"Eating is an Agricultural Act?"The Ethics of Food and Eating
This project was centered around your food. We got articles and we read the book “Omnivore's dilemma.” Based on these resources we developed our personal food ethic. What does Omnivore's dilemma mean? The term Omnivore's Dilemma means that we as Omnivores can eat anything but how do we know what not to eat. Now in modern day terms this means we have thousands of choices for food but do we really know where it comes from? Years ago when we had to hunt and gather our food we were with it through the whole process. We killed the animal then skinned the animal then cooked it. We had total control of the process. When you think about the process today, we go to the store, pick it up and bring it home. We are only there for a small part of this food's “life.” During this project we were studying food in Humanities as well as Chemistry. This helped me when it came to learning the content because I wasn't going back and forth between two different subjects. These two classes did tie together and one example would be corn. In humanities we get to understand how corn is in everything and controls the food economy. This is similar to how ingredients nowadays are so interconnected with each other. When you think of food you may just think “oh yeah it gives us energy” but there is so much more to it. Food is an ethical debate and people have many different opinions. The first thing that struck me during this project was industrial farming. It is quite the contrast between the typical farm you would think of. The animals are locked and forced to eat corn that makes them bloated. These are things I wont think about much unless I had this project.
Your life on earth
Future of work america
Listen to our Podcast!
In class timed writing
The textbook that we read went over the industrial revolution in the United States. In the reading it describes how the country goes through a technological boom. “ These included a wealth of natural resources, among them oil, coal and iron; and a swelling urban population that consumed the new manufactured goods.” The textbook does not show how they were able to get those resources and how the country gave the working class the short end of the stick.
During the industrial revolution is was clear to the working class that capitalism did not benefit everyone.
The United States experienced a great amount of growth , technologically, and in population. In the article “ Waifs of New York slums,1890” the author describes how the families in the slums could not support a child. A specific quote from the article is “Take care of johnny, for god sake, I cannot.” With the rapid growth of urban areas the living conditions got worse. The textbook leaves out that the people in the urban areas were forced to leave their kids on the street. This gives the reader the idea that the economic growth was beneficial to everyone in the country. A big reason the country grow was because of the labor force.
The United States relayed on their child labor to become a world super power. In the article “From the bitter cry of the children” the author goes around the country and looks at the conditions the child laborers were in. “Clouds of dust fill the breakers and are inhaled by the boys, laying the foundations for asthma and miners consumption.” This shows how the boys health was sacrificed for the country's growth on the global scale. The boys would go home with a small amount of money that they could barely survive off of. Meanwhile the capitalists in the cities were continuing to grow their wealth, creating a very large divide between the working class and the rich. The capitalist idea of bringing everyone up didn't seem to work for everyone in the industrial revolution.
The biggest challenge that we had was putting the script together. This was difficult because we needed it to flow and to connect to the main idea. I was the main person that was putting the script together while the others had their other roles. We overcome this by starting with small sections such as the historical context, we made a lay out that started with background research and then we added our own options and facts we found. We had the interviews in the middle so we can transition to our real life example. This was much better than our original lay out. I am very proud of this project but if I had to change anything I would add our own personal experiences with education. We all went to mountain but we all went to traditional elementary schools. Even with this we all have different ways we look at school and this would have been cool to add to the podcast. This project we didn't add to much about us personally and it was very facts driven which is good but it would have taken it to the next level. I am most proud of our interviews and how we built off of them. For our interviews we used questions such as “What's the difference between what you learned in high school and what your teaching?” and “Do you think what you are teaching will help students flourish in the future?.” The first question connected to our historical context because we were going over how education has changed. The second question leads us into our next section which was seeing if education can help students succeed in the future. Because of these interviews we were able to add variety and different perspectives in our podcast. I have grown as a student by becoming more simple and minimalist. What I mean by this is when you are reading from a large script you can start to lose the listeners interest. During this project I couldn't just write and write about the topic like I usually do. When I was writing I had to give the listener the core idea of what I wanted to portray instead of adding details. This made the podcast have a straight to the point and not something you dreaded to get through.