Choosing to fight through and adapt to the disability is just the same as fighting through a hardship in everyday life.

The disabled may be viewed as deviations from the norm and thus different and unapproachable. Empathy bridges the gap between all human beings. If an able bodied person were to actively empathize with their fellow humans, they’d be able to understand their plight and make the world more welcoming to the disabled. The disabled will not be viewed as freaks of nature but as the human beings that they are. Their efforts to participate and contribute to society will become more welcome and the world would be much better at understanding its patrons. The world will be better with the disabled’s different abilities and a stronger community will be forged. Humanity and empathy will unite the world into one.

Works Cited

Bognar, Greg. “Is Disability Mere Difference?” J Med Ethics, vol. 42, no. 1, 2015, pp. 46-49.

Davis, Lennard J. “Constructing Normalcy: The Bell Curve, the Novel, and the Invention of the Disabled Body in the Nineteenth Century.” The Disability Studies Reader, Routledge, New York, 2006.

Dick, Philip K. Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? Ballantine Books, 1996.

“Examined Life – Judith Butler & Sunaura Taylor 720p.avi.” YouTube, uploaded by 黃小竹, 6 Oct. 2010, www.youtube.com/watch?v=k0HZaPkF6qE.

Recuber, Tim. “What Becomes of Empathy?” Cyborgology, 20 July 2016. www.thesocietypages.org/cyborgology/2016/07/20/what-becomes-of-empathy/. Accessed 1 Sept. 2016.

Mid-Term Essay – Refugees vs. Androids: Where is the Empathy?

In today’s society, hearing about Syrian refugees fleeing for their lives is a major part of the news. Whether it is on T.V., in the newspaper, online, or in the election, the decision to let these refugees into our country is a highly discussed topic. When it comes to the opinion of citizens of the United States, some will believe that it is a horrible idea. From fear of terrorism to using up resources and taking jobs, Americans have always had little empathy for immigrants and refugees that show interest in entering our country. Many examples of this can be found throughout history, including Japanese Internment camps, illegal immigrants from Mexico, and now the Syrian refugees. While reading Phillip K. Dick’s novel Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? the similarities between the treatment of android and the treatment of these terrified refugees are evident. The novel involves a bounty hunter named Rick Deckard, whose job is to “retire” or murder androids who are trying to disguise as humans on an apocalyptic Earth. As the novel progresses, Deckard struggles with the concept that androids are more human than machine, and whether they deserve to live or die. The circumstances of the Syrian refugees and the androids in Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? are similar to one another, and lead to a lack of empathy from those who cannot relate.

Both of these groups are fleeing their current homes in search of a better life. For Syrians, the land they used to call home has become a war-stricken area. According to statistics from February 2016, around 250,000 Syrians have been murdered because of the violence and destruction surrounding them, along with 13.5 million people in need of humanitarian assistance (Amnesty International 2016). They are more than unhappy with their living situation and want to find a peaceful country to live in that will keep them safe. Many of these refugees have resided in other eastern countries. Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan, Iraq, and Egypt hold more than 4.5 million refugees, but at least 450,000 of those people are in need of resettling (Amnesty International 2016). So while the United States could take in some of those refugees in need, many America citizens are not in favor of letting these people into our country. There are many reasons that U.S. citizens might not want Syrian refugees to enter the United States, but one problem that may be facing Americans is a lack of empathy for this group of people.

In the article “What Becomes of Empathy”, the author explains that many Americans may not experience empathy for these people because they are so different than themselves. The author explains that we feel greater empathy for those similar to ourselves, so people who are a different race, religion, or live in another country are harder to relate to and we cannot empathize with them (Recuber 2016). So if citizens in America are unfamiliar with Syria, the practice of Islam, or living in a war zone, empathy for these refugees may not exist. Another reason Americans might be having a harder time relating to these refugees is because of the society we live in. According to clinical psychologist Authur P. Ciaramicoli, the world we live in makes us more self-centered, stating that “I think we have become a society where we rate status over relationships. We relate image over character and when you do that, you place much less emphasis on the skill or the ability of empathy” (qtd. by Grasgreen, 2010). If our society is more narcissistic and focuses on oneself, it is easy to empathize less with a group of people who are relying on others for help.

In Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep, the androids are fleeing Mars to start a new life. On their pervious home planet, they were used as an incentive to get humans to move to Mars. If the humans moved, they would be given an android to use as a slave. In the novel, a group of six androids fled together to live on Earth disguised as humans. They believe if they kept off of the grid and performed regular jobs, they can avoid being “retired” by a bounty hunter. The humans on Earth do not have any empathy for the androids because they do not see them as a living thing with feelings. In chapter one of the novel, Deckard’s wife, Iran, accuses Rick of being a murderer. He frustratingly responds to her attack by saying, “I have never killed a human being in my life” (Dick 4). Rick and the rest of the police force have no empathy for these android as they retire them, because they are not technically human. That is why they use the term retire instead of kill, because they do not believe that they are ending a life. He sees them as a threat to their humanity and does not care why they are coming to earth, as long as he can make a paycheck off their retirement.

When it comes to both groups, each of them experiences harmful stereotypes. For Syrian refugees, the main concern that faces them is terrorism. Many Americans believe that letting in any Syrian refugees will make it easier for terrorist to gain entrance to our country. This leads to unjustified fear and hatred towards an entire group of people, for little to no reason. In Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?, the belief is that androids are dangerous because they are not human. They cannot follow Mercerism, which makes them a threat to their society. Mercerism is a religion that the people of Earth follow that’s main focus is on empathy for all living things. The androids do not have empathy and therefore cannot live in a world where caring for living thing is the highest ideal. Their lack of empathy makes them feared, because they do not stay in the regular mold of society that the humans reside in. This is similar to the fear of refugees due to a lack of empathy. The definition of terrorism is “the use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims”. Based off this definition, terrorists are seen as lacking empathy because they not care who is injured or killed in their attacks. Because Syrian refugees have this stereotype following them, some citizens cannot empathize with refugees because they believe they do not have empathy themselves.

While these stereotypes are intimidating, a majority of these groups are the opposite of their violent type cast. When it comes to Syrian refugees, there is almost little to no fear of terrorist entering the United States. According to information from the Migration Policy Institute, of the 784,000 refugees that have settled in America since 9/11, only three have been arrested for planning terrorist activities (Newland, 2015). If society can start to see how little of these people are a harm to society, then empathizing with their situation may become easier. In Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep, there are many examples of harmless androids coming to live on Earth. The main example of this is the opera singer, Luba Luft. In the novel, there is no evidence that she has put any human in danger. But because she is an android, Rick Deckard must retire her. Once the job is done, Rick comes to the realization that Luba did not deserve to be retired. He starts to become regretful, saying that “she was a wonderful singer. The planet could have used her. This is insane” (Dick, 136). He continues his rant, saying “how can a talent like that be a liability to our society” (Dick, 137). He realizes that not all androids are a danger to humanity, and that many have a lot to offer their society. The same can be said for Syrian refugees. By casting out an entire group of people, it is impossible to know what kinds of knowledge and talents they can offer to our country. This lack of empathy is causing our country to lose its diversity, one of the many features that makes this nation great.

It is interesting to see the connections between the androids in Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? and the Syrian refugees. It is easy to see that both groups have been through hardships that cause them to feel threatened almost constantly. It is important to see how our empathy has a role in how we see other groups of people, and how we can use that empathy to gain understanding and breakdown harmful stereotypes. If we as Americans can try to understand how these refugees are feeling, and the reason for them trying to enter the United States, then we can join together and destroy these harmful stereotypes that are the cause of so much hatred.

Work Cited

Dick, Philip K. Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? New York: Del Ray, 1996. Print.

Grasgreen, Allie. “Empathizing 101.” Empathizing 101. Inside Higher ED, 24 Nov. 2010. Web. 3 Oct. 2016.

Newland, Kathleen. “The U.S. Record Shows Refugees Are Not a Threat.” Migrationpolicy.org. Migration Policy Institute, 07 Oct. 2015. Web. 1 Oct. 2016.

Recuber, Tim. “What Becomes of Empathy?” Cyborgology. The Society Pages, 20 July 2016. Web. 2 Oct. 2016.

“Syria’s Refugee Crisis in Numbers.” Amnesty International. Amnesty International, 3 Feb. 2016. Web. 05 Oct. 2016.

Midterm Essay- Who has the status of being Morally Superior? By: Monica Patel |English 281| 10/11/16

Midterm Essay- Who has the status of being Morally Superior?

By: Monica Patel |English 281| 10/11/16

Philip K. Dick’s novel Do Android Dream of Electric Sheep is about a world that is ruled by cyborgs that are almost duplicates to humanity. In the novel, character’s wealth, and morals are defined by owning an animal, specifically farm animals who hold the highest rank. In today’s society, being extremely wealthy means that an individual has an enormous platform that offers endless opportunities to do well in the world. So, that raises the question: Is wealth the proof of an individual being morally superior?

We can understand the meaning of wealth better, by reading Philip K. Dick Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep. So, let’s start from the beginning, in the second chapter of the novel, there is a passage that reads “First, strangely, the owls had died…Medieval plagues had manifested themselves in a similar way, in the form of many dead rats” (Dick 16). It is revealed to the reader that after the World War Terminus, the animals have become endangered, so it’s considered “respectable” for someone to own an animal.

Now, in the beginning of the novel the main character Rick is considered “inferior” because he owns an electric sheep (a fake animal, which is made out of wires). “After an interval Barbour said, ‘you poor guy. Has it always been this way?’ (Dick 11) After Rick explains to his neighbor how his sheep is a machine, his neighbor feels sorry for him. Later in the story Rick’s ultimate goal is to make enough money to get a real animal. Some readers may ask themselves; why does an animal prove our wealth? The answer is simple: because animals are extinct, you are considered morally righteous for helping a species who are unable to care for themselves. In addition, due to the fact that animals are extinct, large organizations increase the prices on animals. Individuals with well-paying jobs are able to afford one.

Anyone can argue that this topic can relate in reality today. In the article “Are Rich people more Ethical?” By Neil Wagner, the article describes experiments done by the University of California, Berkley, where individuals with upper class backgrounds were less moral when it came to ethical situations. An example would be: one of the experiments where the volunteers were shown a jar of candy. They were told that the candy was for the children who are ill in the hospitals, and that the volunteers were more than welcome to take more than one piece of candy. Those who came from an upper class backgrounds took more than two pieces of candy, versus those with lower class backgrounds who either took one piece, or no pieces of candy. Another example, stated in the article was; “The fifth experiment placed the volunteers in the role of job interviewer of candidates seeking long-term employment…. Upper-class volunteers were much less likely to inform the candidate that the job was going to be a much shorter one than anticipated.” (theatlantic) This article does give an insight on what kind of character an individual who is financially successful, possess. In another article titled “Are the wealthy less ethical?” By Adriene Hill, where she has an interview with Paul Piff who is a Ph.D candidate at the psychology department at Berkeley. The whole gist of the interview is: yes in a way the rich are less ethical, because of greed. According to the interview, the upper class individuals thought they needed to put themselves first, before anyone else in the world.

This reasoning can be true for Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? Did Rick let his greed get in the way of doing what is right? Let me explain; Rick needed to earn more money to purchase a decent animal, to achieve this goal his job was to kill as many androids as possible. The only problem was, androids in this novel were almost identical to humans, to the point that androids didn’t even know if they themselves were human or not. In the novel technology, and science is so advanced that the scientist was able to insert “fake memories” in an androids mind. This will completely diminish the line of differentiating between humans, and robot. “He had never thought of it before, had never felt any empathy on his own part toward the androids he killed” (Dick 141). This is when Rick had to kill the android Luft, who was an opera singer. After he heard her perform, he questioned if this was the right thing to do. What makes Luft different from a female entertainer? This is the first part of the book where Rick’s greed didn’t get in the way of his choices, where he questioned the lack of principles in his job.

In “Reading books and watching films makes you kinder in real life” by Lea Surugue the article explains how fiction helps individual better understand empathy. “Some studies have shown that fiction can even make you feel empathy for people who live very different lives than you” (Surgugue) so could fiction be the solution for the wealthy to be more moral? So that they could use that power for people who actually understand what it means to have values that aren’t selfish. The same question arises from the article Reading literary fiction improves empathy, study finds by Liz Bury. “Testing people’s ability to read faces is a bit odd. The thing about novels is that they give you a view of an inner world that’s not on show. Often what you learn from novels is to be a bit baffled … a novel tells you not to judge,” Davies said.” (Liz Bury) This is similar to the Voit Kampff test, in the novel Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep, with empathy anyone can fake facial expressions, or even verbal responses, and we never know what’s going on in the mind of that person.

Based on the article this raises the next question; Are people who are considered poor whether it’s in reality or in the novel more morally righteous? According to the article “5 Ways the Poor Are More Ethical than the Rich”, by Paul Buchheit, Yes. Reasons being the poor are more generous, they are most grateful, and giving, and the rich focus more on themselves. “Research has shown that low-income Americans spend a much higher percentage of their income on charitable giving. Results from three studies average out to 4.5% from low-income people, 2.7% from those with high incomes. With respect to helping people in need, the rich give even less.” (alternet) This article can also be applied in Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep. For example John Isidore another character from the novel, who does not own an animal but he is truly kind and tries to help out anyone he meets, he is the only character in the novel who truly understands the concept of Mercer (the only religion that is followed). Based on the sole fact that he doesn’t own an animal make him less human than Rick or Iran? Another Article titled: “Are poor people more moral than the rich?” States “Paul Piff, a doctoral student of psychology at UC Berkeley – which was founded in 1868 – stated: “The increased unethical tendencies of upper class individuals are driven, in part, by their more favorable attitudes toward greed. “The research has been published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences and Mr.Piff claimed the findings are helping to shed light on the inequality that is serving to shape selfishness and other conducts relating to ethics.” (bps.org.uk) Does this article, along with the other articles included in the essay, answer the question: If the rich are morally righteous?

The argument in defense of the wealthy is; if anyone wants to succeed in life, then you have to put yourself first in order to be successful. Isn’t this a humane way of thinking, one of the basic principles of success? If so, why the rich should be looked down upon on their mindset if they just want to be the best and ensure survival. In a way, we are all doing the same, making sure that “I” or “you” succeed in life. “Greed is good, because it is the most important incentive for people to work hard, get a good education, start a business, or invest in a company. This makes people productive and contributing members of society. And in return, people are paid a salary, become more educated, and (hopefully) build wealth so that they can in return live a prosperous, more comfortable, and full life.” This quote is from another article titled “Greed is Good and Bad. This passage from the article is proof that greed shouldn’t be considered unethical, that the rich aren’t unprincipled, they are just hard working. Also one question that may arise, do the middle or lower class take responsibility on some of the problems society faces (such as the increase of poverty in certain areas of the world)? No, only because not everyone, especially those who have families to take care, loans to pay off can even afford to donate some money. Then it can be debated if the responsibility lies on the wealthy. Isn’t the ability to help others in need what makes us human? After all it is emphasized in the novel Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep.

In the article “Americans see growing gap between rich and poor” by Bruce Drake, provides charts to demonstrate the difference in perception of rich people vs. the poor. The first chart demonstrates how the wealthy are perceived. The article gave a clear description of the results of the first table, “More than half (55%) saw the rich as more likely to be greedy compared with 9% who said less likely, and 36% who took neither side.” (pewresearch) This type of research does show that the rich does hold that reputation of being greedy. There is a reason for this, possibly because it is true. The second chart described how the poor were perceived. Now there was a description for the second table in the article, “Democrats said poor people work but do not earn enough money. But only about half (53%) of moderate and liberal Republicans agreed. Conservative Republicans were evenly divided: 43% said the poor do in fact work but cannot earn enough while 40% said most poor people do not work.” (pewresearch) Does the poor hold responsibility to why they do not earn enough? Not entirely, for example some individuals could not afford an education, or there are youths who need to work instead of learn in order to put food on the table. This last chart demonstrates that there is an overall difference between the rich and the poor. There is not only an income gap between the two classes, but in addition there is a gap between ethics. The poor realistically have less power, they cannot help change the imperative issues that face society today. Issues such as; finding cures for rare diseases, or contributing in advanced technology. Only the wealthy, have not only the money, but time to help solve majority of world’s problems.

In my opinion I feel like because the wealthy have so many responsibilities, and standards that must be met, of course they should be morally righteous. But in reality that’s not always the case. Being wealthy or poor does not determine one’s moral superiority. The definition of moral is: concerned with the principles of right and wrong behavior and the goodness or badness of human character. I believe that we all have this concern, but we do express it in different ways. There is not one person on this earth who doesn’t understand the fundamental basics of what is right, and what is wrong. It’s the values, and beliefs that makes that person morally righteous, not the status. I personally found it humorous in Philip K. Dicks novel how embarrassing it was to not own an authentic animal. It shouldn’t be embarrassing, because just like in the real world, not everyone can afford those necessities that are sometimes impossible to achieve.

Sources:

“America’s Worst Charities.” America’s Worst Charities. N.p., n.d. Web. 02 Oct. 2016. <http://www.tampabay.com/americas-worst-charities/>.

“Are Poor People More Moral than the Rich?” BPS. The British Psychological Society, 3 Jan. 2012. Web. 02 Oct. 2016. <http://www.bps.org.uk/news/are-poor-people-more-moral-rich>.

Bury, Liz. “Reading Literary Fiction Improves Empathy, Study Finds.” Web log post. Hypothes. The Guardian, 8 Oct. 2013. Web. <https://via.hypothes.is/https:/www.theguardian.com/books/booksblog/2013/oct/08/literary-fiction-improves-empathy-study#annotations:qfVLslp1Eead4qeiMoDrfg>.

Drake, Bruce. “Americans See Growing Gap between Rich and Poor.” Pew Research Center RSS. N.p., 05 Dec. 2013. Web. 10 Oct. 2016. <http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/12/05/americans-see-growing-gap-between-rich-and-poor/>.

Humanity, Phil For. “Greed Is Good and Bad.” Phil for Humanity. N.p., n.d. Web. 02 Oct. 2016. <http://www.philforhumanity.com/Greed_is_Good_and_Bad.html>.

Images, PATRICK LIN/AFP/Getty. “Are the Wealthy Less Ethical?” Are the Wealthy Less Ethical? Market Place, 28 Feb. 2012. Web. 02 Oct. 2016.

L Buchheit / AlterNet, Paul. “5 Ways the Poor Are More Ethical Than the Rich.” Alternet. N.p., 18 May 2014. Web. 02 Oct. 2016. <http://www.alternet.org/economy/5-ways-poor-are-more-ethical-rich>.

Stanger, Melissa. “The 50 Richest People on Earth.” Business Insider. Business Insider, Inc, 26 Jan. 2016. Web. 02 Oct. 2016. <http://www.businessinsider.com/50-richest-people-on-earth-2016-1>.

Surugue, Léa. “Reading Books and Watching Films Makes You Kinder in Real Life.” Web log post. Hypothes. International Business Times, 19 July 2016. Web. <https://via.hypothes.is/http:/www.ibtimes.co.uk/reading-books-watching-films-makes-you-kinder-real-life-1571434#annotations:_MOsQlpyEeaiesf9ed4wVw>.

Midterm Assignment: What defines our humanity?

We have the privilege of shaping our midterm essays to fit a real publication with guidance and feedback from the editors. Cyborgology, an academic, peer-edited blog, has agreed to work with our class to contextualize and format this assignment for submission to their publication. This publication takes issues presented in literature and contextualizes their overarching questions by relating the content to relevant political and cultural events. Therefore, you will take the themes we have discussed regarding Philip K. Dick’s Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep and present them to an educated audience in terms of a current event you consider parallel in some significant way. The goal is to shed light on both the novel and our society by pairing them together. In class on 9/27 the editors will come to provide background information on Cyborgology, discuss their expectations, and answer your questions.

Using the audience, format, genre, and style of a typical Cyborgology post (see list of examples here) as your model, you will craft a ~2,000-3,000 word blog post that answers the question “What Makes Us Human?” with a particular emphasis on the concept of empathy. In order to address this question you must frame it in terms of the texts we have read. Every paper must use Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep as the primary example, and use at least two of the articles we have read as secondary evidence. You are also welcome to include up to two additional sources from either our course readings or reliable outside sources that you consider essential to make your point. (In other words, you must have a minimum of 3 sources, and a maximum of 5 sources.) All sources must be integrated through summary, paraphrase, or quotation with proper MLA formatting (use OWL at Purdue for guidance).

Please see the Cyborgology submission guidelines for further information. You can and should include hyperlinks to your sources as indicated in this guide. You are also encouraged to use images, videos, or infographics that demonstrate your point (with captions and citations). Also, read this post on writing for a public audience by editor David Banks.

Sample outline: *From Cyborgology editor David Banks*

Introduction to X
Sentence telegraphing at the possibility that X is better understood with Y.
Summary of coverage of X
Why summary is wrong/incomplete/misunderstood by 3rd parties.
Introduction of theory Y
Application of theory Y
Synthesis of X and Y
Prescriptions and conclusions

Two printed copies of your draft in TNR, size 12, double spaced are due on 10/4 in class. Your final essay must be posted to our site under category “midterm” and tag “cyborgology” by 10/11.