Mind reading is no longer only a special ability of a fictional superhero. Some scientists have shown that it is possible to read people's mind and to know what they are thinking about. This, for some people, is terrifying. They and I think most people do, do not like others to meddle with their ultimate possession, their mind. For ethical reason, there are some secret they prefer no one should know.
Should we abandon the benefits of this major breakout in technology? Should we abandon the development of something that might be the only hope for disorder, such as autism or schizophrenia? Perhaps there is something we can do in order to allow this technology developed without too many denials. The solution is, of course, the answer to every worry that has arisen. These includes questions like "To whom this technology might be applied to?" or "What would we do if parents start to push their children in certain subject just because the "brain test" result tells so?" or "Who will pay and operate the brain map database?" or even "Will it be legal for the court to use it in trial?"(Caplan, Lou Morano, 2003)
Firstly, the technology should be applied for those in special need only, for those who suffer certain diseases, for instance. The government can help in providing rules to set a regulation about this. Secondly, as it is limited for several people only, we do not need to worry about parents being misled by brain mapping technology. Thirdly, the answer should be simple, for those who want to make a database; they have to pay by themselves. The last question, probably the most difficult question to answer, for me it sounds good to have this technology if the certainty of its result is considerably high, almost 100 percents. Otherwise, it should not be applied.
In conclusion, mind mapping technology brings many ethical considerations. To eliminate this doubt, people need to limit the usage of the technology to the degree where it cannot be misused. The government should make a limitation as a law which would assure everything goes well.
Saturday, November 8, 2008
Thursday, October 30, 2008
Nowadays, various methods have been developed to encounter waste problem. The two finest method are the incinerator method and "zero waste" approach. While the incinerator method is burning the waste to make it vanishes, the zero waste method is recycling the waste into something useful (Collins, J.,2002). In many aspects, environmental and economical, zero waste is more beneficial than the incinerator method. Therefore, every country should adept the zero waste method.
Actually, both incinerating and recycling need a considerable amount of energy. However, recycling process produces useful materials which can be sold to cover the cost. On the other hand, incinerating does not produce anything useful. This means the cost needed for the incinerating process have to be supplied by the government. Therefore, financially, zero waste is better.
In addition, zero waste approach also brings an enormous benefit to the environment. Although it also produces pollution, it reduces significantly the need to exploit the environment. Paper, for instance, which are made from trees, are example of a recyclable material. By recycling papers, less trees need to be cut. Incineration, on the other hand, does not bring any benefit for the environment.
However, "no tusk have no crack", one of the zero waste cutbacks is the difficulties in encouraging the society to help by separating the waste according to their type, for example, plastic from paper or organic material. Although it is hard, with perseverance this problem can be overcome.
In conclusion, despite of the difficulties to apply zero waste method, it is still better than incineration both financially and economically. Thus, every country should try to develop this method.
Actually, both incinerating and recycling need a considerable amount of energy. However, recycling process produces useful materials which can be sold to cover the cost. On the other hand, incinerating does not produce anything useful. This means the cost needed for the incinerating process have to be supplied by the government. Therefore, financially, zero waste is better.
In addition, zero waste approach also brings an enormous benefit to the environment. Although it also produces pollution, it reduces significantly the need to exploit the environment. Paper, for instance, which are made from trees, are example of a recyclable material. By recycling papers, less trees need to be cut. Incineration, on the other hand, does not bring any benefit for the environment.
However, "no tusk have no crack", one of the zero waste cutbacks is the difficulties in encouraging the society to help by separating the waste according to their type, for example, plastic from paper or organic material. Although it is hard, with perseverance this problem can be overcome.
In conclusion, despite of the difficulties to apply zero waste method, it is still better than incineration both financially and economically. Thus, every country should try to develop this method.
Saturday, October 25, 2008
Port Folio 4 : Difficulties in English
It has been 12 years since I learn my first English word, and since then, almost every day, I have tried to improve my language skill. However, I have not come to the level I wish to be or, to be more precise, the level I need to be.
After those beautiful years of childhood, I have chosen Singapore to be the place to pursue my university degree. After being in Singapore for a while, I started to realize that my English is way below standard, in writing, in speaking, in reading, everything. Nevertheless, it affects me in my course at the university.
Engineering, my course, requires its student to understand various concept and to show their understanding in the exam. For me, it is quite a nightmare. I need more time to understand the concepts than I would need if I learn it in my own mother tongue. Even so, there are also some misunderstandings of what the books or lecturers really means. Despite of it, I can still overcome it with a bit of hard work. Unfortunately, the second thing I need to do, show my understanding in the exam, is far worse. This time, I could not possibly have more time to write the answers. It is also impossible to bring a dictionary for exam. Therefore, I just have to pray and hope the examiners would understand what i am trying to say in such limited language.
However, I think I know why I have such problem. I always try to translate everything I read to my language than understanding it. Of course it takes more time and causes more misunderstandings. This also happens when I write. I tend to think of something in my language and translate it. If I can not find a suitable word to translate it, I would then get into trouble.
So, the solution to my problem is to start to think in English. It requires a long time before I can master the technique. I have to change a life long habit and it cannot be easy. Surely it is going to be hard, but "impossible is nothing"(Nike,n.d.).
After those beautiful years of childhood, I have chosen Singapore to be the place to pursue my university degree. After being in Singapore for a while, I started to realize that my English is way below standard, in writing, in speaking, in reading, everything. Nevertheless, it affects me in my course at the university.
Engineering, my course, requires its student to understand various concept and to show their understanding in the exam. For me, it is quite a nightmare. I need more time to understand the concepts than I would need if I learn it in my own mother tongue. Even so, there are also some misunderstandings of what the books or lecturers really means. Despite of it, I can still overcome it with a bit of hard work. Unfortunately, the second thing I need to do, show my understanding in the exam, is far worse. This time, I could not possibly have more time to write the answers. It is also impossible to bring a dictionary for exam. Therefore, I just have to pray and hope the examiners would understand what i am trying to say in such limited language.
However, I think I know why I have such problem. I always try to translate everything I read to my language than understanding it. Of course it takes more time and causes more misunderstandings. This also happens when I write. I tend to think of something in my language and translate it. If I can not find a suitable word to translate it, I would then get into trouble.
So, the solution to my problem is to start to think in English. It requires a long time before I can master the technique. I have to change a life long habit and it cannot be easy. Surely it is going to be hard, but "impossible is nothing"(Nike,n.d.).
Sunday, September 28, 2008
Portfolio 3
Carbon Capture Plant in Germany
Vattenfall, one of the largest energy companies in Europe, has established a new type of power plant that can bring answer to today’s problem of climate change. The technology, carbon capture and storage (CCS), is capable of reducing nearly all carbon dioxide which is emitted by a normal coal power plant. The carbon dioxide emitted will not be released to the atmosphere, but compressed to a liquid and pumped into deep porous rock. Then it will be injected for permanent storage in a gas field.
“This technology will become more important than offshore wind farms,” claimed Vattenfall boss Lars Josefsson ( www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,2144,36289,00.html ,2008). It is not a bluff, as it is as clean but more effective in fulfilling energy needs. According to Hattaka, the process was viable because companies need to pay for every ton of carbon dioxide they release into the air. “At 30 to 35 euros per emission certificate, the nechnology breaks even,” he said.
However, the plant that existed is comparably small to those conventional coal power plants. There is a plan to build a bigger “demonstration plants” in 7 to 12 years from now, but some critics said that they are uncertain if it would work on large scale. In addition to this, Thomas Becker of BUND, a German conservation group, also said that the power station will obtain 10 percent less power from coal than conventional plants did, and it was not clear if there were enough suitable sites to dump the CO2. As conclusion, they suggest to concentrate on far cheaper renewable energy.
Despite of the critics, the European Union wants to have 10 or 12 full-scale CCS power stations within the next few years, although it is not clear who will pay and run the plants.
Taken from:
“Carbon Capture Plant Opens in Germany Amid Reservations”, 9 September 2008, retrieved from http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,2144,36289,00.html , September 11, 2008.
Vattenfall, one of the largest energy companies in Europe, has established a new type of power plant that can bring answer to today’s problem of climate change. The technology, carbon capture and storage (CCS), is capable of reducing nearly all carbon dioxide which is emitted by a normal coal power plant. The carbon dioxide emitted will not be released to the atmosphere, but compressed to a liquid and pumped into deep porous rock. Then it will be injected for permanent storage in a gas field.
“This technology will become more important than offshore wind farms,” claimed Vattenfall boss Lars Josefsson ( www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,2144,36289,00.html ,2008). It is not a bluff, as it is as clean but more effective in fulfilling energy needs. According to Hattaka, the process was viable because companies need to pay for every ton of carbon dioxide they release into the air. “At 30 to 35 euros per emission certificate, the nechnology breaks even,” he said.
However, the plant that existed is comparably small to those conventional coal power plants. There is a plan to build a bigger “demonstration plants” in 7 to 12 years from now, but some critics said that they are uncertain if it would work on large scale. In addition to this, Thomas Becker of BUND, a German conservation group, also said that the power station will obtain 10 percent less power from coal than conventional plants did, and it was not clear if there were enough suitable sites to dump the CO2. As conclusion, they suggest to concentrate on far cheaper renewable energy.
Despite of the critics, the European Union wants to have 10 or 12 full-scale CCS power stations within the next few years, although it is not clear who will pay and run the plants.
Taken from:
“Carbon Capture Plant Opens in Germany Amid Reservations”, 9 September 2008, retrieved from http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,2144,36289,00.html , September 11, 2008.
Thursday, September 11, 2008
Assignment 2
"Grammar and logic free language from being at the mercy of the tone of voice. Grammar protects us against misunderstanding the sound of an uttered name; logic protects us against what we say having double meaning." (Rosenstock-Huessy). As what Rosenstock-Huessy said, grammar should be helping us to make our writing understandable. Unfortunately, using a correct grammar is not easy. While using it correctly will help the reader, misused of it will confuse them even more.
I did a lot of grammar mistakes before, knowingly or unknowingly. From what I discovered, most of them are related to plural-singular rules. This contributes to around 50% of the mistakes I made.
There are two reasons why I find it is hard to master this area. Firstly, the nature of my mother tongue does not have anything to do with singular or plural. The other reason is the complexity of rules in it.
I have spoken a language which does not add any ‘s’ or ‘es’ for a plural word. Therefore, I never need to be worried whether I am speaking about one or two or even infinite number of things, neither do I need to be worried of the countable or uncountable rules. This is why I cannot naturally tell whether something is plural or singular.
In addition, there are a lot of guidelines determine whether something is singular or plural. There is the countable and uncountable rule, where uncountable nouns will be considered as a singular thing. I get confused when it comes to words that can be both depending on the context, such as “work”. Another rule that annoys me is the negative form rules. “I do not have any book.” Or “ I do not have any books.” Until now, I cannot tell the difference.
In conclusion, one of grammar problem I am facing is plural-singular problem. The only way I can overcome it might be to keep practicing, so I will become more familiar with it.
I did a lot of grammar mistakes before, knowingly or unknowingly. From what I discovered, most of them are related to plural-singular rules. This contributes to around 50% of the mistakes I made.
There are two reasons why I find it is hard to master this area. Firstly, the nature of my mother tongue does not have anything to do with singular or plural. The other reason is the complexity of rules in it.
I have spoken a language which does not add any ‘s’ or ‘es’ for a plural word. Therefore, I never need to be worried whether I am speaking about one or two or even infinite number of things, neither do I need to be worried of the countable or uncountable rules. This is why I cannot naturally tell whether something is plural or singular.
In addition, there are a lot of guidelines determine whether something is singular or plural. There is the countable and uncountable rule, where uncountable nouns will be considered as a singular thing. I get confused when it comes to words that can be both depending on the context, such as “work”. Another rule that annoys me is the negative form rules. “I do not have any book.” Or “ I do not have any books.” Until now, I cannot tell the difference.
In conclusion, one of grammar problem I am facing is plural-singular problem. The only way I can overcome it might be to keep practicing, so I will become more familiar with it.
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
assignment 6
There are various reasons why people do not like to do things in new ways. These include environmental issues, ethical issues, and personal subjectivity problems. First, some inventions in technology are being resisted for their potential harm to the environment, even though the probability of this potential danger is extremely low. Nuclear power development, for instance, is the example of this. People are terrified that a single mistake in the nuclear power producing process can damage the environment and endanger humans' life for generations. Other issues that drive people to resist new technology is ethical issues. Many people think that it is just not right for men to interfere with what is considered as "God's work". The improvement of humans' knowledge has reached a state that people can do almost everything, even creating a new life form from a single cell which is known as cloning. This, for some people, is wrong. They believe when men mess with nature, something terrible might happen. They fear that a new species or a dangerous mutant will be created as a result of it. In addition to those reasons, another common reason is people feel comfortable enough with their way of life now. This means anything new that does not really help their life is not needed. As long as they are happy, it is better not to take risk. Imagine if there are no other ways than nuclear power to produce electricity, certainly no one will oppose the plan to build a nuclear powerplant. However, when there is a safe old way, there is no point risking their comfortable life. In conclusion, people resist some new invention because of ethical and environmental issues or subjectivity problems.
Wednesday, August 20, 2008
Portfolio Task 1 : Engineers: Important Member of the Society
Centuries ago, engineers were being admired for their massive contribution for the society. from the metallurgist that ended the Stone Age, to the shipbuilders who united the world, and even until the 20 th century where engineering records its greatest achievement through invention in every aspect of life. (National Academy of Engineering, 2008 ) However, nowadays it is common for people to think that engineers only build buildings, repair electronic equipments, produce generic drugs or briefly manufacturers. ( Ramakrishna, 2008)
In reaction of this mind set, engineers have tried and have shown to the world that it is not true. Being an engineers means much more than that. An engineer has an unlimited ways to contribute productively to the society.
The first area is within the engineering world itself. Rather than only maintaining past achievements, which is also important, an engineer could seek for alternatives to face challanges in human's life. They involve ways to sustain resources and environment, develop a better system to prevent natural disasters or men-caused disasters and better health care facilities. (National Academy of Engineering, 2008 )
In the other hand, engineers can also contribute to the society in other various area. With their critical thinking and systematic minds as based, engineers are needed in services-oriented economy. They are highly sought a fter to design and manage health-care systems, run information management and transportation systems, manage large-scale project, and even bank managers. (Ramakrishna,2007)
In conclusion, engineers have a lot of choices to do. They can get involved in manufactures, researches, service areas, or even finance. There is virtually no limit for engineers to serve the society.
In reaction of this mind set, engineers have tried and have shown to the world that it is not true. Being an engineers means much more than that. An engineer has an unlimited ways to contribute productively to the society.
The first area is within the engineering world itself. Rather than only maintaining past achievements, which is also important, an engineer could seek for alternatives to face challanges in human's life. They involve ways to sustain resources and environment, develop a better system to prevent natural disasters or men-caused disasters and better health care facilities. (National Academy of Engineering, 2008 )
In the other hand, engineers can also contribute to the society in other various area. With their critical thinking and systematic minds as based, engineers are needed in services-oriented economy. They are highly sought a fter to design and manage health-care systems, run information management and transportation systems, manage large-scale project, and even bank managers. (Ramakrishna,2007)
In conclusion, engineers have a lot of choices to do. They can get involved in manufactures, researches, service areas, or even finance. There is virtually no limit for engineers to serve the society.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)